Bad Situation

[Favre.com]

Recently the following trade was approved in my league:

Team A gets: McCoy, Calvin Johnson, Vincent Jackson, Josh Freeman, AJ Green

Team B gets: Gore, Ochocinco, Percy Harvin, Brees, Deon Branch

I think this needs to be automatically vetoed.

After trade was pending, commissioner changed rules from 2 days of reject time for league votes to 1 day of reject time for league votes. I noticed this and emailed the entire league about it, we got the minimum amount of votes necessary to veto and vetoed. Commish in turn changed settings from "league vote" to "by Commissioner" and pushed the trade through. The other owner has not responded. Commish said he changed settings cause too many people were bitching and wouldn't make the league fair by just vetoing everything. He said because no collusion can be proven the trade needs to stand (I kinda suspect collusion since the other owner and commish are good friends, but either way the other owner doesn't really know a lot so he may have just accepted for the sake of accepting). Commish says he did everything fair, other guy accepted, no collusion, etc.

I have quit the league, and am currently in the process of searching for another league. With that said, is he really in the right here?

[Dan Lambskin]

personally i would let the trade go unless i suspected collusion, however, the commish should not be changing rules during the season and without a league vote
seeing that he's involved in the deal i do think something fishy is going on here

[ampant]

I think its a crappy trade, but people should be free to make crappy trades. The point of vetoes is to prevent cheating/collusion. . . NOT to superimpose one person's player values over another. You don't veto people's boneheaded draft-trades, do you? Fantasy is all about player evaluation, and who is to say Gore won't outperform McCoy. Brees is definitely head and shoulders above Freeman. At time in the past, both Harvin and Chad have been premier WRs. Maybe the dude is higher on those players than you are, whatever. Who knows if he made a boneheaded decision or what. But you are going to see some stupid trades in Fantasy. Maybe you'll be wrong about some of your player evaluations.

In this case I think Team A is the clear winner, but its not like he's trading Purple Jesus for a kicker and a bag of sand.

[ampant]

personally i would let the trade go unless i suspected collusion, however, the commish should not be changing rules during the season and without a league vote
seeing that he's involved in the deal i do think something fishy is going on here

I was latching on to the merits of the trade itself. But if you think the commish is shady I think that's a gut call you have to make. Dan is quite correct in pointing out that changing rules once the league is established without a vote is bad form.

[Kareighuis]

It's a stupid trade, but not veto-worthy, IMO.

But, the commish-
A) shouldn't change the review period for trades from 2 days to without-
1- a league vote, or
2- league input/feedback on the proposal, or
3- a heads-up the change will be forced through;

B) shouldn't change settings from "league vote" to "by Commissioner" without-
1- a league vote, or
2- league input/feedback on the proposal, or
3- a heads-up the change will be forced through.

Terrible actions taken here. While the trade is very questionable, the commish actions aren't- they were clearly wrong.

[Bobbleheadrusty]

I'm not sure how its remotely vetoable? If you tried to rally a veto over it I would say that collusion is happening on your side only. While I hate that the commissioner changed the rules, I agree with him that a league that is this willing to pull the trigger is probably gonna suck anyway.

Not knowing your rules, or the situation, but Brees for Freeman is a huge difference, probably more then any other position in that deal.

[Aberfoyle]

I think the main problem is changing all the league setting while the trade is going on. Sounds sketch, I would run.

Help

viewtopic.php?t=494119