Commissioners should NEVER veto trades! - Fantasy Football Cafe 2014 Fantasy Football Cafe


Return to Commissioner's Corner

Commissioners should NEVER veto trades!

Moderator: Football Moderators

Re: Commissioners should NEVER veto trades!

Postby Matthias » Mon Nov 17, 2008 5:07 pm

bungle613 wrote:Fair enough but read through the last 15 "should this be vetoed" posts. Very few of those even warrant the question of trust. I prefer not to chase after a possibility but to look at the players involved first. If that triggers something in my head, then I will dig depper, not the other way around.

Just for fun, I did.
Number one: owner gave up and dumped his roster.
Number two: no issue; 2nd & 3rd place teams and reasonable trade.
Number three: turns out it was a player loan deal.
Number four: the OP was one of the guys on the deal but legit trade.
Number five: first place/last place/dead team deal discussed above.
Number six: first place/team out of contention.
Number seven: team out of contention/collusion suspected/buddies involved.
Number eight: brothers doing a 1-week loan.
Number nine(?): this isn't really a "should this be vetoed" post but rather "did the commissioner misbehave" so not sure if this should count, but it doesn't look like collusion and doesn't raise the question of trust.
Number ten: the OP was one of the guys on the deal but legit trade.
Number eleven: legit trade; issue of trust raised only positively (no collusion, owners don't know each other outside of the league).
Number twelve: two brothers, one last place, one going to playoffs
Number thirteen: no issue of trust raised.
Number fourteen: no issue of trust raised.
Number fifteen: trust mentioned only positively (he says it's not collusion)

So of those fifteen, by my count numbers 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 12 raised the issue of trust in a negative way; one of them (#9) wasn't really a veto/no veto question, and in two (4 & 10) the OP was one of the people involved so it's not quite a commissioner asking. So depending upon how you count it, either 7 of the last 15 or 7 of the last 14 or 7 of the last 12 veto/not veto threads involved the issue of trust. No matter how you stack it, that's right around if not over 50%, which is more than I would call very few.
bungle613 wrote:A poster who asks if I believe Chris Johnson and Visanthe Schiancoe for Clinton Portis and Antonio Gates and states that Johnson is mediocre and Shiancoe is garbage my answer will simply be NO. Not, look for this or look for that. The answer is no, it should not be vetoed.

I'll just say as long as there's no issue of trust, it's fine. But in this case at least asking for more information definitely made the trade more questionable; and conversely, if someone says, "Oh, I know these guys and I'm sure it's ok and I just think it's not a fair trade" it makes the trade iron-clad - you approve it.

Overall, though, I think we agree on things.
Matthias
General Manager
General Manager


Posts: 2398
Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: Commissioners should NEVER veto trades!

Postby Matthias » Mon Nov 17, 2008 5:19 pm

The Lung wrote:In my book, a trade is only collusive in fantasy football if it greatly benefits one owner over another.

Your book is wrong, quite frankly. Collusion is much broader than that, even just in fantasy football. I guess you could say that you're only policing for obvious collusion or collusion done by idiots.
The Lung wrote:Is the trade horribly unbalanced? No. End of story - the trade would go through the leagues I commish.

I let in every trade, no matter how unbalanced, in the leagues I commish, because I know and have invited everyone in my leagues. But when I'm giving advice to a random person on the Cafe, I'm not making a decision about my league. And when you put a link to this thread, giving people advice, you're not giving advice on your league, either. This is not about how to best run a league. If it was about that, then the answer is: invite guys you know, who you know are going to compete, and who care more about what people think about them than winning a fantasy game in any given week. Then you don't even need a veto system. But that is never the question and so saying, "this is how I do it in my league" is not the right answer.
Matthias
General Manager
General Manager


Posts: 2398
Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: Commissioners should NEVER veto trades!

Postby The Lung » Mon Nov 17, 2008 6:07 pm

Matthias wrote:I let in every trade, no matter how unbalanced, in the leagues I commish, because I know and have invited everyone in my leagues. But when I'm giving advice to a random person on the Cafe, I'm not making a decision about my league. And when you put a link to this thread, giving people advice, you're not giving advice on your league, either. This is not about how to best run a league. If it was about that, then the answer is: invite guys you know, who you know are going to compete, and who care more about what people think about them than winning a fantasy game in any given week. Then you don't even need a veto system. But that is never the question and so saying, "this is how I do it in my league" is not the right answer.


I don't even know what you are getting at here, but I suspect that it digresses very far from the stated goal of this thread.

