• Draft and Trade Talk Message Board

  • CWizzle CWizzle Mar 4, 2013 11:16 AM Flag

    Veto Worthy?

    I am in a 20 team Dynasty league (keep whole roster), with 20 man rosters.
    So this is a very very deep league and lots of players have value that would be scrubs in normal leagues.
    A pending trade just got veto'd. I wasn't involved in it, and didn't vote for it to be veto'd but I just wanted to get some outside opinions. Since I was always told that veto's were meant to stop collusion/cheating or to stop a trade that would make the league so unbalanced that nobody else would ever have a chance at winning.

    Team A gets:
    Russell Westbrook
    Andrea Bargnani

    Team B gets:
    John Wall
    Darren Collison
    Kyle Singler

    Now team B said that since Westbrook was his only PG he was trading a stud for depth. He believes Wall is going to turn into a top 5 PG eventually, and until then could use Wall and Collison more than just Westbrook. He also mentioned that he can't trust Bargnani and feels like he might never be a starter again even if he gets traded in the off season. He doesn't want the headache and was willing to give up some value to get rid of him.

    Now my opinion on this is that it was a dumb trade. If the guy wanted PG depth he could have gotten better than that for Westbrook and Bargnani. I think it is a steal for team A. BUT at the same time, there is obviously no cheating going on and in a league with 200 players owned, people value players differently. I just don't see why every trade that isn't 100% fair is automatically vetoable. I've seen many trades go thru where I said, What the hell are they thinking? That was stupid! But just because they were stupid doesn't mean they were vetoable right?

    Or am I completely off base and this is 100% vetoable?
    I was not involved in the trade so I guess I don't really care. It just worries me that in the future if I pull off a nice trade that other managers don't like they will vote against it and have it veto'd.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • In a dynasty league where owners would think beyond this year, you can't argue against their projections of who will have better stats between Westbrook and Wall. Also, playing in a 20-team league in which garnering depth is the key, you can't argue against the potential of Wall and Singler versus Westbrook ROS and beyond. If this is the only trade you see between these two teams (meaning there weren't bad trades between them previously and thus no suspicion of collision), this trade should not be vetoed.

    • the is vetoable for sure. Westbrook is worth more than Team B. ANswer mine "Trade Love?"

    • I agree. A veto should only happen in cases of collusion. I too have seen worse I am in a 200 player deep league. Even here Westbrook and Wall are the only really relevant players for this year. The rest are all bottom of team rotation players. That you keep if/when they are hot and drop them for someone else when they are not. Mine are Antawn Jamison/Donatas Montiejunas/Wilson Chandler. Although in a Dynasty/Keeper like mine Singler Has some upside But is available on waivers. All that being said I have Wall and would jump at the obvious upgrade with Westbrook by having to only give up only giving up bottom of the team additional pieces to get him.

      • 1 Reply to neil
      • sorry I thought you were also in a 200 player league. But you are in a 400 player(20 teams X 20 players) league so you are talking about probably having injured and/or guys in the D-League stashed on some teams. Since there is only a maximum of 450 players on NBA rosters (30 teams X 15 roster spots) So any guy who actually plays is valuable.

 

Expert Fantasy Advice

Sign up for Yahoo Fantasy Football