vetoable, dumb or makin too much of it

[fantasymind 1]

I have just finished reading all five pages and feel the need to make a few observations, followed by my own opinion, fwiw.

 

*While there are certainly two opposite viewpoints stated throughout this thread as it relates to the vetoing of trades, it seems that my 2 cents and usmc are the two most outspoken proponents of vetoing a trade for reasons other than just collusion. While they both have stated that they believe this trade to be likely collusive in nature, they also both discuss "competitive balance" and league-wide input as factors in vetoing. This viewpoint, based on the million posts that will pop up throughout the season, has historically been in the minority, at least here at FFT. Doesn't make it right or wrong, just not in line with what seems to be the popular consensus on the issue.

 

*2 cents has come across to me, throughout this thread, as pretentious. Not attacking him personally, because, many times, I found his arguments sound and logical. And, coming on to a fantasy football web-site and referencing the fact that you are familiar with "ad hominem", "slippery slope" and "straw man" arguments is also fine. What I found somewhat off-putting is that it seemed like every other post was "ad hominem" this, "slippery slope" that. Again, it is great that you are familiar with these terms; it just starts to get old when so many of your responses reference terms that are not part of most people's daily vernacular. Not saying you need to dumb it down, just that it came across (to me at least, and, maybe, incorrectly) as you feeling the need to "prove" how intelligent you are. I don't think you need to do that.

 

*2 cent has also asked, at various points throughout this thread, that people think "outside the box". Besides that term being a pet peeve of mine (in my estimation, a lazy and overused way of saying, "Aren't I smart and contrarian? People will certainly not agree with my view now, but, once history has a chance to judge me, they will surely see my genius"), I also am not sure what, exactly, people are supposed to be thinking outside the box on. If anything, the process cent describes of a league vote, followed by a commissioner's investigation, seems abundantly "inside the box". Please elaborate a little on what you mean, if you don't mind.

 

As far as my own opinion, I am in the camp of "No collusion = No veto". I believe that an owner's payment of a franchise fee entitles that owner to manage his/her team in the manner that they so choose, provided that they are not doing anything that willfully disrupts the integrity of the league (collusion being the most common such action). I am also of the opinion that trading is a skill that some are better at than others. There are often winners and losers in trades, which is what makes it fun, imo. It seems obvious that the Jacobs/AJ owner is the "winner" of this trade. But, at the end of the year, if Caddy blows up and AJ underperforms/suffers an injury, won't everyone in the league point to how the other owner "thought outside the box" and fleeced the other guy? In my opinion, trades can only be judged at the end of the year, and, in my experience, they rarely end up as cut and dry as the majority thought they would. When a league starts to allow for owners to make subjective judgments of player worth, I have found it to be a gray area that eventually spirals into a situation where every trade gets voted down and the league eventually either disallows all trades or disbands due to hard feelings amongst members. For those that have argued this trade as collusion, based solely on when all of the players were drafted, I counter-argue that this may be much less lopsided than it may appear. For starters, ADP merely shows the price that people are paying for a player, not necessarily their value. For instance, Randy Moss has an ADP in the 4/5 round range, and Mark Clayon is in the 8-10 range. I'd personally much rather have Clayton, even though his ADP is so many rounds higher. It just means that I can probably wait to get Clayton while I would have to (over)pay for Moss. Secondly, evaluating this trade, it seems that Brandon Jacobs is being given quite a bit of love for someone who has never been "the man" for a full season. And, while I agree that AJ has more upside than Eddie Kennison, aren't they in pretty much similar situations (#1 wideout on a likely sub.500 team with question marks at QB). By arguing the draft rounds as a basis for vetoing, you are basically saying that owners are not allowed to change their minds over the course of the pre-season...I believe that no commissioner should outweigh an owners right to that.

 

However, above everything else, I think that each league is unique and, what works in my league, may not work in anyone else's. 2 cent has stated again and again that his league is set up a certain way and that it works for them and...that is great! I don't play in that league so I makes no difference to me what his (or anyone else's) league rules are. It only matters that the league you are in fits you. And, while this debate could (and will) go on for years and years, in the end, we all know what opinions are like... even though the veto only if collusion camp is right

[Savage Beast 1]

Bwahahahaha...............................................

 

Caddy and Kennison could very well net more total fantasy points then Jacobs and Johnson will by seasons end.

 

On paper, the Johnson Jacobs combo looks better, but who knows for sure by season's end which combo will be the best?

 

It's not like the trade is for LT and Steven Jackson, it's measly Jacobs and Johnson.

[lambert58 71]

the point of the trade is to benefit both teams..that trade clearly benefits one team

also, i hate when a trade like this identifies the dumb guy in the league and then everyone tries to rip him off

 

 

No it is not. I am trading to benefit my team not help your team. I realize that I have to give something of value in order to get value in return but I am NOT trying to benefit the other team.

 

Trades do not have to be fair either. Caddy and Jacobs could put up similar numbers. Kennison and An. Johnson MIGHT be a little lopsided but probably not by much. Andre Johnson has never scored a bunch of touchdowns and I believe that K.C. will be playing from behind a lot so Kennison might get a lot of looks. Maybe he won't but the point is it is MY DECISION to take that risk. To veto this trade would be criminal...

[Pimptaddy 0]

Unless there is clear evidence of collusion, trades should never, never, never be vetoed.

 

 

I disagree, I do not like to aprove trades in the pre-season. There are too many unknowns, and I also veto trades between two weak teams as the trade usually makes them both stronger.

[usmcwar85 0]

No it is not. I am trading to benefit my team not help your team. I realize that I have to give something of value in order to get value in return but I am NOT trying to benefit the other team.

 

Trades do not have to be fair either. Caddy and Jacobs could put up similar numbers. Kennison and An. Johnson MIGHT be a little lopsided but probably not by much. Andre Johnson has never scored a bunch of touchdowns and I believe that K.C. will be playing from behind a lot so Kennison might get a lot of looks. Maybe he won't but the point is it is MY DECISION to take that risk. To veto this trade would be criminal...

 

of course you are not TRYING to benefit the other team but a logical trade benefits both teams or in the case of this trade someone is a total retard and thinks his team is benefitting.

[phillybear 366]

of course you are not TRYING to benefit the other team but a logical trade benefits both teams or in the case of this trade someone is a total retard and thinks his team is benefitting.

 

We all make mistakes in fantasy football. When we were newbies, we all had to learn some hard lessons to become more savy. Personally, I think Andre Johnson is a top 7, possibly top 5 WR this year, so I would not have traded him away. But this trade is not vetoable based on the information provided by the thread starter.

 

Besides, some retards are idiot savants. Maybe this Rain Man pulled off an awesome trade. We have no way of knowing until the season gets underway. You have to allow for that possibility. That the interesting part of fantasy football. If we all drafted by ADP, and followed ADP all year in trades, what the hell fun is that. You might as well let a computer program run your team. I personally enjoy variety in fantasy football. That's why I joint 6-8 leagues every year. Every league is different, with completely different draft results, and completely different opinions. My neighbor just did a draft where Drew Brees went in the first round, and Brandon Jacobs went in the 7th round.

[joefry 0]

the point of the trade is to benefit both teams..that trade clearly benefits one team

 

also, i hate when a trade like this identifies the dumb guy in the league and then everyone tries to rip him off

 

It is sort of arrogant of you to assume that your viewpoint is universal...the guy with caddy obviously is nervous and really values jacobs, hence the percived discrepancy in wr value. There is no way you veto that, otherwise why even have trades?

[Frankie Valiant 0]

A.Johnson in my opinion is over-rated and is always drafted way to early, and he never seems to perform to his full potential...

E.Kennison has never been rated high ever! although if you look at his last four years compared to Johnsons last four, Kennison has better numbers.... I know Kennison is older and probably over the hill, but what's to say he wont live up to his last four year average of 65/6/900...or even better?

 

if Johnson is a Bust or just plays at his four year average of: 80/4/1,000 and Caddy has a great year. who wins in this trade?...

 

if I were the commissioner in this league I would not veto the trade...

I am real curious now to see how this un-folds at the end of the season.........

[Jimmy 0]

But that's not what this is. This is a 3rd/4th for a 6th/15th and there is no logical reason why the Jacobs/AJ owner failed to pick Caddy & Kennison if he wanted them. None. Not one person has yet made a plausible case for why this deal would be accepted - probably because there is no plausable excuse for it. It's nonsensical.

 

*Ring* *Ring* "Umm..hello?" "Hey, it's the commish. There have been some questions about the trade you just made and I was hoping you could tell me your side of it."

 

"Sure, dude. You know it's been a few weeks since we drafted and I was in a hurry back then. I just went by my cheatsheet and hadn't really been paying attention. In the last couple pre-season games Caddie has looked like an S. T. U. D. stud! And well, let's face it, Jacobs won't last the season as the starter."

 

"Fair enough. But, isn't Kennison kind of a turd?"

 

"Yeah, probably, but I don't care. I've got Housh and Galloway already, so I only need him for a couple BYEs. Besides, I'm not sure that Schaub will complete enough passes to the right team to make AJ worthwhile. Mostly I just wanted to do whatever it took to lock up Caddie - he's going to win the title for me this season."

 

 

_my_2_cents_ - I just want to say that you've done a great job of opening my eyes to the possibility of veto'ing this trade. When I first started reading I was completely in the "you can't even consider veto" camp. The fact of the matter is, you brought up some good points. Also, I think that both sides where working pretty strongly to make a point and probably not representing how they'd really handle this situation. Esp in your case, where you know all the owners, I'd like to think you'd take the time to talk to the owners before veto'ing anything - no matter how lopsided you and/or the rest of the league THOUGHT it was. While none of us may personally agree with the scenario I outlined above, it's pretty darn legit. I've often times accepted a player I thought was worthless to: 1. meet roster requirements, 2. get the deal done.

 

p.s. Nice post, Fantasyman - well thought out and rational.

[rdrs4life 0]

[ ] thread delivers

[Guest RenoZ]

I vote for a smilie with a small guy bent over with a big red hand-smack mark on his ass.

 

[rdrs4life 0]

I disagree, I do not like to aprove trades in the pre-season. There are too many unknowns, and I also veto trades between two weak teams as the trade usually makes them both stronger.

 

 

I hope this is a level.

 

 

Otherwise you deserve a soupy travis as well as anyone dumb enough to let you run the league.

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

*2 cents has come across to me, throughout this thread, as pretentious. Not attacking him personally, because, many times, I found his arguments sound and logical. And, coming on to a fantasy football web-site and referencing the fact that you are familiar with "ad hominem", "slippery slope" and "straw man" arguments is also fine. What I found somewhat off-putting is that it seemed like every other post was "ad hominem" this, "slippery slope" that. Again, it is great that you are familiar with these terms; it just starts to get old when so many of your responses reference terms that are not part of most people's daily vernacular. Not saying you need to dumb it down, just that it came across (to me at least, and, maybe, incorrectly) as you feeling the need to "prove" how intelligent you are. I don't think you need to do that.

 

Sorry you're so judgemental and project so many things onto me. The fact is that each time I used the term for the fallacy presented it was in context with the appropriate post quoted.