Very simply put, when Cafe members come to the Commissioner's Forum here at the Cafe asking whether a veto should be traded, 99 out 100 times, the consensus answer amongst practically everyone here is no. The only exception is when the trade is so horribly unbalanced that the only reason that the "losing" end of the deal would agree to such is that he was colluding with the other manager.

Without knowing ANYTHING about someone's else's league, that is the advice I'm going to give other Cafe members. That is also the same advice I've observed dozens if not hundreds of other Cafe experts here giving. That is the sole point of this thread.

Please feel free to give your own advice if you like. No one is going to stop you. It is absolutely your perogative to do whatever you like in that regard. ;-D
(~);}

Image

(~);}
The Lung
Moderator
Moderator

User avatar
ModeratorCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeMatchup Meltdown SurvivorCafe Blackjack Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 9850
(Past Year: 61)
Joined: 2 Jan 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Disgusted with Mocha Bean

Re: Commissioners should NEVER veto trades!

Postby Matthias » Mon Nov 17, 2008 6:43 pm

The Lung wrote:
Matthias wrote:I let in every trade, no matter how unbalanced, in the leagues I commish, because I know and have invited everyone in my leagues. But when I'm giving advice to a random person on the Cafe, I'm not making a decision about my league. And when you put a link to this thread, giving people advice, you're not giving advice on your league, either. This is not about how to best run a league. If it was about that, then the answer is: invite guys you know, who you know are going to compete, and who care more about what people think about them than winning a fantasy game in any given week. Then you don't even need a veto system. But that is never the question and so saying, "this is how I do it in my league" is not the right answer.

I don't even know what you are getting at here, but I suspect that it digresses very far from the stated goal of this thread.

My point is that people, when asked these questions, tend to over-personalize them. "I have had X trade vetoed and it really sucked" or, "In my league, I would never veto this trade" when the truth is, these questions aren't being asked in the context of your/my team or your/my league. They're being asked in the context of a league that, until we ask the OP about, we don't know. I'm all for letting people make their own decisions and live with their own mistakes or reap their own rewards. But until we have a little bit of more info on the league and people involved, we don't really know if that's probably what's happening or if it's more likely that two people are colluding.
The Lung wrote:Very simply put, when Cafe members come to the Commissioner's Forum here at the Cafe asking whether a veto should be traded, 99 out 100 times, the consensus answer amongst practically everyone here is no. The only exception is when the trade is so horribly unbalanced that the only reason that the "losing" end of the deal would agree to such is that he was colluding with the other manager.

All I'll say is point to the 15 most recent threads I looked at above. In half of them, it looks like (if not were outright admitted) collusion or may as well have been because one guy was just throwing away players. And in only a few of them were the trades of the Adrian Peterson for Martin Gramatica variety. Maybe I just found the lucky 7; maybe the 685 threads below it are all people griping about deals that were above board. But I don't really think that's the case. And all evidence to the contrary, I'm not obsessive enough to actually check.
The Lung wrote:Please feel free to give your own advice if you like. No one is going to stop you. It is absolutely your perogative to do whatever you like in that regard. ;-D

Will do. ;-)
Matthias
General Manager
General Manager


Posts: 2398
Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: Commissioners should NEVER veto trades!

Postby flotsamnjetsam » Mon Sep 07, 2009 1:39 pm

I hope you don't mind Lung...but I found this thread & restickied it. I just answered a question about this same subject & I think this thread should be up top. ;-D
Image

Thanks to deluxe_247 for the awesome sig!
flotsamnjetsam
Moderator
Moderator

User avatar
ModeratorCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterGolden Eagle EyeCafe MusketeerTrivia Time Trial ChampionPick 3 Weekly WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorCafe Blackjack Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 17170
(Past Year: 79)
Joined: 12 Oct 2005
Home Cafe: Football
Location: New York State Of Mind: 18-1

Re: Commissioners should NEVER veto trades!

Postby FantasySportsMaven » Fri Oct 09, 2009 11:06 am

So should teams who give up on the current year be able to make deals which might(?) help them next year but give another team a huge benefit this year?

If so, then I'd think that any team whom as a result of a non-vetoed trade which resulted in a KILLER Team, should Immediately begin to do those same type deals? Of course, that would result in a league of about only a few active teams for the rest of the year with a bunch of teams just trying to be as bad as possible while vying for the bottom?

Does that make sense to anyone... even LUNG?
2011 FFB Totals
Terrible at everything, and a liar.
FantasySportsMaven
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 2611
Joined: 6 Mar 2007
Home Cafe: Football

Re: Commissioners should NEVER veto trades!

Postby Dan Lambskin » Fri Oct 09, 2009 11:55 am

FantasySportsMaven wrote:So should teams who give up on the current year be able to make deals which might(?) help them next year but give another team a huge benefit this year?

