vetoable, dumb or makin too much of it

[darwin 0]

Sniff....sniff.....

 

I call collusion.

Kennison was not even drafted in 16 rounds for our 12 teamer.

And Caddy was more than a full round later than Jacobs.

Why not draft Caddy instead of Jacobs in the first place?

What changed in the idiot owners mind in the past week?

 

Definately collusion, though it would help to know where Caddy, Jacobs, and the WR's were taken in your draft.

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

How about trading Lamont Jordan for Maurice Jones Drew last year before the season started. There are huge busts every year, and surprises every year. You simply cannot accurately predict how every single players will perform this year. All you can do is simply project points, create a cheat sheet, and pray.

 

I have been commish of a number of leagues every year. I never vetoed a trade, no matter how many owners complained. And at the end of the season, those "controversial" trades ended up fair or had zero impact on the league, every single time.

 

Whenever I had a trade vetoed where I was not commish, I quit at the end of the year. It's a matter of principal to me.

 

All due respect phillybear (because I actually do like you) this is a fallacy. No one would have dealt Jordan for MJD last year. one was considered a top 10 pick based on his 1500/70 reception/10 TD season, and the other was considered a backup, and in fact a 3rd stringer before Greg Jones got hurt.

 

So if this deal were proposed, your league would have said it was collusion and correctly voted it down. And even if it wasn't collusion, no league or commish would have allowed that deal because at the time, in the context of the moment, it would have been god awful.

 

Simply put, you cannot use hindsight to prove this point. Knowing what we now know you could make this argument for Sean Alexander Vs MJD too and would be just as flawed.

 

Sorry - it's just a lame argument. You go by what you know at the time. And right now you're taking about two guys who's ADP are lower going for two who's ADP is higher - and the difference between AJ & Kennison is 8 rounds. The difference between Caddy & Jacobs is closer, but since the top 3 rounds are worth more than the lower rounds, it's a similar differential in value.

 

Again, all due respect. Hindsight proves nothing. I am prepared for you to kill and eat me now.

[phillybear 365]

the lamont jordan owner would have NEVER made this trade before the start of the season though considering he had to take lamont early in the first round just to get him...nobody would trade their first round pick for someone that didn't even get drafted in most leagues

 

Nobody would make this trade based on ADP. Apparently, a lot of people were very, very wrong.

 

Being in the majority doesn't make you right. That is why it is dangerous to give people a right to veto, or vote to veto.

[DankNuggs 305]

Wrong. it most certainly does matter what I think. in the league constitution the league members elected me as that governing party. So again - your reasoning here is flawed. It's not like as commish I just step in and shoot it down.

 

The context of my determination is that more than 1/2 the league has voted agian st this deal and in the constitution the league has authorized me to be the final authority on whether that deal in that circumstans is approved.

 

This whole, "who are you to decide whether it's a fair deal" is just a load of crap - I'll tell you who I am: I am the guy who the league elected to be the guy to make that determination. If I am involved in the deal, the co-commish is the one to determine it, and it it's a deal between I and the co-commish we have a 3rd league member as an alternate to make the determination.

 

This is why we have a league constitution and have a league voting process for trades. If you don't like it, great - don't play in my league. But don't go telling me I have no right to make the decision, because it is precisely my call to make once 6 of 12 league members voiced their opinion as to vote down the deal.

 

And again: think outside the box. 1/2 the league or more votes a deal down for imbalance, and the commish says, "well they're not cheating even though one guy is clearly raping the other, so I'm approving it" - hey, good luck filling your league next year because none of the people who voted it down will want to play in that league the next year.

 

Ludicrous... you have a conflict of interest which you are flat out ABUSING. You and every other non-involved owner in the league inherantly doesn't want to allow teams to make trades that improve them. Improving in and of itself upsets the 'competitive balance' that you defend as a holy grail.

 

 

Your choice is to not invite the owner back the next season....NOT decididing team moves based on your slanted view of reality (even if you copy/paste your reality from the FFtoday boards/ADP)

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

You type for a half hour about stats and ADPs being the deciding factor in trades...and then tell me to think outside the box? Hilarity.

