Stamkos and Tyler Johnson FOR Draisaitl and Sam Bennett - VETO??

[Daydream Nation]

If a trade is so unfair that it throws off the competitive balance of the league then I would veto it. I would rather hurt the feelings of a couple owners than let someone greatly improve their team by a horrible decision by one other owner.

[horrorfan]

If a trade is so unfair that it throws off the competitive balance of the league then I would veto it. I would rather hurt the feelings of a couple owners than let someone greatly improve their team by a horrible decision by one other owner.

At what line is a deal 'unfair' versus being unbalanced and ok? I would guess that it's not easy to define. Then when you have a commish making that decision alone is questionable IMO. Also, what's the point of playing then if others not involved in the deal have a say on what you can and cannot do? Sure, there are trades that are unbalanced, but the onus is on the commissioner to ensure you have 'quality' managers in your league. Telling a manager that what they accepted is not good enough then might as well remove that manager from the league. There are greater issues with the league if you are concerned about unbalanced deals. Vetoes don't solve anything. All is does is create mistrust and is just a bandaid solution. Where is the line?

[Rylant]

I couldn't agree more with Horrorfan's stance on this one. I pretty firmly believe that a league which has a commissioner with the power to veto trades solely based on his own opinion is far more dangerous to the integrity of that league, than a league that allows the occasional bad trade to happen.

Rylant

[audiopile]

Too bad the commish stepped in. Does he not have his own team too manage?

Also Draisaitl and Bennett for Stamkos is a bad deal for 4th place team and just because he is higher in the standings doesnt mean he should be stuck with the dirt end of the stick. In fact, a teams position in the standings is irrelevant if you want to evaluate a trade.

[metaldude26]

I've been a strong advocate of the "no collusion, no veto" camp but having seen bad trades rip leagues apart over the years I'm not so staunchly against it. I think that if you have a good manager base you can entrust the whole league with veto voting power where you need like 3/4 of the votes to veto. You definitely don't want that power in the hands of one guy but if every manager weighs in then that's a better system.

Now, managers could be vindictive, or they could just be biased but they will soon realize that if they vote down any and every deal that it also will come back around and prevent them from getting deals done in the future.

As for this deal here, there's an argument to be made that Draisaitl is the best player in the deal and that alone is reason not to veto it. I don't like the deal for the side getting Drai+Bennett. I'd like to see them getting a little bit more future value, be it picks or prospects, to mitigate that they are giving up two proven guys who are still in their mid-20s but if the guy really believes that Stamkos' 90+ days are done and that Drai is just scratching the surface who are we to tell him otherwise.

It's a tricky issue, this veto stuff. You also have to give the manager in fourth place credit for amassing tantalizing young talent in Drai and Bennett needed to pull this deal off. These are blue chip guys currently playing in the NHL. This isn't the pou pou platter of middling picks and prospects that really throws leagues into disarray.

[Rato]

The trade was vetoed. The commissioner said they can do the deal if Tyler Johnson is removed.

This is ridiculous. LOL

[havanablast21]

The trade was vetoed. The commissioner said they can do the deal if Tyler Johnson is removed.

Too much power by commish. That decision was worse then the potential impact of the trade.

[rataylor22]

Your league has officially broken with the commissioner's decision. With no collusion, there should be no reason to veto. And in terms of "bad trades braking apart your league", this isn't that. As it is, Bennett has outscored Johnson so far this season and Draisatl has outscored Stamkos. And this isn't some random hot streak. We're talking about 2 ELITE young players in Sam and Leon, versus an elite Stamkos and still figuring it out Johnson. Hell, maybe this is a sell high on Johnson based on last year.

The fact that your commissioner thinks he alone has the ability to decide what is and isn't a fair trade based on his own opinions is just ridiculous. I actually think the trade was pretty even, and could potentially favor the Bennett side pretty easily in 2 to 3 years.

[IslanderFan]

I agree with you that the trade is not that bad, quite fair in fact which puts me in the minority on this thread. Our commissioner is monitoring the thread and feels that the responses here are not really giving enough consideration to 2 things: 1) that Stamkos is an "elite" player which requires more trade scrutiny, combined with... 2)not enough consideration is being given to the fact that the trade is between a playoff bound team and non playoff bound team. There are other teams in the league who also don't think think this trade should be approved, but ultimately it is the decision of the commissioner. Again, I personally think the trade is fair and actually is a good trade for both teams and exactly the type of trade that full keeper leagues were meant to bring about. I also agree that even if it is not fair in his opinion or the opinion of others, if it is fair in the opinion of 2 owners involved who have been in the league for 20 years without any issues, than it should not be subject to a veto. The commissioner has always acted in good faith and wants what is best for the integrity of the league and his decision is not based on his own situation or league standing.

