The Big Bad Veto - Fantasy Baseball Cafe 2014 Fantasy Baseball Cafe
100% Deposit Bonus for Cafe Members!

Return to Baseball Leftovers

The Big Bad Veto

Moderator: Baseball Moderators

Postby Transmogrifier » Wed May 19, 2004 4:15 pm

What do you post?

"I veto all trades that are not completely even, based on draft value, as I see it."

This is absurd, for several reasons:

1. Again, your analysis is subjected onto others.

2. There are no "smart" trades, as all trades must be of equivalent draft value. So, to win your league, it's all about the draft. Cabrera is still a late round pick, Glaus is a bargain now with all those homeruns, and Preston is still a great OFer. This is insane.

Overall, you rule out the possibility that your analysis might be wrong--not theirs.
I'm back. Sorta.

Do not boo Johnny.
Transmogrifier
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Fantasy ExpertCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeSweet 16 Survivor
Posts: 7181
Joined: 17 Apr 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: No taxation without Representation!

Postby bleach168 » Wed May 19, 2004 4:17 pm

pokerplaya wrote:A-Rod for Delgado is just another example of what I feel is wrong with the veto. This trade is clearly not something that should be vetoed. Your analysis is irrelevant, it is not your trade. Whether or not A-Rod out produces Delgado is irrelevant. It is his prerogative to make that deal, and what you or anyone else feel about that deal should not be factored in.


Maybe I should add that I offered him Beltran for A-Rod and he rejected it. Instead he wants Delgado? If he really wanted Delgado that badly, why didn't he just draft him with the #1 pick? It all seems so illogical. I don't know about you, but that makes me suspect collusion. Of course, I can't prove it.
"And so he spoke, and so he spoke, that lord of Castamere. But now the rains weep o'er his hall, with no one there to hear." - The Rains of Castamere
bleach168
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy Expert
Posts: 5058
(Past Year: 16)
Joined: 22 Apr 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby rolenfan » Wed May 19, 2004 4:20 pm

bleach168 wrote:For the record, I've only vetoed one trade so far this year. It was an A-Rod for Delgado trade and so far, I'm in the right.

Now, as for speaking with the person trying to trade A-Rod away, I did do that. I just didn't like his reasoning so I vetoed it. He felt Delgado would produce as much as A-Rod and then left it at that. He didn't even think Delgado would outperform A-Rod. But maybe that was because I pointed out with career stats that A-Rod is better than Delgado in every category in our league not to mention his position eligibility.

Of course, there is the possibility Delgado outperforms A-Rod. In which case I would be wrong. But 9 times out of 10, A-Rod will have more value than Delgado. I will take a 90% veto success rate. In the possible case that A-Rod gets injured and Delgado outperforms him that way, I don't consider that a mistake on my part. The injury possibility was not a factor in making that trade and shouldn't be counted against the veto'ers if that were to become a reality.

As for the Pujols vs. Green version 2001 debate. This example represents the 10% mistake rate. But did the person who missed out on Pujols really lose anything? Green did hit 49 homers and stole 20 bases that year.

That's not the greatest example, but I do get your point and I will admit vetoes don't always work out the way that was intended. But like I said, a 90% success rate is okay with me.

Don't you see? You are doing it again. You are imposing YOUR opinions onto MY team. You absolutely are NOT in the right voting against that trade. The guy told you that he felt Delgado would have a better year. No collusion, no facts hidden, he just was playing his hunch, or maybe his research pointed that way. Just because you think he is wrong does not make the trade unfair. It is not your place to decide who is of more value and base your decision on that. You are stepping over the line.

You have no right to say I can't trade A-Rod for Delgado. Maybe you are correct in that A-Rod is a better player, maybe you are not, that is not the point. The point is that I want Delgado and not A-Rod, for whatever reason. Maybe I have Renteria also as a SS, Lowell at 3B and nobody at 1B. Whether you think A-Rod is a better choice for SS or 3B doesn't matter. What I think is what matters for my team. Your stance gives the appearance that all teams are to be operated collectively by the managers in the league, and that is just wrong.

