Veto is by league vote. Two hours after I accepted a trade, the commish emailed the whole league with this, "All I ask is that you review the pending trade. In my opinion it is very lopsided." He then wrote this on the league message board, "this pending trade is wildy uneven in my opinion."
Here is the trade: I give Graham, Stewart, Driver, and Dallas D for Addai, Colston, Buckhalter, and Crayton.
My Team (1-2) QB Brees RB SJax, Graham, Stewart, CJohnson, Perry WR Fitz, Driver, Meachem, Henderson, Branch TE Scheffler K Bironas DEF Dallas, Carolina
His Team (0-3) QB McNabb, Campbell RB Addai, Maroney, Ward, Mendenhall, Buckhalter WR Roy Williams, Colston, Crayton, Muhammed, Matt Jones TE Winslow K Prater DEF Tampa Bay
2 Questions: Should the commissioner really be emailing the league and posting on the message board in an effort to get league members to veto a trade? Is this trade "very lopsided" and "widely uneven"?
A for the commish, not his job to solicit responses. I feel that as a member of the league he can both vote against it (if he chooses, he would be wrong to do so) and he can also post his thoughts on the deal in a league post but emailling the league or posting that he would like others to veto the deal is over the line.
As for the commish saying something...since your league's veto system is based on everyone voting, the commish's opinion isn't special. It would be the same as anyone else publicly saying they don't like a pending trade. IMO you should respond publicly to him and ask him why he feels it's unfair. You can then defend your reasons or debunk his reasons. I'm assuming your reasoning will be better than your commish's, so other voters should see that and know that the trade is not worthy of a veto.
Thanks to deluxe_247 for sig, he is welcome to sail with the Captain too! I will win all of the fantasy cafe games.....next year
If it takes some votes from league members then there shouldn't be a problem, that trade is fair and its certainly not heavily lopsided, seems like the Commish shouldn't of put the trade on a platform like that, that seems out of place but if this gets vetoed then you have some shady league members you shouldn't bother playing with...I love leagues where trades like this are involved, if your league doesn't vote against it then it won't matter that the commish spoke up, although I do agree it wasn't really needed.
Current Cafe Dynasties: 4th and Goal Fourth & Inches Double D Any Given Dynasty Eat Cheese Dynasty NFL's Finest Cafe Very Special Forces
Thanks for the opinions, guys. I appreciate it. This trade was vetoed.
After the veto I posted this on the message board.
I took it upon myself to post this trade at a forum. Every reply stated that the trade was fair and shouldn't be vetoed. Poop has yet to respond to my post, and Joon never explained why he thought this trade was veto worthy. When managers aren't allowed to manage their own team, the integrity of the league is put into question. Basically, four managers said that Frankie Flowers is too incompetent to manage his own team. I sincerely hope that this is a one time only occurrence and that in the future if teams disagree with a trade they will take into account team needs and actual stats, and then post their opinion based on facts.
If Poop and Joon care to respond, please post Graham's stats vs. Addai's stats in the previous 10 regular season games started. Also explain how Stewart has just about as many points as Addai while he's still being worked into the starting role. Explain how it's better for the last place team to have Colston who may not even play until week 10 over Driver who will put up stats now.
The commish responded with this:
Look, you can argue until you're blue in the face, but the way this league is set up, each manager is given the power to veto trades. Plenty of trades have gone through in this league and it's within the power of each member to veto a trade if they deem it unfair.
Here is why I vetoed this trade.
First, a defense cannot be valued at the same level as a rb or wr. Defenses are typically taken in the last round or 2nd to last round, while rbs are typically taken in the first round.
It doesn't add up for me. But this of course is my opinion. I don't have to agree with you. You don't have to agree with me. Fantasy football is about putting values on players and I don't expect us to agree on all of it. I have one vote like everyone else.
We review trades so we can protect ourselves from collusion. Do I think you guys have some secret deal going on? It's unlikely. But I have a right to veto a trade which I deem lopsided. Furthermore, I don't feel I or anyone else who had vetoed this trade, needs to explain themselves. You use your own judgement on grading players, and if you don't like it, you veto. Simple as that.
And I understand you pled your case to the forums and the consensus was that the trade was fair. Unfortunately, the only consensus that matters is the one in this league. Now can we please move on?
I'm just a little flabbergasted by his response. Also one note: there has actually only been one trade that was not vetoed by the league and that trade involved the commish. The other two trades have been vetoed.
I agree with everyone else that said this trade should've been passed. Trades should be vetoed for 1 reason and 1 reason only...if collusion/cheating is suspected. Otherwise, EVERY trade, no matter how lopsided it might look on paper should get passed. I'm in numerous leagues and none of them let all the owners vote on trades. We have a commish and/or a co-commish that decide all trades. Then we have backup co-commishes for trades involving the commish or co-commish. Noone in my leagues would every cheat/collude so we NEVER have to veto a trade. Sorry to say but your commish seems clueless to me. Not only did he veto a trade that should've been passed, he also tried to sway votes which IMO is another no-no. I'd propose a change to the system for next year & I'd try to get a commish who understands the way trades should be reviewed. If that doesn't happen I might decide not to play in the league again. I love how he tries to defend his decision. He really doesn't know how clueless he is when it comes to being a commish.
addai >> Graham (Graham is outperforming him though) Colston >> Driver but with missing 4-6 weeks Driver would get a single < Stewart >>> Crayton Dallas > Buckhalter (not really comparable but my guess is Dallas ADP is hgher then Buckhalter.
Legit deal and if your league has had only 1 of 4 trades passed, you may want to think about moving on next year.
addai >> Graham (Graham is outperforming him though) Colston >> Driver but with missing 4-6 weeks Driver would get a single < Stewart >>> Crayton Dallas > Buckhalter (not really comparable but my guess is Dallas ADP is hgher then Buckhalter.
Legit deal and if your league has had only 1 of 4 trades passed, you may want to think about moving on next year.
You know what it is? This douche-bag commish didn't like the idea of you getting Addai and Buckhalter. That's it. So the rest of the lemmings in your league did the expected - voted it down. I can never figure out why leagues continue to be configured with league votes. Every single trade will get voted down. It's funny how the commish then tried to rationalize his vote by ranking Crayton as a "tier-2" and an injured Colston a "tier-1," as if he's playing tomorrow against SF. Bottom line? Don't play in this league next year.
Cafe Home
Fantasy Baseball
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by kaveman » Sat Sep 27, 2008 1:58 am 
