vetoable, dumb or makin too much of it

[Jimmy 0]

And the absolute fact is that the Jacobs/AJ owner chose not to draft either Caddy or Kennison in the 3rd and 4th rounds (where he's now dealing his 3/4 picks for them), nor did they choose to draft either for 2 more rounds in Caddy's case or for 12 more rounds in Kennison's case. I'd call that ample opportunity.

 

So regardless of where I or anyone values these players, the jacobs/AJ owner DID NOT VALUE THEM that highly.

 

So you keep saying. But why is it so hard to fathom that the owner didn't prepare much, picked up a magazine on the way to the draft and then spent the next couple weeks studying and realizing, "oh crap! I don't like my team." The majority of owners across the country don't spend as much time as we do and most go into drafts unprepared (even if they don't realize it at the time.)

 

Here's my last theoretical question to you:

 

This exact scenario happens in your league, everyone votes to veto it, but the guy receiving Caddie comes to you and says, "Look, I know I should have drafted him a few weeks ago, but I learned some stuff and honestly believe that Caddie will be the #1 RB this year and the only way I could get him was to combine Jacobs and AJ. We just threw in Kennison to balance the rosters."

 

Would you still veto it?

[NJJoe20 0]

At the end of the season, I'd wager a pretty penny that the output of the two sides will be close to equal. Brandon Jacobs isn't a special back, imo, and I'll be shocked if he lasts 3 games as the main guy in NY, hence the signing of Rueben. On the other hand, Caddy is a top 5 pick who had a down season on a terrible team. Andre Johnson blows Kennison out of the water, talent wise, but his situation sucks, due my belief that Schaub is going to fall on his face. Bottom line, let the owners do as they wish...you don't have a crystal ball...

[Guest RenoZ]

Nice to see My2cents get ripped to shreds for his tunnelvision

Everything i said was proven correct.

I will now bask in the glory

 

 

hahaha

 

Yesterday, him and his lil' buddy were declaring victory simply because you and I were the only ones in the thread. Today...not so much.

[Blaneyfan 0]

But once again, and again, and again, draft round does not matter. Some players prefer to target wide receivers earlier than other players. I am one of those who waits until the late rounds because I believe that after the top 3 or so receivers most of the rest are the same. For example, based off of the last 4 years averages here is what you have.

 

Kennison 975.25 yards per season 5.75 touchdowns

 

Johnson 988.25 yards per season 4.25 touchdowns.

 

Despite these FACTUAL averages Andre Johnson consistently went several rounds higher to a player who believed in the hype. The player who waited 5 or 6 rounds to get Kennison might have believed they were rated equal and thus received a better value for kennison for the same, if not slightly better, production.

 

I personally have Kennison and Johnson rated in the same tier. Nothing has been done to prove that they don't belong in the same tier. I can't help it if some Johnson fan fell for the hype and picked him 8 rounds higher than his production shows he should be picked.

 

Could not agree more

I've made trades post draft after I further analyzed things. Sometimes it works out, sometimes it doesn't, Not so much anymore as I have gotten better, and now do much more pre-draft work. But it is my team and my right to take a chance on whatever and the heck I choose to risk. I mean it is gambling right? Some are good at it and some should find another hobby.

 

So what if this guy was drafted here and that guy was drafted there? If the guy is stooopid he's stooopid, the good lord knows there is lot's of ém out there playing this great game. If I can take advantage of someone in the league you bet yer a$$ that I will fire off a few crazy trade offers and see if one sticks. It sure isn't cheating and a commish worth a pinch of coon $hit would deal with someone if they are that stooopid.EDIT TO ADD: By "deal with someone" I mean boot him out for the next season if he is not up to the level of your league.

 

Disclaimer: Collusion is collusion and can not be tolerated under any circumstances. If that is what is suspected here then deal with it harshly and severely. I have not seen in this thread where this has been proven as collusion or if there was a response from the owner. If there was I apologize as I didn't see it and I'm not reading this whole thread again.

 

The trade in question on this thread would never be vetoed in any of my leagues that I care about. It is not a blockbuster trade that is going to upset the balance in too many leagues.

Although I have never experienced the situation, it never ceases to amaze me the number of commishes out there that are arrogant enough to think they know how to, and do, run someone else's team, (who paid their cash I might add). Might better just take the cash, draft everyone's team, run the rosters, and pay out the cash at the end.

 

All that said though, different strokes for different folks and ya'll might better phuck off from each other and carry on. As another poster said, (sorry can't remember who in this thread), different leagues will be run different ways and as long as you are happy with the way yours are run then phuck everyone else.

[Guest RenoZ]

Ladies and Gentlemen:

 

Let me introduce you to the "Giants Fan of the Mange Bored: _my_2_cents_"

 

 

Welcome to a world of posts with 427 views and 3 replies (all by you).

 

Peace.

