• Commissioner Corner Message Board

  • A Yahoo! User Jan 20, 2008 11:00 AM Flag

    Should trades be vetoed

    Trade A-
    Shedlon Souray, Henrik Sedin for Brian Rafalski
    Trade B-
    Jason Arnott and Ilya Kovalchuk for Sidney Crosby and Mark Naslund

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Trade A is even. Rafalski is doing amazing. Souray can if he stays healthy and Sedin is consistent for a center. The player wanting Rafalski probably wants consistency, but the player wanting Souray and Sedin will win the trade if Souray can stay healthy and return to his former self. If not, the Rafalski recipient is going to win that trade.

      Trade B should be vetoed. Crosby is injured and Kovalchuk produces Crosby-like numbers only more goals and at a more valuble position (winger). If Crosby is not injured, this is a pretty fair trade, but because he is, it is very one sided. Arnott is hot right now and Naslund isn't. Basically Arnott>Naslund (depending on depth of positions) and Kovalchuk>>>>>>>>>>>injured Crosby.

      Trade B should never happen unless it's a keeper league. The guy getting Arnott and Kovalchuk would pretty much be demolishing and humiliating the guy getting Crosby and Naslund.

    • Only if there is collusion involved. A commissioner isn't there to quash every trade. If the owners in the league are dumb enough to get ripped off, then so be it. Commissioners shouldn't veto trades to save a guy from making a bad decision. Who knows - Team A may have crap defence and an overflow of centres. As long as each team is addressing a need and it's not 'sketchy', then you can't overturn a trade. Everyone is a 'big boy/girl' and should be able to handle themselves.

    • trade A - leave it be

      trade B - veto due to Crosby injury.

    • Kovalchuk for Crosby is not fair since crosby is injured. Kovalchuk is equal to Crosby in points, with more goals. Naslund > Arnott due to position, but that's getting really picky.

      That being said, I'm in agreement that lopsided doesn't mean veto worthy.

      I'm fairly sure Florida got Luongo and Jokinen for 2 players named... Oh I forget. Get it?

    • People vetoing trades make me sick. Mind your own business...

      • 1 Reply to Habs_fan
      • Sometimes trades are made in order to fill a certain position. In doing so sometimes we have to give up more then we recieve. Another manager might want one of your players bad enough if so nothing wrong with asking for more then you have to give up. Thats the way the pros do it. Just ask philly what they gave up to get Lindros. Wining just takes the enjoyment of particpating in these fantasy pools.

    • buyer beware!

    • Let people trade. Neither of these deals is so over the top that there is obvious collusion.

      Trade A is fine Rafalski is top-shelf talent who should command sacrifice in order to get someone to give him up.

      Trade B is fine as well: Arnott = Naslund and Kovalchuk = Crosby

      Everyone has reasons for making trades that outside viewers don't see. And having a commish be the final say on that is crap. Only a league vote should be allowed in order to veto, and even that is an issue since competitors likely would vote against trades that benefited opponents and were a detriment to themselves.

      • 1 Reply to Napoli25
      • Based on most of the feedback here, now I see why most trades in the 2 public pools I'm in keep getting vetoed. It seems most users have no clue what the veto button is for. WAY OFFSIDE ONE-SIDED TRADES not what one deems as fair. If both parties have bargained in good faith who are you to decide that they have not.

        I think most of you need to pull your head out of your A$$ES

        Both of these trades are fine, how do we know the guy with Rafalski doesn't have Lidstrom & Gonchar and is lacking in PIM and is stuck with Marleau, and maybe the guy with Sedin has Ribeiro and Datsyuk and is hurting on D, y does he need Henrik, stop judging a book by its cover and let people play.........


    • Trade A shouldn't be vetoed. Rafalski is a elite defensman who plays for one of the top teams in the nhl. Sedin is a C, which are not hard to replace, and Souray has that nagging shoulder.

    • Trade A should be vetoed for sure...Team B is fairly even but if crosby was healthy it should be vetoed too---since he is injured its fairly even

    • View More Messages

Expert Fantasy Advice