Vetoing

by hiphopnerd on Jun 2, 2007 4:18 PM EDT

I'm commish for a couple leagues amongst friends...they're all non-keeper. I went with Commish Veto this year, because in seemed like with League Votes, no one ever bothered to vote. I've already vetoed a trade this year, and one has just been accepted that I really feel like vetoing as well.

But I'm starting to question if I'm making the right decisions here...am I going overboard in trying to keep trades fair? Was my own trade fair? Should I just leave people to their own stupidity unless it's a really unbalanced trade? But then what constitutes really unbalanced?

Trades that have occurred in this league:

Dan Wheeler for Scott Shields (4/25)
VETOED- Ramon Hernandez & Ted Lilly for Bengie Molina, Adam Dunn, & Jim Thome (5/10)
Juan Pierre, John Lackey, Greg Maddux for Ty Wigginton, Andruw Jones, & Jim Thome (5/15)
MY TRADE- Carl Crawford & Nick Swisher for JJ Hardy, Brian Roberts, & Kevin Youkilis (5/24)

Currently Pending) David Wright for Kelly Johnson (6/1)

Tweet Comment 3 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

It's a tough call

Sometimes trades look unfair that work out wonderfully for the person that looks like he/she is getting screwed. I personally like league voting but not a majority of league managers. If there are 10 teams then 4 vetoes should be enough. This is especially true during the second half of the season when some team managers stop participating because they are out of the playoff picture. I think what has worked best is to have a veto w/ a reason posted. This stops people trying to veto just for the sake of voting a veto. And if 4 out of 10 will veto and post a reason then there is usually a real good reason for the trade to not go through.

Last year I had a yahoo leaue with 20 teams and commissioner veto because the league vote rule required like 8 vetos to stop the trade. I knew that there would most likely not be eight interested managers in August/September so the veto power was pretty much laughable. So what we decided to so was for people to post a message requesting the trade not go through (and why it should not go through). If we had a total of five plus me or six total then the trade did not go through.

FWIW- I have found that money leagues have much fewer problems than free leagues. But all the rules should be set out and voted on before the season starts. If you are commish and have the ultimate veto power then that is your horse to ride the rest of the year. If the trade is somewhere even close at all it should go through.

by acr on Jun 2, 2007 7:50 PM EDT reply actions

Vetoing

It not worth the headache, not only that but Its totally subjective, despite the title of commish it does not make one the know all of what is considered and even trade. BTW I am a commish of an auction 12 team, 4x4 AL only keeper league with minors and there is NO vetoing or voting. Deals considered bad go through with much bitching, but eventually blow over, or as Acr said work out better for the "screwed" team

I am not a fan of voting on deal either. but it is definetey the lesser of the two evils.

IMHO: I believe when leagues have a veto rule or voting they dont usually last or have high turnover amongst the league members.

MLG_true_MVP-88'

by Hinz57er on Jun 3, 2007 7:54 AM EDT reply actions

Veto

First off, this is an excellent diary topic and most of us deal with voting for or against trades or wishing we had the ability to do so - usually when another team gets what we consider a great deal.

by faketeams on Jun 3, 2007 2:40 PM EDT reply actions