Todd's Trade Veto Article

Ask questions or post comments on all site articles, essays and analysis pieces.
Post Reply
Message
Author
da_big_kid_94
Hall of Famer
Posts: 1574
Joined: January 3rd, 2009, 12:09 am

Re: Todd's Trade Veto Article

#11 Post by da_big_kid_94 »

And I think you are trying to take a supposition and make it a fact - no reason to think he wouldn't sign? It would be unprecedented for a player not to sign and enter the next year's draft hoping to be picked up by another team? You and I both know there have been quite a few guys like Aaron Crow who have done just that. Would your feelings be different if, instead of Tallion, the player had been Matt Purke or LeVon Washington in 2009? If Tallion had decided not to sign by the August deadline ....what then?

And this discussion between you and I is a shining example of why trade vetos won't work. You and I both have strong viable views on this and we aren't going to change(most likely :lol: ) - so why would we believe a "stupid" owner would suddenly get religion when a veto falls in his lap?
These are my views based on my own opinions and observations - your mileage may vary.
"KNOW THY LEAGUE" - the Forum Funklord - 4/13/2009
Fantasy is managing stats ... roto is managing teams

User avatar
Todd Zola
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8260
Joined: December 25th, 2008, 12:45 pm

Re: Todd's Trade Veto Article

#12 Post by Todd Zola »

This is the second example this week why I miss the old boards, but then, if this is indeed the second example this week, perhaps these boards aren't so bad after all :)

I am sort of surprised no one has chimed in with the usual peace-maker: so long as the entire league agrees, there is no bad rule.

In this case, if the entire league is on board with trade vetoes who is anyone to say they are bad?

And if the entire league is against them, who is to say they are wrong?

So maybe my future angle when dusting off the "trade veto" column is to contend that I would have no issue playing in a league that has a mechanism to veto trades, provided I agree with the process and do not feel the process is abused by my fellow league mates.

Obviously, given their druthers, others would opt not to play in such a league, regardless of the mechanism.

If I am in a league and the other owners do not care if someone deals Carl Crawford for Jarrod Dyson, then perhaps the solution is for me to find another league. if they do not care that their valuable time spent preparing for the league could be compromised, who am I to tell them how to think.

But, if someone else is in the league and all but that person are in an uproar over the deal, who is that person to tell the others to "STFU and deal with it"?
Catchers are like prostate exams -- comes a time where you can't put if off any longer, so you may as well get it over with and take it up the butt - The Forum Funklord

I'd rather be wrong for the right reasons than right for the wrong reasons - The Forum Funklord

Always remember, never forget, never say always or never. - The Forum Funklord

You know you have to seek therapy when you see one of your pitchers had a bad night and it takes you 15 minutes to find the team you have him on. - The Forum Funklord

da_big_kid_94
Hall of Famer
Posts: 1574
Joined: January 3rd, 2009, 12:09 am

Re: Todd's Trade Veto Article

#13 Post by da_big_kid_94 »

Todd Zola wrote:This is the second example this week why I miss the old boards, but then, if this is indeed the second example this week, perhaps these boards aren't so bad after all :)

I am sort of surprised no one has chimed in with the usual peace-maker: so long as the entire league agrees, there is no bad rule.

In this case, if the entire league is on board with trade vetoes who is anyone to say they are bad?

And if the entire league is against them, who is to say they are wrong?

So maybe my future angle when dusting off the "trade veto" column is to contend that I would have no issue playing in a league that has a mechanism to veto trades, provided I agree with the process and do not feel the process is abused by my fellow league mates.

Obviously, given their druthers, others would opt not to play in such a league, regardless of the mechanism.

If I am in a league and the other owners do not care if someone deals Carl Crawford for Jarrod Dyson, then perhaps the solution is for me to find another league. if they do not care that their valuable time spent preparing for the league could be compromised, who am I to tell them how to think.

But, if someone else is in the league and all but that person are in an uproar over the deal, who is that person to tell the others to "STFU and deal with it"?
Who was it that said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results? There really isn't any problem with the concept of a trade veto. It's in the execution where things get sticky. Again, if you have owner(s) whose acumen is called into question on trades themselves, why would anyone think that putting in trade vetos in such a league would be a good thing when the same people who brought things into question in the first place are involved? Your caveat "do not feel the process is abused by my fellow league mates" says it all.

