Is this trade fair? Team 1 proposed it. Team 2 accepted it.
Team 1: Gives K Warner and L Johnson
His Roster:
QB: Manning, Rivers, Warner RB: L Johnson, J Stewart, L White, D Sproles, Buckhalter WR: Burress, Bowe, Stuckey, Lloyd TE: Gates K: Gould DEF: Philly
Team 2: Gives S Jackson, M Forte
His Roster:
QB: M Hasselbeck, M Cassel, M Leinart RB: S Jackson, M Jones-Drew, M Forte WR: A Johnson, Chad Johnson, L Evans, B Johnson TE: J Witten, T Heap K: Kaeding, Akers DEF: Dallas
I included the full rosters so you could see that Team 2 is obviously a little less FF savvy, wasting spots on an extra kicker, a washed-up TE, and a QB who hasn't started in a year. He accepted this trade, but I feel like he is getting taken a bit (I feel he could get much more for Jackson/Forte), and while it's not my job as Commisioner to think for people, it is my job to make sure all the other managers feel like this is a fairly-run league. So any thoughts / opinions are greatly appreciated.
doesn't matter how savvy you feel someone is. You should not artificially restrict trades unless you suspect collusion. No collusion here, let the trade go through.
why are you even wasting peoples time asking this question. of course you let it go through. its not your job to manage peoples teams. unless there is collusion involved the trade goes through, no questions about who is getting the better dead.
who are you to tell someone how to manage their teams? if thats the case why dont you just manage all the teams?
padrino990_200 wrote:why are you even wasting peoples time asking this question. of course you let it go through. its not your job to manage peoples teams. unless there is collusion involved the trade goes through, no questions about who is getting the better dead.
who are you to tell someone how to manage their teams? if thats the case why dont you just manage all the teams?
Dude...relax. I never said I wanted to manage anyone's team. I actually kind of said the opposite. And as far as 'wasting peoples time', give me a f'ing break. There are a million ridiculous questions on this board. And in essence, Fantasy Football is about wasting time. If you thought this was such an absurd question, then don't respond. It's fine. But don't make it sound like I just created some unavoidable burden for everyone here...
In hindsight, this was a mistake to ask this question and overthought the whole thing. Sorry for bringing it up...thanks for the responses.
wow take a lesson from your own response and relax. just trying to stress the point that trade vetoes should even be thought about unless you think there is cheating. so many commishes on here seem to over think trades that go through their leagues. in my league unless people raise concern, or unless i think there is cheating i barely look at the trades.
sometimes i get a little overzealous in my responses, but it wasnt meant harshly.
padrino990_200 wrote:wow take a lesson from your own response and relax. just trying to stress the point that trade vetoes should even be thought about unless you think there is cheating. so many commishes on here seem to over think trades that go through their leagues. in my league unless people raise concern, or unless i think there is cheating i barely look at the trades.
sometimes i get a little overzealous in my responses, but it wasnt meant harshly.
Sorry...didn't mean to take it so harshly. Bad day...
There aren't many trades in my league. This is the first this year and there have been probably less than 10 in the 4 years or so I've been running this league. I know in the end I overthougth it, but I have seen many people ask about the fairness of trades on this forum strictly because the value seemed so uneven. But again, in hindsight, this trade isn't even all that uneven and there is no collusion, cheating, etc...and I really have no interest in 'controlling' anything in my league that way. Just got paranoid that I was being too lazy and maybe letting an unfair trade go through that would piss everyone in the league off.
So again, I apologize for responding so harshly.
Thanks for the responses. They broke me out of my morning haze and let me see that I was totally overthinking this...
just so you know i've probably answered 20 of these questions on here and everytime its the same thing. but i think everytime i get a little more harsh about it. alot of people think that the idea of a veto is to stop a team from getting stronger, cancel the trade so they can offer a better deal, or just out of jealousy because they want a player involved. these are all bad reasons and i would never let them happen in my league.
padrino990_200 wrote:why are you even wasting peoples time asking this question. of course you let it go through. its not your job to manage peoples teams. unless there is collusion involved the trade goes through, no questions about who is getting the better dead.
who are you to tell someone how to manage their teams? if thats the case why dont you just manage all the teams?
And as far as 'wasting peoples time', give me a f'ing break. There are a million ridiculous questions on this board. And in essence, Fantasy Football is about wasting time.
spodog and seahorn....awesome how you two answer every one of these, and seem to come up w some new way to express the same answer every time. im going through every one just to see what you'll say next
and to anybody else who has been answering a lot of them...no offense that i didnt name you...those two just have pics that i recognize in each one
Cafe Home
Fantasy Baseball
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by skinny d » Tue Sep 23, 2008 12:04 pm 
