When to Veto - Fantasy Baseball Cafe 2014 Fantasy Baseball Cafe
100% Deposit Bonus for Cafe Members!

Return to Baseball Leftovers

When to Veto

Moderator: Baseball Moderators

When to veto

Only Collusion
25
56%
Every Unbalanced Trade
1
2%
Only Extremely Unbalanced Trades (even though no collusion)
19
42%
 
Total votes : 45

Re: When to Veto

Postby jackie hayes » Wed Apr 07, 2010 10:45 am

I was in a league last year where someone wanted to trade Hanley for Carlos Zambrano (straight up). He didn't think Z was better, he was just a Zambrano fan and didn't care about competing in fantasy. It's not collusion, per se, but I'll veto that every time. It takes less than collusion, but more than being lopsided -- if I believe both teams are trying to compete (even if one is going about it in a stupid way), then I won't veto.
jackie hayes
Major League Manager
Major League Manager

Cafeholic
Posts: 2069
(Past Year: 63)
Joined: 19 Apr 2008
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: When to Veto

Postby great gretzky » Wed Apr 07, 2010 11:06 am

Question:

If I am getting the perceived "crap half" of the trade, why should I have to divulge my reasons for doing so?

I remember a handful of years ago, someone in one of my leagues traded Sosa, Frank Thomas and Mike Lieberthal for Crawford, Pierre and Podsednick (this was 2003), and people were all kinds of mad. Well, the point is, it got that team into the money, whereas he was treading water otherwise. This was the first year Crawford hit over 50 stolen bases, but people didn't know -- so he was "unproven." Juan Pierre was known by now, but didn't have the stature of Sosa or Big Hurt, and Pods was even more unknown than Crawford.

People RIPPED on it. I did too. And it taught me a very valuable lesson in this game. It isn't our place to judge it/veto. And the worst was, the guy had to publicly explain himself, which of course muted the novelty of his strategy. If it went by undiscussed, it would have flown under the radar and been harder to thwart, as pods and craw were not known for being game changers yet.
great gretzky
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Cafeholic
Posts: 3769
Joined: 3 Jun 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Washington, DC

Re: When to Veto

Postby kab21 » Wed Apr 07, 2010 11:22 am

We had a trade vetoed last year that featured some obscure MR that got bumped up to the teams closer. But the guy that traded away his new closer didn't know about this and was thrilled to get an offer for mr obscurity. Now I don't care to protect the team not paying attention but in a deep league this pretty much amounts to getting a closer for free. And that can be the difference between 3rd and 1st. so that's getting a veto along with the guy that accepts a proposed trade when he finds out that one of the players that he is trading suffered a bad injury. There is no place for that here.

But for the most part I don't use the veto button. I'm not saying I won't ever veto a trade but it irks me when I see several veto votes for every trade that happens.
kab21
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicCafe WriterCafe Ranker
Posts: 5340
(Past Year: 170)
Joined: 24 Nov 2007
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: When to Veto

Postby thedude » Wed Apr 07, 2010 11:31 am

great gretzky wrote:Question:

If I am getting the perceived "crap half" of the trade, why should I have to divulge my reasons for doing so?

I remember a handful of years ago, someone in one of my leagues traded Sosa, Frank Thomas and Mike Lieberthal for Crawford, Pierre and Podsednick (this was 2003), and people were all kinds of mad. Well, the point is, it got that team into the money, whereas he was treading water otherwise. This was the first year Crawford hit over 50 stolen bases, but people didn't know -- so he was "unproven." Juan Pierre was known by now, but didn't have the stature of Sosa or Big Hurt, and Pods was even more unknown than Crawford.

People RIPPED on it. I did too. And it taught me a very valuable lesson in this game. It isn't our place to judge it/veto. And the worst was, the guy had to publicly explain himself, which of course muted the novelty of his strategy. If it went by undiscussed, it would have flown under the radar and been harder to thwart, as pods and craw were not known for being game changers yet.


I agree with this. When people veto a trade they are really making a different value judgement than the owner "losing" the trade. Sometimes you need to make risky trades if you want to win the league. by vetoing a trade you are just imposing your subjective views on another owner. No one would ever say that an does not have the right to make a "bad draft choice," so why should the league say an owner does not have the right to make a "bad trade?"

