Veto Trade Confirmation

[DynastyDeepDive]

Trade Veto Confirmation

I am commish of a league and a trade just occurred. Edeleman for Alfred morris.

The but head who traded morris away is the worst owner. Gave away Fotre for practically nothing earlier this year too.

I feel I need to veto trade.

Thoughts?

[DynastyDeepDive]

Meant to say owner who traded Edeleman away is a butt head. It's a PPR league too.

Feel this is lopsised

[sloth8u]

you dont get a much closer trade in terms of market value. every time i see a thread in which a commish would like to veto.............i wonder to myself.....what do you as commish, think would make this fair??? jtsmalls, can you please answer this.

[SpartyOn]

According to September ADP:
Morris - 66
Edelman - 51
Not even close to a veto worthy trade. Just because you are the commish doesn't make you more knowledgeable than your league mates.

[bubbamsu]

Unless you know without a doubt that there is collusion, then you NEVER veto a trade. We all have seen trades that we personally feel are terrible but if two willing owners trade, then who are we to decide what is right or wrong for their teams. We as commissioners, have the responsibility to lead the league, not to interject our personal opinions into other teams trades, waivers, draft selections, etc...

When you look at the trade it is far from being lopsided and I am sure their are worse trades that have happened in your league before.

If I was in this league and the commish vetoed this trade based on his personal opinions, then it would be the last season I was in this league.

I would say that if I was in your league and you vetoed a trade without league approval, then you would be looking at replacing my team the next year, instant adios from me. Regardless if I was involved in the trade or not.

[DynastyDeepDive]

I would poll the other owners and not veto myself. Perhaps it's not veto worthy. It's just a horrible trade making one of the stronger teams in our league even stronger. He took advantage of an inexperienced owner.

Trading one of the best PPR receivers for a running back who doesn't catch the ball and about to lose his job makes no sense to me.

[Ghosted]

Sounds like sour grapes to me. Edelman is really solid, but he's always been one of the toughest players to get fair value for, and this definitely isn't that far off. Heck, he could be one solid concussion away from having his entire career put in jeopardy.

[grooner]

There is no way u can veto this trade. It's not lopsided at all. Sounds to me you are angry that the strongest team made a trade...

[heyfeefellskee]

It's a fair trade.

[sloth8u]

I would poll the other owners and not veto myself. Perhaps it's not veto worthy. It's just a horrible trade making one of the stronger teams in our league even stronger. He took advantage of an inexperienced owner.

Trading one of the best PPR receivers for a running back who doesn't catch the ball and about to lose his job makes no sense to me.

this is not a horrible trade. in fact, i dont think most would even blink an eye at it if it happened in our leagues.

as commish and if you feel you have a "lost" owner...you need to make an attempt to educate him by sending him here. dont try to tell him how to run his team. you mention the inexperience...im sure you can remember what its like learning on the fly. pretty much everyone has to "learn" the value and long term implications of making moves in a dynasty league.

this trade really isnt bad at all. maybe some sour grapes here i guess. or maybe just differing opinions on value. if this trade would have been fine before jones went off in week 2, im not sure how its any different 1 week later.

[UnsafeAtAnySpd]

I'm with everyone else... There's no reason at all to veto this trade unless you plan on disbanding the league anyway.

[sloth8u]

as you can see, this isnt close to vetoable, but maybe we can help explain why, so your not having these same concerns in the future.

first i will tell you that ive only ever had 1 trade vetoed in any of my leagues. a few years back i trade my andre johnson for a prospect named antonio brown and a future 1st. a 1st that in all likelihood would have been a guy by the name of andrew luck. atleast thats who the other owner ended up with when it was vetoed and chances are i would have taken him aswell. much like you, the commish was telling the league how unbalanced the trade was and that the other team was ripping me off. long story short, he puts it to vote and the vote is to veto it by a narrow margin...its my belief that the other owners didnt want the other team to get any stronger. that guys team disappointed and wound up with an early pick. fast forward to the present and that guy still brings up how lucky he was to have that trade vetoed. truth be told, we have no idea how players or teams will progress. situations change. good teams get unlucky and dont finish as strongly as projected.

