What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Draft Delima (1 Viewer)

H

hotboyz

Footballguy
I had my draft this evening there was a trade completed during the draft the trade was Mcnabb and FWP for Bulger and Jamal Lewis. A couple of owners in my league got very salty saying that this was a unfair trade and since I have Veto power they felt as though I should veto the trade. I did not veto the trade because for 1 we do not have a rule in place that says you cannot trade players during the draft and for 2 even though I don't like the trade you can't veto a trade based on what you think a players numbers will be. Did I make the right decision?? One owner even suggested that we not be allowed to trade players until week #1 does that sound right??

 
You did have veto power so you could have done what you wanted.

I'd much rather have McNabb and FWP but it's not a completely ridiculous trade. The spoils go to the owner feeling everyone out and making trades.

 
I don't see anything wrong with that trade--particularly given many people's concern with McNabb's injury and future risk.

Even with veto power I think that sort of judgement call is a misuse of it. It's got enough to it to justify.

 
Although I'd love to be the one getting FWP/McNabb in that deal, this trade is not crazy enough to be vetoed. I suggest you send your league whiners to this site to read this thread for themselves. I doubt you'll get many (if any) that say that trade should be vetoed.

 
Dilemma is the word I think you want, and tell the whiners to MYOB. If it's not totally ridiculous, let it go because you just really never know what is going to happen. It's unfair to handcuff an owner with your personal predictions.

 
I want to thank everyone for your responses I thought I made the right call but I have no problem putting this kind of thing out there to see what others think.

 
As a commiss, I don't think you can veto a trade based on stupidity. You cannot tell someone that they cannot make a trade that they think improves THEIR team based on the fact that other people don't see it the same way. I've seen many "lopsided" trades that end up favoring the person that supposedly got "taken." Tell the other owners to stop their crying and just play the game. Kudos to you commiss for not caving!!!!

 
There is nothing fishy about that trade, and I don't think it is lopsided. McNabb and Bulger are both great, but someone might be gun shy about McNabb coming off an injury. Parker and Lewis are both good. Parker has a new coach, and Lewis is on a new team, so they both have question marks too. There is absolutely no reason to veto this trade.

 
From our league's rules:

" The Commissioner is not here to make sure that trades are “fair”. If one owner “gets the best of the deal” the Commissioner will not intervene. ONLY when collusion is suspected or a gross (and I mean GROSS) imbalance occurs will any veto power be used."

 
First thing a commissioner needs to do in a case like this is approach both teams privately and ask for their rationale for how the trade helps their team. If you haven't done that you don't have any basis for making a decision on.

After you hear their reasoning, the test I apply is, "Is the reasoning given something that a reasonable person could actually believe." That doesn't mean "do I agree with it". It means do I believe that anyone could honestly believe it.

In this case I don't think it would be hard for the owner getting shafted to at least have a reasonable explanation for why he thought the trade improved his team. But you should still ask. You would be surprised how many people out there don't even have a clue what they are doing is unethical and will come out and tell you something like, "We agreed he'd trade me his best QB and RB next year in exchange for my doing this this year."

So next time, ask them before you make a ruling. And speaking of what I mentioned in the last paragraph, I'd even go so far as to confirm this was the extent of the trade and they didn't have any additional provisions they hadn't revealed to the league.

 
majech said:
As a commiss, I don't think you can veto a trade based on stupidity. You cannot tell someone that they cannot make a trade that they think improves THEIR team based on the fact that other people don't see it the same way. I've seen many "lopsided" trades that end up favoring the person that supposedly got "taken." Tell the other owners to stop their crying and just play the game. Kudos to you commiss for not caving!!!!
Click to expand...
:) I'd have made the same decision.
 
Depending on the rosters of the two traders, I don't even think this trade is that bad. If the guy trading away McNabb and FWP has some good RB depth, I'd at least consider the same trade in his position.

It's definitely NOT something that should be getting vetoed.

 
As a commissioner also i say No Veto. I almost had to deal with this also. I had an owner trying to sell Norwood or Tatum Bell for either Palmer, Brady, McNabb, or Hasselbeck just because he waited till rd 14 & 15 to draft Harrington and Jackson

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

W
Dynasty Rookie Draft 1.02 Dilemma
Replies
21
Views
823
beef
beef
eighsse2
The Dynasty "Next Move" Thread
Replies
37
Views
1K
JohnnyU
JohnnyU
I
  • Poll Poll
Allow trading future draft picks?
Replies
13
Views
953
Jppaul
J

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top