It's like Bill Engvall's Preparation H bit - Ever notice the Preparation H label says "DO NOT TAKE ORALLY"? Know why that's there? Means someone had to have already done it! Same thing with the veto - you won't know about any abuse until after it's already happened.

And as for the old boards, I concur ... I miss them as well and some of the folks who used to hang there (cept for maybe a few). But ... c'est la vie.
Last edited by da_big_kid_94 on April 22nd, 2011, 2:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
These are my views based on my own opinions and observations - your mileage may vary.
"KNOW THY LEAGUE" - the Forum Funklord - 4/13/2009
Fantasy is managing stats ... roto is managing teams

User avatar
Todd Zola
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8260
Joined: December 25th, 2008, 12:45 pm

Re: Todd's Trade Veto Article

#14 Post by Todd Zola »

Perhaps the insanity part is continuing to dust off this topic, OTOH, it did bring a little more traffic to the home page and forums ;)

As alluded to, I am in a league that uses vetoes. What has evolved is a sort of self-policing where the "score" of each trade has sort of led to an understanding within the league of which deals are okay, within the context of this particular league and which are met with some degree of discord. The result has been on the whole, even the negotiation process is now devoid of the "insulting" offer. While I admit this league may be the exception as opposed to the rule, the veto process has actually helped shape the league and we have not had a veto in years. That said, almost every deal has had a NO vote for one reason or another, many for the "negative" reasons others have talked about. But since it takes 9 of the non-involved 12 owners to enact a veto, this too self-polices.

Hmm, what other hot-button topic can I dig up for next week.....
Catchers are like prostate exams -- comes a time where you can't put if off any longer, so you may as well get it over with and take it up the butt - The Forum Funklord

I'd rather be wrong for the right reasons than right for the wrong reasons - The Forum Funklord

Always remember, never forget, never say always or never. - The Forum Funklord

You know you have to seek therapy when you see one of your pitchers had a bad night and it takes you 15 minutes to find the team you have him on. - The Forum Funklord

da_big_kid_94
Hall of Famer
Posts: 1574
Joined: January 3rd, 2009, 12:09 am

Re: Todd's Trade Veto Article

#15 Post by da_big_kid_94 »

Todd Zola wrote:Hmm, what other hot-button topic can I dig up for next week.....
Might another way of phrasing this be topic redux? Or maybe a topic out of KC? Or maybe from Baylor U?
These are my views based on my own opinions and observations - your mileage may vary.
"KNOW THY LEAGUE" - the Forum Funklord - 4/13/2009
Fantasy is managing stats ... roto is managing teams

User avatar
Todd Zola
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8260
Joined: December 25th, 2008, 12:45 pm

Re: Todd's Trade Veto Article

#16 Post by Todd Zola »

da_big_kid_94 wrote:
Todd Zola wrote:Hmm, what other hot-button topic can I dig up for next week.....
Might another way of phrasing this be topic redux? Or maybe a topic out of KC? Or maybe from Baylor U?
Was thinking more along the lines of a site piece that would inspire comments. Otherwise, I would call the White Sox lucky and put a BOLO out for a fan of the team.
Catchers are like prostate exams -- comes a time where you can't put if off any longer, so you may as well get it over with and take it up the butt - The Forum Funklord

I'd rather be wrong for the right reasons than right for the wrong reasons - The Forum Funklord

Always remember, never forget, never say always or never. - The Forum Funklord

You know you have to seek therapy when you see one of your pitchers had a bad night and it takes you 15 minutes to find the team you have him on. - The Forum Funklord

Black Sox
Major League All-Star
Posts: 350
Joined: January 4th, 2010, 10:39 am
Preferred Style: 5x5 Mix

Re: Todd's Trade Veto Article

#17 Post by Black Sox »

Trade Veto's are a hot button topic and many people have some strong opinions on the subject. I've used the veto button for many different reasons, and have had many people share their views on how they use them also, they include

1. Stop an "unfair" trade - The biggest problem I've found in my leagues has been the trading the underperforming early round pick for the hot starting player. I always look at the pedigree of the hot starter to judge the likelyhood of season long breakout, or simply a hot start. My personal belief is that "most" players perform to previous levels unless were dealing with a skill increase or decline ( ie I think Crawford will course correct and be what we thought he would be where as I belive Jeter will not ) As with anything your dealing with people's preception
and while I think my opinion on players correct more often this is where the argument for letting people manage their teams as they see fit comes into play. ( I've done it )