 

If one team loses to the other in the Super Bowl because Cadillac runs wild and he lost out on him, are you going to reimburse his winnings? Seriously?

 

You CANNOT tell another owner who they can or cannot have on their roster. They paid an entry fee just like you did. You can, however, not invite him back next year if you want the league to be a little more competitive.

 

Actually I typed for 6 minutes, but nice Ad Hominem there big guy.

 

And again - you disregard the situation I presented, seemingly deliberately. In context I am only forced to make this decision because 50% of my league voiced their disapproval of the deal.

 

Pay attention and we'll have better discussions.

[jeffkomlo 19]

Thx for input

 

Here's how they drafted

 

 

Team A: #72 Caddy, #145 Kennison

Team B: #32 Jacobs, #41 An. Johnson

 

Team A roster

Bulger

R. Brown

LT

R. Moss

S. Moss

Ward

Caddy

Kennison

 

Team B roster

Palmer

Green

Jacobs

Galloway

TJ Housh

An. Johnson

Morency

Randle EL

 

 

thx

[kwhiz73 0]

I can't even believe some of you would even think about vetoing this trade.

 

Fact of the matter is this:

 

RBs:

 

Cadillac, at the beginning of last year was a late first round, second round pick and had a bad year in 06.

 

Jacobs---are you kidding me---Cadillac could easily be ranked ahead of Jacobs--as a matter of fact well ahead.

 

WRs:

 

Did any of you have Andre Johnson in 2005? Talk about a worthless wide receiver. Had a great year last year; however, who is to say he isn't due for another bust?

 

Kennison--not saying he's as valuable as AJ--but he's not too many tiers down from him.

 

 

Conclusion: Cadillac could potentially be an upgrade---Kennison a downgrade. Could be a great trade for both teams depending on need.

 

 

To even consider a veto is just a commissioner poking his nose where it doesn't belong. Besides--it's not uncommon for a league to have a couple players that fall for bad trades now and again.

[Guest RenoZ]

Sorry - it's just a lame argument. You go by what you know at the time.

 

So, you KNOW that Jacobs and Johnson will outscore Williams and Kennison? For a fact?

 

Again, if you fock the guy out of the players that he wants and you are wrong, then what?

[PatsFanatic 0]

I said that I would like to argue Kennison's worth vs. Johnson's worth? Show me a link, dipsh1t.

 

Here I'll type it one more time for you:

 

You were questioning him on the fact that he said the trade was unfair because that would be implementing his own rankings which isn't fair. I agree with this completely in principle but again in this particular case it doesn't matter what his personal rankings are on the players. Kennison is obviously a much much worse player and thus less valuable than Johnson. If this isn't in debate then what is the point of your original post where you question him using his personal rankings to decide if the trade is fair or not? Its not using personal rankings when one WR is undrafted and the other is a 5th round pick. Thats common sense that Johnson is worth much more value.

[DankNuggs 305]

All due respect phillybear (because I actually do like you) this is a fallacy. No one would have dealt Jordan for MJD last year. one was considered a top 10 pick based on his 1500/70 reception/10 TD season, and the other was considered a backup, and in fact a 3rd stringer before Greg Jones got hurt.

 

So if this deal were proposed, your league would have said it was collusion and correctly voted it down. And even if it wasn't collusion, no league or commish would have allowed that deal because at the time, in the context of the moment, it would have been god awful.

 

Simply put, you cannot use hindsight to prove this point. Knowing what we now know you could make this argument for Sean Alexander Vs MJD too and would be just as flawed.

 

Sorry - it's just a lame argument. You go by what you know at the time. And right now you're taking about two guys who's ADP are lower going for two who's ADP is higher - and the difference between AJ & Kennison is 8 rounds. The difference between Caddy & Jacobs is closer, but since the top 3 rounds are worth more than the lower rounds, it's a similar differential in value.

 

Again, all due respect. Hindsight proves nothing. I am prepared for you to kill and eat me now.

 

This is so skewed, it really doesn't require retort.

 

You look at ADP as your mark...

 

 

ADP assumes a specific set of rules/league, which 95% of people who draft have adopted something different, which nullifies the entire ADP

 

example: Start 2QB league = ADP in garbage can.

