Would you protest a trade if you knew there was no collusion?

[pryor15]

it has to be pretty lopsided. like clemens for brett tomko or something like that. the big reason, i would suspect, would be if someone got hurt just before the trade was agreed to. (like a torn acl)

interestingly enough, i had a trade almost get vetoed, until the commish found out the team getting the best of it (me), hadn't made the offer.

[Sluss]

I had this argument on draft day in one of my league's. Last year I worked a trade with a guy where I would get Hines Ward for Quentin Griffin. This was the week before Griffin blew out his knee. Five guys in the league voted against the trade. With one guy actually telling me, "That would make your team too good." I was livid. Even though I only wanted Ward to cover Chad Johnson and Marvin Harrison's bye weeks. Yes I am a greedy bastard.

So this year I tried to get the rule put in that said that you can only veto if there is collusion. This was met with all types of resistence. Of course one was from the same guy who voted down a keeper league because whoever gets Tomlinson will win for the next two years. But, there are a lot of guys who just don't know how to make a trade and are afraid of guys making trades.

Every trade will favor one side in fantasy. Otherwise there is no reason to make the trade. I have made bad trades simply because I knew I could spin off the guy I got for someone better from another team.

[TxSteve]

Yes,

In one of my leagues; I'm currently in 1st place (3-0).

The second place team is very good...but lacking a quarterback.

He negotiated a trade: He gave Trent DILFER and Ray Lewis for Carson Palmer.

I and several others vetoed this stupid trade.

(edited as I said Green; but meant Dilfer)

[Black Aces 518]

Man, you people suck. I hate people who veto trades for BS reasons, and I would never play in a league with people who do this crap.

The best is when someone is like "you're trading a 10th rounder for a 3rd rounder, that's not fair." This is 5 or 6 weeks into the season when people say this, too. Draft day position is worthless. Anyone who says that crap, I'll offer Ahman Green for Cadillac Williams. After all, I'm sure Green went higher.

I also hate when people don't understand in a trade that one team's needs are desperate. I traded Rudi Johnson for Carson Palmer. This may seem unfair against me (or for me if you use the draft position guidelines). But I have Kevin Jones, Priest Holmes, Thomas Jones all available at RB. I had Kurt Goddamn Warner as my QB. I am willing to suffer the small decline in RB for the big uptick in QB.

Unless someone is cheating, don't veto the trade. And anyone who does it because you're in 1st and it would better the team in 2nd is a giant vag.

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]
This is one of my biggest pet peeves. The voting on this poll disgusts me. If people are going to be punished for being a good negotiator or taking advantage of a weaker team, why don't we have "REDO's" for when certain teams draft too well as well.

Unless it's clearly collusion, one should never veto. I've voted to veto only one trade in all my years of fantasy football, and it was only becuase a winless team was obviously giving up on his season.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. In the 18 years my rotisserie baseball league has existed, not a single trade has ever been vetoed.

[fingokra]

sure glad the people in my league haven't

Drafted Team:.............Week #4 Team:
Culpepper.................Culpepper
Plummer...................Farve
A.Green...................A.Green
T.Bell....................D.Davis
Barlow....................Barlow
Davenport.................Shipp
Horn......................Horn
D. Jackson................D. Jackson
I. Bruce..................I. Bruce
Ke. Johnson...............Ke. Johnson
D. Graham.................D. Graham
D. Boston.................Gonzalez
Phili.....................Phili
Nugent....................Kasay

Clarkmeister gave me an F on the draft and I see why, but I think I have a passing team now.

trade Burleson for D. Davis
picked up W. Parker preweek #1 off waivers and traded him and T. Bell for Gonzalez
also got Shipp and Farve off waivers (12 team league)

[West]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
like saying don't play poker with morons

[/ QUOTE ]exactly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Err..


Sure, if you're in a league where everyone is good, you may never need to veto a trade. I don't think I'd waste my time playing in a league that didn't have a mechanism for voting down lopsided deals though, even deals where there is no collusion likely. Winning the league shouldn't be about who can sucker or browbeat the chumps at the bottom of the standings the worst....

No, you shouldn't vote to veto or protest legitimately reasonable trades just because you're not happy about what a competitor is getting.

[Russ McGinley]

I just witnessed a guy trade Andre Johnson (his 4th round pick) to the league commissioner for Matt Jones (post-draft FA pickup) straight up. He claims he thinks David Carr "stinks" and Andre Johnson "doesn't do it" for him. After two games against two of the toughest pass defenses in the league. Some people are really [censored]' stupid.

[Clarkmeister]

Rule #1: There shall be no trades disallowed unless there is collusion.

Rule #2: In case of collusion, both parties should be immediately expelled.

Very, very simple. Anything else is asinine.

[scott8]

I appreciate everyone's thoughts and can say I had never really thought about it before, but now I would not vote to protest a trade without collusion.

-SC