Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

DB21

Vetoed Trade

Recommended Posts

Ill be back if this discussion is still ongoing. This is a long one.. I have some s--- to do.lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I traded LT in his prime for AP as a rookie was I crazy would you have vetoed that trade when AP came out as a rookie? The way this thread is going it sounds like YES.

Knowing what we know now in a dynasty league who got the better deal me or him? AP rushed 2k yards LT retired.

Lol you can't be serious.....

In a dynasy league trades like that are totally fine and happen all the time.

You're not even in the same ball park here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ill be back if this discussion is still ongoing. This is a long one.. I have some s--- to do.lol

I'm just waiting for you to say why ponder would be vetoable bc it totally contradicts your entire argument. Ill await your answer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone who thinks this shouldn't of been vetoed is nuts. As a commissioner you should not allow lopsided trades collusion or not

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So by your logic all sell high canidates should NOT be sold?

Who said that and what makes Big Ben a sell high candidate right now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You did the right thing to veto this trade. waaaaaay one sided. A.J Green is a top 5 receiver whos a 2nd/3rd round pick. Big Ben doesnt even get drafted in some leagues...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No I'm just stating everyone who is saying Green is worth so much more then Ben can be proven wrong because Football has not started. Green could regress, The Qb for the Bengals could regress.

Things happen I am AGAINST a commish veto. Personally I would not veto this trade and I feel the league should make decisions not just one random guy who is the commish that also plays in your league.

Gabbert could throw for 5k yards this season, is he still worth the same as he was last year? Would it be unfair just because its Gabbert to say no thats a bad trade look at his past this other guy is so gonna out play him this year.

It comes down to being a bad trade but it was ACCEPTED by both teams no one held a gun to the others head and said do it now!

You are a breath of fresh air in here man. This is exactly what Im saying. As long as were talking starters.. anything can happen. Obviously trading starters for bench players or backups is ridiculous.

And trading a 2nd rounder for a player that isn't drafted until the 11th or 12th round is ridiculous.

So I guess if I traded my top WR for Cam in his rookie year when he was a late round flier... that woudlve been ridiculous too right? Because what round a player is drafted in means absolutely everything. Riiiiiight.

you say pick a side. I said trade vetoed, Big Ben for Top 5 WR. I then said if Big Ben comes out with big games, it could be different. Because a lot of people are willing to give up the farm for the Hot Hand. YOU PROVED MY POINT. Cam's rookie year, a trade for him BEFORE a game was played made no sense. When he came out HOT, people were willing to trade a Top 5 WR or anything else to get the Hot Hand. At this point, the trade makes no sense. He has been a top 10 FFL QB once in ten years. ONE TIME. When players get hot, they are in demand. Right now he is an Elite Backup FFL QB. And you say because of his injury, is the reason he is not currently elite. You are correct. He has been injured for 6 years! Did A-Rod sell him a magical pill. NO... Big Ben may be an awesome leader on his team, but an elite FFL QB? No. Here is the deal... If you think Ben is going to be great, then you go get him. But you don't give up one of your best players on a hunch that a player built a fountain of youth in his back yard. `Come On Man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't go through all the posts and I'm not sure if both teams qbs were posted or not, but there's probably a good chance the guy who had Ben probably had him on the bench. I'm not a fan of veteoing trades unless there's collusion or completely lopsided, but in this case I'd say it's justified. Yes, Big Ben could finish a top 5 qb and Green could get injured or face plant, but the odds are in Greens favor to end the season on a high note.

I mean where does it end? What if the guy who gets Green ends up trading for other stud players as well, essentially stacking his team. I play in money leagues and I'd be pretty pissed, because that could screw up playoff seeding as well as potentially get me bounced due to some guy stacking players. Of course there's no guarantee in fantasy, and that guys whole team could have a bad week, but fantasy is almost primarily based off of luck and all you can do is do your research, put your best lineup in and hope for the best.