 

 

Your baseline data is skewed, and thus irrelevant. Unless it is player dumping, let them play

[phillybear 365]

Hindsight proves nothing.

 

But projecting the season totals before the season even starts proves nothing. It's an educated guess. It may be done with a lot of research, but it's just a guess.

 

Well, I am sure I will never be in a league with you, so at least you don't have to be worried about me setting your house on fire.

[usmcwar85 0]

You type for a half hour about stats and ADPs being the deciding factor in trades...and then tell me to think outside the box? Hilarity.

 

If one team loses to the other in the Super Bowl because Cadillac runs wild and he lost out on him, are you going to reimburse his winnings? Seriously?

 

You CANNOT tell another owner who they can or cannot have on their roster. They paid an entry fee just like you did. You can, however, not invite him back next year if you want the league to be a little more competitive.

 

but now what about if the team with jacobs and johnson is now a superpower and takes the league with no problem due to collusion??? i would say that this league was just ruined and wasted 16 weeks (since thats when most FF superbowls are) of my time and possibly $$$ if its a pay league

[DankNuggs 305]

So, you KNOW that Jacobs and Johnson will outscore Williams and Kennison? For a fact?

 

Again, if you fock the guy out of the players that he wants and you are wrong, then what?

This is the point.... THe SINGULAR point.

[PatsFanatic 0]

I can't even believe some of you would even think about vetoing this trade.

 

Fact of the matter is this:

 

RBs:

 

Cadillac, at the beginning of last year was a late first round, second round pick and had a bad year in 06.

 

Jacobs---are you kidding me---Cadillac could easily be ranked ahead of Jacobs--as a matter of fact well ahead.

 

WRs:

 

Did any of you have Andre Johnson in 2005? Talk about a worthless wide receiver. Had a great year last year; however, who is to say he isn't due for another bust?

 

Kennison--not saying he's as valuable as AJ--but he's not too many tiers down from him.

Conclusion: Cadillac could potentially be an upgrade---Kennison a downgrade. Could be a great trade for both teams depending on need.

To even consider a veto is just a commissioner poking his nose where it doesn't belong. Besides--it's not uncommon for a league to have a couple players that fall for bad trades now and again.

 

So if the owner feels this way then why did they draft Jacbos instead of Caddy and then again draft Johnson instead of Kennison? Can you just answer that? Because you certainly would have to pick them in that order to get them.

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

So to belong in your league, you need to accept your own personal ranking system, for which all trades will be judged against...

I never said that. That's an assumption and an inaccurate one at that. If 50% of my league votes down a deal then I am responsible for making that decision. I make that decision not based on my own personal rankings but on the collective rankings of FFT, MockDraftCentral, TSN, Rotoworld and my own insight/intuition based on all available research. My league has entrusted me to make these types of calls and while I don't enjoy doing so (nor have I once had to in the 4 years this league's been in existance) if needs be I will step up to the plate and make the call.

 

Easy fdor you to criticize from the outside, assuming it's all on me.

 

You are an idiot.

That type of personal atack has no place in intelligent conversation. We have a disagreement you and I. That makes neither of us more or less an "idiot" than the other. Thanks.

 

You are judging a traed based on preseason perfomance.

No, that is but one aspect of evaluation. The judgement comes from ADP, ratings from 4 different resources and knowing that a 26 y/o up and comer is probably worth more than a 34 y/o who wasn't even drafted in 2 of my leagues.

 

obviously.

 

You should be removed of your duties as commish and rightfully take a savage beating from a tube sock stuffed with quarters.

 

Not even worthy of a response.

 

 

Ludicrous... you have a conflict of interest which you are flat out ABUSING. You and every other non-involved owner in the league inherantly doesn't want to allow teams to make trades that improve them. Improving in and of itself upsets the 'competitive balance' that you defend as a holy grail.

 

No, competitve balance only applies to trades. And IMO trades don't even have to be completely balanced. But they do at least have to be CLOSE. In the hypothetical (which again, I've never had come up because my leaguemates don't make deals like this) this one's so not even close that it garnerd 50% of the league voting it down, at which point it becomes my responsibility to make the determination. That's how the league works. Again, you can disagree, but I've managed to keep this league in good harmony for 4 years going into the 5th. Obviously my league has no problem with it, yet in your eyes I'm satan incarnate. Hey, you're entitled to that opinion and I am entitled to not care in the slightest what you think.

