Almost vetoed trade

[Kessel's Hotdogs!!!]

So I'm in a multi-cat salary cap league. 16 teams. My team just missed the playoffs. Goaltending is an issue as well. So I've decided to try and rebuild.

So I read the Dobber boards for feedback from all you mutants. And I ended up making a trade.

I give Sean Couturier

I get Kirby Dach, Sam Poulin and a 2022 1st.

Best I could do. Previous team owner traded a no#2 Dman in a Canadian market plus a 3rd line plug for two firsts and an overseas prospect. (No veto but that will become important in a minute) so I need to restock the cabinet.

I defended it as futures plus 4.3 mill in cap space and he gets production now.

Well my Couturier trade was vetoed and went to commish for review.

Commish was fine with it after my explanation.

My questions:

1) thoughts? And

2) what do you guys use for trade vetoes so a veto can't be weaponized?

Thanks

[sweetcelly]

Definitely not veto-worthy. It's actually pretty ridiculous that this would be vetoed. Dach could very well be a much better player than Couturier in the not so distant future, kid's a beast.

[chuckcouples]

Definitely not veto worthy.

[Kessel's Hotdogs!!!]

So what does everyone in their league use for trade vetoes. If our league hits a certain amount of vetoes, then it goes to commish.

[stevegamer]

So I'm in a multi-cat salary cap league. 16 teams. My team just missed the playoffs. Goaltending is an issue as well. So I've decided to try and rebuild.

So I read the Dobber boards for feedback from all you mutants. And I ended up making a trade.

I give Sean Couturier

I get Kirby Dach, Sam Poulin and a 2022 1st.

Best I could do. Previous team owner traded a no#2 Dman in a Canadian market plus a 3rd line plug for two firsts and an overseas prospect. (No veto but that will become important in a minute) so I need to restock the cabinet.

I defended it as futures plus 4.3 mill in cap space and he gets production now.

Well my Couturier trade was vetoed and went to commish for review.

Commish was fine with it after my explanation.

My questions:

1) thoughts? And

2) what do you guys use for trade vetoes so a veto can't be weaponized?

Thanks

That's not remotely close to anything that should be vetoed. The best way to stop weaponizing of the veto is to get the commissioner to stop the nonsense vetoes.

If I was the commissioner, I'd actually want an explanation from the people voting to veto as to why this is veto-worthy. Sometimes you get the explanation that "It makes a good team better", "It's bad for league competition", "This makes it harder on the other teams who are competing", or my favorite, "It's not an even deal".

Those explanations would then be used to review EVERY one of their future trades for a few years. And yes, I've done that; it was in a league where I ended up commishing by former commishes stepping down or quitting the league. It lasted about 4 more years, but it was very frustrating.

The even deal one was great, the guy wanted to make sure deals had even numbers of points being dealt - this was football. He was okay with things being off by single digit points over the current year, but not more than that. I simply stated that if deals not being exactly even or really close to even is a problem, then we need to ban trades, because nobody knows exactly what's going to happen, and making sure that point production is even in the past will not indicate future production. So I made sure that going to a no-trade league was on the table for the next year. And every deal that got made where things weren't within single digit points ended up going to the veto process, including when that guy did it but didn't care that his deal didn't meet his own rules - because I made sure to call for the veto vote myself. Yes, the league had a rule where if 1 person vetoed, it got reviewed - that also got fixed.

If you are using voting for veto review, some supermajority should be needed - say 60-70% of the league with the 2 owners in the deal automatically voting "yes". You need to not have 3 way deals there, because it gets ugly.

Leagues I'm in:
The league I found through this forum has some sort of commissioner veto process, but honestly, I don't really know what it is. I just make reasonable deals, and it's fine.

My league in sig rarely has trades, and we have no veto process, because everyone is reasonable. I suspect there is a rule that the commish can do something if it's a problem, but we're 25+ years in.

[sweetcelly]

As long as your league consists of competent GM's with integrity, there really should be no need for vetoes ever. If someone is compromising the integrity of the league with collusion, might be time to look for a new GM.

[Kessel's Hotdogs!!!]

Reason for veto was according to one owner , it's an over pay. Two other owners did not respond when asked by the commish why they vetoed. Trade went through so I don't care. I was just looking for feedback about how everyone handles trades. Commish is open to ideas.

I've been in 4 other leagues and I've only seen one other trade almost vetoed because the commish who was a league participant didn't like the trade. (Commish also wanted the player I was trying to trade for as well) .

[butch]

what side of the deal did commish deem that the gm got ripped off ?

[Axeman33]

This "mutant" doesn't feel it's veto worthy, but I'd still rather have Couturier. He's one of the best bargain contracts in the league.

[SuperLight]

Veto is only for collusion and/or risk of completely ruining a team.

[HonkyTonkMan]

Veto is only for collusion and/or risk of completely ruining a team.

Agreed. I mean, sometimes an NHL GM makes a deal in real life that would probably be vetoed in a fantasy pool. A bad trade isn't collusion....

Veto needs to be in blatant collusion situations only.

[Eskimo Brother]

This "mutant" doesn't feel it's veto worthy, but I'd still rather have Couturier. He's one of the best bargain contracts in the league.

This was my thought too. Just because it's the best you can get doesn't mean you have to take it.

[metaldude26]

Vetos should only be used on collusion deals. But I do feel like they can serve a purpose with new GMs in complicated leagues where it's clear that a trade will cause competitive imbalance.

Not sure this trade fits, but I could understand why a league might go there. Generally, you are losing if you give up the best player.

I'm not convinced that this can't work out for you. Obviously, you want to find a way to acquire Dach without losing Couturier, but maybe that was not possible. And there's a non-zero chance he becomes a better option than Couturier in the next couple of seasons. If that happens, well you'd never acquire Dach.

[bbfl1987]

So I'm in a multi-cat salary cap league. 16 teams. My team just missed the playoffs. Goaltending is an issue as well. So I've decided to try and rebuild.

So I read the Dobber boards for feedback from all you mutants. And I ended up making a trade.

I give Sean Couturier

I get Kirby Dach, Sam Poulin and a 2022 1st.

Best I could do. Previous team owner traded a no#2 Dman in a Canadian market plus a 3rd line plug for two firsts and an overseas prospect. (No veto but that will become important in a minute) so I need to restock the cabinet.

I defended it as futures plus 4.3 mill in cap space and he gets production now.

Well my Couturier trade was vetoed and went to commish for review.

Commish was fine with it after my explanation.

My questions:

1) thoughts? And

2) what do you guys use for trade vetoes so a veto can't be weaponized?

Thanks

Man, as a GM who loves rolling the dice on young players, I think you actually did ok in this. I can’t stand vetoes. In my mind, the only time a veto should be used is if there’s proof of collusion between the two GMs. Bad trades happen in the NHL all the time, and as far as I know, other GMs can’t veto two other guys’ trades.

[Kessel's Hotdogs!!!]

Okay thanks on the trade feedback and veto for collusion feedback.

What do you do in your leagues for trades and feedback? Do you have public or anonymous vetoes? Something else? What works for you?