If so, then I'd think that any team whom as a result of a non-vetoed trade which resulted in a KILLER Team, should Immediately begin to do those same type deals? Of course, that would result in a league of about only a few active teams for the rest of the year with a bunch of teams just trying to be as bad as possible while vying for the bottom?

Does that make sense to anyone... even LUNG?


happens in my keeper leagues every year (3 year limit on keepers and we allow trading for future year draft picks)...sure it creates a few "super" teams, but everyone has the same opportunity to acquire players...some owners are just more willing than others to mortage the future for immediate success...personally, i'm usually a buyer, but if i have a real stinker of a team i have no problem selling every last piece someone will buy.

Dynasty leagues it doesnt happen quite as much, because there arent a whole lot of guys that dont have any future value
Dan Lambskin
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
EditorFantasy ExpertCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeSurvival Of The Fittest WinnerPick 3 Weekly WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorCafe Blackjack Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly WinnerTrivia Time Trial Monthly Winner
Posts: 7054
Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: being a fan of the worst franchise in the NFL

Re: Commissioners should NEVER veto trades!

Postby FantasySportsMaven » Fri Oct 09, 2009 12:26 pm

Dan Lambskin wrote:
FantasySportsMaven wrote:So should teams who give up on the current year be able to make deals which might(?) help them next year but give another team a huge benefit this year?

If so, then I'd think that any team whom as a result of a non-vetoed trade which resulted in a KILLER Team, should Immediately begin to do those same type deals? Of course, that would result in a league of about only a few active teams for the rest of the year with a bunch of teams just trying to be as bad as possible while vying for the bottom?

Does that make sense to anyone... even LUNG?


happens in my keeper leagues every year (3 year limit on keepers and we allow trading for future year draft picks)...sure it creates a few "super" teams, but everyone has the same opportunity to acquire players...some owners are just more willing than others to mortage the future for immediate success...personally, i'm usually a buyer, but if i have a real stinker of a team i have no problem selling every last piece someone will buy.

Dynasty leagues it doesnt happen quite as much, because there arent a whole lot of guys that dont have any future value

Took your advice and decided to stop trying in one league this year. Offered Brees and Jennings for high draft picks next year.
2011 FFB Totals
Terrible at everything, and a liar.
FantasySportsMaven
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 2611
Joined: 6 Mar 2007
Home Cafe: Football

Re: Commissioners should NEVER veto trades!

Postby FantasySportsMaven » Fri Oct 09, 2009 12:28 pm

After I win it all in 2010, I probably will just quit the league... :-) ;-D
2011 FFB Totals
Terrible at everything, and a liar.
FantasySportsMaven
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 2611
Joined: 6 Mar 2007
Home Cafe: Football

Re: Commissioners should NEVER veto trades!

Postby Dan Lambskin » Fri Oct 09, 2009 12:47 pm

FantasySportsMaven wrote:
Dan Lambskin wrote:
FantasySportsMaven wrote:So should teams who give up on the current year be able to make deals which might(?) help them next year but give another team a huge benefit this year?

If so, then I'd think that any team whom as a result of a non-vetoed trade which resulted in a KILLER Team, should Immediately begin to do those same type deals? Of course, that would result in a league of about only a few active teams for the rest of the year with a bunch of teams just trying to be as bad as possible while vying for the bottom?

Does that make sense to anyone... even LUNG?


happens in my keeper leagues every year (3 year limit on keepers and we allow trading for future year draft picks)...sure it creates a few "super" teams, but everyone has the same opportunity to acquire players...some owners are just more willing than others to mortage the future for immediate success...personally, i'm usually a buyer, but if i have a real stinker of a team i have no problem selling every last piece someone will buy.

Dynasty leagues it doesnt happen quite as much, because there arent a whole lot of guys that dont have any future value

Took your advice and decided to stop trying in one league this year. Offered Brees and Jennings for high draft picks next year.


note...it doesnt always work out...i had the #1 pick 3 years in a row once :-b we really dont have too many teams give up a 1st rounder though, a 2nd is somewhat common and 3rds are pretty standard (and obviously later round picks as well)

also...nothing wrong with giving up too early, but myself, i try until it looks like i have no shot and then sell, sell, sell (assuming it's before the deadline)
Dan Lambskin
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
EditorFantasy ExpertCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeSurvival Of The Fittest WinnerPick 3 Weekly WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorCafe Blackjack Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly WinnerTrivia Time Trial Monthly Winner
Posts: 7054
Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: being a fan of the worst franchise in the NFL

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 18:57 hours
(and 34 days)
2014 NFL Schedule


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