 

Your choice is to not invite the owner back the next season....NOT decididing team moves based on your slanted view of reality (even if you copy/paste your reality from the FFtoday boards/ADP)

 

No, my responsibility is to make the call when my leraguemates vote down a deal. You imply that I would vote down any deal that improves one team more than the other and that's where you're 100% off base. I would absolutely allow imbalanced deals to pass even with 6 votes against and even if it's the best team in the league improving. I have no problem with any of that - that's all your assumptions of me, and completely foolish assumptions at that because they are wildly inaccurate.

 

But in this example, with these 4 players being traded, I would shoot down the deal every time. Thanks for offering your personal opiions of me and also for insulting me when I am civilly discussing something - now I know who to ignore on this board.

[DankNuggs 305]

but now what about if the team with jacobs and johnson is now a superpower and takes the league with no problem due to collusion??? i would say that this league was just ruined and wasted 16 weeks (since thats when most FF superbowls are) of my time and possibly $$$ if its a pay league

You are a crybaby that shouldn't be in the league anyways.... You think a Caddy for Jacobs trade is enough to win the league in and of itself...

 

You obviously should be stripped of your veto power of trades.

[hitman29 0]

I think you can point to this reason for collusion here: The guy trading Jacobs/AJ could have just drafted Caddy/Kennison. It's not like it's week 8 and Jacobs is in a full blown RBBC and Caddy is performing well. Your draft was how long ago? A week? 2 weeks? What reason does this guy have for trading 2 guys who he drafted highly for 2 guys he could have had much later? Any trade this lopsided that is made BEFORE the season, with no notable things having happened to hamper any of the players values is beyond fishy.

[Guest RenoZ]

Here I'll type it one more time for you:

 

You were questioning him on the fact that he said the trade was unfair because that would be implementing his own rankings which isn't fair. I agree with this completely in principle but again in this particular case it doesn't matter what his personal rankings are on the players. Kennison is obviously a much much worse player and thus less valuable than Johnson. If this isn't in debate then what is the point of your original post where you question him using his personal rankings to decide if the trade is fair or not? Its not using personal rankings when one WR is undrafted and the other is a 5th round pick. Thats common sense that Johnson is worth much more value.

 

I am talking about HIS rankings, you are talking about MY rankings. Conversation over.

 

I have NEVER said that I would even put them in the same general category. Not even close. I simply said that you CANNOT do his rankings for him.

[usmcwar85 0]

i think that just based on those rosters, it is obvious collusion...how can one team possibly trade bench players to obtain another teams starters and get away with it???

[Dutch1 0]

Here's how they drafted

Team A: #72 Caddy, #145 Kennison

Team B: #32 Jacobs, #41 An. Johnson

Looking at the specific situation, I would argue collusion based solely on that fact right there.

[dcOne 2]

So, you KNOW that Jacobs and Johnson will outscore Williams and Kennison? For a fact?

 

Again, if you fock the guy out of the players that he wants and you are wrong, then what?

 

 

The Commish says to him "Well....Ummm.....Well....Gee Whiz.....I thought......Ummmm.....welllll uhhhhh"

[usmcwar85 0]

this is definite collusion here...hey 2 cents. do you smell that??? smells like victory to me

[PatsFanatic 0]

I am talking about HIS rankings, you are talking about MY rankings. Conversation over.

 

I have NEVER said that I would even put them in the same general category. Not even close. I simply said that you CANNOT do his rankings for him.

 

I agree to an extent though. If someone wanted to trade Caddy for Jacobs straight up I would be fine with that trade even though I think its lopsided. Its the fact that Johnson and Kennison is included that makes it ridiculous IMO. I just wouldn't want my league f-ed up because one idiot/colluding owner. Its not fair to every other team in the league because you basically just gave the one team getting Jacobs/Johnson an extra 5-6 rd draft pick in Johnson while also letting them get a RB that probably went a round earlier than Caddy. Its just a downgrade at both positions and as long as they were drafted with Jacobs before Caddy and Johnson before Kennison then its unfair because the owner could have just drafted Caddy and Kennison to begin with. I just think its obvious that collusion is going on because the owner obviously passed on Caddy to draft Jacobs and did the same with Johnson/Kennison. If they actually liked Caddy/Kennison more they wouldn't have drafted this way. Its not like when the season starts and players increase or decrease their value. None of those players values should have changed much to make this trade make any sense at all.