 

Oh ya...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

m2cIAFP

[DankNuggs 305]

hahaha

 

Yesterday, him and his lil' buddy were declaring victory simply because you and I were the only ones in the thread. Today...not so much.

well done... I tried to explain to him that i was smarter than him... He started barking adhominem... i think he thinks thats a sophisticated way to call someone a h0m0.

 

 

I'd let him know, but he's too busy vetoing trades, waiverwires moves, and his wifes dinner menu.

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

So you keep saying. But why is it so hard to fathom that the owner didn't prepare much, picked up a magazine on the way to the draft and then spent the next couple weeks studying and realizing, "oh crap! I don't like my team." The majority of owners across the country don't spend as much time as we do and most go into drafts unprepared (even if they don't realize it at the time.)

 

 

The difference between your argumenr and the argument I presented is that mine is based 100% on absolute fact of the matter. what I am observing actually happened, and I am basing my judgement solely on the facts of the matter.

 

Your argument, no offense intended, is based on wild ass off the cuff speculation with no bearing whatever in fact. Not even a hint of a hint of a fact to support your proposed explanation.

 

 

Sorry - I'll take my fact-based evalution any time. You're not alone - a lot of folks have gone to great lengths to paint various scenarios of "what if" to explain the insanity involved in dealing a 3/4 for a 6/15 - yet none successfull, and yours is no different. It's a wild ass guess. Sorry. I'll stick with the facts. And the facts are that the Jacobs/AJ owner did not value his players like that.

 

Even if I were to entertain your theory (which I am not) I would suggest that no resource available to that manager could possibly have him convinced that Kennison is better than AJ, or Caddy better than jacobs. There's a strong concensus opinion industry wide on free and pay sources alike. So the "bought a magazine on the way to the draft, but since has better data" argument is easily shot down anyway. Not that I am entertaining it - just pointing that out.

 

Here's my last theoretical question to you:

 

This exact scenario happens in your league, everyone votes to veto it, but the guy receiving Caddie comes to you and says, "Look, I know I should have drafted him a few weeks ago, but I learned some stuff and honestly believe that Caddie will be the #1 RB this year and the only way I could get him was to combine Jacobs and AJ. We just threw in Kennison to balance the rosters."

 

Would you still veto it?

My response would have been, Then why didn't you take him in the 5th round when he was still available?"

 

I can fathom no explanation to that.

 

And I would then point out that "tossing in" a 4th round, top 10 WR headed into his 5th year when you are ALREADY giving up more than you're getting makes me suspect collusion, and I would further press for information.

 

If no explanation could be given then I would absolutely veto it.

 

Because in context of reality where Caddy has rushed for negative yards a couple games and less than 1 ypc through the preseason, when you offer Jacobs for Caddy the Caddy owner says, "YES!!" - and if the Caddy owner counters for Jacobs+AJ (your 3rd and 4th round picks) the response from the Jacobs owner, if he is in his right mind, is too profane to post here - but to paraphrase for politeness, it would be "why should I give you a 4th round #1 or #2 WR to get a RB who you took 3 rounds after Jacobs when I'm already giving up more value in Jacobs?"

 

This is all so logical I'm kind of surprised I even have to explain it. Seems obvious, really.

[DankNuggs 305]

My response would have been, Then why didn't you take him in the 5th round when he was still available?"

 

I can fathom no explanation to that.

 

And I would then point out that "tossing in" a 4th round, top 10 WR headed into his 5th year when you are ALREADY giving up more than you're getting makes me suspect collusion, and I would further press for information.

 

If no explanation could be given then I would absolutely veto it.

 

Sounds like you've changed your tune. You are advocating the process i outlined.

 

If there isn't an explanation that passes the smell test, it is likely collusion. The issue is the intent of the owner making the deal.

 

 

 

 

Good to see you've learned.

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

Sounds like you've changed your tune. You are advocating the process i outlined.

 

If there isn't an explanation that passes the smell test, it is likely collusion. The issue is the intent of the owner making the deal.

Good to see you've learned.

 

No, it sounds like you turned on your brain, as I never once even responded to your post suggesting this as I thought it too obvious to bother. Thus, I never disagreed with it - I was always a proponent of listening to an explanation. But as commish evaluating a deal that was voted down by the league that's only one aspect of the research I'd do.

 

You were just too busy calling me an "idiot" and saying what a horrible commissioner I was to realize that.

 

 

Ladies and Gentlemen:

 

Let me introduce you to the "Giants Fan of the Mange Bored: _my_2_cents_"

 

 

Welcome to a world of posts with 427 views and 3 replies (all by you).

 

Peace.

 

Oh ya...

m2cIAFP

 

it's funny - I have been offering my opinion and debating civilly with any who care to engage in it. I make no bones about my opinion, nor have I insulted anyone for theirs.

