Help a Commish

[Pocket Pair Professor 0]

Team A = Marquis Colston, Deangelo Williams, Eddie Royal

for

Team B = Tony Gonzalez, Ronnie Brown, Chris Chambers

 

fair trade?

[edjr 5,567]

[gougman 0]

Whether it is a fair trade or not it does not seem to be that uneven where it would require a commish intervention.

[Deuce Blue 0]

Please email cbfalcon privately as he can break down the %'s to the exact number as to be sure to maintain a competitive balance in the league.

[yostevo 0]

If you want to control 12 teams, you really should just start another league where you draft 12 teams. You can have the "live" draft in your bedroom and set all the lineups.

 

It'll be a riot.

[ed_jones 0]

Whether it is a fair trade or not it does not seem to be that uneven where it would require a commish intervention.

 

 

 

 

+1.

[JT 137]

I'm curious...and should probably be kicked in the nads for asking...but why in the world would you even question whether this trade was fair or not?

 

More importantly, what makes you think your role as commissioner is to manage everyone elses team?

[PanicAttack 13]

Whether it is a fair trade or not it does not seem to be that uneven where it would require a commish intervention.

 

 

^^THIS^^

 

Maybe bad trade but not COLLUSION. COLLUSION=only reason EVER for veto.

[kutulu 1,551]

I crunched the numbers for the rest of the year and barring injury:

 

Marquis Colston, Deangelo Williams, Eddie Royal will produce 415 FF points

 

Tony Gonzalez, Ronnie Brown, Chris Chambers will produce 413 FF points

 

 

Therefore, this trade should be vetoed and anyone associated with it banned from the league.

[skibadee 0]

Thats one of the most fair trades I have seen when someone is asking about veto or not

[yostevo 0]

Please email cbfalcon privately as he can break down the %'s to the exact number as to be sure to maintain a competitive balance in the league.

I see CB's lure even transcends to other threads. Now you know you're good when that happens.

[Deuce Blue 0]

Thats one of the most fair trades I have seen when someone is asking about veto or not

 

You must have been away last week. epic threads on the veto subject

[ed_jones 0]

You must have been away last week. epic threads on the veto subject

 

 

 

uggh, we can only hope that garbage does'nt happen again. All these VETO questions help me understand why alot on here really hate even having veto options. I still advocate having a veto option in place but only for the most extreme cases, not for equal or bad trades and not for petty reasons.

[jrbdmb 28]

This trade should immediately be vetoed, the two teams involved thrown out of the league, and all future trades in your league banned.

[Turf CamelToe 1]

That trade looks too fair to even be questioning.

[mobb_deep 917]

Please email cbfalcon privately as he can break down the %'s to the exact number as to be sure to maintain a competitive balance in the league.

 

What is this supposed to mean? cbfalcon is 100% correct. I'd definitely veto this trade. This trade is completely unfair.

[cbfalcon 824]

Team A = Marquis Colston, Deangelo Williams, Eddie Royal

for

Team B = Tony Gonzalez, Ronnie Brown, Chris Chambers

 

fair trade?

 

Why are people throwing my name out around here?

 

That said....

 

Colston is much better than Gonzo.

DWill was projected top 5 and will be better than Brown by years end no doubt.

Royal is better than Chambers.

 

This trade isn't as clearly silly as that other thread's trade because Brown is currently exceeding what he'll eventually end up doing..

 

So while I'd lean toward veto, I'd at least give both teams a chance to explain themselves and try and convince me it was a fair trade.

[BigBlue7 0]

Why are people throwing my name out around here?

 

That said....

 

Colston is much better than Gonzo.

DWill was projected top 5 and will be better than Brown by years end no doubt.

Royal is better than Chambers.

 

This trade isn't as clearly silly as that other thread's trade because Brown is currently exceeding what he'll eventually end up doing..

 

So while I'd lean toward veto, I'd at least give both teams a chance to explain themselves and try and convince me it was a fair trade.

 

I'm starting to think this is a joke. Are you just trying to get a rise out of people?

[mobb_deep 917]

Why are people throwing my name out around here?

 

That said....

 

Colston is much better than Gonzo.

DWill was projected top 5 and will be better than Brown by years end no doubt.

Royal is better than Chambers.

 

This trade isn't as clearly silly as that other thread's trade because Brown is currently exceeding what he'll eventually end up doing..

 

So while I'd lean toward veto, I'd at least give both teams a chance to explain themselves and try and convince me it was a fair trade.

 

Wow, now I'm starting to think you didn't know what you were talking about in the other thread. I do have 700 more posts than you, so that might have something to do with it. DWill was a top 5 pick. No way can you say it's fair to trade a top 5 pick for only a top 30. Especially when you add in how much earlier Colston was drafted over Gonz (atleast 15 picks). This isn't even remotely fair.

[cbfalcon 824]

I'm starting to think this is a joke. Are you just trying to get a rise out of people?

 

No joke.

 

I;m unsure that I'd veto this trade upon further review. Brown has been really good. Probably good enough to offset the downgrade from Colston to Gonzo.

 

I'd ask the owners to explain their thought process to me. Assuming they both made sense, I'd let the trade go through.

[schmitty34 2]

No joke.

 

I;m unsure that I'd veto this trade upon further review. Brown has been really good. Probably good enough to offset the downgrade from Colston to Gonzo.

 

I'd ask the owners to explain their thought process to me. Assuming they both made sense, I'd let the trade go through.

 

 

 

This is a serious question. Are the people in your league ok with the fact that they have to explain every trade to you? I agree that Team A would probably get the better of the deal, but to make them explain why they are doing that....what is the reasoning for that?

