Proper criteria for voting against a trade? - Fantasy Football Cafe 2014 Fantasy Football Cafe

Return to Football Talk

Proper criteria for voting against a trade?

Moderator: Football Moderators

Postby matmat » Tue Nov 01, 2005 2:39 am

lushmd wrote:Thanks for the input guys. Here are the rosters:

Team A:
QB: B. Favre*, D. Bledsoe, J. Plummer (just picked up off WW)
RB: SA, D. Davis, R. Droughns, K. Barlow
WR: T. Holt, L. Fitzgerald, K. McCardell, C. Chambers, E. Kennison*, A. Chatman
TE: J. Shockey
K: J. Reed
DST: Chicago

Team B:
QB: K. Collins. M. Brunell
RB: P. Holmes, J. Jones, C. Portis, F. Taylor, W. Dunn*
WR: T. Owens, A. Boldin, TJ Housh, D. Mason, D. Stallworth
TE: T. Heap
K: J. Kasay
DST: Philadelphia, Atlanta

* denotes players involved in pending trade

I REALLY like the trade. I think favre is just a throw in, probably. (is this a 2QB league?) team B just lost Boldin and with baltimore sucking and stallworth never being any good he is getting a GOOD receiver, ok, not great, but certainly a servicable one. Team B also has depth at RB. granted JJ is hurt, but likely to be back in two weeks, so not so bad. The worry i have is that priest is dinged up too, but i guess the trade went through before sunday?

I like it.
How is my typing? Call 1-555-382-5968
Many posters could benefit from this.
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar

Posts: 1816
Joined: 12 Sep 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Hovering over a keyboard.

Postby Pete123444 » Tue Nov 01, 2005 2:45 am

Veto's should only be in the hands of the commish. If the league gives you the power of veto, then you can veto it if you don't like how the guy spells his name. If you have the power and don't like how it sets up an opponent's team, veto it.

Thanks GP!!
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Sweet 16 Survivor
Posts: 2523
Joined: 5 Jun 2003
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Tucson Arizona

Postby bdrotoronto » Tue Nov 01, 2005 7:27 am

I own all three of those players, and I don't think that's that lopsided of a deal. Dunn is having a very good season, and Kennison you just can't trust at all. Favre is good, but I always think a running back is more valuable than a quarterback, and the Packers have suffered so many injuries that who knows when Favre's magic might run out, he is always a risk for INT's.
Defensive Assistant
Defensive Assistant

User avatar

Posts: 467
Joined: 10 Sep 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: T.O.

Postby josebach » Tue Nov 01, 2005 8:42 am

Team A has 3 dependable Quarterbacks and 2 dependable running backs.
Team B has 1 dependable Quarterback and 4 dependable running backs.

I imagine Favre and Dunn will both be spot starters. Makes total sense to me.

On top of that, Kennison probably won't start for either team. I'm going with the majority here. No reason at all to veto.
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Cafe Ranker
Posts: 4611
Joined: 27 Aug 2003
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Tallahassee, FL

Postby dream_017 » Tue Nov 01, 2005 9:54 am

I am with the majority in the cafe that believe unless there is collusion than a trade should stand. This trade does not look veto worthy to me.
This was posted a while ago and I think it is very good in judging if a trade should be vetoed.

The Balanced Man wrote:
Here is what my league uses as a standard to judge. Don't know if it helps:

1. FAIRNESS IS when the trade reasonably benefits both teams involved.

2. There is a Presumption of Fairness for all trades.

3. Three Factors involved in what reasonably benefits both include: Statistics, Potentiality, and Team Needs.

4. In order to reject a trade, you should feel that there are no reasonable benefits to both teams in Statistics Potentiality, and Team Needs. Hence, if one or more Factor is reasonably fair for both sides, and they are reasonably equivilent, the trade should be UPHELD. If no factor are reasonably fair, The Trade should be REJECTED.

5. The case may also exist where on player is high on one factor, and the other player is high on another. For example, one may want to trade a player that has very high potential (Ex: Steven Jackson) for a Player that is Statistically Superior (Ex: Andre Johnson). This trade should be accepted as long as you feel that it reasonably benefits both teams, even though the benefits to the teams do not derive from the same factor.

6. Statistics- Look at this by examining how statistics compare. The league suggests considering three year player averages, last years stats, and the stats for the current year.

7. Team Needs- Team Needs include: The need to fill a position (EX: A team is short on Quality RB), The need to change team structure in order to win more games (EX: I am 4-5 and need different personnel to gain different results), and the need to add depth to ones roster.

8. Potentiality- Potentiality is when a player has a chance to score many more points in upcoming weeks than they have previously. (EX: A RB starting because a starter will not play, addition of a Stud QB to an offense that will make a WR that much better, etc. However, a current stud player does not have any potential. A stud is statistically superior, but there is little chance that they will score many more points in upcoming weeks as compared to former weeks.
Cafe Google
Cafe Google

User avatar
ModeratorCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe MusketeerWeb SupporterPick 3 Weekly WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorCafe Blackjack Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 15305
(Past Year: 59)
Joined: 3 Aug 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Ford Field: Section - 132; Row - 19; Seat - 11


Return to Football Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Start & Sit Sleepers Rankings Leagues

Get Ready...
The 2014 NFL season kicks off in 4:57 hours
(and 39 days)
2014 NFL Schedule

  • Fantasy Football
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact