Trade fairness - Trade REJECTED by league

[Orenthal Shames]

i don't see the problem, honestly

contract league or no contract league, seems legit to me

Yup

[BigBawseRoss]

god i hate salary and contract leagues, after sifting thru all the bs and trying to weigh all variables it seems like a fine trade but kinda whack the dude gets rodgers and and extra $50. you should have to work within your cap isnt that like what the point of a cap is???

[abloom]

god i hate salary and contract leagues, after sifting thru all the bs and trying to weigh all variables it seems like a fine trade but kinda whack the dude gets rodgers and and extra $50. you should have to work within your cap isnt that like what the point of a cap is???

That seems like the most unfair part.

[Vectorgod]

I see no problem with either side of the trade. It is definitely not a threat to your league's integrity or possible collusion.

I do see a potential problem with the cash part of it, depending on your league structure. If the $50 you mentioned is "cap space credit", that is a red flag. The cap is the cap, period. Now if it is paying cash to the other owner for FAAB bidding, paying taxi squad salaries, etc. then I see no problem at all.

[Shcritters]

I see no problem with either side of the trade. It is definitely not a threat to your league's integrity or possible collusion.

I do see a potential problem with the cash part of it, depending on your league structure. If the $50 you mentioned is "cap space credit", that is a red flag. The cap is the cap, period. Now if it is paying cash to the other owner for FAAB bidding, paying taxi squad salaries, etc. then I see no problem at all.

Thanks for bringing this up, as I didn't state the league rules on this. On this topic, we do not have FAAB dollars, we use the remaining cap space dollars available to each team as what you can bid on players. Also, per the rules, salary cap dollars can be traded within year to allow for more trading (trading in salary/contract leagues can be hard to make player $'s work out). The rules specifically state "Trades may include one or more players and/or salary cap dollars. However, salary cap dollars may only be traded for the current year."

Don't know if this changes your opinion or not, open to feedback.

[hawk2119]

Seems reasonable to me.

[hockeyBjj]

I'd rather have the Rivers and Arob side, but if I was a stud qb away from a championship run I wouldn't hesitate to overpay by this amount and get the best qb in the game

You have your panties in a bunch over a slightly lopsided trade. There's a million times worse out there

[Missile]

Can you explain your issue with the trade?

[Shcritters]

I don’t have an issue with the trade at all. I was the one giving Rivers/ARob and receiving Rodgers. A couple people in my league are in an uproar believing this 1). Unbalanced because They think player values aren’t there, and 2). Because of the trading of cap dollars. What I’ve heard here is ‘fair trade, no concerns’, which is what I would have thought the outcome would be. Appreciate the feedback.

All this said, looks like it is going to a veto vote. We’ll see how it plays out.

[M-Dub]

I'd rather have the Rivers and Arob side, but if I was a stud qb away from a championship run I wouldn't hesitate to overpay by this amount and get the best qb in the game

You have your panties in a bunch over a slightly lopsided trade. There's a million times worse out there

Nailed it.

In a vacuum, I’d rather have ARob/Rivers, but I can totally see making this trade for a title push if I’m loaded at WR already. Nothing wrong with this trade.

[TrashPanda]

Yea I see it pretty equal. Rodgers in a 6 pt passing td league is a dream. Not a huge fan of arob either

[Vectorgod]

On the dollars issue it looks like your league setup is the problem, not this trade. I recommend that at some point, probably after this season ends, you work on your league finances to differentiate between salary cap and cash. However, that is a more appropriate discussion to have over in the salary cap forum.

If this trade goes to a veto vote and gets reversed, then I think your league is headed for trouble. Many people here hate veto votes, while others believe they have a place in very specific circumstances. If the only problem people have with the trade is the cash part of it AND your bylaws specifically allow that to happen, then they should be voting on bylaws changes, not on vetoing a perfectly legitimate trade.

I am a commissioner who happens to believe in the necessity of veto votes in very specific circumstances in order to maintain league integrity, but I also make it very clear that I won't entertain objections to trades simply because "I made [or would make] a better offer" or "Owner A is going to kick my azz if this trade goes through". Vetoes or veto votes should ONLY happen if there is evidence of collusion, tanking, or some other serious threat to league integrity.

[Missile]

I don’t have an issue with the trade at all. I was the one giving Rivers/ARob and receiving Rodgers. A couple people in my league are in an uproar believing this 1). Unbalanced because They think player values aren’t there, and 2). Because of the trading of cap dollars. What I’ve heard here is ‘fair trade, no concerns’, which is what I would have thought the outcome would be. Appreciate the feedback.

All this said, looks like it is going to a veto vote. We’ll see how it plays out.

The fact that this trade is even going to a veto vote would make me instantly quit the league.

[vixen]

I don’t have an issue with the trade at all. I was the one giving Rivers/ARob and receiving Rodgers. A couple people in my league are in an uproar believing this 1). Unbalanced because They think player values aren’t there, and 2). Because of the trading of cap dollars. What I’ve heard here is ‘fair trade, no concerns’, which is what I would have thought the outcome would be. Appreciate the feedback.

All this said, looks like it is going to a veto vote. We’ll see how it plays out.

The fact that this trade is even going to a veto vote would make me instantly quit the league.

i agree....

[FKC]

Seems ok, but I'd rather have the Rivers side. Rodgers is obviously better, but how much better is he going to be for just this year? Rivers will still put up QB1 numbers and you get a WR2 with WR1 upside.

X2. I don’t really see what the problem is. I’d rather have the Rivers & ARob, but there’s nothing wrong with the trade. As long as there’s no evidence of collusion, fair is fair.