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!

Trade is being put up for veto vote- thoughts? (1 Viewer)

fruity pebbles

fruity pebbles

Footballguy
I know these things never go well but lol. League owners can put one trade up per year for league vote. This one just got a veto request and will be put up for vote. I'm not going to say anything on how im voting, want honest opinions. 32 team dynasty league, 2 copies each player. Currently in the 46th round of the initial draft, 53 man rosters.

 
leagues with veto ability, i want no part of, especially dynasty. one man's trash is another man's treasure.

 
Don't like the trade at all but don't see it as obvious collusion so Id let it stand. People are allowed to be stupid.

 
Besides the defensive players, the only players who aren't waiver wire fodder are Amaro, Bryant, Carr and Storm. If it was just those guys for RG3 I wouldn't blink an eye.

 
that is not obvious collusion. some may see it as stupidity, but collusion? seriously? the ONLY trades that should be nullified are those that are a result of collusion. you're playing with grown men (and women at times). let them screw up on their own.

i really really really can't stand the "not fair enough/not balanced enough" arguments for vetoing trades. i've left leagues in the past because of this.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'd probably want know part of that long long term if an owner is willing to give away DT and RG3 for a bunch of players who would be the bottom roster bench of most teams in competitive leagues.

 
WagesOfZin said:
that is not obvious collusion. some may see it as stupidity, but collusion? seriously? the ONLY trades that should be nullified are those that are a result of collusion. you're playing with grown men (and women at times). let them screw up on their own.

i really really really can't stand the "not fair enough/not balanced enough" arguments for vetoing trades. i've left leagues in the past because of this.
Click to expand...
Not directed at you specifically, WoZ, but leagues don't need to protect owners they need to protect leagues.

For instance, if you are the number one seed going into the trade deadline and some loser team does a lopsided trade with the number 2 seed - that's not far to you. It's not about protecting that owner - it's about protecting the rest of the league from that owner.

 
cstu said:
Besides the defensive players, the only players who aren't waiver wire fodder are Amaro, Bryant, Carr and Storm. If it was just those guys for RG3 I wouldn't blink an eye.
Click to expand...
I don't agree with cstu often but in this case he's right. Guy is throwing a lot of nothing at Griffin and Thomas... IF Amaro, Carr and Bryant work out, and that's a big if, maybe he'll lose the deal but the picks are even pretty negligible picks in this instance. Can't believe people think Cowboys is getting fleeced here. That alone should mean this trade doesn't get overturned.
 
cstu said:
Besides the defensive players, the only players who aren't waiver wire fodder are Amaro, Bryant, Carr and Storm. If it was just those guys for RG3 I wouldn't blink an eye.
Click to expand...
So besides those seven guys, then?

It's a lot of depth for a little top-level talent. :shrug: It isn't a great trade, but that's pretty common in a league of that size and scope. And a lot of people aren't exactly bullish on RG3's long term prospects in an offense wants to turn him into a pocket passer.

Trades with that many young players floating one direction turn out the opposite of how one would expect way more often than you'd think.

 
It depends on the scoring system a lot in this case. Miller and Ford are both expected have their stats bolstered by sacks. If it's big points for sacks league it changes the dynamic of the trade.

Also, I'd have to see the rest of their rosters before I called this conclusion, since that is the only reason to vote trades. Trading an elite WR and a high upside QB in a 32 team league, DURING the start up draft has to raise some questions. Who else do the Bucs have for a QB? If the Bucs don't have anything better then Hoyer I would lean heavily towards a vote. QBs are not easy to find in a 32 team league.

More info required.

 
Borden said:
It depends on the scoring system a lot in this case. Miller and Ford are both expected have their stats bolstered by sacks. If it's big points for sacks league it changes the dynamic of the trade.

Also, I'd have to see the rest of their rosters before I called this conclusion, since that is the only reason to vote trades. Trading an elite WR and a high upside QB in a 32 team league, DURING the start up draft has to raise some questions. Who else do the Bucs have for a QB? If the Bucs don't have anything better then Hoyer I would lean heavily towards a vote. QBs are not easy to find in a 32 team league.

More info required.
Click to expand...
It's really a 16 team league since they have duplicate players.

 
Borden said:
It depends on the scoring system a lot in this case. Miller and Ford are both expected have their stats bolstered by sacks. If it's big points for sacks league it changes the dynamic of the trade.

Also, I'd have to see the rest of their rosters before I called this conclusion, since that is the only reason to vote trades. Trading an elite WR and a high upside QB in a 32 team league, DURING the start up draft has to raise some questions. Who else do the Bucs have for a QB? If the Bucs don't have anything better then Hoyer I would lean heavily towards a vote. QBs are not easy to find in a 32 team league.

More info required.
Click to expand...
two copies are available, so scarcity like a 16 team league.

