The point of the draft analogy is this - whether by trade or by draft a team has made itself much weaker. I'm sorry, I don't think I was making myself very clear on that. The end result is the same - teams that play the now-weakened team have an advantage. In my league where we play an unbalanced schedule, those teams playing this owner have a disproportionate advantage over the rest of the league.
The same holds true for the trade. If I trade LT2 for Jamal Lewis my team is ridiculously weakened. However, I am a sane and rational person (really!) and the assumption has to be that if I'm willing to go swimming I'm willing to get wet. Nobody - including the commissioner - should be holding my hand keeping me out of the deep end. The owners playing me have an advantage over those owners not playing me.
The Commissioner's role is not that of babysitter. By disallowing trades between competent owners the Commissioner is saying that the owners in his league aren't mentally capable of making the trade - if that's the case in your league, I want to join ASAP.
ironically, despite all the drum-beating about free choice and what not, what gets ignored in all of this is league owners made a choice to join a league with a veto condition. so, in one sense, everyone is already in the pool. there's nothing to say that this free choice of trading away tomlinson for jamal is a superior enactment of free will that should be respected over the free choice of joining the league with a commissioner veto.
besides, at the end of the day, no two teams are going to enact a trade and then graciously send out a league email that they did this in order to push one of them into the title because the other was writing off the season. so you judge your standard of collusion based on the fairness of the trade. and if a trade is blatantly unfair... we nix it. or not. whatever the commish decides (that is why they're there, after all).
klaxs258 wrote:that trade is fine nothing wrong with it
100 posts baby
congratulations. you have reached the summit. you are now at the pinnacle of your fantasy football experience. you are the most magnificent, brilliant, thoughtful, helpful poster ever.
How is my typing? Call 1-555-382-5968 Many posters could benefit from this.
I see that this thread has broken down into more of a philosophical discussion than a discussion of the issue at hand.
First: The only reason to veto a trade is collusion, IMO. If there is a league idiot that is making poor trades willingly, try to offer him something, but don't be upset when someone else makes the trade to take advantage of it.
Second: The only way to judge collusion is based on whether or not the trade is reasonable given the situations of both owners involved.
Third: The trade mentioned at the top of this trade may look lopsided to some, but to others it may look fair. To be honest, I see everyone saying this trade is unfair, but I am not sure who is getting the better deal when I look at it.
Sure, Gates is a monster and LJ will be once Priest is out of the picture, but when will Priest be out of the picture? Does the owner giving up LJ have time to wait for him to step up? Maybe he has Heath Miller sitting on his bench scoring a TD a week, while LJ is starting at RB. The fact is, Fred Taylor is going to be better right now than LJ, because LJ is waiting on a Priest Holmes injury that may not come this year (and don't point to the head injury - Oakland is a division rival and KC is in a tight division race - Priest will play this week). It is not hard to imagine a situation in which this trade improves both teams.
As far as whose hands the power should be in, it depends on the league. It is hard to put all of the power in the commish, because what happens when the commish makes a trade? Automatic approval? That's not exactly fair. The commish should face the same scrutiny as the rest of the league, but if you set up a system to fairly evaluate the commish's trades, there's really no reason not to apply that system to all trades. So it seems to me that it is fundamentally wrong to put veto power solely in the hands of the commissioner.
onnestabe wrote:I see that this thread has broken down into more of a philosophical discussion than a discussion of the issue at hand.
First: The only reason to veto a trade is collusion, IMO. If there is a league idiot that is making poor trades willingly, try to offer him something, but don't be upset when someone else makes the trade to take advantage of it.
Second: The only way to judge collusion is based on whether or not the trade is reasonable given the situations of both owners involved.
Third: The trade mentioned at the top of this trade may look lopsided to some, but to others it may look fair. To be honest, I see everyone saying this trade is unfair, but I am not sure who is getting the better deal when I look at it. Sure, Gates is a monster and LJ will be once Priest is out of the picture, but when will Priest be out of the picture? Does the owner giving up LJ have time to wait for him to step up? Maybe he has Heath Miller sitting on his bench scoring a TD a week, while LJ is starting at RB. The fact is, Fred Taylor is going to be better right now than LJ, because LJ is waiting on a Priest Holmes injury that may not come this year (and don't point to the head injury - Oakland is a division rival and KC is in a tight division race - Priest will play this week). It is not hard to imagine a situation in which this trade improves both teams.
As far as whose hands the power should be in, it depends on the league. It is hard to put all of the power in the commish, because what happens when the commish makes a trade? Automatic approval? That's not exactly fair. The commish should face the same scrutiny as the rest of the league, but if you set up a system to fairly evaluate the commish's trades, there's really no reason not to apply that system to all trades. So it seems to me that it is fundamentally wrong to put veto power solely in the hands of the commissioner.
Cafe Home
Fantasy Baseball
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by knapplc » Tue Nov 01, 2005 2:56 pm 
(and i am the commish of our league)