 

Simply put, I grew tired very quickly of being called an "idiot" and other insults and personal attacks, and rather than sink to the level of the insulting poster as I may have in the past I chose to take the enlightened approach and point out each occasion it was done. I'd respond to the attacker's point, and they would ignore the response and cast an insult. Sorry if your delecate sensibilities were put off by that style, but I am damned if I do and damned if I don't. If I choose to wallow in the muck with those who's vocabulary is based around calling people names, I get suspended or banned. If I instead point out what they are doing, I get called pretentious, or someone (like you) assumes I'm posting $5 words just to sound smart.

 

Maybe you struggled in English class - I majored in it in college. Sue me if I have an above average vocabulary I guess. Ironic being put off by someone's use of words on a message board, no?

 

*2 cent has also asked, at various points throughout this thread, that people think "outside the box". Besides that term being a pet peeve of mine (in my estimation, a lazy and overused way of saying, "Aren't I smart and contrarian? People will certainly not agree with my view now, but, once history has a chance to judge me, they will surely see my genius"), I also am not sure what, exactly, people are supposed to be thinking outside the box on. If anything, the process cent describes of a league vote, followed by a commissioner's investigation, seems abundantly "inside the box". Please elaborate a little on what you mean, if you don't mind.

 

Don't mind a bit, so long as you drop your incessant need to attack me with your presumption and pseudo psychoanalysis. So because you have a pet peeve with an expression, that equates to me being "smart and contrarian" and as in your thinly veiled assertion, smug and deserving of your contempt? Again - I refuse to respond in kind, but I will point out what a raging ass that makes you sound. You know, while we're in the business of analyzing each other.

 

So to answer your question, it's simple: the poster I was addressing at the time kept using projection over and over again to insinuate various things. First I had no business stepping in, and it was terrible of me as commish to do so *only* because of ADP. I corrected that and pointed out that it was not just on ADP, but rather on a combo of the league vote, ADP, and the rankings of several sites. He then responded saying how horrible a commish I was if I were to vote down such a trade based *only* on my judgement and projection. Time and again, despite being told directly otherwise, he continued to assert that I was somehow using a singular basis for veto. TIme and again he was corected and ignored it.

 

Additionally, he asserted that the ONLY reason to veto a deal is for collusion. I happen to find that a very narrow minded approach, and have gone into great detail as to why I believe that and provided examples of other reasons why a deal should be vetoed.

 

That's what I mean by "thinking outside the box".

 

So whether you have some strange aversion to that expression or not, it fits.

 

Thanks for your completely asinine analysis of my posts and my motives - you're completely off base, but you've made so many snap judgements about me that I won't bother correcting you.

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

A.Johnson in my opinion is over-rated and is always drafted way to early, and he never seems to perform to his full potential...

E.Kennison has never been rated high ever! although if you look at his last four years compared to Johnsons last four, Kennison has better numbers.... I know Kennison is older and probably over the hill, but what's to say he wont live up to his last four year average of 65/6/900...or even better?

 

if Johnson is a Bust or just plays at his four year average of: 80/4/1,000 and Caddy has a great year. who wins in this trade?...

 

if I were the commissioner in this league I would not veto the trade...

I am real curious now to see how this un-folds at the end of the season.........

 

But at the end of the day none of that matters. What matters is that the team with Jacobs/AJ could have had ALL of Jacobs/AJ/Caddy & Kennison with his 3rd, 4th, 5th and 14th picks if he valued those players that highly. People keep saying, "you don't know where the team with Jacobs/AJ has these guys valued!" - but we do. Obviously not valuable enough to spend a 5th or 6th roundrt on Caddy or any pick in the 1st 14 rounds on Kennison.

 

Instead he took other players, and is now dealing the 3/4 for the 6/15.

 

So no matter where they finish the year...no matter how over or underrated anyone is...no matter what stats they show, this trade is insane for the fact that if the Jacobs/AJ owner wanted those players he had several rounds to take Caddy, and 13 rounds to take Kennison and deemed them unworthy at the time. Yet now they're worth his 3rd and 4th round picks.

 

Finally your claim of AJ being overrated is interesting, but I posted their respective stats, and the fact is that AJ's WORST receiving season at 64 receptions was just 4 receptions lower than Kennison's best receiving season of 68 catches. AJ had over 100 catches last year. Kennison had 50-something. But again - it matters not because he could have had all 4 of these players if he actually valued them that highly.

 

All due respect, but sometimes I think people ignore the scenario to make a point about whether deals should be veto-able.

 

Let me ask you - are you in the "Kennison for Tomlinson" camp, where you'd allow that deal to fly because after speaking with the team manager it turned out to be based on stupidity rather than collusion? You'd allow a deal to ruin a 12 man league by gift wrapping the 1.01 pick for an unscrupulous manager to the detriment of 11 others because of 1 idiot making 1 idiotic move? Maybe they're a n00b to FFB. Maybe they aren't so bright to begin with. But allowing that deal would cost you the league. Guaranteed.

 

And if you aren't in the LT for Kennison camp, then please explain the difference between dealing a 1.01 for a 15.xx and dealing a 3/4 for a 6/15. I keep trying to mentally justify this deal and I keep coming up blank. I'm trying hard to see the other perspective here and I got nothing.

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

hence the percived discrepancy in wr value.

 

The "perceived" discrepancy?

 

Please explain to me how a 34 year old with a rookie QB on a bad KC team is worth more than AJ, who's in his 20s and coming off a 100 catch season with an upgraded offense in Schaub & AGreen and a solid offensive coach gameplanning.

 

I'm dying to hear why every ranking site and FFB analyst has AJ a top 10 WR and Kennison barely worth drafting.

 

I'm curious also as to why it's a "perceived" discrepancy when ADP is the average position that a player is taken - and per MockDraftCentral, where people pay to participate in mocks, AJ is a top 30 pick and Kennison isn't taken until 145.

 

Seems like there's a bit more than perception going on for 100s of experts and people like you & I ranking Kennison and Johnson where we do respectively, no? And the final kicker - in THIS league that we've been discussing, AJ was taken in the 3rd and Kennison in the 15th round. That's not perception at that point - it's reality. Johnson is worth a 3rd rounder and Kennison is worth a 15th rounder.

[rdrs4life 0]

Damn 3 posts in a row, you must be right then.

[Dr. Octopus 0]

The "perceived" discrepancy?

 

Please explain to me how a 34 year old with a rookie QB on a bad KC team is worth more than AJ, who's in his 20s and coming off a 100 catch season with an upgraded offense in Schaub & AGreen and a solid offensive coach gameplanning.

 

I'm dying to hear why every ranking site and FFB analyst has AJ a top 10 WR and Kennison barely worth drafting.

 

I'm curious also as to why it's a "perceived" discrepancy when ADP is the average position that a player is taken - and per MockDraftCentral, where people pay to participate in mocks, AJ is a top 30 pick and Kennison isn't taken until 145.

 

Seems like there's a bit more than perception going on for 100s of experts and people like you & I ranking Kennison and Johnson where we do respectively, no? And the final kicker - in THIS league that we've been discussing, AJ was taken in the 3rd and Kennison in the 15th round. That's not perception at that point - it's reality. Johnson is worth a 3rd rounder and Kennison is worth a 15th rounder.

 

 

You keep twisting facts to make your argument stronger. By now you must know that Huard has been named starter and even if they were going with Croyle, by your logic isn't Houston going with a rookie starter as well. Both are first year starters, neither are rookies. Huard was the second highest rated passer last year, so perhaps he has another good year.

 

Kansas City was a playoff team last season, Houston sucked for the 100th year in a row. But Kansas City is the bad team?

 

You've ignored this point a few times now. Why do you need to control everyone in your league? Ignoring your bias against the players and assuming you're right and this is a horrible trade:

 

Perhaps the guy trading away Caddy is an excellant salesman and convinced the Jacobs owner that Caddy will be huge now that Alstott is no longer in the picture. Should he suffer because he's good at trading. Its part of the game. Its a skill. You're taking that skill away by passing your judgment on this trade and disallowing it.

 

Isn't negotiating a good trade for oneself part of fantasy football?

 

I have a guy in my baseball league that tries to polish every turd on his team. If Braden Looper pitches a gem he's the next Clemens. I don't fall for his BS, but some may/do. I give him credit he's good at the sell, more power to him when he pulls off a deal in his favor.

 

It doesn't have to be collusion at all. Just two people making trades and one getting over (or maybe not, we'll see).

[lambert58 71]

The "perceived" discrepancy?

 

Please explain to me how a 34 year old with a rookie QB on a bad KC team is worth more than AJ, who's in his 20s and coming off a 100 catch season with an upgraded offense in Schaub & AGreen and a solid offensive coach gameplanning.

 

I'm dying to hear why every ranking site and FFB analyst has AJ a top 10 WR and Kennison barely worth drafting.

 

I'm curious also as to why it's a "perceived" discrepancy when ADP is the average position that a player is taken - and per MockDraftCentral, where people pay to participate in mocks, AJ is a top 30 pick and Kennison isn't taken until 145.

 

Seems like there's a bit more than perception going on for 100s of experts and people like you & I ranking Kennison and Johnson where we do respectively, no? And the final kicker - in THIS league that we've been discussing, AJ was taken in the 3rd and Kennison in the 15th round. That's not perception at that point - it's reality. Johnson is worth a 3rd rounder and Kennison is worth a 15th rounder.

 

 

You are basing things off of your opinion. Does age matter? Joey Galloway who had a rookie q.b. last year on a bad team outperformed many of the younger receivers with a better offensive system. In your OPINION Houston will have an upgraded offense, though they have not proven so yet. To turn your reasoning around, who has a better supporting cast to take pressure away? Johnson with Ahman Green and Jacoby Jones or Kennison with Larry Johnson and Tony Gonzales. Brodie Croyle has already been named the back up in K.C. behind Damon Huard who had a decent season last year. His season last year was far better than ANY season Schaub has had. Don't let opinions get in the way of facts.

 

Yes, Johnson caught 100 balls last year but only had 5 touchdowns, close to his career average. Kennison has been consistantly around 1000 yards and close to 5-7 touchdowns the last 5 years.

 

Who cares about ADP? Mock drafts are an exercise for bored people and has no bearing on how players perform or will perform. Remember a couple of years ago when Fantasy Football Index had Tatum Bell ranked #1 running back? Because of that one magazine a vast majority of Mock Drafts had Tatum Bell going top three. He was PERCEIVED to be a top back based off of what??? Opinions don't make a great player.

 

Draft position is also not an indicator of how a player will do. Many players outperform their draft position. You also act like only the receivers were involved in this decision. The running backs Jacobs and Caddy factor in to this trade as well.

[Jimmy 0]

*Ring* *Ring* "Umm..hello?" "Hey, it's the commish. There have been some questions about the trade you just made and I was hoping you could tell me your side of it."

 

"Sure, dude. You know it's been a few weeks since we drafted and I was in a hurry back then. I just went by my cheatsheet and hadn't really been paying attention. In the last couple pre-season games Caddie has looked like an S. T. U. D. stud! And well, let's face it, Jacobs won't last the season as the starter."

 

"Fair enough. But, isn't Kennison kind of a turd?"

 

"Yeah, probably, but I don't care. I've got Housh and Galloway already, so I only need him for a couple BYEs. Besides, I'm not sure that Schaub will complete enough passes to the right team to make AJ worthwhile. Mostly I just wanted to do whatever it took to lock up Caddie - he's going to win the title for me this season."

 

Why do people keep comparing Kennison to AJ? Maybe their league has roster requirements and Kennison was just thrown in to balance that out. From his standpoint, he was simply trading away a bench-WR to receive a bench-WR - their names and when they were drafted are irrelevant. All he cared about was that he realized that Caddie was the next coming of LT, Jacobs sucked, and somehow he needed to rectify the situation.

 

Again - I think people in this thread probably feel more strongly about the argument than the situation. I sincerely hope noone would really make the veto decision without talking to the owners in question first.

[Sho Nuff 720]

Why do people keep comparing Kennison to AJ? Maybe their league has roster requirements and Kennison was just thrown in to balance that out. From his standpoint, he was simply trading away a bench-WR to receive a bench-WR - their names and when they were drafted are irrelevant. All he cared about was that he realized that Caddie was the next coming of LT, Jacobs sucked, and somehow he needed to rectify the situation.

 

Again - I think people in this thread probably feel more strongly about the argument than the situation. I sincerely hope noone would really make the veto decision without talking to the owners in question first.

 

AJ is not a bench WR. yeah...top 10 WRs as bench throw ins.

 

Its not like it was Kennison and Amani Toomer here.

 

But yes...when they were drafted is very relevant.

 

People keep comparing those two because that is where the biggest discrepancy is. You can make a case that Caddy for Jacobs is pretty even. But nobody out there can make a case that AJ for Kennison is even close.

[Dr. Octopus 0]

AJ is not a bench WR. yeah...top 10 WRs as bench throw ins.

 

Its not like it was Kennison and Amani Toomer here.

 

But yes...when they were drafted is very relevant.

 

People keep comparing those two because that is where the biggest discrepancy is. You can make a case that Caddy for Jacobs is pretty even. But nobody out there can make a case that AJ for Kennison is even close.

 

No one has to, except for the guy who traded for him, maybe he doesn't care he thinks they are close and wanted Caddy badly.

 

Most magazines and websites have Eli Manning ranked between 15-20. I hva ehim ranked #6 overal. And you know what I think I'm right. I don't care what "experts" or message board posters think. So if I traded for Eli are you goint to veteo that trade to protect me.

 

Once again I'll bring up a baseball example. A few years ago I made a trade for a mid-level closer (Say Bob Wickman) for a a player that was off to a blazing start. Don't remember who it was but let's say like JJ Hardy this year. The guy was leading the league in HRs at mid-season, but I thought he would cool down.

 

So I offered the trade becuase I needed saves and the guy excepted. The league was in uproar (they though I was getting ripped off) and voted to veteo the trade. I protested stated my case, explained how the guy had never hit 20 HRs before and he wouldn't again, blah blah blah.

 

I convinced the commisioner to let the trade stand. I won the league that year by the way. See the general masses aren't always right, that's the danger with overzealous commsioners or league wide veteos.

[PatsFanatic 0]

No one has to, except for the guy who traded for him, maybe he doesn't care he thinks they are close and wanted Caddy badly.

 

Most magazines and websites have Eli Manning ranked between 15-20. I hva ehim ranked #6 overal. And you know what I think I'm right. I don't care what "experts" or message board posters think. So if I traded for Eli are you goint to veteo that trade to protect me.

 

And thats fine if you are really high on Eli. The difference being in this case is that you would have drafted Eli. If you want to compare the Eli situation to this one it would be like you drafting Marc Bulger in the 4th, some guy drafting Eli in the 9th and then you trading Eli for Bulger straight up. If you were really that high on Eli you would have taken in the 4th or 5th or 6th ect. Its completely different once the season starts and the value of the players change. Your closer situation doesn't work either because you were trading hitting for pitching. In this case he's trading a RB and WR for a RB and WR who according to where he drafted the players himself are worse. This has nothing to do with people's value of the player, the owner who drafted Jacobs and Johnson set the value during the draft.

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

This has nothing to do with people's value of the player, the owner who drafted Jacobs and Johnson set the value during the draft.

 

I've made this point 20 times in this topic. Never mind man, it will fall on deaf ears.

[Voice_Of_Reason 0]

I have a question for you 2 Cents...

 

Let me ask you this... If you made a trade (any trade, any players), and you loved the trade. What if 6 owners in your league called for a veto. What would you do? In your mind, you wanted the trade and thought at the very least your team improved. But what if 6 different people with 6 different opinions disagreed with you? What then?

 

The reason I ask is because I know what my response would be. I would be looking for a new league. My decisions are based on my beliefs. And while my beliefs may not be shared by all, it is still up to me to manage my own team. Once others tell me how to manage my team, the fun in FFB is gone. At least for me.

[Dr. Octopus 0]

And thats fine if you are really high on Eli. The difference being in this case is that you would have drafted Eli. If you want to compare the Eli situation to this one it would be like you drafting Marc Bulger in the 4th, some guy drafting Eli in the 9th and then you trading Eli for Bulger straight up. If you were really that high on Eli you would have taken in the 4th or 5th or 6th ect. Its completely different once the season starts and the value of the players change. Your closer situation doesn't work either because you were trading hitting for pitching. In this case he's trading a RB and WR for a RB and WR who according to where he drafted the players himself are worse. This has nothing to do with people's value of the player, the owner who drafted Jacobs and Johnson set the value during the draft.

 

 

 

My baseball analogy is very relevant, perhaps you missed the point. People see values quite differently and no one should be able to project their value of a trade onto some one else. People should be allowed to run their team as they see fit.

