Trade vetoed for selfish reasons? (1 Viewer)

[doowain]

Ok, this post isn't about whether or not trades should be allowed during the playoffs. For what it's worth, I don't think they should. But, our league allows them, so I roll with it.

This past week I lost in the first round of the playoffs. Seeing an owner trying to sell Kevin Smith (he is still in the playoffs), I offer him Thomas Jones for Kevin Smith. We broke no rules on this deal. It's not a lopsided trade. I'm taking a calculated risk on Kevin Smith (injury) and selling one of my old veterans who can help the other team win now. So, clearly, it's a fair trade.

Another rule I disagree with in our league is that trades go up for vote for 2 days. If that trade receives 5 veto votes, it's rejected. Now, that rule is bad for a few reasons. Off the top, it's bad because it's not a majority vote rule. There should be 7 votes required IMO. The other bad part of the rule is that it allows owners to vote on trades based on the personal gain/damage. And I think that's what happened here. That playoff team gained another piece and they didn't want to play against Thomas Jones (I know....scaaaaaaaary).

The trade was vetoed (even the commish voted it down). And the reasons given were:

"are trades legal during the playoffs with a team still competing?? i voted 'no' cuz i think trades should be locked at the start of the playoffs"

"i did too for the same reason"

"...from everything I've heard, Kevin Smith's career could very well be over. This is why I personally rejected the trade. It has nothing to do with a deadline. If the trade would have been for Donald Brown, Felix Jones, Darren McFadden (Just naming names for an example) I would have voted the other way"

(Yeah, because McFadden, Brown, and Felix have been the model of health during their careers thus far)

Link to League Message Board Thread

So, the validity of the trade (which is what the vote is intended for) is not being questioned....but whether we should allow trades during the playoffs.

The reason I'm posting this is to get some feedback from FBGers. I feel like I'm being stopped from making my team better (trading off a vet who is about to go the way of LT value wise for young RB). We didn't break any rules. In fact, if anyone is breaking/bending rules....it's the guys who voted the trade down.

What do y'all think?

 

[ScottyDog]

I think you are getting what you deserve. When you agree to play in a league that has rules as asanine as the ones you have mentioned, this crap will happen. Only thing you can do is have the rules changed before next season or don't play in the league next year. STUPID RULES.

Ok, this post isn't about whether or not trades should be allowed during the playoffs. For what it's worth, I don't think they should. But, our league allows them, so I roll with it.

This past week I lost in the first round of the playoffs. Seeing an owner trying to sell Kevin Smith (he is still in the playoffs), I offer him Thomas Jones for Kevin Smith. We broke no rules on this deal. It's not a lopsided trade. I'm taking a calculated risk on Kevin Smith (injury) and selling one of my old veterans who can help the other team win now. So, clearly, it's a fair trade.

Another rule I disagree with in our league is that trades go up for vote for 2 days. If that trade receives 5 veto votes, it's rejected. Now, that rule is bad for a few reasons. Off the top, it's bad because it's not a majority vote rule. There should be 7 votes required IMO. The other bad part of the rule is that it allows owners to vote on trades based on the personal gain/damage. And I think that's what happened here. That playoff team gained another piece and they didn't want to play against Thomas Jones (I know....scaaaaaaaary).

The trade was vetoed (even the commish voted it down). And the reasons given were:

"are trades legal during the playoffs with a team still competing?? i voted 'no' cuz i think trades should be locked at the start of the playoffs"

"i did too for the same reason"

"...from everything I've heard, Kevin Smith's career could very well be over. This is why I personally rejected the trade. It has nothing to do with a deadline. If the trade would have been for Donald Brown, Felix Jones, Darren McFadden (Just naming names for an example) I would have voted the other way"

(Yeah, because McFadden, Brown, and Felix have been the model of health during their careers thus far)

Link to League Message Board Thread

So, the validity of the trade (which is what the vote is intended for) is not being questioned....but whether we should allow trades during the playoffs.

The reason I'm posting this is to get some feedback from FBGers. I feel like I'm being stopped from making my team better (trading off a vet who is about to go the way of LT value wise for young RB). We didn't break any rules. In fact, if anyone is breaking/bending rules....it's the guys who voted the trade down.

What do y'all think?

 

[abe froman]

If trades are alllowed then people should not be voting against yours. If a majority of the team owners feel that trades should not be permitted after a certain point then you shoud create a vote or poll and if it passes then this will not be an issue for the future. TEAMS SHOULD NOT BE VOTING DOWN TRADES BECAUSE THEY FEEL THEY SHOULDNT BE ALLOWED. Id ditch this pi$$ poor league and probably these "friends" too as they seem like a bunch of chumps..

 

[Jimmy James]

I think you are getting what you deserve. When you agree to play in a league that has rules as asanine as the ones you have mentioned, this crap will happen. Only thing you can do is have the rules changed before next season or don't play in the league next year. STUPID RULES.