I will say that vetoes should be a league vote, though. If the majority of the owners are fine with a trade like that going through, then so be it. This is part of the reason I hate relying on trades, because rarely will you get a fair deal, someone is always looking to get the upper hand, which is fine I guess for whoever is getting that hand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No I'm just stating everyone who is saying Green is worth so much more then Ben can be proven wrong because Football has not started. Green could regress, The Qb for the Bengals could regress.

Things happen I am AGAINST a commish veto. Personally I would not veto this trade and I feel the league should make decisions not just one random guy who is the commish that also plays in your league.

Gabbert could throw for 5k yards this season, is he still worth the same as he was last year? Would it be unfair just because its Gabbert to say no thats a bad trade look at his past this other guy is so gonna out play him this year.

It comes down to being a bad trade but it was ACCEPTED by both teams no one held a gun to the others head and said do it now!

You are a breath of fresh air in here man. This is exactly what Im saying. As long as were talking starters.. anything can happen. Obviously trading starters for bench players or backups is ridiculous.

And trading a 2nd rounder for a player that isn't drafted until the 11th or 12th round is ridiculous.

So I guess if I traded my top WR for Cam in his rookie year when he was a late round flier... that woudlve been ridiculous too right? Because what round a player is drafted in means absolutely everything. Riiiiiight.

you say pick a side. I said trade vetoed, Big Ben for Top 5 WR. I then said if Big Ben comes out with big games, it could be different. Because a lot of people are willing to give up the farm for the Hot Hand. YOU PROVED MY POINT. Cam's rookie year, a trade for him BEFORE a game was played made no sense. When he came out HOT, people were willing to trade a Top 5 WR or anything else to get the Hot Hand. At this point, the trade makes no sense. He has been a top 10 FFL QB once in ten years. ONE TIME. When players get hot, they are in demand. Right now he is an Elite Backup FFL QB. And you say because of his injury, is the reason he is not currently elite. You are correct. He has been injured for 6 years! Did A-Rod sell him a magical pill. NO... Big Ben may be an awesome leader on his team, but an elite FFL QB? No. Here is the deal... If you think Ben is going to be great, then you go get him. But you don't give up one of your best players on a hunch that a player built a fountain of youth in his back yard. `Come On Man.

No! So you mean to tell me if Ben has a good 2 games that his whole season outlook changes for you? and then the trade is fair. Are you serious man? Somebody else please tell me Im not the only one who sees all kinds of wrong with this situation. So right now the trade is unfair but just 2 games changes everything? Short sighted much? You proved my point my friend. Why would trading for Cam before his rookie season started be unfair but after he played 2 games and does good... then its fair? You gotta be kidding me. What kind of value are you going to get trading for players after they breakout? NONE! So in your league I guess nobody is allowed to trade for players they think will be better then they are perceived to be by everybody else because hey they havent done it yet right? But if they have a good game or 2 then that changes everything and makes it fair and justifiable to trade the house for them right? Riiiiiiiiiiight. Total nonsense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... and then you talk about his injuries as a reason you vetoed it and dont like Ben this year. I guess the crystal ball is out again... now not only are we predicting numbers but were predicting injuries as well. Your 2013 Most Valuable Commish award goes to this fella right here. Horrible reasoning for your vetoing of this trade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No I'm just stating everyone who is saying Green is worth so much more then Ben can be proven wrong because Football has not started. Green could regress, The Qb for the Bengals could regress.

Things happen I am AGAINST a commish veto. Personally I would not veto this trade and I feel the league should make decisions not just one random guy who is the commish that also plays in your league.

Gabbert could throw for 5k yards this season, is he still worth the same as he was last year? Would it be unfair just because its Gabbert to say no thats a bad trade look at his past this other guy is so gonna out play him this year.

It comes down to being a bad trade but it was ACCEPTED by both teams no one held a gun to the others head and said do it now!

You are a breath of fresh air in here man. This is exactly what Im saying. As long as were talking starters.. anything can happen. Obviously trading starters for bench players or backups is ridiculous.

