Fair trade or veto? (I'll help you)

[biju]

I think I'm in the minority here.

So can we talk in some better terminology?

The "Jordan" guy has picks 1.10, 2.01 (11th overall), and then 3.10 and 4.01 right?

The "other guy" has picks 1.01, 2.10, 3.01, 4.10 right?

So they're trading what exactly? If I understand you correctly they'll end up with:

Jordan guy: 1.10, 2.10, 3.01, 4.01
Other guy: 1.01, 2.01, 3.10, 4.10

So nobody ends up with a greater or less number of picks and the Jordan guy still has a second round pick to use on Jordan.

I guess I don't see how that's unfair. That seems like just a smart move on the Jordan guy's part and I don't see how that's going to affect anyone else's picks since they still keep the same picks between the two of them.

I don't see anything wrong with it and unless you change the rules this should be allowed. I would say if you don't like it you'll have to change the rules and wait until next year. Otherwise the Jordan guy probably will be pissed and rightfully so. It's not his fault he's bend the system to his advantage.

Besides, I like that kind of intelligence and would prefer to encourage it in a league I ran.

[Bloody Sox]

In my baseball league, the way we've handled this in the past is to let teams trade within the same round (like your example) but not trade away picks to move up or down in rounds (i.e. you need to have a pick to keep the guy). But I must admit, our draft this past spring turned out to be a trade-fest of deals like this one and it seemed un-natural and I'll be pushing to change the rules to prevent it.

[Lucky7]

Biju, you understand it correctly. The problem I have is that "Jordan" guy isn't really giving anything up, but he's getting a much higher 3d round pick.

[onnestabe]

Biju, you understand it correctly. The problem I have is that "Jordan" guy isn't really giving anything up, but he's getting a much higher 3d round pick.

If you allow it to goo through, everyone is going to be doing deals like this to level the playing field. So be prepared to have to process a billion draft trades.

[Twisted Sister]

This is a problem with the rules, not the owners. Everything is fair game w/in the framework of the rules.

Get the league to change the rules, otherwise... no, you may not veto this trade. It is not collusion... both teams clearly benefit.

I know this will not be popular with other people here... and personally, I find it very unethical of the teams.

[Kensat30]

Time to get a rule discussion going. Either allow this and all other trades like it, or get a rule preventing it from happening. I'm pretty sure you will get 8/10 or 10/12 owners to make it happen. Hopefully your league is set up to resolve situations like this when they arise.

[Plindsey88]

Either there is a rule preventing this, or there isn't....