player value changes so often and fast that its impossible for any single person or group such as the members of a league to accurately determine the exact value of any player. do you remember josh gordon or trich going 1.1 in startups? wow...how wrong were the masses there. cruz and nicks were once considered top 10-15 wr's in dynasty land....amazing how thats changed over just 2 or 3 seasons. on this very site, cp was being ranked as a wr1 last offseason, not so much anymore. megatron was essentially untouchable this time last year, now if you want to move him...its tough finding a buyer for a fair price. take a look at the older rb's. some will tell you that their value is a late 1st, the same owners wont move them for that though. you get the point.

if you as commish, step in when your owners are making deals...you do nothing but set yourself up for problems in the future. i still jokingly check with the commish before i make a trade in that league where my trade was vetoed. in your instance...what if edelman breaks his leg this weekend and alfy goes on to finish as a solid rb? where does that leave you? interfering with other owners moves, just isnt going to get you anywhere in the long run.

any time i see something i feel is pretty lopsided, i have no qualms posting a sarcastic comment about how someone got screwed. but noway do i think anything should be vetoed. i saw a guy trade his entire 2016 draft for blake bortles this offseason. the guy already owns matt ryan in a 1 qb league. thats about as bad as ive seen...and you can bet that i had something to say...but i wasnt calling for a veto, nor did i expect it.

do yourself a favor and save the headaches...just get the idea of vetoing out of your league and things will run much smoother. once 1 veto takes place, your going to have owners crying for a veto every time a trade is made. most of the time it has nothing to do with them, other than the fact that they didnt make the trade. they feel their chance of winning were tampered with...well maybe 1 team did seem to get stronger...so what! thats why people trade. i traded ap this offseason for two 2nd's..i got some pretty negative feedback and harassed a bit...i ended up with david johnson and matt jones with those 2 picks. im not winning this year, and noone would give a 1st for ap...i took what i could get, to hopefully help for the future of my franchise. this week alone, ive received 3 offers for jones and 2 offers for johnson. all willing to give a future 1st. i havent taken any offer because these guys are young and look to be in line for an uptick in value, but thats my decision. one i may regret...but its my franchise to run. you as commish cant possibly forsee how things will work out. noone can. dont get yourself wrapped up in current value when it comes to other owners in your league. its an impossible spot to be in, and it certainly isnt worth the headache my friend.

it appears that you must have a veto process in your league. i would get rid of that asap. that will eliminate all your problems involving this issue.

[bonscott]

It's just a horrible trade making one of the stronger teams in our league even stronger.

This is the problem right there. Just because a team gets stronger is no reason to veto. Isn't that the whole point of trading, is to get better?

Trading one of the best PPR receivers for a running back who doesn't catch the ball and about to lose his job makes no sense to me.

And you know this how? I'm personally no Morris fan but one more fumble that might put the rook in the doghouse and Morris rocks on the rest of the season. Plus he's a FA next year and could start, oh I don't know, maybe Dallas? Or Chicago with Forte gone? Or maybe Denver?

Point is you're basing your problem with the trade strictly on what has happened this past week and the fact you don't want a team to get stronger. This trade wouldn't even cause a blip on the radar in any of my leagues. It's "fair" even when you look at ADP.

[ddog2303]

Example: in 2013 I traded Murray, Hilton, and Mario Williams for Welker, Lacy, and Watt. The commissioner hated the trade and said I was robbing him. So I was told to make a better offer that included draft picks. I ended up giving that haul plus 1st and 4th round picks for Lacy and Watt. Murray was dominant that year and obviously last year and Hilton has been a solid WR. I ended up getting robbed on that trade and the league ended up voting down the commissioners ability to veto trades unless a new owner couldn't explain why he was making the trade. I ended up having to trade more assets to get my picks back and since I wasn't high on Lacy when he got the concussion that year I traded him for peanuts and lost out there too. Bad trades happen. There have been very few trades in my league that I thought were even. People have varying opinions. Vetoing a trade simply because you don't like it is wrong and imo there is no place for it in fantasy football.

[auggiedoggies]

This thread is the exact reason why vetoes shouldn't exist unless it's clear and documented collusion.