 

The draft was over a month ago and people's opinions could have changed. So when they were drafted is no longer relevant. Like I said maybe team B is high on the fact Alstott hung it up and loves Kennison now that Huard is named starter. Maybe he sees Bradshaw as a legit threat to Jacobs. Perhaps these thoughts are irrational to you, but you don't know what he was thinking. You can't automatically assume collusion. This trade doesn't show it on its face at all.

 

This trade is semi-lopsided on its face but is not nearly as agrecious as it people are making it out to be.

 

Everyone is so stuck on last season's stats. Here are some stats from 2005 (only two seasons ago)

 

68-1102-5

 

63-688-2

 

Which WR would you rather have?

 

 

 

Not one of the veteo people have addressed the biggest argument for allowing this trade though.

 

 

What is so wrong about a person that is good at negotiating trades? Some people are good at selling a deal. Why should they suffer and lose a vluable skill because a few whiny people are so afraid of competive balance? Especially since those people could be very worng about how the season will play out.

[Jimmy 0]

AJ is not a bench WR. yeah...top 10 WRs as bench throw ins.

 

To who...you? Like the fictional guy said, "hey I've Galloway and Housh, anyone else is just going to sit on the bench."

 

So, to him it IS a bench WR. No matter what the rest of us think.

 

If he were trading LT/Kennison for Jacobs/AJ, NOONE would blink an eye at the Kennison part of the trade. Just because you don't feel as strongly about Caddie out-performing Jacobs as he does, doesn't mean this has any basis for veto without representation.

 

 

(And yes, I believe that in the real case it's a new owner that got talked into making a bad deal. My whole point is that you better TALK to HIM first and make sure, though, before blindly vetoing.)

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

I have a question for you 2 Cents...

 

Let me ask you this... If you made a trade (any trade, any players), and you loved the trade. What if 6 owners in your league called for a veto. What would you do? In your mind, you wanted the trade and thought at the very least your team improved. But what if 6 different people with 6 different opinions disagreed with you? What then?

I fail to see how this is relevant in the slightest.

 

This deal is what it is: a 3rd and 4th rounder being dealt for a 6th and 15th rounfer. In my league that trade would never be offered because in my league my friends would tell you to get the fock out of there. But on point, the players are obviously valued where they are - it's still preseason and not one thing has changed their value since they drafted.

 

And contrary to Doc Ock saying I change my reasoning, I've actually been completely consistent: if the Jacobs/AJ owner wanted Caddy & Kennison he could have spent a 5th or 6th on Caddy or a 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th, 11th, 12th, 13th, 14th, 15th on Kennison. But he did not.

 

And to me, that is the deciding factor here - not that the deal is close - believe it or not, I do not ever want to have to veto a trade. I hope that I play with competitive enough owners that some crap like this would never happen, and going into our 5th year it never had. But the point remains that the Jacobs/AJ owner drafted them in the 3rd and 4th rounds, and then had AMPLE OPPORTUNITY to draft both Caddy and Kennison, but passed them both up presumably for what he had ranked as better players. Not what I had ranked - not what some website had ranked, not even what ADP indicates - but where the manager with Jacobs/AJ ranked them. The proof is in the draft itself - that's what gave those players their value. And it's not like it's week 5 and Jacobs is hurt or in a RBBC, so the Jacobs owner panics....this is preseason and the fact is that Caddy has looked awful, so if anything his value has slid while Jacobs has held steady.

 

I'm not sure how many more times or more creative ways I can explain this, and I am baffled as to how you can all ignore it in the name of belaboring your point about commissioners not being able to veto except for trades. I think you're all being pretty unreasonable when it comes to ignoring this scenario of a 3/4 for a 6/15 in order to stick to your guns on what you see as a moral imparative that the commish never ever interfere so long as there's no cheating.

 

The irony is that I also feel that way 99.999% of the time. But this is a 3rd/4th for a 6th/15th.

 

What part of that isn't registering with you folks? I know you're all way zealous to take out your bitterness and frustrations from past commissioner transgressions in your leaues - I get it. But what I don't get is how you can support this trade reaching for every reason in the world why it could be considered fair when the draft itself is proof that it isn't fair.

 

 

 

The reason I ask is because I know what my response would be. I would be looking for a new league. My decisions are based on my beliefs. And while my beliefs may not be shared by all, it is still up to me to manage my own team. Once others tell me how to manage my team, the fun in FFB is gone. At least for me.

 

 

On your specific point I probably feel like you do. 99.9999% of the time I think you're spot on. In the case of a team dealing a 3/4 for a 6/15 though I have to call BS. There's something very fishy about that trade and it's not just my rankings, it's not just ADP and it's not just the rankings of every fantasy expert on the planet: it's the rankings of the Jacobs/Kennison owner who deemed Caddy & Kennison unworthy of drafting on draft day. And now 20 days later he's willing to overpay for Caddy by 3 rounds and Kennison by 10 rounds? I'm sorry, but try to put your personal bias against commissioners aside to think about this one because if you don't see something out of whack there, there's something wrong.

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

Everyone is so stuck on last season's stats. Here are some stats from 2005 (only two seasons ago)

 

68-1102-5

 

63-688-2

 

Which WR would you rather have?

And here you present the same flawed reasoning to support your point, when you are also taking one season and getting "stuck" on it while making the generalization that others are also doing that.

 

The fact is that I posted both WRs stats for their respective careers. One of these WRs is 34, the other 26 -which is more of an injury risk? Which of the two is considered one of the best young WRs in the game? Which one has as many 1000 yd seasons in 4 years as the other does in 11 years? Which one has a career high of 68 receptions (Kennison) while the other's career low is 64 (Johnson)?

 

You also mentioned AJ's "rookie" QB - Schaub is not a rookie. Just a point of fact you seem to be confused about.