 

Meanwhile you and DankNuggs now have what - 5 posts between you on this page alone insulting, antagonizing and belittling me, not one of which contains any on-topic substance whatsoever. Further, you post to supoprt each other's blatant antagonism and bating.

 

Nice to see what you guys really bring to the table. Why even participate here? Serious question - I mean, you think you know everything, you insult others for their opions and you post just to agree with each other - what a couple of children. why not go start your own web site where you two can insult people and agree with each other until you're blue in the face - if you think people on this forum respect you for these posts you ought to reconsider. I'd just about guarantee that 90% of the people here who agree with you actually lose respect for you with each instance of this type of badgering.

 

This will be my last time addressing either of you. continue to insult me all you like - whatever makes you feel better about your miserable little lives I guess.

[DankNuggs 305]

Revisionist history - my2cents.

[DankNuggs 305]

No, it sounds like you turned on your brain, as I never once even responded to your post suggesting this as I thought it too obvious to bother. Thus, I never disagreed with it - I was always a proponent of listening to an explanation. But as commish evaluating a deal that was voted down by the league that's only one aspect of the research I'd do.

 

You were just too busy calling me an "idiot" and saying what a horrible commissioner I was to realize that.

it's funny - I have been offering my opinion and debating civilly with any who care to engage in it. I make no bones about my opinion, nor have I insulted anyone for theirs.

 

Meanwhile you and DankNuggs now have what - 5 posts between you on this page alone insulting, antagonizing and belittling me, not one of which contains any on-topic substance whatsoever. Further, you post to supoprt each other's blatant antagonism and bating.

 

Nice to see what you guys really bring to the table. Why even participate here? Serious question - I mean, you think you know everything, you insult others for their opions and you post just to agree with each other - what a couple of children. why not go start your own web site where you two can insult people and agree with each other until you're blue in the face - if you think people on this forum respect you for these posts you ought to reconsider. I'd just about guarantee that 90% of the people here who agree with you actually lose respect for you with each instance of this type of badgering.

 

This will be my last time addressing either of you. continue to insult me all you like - whatever makes you feel better about your miserable little lives I guess.

 

I call things like i see them. You whine about my participation, but why did you consider arguing your point if you couldn't handle anyone who disagrees with you? Only child syndrome or something?

 

 

You are really bent out of shape. And you lost your argument.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I like that.

[Jimmy 0]

This is all so logical I'm kind of surprised I even have to explain it. Seems obvious, really.

 

Of course it does. Because you seem to believe that the only projections that matter are the same conservative, cover-your-ass, don't go to crazy projections that exist all over the Internet. I mean, let's face it, as the proprietor of a well-trafficked site, you only have so much room to make bold predictions. And I guess my issue is that you seem to apply that same penalty to your owners. It's been nearly a month since the draft, why isn't he allowed to change his mind? For all you know, he met Barry Sanders at the mall and Barry told him that he was going to teach Caddie how to run for 2000 yards and 18 tds this season.

 

You talk about me making a wild ass speculation - but, I have yet to see any word as to the real owner's justification (although, it's entirely possible that I missed it among all the made up stuff.) Also, I should add, you've asked several times for ANY reason why that trade could be acceptable and I've given it to you. I've also admitted that the REAL situation at hand is pretty stinky and something as a commish that I would investigate. Though, I still believe it's more likely a case of a new owner getting talked into something than any active form of collusion.

[VinGoodman 0]

These decisions cannot be made in a vacuum. We need more information:

 

How much money is at stake, and what is that worth to the people in the league?

 

Do the players know each other? What is the nature of all the relationships? Will they hate each other if they learn they've been taken advantage of, or will they just laugh it off?

 

How much experience do the people have with fantasy football? Do those better at it care about helping those who are not as experienced? Do those inexperienced players care to learn to be better at this game, or is it just an excuse to hang out with buddies?

 

Basically, we need to understand more about the context. In a recreational league among friends and family who do not generally fleece each other, I would frown on this trade (not necessarily veto it, but I'd look at it more closely). In a cutthroat league where just about anything goes ("If I can sell you the Priest and get Tomlinson, sucks to be you," type of mentality), then this trade is frustrating but acceptable. In fact, the other owners in such a league, knowing the cutthroat nature, should all be trying to trade with the sap and clean him out before the others beat him to it. Then, it becomes a league with essentially one less player, and anyone losing to that player would be the source of endless ribbing for weeks to come. Anything in between means something different in terms of how this needs to be handled. So, if you want our advice, tell us more! Until then, we just have a lot of opinions based on what we think fantasy football leagues are like.

 

PS I love this thread. It posed a question I didn't think hard enough on before, about making a decision on the nature of the league and making sure everyone playing it fits the league's temperament. As I read the trade, I kept thinking we're mixing wolves (shysters) and sheeps(suckers) in a league, and that's the problem.