[jrbdmb 28]

Why are people throwing my name out around here?

 

That said....

 

Colston is much better than Gonzo.

DWill was projected top 5 and will be better than Brown by years end no doubt.

Royal is better than Chambers.

 

This trade isn't as clearly silly as that other thread's trade because Brown is currently exceeding what he'll eventually end up doing..

 

So while I'd lean toward veto, I'd at least give both teams a chance to explain themselves and try and convince me it was a fair trade.

So in your all-knowing, all-seeing universe you "know" that DWill will be better than Brown by the end of the year? And you "know" that Royal will end up better than Chambers, though both have underachieved so far.

 

Did you "know" in 2008 that Turner and Forte would be Top 5 RBs, Slaton would be a Top 10 RB, that Roddy White and Antonio Bryant would be Top 10 WRs? God I'd be pissed if I had done a trade for one of these guys and you vetoed it because you "knew" that my Larry Johnson or Braylon Edwards were much better than the above based on their ADP.

 

Geez would it suck playing in your league, every trade having to undergo your minute analysis to guarantee that the competitive balance of the league is maintained. But why stop there? Do you also analyze add/drops? Roy E. Williams was dropped in my league this week, would you permit that? How about setting lineups? Would you force a team with Hasselbeck and Roethlisberger to start Hass since he is higher in the ESPN / CBS rankings?

 

Or like others said this has to be a joke, as no non-newbie owners would put up with your meddling.

 

(Note: I'm not part of the "every trade goes through" crowd - but a trade would have to be really wacky for me to consider a veto. The above trade doesn't even merit a look.)

[cbfalcon 824]

This is a serious question. Are the people in your league ok with the fact that they have to explain every trade to you? I agree that Team A would probably get the better of the deal, but to make them explain why they are doing that....what is the reasoning for that?

 

I don't veto every trade and I don't make people explain every trade to me.

 

A good fair trade is one that we would all look at and not all agree on who got the best of it.........if we all agree on which side of a trade we'd take, then odds are it wasn't that fair of a trade. Right?

 

I'm surprised that concept is hard for people to agree with.

[JT 137]

I don't veto every trade and I don't make people explain every trade to me.

 

A good fair trade is one that we would all look at and not all agree on who got the best of it.........if we all agree on which side of a trade we'd take, then odds are it wasn't that fair of a trade. Right?

 

I'm surprised that concept is hard for people to agree with.

 

A fair trade is one that each of the participating owners is happy with. It doesn't matter one bit what the commissioner or other owners think of it. You guys don't know anything more about future performance than the guys making the trade.

 

The only exception is clear evidence of collusion.

 

I'm surprised THIS concept is hard for some people to understand.

[jrbdmb 28]

 

In 2008 I decide after a week or two that Larry Johnson is done. I work out a trade to get Matt Forte. I'm happy with the trade, the other owner is happy, but since CBFalcon and some other owners don't think it's "even" the trade gets shot down. Thanks a lot.

[cbfalcon 824]

A fair trade is one that each of the participating owners is happy with. It doesn't matter one bit what the commissioner or other owners think of it. You guys don't know anything more about future performance than the guys making the trade.

 

The only exception is clear evidence of collusion.

 

I'm surprised THIS concept is hard for some people to understand.

 

Sometimes people need to be policed for their own good.

 

Obviously you would veto someone trading a kicker for Adrian Peterson. I would veto a backup RB for a stud WR. The only thing we are debating is where to draw the line. I keep leagues fair.

 

It's an extreme example, yes...Yet the best kicker has the same amount of points as Slaton or Deangelo right now... If someone didn't know what they were doing, they could be tricked into this trade and it not be collusion.

 

So you'd let a kicker for ADP go even if you found out it wasn't collusion and just a dumbass?

[JT 137]

Sometimes people need to be policed for their own good.

 

Obviously you would veto someone trading a kicker for Adrian Peterson. I would veto a backup RB for a stud WR. The only thing we are debating is where to draw the line. I keep leagues fair.

 

It's an extreme example, yes...Yet the best kicker has the same amount of points as Slaton or Deangelo right now... If someone didn't know what they were doing, they could be tricked into this trade and it not be collusion.

 

So you'd let a kicker for ADP go even if you found out it wasn't collusion and just a dumbass?

 

No. In our league, you must trade position for position. QB must bring a QB, etc. Since we do use a FLEX, WR/RB can be mixed.

 

We eliminated the trade veto process years ago because of just what you describe: one guy believing he's so smart that he knows the future.

 

The world is full of dumbasses, and they face the consequences of their actions. We've banned an owner from future seasons for tanking/attempting to sell off his team.

 

Each owner pays the same amount in order to participate. Each has the right to manage his roster as he sees fit. And no other owner or commish...no matter what lofty opinion he/she may have of their football prognostication skills...has any real knowledge that should inhibit that.

 

ETA: Getting away from the point a bit. Key here is that there is NOTHING about the trade in the original post that should warrant even looking at it for veto. That system does little except keep owners from trying to do what they signed up for: manage their roster.

[Foghorn Leghorn 0]

Why are people throwing my name out around here?

 

That said....

 

Colston is much better than Gonzo.

DWill was projected top 5 and will be better than Brown by years end no doubt.

Royal is better than Chambers.

 

This trade isn't as clearly silly as that other thread's trade because Brown is currently exceeding what he'll eventually end up doing..

 

So while I'd lean toward veto, I'd at least give both teams a chance to explain themselves and try and convince me it was a fair trade.

 

Keep fishing, my man - you'll get a record haul this year.