Vetoable trade?

[Whisper]

Hey all. So the current leader in our 10-team league (Team A, 3-0) apparently proposed this trade to the 9th-place team (Team B, 1-2), who looks to have already accepted it.

Some of the other owners (including the league commish) feel that it's lopsided, so I'm just debating my particular vote.

Team A gets: Joseph Addai and Mushin Muhammed
Team B gets: DeSean Jackson and Julius Jones

Basically, I know that Team A is REALLY capitalizing on Jones and Jackson being hot right now. I just don't know if it's quite one-sided enough to actually veto. My guess is Team B is either panicking because of his poor early-season performance, or he just doesn't care much anymore.

Thoughts?

[The Lung]

Unless there's evidence of collusion, I allow nearly every trade (no matter how unbalanced it may seem to you or others) to proceed.

[flotsamnjetsam]

Unless there's evidence of collusion, I allow nearly every trade (no matter how unbalanced it may seem to you or others) to proceed.

I agree with Lung. Unless you suspect collusion/cheating between the 2 owners, you must allow the trade to go through...no matter how lopsided it might look on paper.

[Whisper]

Yeah, that's always been my approach as well, hence my hesitation to vote up to this point.

Thanks for the opinions.

[raised]

Yeah it`s not a good trade. But, I`ve been on the other side of that. Like I had too many wr and they vetoed a trade when I traded one of them below value. Hey I`m trying to win, not make even trades. Guys on the bench don`t help me. Just saying that trades really shouldn`t be blocked if you`re sure there is no collusion. I guess the only down-side to that is that if you suspect collusion it`ll be harder to block.

[bungle613]

Keeper league, really bad deal. Redraft, just a bad deal but honestly, Jones and Jackson have put up more points. Let it go.

[Whisper]

Yeah, I think the main issue from the other managers' perspectives was that Team A is already fairly stacked (B. Marshall, T. Holt, R. Wayne, V. Jackson, M. Lynch), so by grabbing Addai, he esentially has two first-round (or late second-round) RB's, along with the inhuman Marshall.

Trade went through, though, so I'm sure Team A's owner is quite happy. Conversely, Team B will be kicking himself soon enough.

[JasonSeahorn]

Yeah, I think the main issue from the other managers' perspectives was that Team A is already fairly stacked (B. Marshall, T. Holt, R. Wayne, V. Jackson, M. Lynch), so by grabbing Addai, he esentially has two first-round (or late second-round) RB's, along with the inhuman Marshall.

Trade went through, though, so I'm sure Team A's owner is quite happy. Conversely, Team B will be kicking himself soon enough.

Yeah it's good that you didn't veto it. The argument that a trade makes one team too stacked is not a good one...every other team had a chance to draft a "stacked" team or make trades themselves. Some argue that it affects "league integrity", but if that is the case then everyone should have a .500 record and everyone gets a little plastic trophy at the end of the season as if they were playing little league.