[Pinto 0]

Heh, this thread is still going. I posted (#3 post) in the newbie thread a while ago:

 

http://www.fftodayforums.com/forum/index.p...p;#entry3229542

 

Perhaps the "expert" people defending the veto should realize they have newbish traits.

[darwin 0]

Perhaps the "expert" people defending the veto saying ban all vetos should realize they have newbish trollish traits.

 

Just saying...If you count the insults, its clear you're here for the fight not for the topic.

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

Of course it does. Because you seem to believe that the only projections that matter are the same conservative, cover-your-ass, don't go to crazy projections that exist all over the Internet.

 

No, they're based on the picks these managers actually made.

 

This it is roughly the same as if they made a pre-draft deal of a 3rd and 4th round pick for a 6th and 15th round pick.

 

For the 14th time.

 

Why use projection to misrepresent me when you can read my posts to see what I'm actually saying? Strange habit with some of you. Really makes you look desperate, actually.

 

 

I've also admitted that the REAL situation at hand is pretty stinky and something as a commish that I would investigate. Though, I still believe it's more likely a case of a new owner getting talked into something than any active form of collusion.

 

And that's where I agree with you. I also am inclined to believe that it's not collusion but rather stupidity.

 

 

I think one of the problems though is that we're mixing arguments. Many of us agree that the deal stinks, and that something is fishy. You and I certainly are on the same page there.

 

But some believe if it's just a stupid owner tanking his team and giving another owner 2 more top 4 picks in the draft (which is exactly what this deal does) for a 6th and 15th pick, that it makes it vetoable, in order to preserve what we see as "league integrity" - that isn't some loose definition meaning all deals need to be fair and no team can be allowed to improve as some have asserted using slipperly slope illogic.

 

No, it just means that an entire league should not be forced to suffer because one owner is a complete n00b moron. And regardless of whether it was a legitamate intention to cheat the league or not, the end result is the same. And that doesn't make the owners who voted it down crybabies because they're absolutely right. And it doesn't make the commish who killed the deal Hitler for doing so. Sometimes one has to look at consequences in addition to the deal at face value. in this case face value stinks, but we've already agreed that's a matter of opinon and opinions vary. I think some are being disingenuous in order to stick to their points on that one, but again it's beside the point. the point is that if more than half the league is up in arms about the deal, and simultaneously you learn that it's the result of a stupid move by an inexperienced owner, then you may have to kill it just to keep that league intact.

 

That's an aspect I mentioned in one of my 1st posts, but was somewhat lost in all the back & forth about "value" and perception of value.

 

In the case of this deal, kill it and keep the league intact or pass it and probably end up replacing half your owners. Because regardless of intent of the deal, the end result still gives an owner and additional 3rd and 4th round pick and causes all the other owners to suffer. And it causes the n00b to ruin his season and everyone to hate his guts for it. It's just not worth the headache to pass this deal as a commish.

 

I feel it is the commish's job to look out for the best interests of the league. Sometimes that happens when evaluating a trade that's been voted down, even if no collusion. Sorry if my proposed actions in this hypothetical situation offends anyone - that's just how I see it.

 

but once again, for those who have managed to refrain from tossing around insults and attacks, is it an excellent debate and one I've really enjoyed.

[Sho Nuff 720]

Ladies and Gentlemen:

 

Let me introduce you to the "Giants Fan of the Mange Bored: _my_2_cents_"

 

 

Welcome to a world of posts with 427 views and 3 replies (all by you).

 

Peace.

 

Oh ya...

m2cIAFP

 

 

Now...I have had as many arguments against _my_2_cents as anyone. But IMO...there is no comparison to GFIAFP.

 

 

That said...in this case...he is right.

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

Perhaps the "expert" people defending the veto saying ban all vetos should realize they have newbish trollish traits.

 

Just saying...If you count the insults, its clear you're here for the fight not for the topic.

 

As the target of most of those insults, I would caution to not paint with so broad a brush. There's far more here on that side who aren't - just that DangNuggs and RenoZ are the most prominant on that side and post the most prolifically so it gives it that appearance.

 

Those two members have those traits, no doubt, but I don't think it fair to generalize. Spot on with the observation though.

[Sho Nuff 720]

Of course it does. Because you seem to believe that the only projections that matter are the same conservative, cover-your-ass, don't go to crazy projections that exist all over the Internet. I mean, let's face it, as the proprietor of a well-trafficked site, you only have so much room to make bold predictions. And I guess my issue is that you seem to apply that same penalty to your owners. It's been nearly a month since the draft, why isn't he allowed to change his mind? For all you know, he met Barry Sanders at the mall and Barry told him that he was going to teach Caddie how to run for 2000 yards and 18 tds this season.

 

You talk about me making a wild ass speculation - but, I have yet to see any word as to the real owner's justification (although, it's entirely possible that I missed it among all the made up stuff.) Also, I should add, you've asked several times for ANY reason why that trade could be acceptable and I've given it to you. I've also admitted that the REAL situation at hand is pretty stinky and something as a commish that I would investigate. Though, I still believe it's more likely a case of a new owner getting talked into something than any active form of collusion.

