The Fish Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 Jennings is a "one and done" keeper, his slot was 1st round this year. Cobb was drafted in the 11th so he'll be a 10th round keeper next season, assuming he's kept. The trade is Cobb for Jennings, straight up. Both teams want this trade. Would you veto it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish Posted September 16, 2012 Author Share Posted September 16, 2012 I should note - I'm involved in the trade and the commish for this league so I don't get a vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTSuper7 Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 Vetoing is ghey. Unless people can prove somehow that the people involved in a trade are cheating, let them manage their teams the way they see fit. People might not be replying because if you search the forum, you'll see every thread like this pretty much goes the same way. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 No collusion, no veto 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flemingd Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 17 views. 0 balls. More like zero care. As said, veto'ing idiotic. If there's collusion you don't veto, you declare martial law and deny the trade. If there's no collusion, you treat your owners like they are more than 11 years old and let them run their teams. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White lightning Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 More like zero care. As said, veto'ing idiotic. If there's collusion you don't veto, you declare martial law and deny the trade. If there's no collusion, you treat your owners like they are more than 11 years old and let them run their teams. Haha, you beat me to it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
electricrelish Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 Veto it just to piss everyone off including yourself. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdrudge Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 Veto it just to piss everyone off including yourself. Well, since he's commish just take whoever he wants, damn what anyone else in the league thinks. Declare martial law! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MotorcityManiac1 Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 I always see this "if there is no collusion", my question is how and the heck can you tell from ONE trade...if its collusion. I mean, sure if they keep making questionable, heavily weighted to one team trades over and over. In a case like this, if its their first trade together, or first questionable one together....how do you deem it "collusion" or just a poor decision that YOU wouldn't make. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
electricrelish Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 (edited) I always see this "if there is no collusion", my question is how and the heck can you tell from ONE trade...if its collusion. I mean, sure if they keep making questionable, heavily weighted to one team trades over and over. In a case like this, if its their first trade together, or first questionable one together....how do you deem it "collusion" or just a poor decision that YOU wouldn't make. In this case, it's most likely a trade you wouldn't make, but I can see rational for both. Last season in a BoTH league, someone traded Michael Vick for DeMarco Murray. This period was when Vick was still considered "elite" and Murray had like one good game to his credit. The trade caused all kinds of controversy where everyone including myself thought that the guy who got Michael Vick had completely won this trade. That guy was the commissioner so it was even more controversial and caused an uproar with people threatening to quit, etc. Anyways for the rest of the season, Vick was awful and Murray was great. No one saw it coming except the guy who supposedly made the terrible trade. You gotta let people do what they want to do. Edited September 16, 2012 by electricrelish 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish Posted September 16, 2012 Author Share Posted September 16, 2012 Thanks for weighing in, folks. I'm annoyed I took it here, frankly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 Thanks for weighing in, folks. I'm annoyed I took it here, frankly. ... as I am sure the owners involved in the trade you posted are annoyed that you are attempting to manage their teams for them ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MotorcityManiac1 Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 (edited) In this case, it's most likely a trade you wouldn't make, but I can see rational for both. Last season in a BoTH league, someone traded Michael Vick for DeMarco Murray. This period was when Vick was still considered "elite" and Murray had like one good game to his credit. The trade caused all kinds of controversy where everyone including myself thought that the guy who got Michael Vick had completely won this trade. That guy was the commissioner so it was even more controversial and caused an uproar with people threatening to quit, etc. Anyways for the rest of the season, Vick was awful and Murray was great. No one saw it coming except the guy who supposedly made the terrible trade. You gotta let people do what they want to do. Def not sayin dont let people do what they wanna do, but there are cases where you have a known NOOB in your league, and you also have known experienced owners. I mean I guess let noobs learn the hard way is one way you could look at it...but I also think it could be detrimental to the league to some degree if the noob is being taken serious advantage of. I just don't see where we can decide its collusion for one trade, and how veto'ing over OUR interpretation (as a commish) or assumption of collusion, is any diff then veto'ing one we feel is bad for any other reason....if we have no proof they are colluding. Edited September 16, 2012 by MotorcityManiac1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 (edited) Thanks for weighing in, folks. I'm annoyed I took it here, frankly. You're involved in the trade and you're annoyed that the consensus here are saying it should stand? Or are you annoyed you even had to bring it here to confirm what you should have already known? I don't follow... Edited September 16, 2012 by delusions of grandeur 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tekie Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 There's a big difference between collusion and stupidity. Stupidity should be allowed in all formats. