constant trade controversey in 5x5 roto league...

[Rdonofrio]

This league is in it's second season. Last season not many trades were made, but this season everyone is learning more about fantasy baseball so trades are a lot more frequent. We are all friends and go to college together, so no strangers in this. Anyway, two weeks ago The 3rd place team traded Bonderman to the 10th place team (10 teams in league) for Weathers. A middle of the pack team wanted it to be vetoed, but I don't think it's a vetoable trade. I feel the only reason the guy wanted it vetoed was because he would have given the third place team a better player than Weathers for a guy like Bonderman.

So basically since this trade there have been about 4 or 5 more, and everytime a trade goes up my roomate the commish keeps hearing it from everyone in the league... veto this veto that. How do I explain that to these guys that the veto trade tool is not to be used just because one side may be getting a better player than the other. Teams have different needs and whatnot- but these guys are just all getting mad at each other. Any idea of what I could say to calm the managers down?

[Bloody Sox]

There are many things you can say:

1. First and foremost, you should say that the point of trades is to improve your chances of winning. If both teams can make a reasonable case that they are doing that, then a veto should never apply.
2. You should say that trades are not always perfectly even. If one team is desperate for saves, he may trade someone of more value (i.e. Bonderman) on the open market than what he is getting back.
3. You should tell guys that are mad about a trade because they would have given more that they should have been making offers themselves to find out what is available.
4. You should tell everyone to decide what you want your veto rules to be: majority vote or commissioner approval. Sounds like they'd prefer the vote, but if they do then it sounds like no trades would ever go through. My suggestion is to make it commissioner approval, but only if 3 or more people protest. If 3 do protest, then get arguments/rationale from both guys involved in the trade. After that, if people want to take a vote then go for it.
5. You should get everyone to agree on what the veto philosophy should be: collusion only or anything that is "too unbalanced"
5b. If the philosophy is based on "imbalance", then get everyone to agree on what "unbalanced" means and how to define it.

[talan37]

You can either~ make it commishioner veto: although with how veto happy people are then they probably wont like this.

Or set up actual criteria that a trade must meet to be considered vetoable. Obviously the people in the league most come to some rough agreement on what these criteria should be.

[Lofunzo]

I feel the only reason the guy wanted it vetoed was because he would have given the third place team a better player than Weathers for a guy like Bonderman.

Then tell him that if you snooze, you lose. He "would have" given a better player while the other guy decided to step up and make a deal. I hate it when people sit there and do nothing with their teams yet they complain about other fair deals.