 

Again...please quit with this rhetoric that anyone thinks its just about their projection...or even a consensus of every known website's projections. The actual drafting party picked Jacobs and AJ well ahead of Caddy and Kennison. Its not even close.

[Dr. Octopus 0]

The difference between your argumenr and the argument I presented is that mine is based 100% on absolute fact of the matter. what I am observing actually happened, and I am basing my judgement solely on the facts of the matter.

 

Your argument, no offense intended, is based on wild ass off the cuff speculation with no bearing whatever in fact. Not even a hint of a hint of a fact to support your proposed explanation.

Sorry - I'll take my fact-based evalution any time. You're not alone - a lot of folks have gone to great lengths to paint various scenarios of "what if" to explain the insanity involved in dealing a 3/4 for a 6/15 - yet none successfull, and yours is no different. It's a wild ass guess. Sorry. I'll stick with the facts. And the facts are that the Jacobs/AJ owner did not value his players like that.

 

No we've simply pointed out scenarios that could explain why this trade was made rather than just dismiss it as collusion beyond a doubt as you seem to be doing. Facts. What facts do you have that there was collusion involved? None, except your tired spiel about where they were drafted which has been explained away as nauseum.

 

This draft took place a month ago and situations have changed since then. One more time:

 

1. Mike Alstott has retired. Some people think this upgrades Caddy's value. I had Caddy in a dynasty and some one gave me a sweet offer to move him right after the news broke. So this tells me Caddy's value has gone up (he also went in the 4th round of my recent re-draft).

 

2. LJ signed and Huard was named QB. This raises Kennison's value in some people's eye. Whether it does in your or not is irrelevant if it did in this league.

 

3. One poster pointed out that some people let WRs drop and draft them late rather than jump on them early. So the discrepency in draft positions becomes irrelevant. Why would Team B take Kennison in Round 6 if he knows he can get him in Round 14, even if he sees him as a Round 6 value. You use ADP right?

 

 

So is it a fact that this is collusion? Or is it a fact that you think its unfair and would veto it despite the fact that both parties may be very happy with their deal?

[DankNuggs 305]

Again...please quit with this rhetoric that anyone thinks its just about their projection...or even a consensus of every known website's projections. The actual drafting party picked Jacobs and AJ well ahead of Caddy and Kennison. Its not even close.

This doesn't matter, what matters is whether there is collusion to stack a team.

[Sho Nuff 720]

This doesn't matter, what matters is whether there is collusion to stack a team.

 

It matters quite a bit. Sure it is circumstantial evidence...but its evidence none the less because of how much of a difference there is between AJ's value and Kennison's value given there has not been enough happening in the preseason to change that. Please quit with the LJ coming in and Huard being named changing Kennison's value this much. This is crazy talk.

[Blaneyfan 0]

And that's where I agree with you. I also am inclined to believe that it's not collusion but rather stupidity.

 

Then that should be the end of it, people are allowed to be stupid.

You and the league let the individual in the league, deal with his stupidity or kick him out next year.

[DankNuggs 305]

It matters quite a bit. Sure it is circumstantial evidence...but its evidence none the less because of how much of a difference there is between AJ's value and Kennison's value given there has not been enough happening in the preseason to change that. Please quit with the LJ coming in and Huard being named changing Kennison's value this much. This is crazy talk.

I never mentioned once anything about huard, or LJ signing.

 

 

I think vetoing based on ADP rankings on random websites is ludicrous... You need to figure out intent. I agree you can start with circumstantial evidence that makes the case worthy of exploring. But you can't stop there and veto. You ask for the rationale, citing circumstantial evidence, and determine whether the justification is given in good faith.

 

 

 

Vetoing based off of ADP is idiotic. and i will stand firmly behind that, whether that means you think im a troll or not. I've clearly, rationally, and logically plotted the correct course to preserve league integrity by eliminating collusion, without suffocating the league in bureaucracy, drama, and power trips.

[Jimmy 0]

Again...please quit with this rhetoric that anyone thinks its just about their projection...or even a consensus of every known website's projections. The actual drafting party picked Jacobs and AJ well ahead of Caddy and Kennison. Its not even close.

 

And they're not allowed to change their mind. Check.

 

I feel it is the commish's job to look out for the best interests of the league. Sometimes that happens when evaluating a trade that's been voted down, even if no collusion. Sorry if my proposed actions in this hypothetical situation offends anyone - that's just how I see it.

 

but once again, for those who have managed to refrain from tossing around insults and attacks, is it an excellent debate and one I've really enjoyed.