 

Look, you can argue the literal value all you like when it comes to the stats they're put up, and hey - maybe you can make good points about that. But the fact is that the Jacobs/AJ owner not only did not value these players the same on draft day, he valued Caddy & Kennison as being unworthy to draft when the opportunities were there....round after round he watched those players slide and did nothing. So the value as perceived by the guy receiving them in this deal was not even close to equal in his eyes.

 

And that is the point. That is why this trade stinks, and that is why it should be vetoed.

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

Damn 3 posts in a row, you must be right then.

 

either that or it was in response to 3 separate posts.

 

I could easily say, "damn, a useless post with only a snipe and no content - you must not have the ability to form an opinion then."

 

But I'd like to think I'm above that.

[Cylon Patrol 0]

I'm late to the party here. I meant to respond yesterday, but lost track of time here at work.....err, I mean.....at home.

 

Anyway, this isn't a trade I would have made had I owned Jacobs/Johnson, but vetoable?? No way in hell. The last time I saw the thread, no rosters were posted. But who knows? Maybe Andre Johnson's owner had plenty of depth at WR and wanted an upgrade at RB.

 

Brandon Jacobs...........

[Dr. Octopus 0]

I think you're all being pretty unreasonable when it comes to ignoring this scenario of a 3/4 for a 6/15 in order to stick to your guns on what you see as a moral imparative that the commish never ever interfere so long as there's no cheating.

 

 

Why? When you've ignored any good argument against vetoing it (not going to rehash all of them but just the main points):

 

1. The draft was over a month ago and things have changed since then (i.e. Alstott retirment, Huard named starter).

 

2. Team A may be a great salesman and sold the deal. Why should you take that skill away from him?

 

3. Where have you proved collusion? It's all your opinion on the players value and where they were drafted (see 1).

 

4. Everyone is so stuck on last season's stats. Here are some stats from 2005 (only two seasons ago)

 

68-1102-5

 

63-688-2

 

Which WR would you rather have?

 

 

Just a few points.

 

I also never accussed you of changing your reasoning. I merely accused you of twisting facts to make the Kennison for AJ exchange appear even more lopsided than it is (i.e. rookie QB, bad team, etc. ) see a few posts above.

 

Seriously though. What happens at season's end if Caddy and Kennison outplay Jacobs and AJ. Unlikely, not impossible. Plenty of more far fetched scenarios have played out. Oops sorry.

[Dr. Octopus 0]

And here you present the same flawed reasoning to support your point, when you are also taking one season and getting "stuck" on it while making the generalization that others are also doing that.

 

Come on, that's my point.

[Dr. Octopus 0]

You also mentioned AJ's "rookie" QB - Schaub is not a rookie. Just a point of fact you seem to be confused about.

 

You may want to go back an re-read, because you seriously miss points. You said KC has a rookie QB, Croyle isn't a "rookie" either (not to mention that you should know Huard was the starter but you once again twist the facts in order to attempt to make your argument stronger). They are both first year starters. You can't have it both ways.

[Voice_Of_Reason 0]

I fail to see how this is relevant in the slightest.

 

This deal is what it is: a 3rd and 4th rounder being dealt for a 6th and 15th rounfer. In my league that trade would never be offered because in my league my friends would tell you to get the fock out of there. But on point, the players are obviously valued where they are - it's still preseason and not one thing has changed their value since they drafted.

 

And contrary to Doc Ock saying I change my reasoning, I've actually been completely consistent: if the Jacobs/AJ owner wanted Caddy & Kennison he could have spent a 5th or 6th on Caddy or a 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th, 11th, 12th, 13th, 14th, 15th on Kennison. But he did not.

 

And to me, that is the deciding factor here - not that the deal is close - believe it or not, I do not ever want to have to veto a trade. I hope that I play with competitive enough owners that some crap like this would never happen, and going into our 5th year it never had. But the point remains that the Jacobs/AJ owner drafted them in the 3rd and 4th rounds, and then had AMPLE OPPORTUNITY to draft both Caddy and Kennison, but passed them both up presumably for what he had ranked as better players. Not what I had ranked - not what some website had ranked, not even what ADP indicates - but where the manager with Jacobs/AJ ranked them. The proof is in the draft itself - that's what gave those players their value. And it's not like it's week 5 and Jacobs is hurt or in a RBBC, so the Jacobs owner panics....this is preseason and the fact is that Caddy has looked awful, so if anything his value has slid while Jacobs has held steady.

 

I'm not sure how many more times or more creative ways I can explain this, and I am baffled as to how you can all ignore it in the name of belaboring your point about commissioners not being able to veto except for trades. I think you're all being pretty unreasonable when it comes to ignoring this scenario of a 3/4 for a 6/15 in order to stick to your guns on what you see as a moral imparative that the commish never ever interfere so long as there's no cheating.

 

The irony is that I also feel that way 99.999% of the time. But this is a 3rd/4th for a 6th/15th.

 

What part of that isn't registering with you folks? I know you're all way zealous to take out your bitterness and frustrations from past commissioner transgressions in your leaues - I get it. But what I don't get is how you can support this trade reaching for every reason in the world why it could be considered fair when the draft itself is proof that it isn't fair.

On your specific point I probably feel like you do. 99.9999% of the time I think you're spot on. In the case of a team dealing a 3/4 for a 6/15 though I have to call BS. There's something very fishy about that trade and it's not just my rankings, it's not just ADP and it's not just the rankings of every fantasy expert on the planet: it's the rankings of the Jacobs/Kennison owner who deemed Caddy & Kennison unworthy of drafting on draft day. And now 20 days later he's willing to overpay for Caddy by 3 rounds and Kennison by 10 rounds? I'm sorry, but try to put your personal bias against commissioners aside to think about this one because if you don't see something out of whack there, there's something wrong.

