Is this trade vetoable?

[jtl18 0]

Hi everyone,

 

I just made a trade which some owners are irate about and I want to see if this forum agrees. The league is a 14-team PPR redraft league which starts 1 QB, 3 WR. 2 RB, 1 TE, 2 Flex, 1 K, 1 DEF.

 

I dealt Kurt Warner, Priest Holmes, and Donte Stallworth for Andre Johnson. Our scoring system values QB fairly highly and the team getting Warner has V.Young and McNair currently at QB. Additionally, the team acquiring Warner and company cannot lose another game or it will miss the playoffs. Is this deal vetoable?

 

Please leave a link and I'll reply to yours.

 

Thanks!

[ric0 23]

that's a lot to give up for andre johnson and can see why some may see this a lopsided.

 

try taking away stallworth or holmes and it my fly better with the others.

 

help me out.

[jtl18 0]

I think I was misunderstood. People think the guy giving up Andre Johnson is the one getting ripped off! All 3 guys I am dealing are pretty much bench guys for me.

[beatsdesign 0]

I dont think so. If owners think its fair then you can't veto a trade.

 

JB

 

thx for help

[ProfessorP 0]

Cant agree with those who think the OTHER is the one who got ripped off. That RicO thought the opposite indicates the deal may NOT have been fair, but that the imbalance lies in the eyes of the beholder, so its all good!

[Patrick977 0]

I think I was misunderstood. People think the guy giving up Andre Johnson is the one getting ripped off! All 3 guys I am dealing are pretty much bench guys for me.

 

I wouldn't think it'd be vetoable based on that feeling. Andre Johnson is a better player than any you offer, but he's upgrading at QB and at least a starter at RB for him. Downgrade at WR, but any Patriot has potential. I don't think they should veto it, but I'd say that they're on your bench is your only concern. You basically gained a stud WR for no one you use, which means you've improved significantly. They shouldn't veto though.

 

Thanks for mine!

[chrisfab 0]

If the guy can't afford another loss, he needs to deal AJ. The trade is fair.... I am still unsure about AJ's value, I have a trade question below....

 

http://www.fftodayforums.com/forum/index.p...howtopic=300754

[adrian2280 0]

Definitely not vetoable. One could argue that A. Johnson has a ton of question marks.

 

Thanks for mine!

[Sportslitter 0]

Definitely not vetoable. One could argue that A. Johnson has a ton of question marks.

 

Thanks for mine!

 

This trade is not vetoable in my opinion. AJ will be back in week 11 and Priest is a friggin starter now.

[whiteknight 0]

the trade shouldn't be vetoed. johnson is better than all three of the guys you traded him for, holmes is playing now, plus stallworth is putting up points..very fair trade..

 

thanks for mine.

[Dunger 0]

That trade should go through

[Derno 0]

Let it go, let it go, let it go. Every player in the trade has questions, risks and upside.

 

Veto = whining that they couldn't package something to get him.

[MikeyNavy 1]

I don't see that as a bad trade. There are uncertainties on both sides. Priest is a starter...but you don't know for how long. Andre Johnson has been out a long time and who knows if is injury will linger. By the time he gets back in form...season is over. Also, Schaub and Sage are getting beat up all over the place now, so they may not have time to get him the ball. He does have lots of potential though...so you're doing alright.

[hooflungpoo 0]

i dont think it is that bad of a deal; like others have said, if both sides agree, it shouldnt be vetoed