 

Hey, I'm with ya. And honestly I still believe that most of the people arguing so dramatically would probably end up doing similar things if they were really in the situation. A lot of extreme "what-ifs" are being thrown in on both sides to support arguments that are based mostly on speculation and limited information from a third party to the real trade. Unless you're just completely close-minded or arguing to be a jerk, it's hard not to take something useful from it. It's certainly opened my mind up a lot from the strict "no collusion, no veto" way of thinking.

[DankNuggs 305]

As the target of most of those insults, I would caution to not paint with so broad a brush. There's far more here on that side who aren't - just that DangNuggs and RenoZ are the most prominant on that side and post the most prolifically so it gives it that appearance.

 

Those two members have those traits, no doubt, but I don't think it fair to generalize. Spot on with the observation though.

Paaaahhhleeeeeease, oh champion of league integrity....

[DankNuggs 305]

And they're not allowed to change their mind. Check.

Hey, I'm with ya. And honestly I still believe that most of the people arguing so dramatically would probably end up doing similar things if they were really in the situation. A lot of extreme "what-ifs" are being thrown in on both sides to support arguments that are based mostly on speculation and limited information from a third party to the real trade. Unless you're just completely close-minded or arguing to be a jerk, it's hard not to take something useful from it. It's certainly opened my mind up a lot from the strict "no collusion, no veto" way of thinking.

no one posted the most important piece of the discussion, the explanation from the AJ/BJ owner.

 

my2cents presumes there is no argument that could convince him it isn't collusion

 

i believe there could be a genuine argument.

[Pimptaddy 0]

Ban all trades! There is no reason to trade unless you drafted a horrible team. It is your fault if you F'd up your draft. Play with the team you drafted and stop wasting our time.

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

No we've simply pointed out scenarios that could explain why this trade was made rather than just dismiss it as collusion beyond a doubt as you seem to be doing.

 

Actually no, from the beginning I've stated that it's either collision or a complete idiotic move. and that I feel in either case it's vetoable.

 

Others have insulted me for that because they feel a deal is only vetoable for collusion.

 

I've been extremely consistent with this, but this is the 2nd or 3rd time you've tried to suggest otherwise.

 

I am 100% open to the possibility that it isn't collusion and is just stupidity. And as I said in my last post - that needs to be votoed as well for what I see as league-wise concerns.

 

 

Facts. What facts do you have that there was collusion involved? None, except your tired spiel about where they were drafted which has been explained away as nauseum.

but it's not tired, nor is it a shpiel. It's a fact. Facts do not get tired and repeating the facts doesn't dismiss them or make them any less relevant as you attempt to do here.

 

And the fact is unchanged that the jacobs owner had several rounds (12 in the case of Kennison) to take the players he's now dealing for.

 

Third draft took place a month ago and situations have changed one more time:

 

1. Mike Alstott has retired. Some people think this upgrades Caddy's value. I had Caddy in a dynasty and some one gave me a sweet offer to move him right after the news broke. So this tells me Caddy's value has gone up (he also went in the 4th round of my recent re-draft).

 

This is somewhatnegated by the fact that Pittman has looked better int he preseason and Caddy has been stuck in neutral. What good does one player retiring do if the player who's suppossed to get a boost sucks? I mean while we're arguing the post-draft intagables you cannot fail to acknowledge both sides of that, right? After all, that's your whole point - that value can change post-draft on news, right? So it adds value to Caddy to give him 3 rounds worth of improvement in projection (from a 6th to a 3rd) on the news of Alstott retiring (an indirect thing, btw) but that Caddy has looked terrible doesn't hurt his value in the slightest? Sorry - you can't have both. Either all news effects Caddy's value or no news does. You seem to want to pick & choose which is relevant to suit your argument.

 

2. LJ signed and Huard was named QB. This raises Kennison's value in some people's eye. Whether it does in your or not is irrelevant if it did in this league.

Sure - maybe it makes Kennison at 34 y/o a draftable player whereas before I considered him undraftable. He's still a 13th-15th round add because of his age and the team around him regardless of who's at RB. did he get any younger? Did his upside improve? Did his average number of receptions per year suddenly surpass Andre Johnson when LJ signed? No. It remains constant that AJ has higher upside, is 8 years younger and is coming off of a 100+ reception season headed into his 5th year in an improved offense. It is also constant that AJ has had as many 1000+ seasons in 4 years as Kennison has had in 11 years. Nor does it change the projections for either player, which I won't get into because y'all suddenly stopped believing in projections because they don't help your arguments.

 

But even throwing you a bone and saying yes, it increases Kennison's value, it doesn't increase his value to the point that he's worth a 4th round projected top 10 WR. No way, no how. Nothing you say could possibly convince me of that. Sorry - my common sense prevents it.

 

3. One poster pointed out that some people let WRs drop and draft them late rather than jump on them early. So the discrepency in draft positions becomes irrelevant. Why would Team B take Kennison in Round 6 if he knows he can get him in Round 14, even if he sees him as a Round 6 value. You use ADP right?