[FantasyKing 4]

No sh!t.

 

So in other words, "Trading is only allowed if it makes NEITHER team better".

 

The guy getting Jacobs most likely thinks that Jacobs is going to remain the starter and have "Giants-Starting RB-like stats" and that Williams will continue to struggle.

 

So now I guess team-owner's opinions are worthless?

 

 

As a commish, the vetoing of the trade is not due to because it makes one team better - it is due to the trade being fair or unfair. This is a ridiculous trade and should be vetoed, I would veto it and I'm sure my league would vote 10-0 to veto it. It is completely lopsided, Eddie Kennison is hardly even a draftable player anymore while the other team gets 2 bonafide starters for a very shaky RB.

 

The trade itself must be fair. I love these guys who say the commish should butt out and all trades should go through. But if you have a good team and are thinking you are going to win your division, then someone trades LT to your rival for Thomas Jones, Isaac Bruce, and Kellen Winslow then you'd be screaming to call for a veto.

[Guest RenoZ]

The Commish says to him "Well....Ummm.....Well....Gee Whiz.....I thought......Ummmm.....welllll uhhhhh"

 

 

...and that's about it.

[dcOne 2]

Here is collusion:

 

An owner is out of the playoffs trades away Chad Johnson for a guy with a torn ACL.

[DankNuggs 305]

I never said that. That's an assumption and an inaccurate one at that. If 50% of my league votes down a deal then I am responsible for making that decision. I make that decision not based on my own personal rankings but on the collective rankings of FFT, MockDraftCentral, TSN, Rotoworld and my own insight/intuition based on all available research. My league has entrusted me to make these types of calls and while I don't enjoy doing so (nor have I once had to in the 4 years this league's been in existance) if needs be I will step up to the plate and make the call.

 

 

Easy fdor you to criticize from the outside, assuming it's all on me.

 

ROFL. Ya its beyond easy. It clearly isn't player dumping. Its about a crybaby league forcing the commish to roster manage at the behest of the angry masses (who have NO incentive to allow any trade other than those they are party to). <<<You can't argue that.

 

 

 

 

 

No, that is but one aspect of evaluation. The judgement comes from ADP, ratings from 4 different resources and knowing that a 26 y/o up and comer is probably worth more than a 34 y/o who wasn't even drafted in 2 of my leagues.

 

obviously.

Not even worthy of a response.

 

I said its idiotic, because if i was in the debate, and i successfully proved it wasn't player dumping, then any argument against is idiocy and moot

 

I guess i can understand the position the league put you in. But a good commish say "No collusion, both teams think the trade helps their squad...accepted" and moves on...

 

 

Thats what a good commish does...a bad one micromanages and puts there hand in places it shouldnt be.

[usmcwar85 0]

Here is collusion:

 

An owner is out of the playoffs trades away Chad Johnson for a guy with a torn ACL.

 

that is blatant collusion...this trade is horribly disguised collusion

[Guest RenoZ]

this is definite collusion here...hey 2 cents. do you smell that??? smells like victory to me

 

You, sir, are a focking moron.

 

We've said since post #1, if it is collusion, then veto.

 

Prove it. Why would someone pay their entry fee and then "punt" before the season started? The commissioner in this situation cannot do anything except not invite the guy back next year.

[dcOne 2]

The trade itself must be fair.

 

 

According to who?

 

 

And who the FOCK is going to collude before season starts?

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

This is so skewed, it really doesn't require retort.

 

You look at ADP as your mark...

ADP assumes a specific set of rules/league, which 95% of people who draft have adopted something different, which nullifies the entire ADP

 

example: Start 2QB league = ADP in garbage can.

