To owners/commissioners who veto trades:

[whomper]

Keg and CN..Thanks for clearing it up..Something is better then nothing. If I am in that league to be honest I still think its a steal as a 6th rounder isnt hugh value for SJAX but I guess I am in the minority and I know you guys and BC do keepers so I will defer..If I am an owner competing with the SJax owner i think that although the guy out of the playoffs got something for nothing the owner that did get SJax got hugh value for relatively little

Edited November 16, 2007 by whomper

[Caveman_Nick]

Keg and CN..Thanks for clearing it up..Something is better then nothing. If I am in that league to be honest I still think its a steal as a 6th rounder isnt hugh value for SJAX but I guess I am in the minority and I know you guys and BC do keepers so I will defer..If I am an owner competing with the SJax owner i think that although the guy out of the playoffs got something for nothing the owner that did get SJax got hugh value for relatively little

 

 

Don't get me wrong....I wouldn't be all that happy about it. However, I would have to be upset with myself if at anyone for not making the inquiry. If I had offered the 6th first, I'd be the one sitting pretty with SJax.

 

I have been involved in more than one trade in a keeper league that ticked off other owners, and my response has always been "Why didn't you ask?"

 

The league has become much more open and more trades occur over time as a result. Everyone has realized that owners do not go into the next season with an equal slate, so they better do what they can to win or improve.

[Bronco Billy]

Keg and CN..Thanks for clearing it up..Something is better then nothing. If I am in that league to be honest I still think its a steal as a 6th rounder isnt hugh value for SJAX but I guess I am in the minority and I know you guys and BC do keepers so I will defer..If I am an owner competing with the SJax owner i think that although the guy out of the playoffs got something for nothing the owner that did get SJax got hugh value for relatively little

 

 

Don't get me wrong....I wouldn't be all that happy about it. However, I would have to be upset with myself if at anyone for not making the inquiry. If I had offered the 6th first, I'd be the one sitting pretty with SJax.

 

I have been involved in more than one trade in a keeper league that ticked off other owners, and my response has always been "Why didn't you ask?"

 

The league has become much more open and more trades occur over time as a result. Everyone has realized that owners do not go into the next season with an equal slate, so they better do what they can to win or improve.

 

Well played, gentlemen. Couldn't have stated both sides better, as well as the conclusion.

[i_am_the_swammi]

Good stuff, boys...its why bouncing ideas off each other is a terrific way to fine-tune league rules.

 

FWIW, the scenario I presented earlier never came to fruition. The owner of SJax and LJ came to me, asking if he could trade one of them for picks next year. I told him that since we didn't have a rule either allowing or dis-allowing it, I'd put it to a league vote. Vote came back 9-3 against, so we shelved the idea until the offseason.

 

The main reason most owners voted it down (and it was voted down by two owners already eliminated, so kudos to them for keeping the league integrity in mind): no one wanted the eliminated teams purging their rosters to teams in contention. Most agreed that if one team pulled the trigger on a trade like this, all hell would break loose, and every decent player who wasn't a keeper on someone's eliminated team would be traded. We all felt it kind of ruined the season to have teams have vastly different rosters going forward than the roster's that got them there.

 

For instance, one eliminated team has Wayne, Welker and Holmes as his WRs. What if he said to himself: "Ya know what, if I don't dump Welker and Holmes, I'll get nothing for them, so I am going to trade them both to another owner for a 16th round pick".

 

Maybe we are all old fuddy-duddy's, but we felt going down this path would be a bad idea.....

[Caveman_Nick]

FWIW, the scenario I presented earlier never came to fruition. The owner of SJax and LJ came to me, asking if he could trade one of them for picks next year. I told him that since we didn't have a rule either allowing or dis-allowing it, I'd put it to a league vote. Vote came back 9-3 against, so we shelved the idea until the offseason.

 

 

.....

 

Maybe we are all old fuddy-duddy's, but we felt going down this path would be a bad idea.....

 

I don't think having a rule against trading players for draft picks is a bad idea. I think it's perfectly fine! What I think is a bad idea is allowing teams to trade players for draft picks and then trying to arbitrate which picks are fair for which players.