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 (edited) Def not sayin dont let people do what they wanna do, but there are cases where you have a known NOOB in your league, and you also have known experienced owners. I mean I guess let noobs learn the hard way is one way you could look at it...but I also think it could be detrimental to the league to some degree if the noob is being taken serious advantage of. I just don't see where we can decide its collusion for one trade, and how veto'ing over OUR interpretation (as a commish) or assumption of collusion, is any diff then veto'ing one we feel is bad for any other reason....if we have no proof they are colluding. If you choose to babysit your league, that's your choice, but I can speak from experience that it leads to some bad unintended consequences. Even the fantasy experts get it wrong, so it's impossible to draw the line between what is a bad trade and good one... I mean yes, there does become a point where it seems so fishy or bad that you can't look the other way, but I wouldn't go any further than maybe letting the new owner decide if this is really what they want to do (if this is the type of league that wants to babysit new owners). Going any further than that, and you're just asking for trouble, no matter who ends up "right" in the situation. It's extremely arrogant to assume that you know how to manage someone else's team better than they do. Opinions on players differ, and I've gotten egg on my face countless times about both hyping and dismissing certain players. (As for collusion, no, you can't actually get proof in most cases, but you can recognize a pattern or something so obviously fishy to take action. That's different than a rookie mistake or trade you don't like). Edited September 16, 2012 by delusions of grandeur Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish Posted September 16, 2012 Author Share Posted September 16, 2012 You're involved in the trade and you're annoyed that the consensus here are saying it should stand? Or are you annoyed you even had to bring it here to confirm what you should have already known? I don't follow... The latter. I guess I just wanted some backup in case this blows up in my face. I did already know, I just wanted some... I don't know, reassurance? I guess? I'm the Jennings end of the deal, but like I said - the other owner has Cobb as a 10th round keeper next season. Is it highway robbery this year? Yes. Next year? Maybe not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 The latter. I guess I just wanted some backup in case this blows up in my face. I did already know, I just wanted some... I don't know, reassurance? I guess? I'm the Jennings end of the deal, but like I said - the other owner has Cobb as a 10th round keeper next season. Is it highway robbery this year? Yes. Next year? Maybe not. Gotcha, didn't mean to be sarcastic, but I really didn't understand... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish Posted September 16, 2012 Author Share Posted September 16, 2012 No, I gotcha and didn't take any offense. Thanks man... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish Posted September 16, 2012 Author Share Posted September 16, 2012 ... as I am sure the owners involved in the trade you posted are annoyed that you are attempting to manage their teams for them ... Read before posting bro. I was involved in the trade. Just wanted some huddlelove to make sure I wasn't being a dick as I am also commish. get me? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish Posted September 16, 2012 Author Share Posted September 16, 2012 Well, since he's commish just take whoever he wants, damn what anyone else in the league thinks. Declare martial law! Chuck? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 lemme guess, you're the one getting jennings, other guy's either a n00b or a halfwit. meh, trade shouldn't be overruled. but I do think yer league is a joke and you're contributing to that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramhock Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 I vetoed this one, this week in a redraft. Team A is first year player. Team A trades, ARodgers & AJ Green for Stafford, Helu, Ryan Williams & Santana Moss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 I vetoed this one, this week in a redraft. Team A is first year player. Team A trades, ARodgers & AJ Green for Stafford, Helu, Ryan Williams & Santana Moss. Why even let him in your league if he is not competent enough to make his own decisions? Do you also set his weekly lineup because he is a first year player? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramhock Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 Why even let him in your league if he is not competent enough to make his own decisions? Do you also set his weekly lineup because he is a first year player? Needed a last minute replacement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.