Shoot, why not just appoint you the trade czar of the league? You know what is best for every team, why should they even bother thinking of trades? You just do it for them. That's a stretch, I know, but geez, you really think you have the right to tell people who is better for their team than they do? You can disagree with their trade decisions, that's OK, but that doesn't make it OK for you to prevent them from making their own mistakes.

In the absence of improper ethics, you have no reason to vote against that A-Rod/Delgado trade. Side Note: I disagree with your conclusion that A-Rod is a better player than Delgado. They are actually very close when you look at their career numbers. Besides, because of the need to fill rosters by position, it isn't a matter of who is better overall, but what do I need more, a stud 1B or a stud SS/3B.
"You can observe a lot by watching" Yogi
rolenfan
College Coach
College Coach

User avatar

Posts: 315
Joined: 11 Apr 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: St. Louis

Postby pokerplaya » Wed May 19, 2004 4:20 pm

Transmogrifier wrote:Overall, you rule out the possibility that your analysis might be wrong--not theirs.


Incredibly simplistic argument, but I overlooked it completely. Completely true, and absolutely no one can argue against that premise.

Bleach, when people draft they have a certain game plan in mind. He had the first pick, chose A-Rod, which he thought was the best pick at the time. However, he then drafted and he may have drafted a good SS, 3B and was lacking a stud 1b and he turned his sights to Delgado. While ARod was his pick in round one, he didn't realize he would draft so and so in a late round, and now he has no 1B and is stacked at SS or 3B. My point is that people can change their mind, and addressing team needs weigh heavily. That being said, I do not know who is on his team so I can only speculate.
Last edited by pokerplaya on Wed May 19, 2004 4:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
pokerplaya
Kitchen Staff
Kitchen Staff

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe MusketeerPick 3 Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 12812
(Past Year: 9)
Joined: 18 May 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby rolenfan » Wed May 19, 2004 4:26 pm

bleach168 wrote:
pokerplaya wrote:A-Rod for Delgado is just another example of what I feel is wrong with the veto. This trade is clearly not something that should be vetoed. Your analysis is irrelevant, it is not your trade. Whether or not A-Rod out produces Delgado is irrelevant. It is his prerogative to make that deal, and what you or anyone else feel about that deal should not be factored in.


Maybe I should add that I offered him Beltran for A-Rod and he rejected it. Instead he wants Delgado? If he really wanted Delgado that badly, why didn't he just draft him with the #1 pick? It all seems so illogical. I don't know about you, but that makes me suspect collusion. Of course, I can't prove it.

You mean you think Beltran is better than Delgado, and A-Rod is better than both? Maybe, but if so, not by much. All three are exceptional players, all first-round picks in most leagues. All three are also at different positions, so the value is relative. If I have Pujols, Delgado is worth less to me than A-Rod. If I have Tejada, A-Rod is worth less to me than Delgado.

Still, we aren't discussing what player is better, we are discussing what justifies a trade being vetoed. Nothing you have said so far justifies a veto. You have a right to your opinion of players, so does the other manager. You basically just told the guy wanting Delgado that your opinion means more than his does and that you know what is best for his team, he doesn't have the right to make that decision.

That, my friend, is just wrong.
"You can observe a lot by watching" Yogi
rolenfan
College Coach
College Coach

User avatar

Posts: 315
Joined: 11 Apr 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: St. Louis

Postby bleach168 » Wed May 19, 2004 4:27 pm

Transmogrifier wrote:What do you post?

"I veto all trades that are not completely even, based on draft value, as I see it."

This is absurd, for several reasons:

1. Again, your analysis is subjected onto others.

2. There are no "smart" trades, as all trades must be of equivalent draft value. So, to win your league, it's all about the draft. Cabrera is still a late round pick, Glaus is a bargain now with all those homeruns, and Preston is still a great OFer. This is insane.

Overall, you rule out the possibility that your analysis might be wrong--not theirs.