Edited November 16, 2007 by Caveman_Nick

[i_am_the_swammi]

I don't think having a rule against trading players for draft picks is a bad idea. I think it's perfectly fine! What I think is a bad idea is allowing teams to trade players for draft picks and then trying to arbitrate which picks are fair for which players.

 

Very well said.

[Hat Trick]

The main reason most owners voted it down (and it was voted down by two owners already eliminated, so kudos to them for keeping the league integrity in mind): no one wanted the eliminated teams purging their rosters to teams in contention. Most agreed that if one team pulled the trigger on a trade like this, all hell would break loose, and every decent player who wasn't a keeper on someone's eliminated team would be traded. We all felt it kind of ruined the season to have teams have vastly different rosters going forward than the roster's that got them there.

 

This is pretty much what I meant by what I brought up. It's unethical if you ask me.

[Big Country]

Sorry I missed the meat of the draft pick conversation, but it has been well covered.

 

THe hard part with arbitrarily saying that a 6th was not enough value is that there are so many variations to keeper leagues, that without knowing all of the deatils it is hard to blanketly state that it was too much or too little.

 

This "situation" is less of an issue in dynasty leagues ISMHO as by there very nature, any traded player can be kept so a player like SJax has what I will call near "true value" in a dynasty as compared to a redraft league as SJax has ongoing value for years to come.

 

The same can not be said for a limited keeper league as, at least in the case cited, SJax has no (or limited) long term value as he is not able to be kept (or, in the case cited, he could be kept at the expense of Addai). So now you are at the point of having to compare apples to oranges as you look at immediate vs. potential future value. Currently, SJax has next to no value for his current owner. He is out of the current years playoff picture, and apaprently there is no weekly cost for losses, etc. or the owner is unconcerned with that. So what he has is a commodity with zero future value and limited immediate value for him, but that could be a high value immediate commodity for another owner (one mans trash is another mans treasure). Now, SJax in this case certainly will not receive "true value" as he has no future value, only the limited immediate value, thus no team (well, league dependinet based on keeper rules) will give up anything of true "high value" due to his limitations. Thus, the owners wanting him must determine just how much future value it is worth giving up (the only commodity that would be of interest to the current SJax owner) in order to acquire the immediate services of SJax. A lot of what ifs, but if the owner acquiring SJax does not win the league, and the pick they giv up turns out to be some sleeper RB stud that is kept for 6 years, who wins out? Thi i why it is impossible to really evaluate these trades on a current value basis. Both owners have different goals, both commodities have different values to different people.

 

An Eskimo has little use for ice (SJax), thus it has little to no value to him, but someone in the middle of the Sahara may have great use for ice, thus it has higher value for him. The guy in the Sahara has no use for a parka. The Eskimo does. Different commodities have different values based on situations, and that is the beauty of trade negotiations this time of year in keeper/dynasty leagues.

[Big John]

 

Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should do something.

See sunysteelfly76's sigline.

[Jackass]

Sorry I missed the meat of the draft pick conversation, but it has been well covered.

 

THe hard part with arbitrarily saying that a 6th was not enough value is that there are so many variations to keeper leagues, that without knowing all of the deatils it is hard to blanketly state that it was too much or too little.

 

This "situation" is less of an issue in dynasty leagues ISMHO as by there very nature, any traded player can be kept so a player like SJax has what I will call near "true value" in a dynasty as compared to a redraft league as SJax has ongoing value for years to come.

