sbizzle Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 I made a trade to someone in my league, he accepted it and 4 people objected to the trade for what ever reasons. Since only 4 objected it goes to the commissioner to make the final decision. He is suppose to see if the trade is fair or not fair. I traded Matt Hasselbeck, Jason Witten, and the Steelers Defense for Chris Johnson and Vincent Jackson. His quarterbacks are Matt Ryan and Michael Vick(backup). His Tight End is Matt Spaeth (who has score zero points in every week but one). His Defense is the Eagles. His running backs are Chris Johnson, DeAngelo Williams, and Rashard Mendenhall. His receivers are Santonio Holmes(starter), Greg Jennings(starter), Vincent Jackson(starter), Terrell Owens(backup), Mike Wallace(backup), and Roy E. Williams(backup). My running backs are Ricky Williams and Kevin Smith. My receivers are Derrek Mason, Randy Moss, Mario Manningham. One guy objected because we are both in the same division and he says its unfair and puts him at a disadvantage because it makes both of us better. Simply, we need input from people we don't know and have nothing invested in it. 1. Vote "Yes" if you think its a fair trade or "No" if you think its not. 2. Would you object any trades that delt with teams in your division? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS Miscreant Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 One guy objected because we are both in the same division and he says its unfair and puts him at a disadvantage because it makes both of us better. That's the weakest crock of poopye there can be for a veto and exactly the reason why other owners should not vote on trades. I think the trade is fine... Yes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shorttynaz Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 Wrong forum - but regardless, seems kinda one sided if you ask me. You traded a mediocre QB, a TE who's not producing this year, and a defense for the best fantasy RB (based on points) and a #1 WR. If you were getting Mendenhall and VJax, then (to me) that's more of a fair trade.. If it goes through - then more power to you. If not, I wouldn't be surprised. And for whatever it's worth, I'm not at all opposed to people in the same division trading. Why wouldn't you try to make your team better regardless of who you trade with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
masterwing Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 i would veto that everytime if it was up to me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
masterwing Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 i would veto that everytime if it was up to me Not fair at all Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FootballFrenzy Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 #2 you need people to vote on trades so people don't stack teams! What if someone traded a great quarterback for someone who never plays? That being said you shouldn't abuse the voting on trades. If it is a fair trade no matter who it is you should vote yes. Seems like a fair trade to me since he has a pretty decent backup running back and plenty of receivers to cover the guy hes trading. 1. Yes its fair 2. Yes I would as long as the trade was in my division Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PPIchamp Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 You are definitley getting the better end of that deal, but the other guy did agree to it. Personally, it takes a grossly lopsided trade for me to veto it. I feel if two owners agree to a deal, who am I to say they can't do it. Unless, like I said, it grotesquely lopsided. As for that one guy who said he vetoed it because it'll make both your teams better....well, ask him....what the hell do people makes trades for in the first place? What team is going to propose or accept a deal that they think will make their team weaker? Maybe if he had some motivation and creativity he could do the same thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FantasyGod706 Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 Haha, you must play in one of the CBS leagues! That is one of the more fair trades Ive seen in a while. You would both benefit from that so I would definitely say the trade is fair! Plus doesn't everyone in the league have the same chance to make a big trade and better their own team? That guy in your division should have traded with someone else if he says it doesn't help him. I would say its fair and approve of it, UNLESS he made trades earlier on and you just rejected him so hes trying to get you back. If you haven't rejected his trades he has no reason to object to yours. FAIR! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbizzle Posted November 19, 2009 Author Share Posted November 19, 2009 Please try and be direct. It's hard to tell on 1-2 of these if you would approve it or not approve the vote. Thanks!! So far... Yes: 4 No: 1 Maybe: 1? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shotgun Messiahs Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 Wrong forum - but regardless, seems kinda one sided if you ask me. You traded a mediocre QB, a TE who's not producing this year, and a defense for the best fantasy RB (based on points) and a #1 WR. If you were getting Mendenhall and VJax, then (to me) that's more of a fair trade.. If it goes through - then more power to you. If not, I wouldn't be surprised. And for whatever it's worth, I'm not at all opposed to people in the same division trading. Why wouldn't you try to make your team better regardless of who you trade with. I agree and I would veto this as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eags Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 if the year was to end right now, you would be getting a top 5 overall pick and probably a top 5-7 wide out for what? maybe witten would go first in maybe the 6th round. after that who knows? sorry dude my vote would have to be nada. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Grey Pilgrim Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 (edited) You are raping him. But it isn't the worst rape I've ever seen. According the The Huddle's rest of the season rankings, which I accept as an honest broker, you are giving the 14th ranked QB (which will likely mean you are giving a backup QB), the 11th ranked TE (maybe a backup, maybe a starter), and the 2nd ranked Def (definitely a starter, but generally defenses are not a large contribution, kind of like giving him the best kicker). He is giving you the 3rd best RB (and in a PPR league, probably the best), and the 6th ranked WR. Wow!!! You're doing very VERY well. I can understand the consternation. But like I said, I've seen worse. Edited November 19, 2009 by The Grey Pilgrim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 If both teams get better, it's fair. I'd veto the vetoes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moreinfo Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 If both teams get better, it's fair. I'd