This trade is causing an uproar in my league (1 Viewer)

[Dusty Rhodes]

I'm not involved in the trade but I have been asked to look at it and give my thoughts. It's actually pending my ok. (Somehow I have become the trade police)

Team A gets:

Hideki Matsui

Jeff Kent

Team B gets :

Placido Polanco

Grady Sizemore

Seems fair

There's one owner who is up in arms saying the guy who got Sizemore and Polanco raped the other guy.

 

[MrBlonde]

I'm not involved in the trade but I have been asked to look at it and give my thoughts. It's actually pending my ok. (Somehow I have become the trade police)Team A gets:Hideki MatsuiJeff KentTeam B gets lacido PolancoGrady SizemoreSeems fair There's one owner who is up in arms saying the guy who got Sizemore and Polanco raped the other guy.

Well i would say the guy getting Sizemore and Polanco comes out FAR FAR ahead. But i'm not one to veto most trades.

 

[Kiddnets]

bad deal but no collusion no veto IMO

 

[westyplz]

terrible trade by the guy giving up sizemore.

 

[fred_1_15301]

I'm not involved in the trade but I have been asked to look at it and give my thoughts. It's actually pending my ok. (Somehow I have become the trade police)Team A gets:Hideki MatsuiJeff KentTeam B gets lacido PolancoGrady SizemoreSeems fair There's one owner who is up in arms saying the guy who got Sizemore and Polanco raped the other guy.

Team B raped the other guy. This trade should be vetoed in my opinion.

 

[The Kansas Comet]

If it's a keeper league, then Team B absolutely robbed Team A. Even in a re-draft, I still think Team B came out well ahead. If I were in the league, I wouldn't be happy about that trade going through, but I wouldn't veto it unless I thought it was clear collusion. Maybe Team A thinks it will come out ahead in HR's and RBI's.

 

[pollardsvision]

it's an awful trade, but the situation must dicate whether you veto or not.

it sounds like this guy is a new to fantasy baseball. i'm a firm believer in robbing guys blind when you can and rarely support the veto, but it's different if it's a league of experienced guys and maybe you had to find another owner in a pinch. you don't want to overmanage, but you also don't want a rookie getting crazy on you.

if he's new and doesn't have a really good reason for making this trade (that'd be hard to find, but i guess it's possible he desparately needs power and has an over abundance of steals and runs), i'd consider vetoing and letting him take offers for grady. obviously, he'd get a much better one.

if you guys have played with this guy before, then there's really no way to veto. everybody had to know going in.

 

[Balco]

No veto.

It is a bad trade, but not close to a vetoable (not even a word, I know) one.

 

[Buckfast]

If it's a keeper league, then Team B absolutely robbed Team A. Even in a re-draft, I still think Team B came out well ahead. If I were in the league, I wouldn't be happy about that trade going through, but I wouldn't veto it unless I thought it was clear collusion. Maybe Team A thinks it will come out ahead in HR's and RBI's.

I agree with this analysis. If it's a keeper league, it's a terrible trade. If it is a redraft league, I still definitely like the Team B side better, but it is nowhere near worthy of a veto. Power and RBIs can be hard to come by during the season, and the trade seems to make sense if the owner was desperate for more power in his lineup. Team A will likely gain around 15 HRs and at least 50 RBIs in his starting lineup as a result of the trade. If he can afford to sacrifice some Run and Stolen Base production, it is not that bad of a trade. I would approve it.

 

[Dusty Rhodes]

The owner of team A is new to fantasy baseball, and the owner of Team B is known for raping guys.

Definitely no collusion though.

I will let it stand but I will let the owner of Team B, to be careful and tread lightly as there's a new Sheriff in town. :ch-ch:

 

[shadyridr]

I dont understand why people think this is such a horrible trade. Dont get me wrong Team B comes out in front but its nowhere near vetoable

 

[jamny]

the owner of Team B is known for raping guys.

Bad trade, but far from veto worthy.

 

[=Smackdown=]

Unless their is obvious collusion two grown men should be able to pull of any trade.

 

[The Charlie Hustlers]

If anyone complains you should penalize them a reserve space.

 

[TheWick]

If it is for money I would veto the heck outta it

Its so early in the season I'd go back to the draft board...both Sizemore and Polanco were probably taken well ahead of Matsui and Kent, would you have balked had they traded draft picks on that day? I think so

Nothing ruins a league quicker than a butthead trying to rape everyone with 5 trade offers everyday waiting for a bite.