 

The same can not be said for a limited keeper league as, at least in the case cited, SJax has no (or limited) long term value as he is not able to be kept (or, in the case cited, he could be kept at the expense of Addai). So now you are at the point of having to compare apples to oranges as you look at immediate vs. potential future value. Currently, SJax has next to no value for his current owner. He is out of the current years playoff picture, and apaprently there is no weekly cost for losses, etc. or the owner is unconcerned with that. So what he has is a commodity with zero future value and limited immediate value for him, but that could be a high value immediate commodity for another owner (one mans trash is another mans treasure). Now, SJax in this case certainly will not receive "true value" as he has no future value, only the limited immediate value, thus no team (well, league dependinet based on keeper rules) will give up anything of true "high value" due to his limitations. Thus, the owners wanting him must determine just how much future value it is worth giving up (the only commodity that would be of interest to the current SJax owner) in order to acquire the immediate services of SJax. A lot of what ifs, but if the owner acquiring SJax does not win the league, and the pick they giv up turns out to be some sleeper RB stud that is kept for 6 years, who wins out? Thi i why it is impossible to really evaluate these trades on a current value basis. Both owners have different goals, both commodities have different values to different people.

 

An Eskimo has little use for ice (SJax), thus it has little to no value to him, but someone in the middle of the Sahara may have great use for ice, thus it has higher value for him. The guy in the Sahara has no use for a parka. The Eskimo does. Different commodities have different values based on situations, and that is the beauty of trade negotiations this time of year in keeper/dynasty leagues.

 

 

You make good points. I haven't read the whole thread, but problems arise b/c of what you're saying about players having no value in a limited keeper league. So let's say someone has SJax and is out of it and happens to be best friends with the person in first. Well, he could help out his buddy by trading SJax for next to nothing and now the competitive balance of the league is thrown off. We had this problem in our league and moved the trading deadline up to week 7. Now that's a little early for some, but our league is way better b/c of it.

[MothAudio]

Of the 30 or so trades in the four leagues I'm in only two trades were veto'd and as Commish in three of those leagues I voted against neither. The trades that didn't go through...

 

W.Parker for A.Gates/M.Harrison/D.Driver [sept 7] - League vote

 

J.Walker for M.Jones-Drew [August 14] - Commish vote

[whomper]

Sorry I missed the meat of the draft pick conversation, but it has been well covered.

 

THe hard part with arbitrarily saying that a 6th was not enough value is that there are so many variations to keeper leagues, that without knowing all of the deatils it is hard to blanketly state that it was too much or too little.

 

This "situation" is less of an issue in dynasty leagues ISMHO as by there very nature, any traded player can be kept so a player like SJax has what I will call near "true value" in a dynasty as compared to a redraft league as SJax has ongoing value for years to come.

 

The same can not be said for a limited keeper league as, at least in the case cited, SJax has no (or limited) long term value as he is not able to be kept (or, in the case cited, he could be kept at the expense of Addai). So now you are at the point of having to compare apples to oranges as you look at immediate vs. potential future value. Currently, SJax has next to no value for his current owner. He is out of the current years playoff picture, and apaprently there is no weekly cost for losses, etc. or the owner is unconcerned with that. So what he has is a commodity with zero future value and limited immediate value for him, but that could be a high value immediate commodity for another owner (one mans trash is another mans treasure). Now, SJax in this case certainly will not receive "true value" as he has no future value, only the limited immediate value, thus no team (well, league dependinet based on keeper rules) will give up anything of true "high value" due to his limitations. Thus, the owners wanting him must determine just how much future value it is worth giving up (the only commodity that would be of interest to the current SJax owner) in order to acquire the immediate services of SJax. A lot of what ifs, but if the owner acquiring SJax does not win the league, and the pick they giv up turns out to be some sleeper RB stud that is kept for 6 years, who wins out? Thi i why it is impossible to really evaluate these trades on a current value basis. Both owners have different goals, both commodities have different values to different people.

 

An Eskimo has little use for ice (SJax), thus it has little to no value to him, but someone in the middle of the Sahara may have great use for ice, thus it has higher value for him. The guy in the Sahara has no use for a parka. The Eskimo does. Different commodities have different values based on situations, and that is the beauty of trade negotiations this time of year in keeper/dynasty leagues.

 

 

I think you are underplaying the value SJax has to the team that will now pair him up with Addai and have a premiere back for the stretch/ Playoff run. Getting something for nothing is great for the guy that gave up SJAX but I will say again if I am in that league I am pissed off about Sjax getting handed to a contender for nothing. I may have jumped the gun without knowing the facts but after now knowing them I still think a 6th rd pick is laughable for the services of a Healthy SJAX that gets all the touches ..