veto the vetoes. What if the team that vetoed the trade is 7 and 3 and the two that traded are 6 and 4 and all three of these teams have to play each other still because all in same division, this could be considered as going after the king of the hill so to speak and there is a no collusion rule in the league, obviously the 7 3 team would not want to trade because he is winning the division as is. So those who say the other guy could have traded may not have all the data to make such comments. You have to consider what if you were the 7 3 team would you feel it was fair then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfer Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 This gets mentioned all the time here, and it needs to be said again: you cannot see into the future. League members can cry foul or unfair or whatever, but until the season plays out, you just never know. You should only veto trades if you can prove collusion or one guy is a noob who has no clue what he is doing. Clearly both teams are trying to improve, and I'm not sure if adding witten/Hass points are an increase over the loss of CJ points, but only time will tell, at least he is trying. Within division? I just traded McCoy for Ocho within division, and trust me the last place team was pissed because both teams improved. But sour grapes does not equal veto power. You should allow this trade, IMO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piranha Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 A tad lopsided right now, but no reason for veto. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furd Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 So you play in a league where a trade can be vetoed if a certain number of people believe that the trade is not "fair?" Is there a rule? These type of threads are ridiculous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moreinfo Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 So you play in a league where a trade can be vetoed if a certain number of people believe that the trade is not "fair?" Is there a rule? These type of threads are ridiculous. Rules are there but open for interpretation. If 4 players object to the trade, then the trade is held for review by the commissioner. There is a rule as follows: In an effort to prevent collusion among owners, and to ensure fair competition, a trade approval process is used. After two owners agree to a trade, the trade will be put in a pending status for at least 24 hours. If four (4) owners in your league object to the trade within the pending time period, the trade will not be executed, but will go to the Commissioner for evaluation. Example: a trade made at 5:00:00 PM ET Tuesday will not execute before 5:00:00 PM ET Wednesday at the earliest, assuming four owners do not object before then. All trades between owners must be made at least 24 hours before the first game day of the week and not be disputed by four owners in order to be effective for the current week. If four owners object to a trade, the Commissioner can overrule the objection but the trade may be made effective for the following week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moreinfo Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 One more rule... Collusion said league does not permit two or more owners in the same league to work together to better one team at the expense of the other (for example, making one-sided trades, one team dropping highly-rated players so the other team can pick them up, etc.). So maybe the question should be if you were commissioner what would you do? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furd Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 In an effort to prevent collusion among owners, and to ensure fair competition, a trade approval process is used Now we're talking. That rule is pretty weak. (Not a criticism). I don't think that, from an objective standpoint, you could ever, in good faith, veto any trade. You're never going to have any evidence of collusion. And it would take an exrtremely lopsided and unexplainable trade, IMO, to have an unfairly impact league competition. Back to your trade. I don't think that its fair. I think that it is significantly lopsided. But does it unfairly impact league competition? I don't think so. I would not veto the trade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackass Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 (edited) One more rule... Collusion said league does not permit two or more owners in the same league to work together to better one team at the expense of the other (for example, making one-sided trades, one team dropping highly-rated players so the other team can pick them up, etc.). So maybe the question should be if you were commissioner what would you do? I would probably veto. I don't see this as fair competition. My guess is there's more to this story that meets the eye. Why the person would trade Chris johnson, one of the best 5 players in fantasy football, for so little doesn't make sense. Edited November 19, 2009 by Jackass Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearBroncos Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 It definitely wreaks of collusion! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buddahj Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 why can't i get anyone to make trades like that with me? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MedCityBob Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 I made a trade to someone in my league, he accepted it and 4 people objected to the trade for what ever reasons. Since only 4 objected it goes to the commissioner to make the final decision. He is suppose to see if the trade is fair or not fair. I traded Matt Hasselbeck, Jason Witten, and the Steelers Defense for Chris Johnson and Vincent Jackson. His quarterbacks are Matt Ryan and Michael Vick(backup). His Tight End is Matt Spaeth (who has score zero points in every week but one). His Defense is the Eagles. His running backs are Chris Johnson, DeAngelo Williams, and Rashard Mendenhall. His receivers are Santonio Holmes(starter), Greg Jennings(starter), Vincent Jackson(starter), Terrell Owens(backup), Mike Wallace(backup), and Roy E. Williams(backup). My running backs are Ricky Williams and Kevin Smith. My receivers are Derrek Mason, Randy Moss, Mario Manningham. One guy objected because we are both in the same division and he says its unfair and puts him at a disadvantage because it makes both of us better. Simply, we need input from people we don't know and have nothing invested in it. 1. Vote "Yes" if you think its a fair trade or "No" if you think its not. 2. Would you object any trades that delt with teams in your division? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MedCityBob Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 NO It is an unfair trade..........the only thing of value you are giving up is the "D".......and you get 2 top tier players. Think about it......... 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.