Veto: Bad trades or collusion only?

[still-hate-francisco-cabrera]

I hate it when people veto trades because they think it is "unbalanced". It might be, but if a manager is dumb enough to trade away one of his stars for 3 utility infielders, my thought isn't "We can't let this happen". My thought is "Why didn't I offer that idiot my 3 utility infielders first!!!".

[bleach168]

I'm willing to bet that in many of these cases, collusion was involved and you just couldn't prove it. I've been in leagues where there was collusion and it wasn't admitted until well after the season ended. I've been in a different league where one owner was able to amass 6 first round picks through trading and I couldn't prove he cheated in any way. I've vetoed a few deals when I commished but two savvy owners (or one owner with two teams) could very easily collude under my watch even though I'm probably the strictest guy here.

When I don't play fantasy baseball, I play all sorts of other games against people, be it cards or online gaming and I have never played a game where there wasn't people looking for ways to cheat. If people could get away with cheating (and most of the time, they do) you gosh darn better believe they are cheating their ass off.

Like Poker said, the best solution is to play in competitive leagues where there are no idiots (so there's no defense against a bad trade). But that's like 2% of leagues out there. Good luck.

[Oatsdad]

I'm willing to bet that in many of these cases, collusion was involved and you just couldn't prove it.

Yeah, maybe, but there really ARE some dumb players out there. Last year I got Carlos Lee and Matt Holliday for Nick Swisher and Troy Glaus!

[Trojan Pony]

I would say 98% of the time for collusion only. But there's that 2% for EGREGIOUSLY lopsided trades, often due to something like one of the guy's being unfamiliar with the league's specific scoring and doing a stupid trade he doesn't even realize is stupid, something like that. As long as I've been a commish, one, maybe two, trades have crossed this threshold. A lot of what I considered to be lopsided trades have passed, but they weren't bad enough to warrant a veto. It's not my job to manage other people's teams.

[Syfo-Dyas]

No fantasy baseball commissioner should EVER believe he is so smart that he can unilaterally veto trades because the THINKS they are not balanced. That's ridiculous.

Outside of collusion, every team owner has the right to run his team any way he wants. Who the heck are you (or I) to say he can't make a "bad" trade? I'm all for educating owners when they make a bad trade...sending a quick e-mail to let them know what they did...but I wouldn't dare tell them they can't make a trade because I think it's imbalanced.

I've seen enough "bad" trades turn out to be good trades that it's simply not worth trying to make this determination.

The Comish shouldnt but the league should veto.

Wheres the line between a stupid trade and collusion?
In Football I talked about a lopsided trade in one league where I was out of contention, and in return I wouldve recieved a similar tradeoffer in another league from the same manager where I had a chance to win.
I didnt wanna do it, so it never materialized.
It wouldve been clearly collusion. But since noone wouldve known about it, just a bad trade.

Ive seen enough bad trades turn out to be worse than anyone would ever imagined, so that doesnt prove anything.

ANd Im glad that the league vetoed some of my trades cause I make stupid things too, although I won 13 of 20 baseball leagues I played in.

[Matthias]

No fantasy baseball commissioner should EVER believe he is so smart that he can unilaterally veto trades because the THINKS they are not balanced. That's ridiculous.

Outside of collusion, every team owner has the right to run his team any way he wants. Who the heck are you (or I) to say he can't make a "bad" trade? I'm all for educating owners when they make a bad trade...sending a quick e-mail to let them know what they did...but I wouldn't dare tell them they can't make a trade because I think it's imbalanced.

I've seen enough "bad" trades turn out to be good trades that it's simply not worth trying to make this determination.

The Comish shouldnt but the league should veto.

Wheres the line between a stupid trade and collusion?
In Football I talked about a lopsided trade in one league where I was out of contention, and in return I wouldve recieved a similar tradeoffer in another league from the same manager where I had a chance to win.
I didnt wanna do it, so it never materialized.
It wouldve been clearly collusion. But since noone wouldve known about it, just a bad trade.

Exactly. Anyone who is a, "No veto except for collusion" true believer, answer one question....

how do you detect collusion in a trade?

[Oatsdad]

how do you detect collusion in a trade?

No one claims it's easy. Heck, I'm sure some thought collusion was involved last year when I traded Swisher and Glaus for Carlos Lee and Matt Holliday! No collusion at all - I didn't (and still don't) know the guy, but he was just not too sharp as a fantasy player.

The collusion issue is the main reason I think any trade vetoes should solely be at the discretion of the commisioner. He can try to figure out if collusion occurred or not. I view this as "innocent until proven guilty" - we assume a trade isn't collusion until proof otherwise.

There're too many valid trades shot down because people worry about their own interests. They claim to care about "competitive balance" but they really veto to make sure Player A doesn't get better...

[Matthias]

how do you detect collusion in a trade?

No one claims it's easy.

My question wasn't if it was easy: my question is how do you do it? Nothing you said addressed that.

[Syfo-Dyas]

how do you detect collusion in a trade?

No one claims it's easy. Heck, I'm sure some thought collusion was involved last year when I traded Swisher and Glaus for Carlos Lee and Matt Holliday! No collusion at all - I didn't (and still don't) know the guy, but he was just not too sharp as a fantasy player.

Now we talkin about Mickey Mouse leagues too. Playin there must be fun.

[Oatsdad]

how do you detect collusion in a trade?

No one claims it's easy.

My question wasn't if it was easy: my question is how do you do it? Nothing you said addressed that.

It's up to the commish to investigate and talk to the players involved. The commish checks out the situation and makes a decision based on what he learns.

Like I said, it's innocent until proven guilty. The commish has to chat with the players and go with his opinion of the situation. That's what a good commish does: rules over the situation in a fair manner.

Does this mean that some circumstances of collusion might go through? Of course, but that's better than having trades vetoed because some schmuck is jealous that he didn't get a good deal. The notion that any lop-sided trade should be vetoed due to "competitive balance" is nuts. They don't have rules for "competitive balance" in the real game - why is it so important in fantasy?