Can't really make a full judgement without rosters, but on the surface, no, I wouldn't veto. Questions on both sides: Rollins (will he be able to get power back), Pence (up and down), Harden (will he remain healthy), and Weeks (will he get to his potential)?
I would only use a veto when I think collusion is involved. You usually don't see that early in a season.
I come from the school that says no trade should be vetoed unless you can prove collusion. Regardless, of whether I think one side is getting better value, the swap is close enough IMO not to start a firestorm.
My leagues let each manager do what he sees best for his team...which may be different than what you think is best for a team. But I play with people I know and trust, so it could be a different situation.
I wouldn't veto this trade unless there is collusion involved or the one team is a beginner.
RRGL1 wrote:My leagues let each manager do what he sees best for his team...which may be different than what you think is best for a team. But I play with people I know and trust, so it could be a different situation.
I wouldn't veto this trade unless there is collusion involved or the one team is a beginner.
Yes, the team trading away Rollins/Pence admitted he's a beginner.
Is it unfair, without question. Is it lopsided, yes. Would I make that deal, NO. However as unfair as this deal seems I would first examine the basis on why this deal is being made. Is the team acquiring Harden in desperate need of SP? Sure its a bad deal but maybe than owner has a man crush on Harden or he has exhausted all other avenues for acquiring a top flite pitcher and this is the best he can do.
Either way I would investigate or inquire with the owners making deal before vetoing.
rupertoooo wrote:Is it unfair, without question. Is it lopsided, yes. Would I make that deal, NO. However as unfair as this deal seems I would first examine the basis on why this deal is being made. Is the team acquiring Harden in desperate need of SP? Sure its a bad deal but maybe than owner has a man crush on Harden or he has exhausted all other avenues for acquiring a top flite pitcher and this is the best he can do.
Either way I would investigate or inquire with the owners making deal before vetoing.
Apparently he turned down Alexei Ramirez and Shields for just Rollins and accepted this deal instead.
America'sGame wrote:I come from the school that says no trade should be vetoed unless you can prove collusion. Regardless, of whether I think one side is getting better value, the swap is close enough IMO not to start a firestorm.
I come from the school that says you win leagues by having a good draft and making solid FA pickups and fair trades, not from fleecing the noob. But so be it.
America'sGame wrote:I come from the school that says you win leagues by having a good draft and making solid FA pickups and fair trades, not from fleecing the noob. But so be it.
Guess it depends on the league. If you want to look out for the overall integrity of the league, then fleecing the noob (as is clearly the case here) should not be allowed.
But then again, most of the owners are probably just mad that someone beat them to the punch. In that case I say let the trade fly. The beginner will learn the hard way, and the remainder of the league can have an unofficial trade boycott with the offending veteran.
Cafe Home
Fantasy Football
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by kaveman » Thu Mar 26, 2009 1:24 pm 
/charlie2.gif){kind=small}
