Vetoable....?

[supertoad]

I am the commish of my league and an owner as approached me to vetoed this trade

F.Anderson for J.Benn, a 2nd this year and a 3rd next year.

I too feel this is lopsided but their is no sign of collusion in this case and I am reticent to veto when their is no collusion. The owner that grab Andersen is now in the running for 2nd spot and will more than likely finish in the money this year even though he gave Benn to the top team (which will now probably finish top team for sure). The owner trading Benn and part of his futur assured me that he would be back next year which negate the fire sale consideration.

Any thoughts on this?

Details in sig

[Kofax]

You probably have to proceed based on your league rules. What is stated in the rules? Do you get the final say in all trades? Do you have a voting system in place?

Ideally I think you should have a voting system in place requiring a significant number of votes to overturn a trade.

Based on this situation though, I do want the Benn side even though he loses some value in points only. It's not that bad of a trade though, the guy getting Andersen might be really high on the guy and think he's actually worth that much. Hell, give it a year or two and Andersen might actually be worth that much. Bad deal, not veto worthy in my opinion, but proceed based on your league rules.

[horrorfan]

The trade is fine, let it go. One team wanted a solid goalie and was willing to trade a top forward.

Slippery slope when you start considering vetoes on deals caused by a third party manager's perception of value. Managers should be entitled to manage their own teams without outside interference.

[supertoad]

League rules states that a veto might be posted by any owner within 5 days following a trade. Owners not involved vote and majority wins (50%+1)

[Pengwin7]

F.Anderson for J.Benn, a 2nd this year and a 3rd next year.

Looks pretty OK to me.
Goalie value can be all over the map from league-to-league... so without getting into league cats... I'd have to assume that Andersen has nice value in your league format.

[Referee3083]

League rules states that a veto might be posted by any owner within 5 days following a trade. Owners not involved vote and majority wins (50%+1)

I think you have your answer right there. Doing anything different not only undermines the rules you've put in place, but also your impartiality as commissioner.

[Magicstew]

Without knowing the teams rosters, I think this is a fair trade. If the 2nd place team needs a goalie to get into the money then you are going to have to overpay a little.
nobody else is going to give him a top rated goalie on the top team. Not a vetoable trade.

[rataylor22]

League rules states that a veto might be posted by any owner within 5 days following a trade. Owners not involved vote and majority wins (50%+1)

I think you have your answer right there. Doing anything different not only undermines the rules you've put in place, but also your impartiality as commissioner.

This, but also it shouldn't be vetoed

[CascadeFilly]

Without knowing the teams rosters, I think this is a fair trade. If the 2nd place team needs a goalie to get into the money then you are going to have to overpay a little.
nobody else is going to give him a top rated goalie on the top team. Not a vetoable trade.

I agree with Magicstew.

[Bookoz]

Definitely a lopsided trade, but I wouldnt say vetoable

I would think that the guy receiving Benn wouldve taken this deal without the picks