- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
When should a trade be vetoed?
Posted on 9/6/16 at 6:17 am
Posted on 9/6/16 at 6:17 am
One guy offered another in my league Jonathan Stewart for Isaiah Crowell... the guy who would receive Stewart told the other guy it was stupid, but the Stewart owner didn't care.
The guy receiving Stewart mentioned the trade to a different guy in the league... he said he was going to tell the commissioner (his best friend) that he wanted that trade vetoed because it wasn't fair. The commissioner vetoed it the next day.
I think it was a chickenshit move by the guy not involved in the trade and the commissioner. The projection for both were similar the first week. I understand a veto if it's something ridiculous like Julio Jones for Jay Ajayi or something, but by their way of thinking, all trades not exactly even should be vetoed.
The guy receiving Stewart mentioned the trade to a different guy in the league... he said he was going to tell the commissioner (his best friend) that he wanted that trade vetoed because it wasn't fair. The commissioner vetoed it the next day.
I think it was a chickenshit move by the guy not involved in the trade and the commissioner. The projection for both were similar the first week. I understand a veto if it's something ridiculous like Julio Jones for Jay Ajayi or something, but by their way of thinking, all trades not exactly even should be vetoed.
7
Posted on 9/6/16 at 7:03 am to zsav77
Yea that shouldn't have been vetoed
Posted on 9/6/16 at 7:16 am to zsav77
Trading 1 player for 1 player when they are the same position
It makes no sense, IMO.
It makes no sense, IMO.
Posted on 9/6/16 at 7:26 am to VermilionTiger
I agree, the trade didn't make sense, but it wasn't like someone was trying to get an unfair advantage.
That is when a trade should be vetoed in my opinion.
That is when a trade should be vetoed in my opinion.
Posted on 9/6/16 at 8:02 am to zsav77
That shouldn't have been vetoed. If you have reason to suspect collusion or if the trade is so unbalanced that you have reason to suspect collusion are the only real reasons.
A couple of years ago my league vetoed a trade because I included Dez instead of Megatron. I had originally offered Mega because I thought the name carried more weight, but the guy wanted Dez more. I chewed out everybody in the league for abusing the veto function, and they let it through. They tried to argue that they blocked the trade because they thought it made my team too strong. Which is bullshite. It turns out that I would have made it to the championship game if I had kept Dez because he blew up the last few weeks of the season. You never know what's going to happen. That's why you don't block trades just because you don't like them.
A couple of years ago my league vetoed a trade because I included Dez instead of Megatron. I had originally offered Mega because I thought the name carried more weight, but the guy wanted Dez more. I chewed out everybody in the league for abusing the veto function, and they let it through. They tried to argue that they blocked the trade because they thought it made my team too strong. Which is bullshite. It turns out that I would have made it to the championship game if I had kept Dez because he blew up the last few weeks of the season. You never know what's going to happen. That's why you don't block trades just because you don't like them.
Posted on 9/6/16 at 8:06 am to Peazey
Exactly. That's what the guy who was receiving Stewart told the guy who was pushing for the veto. No collusion involved, no crazy unbalanced trade.
After it was vetoed, they argued in texts for a while until the guy whose trade got vetoed told the other guy "you know I would never veto a trade like that if you were the one receiving it". The guy who wanted the veto reluctantly agreed.
After it was vetoed, they argued in texts for a while until the guy whose trade got vetoed told the other guy "you know I would never veto a trade like that if you were the one receiving it". The guy who wanted the veto reluctantly agreed.
Posted on 9/6/16 at 8:28 am to zsav77
Collusion is the only reason imo to veto a trade, stupidity does not count as collusion
Posted on 9/6/16 at 8:39 am to zsav77
Collusion only.
Unfair trades shouldn't get vetoed.
I'll go out on a limb and say Crowell has a better year though
Unfair trades shouldn't get vetoed.
I'll go out on a limb and say Crowell has a better year though
Posted on 9/6/16 at 8:55 am to TigerTatorTots
Exactly right TTT. Collusion only. No one can predict the future and wanna be know it all FF guys think they know better than others. This trade is is nowhere close to veto. The guys paid their money, let them make the moves they want to.
This post was edited on 9/6/16 at 10:03 am
Posted on 9/6/16 at 8:55 am to zsav77
Shouldn't have been vetoed. There are many reasons why someone would accept what you would see as an unfair trade, like if he was burned by Stewart in the past and wanted to take a chance on Crowell, or maybe he's a UGA fan. That trade is at least close so that should not have been vetoed.
Vetoes are for obvious collusion or trades so out of whack that it disrupts the parity of the league. Your example of Julio Jones for Ajayi is a good one. In one league last year I had one owner trying to trade Peyton Manning (drafted in the 4th round) to another owner for Le'Veon Bell (drafted in the 1st round). This was the next day after the draft and they were husband and wife. That's a veto.
Vetoes are for obvious collusion or trades so out of whack that it disrupts the parity of the league. Your example of Julio Jones for Ajayi is a good one. In one league last year I had one owner trying to trade Peyton Manning (drafted in the 4th round) to another owner for Le'Veon Bell (drafted in the 1st round). This was the next day after the draft and they were husband and wife. That's a veto.
Posted on 9/6/16 at 8:57 am to zsav77
There should have been a league vote before the commissioner got involved. Every league owner "should" be given the opportunity to voice their opinion. Your commissioner has set the tone that he has no integrity.
Posted on 9/6/16 at 9:04 am to VermilionTiger
quote:
Trading 1 player for 1 player when they are the same position
It makes no sense, IMO.
not everybody values players the same.. if you and i were trading, this early, and we were both happy, why the hell would it matter to anyone else? especially in a trade as marginal as this one
Posted on 9/6/16 at 9:06 am to Mr. Hangover
quote:
not everybody values players the same.
Exactly, I can see situations where a 1 for 1 with the same positions make perfect sense.
Posted on 9/6/16 at 9:07 am to Peazey
quote:
They tried to argue that they blocked the trade because they thought it made my team too strong.
this is the worst reason to veto a trade IMO... if it's a fair deal, that's all that should matter.. someone tried to pull this BS one year in my league and i wasn't even involved in the trade and i spoke my mind heavily in the group text
i stand up for whats right!!
Posted on 9/6/16 at 9:07 am to bigezsaint
I've already decided it's my last year with that league, won't bother with it if they pull that type of chickenshit move.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News