Your baseline data is skewed, and thus irrelevant. Unless it is player dumping, let them play

 

Last comment - you have this annoying habit of projection - here you do it again. You project that I only use ADP when I have thrice stated that I use the rankings of 4 respected websites and my own intuition IN ADDITION TO ADP.

 

Again, that is why you are now deemed unworthy of future responses. Good luck.

[PatsFanatic 0]

Here is collusion:

 

An owner is out of the playoffs trades away Chad Johnson for a guy with a torn ACL.

 

Most people who are colluding aren't that dumb although I wouldn't be surprised to see it happen. Apparently this is the definition of colluding for a lot of people though.

[hitman29 0]

Here is collusion:

 

An owner is out of the playoffs trades away Chad Johnson for a guy with a torn ACL.

 

It's not always black and white though. There are different degrees. Yours is extreme. This is a level below what you said.

 

How long have both of these owners been in the league? How well do they know each other?

[darwin 0]

Team A: #72 Caddy, #145 Kennison

Team B: #32 Jacobs, #41 An. Johnson

 

Look at where they drafted the players! Did team B provide ANY reasoning as to why he NOW thinks Caddy and Kennison are better and that he should have drafted them instead?

 

This is collusion. Nothing has changed to elevate the values of Caddy and Kennison and nothing has happened to degrade the value of Jacobs and AJ.

 

The MOST important role of a commissioner is to maintain fareness. Allowing trades like this is unfair to the other team owners. 95% of trades should go through without question. But when trades like this happen, it is important for the commish to ask the other owners if they object. If they don't, so be it. If they do, you have to act.

 

It sounds like a lot of people here get pissed off that they can't collude, or trade injured players to unsuspecting owners, and they hold commissioners as deserving of contempt. Somebodies got to provide oversight.

[usmcwar85 0]

You, sir, are a focking moron.

 

We've said since post #1, if it is collusion, then veto.

 

Prove it. Why would someone pay their entry fee and then "punt" before the season started? The commissioner in this situation cannot do anything except not invite the guy back next year.

 

theres only one reason. its called profit. 2 friends in the same league decided to combine teams and share winnings...who knows, it could even be the same guy working both teams.

[dcOne 2]

theres only one reason. its called profit. 2 friends in the same league decided to combine teams and share winnings...who knows, it could even be the same guy working both teams.

 

 

Sounds like the commish had his head up his ass when organizing the league then. I vote to boot that commish.

[phillybear 365]

I love these guys who say the commish should butt out and all trades should go through. But if you have a good team and are thinking you are going to win your division, then someone trades LT to your rival for Thomas Jones, Isaac Bruce, and Kellen Winslow then you'd be screaming to call for a veto.

 

So when Randy Moss was traded to New England in the offseason for a 4th round pick, the Indianapolis Colts were screaming into the NFL commissioner's ear to veto the trade because what New England did was unfair. Moss for a 4th round pick? That's ridiculously unfair. And isn't fantasy football supposed to emulate the NFL?

 

Nope. I wouldn't whine about the trade. I would manage my team as best as I could the rest of the year, and let karma take care of the rest.

 

K.A.R.M.A. It's a hell of a thing.

[Sho Nuff 720]

Dumb.

 

1.) It IS a ######-block on a team.

2.) You are pre-determining which players are better/worse for the owners. Not cool.

3.) Collusion IS the only time you veto a trade. Ever.

 

Who's to say this guy doesn't have Caddy ranked above Jacobs? It's possible. Clear starter vs. a guy with a lot of questions. He's taking a hit at WR to improve (in his mind) his RBs. Fock, I am the commissioner in two leagues right now and wouldn't veto anything like this ever - definately not at this time of the year. If it was Week 10 and the "quality" of the players was pretty well determined and one team MAY be helping another to prepare for the playoffs...different story.

 

Id say the owners probably determined who was better or worse when Jacobs and AJ were both most likely drafted higher than Caddy and Kennison.

[PatsFanatic 0]

How is it the commish's fault if two owners agree to combine teams and split the profits?

[Guest RenoZ]

Last comment - you have this annoying habit of projection

 

This coming from the guy who has "projected" how RBs and WRs will finish this season and deemed trades "fair" or "unfair" based on those projections. Hmmm.