And trading a 2nd rounder for a player that isn't drafted until the 11th or 12th round is ridiculous.

So I guess if I traded my top WR for Cam in his rookie year when he was a late round flier... that woudlve been ridiculous too right? Because what round a player is drafted in means absolutely everything. Riiiiiight.

you say pick a side. I said trade vetoed, Big Ben for Top 5 WR. I then said if Big Ben comes out with big games, it could be different. Because a lot of people are willing to give up the farm for the Hot Hand. YOU PROVED MY POINT. Cam's rookie year, a trade for him BEFORE a game was played made no sense. When he came out HOT, people were willing to trade a Top 5 WR or anything else to get the Hot Hand. At this point, the trade makes no sense. He has been a top 10 FFL QB once in ten years. ONE TIME. When players get hot, they are in demand. Right now he is an Elite Backup FFL QB. And you say because of his injury, is the reason he is not currently elite. You are correct. He has been injured for 6 years! Did A-Rod sell him a magical pill. NO... Big Ben may be an awesome leader on his team, but an elite FFL QB? No. Here is the deal... If you think Ben is going to be great, then you go get him. But you don't give up one of your best players on a hunch that a player built a fountain of youth in his back yard. `Come On Man.

No! So you mean to tell me if Ben has a good 2 games that his whole season outlook changes for you? and then the trade is fair. Are you serious man? Somebody else please tell me Im not the only one who sees all kinds of wrong with this situation. So right now the trade is unfair but 2 games changes everything? Short sighted much? You proved my point my friend. Why would trading for Cam before his rookie season started be unfair but after he played 2 games... then its fair? You gotta be kidding me. What kind of value are you going to get trading for players after they breakout? NONE! So in your league I guess nobody is allowed to trade for players they think will breakout because hey they havent done it yet right? But if they have a good game then that changes everything and makes it fair and justifiable to trade the house for them right? Riiiiiiiiiiight. Total nonsense.

Dude, it's about the trade RIGHT NOW! Get off the 2 game crap. I made a comment that it may be different down the road. STAY FOCUSED. Listen. If you have a feeling a player may have a breakout year great. But you don't trade potential for a Top guy. So, you would give up one of your best two players, for an aging QB that has been injured and mediocre. Good luck to you this year man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No I'm just stating everyone who is saying Green is worth so much more then Ben can be proven wrong because Football has not started. Green could regress, The Qb for the Bengals could regress.

Things happen I am AGAINST a commish veto. Personally I would not veto this trade and I feel the league should make decisions not just one random guy who is the commish that also plays in your league.

Gabbert could throw for 5k yards this season, is he still worth the same as he was last year? Would it be unfair just because its Gabbert to say no thats a bad trade look at his past this other guy is so gonna out play him this year.

It comes down to being a bad trade but it was ACCEPTED by both teams no one held a gun to the others head and said do it now!

You are a breath of fresh air in here man. This is exactly what Im saying. As long as were talking starters.. anything can happen. Obviously trading starters for bench players or backups is ridiculous.

And trading a 2nd rounder for a player that isn't drafted until the 11th or 12th round is ridiculous.

So I guess if I traded my top WR for Cam in his rookie year when he was a late round flier... that woudlve been ridiculous too right? Because what round a player is drafted in means absolutely everything. Riiiiiight.

you say pick a side. I said trade vetoed, Big Ben for Top 5 WR. I then said if Big Ben comes out with big games, it could be different. Because a lot of people are willing to give up the farm for the Hot Hand. YOU PROVED MY POINT. Cam's rookie year, a trade for him BEFORE a game was played made no sense. When he came out HOT, people were willing to trade a Top 5 WR or anything else to get the Hot Hand. At this point, the trade makes no sense. He has been a top 10 FFL QB once in ten years. ONE TIME. When players get hot, they are in demand. Right now he is an Elite Backup FFL QB. And you say because of his injury, is the reason he is not currently elite. You are correct. He has been injured for 6 years! Did A-Rod sell him a magical pill. NO... Big Ben may be an awesome leader on his team, but an elite FFL QB? No. Here is the deal... If you think Ben is going to be great, then you go get him. But you don't give up one of your best players on a hunch that a player built a fountain of youth in his back yard. `Come On Man.