 

Right. And equally true from the other side of that same coin, when you draft a WR in the 4th round who is universally thought of to have 4th round value, you do NOT then deal that WR for the guy who you got in the 15th.

 

Also true is that if indeed this was the mindset of the Jacobs/AJ owner, he had 14 rounds to "snipe" Kennison away if he thought of him as having equal value. Because then he'd have 2 WRs with that value instead of squandering a 4th round pick in order to deal for that 15th rounder 3 weeks later. That makes little sense and I am positive that you're smart enough to recognize that point as valid.

 

So is it a fact that this is collusion? Or is it a fact that you think its unfair and would veto it despite the fact that both parties may be very happy with their deal?

 

it's a fact that one guy is dealing his 3rd and 4th rounder for another guy's 6th and 15th rounder. I cannot put it any more clearly than that. It says it all. It shows you how the managers themselves valued these players and I have yet to see a plausable expllanation for what could give Kennison the value of Andre Johnson, or what could boost Caddy up to the point that he's worth Jacobs AND Andre Johnson with kennison as a "toss in" as has been suggested.

 

In my opinion, which I fully admit could be wrong, that is utterly ridiculous.

 

If you disagree that's certainly your perogative.

[Dr. Octopus 0]

Actually no, from the beginning I've stated that it's either collision or a complete idiotic move. and that I feel in either case it's vetoable.

 

Others have insulted me for that because they feel a deal is only vetoable for collusion.

 

I've been extremely consistent with this, but this is the 2nd or 3rd time you've tried to suggest otherwise.

 

I am 100% open to the possibility that it isn't collusion and is just stupidity. And as I said in my last post - that needs to be votoed as well for what I see as league-wise concerns.

 

but it's not tired, nor is it a shpiel. It's a fact. Facts do not get tired and repeating the facts doesn't dismiss them or make them any less relevant as you attempt to do here.

 

Well then that's unfortunate imo. This trade could end up going either way at season's end but you want to decide what an owner should or should not do. Even if others in the league don't like it, that's not their right to decide other than make comments.

 

If you don't think its collusion, why keep bring up where they were drafted? It doesn't matter this owner now has changed his mind and that's his perogative.

 

What happens at season's end if Caddy and Kennison outproduce Jacobs and AJ? Oops sorry dude my bad.

 

Also why shouldn't your owners be able to negoatiate a "good" deal?

 

I don't get it.

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

Hey, I'm with ya. And honestly I still believe that most of the people arguing so dramatically would probably end up doing similar things if they were really in the situation. A lot of extreme "what-ifs" are being thrown in on both sides to support arguments that are based mostly on speculation and limited information from a third party to the real trade. Unless you're just completely close-minded or arguing to be a jerk, it's hard not to take something useful from it. It's certainly opened my mind up a lot from the strict "no collusion, no veto" way of thinking.

 

Agreed - I too have learned a lot from the opinions of others in here. Not saying it changed my mind, but then I have also said all along that I am right there with you all 99% of the time.

 

I think when some members choose to project, insult and misrepresent you as something, it tends to hurt the discussion greatly - I've taken care to say that I am one of the "no collusion, no veto" guys the vast majority of the time.

 

I believe an owner is allowed to be stupid and that another owner is allowed to capitalize on that stupidity.

 

But I also believe that has its limits. And a 3/4 for a 6/15 pushes those limits to the extreme in my opinion for the various reasons I've put out there. But hey, that's just me.

[Pimptaddy 0]

Ok. the two cents guy needs to calm down. This thread is too damn long and he feels the need to reply to every post.

[DankNuggs 305]

Others have insulted me for that because they feel a deal is only vetoable for collusion.

 

 

 

I am 100% open to the possibility that it isn't collusion and is just stupidity. And as I said in my last post - that needs to be votoed as well for what I see as league-wise concerns.

 

Ya, this is 100% wrong...

 

can't really get beyond this.

 

 

You feel you have more right as commish to manage an owners roster than the owner does. Simple solution to that, powertrip commish FIRED.... "Do we have a motion?" "yes" "seconded?" "YES BY ALL"

[DankNuggs 305]

I believe an owner is allowed to be stupid and that another owner is allowed to capitalize on that stupidity.

 

This is 100% contradictory to the last quote i had of you, Schizo?

[hitman29 0]

For all of you that are saying "it's completely possible that Caddy/Kennison outperform Jacobs/AJ", what percentage would you go on record with?

[Jimmy 0]

I cannot put it any more clearly than that. It says it all. It shows you how the managers themselves valued these players and I have yet to see a plausable expllanation for what could give Kennison the value of Andre Johnson, or what could boost Caddy up to the point that he's worth Jacobs AND Andre Johnson with kennison as a "toss in" as has been suggested.

 

In my opinion, which I fully admit could be wrong, that is utterly ridiculous.

