IMPORTANT! Pool wants to veto my trade - please provide me ur thoughts...thx so much!

[PocketRockets05]

League and team settings down below.

I received:
C/W - Datsyuk
W - Kessel
1st round pick 2011

I gave up:
C - Spezza
W - Heatley
5th round pick 2011

Here is the initial thread from last night that I made when I was contemplating the trade.
http://www.dobberhockey.com/index.ph...ad.php&t=85488

Sorry for the repeated thread, but I wanted to change the title so more people respond as somehow this trade is getting veto votes, and it is pool policy that a trade gets posted on an external site if it is going to be vetoed, so everyone in my pool will view this thread.

Please let me know if you think this trade is veto-worthy. My opinion is that it isn't even close to veto-worthy, but I could be wrong I guess. My league+team settings are listed below so please view them at your convenience. Thank-you

[fantasyhockeygeek]

No veto.

See my arguments in this thread: http://www.dobberhockey.com/forums/s...ad.php?t=85350

The fact that you have proof (the existence of the other thread) that you thought about it and the trade was entered into in good faith should be more than enough to satisfy any concerns your league might have about your intentions.

Repeat: the only valid reason to veto a thread is because the two GMs involved are cheating/colluding. The concept of "veto-worthy" itself is flawed. Don't get dragged into any arguments about the value exchanged because it is entirely irrelevant to the discussion. Forget the ideas of winning or losing the trade... the only thing to determine here is if the trade was mutually agreed by two GMs for a benefit they each perceived.

If GMs are looking to veto on the basis of value exchanged, they're petty little brats who need to grow the hell up, and you need to find yourself a league with adults in it. Bad trades happen, and "protecting the league" is a sorry-ass justification for preventing GMs from managing their teams how they like. Sorry to come off so strongly, but without cheating there should be no veto, no matter how lopsided the trade may be.

Repeat: the value exchanged should not enter the discussion.

[nick12345]

I wouldn't veto that

[iglooinhabitant]

if your league vetoes that trade you should quit the pool. That trade is downright difficult to pick a winner. I truly can't decide but I'd lean towards Spezza Heatley.

[Renegade]

GMs should not be basing a veto off of strength of one team over the rest. Trades should be gauged on quality of players both sides receive and this one is no where near lopsided.

Kessel scores goals... that's about it. Heatley and Spezza do both very well when healthy.

[subcrazy]

This trade is pretty equal maybe the spezza side is better now but if you turn that 1st rnd pick into something then the trade will lean in your favor.

this is no where near vetoable( is that a word lol)

I think I would leave this league if its veto'd, the only vetos that should happen if there is cheating involved. Everyone will make bad trades(this is not one) even happens in NHL look at luongo for todd bertuzzi. I wonder how many GMs in the NHL wanted to veto lmao.

[CommittedToTheIndian]

Not remotely vetoable. Like iglooinhabitant said, there's not even a clear winner in this deal, much less a lopsided winner.

[newper114]

wow sucks that you wont beable to keep one of datsyuk and kessel bc in the end i would probably rather have heatley as my keeper.

That being said i dont see a reason to veto this. i dont think either team got much stronger. I think maybe they dont like that you have malkin and ovechkin and now you are also getting a 1st rounder as well. but that shouldnt be veto worthy.

like everyone else i think this is pretty fair and shouldnt be veto worthy.

[SeaDawg]

Not remotely vetoable. Like iglooinhabitant said, there's not even a clear winner in this deal, much less a lopsided winner.

exactly...

your league members are ******ed if they are trying to veto that deal. If this deal is veto'd, then pretty much any other deal will be veto'd too. Your league league might as well not even allow trades.

This is just so stupid.

[PrairieDog]

fairly even trade, maybe slight advantage to the Spezza side but not by a lot. I can't believe some of the trades that are raised for veto.

I know it is hard to do, but if I made this trade (getting either side) and it got vetoed, I would leave the league immediately. How the hell are you supposed to build a team when you have to worry about this crap? "Well he has accepted and we are both happy with the deal, but will it be allowed?"

Garbage. Leave the league and find a better one, there are always leagues looking for GM's on this site.

[JimmyJames]

Not even close to a veto. What a bunch of wahhhhhbabies.

[mister_mcgoo]

what kind of fückwits do you have running your league that they would seek to veto a fair trade and prohibit you and the other GMs from managing your own teams as you see fit? When the veto is being used in this manner it is being used for all the wrong reasons...rather than seeking to prevent cheating its being used for the selfish ends of the other GMs in the league. You have to be a pretty big ******* to veto a trade like this just because you might perceive that it lends an advantage to one team or another...in that case your motivation in using the veto is COMPLETELY selfish and has absolutely nothing to do with the integrity of the league. I refuse to play in lame ass leagues like that because I prefer to play with men, not with children, I suggest you do the same

[horrorfan]

No veto.

See my arguments in this thread: http://www.dobberhockey.com/forums/s...ad.php?t=85350

The fact that you have proof (the existence of the other thread) that you thought about it and the trade was entered into in good faith should be more than enough to satisfy any concerns your league might have about your intentions.

Repeat: the only valid reason to veto a thread is because the two GMs involved are cheating/colluding. The concept of "veto-worthy" itself is flawed. Don't get dragged into any arguments about the value exchanged because it is entirely irrelevant to the discussion. Forget the ideas of winning or losing the trade... the only thing to determine here is if the trade was mutually agreed by two GMs for a benefit they each perceived.

If GMs are looking to veto on the basis of value exchanged, they're petty little brats who need to grow the hell up, and you need to find yourself a league with adults in it. Bad trades happen, and "protecting the league" is a sorry-ass justification for preventing GMs from managing their teams how they like. Sorry to come off so strongly, but without cheating there should be no veto, no matter how lopsided the trade may be.

Repeat: the value exchanged should not enter the discussion.

Could not have stated it any better than hockeypoolgeek.

[subcrazy]

[A Watch]

I am so happy not to be in any leagues that would consider this a veto... It's not that lopsided and depending on what I had on my team I could see myself taking either side.

If they nullify this trade they should just change the rules to no trades.