I'll give you my feeling on the subject. Without speaking with the owners directly involved, I find it impossible to register any opinion on the trade. I suscribe to the no collusion/no veto way of life. However I also believe this trade is lopsided at present. The reason for the underline is due to past experience. I was once in a league (not involved in the trade, just in the league where it occured) where a trade was vetoed by 8 of 10 owners. By seasons end, it was actually a lopsided deal but in the exact opposite side that was originally thought. It was at that moment I became a no collusion/no veto guy. I realized that I took part in screwing another owner out of managing his own team. I realized that he had seen something I hadn't, and it wasn't my right to take it from him.

 

All that said, the reason I cannot judge this trade is because I have not spoken with either owner in the deal. If they could explain it to me, it could make more sense. Until then, I cannot see the collusion in the trade. Perhaps, one owner changed his mind. Perhaps, he saw something in preseason he didn't see before. Perhaps he is a homer who let bad judgement get the better of him. Perhaps he is colluding. Or perhaps the other owner sells cars for a living and convinced him to make the deal. No way for any of us to know without speaking to them. It may very well be fishy, but I'd have to be more involved and have far more info to say if it was collusion or not.

[kwhiz73 0]

what, that you can take any point down a slippery slope to the utmost extreme of generalizations instead of speaking to the issue at hand where it doesn't apply in the slightest and seemingly prove a point?

 

yeah, spot on.

 

After reading this response I feel like I just watched

[Sho Nuff 720]

To who...you? Like the fictional guy said, "hey I've Galloway and Housh, anyone else is just going to sit on the bench."

 

So, to him it IS a bench WR. No matter what the rest of us think.

 

If he were trading LT/Kennison for Jacobs/AJ, NOONE would blink an eye at the Kennison part of the trade. Just because you don't feel as strongly about Caddie out-performing Jacobs as he does, doesn't mean this has any basis for veto without representation.

(And yes, I believe that in the real case it's a new owner that got talked into making a bad deal. My whole point is that you better TALK to HIM first and make sure, though, before blindly vetoing.)

 

So AJ, according to this fictional guy is the 3rd WR. Please. Quit using fictional scenarios as evidence of something.

 

And if he thought so much about him outperforming him...he would have drafted him in the first focking place.

 

I agree that he should talk to both parties...but the trade was idiotic.

[Sho Nuff 720]

either that or it was in response to 3 separate posts.

 

I could easily say, "damn, a useless post with only a snipe and no content - you must not have the ability to form an opinion then."

But I'd like to think I'm above that.

 

Yeah right.

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

Why? When you've ignored any good argument against vetoing it (not going to rehash all of them but just the main points):

 

1. The draft was over a month ago and things have changed since then (i.e. Alstott retirment, Huard named starter).

 

2. Team A may be a great salesman and sold the deal. Why should you take that skill away from him?

 

3. Where have you proved collusion? It's all your opinion on the players value and where they were drafted (see 1).

 

4. Everyone is so stuck on last season's stats. Here are some stats from 2005 (only two seasons ago)

 

68-1102-5

 

63-688-2

 

Which WR would you rather have?

Just a few points.

 

I also never accussed you of changing your reasoning. I merely accused you of twisting facts to make the Kennison for AJ exchange appear even more lopsided than it is (i.e. rookie QB, bad team, etc. ) see a few posts above.

 

Seriously though. What happens at season's end if Caddy and Kennison outplay Jacobs and AJ. Unlikely, not impossible. Plenty of more far fetched scenarios have played out. Oops sorry.

 

Actually I'm not ignoring them at all - I just see many of them as irrelevant for reasons stated. Actually for one reason stated again and again.

 

Hey, it's not my trade and I'm not the commish in that league. My getting on the soap box in here as this spiraled into a spinoff topic had more to do from the abuse I took for expressing my opinion.

 

When it comes to you, VOR, phillybear and many others I've read every word of your posts and I appreciate a good debate/argument. You've all made me think about this a few times - I just can't get past the draft day valuation.

 

I could buy your argument if the picks were a round apart. I've said before that if it were a 3rd and a 4th for a 4th and 5th, or maybe even a 5th and 6th I wouldn't think it was fair necessarily, but I wouldn't consider vetoing it for all the good points that you've made.

 

But here it's a 3rd for a 6th and a 4th for a 15th.

 

Let's look at it from another angle. It's pre-draft and one team in your league wants to deal draft picks to another team. He offers a 3rd and 4th round pick for the other team's 6th and 15th round pick. The trade is accepted and the league goes nuts over it. You as the commish have to make a ruling. Now there aren't even any names or perceptions of value involved - just the picks. Is that a fair deal? What's the benefit to the owner giving up his 3rd and 4th for the 6th and 15th? Does it not jeopardize league balance to giftwrap a second 3rd and a second 4th rounder to the team benefitting?

 

Do you allow it?

[lambert58 71]

I fail to see how this is relevant in the slightest.

 

This deal is what it is: a 3rd and 4th rounder being dealt for a 6th and 15th rounfer. In my league that trade would never be offered because in my league my friends would tell you to get the fock out of there. But on point, the players are obviously valued where they are - it's still preseason and not one thing has changed their value since they drafted.

 

 

 

 

 

Really? Larry Johnson signs his contract and Huard wins the starting job from Croyle does not raise kennison's value?

 

 

I think it raises his value a great deal..

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

After reading this response I feel like I just watched

 

 

all debatating aside, I watched that last night and had to watch it 3 times to fully grasp how unbelievably retarded that girl is.

 

But the fact is that so long as she looks like that and can suck a mean cawk, she will never know suffering. God help her if her looks fade prematurely.