No! So you mean to tell me if Ben has a good 2 games that his whole season outlook changes for you? and then the trade is fair. Are you serious man? Somebody else please tell me Im not the only one who sees all kinds of wrong with this situation. So right now the trade is unfair but 2 games changes everything? Short sighted much? You proved my point my friend. Why would trading for Cam before his rookie season started be unfair but after he played 2 games... then its fair? You gotta be kidding me. What kind of value are you going to get trading for players after they breakout? NONE! So in your league I guess nobody is allowed to trade for players they think will breakout because hey they havent done it yet right? But if they have a good game then that changes everything and makes it fair and justifiable to trade the house for them right? Riiiiiiiiiiight. Total nonsense.

Dude, it's about the trade RIGHT NOW! Get off the 2 game crap. I made a comment that it may be different down the road. STAY FOCUSED. Listen. If you have a feeling a player may have a breakout year great. But you don't trade potential for a Top guy. So, you would give up one of your best two players, for an aging QB that has been injured and mediocre. Good luck to you this year man.

Did I once say I would do this trade..no. I said its not unfair enough to be vetoed. Oh down the road... a whole 2 games down the road? haha. And if your telling me a trade is vetoed one week but 2 weeks later the same trade can go through depending on production for the past 2 weeks... I dont know what to say to that. Your the one that said it so that tells me that you would let the trade go through if Ben exploded for 2 weeks which is the most backwards thing I have ever heard. How is trading about right now??? We trade for what we think the players are going to do for the future right? and you said only 2 weeks into the future this trade would be ok if Ben did good. You know what that means... that it shouldnt be vetoed. Based on your own reasoning. Your the commish man your reasoning for vetoing trades has to be better than this. I didnt make up the whole 2 game thing.. you said it.lol. and your the commish.. unfortunately your word is law in that league which is why im pointing out to you exactly what u said and why your reasoning for a veto is incorrect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My suggestion is for your league mates to run very very far away from any league that you are the commissioner of. Not everyone needs a trophy and new people learn by mistakes. If your coddled you will always suck.

Newbies making mistakes is fine. Everyone always tries to rip off the new guys, but do you not draw the line somewhere? Would you allow an AP for geno smith trade?

Trades like that turn good leagues into circuses

Any league where 2 owners agree to that trade is not a good league. If you have newbies then by all means as commissioner you can educate but dont be a dictator. They have to learn. I was in a similar situation and an owner who was new to it agreed to a trade that I would never have agreed to. Turns out they were just looking at the week 1 projections. After some education of what to look for in terms of value was helpful and they realized that they probably should not have let the trade through. It was not as egregious as something like AP for Geno so had to let it through despite what I thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every veto thread I pose this question and 99% of the time it gets ignored. Let's see if you can show some courage. Ready for the famous question?

Are you playing against random strangers over the Internet or you are playing against all real life friends that you know well?

This will spoil the thread ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the fact that this thread is 10 pages long is indicative of the fact that there is arguments both ways and this trade shouldn't be vetoed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm starting to think that some of the guys arguing for pages on end are actually in this league with the Big Ben for Green trade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the fact that this thread is 10 pages long is indicative of the fact that there is arguments both ways and this trade shouldn't be vetoed.

Now how on earth does that prove it shouldn't be vetoed? That comment literally made zero sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... and then you talk about his injuries as a reason you vetoed it and dont like Ben this year. I guess the crystal ball is out again... now not only are we predicting numbers but were predicting injuries as well. Your 2013 Most Valuable Commish award goes to this fella right here. Horrible reasoning for your vetoing of this trade.

