Is This Trade Vetoable!? (1 Viewer)

[Interseptopus]

Resolved. Team A just called me saying it was a mistake. Now I need to make an ethics decision. Let him make his bone-headed move (he thought he asked for another player too) or let him suffer the result of his stupidity

 

[The Shizzle]

I vote it doesn't belong in this forum.

 

[Interseptopus]

I vote it doesn't belong in this forum.

My team is not involved in this trade. This was an accepted trade. As Commish of my league I am asking advice from the forum. I've seen these types of posts in here before. If it does not belong here then an admin can move it without complaints from me

 

[AcerFC]

I see no prob with it

 

[rock753]

Why would it be voteable?

 

[AnonymousBob]

Do you believe this trade was a result of collusion?

 

[Twilight]

no

 

[Interseptopus]

I see no prob with it

Why would it be voteable?

In our league Westbrook is averaging a bit over 29 points per game after 2 weeks. Witten is averaging a bit over 17 after 4 weeks... 12 points a game difference... Unless Westbrook is out for 4 weeks or something (then I must have missed some breaking news) then I don't see how this could be fair. Guy gives up his best player for a TE... seems kind of insane

 

[two_dollars]

I beilieve teams should be allowed to manage their teams how they see fit. He's giving up depth at RB for one of the only 2 TE's worth having. If he starts getting the injury bug he's done though. I think Forte would have been more "fair" but maybe the owner takes injuries a little more seriously. Westbrook DOES have a hard time staying healthy through his career. However with his WR core, I would have asked Team B to throw in one of his 3 benched WR's to sweeten the deal a bit.

 

[Polish Hammer]

Consider this...What is an estimate on the point differential per week between Westbrook and Forte going forward? What is the same answer from Scaife to Witten? If the Westy/Forte dropoff is say 10 points, and the Scaife/Witten uplift is about 10, then that is the rationale for fairness of the trade on behalf of the guy giving up Westy. Make sense?

 

[valhallan]

He gave up a very good player who has been on the injury report for the absolute best TE, a position for which he has no one to start. It's not that freakin bad, man.

 

[two_dollars]

See, here is his thinking.. he thinks that his net point gain at TE will more than cover his net point loss at RB dropping off from an injured Westbrook to Forte, and I can see where he would think that it makes his team better.

 

[two_dollars]

Consider this...What is an estimate on the point differential per week between Westbrook and Forte going forward? What is the same answer from Scaife to Witten? If the Westy/Forte dropoff is say 10 points, and the Scaife/Witten uplift is about 10, then that is the rationale for fairness of the trade on behalf of the guy giving up Westy. Make sense?

I just posted the same thing.

 

[No. 16]

I'd quit your league if you vetod that trade.

We're adults playing a game and no one held a gun to anyone's head to make the trade. Plus it takes two sides to agree to a deal. Also, can you see the future? Do you know for a fact Westbrook will outscore Witten?

 

[rock753]

I see no prob with it

Why would it be voteable?

In our league Westbrook is averaging a bit over 29 points per game after 2 weeks. Witten is averaging a bit over 17 after 4 weeks... 12 points a game difference... Unless Westbrook is out for 4 weeks or something (then I must have missed some breaking news) then I don't see how this could be fair. Guy gives up his best player for a TE... seems kind of insane

You don't vote on trades because of points or because you think someone got ripped off. You only vote on them if you think people are cheating...Teams should be allowed to manage their teams as they see fit. They should all be given the bennifit of the doubt. More often than not, the common thought is wrong, and the one thinking out side of the box is right.Odviously the Westbrook owner is worried about the injury, and is trying to get some good value for him.Voting on this trade would be just plain silly...Let them play the game, it is just a game.

 

[Interseptopus]

I was going to allow this trade. Some members had rough feedback. Wanted to get some input from a mass of people.

I don't know if I should give him an oopps or not...

 

[Ruffrodys05]

Resolved. Team A just called me saying it was a mistake. Now I need to make an ethics decision. Let him make his bone-headed move (he thought he asked for another player too) or let him suffer the result of his stupidity

In reply to the topic question posed.......NO trade is vetoable, ever, unless collusion can be proved, which is very rare. And looking at a few of these types of topic questions asked here in the SP the last couple of days, about 95% of FBG'ers feel the same way.As far as whether or not you should do anything about his "mistake"......I don't think so and I wouldn't. Each GM/owner is responsible for his/her own team and as such should take more care when accepting trade offers or posting trade offers to others. Let him suffer for his own bone-head mistake, especially if it's a money league, because as soon as you do help him it opens up a whole can of worms and will most likely bring the rest of the league down on you. Then any time somebody thinks they got fleeced in a trade they can just come crying to you saying "it was a mistake" and they will bring up past precedent. Leave it be.

 

[two_dollars]

buyer beware. he clicked accept. it's tough love. you don't want the precedent set.

 

[Fantaholic]

No vetoes unless collusion is evident.

However, you do have a decision to make as to whether you want people in your league with the fantasy IQ level that allows them to trade away a top 3 overall pick for a tight end. That's the question.