My trade was vetoed!

[stevegamer]

I wouldn't veto that, since it seems like both sides made a fair agreement.

In a keep 10, the value right now goes:
Jarry
Hughes/Kakko

If one is contending, it could be a big upgrade in net. For example, I am in first place in a league where my core goalies up until two weeks ago were Murray & Nilsson, and it's a start 2 daily league. Luckily Merzlikins got an injury promotion, and I traded for Greiss.

Jarry has picked up and carried some fantasy teams, as well as the Penguins net for a little while now.

[jtloveshack]

This trade, while looks lopsided, is actually a good trade in certain leagues and another great reminder why more information is key to providing appropriate answers/insight. This is probably a Keep 10, redraft league with no rookie draft. If a team wants to make Hughes and Kakko keepers, they are putting themselves in a tough spot the first year or two with their limited production as 18 year olds. Jarry is to help this season and seeing how he does (next Binnginton maybe) prove to be a very productive keeper.

This is why details matter.

[junyab]

Trades should only be vetoed if collusion is suspected or it throws off the balance of the league to such a degree that it ruins its competitiveness. I doubt either applies here, so it shouldn't have been vetoed.

[Nifty Mittens]

Made a new trade. I’m trading Hughes, kakko, 3rd, 5th, 7th for Tatar, 3rd, 5th, 10th. I’m tied for 1st, he’s last. So I’m getting help this season and an early 3rd and 5th rnd pick. If I tried for a better return it might get vetoed and I’m not greedy. We start 3 centers. I have Eichel, Pettersson, Crosby so I wasn’t starting hughes on busy nights.

[hockeyrobot]

Made a new trade. I’m trading Hughes, kakko, 3rd, 5th, 7th for Tatar, 3rd, 5th, 10th. I’m tied for 1st, he’s last. So I’m getting help this season and an early 3rd and 5th rnd pick. If I tried for a better return it might get vetoed and I’m not greedy. We start 3 centers. I have Eichel, Pettersson, Crosby so I wasn’t starting hughes on busy nights.

I feel like you could be getting a lot more than Tatar and less than a round upgrade of some picks.

[horrorfan]

I would not be part of a league where you have to (re-)structure a deal just so that third party managers accept it.

[GavinC]

Long term, pretty sure you should be getting more than Tatar (who is a massive sell high) and a few mid-late rounds picks, for Hughes/Kakko. That said, you're in first, so doing something right. Personally, as others have said, I'd take the win this year, and find another league next. I'm in the minority that vetoes can do more than just prevent collusion, but this is particularly a hot mess.

[havanablast21]

If it wins you the championship then I guess you’re laughing. I would have tried to do this deal with just Hughes if he’s over flow and hang on or move Kakko in another deal that may have got you a better pick return.

But oh well.

[Wonko]

Meh. Not certain this deal even helps much this season, but owners should be allowed to manage their own teams. As long as no collusion. No veto.

[lucafen4]

Made a new trade. I’m trading Hughes, kakko, 3rd, 5th, 7th for Tatar, 3rd, 5th, 10th. I’m tied for 1st, he’s last. So I’m getting help this season and an early 3rd and 5th rnd pick. If I tried for a better return it might get vetoed and I’m not greedy. We start 3 centers. I have Eichel, Pettersson, Crosby so I wasn’t starting hughes on busy nights.

Not sure why you wouldn't just re-structure the Jarry deal? Tatar seems more veto-worthy than Jarry. Who, if he can enter top 5 in Wins across the NHL enters Vezina conversation. At or near the top in svpct & gaa... He's much more of a burgeoning elite option than Tatar

[Nifty Mittens]

I traded for Bishop in a separate trade. So i needed a winger more than a goalie.

[stevegamer]

If you're happy, that's good, and it's a deal for this year only.

The league is likely happy that you are giving up Hughes & Kakko to one of their more preferred owners for Tatar.

[Kofax]

I'm with the rest.

Hughes/Kakko/Picks for Jarry/picks
&
Hughes/Kakko/Picks for Tatar/picks

both seem like terrible trades (tatar worse then Jarry). There hasn't been enough information provided though to really get a better understanding of how the league works. Positional requirements, current roster, keeper and draft details etc. If Hughes and Kakko can't be kept, there's an argument here, but you should still be getting better pick upgrades regardless.

[Fighting_Emu]

Earlier this season Matthews was traded for Aho and not vetoed.

This is much more brutal then Matthews for Aho (which is actually not that bad for the record). If you had the Jarry side- your league did you a favor. If you had the other side incoming- then two things:

One) That sucks- you would have landed a goldmine.

Two) Leagues that easy get boring. A few dumb trades like that- especially to the same team and there is a massive power shift.

Im way anti-veto but in terms of quality this one is almost collusion level bad. I dont think theres ant real argument you could make for the Jarry side that holds any water whatsoever outside of "Im the noobest noob on the planet and the only way Ill learn is by making brutally lopsided trades that destroy my team". The problem is those owners end up quitting and thenm the league has to sell a dirt farm to get a buy in...

[Fighting_Emu]

Made a new trade. I’m trading Hughes, kakko, 3rd, 5th, 7th for Tatar, 3rd, 5th, 10th. I’m tied for 1st, he’s last. So I’m getting help this season and an early 3rd and 5th rnd pick. If I tried for a better return it might get vetoed and I’m not greedy. We start 3 centers. I have Eichel, Pettersson, Crosby so I wasn’t starting hughes on busy nights.

Your making a common and very very bad mistake. Just because your 1st doesnt mean you need to trade Hughes and kakko. Youll regret that like crazy. this second trade is much worse. Do yousrself a favor and KEEP THEM!!