cbfalcon 824 Posted October 17, 2009 Yea its tough decision that i'll sleep on overnight but I am leaning towards vetoing it.....If the team acquiring smith threw in a wideout then it might even it out It was a no brain veto before. But now that we know the rosters, it's beyond being a no brainer. Heck, now even guys like Fircrotcher are going to have to vote for the veto. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mobb_deep 917 Posted October 17, 2009 It was a no brain veto before. But now that we know the rosters, it's beyond being a no brainer. Heck, now even guys like Fircrotcher are going to have to vote for the veto. Maybe if one team threw in Santa Claus the league could throw snowballs at him. HTH Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bears_Rule 0 Posted October 17, 2009 This info would have been helpful in the original post. As I stated, trades have many more dynamics just saying "player A for player B is unfair". Obviously, it's not a case of a whole league thinking that Smith will be a bum all season, and Buckhalter is the only value he can get for Smith. Seeing the RB's that the 1-4 team has, Buckhalter has low value. It would be different if he was trading for Buckhalter as a starter. I'm not saying you should veto it, but if one thinks Smith will get out of his slump, then this trade is tilted heavily to the team recieving Smith. Smith would be an immediate starter for 5-0 team, and Buckhalter probably wouldnt even be a bye week filler for the other. Why would it matter? If the Eagles homer just wants Buck on his team and is 1-4 and wants to enjoy his fantasy season why not allow it? You guys need a life... Saying that a trade "disrupts the competitive balance of the league" is an obvious example of someone who lives through fantasy football. I've always said if you know, trust and respect all of the owners in your league then you would never need a veto. Let adults make their own decisions. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BirdBradyBobbyOrr 0 Posted October 17, 2009 ugh i mean this is such a bad question it doesn't even deserve any upper case or punctuation who cares if someone wants to trade steve smith for correll buckhalter even the biggest patriot haters would rather hear me wax poetic about tom brady than listen to another should i veto this trade question about two players that are not that far apart in value and who might have very different values for their respective fantasy teams its so crazy that people still continue to put these dumb ass veto questions on this board i cant believe it maybe im just drunk and angry but i have to say i cant believe there are four pages to this dumb ass question brady rules Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Boston Three Party 6 Posted October 17, 2009 RB RankingsWR Rankings Buckhalter doesn't even make the rankings. Steve Smith is 5th overall. There is your link. Not a fair trade in the least. Holy ****, at first I thought you were joking, then I realized there's quite a few idiots in this thread. And I haven't even read the previous 3 pages. This isn't 2008 - Smith has underachieved and for all purposed Buck has overachieved. Thus, at this point in time - it seems like a good deal and you CAN'T or shouldn't veto it. I never veto a trade unless its obvious collusion. This isn't. And letting ###### owners like half the ones in this thread is EXACTLY the reason no one votes on trades. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Boston Three Party 6 Posted October 17, 2009 ugh i mean this is such a bad question it doesn't even deserve any upper case or punctuation who cares if someone wants to trade steve smith for correll buckhalter even the biggest patriot haters would rather hear me wax poetic about tom brady than listen to another should i veto this trade question about two players that are not that far apart in value and who might have very different values for their respective fantasy teams its so crazy that people still continue to put these dumb ass veto questions on this board i cant believe it maybe im just drunk and angry but i have to say i cant believe there are four pages to this dumb ass question brady rules Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fireballer 2,381 Posted October 17, 2009 I'm not saying you should veto it, Falcon, can you not read? I'm not for vetoing. I made my post about fairness of trades so Eagle would have an outside opionion about what people thought of it. What would your thoughts be if Buckhalter continues to out perform Smith? I guess I'm just used to playing in leagues where owners actually know something about fantasy football, and not in ones with a commish that thinks that their knowledge is based on # of posts. Oh yeah, let's not forget that you actually veto draft picks. The mere fact that you mention that someone in your league might pick Detroit D in the first, confirms that you play with retards, and you are their leader. Also, please answer why you advocate buying low in one thread, and not this one. Nevermind. I am done with you. Your retarded mindset will not change. I dont know why I wasted all my time on this. Goodbye. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
