Mastersball Fantasy Forum

Which trade is more lopsided?
Are either of these veto material?

14-team
2-Catcher
4-keepers league.

maybe 15-20% draft inflation, mostly in top 100. For context McCutchen was auto-bid accident so salary probably inflated a few bucks beyond that.



Trade A:
McCutch ($61) for Lucroy ($23) and Martin ($17)

Trade B:
Rodney ($8) for B.Butler ($2), Owings ($1)


I like to avoid using the veto and didn't vote to veto either, but many owners opposed one of these trades and none opposed the other so curious to solicit an outside opinion. Which of these trades seems more lopsided and would you consider veto for either?

thanks

thebearproofsuit wrote:Which trade is more lopsided?
Are either of these veto material?

14-team
2-Catcher
4-keepers league.

maybe 15-20% draft inflation, mostly in top 100. For context McCutchen was auto-bid accident so salary probably inflated a few bucks beyond that.



Trade A:
McCutch ($61) for Lucroy ($23) and Martin ($17)

Trade B:
Rodney ($8) for B.Butler ($2), Owings ($1)


I like to avoid using the veto and didn't vote to veto either, but many owners opposed one of these trades and none opposed the other so curious to solicit an outside opinion. Which of these trades seems more lopsided and would you consider veto for either?

thanks

Honestly? Neither. I am curious as to who is so up in arms about either of these two trades and why.

The one that elicited outcry was the McCutchen one, and I think it's because people don't properly value top catchers in a 14 team catcher league and undervalue Martin in the leadoff role. (comparing his projections to Ellsbury's might be interesting way to solve that.)


I didn't think the other was a veto trade at all either , just curious that if half the league was up in arms about the first one and no one raised an issue with second since they are similar 2 for 1 deals. I see the Rodney side as getting a bit of value but completely in realm of owner preference.

I think main issue is too many of the owners are including published values from the 10 team/12 team one catcher leagues like ESPN/Yahoo etc, so that even if they know Lucroy is more valuable in a 14 team 2 catcher league they still unconsciously are influenced by seeing Lucroy ranked #125 overall etc that the first reaction is that it was two second rate guys for a super star. But in reality the owner is pretty clearly gaining AT LEAST equal benefit from replacing the waiver level guys with Martin/Lucroy as he was getting from McCutch.

also, while keeper value of Lucroy/Martin in a Keep-4 league isn't especially high at their values, there is at least chance that they take a step up and outperform their price by $5-10 plus and generate consideration as a keeper. Pretty much no chance of that for McCutch @ 61.

Trades don't pay attention to stats... or projections for that matter. Someone has the balls to bitch about someone giving up a SIXTY-ONE unit Mc Cutcheon? What's he supposed to do ... leave him on the shelf until his contract expires? Or is it one of those "You didn't get enough for him" beefs? If you're a 260 unit auction, how many of the complainers are willing to take Mc Cutcheon on at that salary? In the words of Katt Williams; "Don't worry, I'll wait". They should stop simply looking at projected stats and take a good hard look at salary. They think so much of McCucheon? Let THEM take a run at him. Ridiculous. beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Each trade seems to have merit for each owner involved. Just because others don't like it doesn't mean they shouldn't happen.

And quite frankly, they have gall pouncing on YOU to do their dirty work for them.

thebearproofsuit wrote:I think main issue is too many of the owners are including published values from the 10 team/12 team one catcher leagues like ESPN/Yahoo etc, so that even if they know Lucroy is more valuable in a 14 team 2 catcher league they still unconsciously are influenced by seeing Lucroy ranked #125 overall etc that the first reaction is that it was two second rate guys for a super star. But in reality the owner is pretty clearly gaining AT LEAST equal benefit from replacing the waiver level guys with Martin/Lucroy as he was getting from McCutch.

DO you have trade regulations?

IF so and the trade doesn't violate any league rules the WTP?

There should NOT be trade vetoes

trade veto in league supposed to be to avoid collusion and dump trades if one team given up etc.

My suggestion would be to find a new league, if you're owners can't play above board than its not a great league. Veto's can be left in the hands of a commissioner in the event of an outrageous trade. Beyond that, don't manage other people's teams. Maybe that guys Aunt is McCutcheon's cleaning lady and found out he's got a stress fracture in his foot. Who knows?!?

Vetoes, fantasy scourge. Need to be banned.