Let it stand. Not a good deal but some guys value IDPs more than others.

I'd guess Tampa decided mid draft to play for 2015 and beyond.

 
The Dude said:
WagesOfZin said:
that is not obvious collusion. some may see it as stupidity, but collusion? seriously? the ONLY trades that should be nullified are those that are a result of collusion. you're playing with grown men (and women at times). let them screw up on their own.

i really really really can't stand the "not fair enough/not balanced enough" arguments for vetoing trades. i've left leagues in the past because of this.
Click to expand...
Not directed at you specifically, WoZ, but leagues don't need to protect owners they need to protect leagues.

For instance, if you are the number one seed going into the trade deadline and some loser team does a lopsided trade with the number 2 seed - that's not far to you. It's not about protecting that owner - it's about protecting the rest of the league from that owner.
Click to expand...
i definitely wasn't insinuating that owners need to be protected. far from it. i'd also venture to say that if you're playing in a league where your example happens, you probably should rethink who's allowed into the league going forward. additionally, "fair" has no place in discussing trades and trade value. value is a subjective concept. "lopsided" trades often have a way of turning out better for the owner that everyone was sure got shafted. it happens all the time.

bottom line, if you have to protect your league from an owner, then you need to make sure that owner doesn't return the following year. as a commissioner of a $$ league, i've taken it upon myself to not invite owners back because they had no place in my league. i damn sure didn't veto any idiotic trades they made in season though. stupidity isn't cheating. it might not be "fair," but neither is life and unless there is cheating going on in my league, i'm not going to start to enforce things based upon subjective valuation, period. in my opinion, it's the only way to remain above reproach. veto one "unfair" trade and you've opened pandora's box. get ready for the complaints to come the next time someone views a trade as "unfair."

 
I see this kind of stuff all the time in my leagues. There is always at least 1 owner that will just bombard everyone in the league with offers where they give up a bunch of crap for a good player, usually with a reason explaining why you should do it. I know if they are making me 5 offers a day they are doing it to the rest of the league. The usually find a sucker or 2 and eventually get all their good players for marginal crap. Its a smart thing to do but I hate it and think it ruins leagues. After 3-4 years that guy will have a stud at everyone starting position while there will be a few teams that dont even have 1 player that would start on the others guy team.

 
Bob Barker said:
I see this kind of stuff all the time in my leagues. There is always at least 1 owner that will just bombard everyone in the league with offers where they give up a bunch of crap for a good player, usually with a reason explaining why you should do it. I know if they are making me 5 offers a day they are doing it to the rest of the league. The usually find a sucker or 2 and eventually get all their good players for marginal crap. Its a smart thing to do but I hate it and think it ruins leagues. After 3-4 years that guy will have a stud at everyone starting position while there will be a few teams that dont even have 1 player that would start on the others guy team.
Click to expand...
And you're looking for new owners as guys who haven't benefitted by these types of trades leave, along with the bad owners.

 
Definitely not collusion. I don't play in IDP leagues so don't know the value of the defensive players. Guy trading RG3 may not be high on him and may like Carr. Maybe it's a bad trade but it shouldn't be vetoed.

 
Tool said:
Definitely not collusion. I don't play in IDP leagues so don't know the value of the defensive players. Guy trading RG3 may not be high on him and may like Carr. Maybe it's a bad trade but it shouldn't be vetoed.
Click to expand...
Then why did he take him with a premium pick?

 
Donnybrook said:
cstu said:
Veto.

It's either collusion or Cowboys has no idea what he's doing.
Click to expand...
Am I reading this wrong? Cowboys made out like bandits. Only player that I would miss is Von Miller.
Click to expand...
I'm with you, everyone's talking about collusion and I don't see it. To me this looks like a bunch of random guys for RG3 and DT I don't see how Cowboys is doing this wrong. I wouldn't trade DT or RG3 for that entire line up being given, let alone both of them AND picks. It's possible it's collusion but I think it's just a really bad trade by someone who doesn't have a lot of dyno experience and doesn't realize that trading 4 quarters for a dollar doesn't work out that well. While the 4 quarters add up to the same amount as the dollar, you only need 1 starting spot for the dollar bill, you need 4 for the quarters.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Khy said:
Donnybrook said:
cstu said:
Veto.