On a different note: What constitutes a bad trade is a slippery thing to define. My extremely unbalanced trade might be your slightly unbalanced trade, which might be "the losing owner's" fair trade. The hard and fast rule of no vetoes without collusion means that our own value judgments are not imposed upon others.

shawngee03 wrote:a tricky form of collusion has presented itself in one of my leagues two different times

my cousin isnt the most knowledgable guy...he just enjoys the game aspect...not all the research and time...so he really doenst know his stuff.

which is fine...but the problem is he will only trade w me. his first year....i sent him a few trade offers...and he accepted everytime. awesome...great for me. it was fine until someone pointed out to me that he was only trading w me...not responding to anyone else's requests...bc he trusted me. he wasnt trying to make my team better at his team's expense...he just didnt know better.

so i had to make it a point not to trade w him anymore for the sake of the league's integrity

the same league has one of my good buddies and his cousin.

the first year they made a trade right after the draft...and another one throughout the year. the cousin did not trade anymore. the next year the same thing. then this year the same thing the day after the draft. all the times my buddy getting the better end of the deal by a good margin. nothing that would create a problem normally....but when you realize that the cousin is like my cousin and only trading w his more knoweldgable cousin out of trust...we finally had to veto the trade this year and tell them to deal with someone else or their stuff would keep getting vetoed

so watch out for the unintenional collusion


I agree that this is collusion.

That fits within a category of what I consider a test for collusion i posted in another thread:

thedude wrote:Some common indicias of collusion are:

* Trades between friends

* Multiple lopsided trades between two owners (often the most obvious sign)

* Lopsided trade btw commissioner and another team, which the commissioner quickly approves

* Player turning down multiple good trade offers and choosing the worst trade offer

Usually the only time collusion can be defiantly determined just by looking at the trade itself is when a star is traded for someone who is on the DL or is not on a major league roster. Here one star player is involved, so you really need to look at more than the trade itself.
Last edited by thedude on Wed Apr 07, 2010 11:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
"I do not think baseball of today is any better than it was 30 years ago... I still think Radbourne is the greatest of the pitchers." John Sullivan 1914-Old athletes never change.
thedude
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicPick 3 Weekly Winner
Posts: 8413
(Past Year: 2)
Joined: 18 Dec 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: The Good Life

Re: When to Veto

Postby Maris09 » Wed Apr 07, 2010 11:33 am

jackie hayes wrote:I was in a league last year where someone wanted to trade Hanley for Carlos Zambrano (straight up). He didn't think Z was better, he was just a Zambrano fan and didn't care about competing in fantasy. It's not collusion, per se, but I'll veto that every time. It takes less than collusion, but more than being lopsided -- if I believe both teams are trying to compete (even if one is going about it in a stupid way), then I won't veto.

Exactly. It's all about COMPETITIVE BALANCE.

In a keeper league this is obviously much harder to determine, in which case probably most trades cannot be vetoed

But in a redraft league, it's fairly easy to determine if a trade is just A) "Kinda unbalanced," or B) Effecting the competitive balance of the league.

It's also not that difficult to let the people involved know, and have them tweak it a little bit to make it a more even trade. I have no problem with anyone trying to make themselves better, but you've gotta give something up in the process too, otherwise why do we all try so hard and pay attention to this stuff?
Maris09
Major League Manager
Major League Manager

User avatar
Cafeholic
Posts: 2152
(Past Year: 8)
Joined: 3 Jun 2008
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: When to Veto

Postby thedude » Wed Apr 07, 2010 11:44 am

Maris09 wrote:But in a redraft league, it's fairly easy to determine if a trade is just A) "Kinda unbalanced," or B) Effecting the competitive balance of the league.


I disagree completely. It is very hard to determine in many cases if a trade is only "kinda unbalanced" or completely unbalanced.

