I hate fantasy football

[jeffro151]

Not because I suck at it, it's because of the money league I am in, they are a bunch of sore losers. I am 5-1, in sole possession of 1st place in both the standings and in points scored. There are 4 teams tied @ 4-2. The person that has scored the second most points in the league is 2-4, but has only scored 21 less points than me. Today, I proposed a trade to the the team in last place in both the standings and in points scored. He accepted it almost immediately, because it would dramatically improve his team.

My team as it sits at the moment:
QB: Rivers, Ryan
RB: Murray, Morris, Bradshaw, Miller
WR: Garcon, Tate, Wayne, Beckham
TE: Cameron, Walker

Other team as it sits at the moment:
QB: Dalton, E.Manning
RB: Gore, McFadden, Hyde
WR: Bryant, Watkins, K. Allen, J. Gordon
TE: Gates, D. Allen

I would receive:
Dez Bryant
Darren McFadden
Andy Dalton

He would receive:
Golden Tate
Lamar Miller
Matt Ryan

My potential team:
QB: Rivers, Dalton
RB: Murray, Morris, Bradshaw, McFadden
WR: Bryant, Garcon, Wayne, Beckham
TE: Cameron, Walker

His potential team:
QB: Ryan, E.Manning
RB: Gore, Miller, Hyde
WR: Tate, Watkins, Allen, Gordon
TE: Gates, Allen

The league voted on the trade and have voted no against it because they claim it would make my stacked team even better. Yes, my WR depth would increase, but I would also lose a good bit of depth at QB and RB. Trade analyzer's even prove that he would be getting the better end of the deal, but the league only sees it as me getting the best player in the deal, and totally ignore all the other pieces involved.

Sorry for the long post, just needed to rant a little bit.

 

[Gooch1034]

Yeah that has been a problem in a few of my leagues over the years. Veto a trade if is potentially collusion or just extremely dumb but if someone is dumb enough to make bad trade, is that your fault?

 

[MilkSpiller22]

If the league regularly votes down trades, then i have no problem with this...

 

[jeffro151]

If the league regularly votes down trades, then i have no problem with this...

9 trades have been approved and 3 have been vetoed.
The ones that have been vetoed were very lopsided.

Larry Fitzgerald & Calvin Johnson
for
Dez Bryant and Sammy Watkins
This was vetoed last week because Fitz has little FF value and Megatron is hurt.

Colin Kaepernick
for
Frank Gore

Kirk Cousins
for
Alfred Morris

 

[MilkSpiller22]

9 trades have been approved and 3 have been vetoed.
The ones that have been vetoed were very lopsided.

Larry Fitzgerald & Calvin Johnson
for
Dez Bryant and Sammy Watkins
This was vetoed last week because Fitz has little FF value and Megatron is hurt.

Colin Kaepernick
for
Frank Gore

Kirk Cousins
for
Alfred Morris

Seeing this, then i have no problem with your trade being vetoed... The problem is the veto system not that your trade got vetoed...

 

[TDs3nOut]

Looks like a pretty fair trade to me, though you would have presumably gotten the most valuable player in the deal, Bryant. People probably voted against it since you are in first and they didn't want you to add Dez to your team.

 

[Gooch1034]

A last place team is in a position where they need to take some risks this far into the season. Like mentioned above, I don't know the veto policy in your league but IMO vetoing those trades is BS. Fitz being a perfect example where he may be worth the risk. Palmer got healthy and his future output will likely be better than past weeks.

 

[TREFF]

I'd have been inclined to veto that deal too. I don't see that it drastically improves his team. Slightly improves his RB, creates a headache at QB, and murders his WR

 

[jeffro151]

Looks like a pretty fair trade to me, though you would have presumably gotten the most valuable player in the deal, Bryant. People probably voted against it since you are in first and they didn't want you to add Dez to your team.

Oh, that's exactly it. Here is one of the guy's reasoning for vetoing it:

The fact that you are advocating very hard for this trade to go through is evidence enough that you know that Dez will add to an already stacked team you have. At this point in the season, it's not about what a computer algorithm deems to be a fair trade, it's about how trades affect the rosters. You are in first. Jason is in last. You getting Dez on a Cowboys team that is getting better each week outweighs the other players in the transaction.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Oh, that's exactly it. Here is one of the guy's reasoning for vetoing it:

His reasoning sounds valid in a league like this... Again, your problem is with the veto system, not that your trade got vetoed...

 

[Hambombs]

Oh, that's exactly it. Here is one of the guy's reasoning for vetoing it:

He's looking more at name brand than the actuall trade IMO.

 

[Hambombs]

A championship isn't won with top name brands. It's won with the best one week performances meaning you're still not guaranteed to win anything with dez. It's anyone's game in the playoffs

 

[tlance]

Not because I suck at it, it's because of the money league I am in, they are a bunch of sore losers. I am 5-1, in sole possession of 1st place in both the standings and in points scored. There are 4 teams tied @ 4-2. The person that has scored the second most points in the league is 2-4, but has only scored 21 less points than me. Today, I proposed a trade to the the team in last place in both the standings and in points scored. He accepted it almost immediately, because it would dramatically improve his team.