It's either collusion or Cowboys has no idea what he's doing.
Click to expand...
Am I reading this wrong? Cowboys made out like bandits. Only player that I would miss is Von Miller.
Click to expand...
I'm with you, everyone's talking about collusion and I don't see it. To me this looks like a bunch of random guys for RG3 and DT I don't see how Cowboys is doing this wrong. I wouldn't trade DT or RG3 for that entire line up being given, let alone both of them AND picks. It's possible it's collusion but I think it's just a really bad trade by someone who doesn't have a lot of dyno experience and doesn't realize that trading 4 quarters for a dollar doesn't work out that well. While the 4 quarters add up to the same amount as the dollar, you only need 1 starting spot for the dollar bill, you need 4 for the quarters.
Click to expand...
I switched the names, meant Bucs.

 
what do you mean by "take him with a premium pick?" are you saying he drafted him high in the 1st round? if so, value of a player when he was drafted is irrelevant once he's actually in the league playing.

trent richardson was likely a first overall rookie pick. good luck getting that back for him now. conversely, vontaze burfict was a late round (at best) rookie pick. his value is astronimcally higher today. i say all that acknowledging that some may value those examples higher or lower than i do. regardless, where they were drafted isn't relevant to a prospective buyer.

it's like a used car salesman trying to tell me how much money the dealership has invested in a car i'm interested in. what they have invested isn't my problem. my valuation is a completely unrelated factor to their investment.

 
WagesOfZin said:
what do you mean by "take him with a premium pick?" are you saying he drafted him high in the 1st round? if so, value of a player when he was drafted is irrelevant once he's actually in the league playing.

trent richardson was likely a first overall rookie pick. good luck getting that back for him now. conversely, vontaze burfict was a late round (at best) rookie pick. his value is astronimcally higher today. i say all that acknowledging that some may value those examples higher or lower than i do. regardless, where they were drafted isn't relevant to a prospective buyer.

it's like a used car salesman trying to tell me how much money the dealership has invested in a car i'm interested in. what they have invested isn't my problem. my valuation is a completely unrelated factor to their investment.
Click to expand...
They haven't finished their initial draft.

 
fruity pebbles said:
I know these things never go well but lol. League owners can put one trade up per year for league vote. This one just got a veto request and will be put up for vote. I'm not going to say anything on how im voting, want honest opinions. 32 team dynasty league, 2 copies each player. Currently in the 46th round of the initial draft, 53 man rosters.

Click to expand...
If your league does the veto thing... I'd veto that trade. With rosters that deep, who gives up elite players for a bunch of guys probably no better than what is already on your bench.

 
WagesOfZin said:
what do you mean by "take him with a premium pick?" are you saying he drafted him high in the 1st round? if so, value of a player when he was drafted is irrelevant once he's actually in the league playing.

trent richardson was likely a first overall rookie pick. good luck getting that back for him now. conversely, vontaze burfict was a late round (at best) rookie pick. his value is astronimcally higher today. i say all that acknowledging that some may value those examples higher or lower than i do. regardless, where they were drafted isn't relevant to a prospective buyer.

it's like a used car salesman trying to tell me how much money the dealership has invested in a car i'm interested in. what they have invested isn't my problem. my valuation is a completely unrelated factor to their investment.
Click to expand...
The guy drafted him within the past few days. His ADP is 75 and that's exactly where he went in my startup last month. To me that's a premium pick (6th round) in a startup. He basically traded his 1st and 6th round picks for a bunch of late round gambles.

 
Yeah Demaryius went mid 1st, Griffin was his 4th round pick. Von Miller went in the 7th, nobody else he received went before the 16th round.

 
WOW. Generally don't like veto leagues, but I'd veto that in a heartbeat. Awful.

 
I don't know if the trade should be vetoed, but the owner of the Tampa Bay Bucs is the type of person that ruins leagues. Kick him out immediately if not sooner.

 
jandyt said:
Don't like the trade at all but don't see it as obvious collusion so Id let it stand. People are allowed to be stupid.
Click to expand...
I agree with this. Unless you suspect collusion or they have broken a rule then let people make their own decisions or don't play in the league with them. As someone said above, the "it destroys the competitive balance" argument is a weak one in regards to vetoing trades. Personally, I don't like the trade and maybe it's lopsided. So? Change the rules, owners, or let it stand.

 
WagesOfZin said:
i'd suspect the veto/non veto thing is going to rear it's ugly head in this league again sooner rather than later.
Click to expand...
it has already several times. each time it was threatened, the 2 teams worked out a more equitable deal. never been part of a league with so many trade issues so early on.

 
In my league, I don't just veto a trade. I make it perfectly clear that if people are going to make trades that are so bad that they need to get vetoed, that owner will be thrown out of the league. This trade is a perfect example of that kind of trade. Not only should you veto the deal, boot the owner and get someone who will take your league seriously.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

BobbyLayne
***Official 1st Pick PPR (Redraft) thread***
Replies
16
Views
1K
SoBeDad
S
BobbyLayne
** Lions at Packers** (-2.5, 47.5) CBS 4:25
2 3 4
Replies
172
Views
5K
Gjallarhorn
Gjallarhorn
Ministry of Pain
FBG Mock Draft '25 Completed with all 101 picks inside
16 17 18
Replies
897
Views
43K
eighsse2
eighsse2

Users who are viewing this thread

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