I'm in a Yahoo! league. The commissioner offered me Michael Vick for Reggie Bush yesterday. I accepted the trade and awaited the league's review of the trade and the pending acceptance of it. There was no collusion and no cause for an unfair balance amongst the teams. Keep in mind that the trade deadline is tonight at midnight.
This morning, I wake up and he had vetoed the trade. He offered it, I accepted it, and then he vetoed it. His reason given: "I was just messing around."
While there's no way to prove it, this reeks of him having cold feet about the trade post-acceptance and using his power to cancel it rather than follow standard Yahoo! trading policies. Don't let that sway your opinion, because it's heresy, but what would you do? Is this even remotely acceptable, or am I overreacting?
What if the commissioner was your cousin and one of your most favorite people? Perhaps at the Thanksgiving dinner table, I will steal his ham.
Dumbjaw wrote:I'm in a Yahoo! league. The commissioner offered me Michael Vick for Reggie Bush yesterday. I accepted the trade and awaited the league's review of the trade and the pending acceptance of it. There was no collusion and no cause for an unfair balance amongst the teams. Keep in mind that the trade deadline is tonight at midnight.
This morning, I wake up and he had vetoed the trade. He offered it, I accepted it, and then he vetoed it. His reason given: "I was just messing around."
While there's no way to prove it, this reeks of him having cold feet about the trade post-acceptance and using his power to cancel it rather than follow standard Yahoo! trading policies. Don't let that sway your opinion, because it's heresy, but what would you do? Is this even remotely acceptable, or am I overreacting?
What if the commissioner was your cousin and one of your most favorite people? Perhaps at the Thanksgiving dinner table, I will steal his ham.
see if he'll accept the trade first, turkey for the ham, if not try to counter offer your sweet potatoes and turkey for his mashed and ham. you might throw in some gravey if you feel that would be more acceptable.
[/quote]
[size=14][b]Letters from the procupine, they'll stick straight through you.
So read one anytime you think you've made mistakes.[/b][/size]
It turns out he did it to "rub it in my face" that he has both McNabb and Vick, and that he never intended to follow through with the trade. He says it's his "dry humor."
As a sign of good will, he reoffered the trade. To make it more fair, I gave him Grossman/Bush for Vick. He immediately dropped Grossman and picked up Favre. Guess he didn't like the QB.
Either way, it all worked out. Part of me feels guilty, but the whole thing was sort of malicious, intentional or not.
If he wanted to rub it in your face, he should have used the message board.
BTW, I would rather have Grossman than Vick. Vick's numbers are inflated by two big weeks (7 out of his 12 passing TDs came in weeks 7 and 8) and he has returned to his mediocre self since then. Also, Grossman's playoff schedule (week 15 + 16) is signifigantly easier (although week 15 in Chicago could have bad weather).
I'd rather have Kitna/Vick as a combination than Kitna/Grossman is really what it comes down to. Vick has higher upside every week because he's basically a passing RB.
Dumbjaw wrote:I'd rather have Kitna/Vick as a combination than Kitna/Grossman is really what it comes down to. Vick has higher upside every week because he's basically a passing RB.
That's funny, because the "passing RB" description is usually used against Vick, not for him. Oh well, it is close enough to be a judgement call, I just happen to disagree on this one.
Cafe Home
Fantasy Baseball
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by Dumbjaw » Fri Nov 17, 2006 10:32 am 
[/quote]
