- 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
Reasons to veto a trade (All discussion here)
Posted on 9/2/15 at 10:12 am
Posted on 9/2/15 at 10:12 am
There are already too many of these popping up. So get them all here in one thread. I will post below the reasons to veto a trade.
1. Is the trade collusion? If yes... veto, if no dont try and manage other owners teams for them.
2. There are no other reasons to veto a trade.
1. Is the trade collusion? If yes... veto, if no dont try and manage other owners teams for them.
2. There are no other reasons to veto a trade.
Posted on 9/2/15 at 10:15 am to oleyeller
quote:
. Is the trade collusion? If yes... veto, if no dont try and manage other owners teams for them.
this one
Posted on 9/2/15 at 10:45 am to oleyeller
Yeah, but what if it will give a team too many good players, and I have to play them later? Who needs 3 top 10 WRs? That's not fair.
Posted on 9/2/15 at 10:49 am to oleyeller
How do you determine collusion?
Oh yea, you can't.
Oh yea, you can't.
Posted on 9/2/15 at 10:54 am to oleyeller
The issue is when and how you determine collusion. This isn't a definite thing. You can only go off of suggestions and evidence. Is the trade so lopsided to where it doesn't make sense? What is the relationship between the partners? Where in the season are we, and is it possible for both teams to make the playoffs? Etc. There are various factors to consider, and none of them are definite besides an actual admission.
In theory, yes, collusion is the only reason to veto. In practice things are more difficult to figure out.
In theory, yes, collusion is the only reason to veto. In practice things are more difficult to figure out.
This post was edited on 9/2/15 at 10:58 am
Posted on 9/2/15 at 10:58 am to Lester Earl
it has to be grossly obvious to call it collusion.
Posted on 9/2/15 at 10:59 am to Peazey
"Collusion" is the biggest myth in fantasy sports.
Posted on 9/2/15 at 11:02 am to Peazey
quote:
The issue is when and how you determine collusion. This isn't a definite thing. You can only go off of suggestions and evidence. Is the trade so lopsided to where it doesn't make sense? What is the relationship between the partners? Where in the season are we, and is it possible for both teams to make the playoffs?
I would agree to these and add "borrowing players". Obviously, you can't tell beforehand, but I would not allow the 2nd trade to take place.
Posted on 9/2/15 at 11:02 am to Lester Earl
quote:
How do you determine collusion?
Here's how. 3 years ago.
Team A has a stacked team and hasn't lost a game all year and is highly unlikely to not win the league
Team B is in second place
Team C is in 2nd to last place.
Day before the trade deadline, which is the week before the playoffs started, Team C trades away Lesean McCoy & Calvin Johnson to Team B for Benjarvis Green Ellis and Joel Dressen.
Only trade i've ever vetoed.
Posted on 9/2/15 at 11:03 am to BilJ
Let's say player A has Demarco Murray and wants to trade him for Ben Watson because he goes to church with Ben Watson, you let that go thru?
Posted on 9/2/15 at 11:04 am to TeddyPadillac
Looks like you were trying to manage their teams for them.
Posted on 9/2/15 at 11:05 am to Lester Earl
quote:
Looks like you were trying to manage their teams for them.
oh come on now
Posted on 9/2/15 at 11:06 am to Lester Earl
I've only seen 1 trade that I'm pretty sure was collusion, and I've been playing FF for a while now. It actually didn't get veto'd because a couple other people and I didn't check our accounts for a few days. Oops.
Posted on 9/2/15 at 11:11 am to Lester Earl
quote:
Looks like you were trying to manage the league for them. Obvious collusion.
fify
Posted on 9/2/15 at 11:12 am to oleyeller
Last year the guy in last place after week 9 I think just started offering all his good players to people for their bench guys. I'm talking like D Thomas for Olsen(other guy had Gronk), AJ Green for Reggie Bush, etc. I was pissed and sent the commish a message and never heard anything back and he let all the trades go through. Oh and he was the one who got D Thomas. It was complete bullshite, but I still beat his arse in the playoffs and won the league.
Posted on 9/2/15 at 11:13 am to BilJ
I'm just fricking around. That's not what I meant by my question.
When you have to question whether it's collusion or not, you don't really know. But the deal is highly lopsided. There are non collusive trades that ruin the integrity of the league. This is a fact.
It doesn't happen much in my leagues but I feel sorry for some of the people that post here. Then you have irrational people like the OP that thinks he knows if every trade is collusion or not. He's prob the same guy that wants to rip everyone off.
When you have to question whether it's collusion or not, you don't really know. But the deal is highly lopsided. There are non collusive trades that ruin the integrity of the league. This is a fact.
It doesn't happen much in my leagues but I feel sorry for some of the people that post here. Then you have irrational people like the OP that thinks he knows if every trade is collusion or not. He's prob the same guy that wants to rip everyone off.
Posted on 9/2/15 at 11:14 am to TeddyPadillac
quote:
Team C trades away Lesean McCoy & Calvin Johnson to Team B for Benjarvis Green Ellis and Joel Dressen
Was that when BGE was tearing things up and McCoy was not getting the ball consistently (Can't recall if this occurred in the same year)? If that was at the same time, then it doesn't seem that far fetched of an offer, depending on their relationship.
I once had a league where my trade was vetoed when I was giving up a top 15 D and a RB#2 for a RB#3 and a top 15 D because I had a bye week issue. The Commish vetoed the trade bc it didn't appear fair. I just coincidently was playing against his Bro-in-law, if I win that game I eliminate his bro-in-law w 2 weeks until playoffs. I appeal and it goes to a 3 person panel (the commish and his 2 bro-in-laws).
I lose appeal, win game, all 3 people kicked out next season.
Posted on 9/2/15 at 11:19 am to TeddyPadillac
I let a trade go last year that was no where near fair, but i knew it wasn't collusion. Ellington for Forte in week 5, in a PPR.
Also had a Kelce for Roddy White trade go through last year.
I do'nt veto trades b/c someone is just stupid, but i'm always a little weary when trades happen right before the playoffs between non playoff teams and playoff teams.
Also had a Kelce for Roddy White trade go through last year.
I do'nt veto trades b/c someone is just stupid, but i'm always a little weary when trades happen right before the playoffs between non playoff teams and playoff teams.
Posted on 9/2/15 at 11:24 am to Lester Earl
The collusion people tell me how you'd handle this
A few years ago when Tebow was playing well, we had a 1-8 team trade Adrian Peterson for him. Basically he didn't give a shite and was just trying to shake up his team. There were 2 other players involved that were insignificant.
The team getting Peterson was in 1st or 2nd.
The guy that got Tebow already had brees, and his next best RBs once he gave up Peterson were terrible.
It wasn't collusion but because he didn't give a shite, nor did the trade not help him, we vetoed it.
A few years ago when Tebow was playing well, we had a 1-8 team trade Adrian Peterson for him. Basically he didn't give a shite and was just trying to shake up his team. There were 2 other players involved that were insignificant.
The team getting Peterson was in 1st or 2nd.
The guy that got Tebow already had brees, and his next best RBs once he gave up Peterson were terrible.
It wasn't collusion but because he didn't give a shite, nor did the trade not help him, we vetoed it.
Posted on 9/2/15 at 11:24 am to Lester Earl
quote:
There are non collusive trades that ruin the integrity of the league. This is a fact.
well sure, terrible owners can do that. But I won't veto those type of deals, they'll just be booted from the league the next year
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News