Is that refering to me? I've vetoed 1 trade out of 15+ trades. Please don't put words into my mouth that I never said. A lot of those trades made me queasy, but I let them go anyways.

I've stated before that I may be wrong. But if I'm right 90% of the time, am I really harming the system?

As for Glaus and Preston being worth their draft position. Please look at my previous posts. You have to allow for in season factors such as injuries or playing time.
"And so he spoke, and so he spoke, that lord of Castamere. But now the rains weep o'er his hall, with no one there to hear." - The Rains of Castamere
bleach168
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy Expert
Posts: 5058
(Past Year: 16)
Joined: 22 Apr 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby Tavish » Wed May 19, 2004 4:27 pm

It actually sounds more like a vengeance veto than anything bleach. I will at least give you credit in that you offered something for a player in question. I have had 4 Beltre trades vetoed in a public Yahoo league (it was an autopick league where I got stuck with 3 real good 3B and no SP). When asked everyone said I wasn't getting any value back for Beltre and then they all refused to accept any trade for him saying he was over rated.

So far every trade that has been vetoed in the league because I was "giving away too much" in their opinion has killed me later down the road as my hunches came to life. Breaking down other people's trades and using the veto based on what you think about it is not only quite arrogant, but an extremely poor way to play a competitive league. Collusion is often clear and collusion is the only reason to use a veto.
Tavish
Mod in Retirement
Mod in Retirement

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe SpotterWeb Supporter
Posts: 11070
(Past Year: 25)
Joined: 3 May 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby Transmogrifier » Wed May 19, 2004 4:28 pm

bleach168 wrote:
Transmogrifier wrote:What do you post?

"I veto all trades that are not completely even, based on draft value, as I see it."

This is absurd, for several reasons:

1. Again, your analysis is subjected onto others.

2. There are no "smart" trades, as all trades must be of equivalent draft value. So, to win your league, it's all about the draft. Cabrera is still a late round pick, Glaus is a bargain now with all those homeruns, and Preston is still a great OFer. This is insane.

Overall, you rule out the possibility that your analysis might be wrong--not theirs.


Is that refering to me? I've vetoed 1 trade out of 15+ trades. Please don't put words into my mouth that I never said. A lot of those trades made me queasy, but I let them go anyways.

I've stated before that I may be wrong. But if I'm right 90% of the time, am I really harming the system?

As for Glaus and Preston being worth their draft position. Please look at my previous posts. You have to allow for in season factors such as injuries or playing time.


Yes, if you are wrong 10 percent of the time, you are hurting the system. Again, you are ruling out the possibility that you are wrong, instead of them.
I'm back. Sorta.

Do not boo Johnny.
Transmogrifier
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Fantasy ExpertCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeSweet 16 Survivor
Posts: 7181
Joined: 17 Apr 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: No taxation without Representation!

Postby bleach168 » Wed May 19, 2004 4:32 pm

The guy told you that he felt Delgado would have a better year.


No he didn't say that. He told me Delgado would equal A-Rod.

Besides, because of the need to fill rosters by position, it isn't a matter of who is better overall, but what do I need more, a stud 1B or a stud SS/3B.


Yes I understand that. Interestingly, he does have Renteria and he pretty much plays A-Rod at Util. With Delgado, he would play him at Util also.

Put these two points together, and by his reasoning, he's not even gaining anything by making this trade. WHY TRADE IF YOU DON'T EVEN THINK YOU'RE IMPROVING YOUR TEAM??? That's why I vetoed it.
"And so he spoke, and so he spoke, that lord of Castamere. But now the rains weep o'er his hall, with no one there to hear." - The Rains of Castamere
bleach168
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy Expert
Posts: 5058
(Past Year: 16)
Joined: 22 Apr 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby Madvillain » Wed May 19, 2004 4:40 pm

Transmogrifier wrote:Bleach, I would not want to be in a league with you.


Agreed. Wow. Nobody's going to tell me how to run my team.
Madvillain
Little League Legend
Little League Legend


Posts: 22
Joined: 21 Apr 2004
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


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