[G.K.Trey]

I think you are underplaying the value SJax has to the team that will now pair him up with Addai and have a premiere back for the stretch/ Playoff run. Getting something for nothing is great for the guy that gave up SJAX but I will say again if I am in that league I am pissed off about Sjax getting handed to a contender for nothing. I may have jumped the gun without knowing the facts but after now knowing them I still think a 6th rd pick is laughable for the services of a Healthy SJAX that gets all the touches ..

 

Maybe you should have offered him a 5th?

[Big Country]

I think you are underplaying the value SJax has to the team that will now pair him up with Addai and have a premiere back for the stretch/ Playoff run. Getting something for nothing is great for the guy that gave up SJAX but I will say again if I am in that league I am pissed off about Sjax getting handed to a contender for nothing. I may have jumped the gun without knowing the facts but after now knowing them I still think a 6th rd pick is laughable for the services of a Healthy SJAX that gets all the touches ..

 

No doubt the owner receiving SJax is getting a very good deal in his mind. He is adding a stud RB for a 6th rounder the following year. Then again, not knowing the full details of the keeper rules, it is hard to arbitrarily put a value on that that pick, but obviously the owner feels that giving up a 6th rounder (a stater in most leagues) the next year is worth adding SJax for a title run this year. Thus, next year he is essentially going to be starting out a round behind the others once it hits the 6th (again, not knowing the keeper rules, this affect could be geater or lesser than the value of a 6th rounder in a redrafter)

 

Then again, the person trading SJax away is getting SPECTACULAR value on their side as they have traded a zero value commodity for an additional starting player pick the following season (again, not knowing the details of the keeper league, the actual value varies from league to league)

 

In the case in question, if we assume the SJax owner shopped him and this was the best offer, the league can not be upset as everyone had their shot at him. If the SJax owner did not shop him, then he is just a not so savvy owner, however, ISMHO it is basic keeper league strategy if you are towards the top of the standings to approach the lower rung teams with such offers... offering up your future (picks or young up and coming players) for the present value that they have(productive veterans or players that can't be kept).

[Grits and Shins]

In my 12 team redrafter league these were the 6th round picks:

 

Braylon Edwards

Tony Gonzalez

Chris Cooley

Jon Kitna

Calvin Johnson

Kellen Winslow

Vincent Jackson

Alge Crumpler

Joey Galloway

Vernon Davis

Ben Watson

Vince Young

 

In my optional 2 player keeper league this was the 6th round:

 

Brandon Jackson

Thomas Jones

Julius Jones

Kevin Jones

BAL

Matt Hasslebeck

Marques Colston (keeper)

Ahman Green (keeper)

Lamont Jordan

NEP

Fred Taylor

Vincent Jackson

 

In my mandatory 3 player keeper league this was the 6th round:

 

Greg Jennings

Jerry Porter

Bernard Berrian

Kevin Curtis

Heath Miller

Ronald Curry

Philip Rivers

Matt Hasslebeck

Leon Washington

Jay Cutler

LenDale White

Randy McMichael

 

 

 

I'd say that in all 3 leagues there was some good value found in the 6th round.

 

If you are going to have a keeper league and allow owners to trade future picks then I absolutely see nothing wrong with trading away a player that can't be kept this year (SJAX) for a future 6th round pick.

[untateve]

I stopped reading after page 1.

 

A trade should never be vetoed unless there is suspicion of collusion. Never.

 

I've been a commish for a couple of leagues and have never vetoed a trade.

 

I'd quit a league on the spot that ever vetoed one of my trades.

[Grits and Shins]

I stopped reading after page 1.

 

A trade should never be vetoed unless there is suspicion of collusion. Never.

 

I've been a commish for a couple of leagues and have never vetoed a trade.

 

I'd quit a league on the spot that ever vetoed one of my trades.

 

So now we just need to figure out how to get you to trade in CORE so we can veto it ..