[stotan]

Our commissioner is monitoring the thread and feels that the responses here are not really giving enough consideration to 2 things: 1) that Stamkos is an "elite" player which requires more trade scrutiny, combined with... 2)not enough consideration is being given to the fact that the trade is between a playoff bound team and non playoff bound team.

So the guy in 14th place who knows he won't make the playoffs isn't allowed to start his rebuild? And the guy in playoff contention can't work with the 14th place guy to help bulk up his team? If this trade helps both teams, then what's the big deal? Even in "real" hockey, teams that are not in playoff contention sell their better players in hopes of returning younger prospects to refresh their roster and go for it in a couple years. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that.

What is wrong is your commissioner thinking he's doing what is best for the league, when in reality, he's making it worse. You say there are other teams in the league that don't think the trade should be approved - OF COURSE they're going to think that, they're competing with the guy who got Stamkos!! To me, this guy took advantage of a situation, not a team - he's looking to win this year, and the team he traded with is looking to rebuild. Your league is a FULL KEEPER - trades like this should be quite normal IMO.

[rataylor22]

Stamkos is an elite player? Or Stamkos is perceived to be an elite player? I'd wager it's more the second on than the first, as were coming up on about a year and a half worth of stats suggesting Stamkos without MSL isn't as productive as Stamkos is perceived. Did the Stamkos owner receive maximum value based on his name? Maybe, maybe not. It's not the commissioners job to decide that. It's the Stamkos' owners job to find a trade and a return he's happy with. Which he has.

From everything the OP has said, the only person guilty of "collusion" is the commissioner of the league, who is very obviously and clearly looking out for the best interest of his own team (I.E. Ensuring a playoff team doesn't get stronger, although like I said, debatable if it gets stronger for this season, probably gets weaker long term), but that commissioner does not give one single shit about the best interest of the league as a whole. That, unquestionably, is very clear.

[Dobber]

The trade was vetoed. The commissioner said they can do the deal if Tyler Johnson is removed.

I wouldn't be in this league anymore if a commish has these kinds of powers and pulled this kind of stunt. I voted fair trade FWIW

[Bubba55]

Throw in a top prospect or some high draft picks and this is not a bad deal. Without those extra pieces this is a dumb ass trade but there are dumb ass owners out there who have to learn the hard way. I don't support the Veto, that's worse than the trade.

[Axeman33]

I've left leagues for this exact reason; commish meddling in trades.

There's nothing worse that putting in the time and effort to work out a trade (sometimes this can take days) only to have it squashed by a commish who just doesn't see your side of the trade and simply disagrees with your reasoning.

Just dumb.

[horrorfan]

Our commissioner is monitoring the thread and feels that the responses here are not really giving enough consideration to 2 things: 1) that Stamkos is an "elite" player which requires more trade scrutiny, combined with... 2)not enough consideration is being given to the fact that the trade is between a playoff bound team and non playoff bound team. There are other teams in the league who also don't think think this trade should be approved, but ultimately it is the decision of the commissioner.

The problem with this line of thinking is that he's letting his own personal viewpoint on player values cloud what should be a simple process. Why should he determine what players should or shouldn't be allowed into a deal between two other managers? The perceived value of players - especially in a keeper league - can vary dramatically so the commissioner should only step in when it's so one sided that there may be something fishy going on. To step in and veto because he feels his perceived value of one side is too much for the other oversteps his role as a commissioner. Furthermore, to randomly say they can remove Johnson and do the trade is ridiculous. That is an arbitrary line that only he has created based on his own perceived value. Again, his perceived value of players should in no way determine whether a deal should occur. Only if the deal is so lopsided that he is unable to see why one manager made the deal should he investigate. And that last word is key - investigate. The fact that it was already determined that the deal was done in good faith should have been the end of it. To veto and then say they can rework it without Johnson is a joke and I question his motives.

The commissioner has always acted in good faith and wants what is best for the integrity of the league and his decision is not based on his own situation or league standing.

What's best for the integrity of the league is not stepping in and preventing other managers from making deals as they see fit. We talk about collusion as a reason to veto a deal. Well, the commissioner stepping in and preventing a deal because of his own perception could be argued as trying not to allow one team to arguably get better now and not allow one team looking for the future. He mentions integrity of the league, well by vetoing this deal he loses that integrity.

If I were either manager I'd be out of that league.

Oh and might as well touch on his point with Stamkos being elite. He had 72 points last year and has 28 in 36 games this season (60 point pace). Draisaitl has 30 points in 26 games and doesn't seem to be slowing down much. Is Stamkos really elite or as rataylor said, is it his perception that he is still elite? Draisaitl could be the next star and Bennett may become one. What if that manager just feels like it's time to target two younger players to build his team around? Johnson's had one good season and he's been struggling or injured this year. Perhaps he doesn't fit into that manager's plans, or doesn't value him as highly? Is this deal really that bad? Maybe he could've gotten more for the Tampa duo but it's his decision, not the commissioner's.

The commissioner should have stayed out of it.