 

If you disagree that's certainly your perogative.

 

I showed you a plausible explanation, you just didn't agree with it. I realize ALL of us are making a lot of assumptions, but your assumptions are that the owner making the trade had all the same information that you do. Or for that matter, that you have all the same information that he does.

 

I don't think a single person in this thread would EVER consider vetoing this trade if Jacobs suffered an 8-week injury the night before the trade. Maybe the Jacobs owner talked to Ms. Cleo and knows something we don't.

 

Wild speculation (in either direction) aside, if you can't prove collusion, you run a lot of risk vetoing trades. If you veto the trade and Jacobs DOES go out for the season, the veto'd owner has a HUGE and valid complaint - even if it was pure coincidence and/or luck. I also realize your side of it: if you don't veto trades, then a small contigent of owners can conspire to control the league season after season. And that's where judgement of the real-world situation comes in and makes all the speculation and conjecture of this thread nothing more than an entertaining debate for the sake of time-killing.

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

Well then that's unfortunate imo. This trade could end up going either way at season's end but you want to decide what an owner should or should not do. Even if others in the league don't like it, that's not their right to decide other than make comments.

 

This is somewhat bogus. You're taking the extremely unlikely stance and suggesting that there's equal chance that it happens as that all 4 players perform at or around their draft value.

 

You would be in the extreme minority. Go on, start a topic debating that Kennison will be better than AJ. You'll be laughed off the forums. It's an unwnnable debate.

 

Also start a topic saying Caddy will outperform Jacobs - it might not get the same laughs, but you'll also have a hard time wining that one.

 

If you don't think its collusion, why keep bring up where they were drafted? It doesn't matter this owner now has changed his mind and that's his perogative.

It doesn't matter if it's collusion or stupidity. The reason I bring up the picks is because those picks had value assigned to them. All rounds of a draft are not equal. And for the 17th time, IF the Jacobs/AJ owner wanted those players, he could have picked them. And then subsequently had several rounds to do so.

 

So it's not saying it has to be cheating - it's saying I fail to understand how anyone could possibly make a convincing argument that the Jacobs owner suddenly changed his mind on the valuation to this extreme. And further, if he did think Caddy was that close or that Kennison was that close, that he didn't make a move to get Caddy in the 4th or 5th or Kennison in the 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th, 11th, 12th, 13th or 14th rounds.

 

What happens at season's end if Caddy and Kennison outproduce Jacobs and AJ? Oops sorry dude my bad.

if that happens without an injury occurring I will eat my hat, and will officially boycott all fantasy writer and "experts" including FFT, Footballguys, TSN, CBS, etc.

 

Also why shouldn't your owners be able to negoatiate a "good" deal?

 

I don't get it.

Never said they couldn't. But I will not as commish pass a blatently unfair deal. and in the case of dealing a 3/4 for a 6/15 it's just too far apart. and as mentioned - I refuse to allow one owners stupidity to ruin a league, causing dissention and potential catastrophic results for the league's future.

 

When it comes down to it, this is gambling. If this deal is allowed to pass regardless of whether there's collusion or not, it will have the same impact on your league. the owners who feel screwed will still feel screwed regardless of the intent of the trade. I've said this before and I'll say it again. It's not worth the disruption this would cause to pass this deal. And it's not right or fair to punish 10 managers for 1 manager's stupidity. That stupid manager doesn't get to benefit from that experience and the whole league becomes a joke for that season, rife with angry managers and likely having to find replacements the next year.

 

but again - each to their own. I respect your reasoning for why you would allow the deal and I won't insult you for it, it is what it is. You may have more tollerance for leaguewide disruption than I. I try to look at the big picture and a deal like this has the potential to cause severe disruption in my opinion.

[DocSoftball 0]

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.

 

My two cents...

 

Whenever there has been a trade approved in which I suspect there is some collusion, I quit at the end of the year!!

It's a matter of principle to me!!

 

The Jacobs/A.Johnson for Cadillac/Kennison trade helps only one team in my opinion.

I would love to see a poll posed to everyone just to see how many would take Cadillac/Kennison over Jacobs/A.Johnson.

 

It's a 2 for 1 deal, I'm not saying I'd veto it. I don't know the owners or much else about the situation, but I would keep my eye on the two of them for other instances of unfair play.

 

Later,

 

Doc

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

This is 100% contradictory to the last quote i had of you, Schizo?

 

Imagine that - more name calling and insults, plus a partial quote on top of it. You seem to have left out the "but this has its limits" part.

 

Man, you're really helping your rep here. I will go back to ignoring you now.

[Cylon Patrol 0]

I would love to see a poll posed to everyone just to see how many would take Cadillac/Kennison over Jacobs/A.Johnson.

 

The wierd thing about this I would be 10 times more apt to suspect collusion if it was Cadillac/A Johnson being traded for Jacobs/Kennison.