davidbostonisgood 2 Posted October 17, 2009 I hope all these posts here are from the same person who has multiple user names. .... continue please. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Foghorn Leghorn 0 Posted October 17, 2009 We feel the same, Kommissar. This did not get the adulation it deserves, as it sums up this whole abortion of a thread in one sentence. :first: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rockafella 0 Posted October 17, 2009 This has turned into one of the dumbest focking threads ever. But, I don't think my post count is high enough for me to have an opinion. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NAn 39 Posted October 17, 2009 I didn't read the whole thread...maddening. CBfalcon, let me ask you one thing: What is your formula of 50/50 v 60/40 or whatever. And show me a trade you would approve and apply the above. And seriously...post count? That is just asinine. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cbfalcon 824 Posted October 17, 2009 I didn't read the whole thread...maddening. CBfalcon, let me ask you one thing: What is your formula of 50/50 v 60/40 or whatever. And show me a trade you would approve and apply the above. And seriously...post count? That is just asinine. It's easier to list trades I won't approve of. One of the top WRs in the NFL for a backup RB is a good example. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NAn 39 Posted October 17, 2009 It's easier to list trades I won't approve of. One of the top WRs in the NFL for a backup RB is a good example. In other words your ducking the question. Easy to criticize others when you don't put yourself out there. Very telling. Pretty much all I needed to know. Wouldn't expect anything less from someone with just 4000 posts. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PurplePrideViking Kingdom 0 Posted October 17, 2009 Why is this thread still open? it should be locked. What a waste of space and time Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Eagles Green 34 Posted October 18, 2009 After reading this thread, I can only come to one conclusion. CBFIAFP Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Stopper 0 Posted October 18, 2009 It is every owner's right to manage his or her team as poorly as they wish, and if an owner wants to make a bad move, let them!!! Owners shouldn't have a say in other teams' business, and the only time a trade should be vetoed is if collusion can be proven. Proven--not suspected. And you keep using this word, "fair." I do not think it means what you think it means... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lexdizzle 1 Posted October 18, 2009 is this a money league? to those saying let owners manage their own teams and let them make dumb trades and give away their good players must not play for money. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cbfalcon 824 Posted October 18, 2009 is this a money league? to those saying let owners manage their own teams and let them make dumb trades and give away their good players must not play for money. Exactly. This is a decent sized money league. $100. Add/Drops cost $5 and trades cost $10. It gets a little ridiculous when some people are more likely to win the league just because they are willing to spend more money than other players. I don't believe in changing the rules midseason, but I may cap the number of moves a team can make before next season. Very telling. Pretty much all I needed to know. "That's all I needed to know" is code for "I don't really have an intelligent point to make, but by saying this I'll sound confident and people will think I'm winning the debate". I could just as easily say "You think trading an elite WR for a backup RB is fair? Cool. That's all I needed to know". Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
De Novo 0 Posted October 18, 2009 Exactly. This is a decent sized money league. $100. Add/Drops cost $5 and trades cost $10. It gets a little ridiculous when some people are more likely to win the league just because they are willing to spend more money than other players. I don't believe in changing the rules midseason, but I may cap the number of moves a team can make before next season. "That's all I needed to know" is code for "I don't really have an intelligent point to make, but by saying this I'll sound confident and people will think I'm winning the debate". I could just as easily say "You think trading an elite WR for a backup RB is fair? Cool. That's all I needed to know". You still sure Steve Smith is an elite WR? It's exactly why you don't veto a trade. If you are so much smarter than everyone else and able to determine who gets the better end of the deal, why don't you just keep the money since you are the smartest person in the league, and thus, bound to win? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Turf CamelToe 1 Posted October 18, 2009 I have Steve Smith and will be offering him for a used Condom. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
phan420 0 Posted October 18, 2009 RB RankingsWR Rankings Buckhalter doesn't even make the rankings. Steve Smith is 5th overall. There is your link. Not a fair trade in the least. I love how you provided a link to projections from September 8th!!!!. Hahahahahaha. p.s. vetos are for "bags that make girls purty area smell mmm, mmm, good"! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