This.Well, with one exception. If you choose to be in a league with voting on trades, you need to accept that perfectly legit deals will be voted down because of that system. People don't have to have a good reason why they vote for President -- they're going to vote whatever way they feel suits them at any time in their fantasy league, too. It wouldn't shock me at all to learn that the same deal submitted on a different day this week would have been approved.

 

[treat88]

I'll be starting a "grown-up" dynasty league this off-season if you are sick of playing in the kiddie leagues.

PM me.

 

[Chairshot]

Unless there is a rule against "selfish" voting, then voting for whatever reason is allowed. Sounds like everything is following your league rules appropriately.

I would never join a league like this. Horrible rules.

 

[Pictus Cat]

People will vote for different reasons.

I only ask that they vote the same way everytime.

One owner I know hates all trades. He vetoes them all.

Inactive owners tend to not even realize there is a trade.

I tell owners to set their own precedents.

From now on, if they think a player might be done for his career, his value is x.

My personal standard, do I believe it is collusion? That's it. Stupidity gets a pass. Dumb trades happen all the time. I often post my thoughts on trades in my leagues. Part of the fun ribbing my friends. Been kicked out for it too.

Another thing you can do is say you would like to talk to anyone who wants to veto your trade to give your side of it and make sure you don't care if they do even if you disagree. If this gives you an opportunity to sway a vote your way with some facts they didn't consider...

GL

 

[Little Joe]

Of course the trade was vetoed for selfish reasons...the same selfish reasons that caused you to make the trade in the first place.

 

[GoBills02]

Of course the trade was vetoed for selfish reasons...the same selfish reasons that caused you to make the trade in the first place.

 

[doowain]

Of course the trade was vetoed for selfish reasons...the same selfish reasons that caused you to make the trade in the first place.

And what was my selfish reason? To make my team better? HOW DARE I....

 

[doowain]

I think you are getting what you deserve. When you agree to play in a league that has rules as asanine as the ones you have mentioned, this crap will happen. Only thing you can do is have the rules changed before next season or don't play in the league next year. STUPID RULES.

This.Well, with one exception. If you choose to be in a league with voting on trades, you need to accept that perfectly legit deals will be voted down because of that system. People don't have to have a good reason why they vote for President -- they're going to vote whatever way they feel suits them at any time in their fantasy league, too. It wouldn't shock me at all to learn that the same deal submitted on a different day this week would have been approved.

I've already turned in my resignation. The league is 3 years old and only has 5 original members. That should say it all. Now they'll only have 4.

 

[bulldog_guy]

Another rule I disagree with in our league is that trades go up for vote for 2 days. If that trade receives 5 veto votes, it's rejected. Now, that rule is bad for a few reasons. Off the top, it's bad because it's not a majority vote rule. There should be 7 votes required IMO. The other bad part of the rule is that it allows owners to vote on trades based on the personal gain/damage. And I think that's what happened here. That playoff team gained another piece and they didn't want to play against Thomas Jones (I know....scaaaaaaaary).

We have a similar voting requirement for our trades (though we stop trading two weeks before the playoffs). the reason we have a 5 veto vote is:1. The are 12 teams in the league2. The assumption is that the two teams involved would votes yes3. 5 'NAY" votes would be half of the owners no directly involved in the deal.5 veto votes is exactly the right number. IMOThe reasons that a owner will vote no can be many. The fact that an owner doesn't want to play against the player being traded is also a legitimate reason (as is any oter reason or lack of reason). But at least 4 other owners must also have their reasons for the veto.

 

[Dreamer]

If I have a choice, I choose not to help another team get better if it doesn't benefit me. That is why I won't play in leagues that vote on trades. I'd vote no on almost every trade.

 

[Topes]

Ok, this post isn't about whether or not trades should be allowed during the playoffs. For what it's worth, I don't think they should. But, our league allows them, so I roll with it.

This past week I lost in the first round of the playoffs. Seeing an owner trying to sell Kevin Smith (he is still in the playoffs), I offer him Thomas Jones for Kevin Smith. We broke no rules on this deal. It's not a lopsided trade. I'm taking a calculated risk on Kevin Smith (injury) and selling one of my old veterans who can help the other team win now. So, clearly, it's a fair trade.

Another rule I disagree with in our league is that trades go up for vote for 2 days. If that trade receives 5 veto votes, it's rejected. Now, that rule is bad for a few reasons. Off the top, it's bad because it's not a majority vote rule. There should be 7 votes required IMO. The other bad part of the rule is that it allows owners to vote on trades based on the personal gain/damage. And I think that's what happened here. That playoff team gained another piece and they didn't want to play against Thomas Jones (I know....scaaaaaaaary).