Even if it were possible, the other owners in the league are in the worst position to make this value judgment. The owners who are not involved in the trade are not benefited in the least by a trade going through. In fact if one team even has the possibility of improving, the owners have an interest in making sure that trade does not pass because it is a risk that the improving team will win the league. Therefore every owner in every league has the self-interest of vetoing every trade that does not involve his team.
"I do not think baseball of today is any better than it was 30 years ago... I still think Radbourne is the greatest of the pitchers." John Sullivan 1914-Old athletes never change.
thedude
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicPick 3 Weekly Winner
Posts: 8413
(Past Year: 2)
Joined: 18 Dec 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: The Good Life

Re: When to Veto

Postby great gretzky » Wed Apr 07, 2010 12:00 pm

IT's NOT about "competitive balance" -- I hate that canard. It's about "competitive integrity."

If everyone is all lumped together, how is parity fun? The point is to win, and especially in roto -- it is a zero sum game. My gains come at your expense. If you start worrying about "Balance" you get into situations where people veto just because the leader is getting even better, even if the trade was fair and made sense for both parties -- and that gets old and stupid real quick.

What I care about is the integrity. Is everyone operating in a good faith effort in their team's best interests? That is the goal from where I sit.

Otherwise, I'll be damned if someone vetoes my trade because I didn't get enough or its lopsided. I have stated many times on this board, and will do so again -- it's my right to overpay if I deem it necessary to do so. Leagues are all unique -- there are baseline values for players, but each dynamic is different. Some leagues have owners who are just stubborn and won't deal. If that is the case, it then skews the market for assets, sometimes forcing me to overpay for what I need. Some leagues are competitive, but there are one or two people who take it to the next level and study the specific cat standings. Some trades make a heap of sense if you dig deeper and actually think about it, but unfortunately people forget its not a game to get the best collection of names, it's to have the proper (winning) distribution of stats.

Unless it is obviously collusion, especially in mixed leagues, the league can recover from one or two bad trades. It seems to me the real snookerings come from (just a guesstimate) the round 5-15 types, because even newbies know the huge names. And while those guys can and often do win a league for someone, it is also something that can be duplicated through a savvy wire move or a subtle trade of your own.
great gretzky
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Cafeholic
Posts: 3769
Joined: 3 Jun 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Washington, DC

Re: When to Veto

Postby DaSh 1s » Wed Apr 07, 2010 12:05 pm

Someone in the first half traded:

BJ Upton
Josh Hamilton
Dan Haren
For
Alex Rodriguez
Corey Hart


Not gonna lie, I yelled veto there.

To make matters worse, it was the commish's brother who was recieving BJ, Josh, Haren and for the duration of the trade the League Vote rule disappeared and it go switched to Commish Approval. Absurd.
B-Chad wrote:Pedroia's LD rate of 20% is reason to believe he'll maintain a higher BA then Cano. It should also be noted he hits more FB's then Cano, which means that even if he posts a lower HR/FB then Cano, he should come in reasonably close to Cano in HR's
DaSh 1s
Major League Manager
Major League Manager

User avatar

Posts: 1893
(Past Year: 1)
Joined: 1 Aug 2007
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: When to Veto

Postby Art Vandelay » Wed Apr 07, 2010 12:12 pm

Why on earth would you veto that trade?
Image
Art Vandelay
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

CafeholicFantasy ExpertPick 3 Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 5265
Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: When to Veto

Postby Art Vandelay » Wed Apr 07, 2010 12:15 pm

kab21 wrote:We had a trade vetoed last year that featured some obscure MR that got bumped up to the teams closer. But the guy that traded away his new closer didn't know about this and was thrilled to get an offer for mr obscurity. Now I don't care to protect the team not paying attention but in a deep league this pretty much amounts to getting a closer for free. And that can be the difference between 3rd and 1st. so that's getting a veto along with the guy that accepts a proposed trade when he finds out that one of the players that he is trading suffered a bad injury. There is no place for that here.

Again, how is this vetoable? One owner does more research and pays closer attention to the news, then gets punished for it when he makes a trade that actually utilizes that information to improve his team. If I was the owner who was getting the now-closer and my trade got vetoed, I wouldn't return to the league the next year. Ridiculous.
Image
Art Vandelay
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

CafeholicFantasy ExpertPick 3 Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 5265
Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

PreviousNext

Return to Baseball Leftovers

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Today's Games
Friday, Oct. 24
(All times are EST, weather icons show forecast for game time)

Kansas City at San Francisco
(8:07 pm)

  • Fantasy Baseball
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact