Fishy trade. Vetoable? - Fantasy Football Cafe 2014 Fantasy Football Cafe


Return to Commissioner's Corner

Fishy trade. Vetoable?

Moderator: Football Moderators

Re: Fishy trade. Vetoable?

Postby West Coast Bias » Sun Sep 09, 2007 11:56 pm

Most of the times I say you have to see the rosters to tell. In this case, not even close to being fishy.

Guy might be getting scared of Maroneys health.

He might like a bye week matchup better

He might want to pair a certain player with another team mate

He might like to diversify within a division so that come week 16 and 17 he is guaranteed that at least one guy won't be sitting the bench while the players team already clinched the division

He might look at his division now that he knows his competition and think he has clear sailing to the playoffs and downgrades slightly for the season because he loves the week 16, 17 match up.

The point is, unless it is obscene, none of us can pretend to guess how good players will do. We stare at those damn rankings for so long that we think the values are concrete.

I just got vetoed for offering:

J.Jones, T. Bell, and T. Holt for E. James, D.Stallworth

Now you say well yeah that looks unbalanced, but I drafted so heavy at WR/RB that it does not hurt me.I STOLE a ton of #2 RB in the mid rounds while guys were getting kickers and defenses. As for Holt, his injury scares the daylight out of me.

It looks unbalanced but I am really just trading 1 Late Rnd 2 pick and 2 mid 6 rounders for 1 mid 2 rounder and an early 7 rounder. So it could be looked at as one 6 rounder too much. Well if I offer you 2 ten dollar bills for a twenty you will say "why am I wasting my time" I HAVE to give more if I am the one offering.

Here is what I plan on doing. I am going to offer these players on the trading block and say "all right guys, you all said that I was giving up too much. It had to be fishy. Well step up and give me more. If you don't then you have to let it go through".
West Coast Bias
Water Boy
Water Boy


Posts: 40
Joined: 25 Aug 2007
Home Cafe: Football

Re: Fishy trade. Vetoable?

Postby West Coast Bias » Mon Sep 10, 2007 12:04 am

Oh, one more thing - In a 12 team re-draft starting qb,rb,rb,wr,wr,wr,te,k,def

Housh goes in round 3
Lynch goes 4

Maroney goes 2
Bulger goes 4


The 4th rounders even out

So you are irritated by a difference of 1 round

The +/- on our ability to predict performance is not anywhere near that limited difference.

nonsense
West Coast Bias
Water Boy
Water Boy


Posts: 40
Joined: 25 Aug 2007
Home Cafe: Football

Re: Fishy trade. Vetoable?

Postby ravensjohnny » Mon Sep 10, 2007 9:47 am

I REALLY DONT CARE WHAT ANYONE SAYS THIS A PERFECT EXAMPLE A TRADE THAT NEEDS TO BE VETOED DESPITE BOTH SIDES GIVING UP TALENT. I MEAN BULGER IS EASILY A TOP 5 QB AND MARONEY HAS BEEN TAKEN SOMEWHERE AROUND 6-10 MAYBE SLIPPING INTO VERY EARLY SECOND RD WHILE HOUSH IS RD 3 OR 4, AND LYNCH IS PROBABLY BETWEEN RD 4 AND 6 DEPENDING ON YOUR LEAGUE

IS THIS TRADE EVEN CLOSE, I THINK NOT
ravensjohnny
Water Boy
Water Boy


Posts: 86
Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: Fishy trade. Vetoable?

Postby dgan » Mon Sep 10, 2007 10:27 am

ravensjohnny wrote:I REALLY DONT CARE WHAT ANYONE SAYS THIS A PERFECT EXAMPLE A TRADE THAT NEEDS TO BE VETOED DESPITE BOTH SIDES GIVING UP TALENT. I MEAN BULGER IS EASILY A TOP 5 QB AND MARONEY HAS BEEN TAKEN SOMEWHERE AROUND 6-10 MAYBE SLIPPING INTO VERY EARLY SECOND RD WHILE HOUSH IS RD 3 OR 4, AND LYNCH IS PROBABLY BETWEEN RD 4 AND 6 DEPENDING ON YOUR LEAGUE

IS THIS TRADE EVEN CLOSE, I THINK NOT


Thank you for making my argument for me. The type of people who want veto power to prevent what they consider bad decisions by other owners are the same people who type a post in all caps. Join a different league or you'll have to put up with guys like this...

If it isn't collusion, you can't veto it. Period. Otherwise, you better be paying the entry fees for these teams you are essentially running.
Image
dgan
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Eagle Eye
Posts: 2941
Joined: 19 Aug 2006
Home Cafe: Football
Location: The frozen tundra of Lambeau Field

Re: Fishy trade. Vetoable?

Postby Peacesells » Mon Sep 10, 2007 11:19 am

ravensjohnny wrote:I REALLY DONT CARE WHAT ANYONE SAYS THIS A PERFECT EXAMPLE A TRADE THAT NEEDS TO BE VETOED DESPITE BOTH SIDES GIVING UP TALENT. I MEAN BULGER IS EASILY A TOP 5 QB AND MARONEY HAS BEEN TAKEN SOMEWHERE AROUND 6-10 MAYBE SLIPPING INTO VERY EARLY SECOND RD WHILE HOUSH IS RD 3 OR 4, AND LYNCH IS PROBABLY BETWEEN RD 4 AND 6 DEPENDING ON YOUR LEAGUE

IS THIS TRADE EVEN CLOSE, I THINK NOT


Maroney goine between 6-10....not once have I seen him go so high. Your facts are not straight.
PLEASE RATE MY AUCTION DRAFT. CLICK BELOW.
viewtopic.php?t=340649
Peacesells
Special Teams Staff
Special Teams Staff

User avatar

Posts: 309
Joined: 30 Aug 2006
Home Cafe: Football

Re: Fishy trade. Vetoable?

Postby Felix the Cat » Wed Sep 12, 2007 8:37 pm

ravensjohnny wrote:I REALLY DONT CARE WHAT ANYONE SAYS THIS A PERFECT EXAMPLE A TRADE THAT NEEDS TO BE VETOED DESPITE BOTH SIDES GIVING UP TALENT. I MEAN BULGER IS EASILY A TOP 5 QB AND MARONEY HAS BEEN TAKEN SOMEWHERE AROUND 6-10 MAYBE SLIPPING INTO VERY EARLY SECOND RD WHILE HOUSH IS RD 3 OR 4, AND LYNCH IS PROBABLY BETWEEN RD 4 AND 6 DEPENDING ON YOUR LEAGUE

IS THIS TRADE EVEN CLOSE, I THINK NOT


I'm inviting you to my league next year! ;-D
Felix the Cat
Offensive Coordinator
Offensive Coordinator

User avatar
Mock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 886
Joined: 22 Jan 2007
Home Cafe: Football
Location: University of Florida, Gator Nation, USA

Re: Fishy trade. Vetoable?

Postby Lofunzo » Thu Sep 13, 2007 1:08 am

Sean_ec wrote:I don't understand why Owner ignorance shouldn't be vetoable.
Also, this guy that is getting Maroney already has Addai and now has Bulger. It's pretty ridiculous.


It is good to include ALL information before bashing someone else in a thread. Under normal circumstances, this isn't a terrible trade.
"There is no bad beer. Some are better than others."
Image
Lofunzo
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar
Baseball ModHockey Mod
Posts: 1287
Joined: 9 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: 2008 GOM: 6

Re: Fishy trade. Vetoable?

Postby dream_017 » Thu Sep 13, 2007 8:03 am

Vetoes should not be thrown around like candy at a Memorial Day parade......I see no issue with this trade and it should not be vetoed
dream_017
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: 15315
(Past Year: 69)
Joined: 3 Aug 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Ford Field: Section - 132; Row - 19; Seat - 11

Re: Fishy trade. Vetoable?

Postby Felix the Cat » Thu Sep 13, 2007 8:34 am

Lofunzo wrote:
Sean_ec wrote:I don't understand why Owner ignorance shouldn't be vetoable.
Also, this guy that is getting Maroney already has Addai and now has Bulger. It's pretty ridiculous.


It is good to include ALL information before bashing someone else in a thread. Under normal circumstances, this isn't a terrible trade.


So it's a bad trade because it makes a team too good? That sounds more like vetoing because you don't want to lose than vetoing for any actual valid reason.
Felix the Cat
Offensive Coordinator
Offensive Coordinator

User avatar
Mock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 886
Joined: 22 Jan 2007
Home Cafe: Football
Location: University of Florida, Gator Nation, USA

Re: Fishy trade. Vetoable?

Postby Lofunzo » Thu Sep 13, 2007 11:09 am

Felix the Cat wrote:
Lofunzo wrote:
Sean_ec wrote:I don't understand why Owner ignorance shouldn't be vetoable.
Also, this guy that is getting Maroney already has Addai and now has Bulger. It's pretty ridiculous.


It is good to include ALL information before bashing someone else in a thread. Under normal circumstances, this isn't a terrible trade.


So it's a bad trade because it makes a team too good? That sounds more like vetoing because you don't want to lose than vetoing for any actual valid reason.


Huh?? Where did I say that at all?? I was referring to the fact that the OP needed to include all important information in the 1st post rather than expecting us to be mind readers. For instance, this might have been good to add to the first post:

Sean_ec wrote:I don't understand why Owner ignorance shouldn't be vetoable.
Also, this guy that is getting Maroney already has Addai and now has Bulger. It's pretty ridiculous.


Wouldn't it be nice to include that information when expecting us to evaluate a trade?? For the record, I don't think that this is vetoable.
"There is no bad beer. Some are better than others."
Image
Lofunzo
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar
Baseball ModHockey Mod
Posts: 1287
Joined: 9 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: 2008 GOM: 6

PreviousNext

Return to Commissioner's Corner

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Forums Articles & Tips Start & Sit Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Get Ready...
The 2014 NFL season kicks off in 23:54 hours
(and 36 days)
2014 NFL Schedule


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