Would you suspect collusion here?

[LegendoftheFall]

im commish of a commish veto 16 team league. We have a trade pending with the 12th place team trading Papelbon to the 7th place team for Zach Duke. Ive gotten a couple of email complaints and i asked each team to give their rational. just by looking at it, the team giving up papelbon is going to suffer in pitching, and the team getting papelbon will pick up a few points in several pitching categories.

Would you be concerned about this or should i let it go?
thanks for any help. I hate to veto,unless its pretty obvious collusion. But i also dont want the other owners up in arms about it. From my experience, actual or percieved collusion often leads to more collusion by other teams.

[Dan Lambskin]

if you dont think collusion is going on then i wouldnt veto it

[SumG]

I think that's fishy enough to warrant further investigation. An issue I'd be concerned about is a manager out of the running, particularly in redraft league, making an awful trade for the sake of messing with the standings of the league overall, if only because its the only way they can impact the league at that point.

Get in touch with the managers involved and try to get justification for the deal from both parties involved (particularly the guy getting Duke). Presumably the guy getting Duke needs SP help, so what I would be looking for in particular is that the guy trading Papelbon at least checked around to see if he could get something more than Duke in return, which I would think he'd be able to do. If he put in at least a good faith effort to find a better deal out there and nobody else wanted to deal, then I'd be OK with the deal, but if he just phoned it in and made a deal because he was out of it, I'd be OK with a veto.

[creedclay]

I agree with above - I don't know if I'd suspect collusion, but it is a little lopsided. If the team giving Paps REALLY needed SP help, I guess it's acceptable, but he should've been able to get a lot more for Paps than that. Maybe he just didn't want the hassle of shopping around, but it is a little fishy - investigate and see what they say, but I wouldn't veto it.

Help with mine? viewtopic.php?f=189&t=394347

[LegendoftheFall]

all very good points thanks. i emailed him and he just simply said he wanted better SPs. im not convinced its collusion, but i think its more of this guy out of the running just mailing it in and not caring anymore. he didnt shop around, hasnt made any other moves in over a month. A tough call. most of the owners are asking for a veto.

[LegendoftheFall]

i had to make a decision and here's what i posted on the message board. (Sorry i blatantly plagerized your messages You put it so well!!)

ok guys, Im blocking the trade. I hope nobody feels im overstepping my bounds here, but either way somebodys going to be unhappy. Here's my reasoning:

1. I'm concerned about a manager out of the running, particularly in redraft league, making an awful trade for the sake of messing with the standings of the league overall, if only because its the only way he can impact the league at that point. Also,The manager in question had been inactive for over a month before this trade.

2. I tried to get justification for the deal from both parties involved (particularly the guy getting Duke). One didnt respond and the other didnt have a very convincing response.Presumably the guy getting Duke needs SP help, so what I would be looking for in particular is that the guy trading Papelbon at least checked around to see if he could get something more than Duke in return, which I would think he'd be able to do. If he put in at least a good faith effort to find a better deal out there and nobody else wanted to deal, then I'd be OK with the deal, but if he just phoned it in and made a deal because he was out of it, it deserves a veto.

3. Most of the people who cared enough to vote on the issue were against it.

Feel free to ask me any questions. thanks and lets have a good second half.