Vetoeable trade? C. Henry(Cin) for D. Branch Non-Keeper

[cwrtlm]

Is this a fair trade? I would say it would be close if Henry wasn't suspended but with his suspension it makes it unfair in my mind.
Thoughts.

[Felix the Cat]

Fair enough.

The Branch owner is taking a risk, but he's entitled to do so. With Henry in trouble yet again (stolen car in his driveway), it's quite a big risk, but if he's back from his suspension on time he'll be putting up big numbers during the fantasy playoffs. Branch hasn't done much thus far so it's not as if he's trading away a stud or anything.

[mariners100]

Its the old risk vs. reward... Henry could have huge upside when he comes back and depending on his depth at WR he might be willing to wait and see.... let it go.

[ABA316]

No veto here. The owner getting Henry knows what he's getting into and Branch hasn't set the world on fire either. Classic boom/bust trade IMO for the owner receiving Henry.

[Goody]

I'll say this again for good measure....

If you don't believe the owners to be cheating (colluding), the trade cannot be vetoed. It doesn't matter if a trade is fair or not. Unless there is cheating between two teams, a trade should NEVER be vetoed.