So you still avoiding the question as to why you said ponder would be vetoable? Cool

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the fact that this thread is 10 pages long is indicative of the fact that there is arguments both ways and this trade shouldn't be vetoed.

Now how on earth does that prove it shouldn't be vetoed? That comment literally made zero sense.

haha.. your right doesnt prove anything. Hes just making the point that if a trade is bad enough to be vetoed then 99% of the ppl would likely see it that way. Which isnt the case here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the fact that this thread is 10 pages long is indicative of the fact that there is arguments both ways and this trade shouldn't be vetoed.

Now how on earth does that prove it shouldn't be vetoed? That comment literally made zero sense.

haha.. your right doesnt prove anything. Hes just making the point that if a trade is bad enough to be vetoed then 99% of the ppl would likely see it that way. Which isnt the case here.

False. Who said 99% of people have to agree on something for it be justified? That's ridiculous

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the fact that this thread is 10 pages long is indicative of the fact that there is arguments both ways and this trade shouldn't be vetoed.

Now how on earth does that prove it shouldn't be vetoed? That comment literally made zero sense.

haha.. your right doesnt prove anything. Hes just making the point that if a trade is bad enough to be vetoed then 99% of the ppl would likely see it that way. Which isnt the case here.

False. Who said 99% of people have to agree on something for it be justified? That's ridiculous

Im not saying hes right.. relax. Im just conveying his message with that post. in all reality there is no definite answer to this.. we can talk in circles all day long with this one. Im ready to throw up the agree to disagree towel at this point. My fingers hurt.lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My suggestion is for your league mates to run very very far away from any league that you are the commissioner of. Not everyone needs a trophy and new people learn by mistakes. If your coddled you will always suck.

Newbies making mistakes is fine. Everyone always tries to rip off the new guys, but do you not draw the line somewhere? Would you allow an AP for geno smith trade?

Trades like that turn good leagues into circuses

Any league where 2 owners agree to that trade is not a good league. If you have newbies then by all means as commissioner you can educate but dont be a dictator. They have to learn. I was in a similar situation and an owner who was new to it agreed to a trade that I would never have agreed to. Turns out they were just looking at the week 1 projections. After some education of what to look for in terms of value was helpful and they realized that they probably should not have let the trade through. It was not as egregious as something like AP for Geno so had to let it through despite what I thought.

For the 101th time, I said I hate commish vetoes bc it leads to a dictatorship. I said he should voted against and let the rest of the league vote on it too. I'm fine with lopsided trades for newbies to "learn from their mistakes", but you draw the line somewhere and this is the line for me and apparently a lot of other people. A top 3 WR for a guy that could be left on WW in a 10 team 1 qb league screws everyone over and isn't worth some newbie learning. We'll have to agree to disagree I guess

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My suggestion is for your league mates to run very very far away from any league that you are the commissioner of. Not everyone needs a trophy and new people learn by mistakes. If your coddled you will always suck.

Newbies making mistakes is fine. Everyone always tries to rip off the new guys, but do you not draw the line somewhere? Would you allow an AP for geno smith trade?

Trades like that turn good leagues into circuses

Any league where 2 owners agree to that trade is not a good league. If you have newbies then by all means as commissioner you can educate but dont be a dictator. They have to learn. I was in a similar situation and an owner who was new to it agreed to a trade that I would never have agreed to. Turns out they were just looking at the week 1 projections. After some education of what to look for in terms of value was helpful and they realized that they probably should not have let the trade through. It was not as egregious as something like AP for Geno so had to let it through despite what I thought.

For the 101th time, I said I hate commish vetoes bc it leads to a dictatorship. I said he should voted against and let the rest of the league vote on it too. I'm fine with lopsided trades for newbies to "learn from their mistakes", but you draw the line somewhere and this is the line for me and apparently a lot of other people. A top 3 WR for a guy that could be left on WW in a 10 team 1 qb league screws everyone over and isn't worth some newbie learning. We'll have to agree to disagree I guess

"Alright Rocko!! Alright Sly!!".... anyone? anyone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites