Baseball is even harder to judge, so I won't go there.
I just think there are too many factors involved to have something uber reliable. Fact of the matter is, not everyone is as good at the important phases of FFL: judging players, judging players within the universe of the league (subtly different), the "poker" game that is exploiting other manager's perceptions, and finally primacy, which is a subject that gets short shrift in FFL. I have made "lopsided" trades simply because I needed to win the next two weeks no matter what, or I would miss the playoffs. I this game you gotta be in it to win it. I view it the same as giving up a queen for another advantage in chess. Sometimes, in fantasy, the veto process prevents you from giving up that queen, since the process is predicated on other's opinions, many of which can be misguided.
I don't think the tradees should have to divulge their strategy in a contested trade either. I go by presumption of innocence, in that the complainers have to make a more thn compelling case as to why it shouldn't go through.
The opening scene of the movie "Saving Private Ryan" is loosely based on games of dodgeball Brian Dawkins played in second grade.
I am in several league each year and I run one of them. I will never be in a money league that allows votes on trades. Like everyone has said, too many people vote based on how the trade affects them and not on the merits of the trade itself.
That being said, in the league I run there have been 2 trades in the past year that raised the ire of the league members. 1 involved Peyton Manning and the other involved LT. The Manning trade happened at this years draft (keeper league) and one owner immediately said “I vote NO!” BTW, there is no voting in the league which I promptly pointed out and everyone soon settled down with a bit of grumbling.
My stance on trades has always been – no collusion/no veto. After some thought when the draft was over I realized that there is one more factor that needs to be taken into account when trades are involved. League moral. If the owners truly believe that unfair trades are taking place you do risk losing good owners. So, I’ve changed my stance slightly and instituted a new rule. Now, if I get a lot of negative response to a trade that has gone through I will be asking both owners why that player they received makes their team better. If their response is at all feasible..the trade will stand. But, if the owner can’t come up with a reason better than “So and so is on my favorite team” then I will reverse the trade.
At heart..I am still a no collusion/no veto guy but I also feel it is important that league moral is high.