New Trade in My League... (1 Viewer)

[by_the_sea_wannabe]

Why do you keep saying its Westbrook for Slaton? Last I checked there's 2 other players involved in that deal

Exactly. And I am pretty sure Edwards has far more value (he certainly does in my book) than does Roy Williams. Seems to me that this is an incredibly fair deal and I would hate to be in someones league who felt that this was anything but fair.

 

[thejag]

I still don't get what's so unfair about this trade. Team getting Westbrook obviously is getting the better deal but this trade simply isn't vetoable. What if it was Chris Johnson instead of Slaton? CJ also had a low ADP going into the season.

Ok. Point is made. Still not sure how everone argues for the "fairness" of this trade when not one of you would trade away Westy for Slaton. Trade Dominator has it 30% uneven....and the guy who offered it said there's no way this moron will accept.But I guess that's that...it's done.

Is this a 'good' trade? Who knows? On the surface, not so much, but it is only week 4. Who knows what happens from here on out.Is it fair? Sure. Absent collusion, this is a fine deal.

 

[Interception Irwin]

The trade is quite fair. It should not be vetoed. You are just jealous.

 

[BobbyLayne]

Is this fair?

yes

If not, what is the protocol for not approving this....majority league vote??

you can't. no league should ever veto trades because other owners feel a trade is unfair. vetoes should be for collusion only.

Just in case you missed it:No league should ever veto trades because other owners feel a trade is unfair; vetoes should be for collusion only.No league should ever veto trades because other owners feel a trade is unfair; vetoes should be for collusion only.No league should ever veto trades because other owners feel a trade is unfair; vetoes should be for collusion only.No league should ever veto trades because other owners feel a trade is unfair; vetoes should be for collusion only.No league should ever veto trades because other owners feel a trade is unfair; vetoes should be for collusion only.No league should ever veto trades because other owners feel a trade is unfair; vetoes should be for collusion only.No league should ever veto trades because other owners feel a trade is unfair; vetoes should be for collusion only.No league should ever veto trades because other owners feel a trade is unfair; vetoes should be for collusion only.No league should ever veto trades because other owners feel a trade is unfair; vetoes should be for collusion only.No league should ever veto trades because other owners feel a trade is unfair; vetoes should be for collusion only.Is it sinking in yet?

 

[Kanil]

Is this fair? If not, what is the protocol for not approving this....majority league vote??

If it's not collusion, it's fair.

 

[jscout]

...No. I do not this these are guys are pulling a fast one. But I do think one of these guys is a complete moron. And I know the guy who's getting Westy only put the trade out there to see if any morons would bite....(his words, not mine)...

Hey Bill, I think you answered your own question. Unless you felt there was collusion, there is no reason to even consider voting. The only thing you can do is give the guy who dangled Slaton props for pulling this off. Remember, in the shark pool it's eat or be eaten. Next time, just make sure you're the one doing the eating.