vetoing trade idea

[MilkSpiller22]

I Have an idea for a veto system, want to hear your guys thoughts:

1.Everyone gets one Veto
2. You can use the veto on any trade for any reason.
3. If you use your veto you attach your veto onto 2 player names(one from each team) and those 2 players can not be traded without your permission. Everytime you dont allow a trade you get the punnishment on rule 4
4. If you use your veto you automatically go to the bottom of the waiver list- if leagues use auctions then it costs 5(more or less depending on the league) units of your free agent bidding money. Dont know what to do in a league that uses first come first serve.
5. if more than 1/3 of the league uses the veto on one trade then the trade is vetoed without penalty.
6. Only one veto is used to veto a trade- the last person who makes the veto call is the one who uses the veto...

Example of rule 5 and 6- 10 team league
Trade is made, Player One uses up his veto and was the first one, Player 2 also uses up his veto on the same trade but records it after player one- then player one gets his veto back and player 2 is now responsible for the veto... then if player 3 calls veto afterwards, now player 3 is responsible. If player 4 calls veto after player 1 2 and 3, then nobody uses the veto since over 1/3 of the league vetoed the trade...

I know this is complicated- and maybe too original... But it adds another strategy to the game, and takes away the insult factor of vetoing a deal...

 

[wilwhite]

I like the idea, but I'm not sure it's enough of a barrier to knee-jerk vetoes. A small chance to wind up at the bottom of the waiver order is no biggie - especially if you're towards the bottom anyway, where the already-successful teams would be.

I had another idea, which was a limited number of trade chits for the year (say six). You use up a chit when you're either party in an accepted trade, and you use up a chit when you veto.

But I still think last-place-pays-third-place and no vetoes is a beautiful solution.

 

[TREFF]

I've always liked Will's idea..he's explained it in further detail before, and it really seems solid.
Personally I don't have an issue with most standard trade veto systems, as if I'm in a league with people I don't know or trust, its generally nothing on the line anyways, ya know, just for fun, so it doesn't bother me. Money leagues, every one I enter into is with people I know, and trust, so there's never any issues. That would be my strongest advice to anyone venturing into money leagues..don't play with people you don't know..shit like crappy trade vetoes happen and it just pisses everyone off.
But if your going to do it, and aren't so sure about the people in the league with ya, then as long as it's a ruling that everyone agrees to, it'll work just fine..whether it's this pretty neat idea from Spiller, Will's chit system, the standard voting deal or whatever, it'l probably be different for everyone. Long as it's been hammered out before the season, everyone is aware of the rules, has agreed to them, so let's play ball.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I like the idea, but I'm not sure it's enough of a barrier to knee-jerk vetoes. A small chance to wind up at the bottom of the waiver order is no biggie - especially if you're towards the bottom anyway, where the already-successful teams would be.

I had another idea, which was a limited number of trade chits for the year (say six). You use up a chit when you're either party in an accepted trade, and you use up a chit when you veto.

But I still think last-place-pays-third-place and no vetoes is a beautiful solution.

I agree, that the last place pays third place is best solution for all...
But, i have been in leagues, with friends, where there was that one trade that just affected the hole fantasy season... I have seen terrible trades... we never veto trades... We dont even have a vetoing system...
But if we use my system then it takes away the personal attack of a veto-since you can veto any trade for any reason- Plus you have to really want to use the veto to use it since you only have one and there is a punishment for using it...

It also brings another strategic game into account... since you can hold players for ransom...

 

[TKOSpikes]

I've always liked Will's idea..he's explained it in further detail before, and it really seems solid.
Personally I don't have an issue with most standard trade veto systems, as if I'm in a league with people I don't know or trust, its generally nothing on the line anyways, ya know, just for fun, so it doesn't bother me. Money leagues, every one I enter into is with people I know, and trust, so there's never any issues. That would be my strongest advice to anyone venturing into money leagues..don't play with people you don't know..shit like crappy trade vetoes happen and it just pisses everyone off.
But if your going to do it, and aren't so sure about the people in the league with ya, then as long as it's a ruling that everyone agrees to, it'll work just fine..whether it's this pretty neat idea from Spiller, Will's chit system, the standard voting deal or whatever, it'l probably be different for everyone. Long as it's been hammered out before the season, everyone is aware of the rules, has agreed to them, so let's play ball.