Victorino for Ellsbury Vetoed?

[FBL Commish]

Leagues with owner veto are just asking for crap like this. If a brotha wants Ellsbury, let a brotha have em'...He'll learn (or be very lucky).

[sox 06]

The trade of Victorino for Ellsbury was prosposed and accepted again and this time there was no veto

[commence8]

OK, well that pretty much invalidates your league's veto system nothing significant has happened lately which would change the values of these players. Have fun in this league...hope you do better next season.

[quitesanemax]

OK, well that pretty much invalidates your league's veto system nothing significant has happened lately which would change the values of these players. Have fun in this league...hope you do better next season.

Yeah, sure, whatever. I'm not sure if Sox06 has talked to any of them, which may have been some reason for the change of view. But even if not, it is possible that one or two of the voters who voted against the trade originally decided that they had been wrong the first time around, and so it didn't get vetoed this time. Also, one thing has changed since this thread started... Coco Crisp has gotten injured, so there is more of a chance that Ellsbury gets the starting job. Its a groin injury too, which I'm always weary of, so, expecially where Ellsbury has impressed already, I see a good chance of Ellsbury getting the starting nod, at least to start the season. If Ellsbury has the starting job, there is absolutely no reason to veto this trade, IMO.

[commence8]

I wasn't aware of the Crisp injury, that must have happened recently.

How many times should a trade try to get passed before it's too many? I guess you also like the way the hall of fame is voted on? But really, this discussion is null and void...Sox06's original question was answered. I'm happy it turned out the way he wanted.

[Russell James]

Good to see the trade was put through.

I don't like league votes because people will never be objective and everyone assigns different values to every player.

Some of you guys are saying Cuddyer and Victorino was too much, I disagree. I am in a 14 team league and Cuddyer remains on the waiver wire. Who cares about Cuddyer, he is a waiver wire warrior in most leagues. He was probably just a throw in anyways.

Every league should allow every trade to go through unless it is a collusive trade or just obviously bad trades. EX: A-Rod for Michael Cuddyer would be a very bad trade. When you deal with league votes people will actually veto trades for no other reason then they don't want a particular team to get stronger. I have played in enough of those leagues that I stay out of them. Owners should be allowed to manage their teams however they want.

Good Luck Sox06, sounds like an interesting league.

[bluebelly83]

I understand why people might veto the trade, but I really think it's manager's choice.

When I commish leagues, I tend to leave it wide open for managers. I call those tricky moves "shananagans"... and I've only had to call it once or twice in 6 years of fantasy sports playing.

Personally, I think Victorino will put up better and more consistent numbers.

[FBL Commish]

Every league should allow every trade to go through unless it is a collusive trade or just obviously bad trades.

Right on. I played in a keeper league for over a decade with no veto (only commish) with ZERO problems. Now my league, FBL, is commish veto only. I don't want anyone vetoing my trade FOR ANY REASON. And, if I can't trust my commish to adjudicate effectivly, then I'm in the wrong league.

[Russell James]

A big 10-4 on that one FBL Commish. I left a league because of that very reason.

[tribefan08]

victorino full season = carl crawford #'s