My team as it sits at the moment:
QB: Rivers, Ryan
RB: Murray, Morris, Bradshaw, Miller
WR: Garcon, Tate, Wayne, Beckham
TE: Cameron, Walker

Other team as it sits at the moment:
QB: Dalton, E.Manning
RB: Gore, McFadden, Hyde
WR: Bryant, Watkins, K. Allen, J. Gordon
TE: Gates, D. Allen

I would receive:
Dez Bryant
Darren McFadden
Andy Dalton

He would receive:
Golden Tate
Lamar Miller
Matt Ryan

My potential team:
QB: Rivers, Dalton
RB: Murray, Morris, Bradshaw, McFadden
WR: Bryant, Garcon, Wayne, Beckham
TE: Cameron, Walker

His potential team:
QB: Ryan, E.Manning
RB: Gore, Miller, Hyde
WR: Tate, Watkins, Allen, Gordon
TE: Gates, Allen

The league voted on the trade and have voted no against it because they claim it would make my stacked team even better. Yes, my WR depth would increase, but I would also lose a good bit of depth at QB and RB. Trade analyzer's even prove that he would be getting the better end of the deal, but the league only sees it as me getting the best player in the deal, and totally ignore all the other pieces involved.

Sorry for the long post, just needed to rant a little bit.

This league is not worth playing in. You would not find me in any league where a trade like this gets vetoed. Tate is solid, Lamar Miller is an every week RB2 with low end RB1 upside now that Moreno is out. Since Calvin's return is uncertain, Tate is a definite starter.

Your trade partner gets 3 starters for 1, so anyone who vetoes this deal is doing so with their own personal interest in mind and not the interest of the league. This deal absolutely helps the other team in the short term, if not the long term also.

 

[tlance]

His reasoning sounds valid in a league like this... Again, your problem is with the veto system, not that your trade got vetoed...

Wrong. This is not your typical veto.

The guy's issue is not that the trade is imbalanced, it is that Jeffro's team was already in first, and now the deal is making them better.

Is that not the purpose of trading? To make both teams better? Or is it only okay if the stronger team to begin with makes his own team worse?

 

[Hambombs]

This league is not worth playing in. You would not find me in any league where a trade like this gets vetoed. Tate is solid, Lamar Miller is an every week RB2 with low end RB1 upside now that Moreno is out. Since Calvin's return is uncertain, Tate is a definite starter.

Your trade partner gets 3 starters for 1, so anyone who vetoes this deal is doing so with their own personal interest in mind and not the interest of the league. This deal absolutely helps the other team in the short term, if not the long term also.

Exactly man. Again. People are just looking at the "big name"

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Wrong. This is not your typical veto.

The guy's issue is not that the trade is imbalanced, it is that Jeffro's team was already in first, and now the deal is making them better.

Is that not the purpose of trading? To make both teams better? Or is it only okay if the stronger team to begin with makes his own team worse?

and in a league like this, where vetoes are not based on collusion, then any reasoning is valid enough... That is the sad thing about leagues like this... I dont like the trade because it helps your team be better than mine, is a valid reason in this league... Just more of a reason not to be in a league like this...

 

[tlance]

and in a league like this, where vetoes are not based on collusion, then any reasoning is valid enough... That is the sad thing about leagues like this... I dont like the trade because it helps your team be better than mine, is a valid reason in this league... Just more of a reason not to be in a league like this...

Utterly ridiculous though.

The other team should flat out quit right now. What recourse does he have? The only way he can make his team competitive is by dealing Dez for a package of starters, like he just did. What other way can he get back in the race?

 

[ckhokie]

You gotta get a reasonable commish in your league and let him approve/deny trades. League votes never turn out well in my experience. Everything gets vetoed, even when it is legit.

To the OP, no reason why this trade should be vetoed.

 

[jarntt]

Not because I suck at it, it's because of the money league I am in, they are a bunch of sore losers. I am 5-1, in sole possession of 1st place in both the standings and in points scored. There are 4 teams tied @ 4-2. The person that has scored the second most points in the league is 2-4, but has only scored 21 less points than me. Today, I proposed a trade to the the team in last place in both the standings and in points scored. He accepted it almost immediately, because it would dramatically improve his team.

My team as it sits at the moment:
QB: Rivers, Ryan
RB: Murray, Morris, Bradshaw, Miller
WR: Garcon, Tate, Wayne, Beckham
TE: Cameron, Walker

Other team as it sits at the moment:
QB: Dalton, E.Manning
RB: Gore, McFadden, Hyde
WR: Bryant, Watkins, K. Allen, J. Gordon
TE: Gates, D. Allen

I would receive:
Dez Bryant
Darren McFadden
Andy Dalton

He would receive:
Golden Tate
Lamar Miller
Matt Ryan

My potential team:
QB: Rivers, Dalton
RB: Murray, Morris, Bradshaw, McFadden
WR: Bryant, Garcon, Wayne, Beckham
TE: Cameron, Walker

His potential team:
QB: Ryan, E.Manning
RB: Gore, Miller, Hyde
WR: Tate, Watkins, Allen, Gordon
TE: Gates, Allen

The league voted on the trade and have voted no against it because they claim it would make my stacked team even better. Yes, my WR depth would increase, but I would also lose a good bit of depth at QB and RB. Trade analyzer's even prove that he would be getting the better end of the deal, but the league only sees it as me getting the best player in the deal, and totally ignore all the other pieces involved.

Sorry for the long post, just needed to rant a little bit.

I'm surprised that the current team you posted is 5-1 and has the most points. How many teams are in the league, 14?

That trade really shouldn't have been vetoed. If you are in a league that vetoes trades just because you are in first place, that is poor sportsmanship. It's still early and it's not like you have a totally loaded team, not that it should matter if the trade is fair.

 

[jeffro151]

You gotta get a reasonable commish in your league and let him approve/deny trades. League votes never turn out well in my experience. Everything gets vetoed, even when it is legit.

To the OP, no reason why this trade should be vetoed.

There in lies part of the problem. This league is my best friend's work league and he is the commissioner. Back in 2009, they had someone back out last minute, so I joined in. Since 2009, I have been the only person that doesn't work there to be in the league. If he were to overrule their vetoes, it would surely cause him a headache, and I do not wish to cause that kind of headache for him.