In my league, I offered a trade: St. Louis DEF for K. Jones (RB). The other owner accepted. The commissioner stepped in and VETOED the trade!
He said it wasn't fair because I was trading a DEF for a team's #1/#2 RB. He said I would have to sweeten the deal to make it fair.
(I would like to add that 1) STL DEF has almost 3x the fantasy points over Jones in my league, and 2) Jones got a bad rating on the Big Board. He's #50: http://fantasysports.yahoo.com/analysis/news?slug=bf-bigboard-football&prov=yhoo&type=lgns&league=fantasy/nfl)
I just happen to know that the other owner LOVES St. Louis.)
Do you think the Commisioner overstepped his bounds?
2006-09-16 18:13:05 · 12 answers · asked by melissa 2 in Sports ➔ Fantasy Sports
Yahoo Big Board:
http://fantasysports.yahoo.com/analysis/news?slug=bf-bigboard-football&prov=yhoo&type=lgns&league=fantasy/nfl
2006-09-16 18:14:29 · update #1
BTW, the commissioner IS another player in our league, so he has a vested interest to win. Also, this is our 3rd private league together, and I have gone to the championship the last two seasons. Conflict of interest?
2006-09-16 19:35:59 · update #2
Also, if you notice on the Big Board, K Jones went from #32 last week to #50 this week. #1 back or not, his value is questionable.
2006-09-16 19:37:40 · update #3
For those of you who said it wasn't a fair trade, K Jones (whom I would have received) had TWO fumbles in Week 2! The other owner emailed me and said Jones hasn't done squat and wants to trade him, but no one else wants him but me.
2006-09-19 12:07:58 · update #4
Is there anything stated in the "rules" of the league stating when a commish can intervene? Our league has a rule where if 6 of 10 members of the league "Object to the trade", then the commish has the right (but not the obligation to veto the trade.
The commish should have only stepped in if he/she suspected collusion or if a rule was violated. The commish's role should not be to determine if a trade is fair or not. They can't stop stupid people from trading.
Based on what you presented so far, I would say the commish went too far.
2006-09-16 18:53:18 · answer #1 · answered by SM 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The veto power of the commissioner is like the "Can't Cut List" -- they were only created to stop collusion and cheating.
The ways a veto should be used: if a player controlled two teams and traded with himself to gain an advantage; if one owner tries to bribe another owner with cash (some leagues have cash prizes for weekly bests); or they are conspiring in some other way.
The veto power shouldn't be used to manipulate the rosters to the commissioner's liking. That's completely unfair.
As far as was the trade fair, I don't even think that is an issue. Both owners agreed. If the owner wanted STL players at any cost, who's to tell him he can't? After all this is a "fantasy" game, isn't it?
Another point on fairness: Both owners are SPECULATING on the future sucess of the players they want to trade FOR. It's very early in the season, and if they want to speculate via this trade, that is their right.
The commissioner definitely overstepped his bounds. I suggest you get out of that league (especially if there is money involved) and be the commissioner of your own league, or join a public league.
2006-09-17 08:52:11 · answer #2 · answered by truthyness 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Fair Trade YES....BUT....There will always be the stereotype that a skilled position player is worth more then a DEF. Before you start a conspiracy theory against your commish, think if it is possible that he is just ignorant and living by the stereotype that I had mentioned before. I will not just answer your question, BUT...I will also offer advice.
Advice: Post a memo on the league board and ask what everyone else thinks about his veto, I think that most people will agree with you and if your commish knows that, you may force his hand into believing/knowing that he is WRONG. You, yourself should not attack the commish, it will only hurt you in later transactions, let the voice of the entire league speak for you. Power in numbers my brother!!!!
2006-09-17 03:55:27 · answer #3 · answered by Michael D 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yeah he was over the line. If the second party and the rest of the league agreed to the trade he should have left it alone. As commish and a player in my own league I understand his position. Seems to me he may have put his interests before the leagues.
2006-09-17 00:38:49 · answer #4 · answered by looking for the left eye 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No....he did the right thing....to trade a defense for a #1RB is ridiculous and the other guy is an idiot for accepting such a trade....I don't care if he was Steven Jackson long lost son, let alone a St. Louis fan. Chalk one up for the Commish!
2006-09-16 19:26:34 · answer #5 · answered by howard h 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I do not think a commissioner should ever veto a trade unless it is lopsided or feels a player has two teams and is trading with himself...St. Louis D proved itself worthy of a trade...I think your commissioner was very wrong.
2006-09-17 01:49:35 · answer #6 · answered by azpisces00 1 · 2⤊ 0⤋
its not a fair trade. i agree with your commish. jones is a starter and its common rule that runnigbacks are one of your top fantasy scorers. in order for st louis to score fantasy points they have to this consistently week after week and i don't see that happening.
2006-09-16 19:09:41 · answer #7 · answered by Rusty Shackleford 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Fair trade, tell your commish to not be a A-0.
2006-09-16 20:23:14 · answer #8 · answered by JoseIIV 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The Commissionor bettere not come anywehre near me. That guy is a freakin nut. He knows nothing about football. Tell him to do some research.
2006-09-16 18:49:31 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yeah I do..But whos the commish ?? is it a player themselfs or does a yahoo staff memeber become a commish...??? and how do I become the commish.
2006-09-16 18:20:10 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