Vetoing trades is the worst idea for a rulebook.If the trade is not collusion then it is all good. Unfair trades are not legislated.
Yes and no. My league has a "sportsmanship" rule that basically states that all owners must be making a good-faith effort to improve their team. Even if a trade isn't collusion, sometimes once an owner is out of it they'll basically just dump off their players and destroy the competitive balance of the league. Even if it's not collusion, an ADP-for-Fargas trade would (and should!) get shot down in a heartbeat because it represents poor sportsmanship. If the guy getting Fargas really wants to make that trade, he's welcome to state his case before the rest of the league explaining how, exactly, he feels as if he's improving his team.
That's always a good test whenever you're tempted to veto a trade for collusion. Ask both owners why they're making the trade, and how they feel like it helps their team. If they can defend the trade from their team's perspective (regardless of how ludicrous you might think that defense is), then the trade stands.
