- 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
Commish Veto Power Abuse
Posted on 11/13/13 at 11:50 am
Posted on 11/13/13 at 11:50 am
Player A drafted Peyton Manning and Drew Brees. Seemed questionable at the time of the draft, but now seems brilliant. Player A unfortunately is weak at the #2RB position. Pierre Thomas & James Starks are his only options.
Player A only plays Drew Brees when Peyton is on BYE.
Player B has Matt Ryan as QB. Ryan's production has dropped all season. Player B has used Case Keenum as his QB the last 2 weeks. Player B managed to pick up Danny Woodhead on waiver early in the season. Player B's only RBs are Eddie Lacey, Danny Woodhead, and Chris Ivory.
Player A and Player B have agreed to swap Danny Woodhead and Case Keenum for Drew Brees. Player A gets another quality RB#2 option. Player B gets an upgrade at the QB position.
Player is 6-4. Player B is 7-3. The Commish is 8-2.
Commish vetos the trade saying Player B is not giving up enough for a Top 5 QB and it would essentially be trade rape. Suggests Player B should give up Brandon Marshalle or DeSean Jackson plus Danny Woodhead and Case Keenum.
Commish is being a bit nosey and controlling don't ya think?
Player A only plays Drew Brees when Peyton is on BYE.
Player B has Matt Ryan as QB. Ryan's production has dropped all season. Player B has used Case Keenum as his QB the last 2 weeks. Player B managed to pick up Danny Woodhead on waiver early in the season. Player B's only RBs are Eddie Lacey, Danny Woodhead, and Chris Ivory.
Player A and Player B have agreed to swap Danny Woodhead and Case Keenum for Drew Brees. Player A gets another quality RB#2 option. Player B gets an upgrade at the QB position.
Player is 6-4. Player B is 7-3. The Commish is 8-2.
Commish vetos the trade saying Player B is not giving up enough for a Top 5 QB and it would essentially be trade rape. Suggests Player B should give up Brandon Marshalle or DeSean Jackson plus Danny Woodhead and Case Keenum.
Commish is being a bit nosey and controlling don't ya think?
15
Posted on 11/13/13 at 11:53 am to Klark Kent
Tell that commish to frick off. He is just looking out for his own good. He knows that it will help both teams.
Posted on 11/13/13 at 11:54 am to Klark Kent
I see both sides of the trade, and the trade is a little lopsided, but not veto-worthy imo...
especially because it looks like the commish is vetoing because he wants to stay in first place
especially because it looks like the commish is vetoing because he wants to stay in first place
Posted on 11/13/13 at 11:55 am to HoLeInOnEr05
quote:
Tell that commish to frick off. He is just looking out for his own good. He knows that it will help both teams.
Yep. Unless it was some 2-6 player giving up Brees for a couple of low end players the commish should have stayed out of it.
Posted on 11/13/13 at 11:56 am to Klark Kent
yea you cant veto that.
if its a 10 team league or even 12 team league, having another stud QB just isnt that valuable to trade, since most teams have a decent enough QB to get by.
commish needs to realize that.
ideally you want to get a stud for Brees, but its really hard unless a team is loaded everywhere but QB
if its a 10 team league or even 12 team league, having another stud QB just isnt that valuable to trade, since most teams have a decent enough QB to get by.
commish needs to realize that.
ideally you want to get a stud for Brees, but its really hard unless a team is loaded everywhere but QB
Posted on 11/13/13 at 11:56 am to HoLeInOnEr05
I would agree the trade isn't fair, but it's still no reason to veto.
I would think they guy with Brees would send some more offers out there and try to get somethign better than just Woodhead, even though Woodhead is a sure starter in a PPR league.
I would think they guy with Brees would send some more offers out there and try to get somethign better than just Woodhead, even though Woodhead is a sure starter in a PPR league.
Posted on 11/13/13 at 11:57 am to Klark Kent
It makes both sides better, but Brees for Woodhead is lopsided no matter the context. I'd veto it.
Posted on 11/13/13 at 11:57 am to Klark Kent
Frick that commish.
Posted on 11/13/13 at 11:57 am to Klark Kent
(no message)
This post was edited on 10/20/21 at 6:27 pm
Posted on 11/13/13 at 11:58 am to Klark Kent
The commish should RARELY flex his authority.
But don't you think that trade is a bit rapey? It's essentially Woodhead (#19RB in my league) for Drew Brees (#2QB in my league).
ETA: I wouldn't expect the Brees owner to get top dollar, but there has to be someone better than Woodhead. shite, throw in a high upside / high risk player. But Woodhead for Brees straight up raises some eyebrows.
But don't you think that trade is a bit rapey? It's essentially Woodhead (#19RB in my league) for Drew Brees (#2QB in my league).
ETA: I wouldn't expect the Brees owner to get top dollar, but there has to be someone better than Woodhead. shite, throw in a high upside / high risk player. But Woodhead for Brees straight up raises some eyebrows.
This post was edited on 11/13/13 at 12:03 pm
Posted on 11/13/13 at 11:58 am to Klark Kent
frick that commissioner. That is a great trade for both teams. Woodhead is the #10RB thus far this year. That's a low end RB1. The value is there.
This post was edited on 11/13/13 at 12:01 pm
Posted on 11/13/13 at 12:00 pm to dualed
quote:
It makes both sides better, but Brees for Woodhead is lopsided no matter the context. I'd veto it.
You would/must be a terrible commissioner then. It's not up to the commish to veto a trade just because he doesn't think it's fair. The only time a commish should veto is when he thinks there is some sort of collusion between the two players and one is just giving up for the season.
Posted on 11/13/13 at 12:00 pm to Klark Kent
Commish is a fricking idiot. Its all about team needs.
Posted on 11/13/13 at 12:00 pm to boom roasted
quote:
But don't you think that trade is a bit rapey?
That's an understatement. If I tried that shite in my league I would get crucified and never invited back. In no universe is Woodhead for Brees a trade that can be made. I want to know the full lineups. I'm sure this could've been tailored better.
Posted on 11/13/13 at 12:09 pm to dualed
We really need to know if this is a PPR league or not. It is a fair deal in PPR.
Posted on 11/13/13 at 12:10 pm to dualed
Comissioner has no right to veto the trade IMO. I'm with the people who say that he should rarely (if ever) use the power. Team A is 6-4 and still in the hunt, why would he intentionally help someone else who is ranked higher than him if he didnt think his team would be improved as well?
Common sense people....
Common sense people....
Posted on 11/13/13 at 12:14 pm to PhiTiger1764
quote:
We really need to know if this is a PPR league or not. It is a fair deal in PPR
Very true
Posted on 11/13/13 at 12:15 pm to Klark Kent
Definitely not a trade the commish should veto. If the rest of the league vetoes it, then fine. Commish should have just left it to the league. If they all think it's unfair, then they'll veto it, and he won't look like the bad guy. If they don't think it's unfair, then the commish definitely looks like the bad guy vetoing it.
Posted on 11/13/13 at 12:15 pm to PhiTiger1764
quote:
We really need to know if this is a PPR league or not. It is a fair deal in PPR.
This. Legit trade in PPR. Not-so-legit trade in standard.
Still, no commish action necessary. If the team giving up Brees had a shitty record with no chance of the playoffs, I might step in.
Posted on 11/13/13 at 12:21 pm to Klark Kent
Player A is selling Brees way too low. I see both sides, but I think that veto can be accepted if all the managers vote. That's the best way to a valid solution.
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News