2. Payback - Someone objects to your trade, you return the favor on theirs ( I've done it )

3. Envy - You wanted a player but were unable to work out a trade, someoene else swoops in and gets him. ( never have )

4. Self Preservation - Your in 1st but your main competitor is nipping at your heels. He makes a deal right before the deadline that you feel will enable him to pass you. (I've did it for the 1st time ever last year, but here's why. The team in question had spent all season preying on the weak and had made a multitude of questionable deals, hence why he was in 2nd. I had objected publicly to a few, but hadn't actually voted to deny them. His last trade was fair ( which makes what happend even funnier ) and would have made the final outcome closer than it was. My objection ended up being the deciding vote. IMO he had gotten a few too many "breaks" and I wasn't going to lose a league title I felt I had earned "the right way".

My one issue with the way most veto processes are run is that it's done in secret. If your willing to object to someones trade then you should be able to stand behind the objection and give an opinion if asked as to why you objeced. I understand the reason why its private is to try to prevent retribution, but in my experiance anyone who's had a deal overturned just objects to every other deal going further on the principle that if they can't trade as thry see fit, then no one can.
Boston Black Sox
Steve Le Blanc

da_big_kid_94
Hall of Famer
Posts: 1574
Joined: January 3rd, 2009, 12:09 am

Re: Todd's Trade Veto Article

#18 Post by da_big_kid_94 »

I may be taking a simplistic position on this but, as long as there is some form of compensation exchanged at the time of the deal on behalf of all parties involved, there really aren't very many "bad" trades. There are lopsided trades sure - but all we can do is judge them at the time of the trade. The players have to actually do what we think they will do after the trade - and that's where the hindsight comes in. How many "lopsided" trades have you witnessed where it blew up in the owner's face because it didn't go as envisioned? And, besides the obvious ones (as with the one stated below), who's the arbiter of lopsided?

If you could reasonably assure me that, in a league that has installed trade vetos, the owners are viewing the trade only with regard to commensurate value and to the overall well being of the league, I could support it. But there's no one who can give me those types of assurances. You will have owners who will say Pujols for a 2012 17th round draft pick is OK by them because it doesn't directly affect them. Other owners will look at standings an think they have a new challenge to their squad that they could very well do without.

The concept of the trade veto is a noble one. i can not say the same about the agendas of all those who hold those vetos.
These are my views based on my own opinions and observations - your mileage may vary.
"KNOW THY LEAGUE" - the Forum Funklord - 4/13/2009
Fantasy is managing stats ... roto is managing teams

User avatar
viper
Hall of Famer
Posts: 1464
Joined: December 31st, 2008, 11:32 pm
Preferred Style: Currently in an AL-only league with the Bill James Technical RCA as the single hitting category and ERA as the single pitching category.
Contact:

Re: Todd's Trade Veto Article

#19 Post by viper »

I guess my view on trades is worth a paragraph or so.

The reason I do not like keeper leagues is my personal belief that any deal involving future player has to be allowed. Pujols for Harper is legit. You should not stop a weak team from looking down the road, even 3-4 years. I resigned from my first and last keeper league this winter. I left a team that has a decent chance to win with a number of very solid under 27 year olds.

I was attracted to the NFBC because of its no-trade rule. I have seen and been hurt far too often by a deadline deal which was very lopsided but but disallowed. And these were mostly in competitive ESPN leagues. We all value players different but in a redraft league when the last place team deal with a contender with a "godfather" type deal, it can be discouraging.

I'm currently in four local 10-team leagues. Six people are in all four. None of these leagues even has trade reviews but it is known that unfair deals will be undone. Two limit your trading partners after certain dates, the earliest being the all star break. I have yet to see a deal that was unfair. The leagues pay the top four teams so trades seem to always involve teams with money aspirations.

For one person to be a commission-in-charge of deciding if trades are fair can be a problem. We all evaluate players differently. This is the main reason that trades happens. This like life in general, if 20 people were asked about a supposed lopsided deal, the final tally would probably included each side being considered as lopsided by a few observers.

In all my fantasy years, the best deals I have made were the ones I decided not to make.
The avalanche has started. It is too late for the pebbles to vote. -- Ambassador Kosh

Mike Ladd
Buffy, the Umpire Slayer

Post Reply