Need some ideas for a trade review system

[mistranslation]

I'm in a 10-team H2H points league in its third year of operation. All the members of the league know each other personally, and rules have been generally agreed upon without problems except for one thing: the trade review system.

In the first year, all trades were accepted no matter what. In the second year, trades involving certain teams (some managers are more intelligent than others) had to be approved by a certain number of people to be passed. Now, in the third year, the league commissioner stated that "only trades that are very unfair" are sent to league vote. Of course, what constitutes a "very unfair" trade is completely subjective according to the commissioner's opinions, which leads to arguments and bickering among league members. Some members have become disinterested recently because they feel that the commissioner has used his power to label a trade unfair and send it to vote (which leads many of them to be vetoed by a minimum of 4 votes). In a H2H points league (at least in ours), about 15 of the top 20 players are ace starting pitchers, and as a result, people are very sensitive about what trades are allowed/vetoed/questioned involving top-flight SP's.

Does anyone have any ideas on a better trade review system? I almost feel like the league could fall apart if this issue isn't addressed. Thanks in advance.

[bigmck]

That second year plan, trades involving "certain owners" are reviewed because they are smarter, has got to be the weirdest thing I have ever heard.== I don't like the Commish getting involved at all. It causes hard feelings. Have an owner vote. Four votes in a ten team league is fine for Veto. == I have ran a league for 20 years. We have a rule that within 24 hours after a trade, anyone can request a Veto vote. In our ten team league it requires four votes to Veto. BTW, in 20 years no one has every requested a Veto vote.

[mistranslation]

That second year plan, trades involving "certain owners" are reviewed because they are smarter, has got to be the weirdest thing I have ever heard.

Yeah, it sucks, but we've seen a few people get ripped off way too many times. Everyone is really sensitive about the league's balance, too, and gets ticked off when someone upsets it.

Another unfortunate part, though, is that whenever the commissioner wants a trade to be vetoed, he tries to convince everyone in the league that he can to vote against it. And most of the time, they comply with his request, which obviously really bothers me as well.

[fast dogs]

Have everyone throw a few bucks into a pool and pay someone to rule on your leagues trades
Vetos have ruined more leagues than anything else, do something to save this 1.

[mkultra]

I can't vouch for how it's turned out, since we just started this year, but my new dynasty league works this way:

- Only the commish can veto. Anyone can request a veto on any trade, which opens up a 24-hour discussion, which is basically meant to give guidance and perspective to the commish. The final decision, though, rests with him.

- A commish serves a 3-year term. At the end of any season, a commish can be recalled by a vote of 75% of the remaining managers.

For a long-term league, I think that kind of thing works. At the core, you have to trust your commish to make reasonable decisions. If he's using his powers to skew the game, you should either toss him or the league.

[converge241]

Don't be afraid to use the cafe, perhaps thats even a dedicated thread that could be offered down the line. Present the trade as is, perhaps the rosters, etc etc and let cafe members vote on it.

Sure league members could be in the cafe but if it gets enough views the agenda votes shouldnt matter.

[hockeykidb3]

i personally like the idea of having two commissioners and having them review the trades but nobody can review their own trades and that is the purpose of the two commissioners

[wrveres]

I can't vouch for how it's turned out, since we just started this year, but my new dynasty league works this way:
- Only the commish can veto. Anyone can request a veto on any trade, which opens up a 24-hour discussion, which is basically meant to give guidance and perspective to the commish. The final decision, though, rests with him.
- A commish serves a 3-year term. At the end of any season, a commish can be recalled by a vote of 75% of the remaining managers.
For a long-term league, I think that kind of thing works. At the core, you have to trust your commish to make reasonable decisions. If he's using his powers to skew the game, you should either toss him or the league.

Since you have a league of friends, no matter how knowledgeable they are, accusations are going to fly. Something like mkultra proposed here would be an excellent solution to your problem.

[bklynkenny]

Have everyone throw a few bucks into a pool and pay someone to rule on your leagues trades
Vetos have ruined more leagues than anything else, do something to save this 1.

The consensus in my league is to utilize an external review panel. I'm sure you can find a group of people on some forum who would be willing to do this at a minimal cost.