Can this be VETOED? WHIR

[mission27]

Team A gets: Cole Hamels
Team B gets: John Smoltz, Jeff Francouer

This is a keeper league so that has to be considered. Is this worth a veto?

Ill answer yours if you please give me some help!

[Matthias]

In a redraft, I would definitely veto. Smoltz is having, and looks like he will continue to have, a year equivalent to Hamels. And I'm a big buyer on Francouer this year... he could be a top-20 OFer.

In a keeper league, I let it go. I didn't get Smoltz in any league because he has to get old eventually (you would think, anyways) and Hamels could be a stud going into the next five years. So it depends kinda on league settings (slots/categories/etc) and how the keepers are structured (keep 3, keep 7, keep at whatever pick, whatever, whatever), but as a generic answer, I can see value equivalence, or at least close enough.

Even though I defend the right to veto trades, I only think it's appropriate where it's truly, truly bad. And this isn't.

[noseeum]

This is one of those where you would definitely have a significant number of owners on both sides of the argument. I think the Smoltz and Francouer is the clear winner, but there are so many owner with the Hamels mancrush and the concern for Smoltz being old that they would prefer Hamels.

Anytime there's debate about who won (even though the Hamels believers are wrong, LOL), there's just no way you can veto.

[WaCougMBS]

This is one of those where you would definitely have a significant number of owners on both sides of the argument. I think the Smoltz and Francouer is the clear winner, but there are so many owner with the Hamels mancrush and the concern for Smoltz being old that they would prefer Hamels.

Anytime there's debate about who won (even though the Hamels believers are wrong, LOL), there's just no way you can veto.

I agree that there is no way you can veto this trade in good faith, though I see the Smoltz side winning quite easily IF everyone stays healthy, etc...

[Oatsdad]

No veto here...

[raiders_umpire]

No veto from me. Smoltz could easily be better then Hamels this year and Francoeur is not a bad bat to have for the future.

[SirGrotius]

what would be the collusion or cheating here? someone's just expecting big things from hamels.

[DaShiz23]

no veto, even though I would lean to one side over the other. Sometimes, a open roster slot can be worth a bit.

[MadMobius]

no veto, even though I would lean to one side over the other. Sometimes, a open roster slot can be worth a bit.

exactly... what if the guy getting Hamels had McLouth riding pine and this was a way to get him into the lineup... then I would love that side of the deal.

no veto on that one

[CruiseJD]

No veto IMO.