Hypothetical - Do you use your commish veto powers? (1 Viewer)

[TheWinz]

Scenario
You hold a live draft after all preseason games have been played, shortly before the season kicks off with Thursday Night Football. The draft goes pretty much according to consensus ADP, with a few people falling and a few reaches. Before week 1 even kicks off, Team A offers their 3rd round pick for Team B's 1st rounder. Now, I have to say this - at this point, nothing has changed for either of the players involved, and both were taken within a pick or two of consensus ADP. Let's say the 2 players were consensus picks 11 & 36. With only the information I have provided and you as commish, would you veto this trade?

 

[rockaction]

Why would you?

 

[Dr. Octopus]

I’d probably ask for an explanation - even if just out of curiosity.

Although it wouldn’t make logical sense to me, I wouldn’t flat out veto the deal, as long as both sides were happy with it.

Other than the oddity of trade based on draft position, do you suspect something shady?

 

[TheWinz]

Why would you?

I will answer your question with a question - would you veto any trade if you thought both parties were happy, even if the trade was 100% lopsided? Let's say Jonathan Taylor for Marlon Mack.

 

[rockaction]

Let's say Jonathan Taylor for Marlon Mack.

I would wonder about collusion in that case.

I've been the commissioner of leagues. Perhaps it's just because it was one league and it was a longer-running one, but we never had an issue where there was a trade as lopsided as the one you ask about. I suppose if I had commissioner powers and there's a veto provision, I'd have to consider it, yes, but mainly because the evidence there points more to malfeasance than misunderstanding.

Vetoing trades is such a slippery slope that I almost would never vote for one. We had one in the league that I take seriously come up for a veto. It was Davis Mills in a 1QB league for a 2023 1st, 2022 2nd, and 2022 3rd. It was nominated for a veto and most of us voted against the veto. This was just this past offseason.

And it's going to hinder the competitive balance of the league, and I still didn't think it should be touched. So there's your answer, I guess.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Why would you?

I will answer your question with a question - would you veto any trade if you thought both parties were happy, even if the trade was 100% lopsided? Let's say Jonathan Taylor for Marlon Mack.

Well, your example is ridiculous. That’s not justifiable but in your original scenario there is a justifiable explanation.
Maybe the 3rd Round player was a super sleeper for the team trying to acquire him. Maybe he figured he “should” be able to wait until Round 3 and the guy was snagged a pick before he was OTC.
So he spent the days after the draft trying to trade for said 3rd round player, and the other guy played hardball and said “I’ll only trade 3rd Round player for your 1st Round player”. If that other owner liked the 3rd Round player better than his 1st Round player but didn’t want to reach during the draft - he reluctantly agrees to the deal.

Now that may be terrible process but if that’s the case - fine let the owner run his team and accept the other guy just got lucky and got an “extra” first round pick because he’s a shrewd dealer.

 

[efactor]

As long as it's in the ball park of reasonable and there is no collusion (doubt there would be in week 1), let the trade go through.

If someone wanted to trade Najee for AJ Brown at this point, it would be pretty reasonable. In fact, the AJ Brown owner would probably not do it

 

[habsfan]

As a commish, I would reach out to the person receiving the 3rd rounder and ask them how they see the trade improving their team. At that point you either get some sort of coherent (and earnest) rationale (regardless whether you agree or not) or you get the "word salad" that smells even more like collusion or incompetence.

 

[stlrams]

Why would you?

I will answer your question with a question - would you veto any trade if you thought both parties were happy, even if the trade was 100% lopsided? Let's say Jonathan Taylor for Marlon Mack.

Yes - I’ve vetoed many trades that were lopsided imo. That’s part of being commissioner.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Scenario
You hold a live draft after all preseason games have been played, shortly before the season kicks off with Thursday Night Football. The draft goes pretty much according to consensus ADP, with a few people falling and a few reaches. Before week 1 even kicks off, Team A offers their 3rd round pick for Team B's 1st rounder. Now, I have to say this - at this point, nothing has changed for either of the players involved, and both were taken within a pick or two of consensus ADP. Let's say the 2 players were consensus picks 11 & 36. With only the information I have provided and you as commish, would you veto this trade?

It would certainly raise an eyebrow.

Not exactly a direct answer, but in the home league I commission we use a voting process.

If the majority votes it down (6 votes out of 10 voting) then it’s automatically killed.

In the event of a 5-5 tie (the 2 teams involved don’t get a cote) it goes to commish. In which case the co-commish and I discuss, and if agreed upon, will veto.

Such a deal in my league would be voted down 10-0.

In this specific case, I would ask the team giving up their 1st for a 3rd what their rationale was for such a move.

 

[bostonfred]

I actually might do this in a league. I wanted kelce but thought i could get him later. He went one spot before me. That guy doesn't want to trade him. He has weak rbs. I ended up getting really good rb depth in the draft but i didn't know that would happen on draft day. And there's only one kelce.

Would i be cheating or colluding to trade a running back i drafted before kelce to get a guy i wanted? Of course not. Even though the news hasn't changed on any of the players involved, once the draft is over, I could easily want a "do over" on my pick.

 

[Chaka]

I love my 3rd round pick and there quite a few guys who went in rounds 1 & 2 that I wouldn't trade him for.

 

[zamboni]

Out of curiosity, who are the players? That might help gauge the value.

 

[Atomic Punk]

The trade could have been positional. In other words, maybe the guy taken at 11is a WR and the manager was able to get great depth later on in the draft at WR. Why not trade that asset for a RB if that is where you are weak?

Too many scenarios that make this impossible to veto IMO.

 

[brun]

Do the rules call for commissioner review of all trades? If not, then unless another team raises an objection I would not do anything.