The trade was vetoed (even the commish voted it down). And the reasons given were:

"are trades legal during the playoffs with a team still competing?? i voted 'no' cuz i think trades should be locked at the start of the playoffs"

"i did too for the same reason"

"...from everything I've heard, Kevin Smith's career could very well be over. This is why I personally rejected the trade. It has nothing to do with a deadline. If the trade would have been for Donald Brown, Felix Jones, Darren McFadden (Just naming names for an example) I would have voted the other way"

(Yeah, because McFadden, Brown, and Felix have been the model of health during their careers thus far)

Link to League Message Board Thread

So, the validity of the trade (which is what the vote is intended for) is not being questioned....but whether we should allow trades during the playoffs.

The reason I'm posting this is to get some feedback from FBGers. I feel like I'm being stopped from making my team better (trading off a vet who is about to go the way of LT value wise for young RB). We didn't break any rules. In fact, if anyone is breaking/bending rules....it's the guys who voted the trade down.

What do y'all think?

Both rules are pretty dumb.You choose to "roll with" the one that fits your needs, trading in the playoffs.

Why don't you also "roll with" the stupid rule that allows owners to vote on a trade for arbitrary reasons?

 

[domvin]

I think you are getting what you deserve. When you agree to play in a league that has rules as asanine as the ones you have mentioned, this crap will happen. Only thing you can do is have the rules changed before next season or don't play in the league next year. STUPID RULES.

This.Well, with one exception. If you choose to be in a league with voting on trades, you need to accept that perfectly legit deals will be voted down because of that system. People don't have to have a good reason why they vote for President -- they're going to vote whatever way they feel suits them at any time in their fantasy league, too. It wouldn't shock me at all to learn that the same deal submitted on a different day this week would have been approved.

I've already turned in my resignation. The league is 3 years old and only has 5 original members. That should say it all. Now they'll only have 4.

Bad rules are in place, and it sounds like you already know this. Good luck finding another league, with more authority. Nothing wrong with that trade, but the setup is really flawed. I'd believe, We all understand the rationale here1. Trades should not be allowed in the playoffs of any league. It just sets a bad precedent.2. Just like others have stated, of course they shot it down.You need to find a league with a more solid foundation, and I'd say this is a perfect example of why trading should not be allowed, after say week 11. I think thats the norm...

 

[Tillmanisahero]

Why is this topic in the shark pool?

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

A team should act in its best interests. If you give an owner veto power for a trade, expect them to use that power to help their team-- i.e., not let a rival get stronger.

Your trade was legal, even if they didn't like it. Their veto was legal, even if you don't like it. Your league is too democratic. Get a stronger commissioner who everyone trusts will act in the league's best interests. If you don't have an owner like that, up the entry fee a little and "hire" an outside party that everyone will trust.

I know people are telling you to ditch the league, but I suggest you try to salvage it first. If people want to keep it the way it is...then move on. But you might not be the only one frustrated with the system. Even the people who vetoed your trade might agree. But don't blame an owner for using the power they're given to help their team.

 

[doowain]

A team should act in its best interests. If you give an owner veto power for a trade, expect them to use that power to help their team-- i.e., not let a rival get stronger.Your trade was legal, even if they didn't like it. Their veto was legal, even if you don't like it. Your league is too democratic. Get a stronger commissioner who everyone trusts will act in the league's best interests. If you don't have an owner like that, up the entry fee a little and "hire" an outside party that everyone will trust.I know people are telling you to ditch the league, but I suggest you try to salvage it first. If people want to keep it the way it is...then move on. But you might not be the only one frustrated with the system. Even the people who vetoed your trade might agree. But don't blame an owner for using the power they're given to help their team.

Fair enough. When I vote on a trade, and clearly I was naive in thinking others followed this line of thought, I only ask myself two things. Does it unbalance the league and is it collusion. If the answer is no to both I vote yes.I clearly learned my lesson.

 

[Jersey35]

Wow... just wow. Just one more reason voting shouldn't be allowed. Your commish thinks he knows what is best for your team and Who Wants Pie? is just a complete dips#it.



I honestly wish there was a LOT more trades in this league. If there isn't more in the future, I don't think this league can survive on rookie drafts and waivers alone.

Seriously? He's apparently one of the biggest reasons trades will NOT increase in this league.

 

[Multiple Scores]

Last season a trade I made got vetoed by the league owners. I asked why and everyone chimed in and simply said and I quote "Your starting roster would be unbeatable, the trade is totally fair but this is money we are talking about here".

These threads don't ever surprise me anymore after that.

 

[billjohnson]

Of course the trade was vetoed for selfish reasons...the same selfish reasons that caused you to make the trade in the first place.

And what was my selfish reason? To make my team better? HOW DARE I....

And you finally get it!! You look out for your team and other guys are looking out for theirs (within the rules of the league). Never understand why guys come here and complain (after the fact) about things that are very clearly part of THEIR league's rules.