• Commissioner Corner Message Board

  • Drew Drew Mar 2, 2012 4:06 PM Flag

    I'm Comish: Should I Veto this trade?

    Team A gets:
    Paul Pierce
    Tyson Chandler
    Ben Gordon


    Team B gets:
    Isaiah Thomas
    Amar'e Stoudermire

    Seems to me like team A is getting both of the best players in the deal. I'm torn on whether or not to veto it. And by veto i mean reject.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • VETO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    • Team A comes out much better, especially in boards/blocks while B doesn't seem to gain much at all. After reading all of what I'm assuming are from other managers within the league, it doesn't sound like this league will be around next year.


      to anyone whos interested. Team B actually got hacked and did not make this trade so when they got their account back they asked me to veto it. Thanks for the advice

    • Team A definitely wins by a decent amount. But, it's not so unfair or one-sided that it should be vetoed. I'm sure each team involved thinks that they are improving their team in some way while making sacrifices in others.

    • veto yourself

    • yoyu fuck should not even be playing you cheat

    • Ask team B why he needs those players. He might want them for specific reason. If it makes sense, then don't veto.


    • I dissent with many of the posts on here. I feel that a commish's responsibility is to the health of the league via PARITY and COMPETITIVENESS. Allowing for trades that creat Superteams, at the league's expense, whether due to Collusion, Naivity or Idiocy, all have the ultimate negative benefit: they create a lopsided, uncompetitive league. I'm in a 14 team Dynasty League where the TOP 4 TEAMS have 20 of TOP 30 players and from players 1-20 are better across the board than teams 7-14. This is nonsense. And is due to a previously weak commish. There wasn't collusion; just dipshits making trades. Worse, we have no salary cap. Which of course would immediately put an end to FOUR stacked teams.

      This trade is partially lopsided in favor of team A. Too many specifics are missing: Keeper/Dynasty Leagu? Is there a Draft? Does there seem to be collusion between either team or others, including through dropping/adding FA's? Are BOTH teams benefiting? Is one or the other already a lil stacked? If team A already is the big dog in the league, you must strongly consider against. Also, you should take into account the two managers experience levels and not allow a weaker Team B manager to lose out strictly due to inexperience. Ultimately, it's not TEAM B's team that you're concerned with. It's the league's health and making sure Team A doesn't start dominating to the rest of the league's expense.

      • 3 Replies to HBs Up
      • I strongly agree with your position, league integrity and competitiveness is far more important than a managers right to trade.

        I love these trade monsters out there who have found a way to look innocent in lopsided trades then complain when it gets rejected. Example, a 2-1 trade where one player is filling in for an injured player and is doing well in the fill in role, well the trade monsters take advantage of this by offering a better than average player and the fill in player for a stud and give the reasoning, it is fair NOW but they know it won't be fair when the injured player comes back from the injury. What I find interesting that they usually won't trade the other way, them taking the 2 players because they know it will hurt them in the long run and playoffs. What I really find funny is when the fill in player has just been picked up off the FA list and they try and pass him off as a player with lots of upside. I get offers like this all the time and the message is usually "I think this is pretty even" but they really know its not.

      • Oh - to the poster above - it sounds like YOU are one of the morons that made a couple dumb trades.

      • First off - not vetoable.

        Secondly (guy above): Don't complain because you don't know how to make trades. In your world, what, no trades should be made? Or - only trades that are 100% equal and provide no benefit should be ALLOWED to be made?

        People like YOU should be banned from fantasy. Sore losers

    • In my opinion (and I say this as a commish myself) it is not the commissioner's job to babysit players from making bad trades. Now, if Team B is long out of the playoffs and Team A is still competetive, and you have reason to suspect intentional collusion between the two teams-then maybe. But otherwise no.

      Also, there is no saying for sure that that trade doesn't end up working in the favor of Team B if Isaiah continues to be hot and Amare finally puts it together, and Pierce fades.

      So I say absolutely not. It's not your place to veto that unless you have good reason to suspect collusion.

    • View More Messages

Expert Fantasy Advice

Sign up for Yahoo Fantasy Football