Trade Vetoes

andrewfr (33 posts)  6/20/2013 11:36 AM

I'm having a problem in my league...Its a yahoo 12 team h2h categories league.  I do not like vetoing trades for any reason, unless it is just something ridiculously lopsided or two teams getting together to help one team...I enjoy trading, and do it quite often.  People were complaining because one team seemed to make pretty dumb trades, and I was lucky enough to be on the better ends of a lot of deals, and even though they might have been in my favor, they were made because the other team thought it made their team better as well.  To stop the complaining, I changed the league to league manager veto instead.  Of course, now everyone vetoes every trade, mine included.  It's only a $15 buy in, so paying for one of those pricey $60-$150 would not make any sense.  It's too late to sign up for the yahoo commissioner trade advisor.  Does anyone have any suggestions for what I can do so trades arent automatically vetoed, but so that I dont take all the power to decide if a trade is fair?

For example, Eric Stults for Asdrubal Cabrera was vetoed when it was clear the first team needed pitching.

Wright/ Gordon for McCutchen/ Choo was vetoed when one team had no 3rd basmen.

Cargo/ Anibal Sanchez for Cliff Lee/ Rios/ Gerrit Cole was vetoed as well.  

I can see some of the trades are a bit lopsided or someone can think its not the best deal, but I see no reason to veto any of them.  What can I do about this problem? 

andrewfr (33 posts)  6/20/2013 12:20 PM

Nevermind, I just bought the 15 dollar yahoo trade review...I didnt know you could buy it mid season.  This should definitely solve a lot of problems.

mbuser (772 posts)  6/20/2013 12:21 PM

Unfortunately, changing the setting to anonymous league voting was never going to be the solution I would suggest that you leave it as commish, but make it so dissenting opinions need to be made public (message board and/or email league) and, if enough managers make a public protest, then the involved parties need to make their case for the trade going through.

Edit - getting the 3rd party involved should be suitable, as well.

andrewfr (33 posts)  6/20/2013 4:20 PM

Yeh the reason I had commisioner veto in the first place is because either no one ever vetoes a trade, or everyone gangs up and vetoes everything just because.  There is a group of about 4 or 5 teams who constantly trade, and about 4 or 5 who never do and dont even look at offers.  I think cause im commisioner, and I've made a lot of trades that have worked out in my favor, the teams that dont trade are getting upset, thinking there is something fishy or whatever, and now they just veto every trade that pops up.  I don't want to alienate the other members of the league, but I don't feel like I should reject a trade that will help my team in fear of someone bitching about it.  When I try to talk to other league members, I got little response, so I just said screw it and let Yahoo decide, and took the 15 bucks out of the prize pool.  I mean, those trades looked even to me... maybe Wright/ Gordon for McCutch/ Choo is a bit in favor of the McCutchen side, but def. not to the point it deserves a veto, right?

mbuser (772 posts)  6/20/2013 4:24 PM

I don't see how any of those deals deserved a veto. It sounds like you need to not invite some people back next season.

andrewfr (33 posts)  6/20/2013 4:53 PM

Yep, I definitely agree

descender (177 posts)  6/21/2013 4:19 PM

It is entirely too easy to "click the veto button" if a trade doesn't suit you or your standing in the league.  

In my leagues we set it so the commisioner handles all trades and we have a 3 day wait period after they are accepted.  During this time other managers can vote against accepted trades, publicly stating their case as to why they think it is unfair.  If enough managers (3 or 4 should be enough) vote against a trade, the commisioner gets involved (or another designated manager if the commish is involved in the trade).  The managers involved in the trade are generally asked to publicly defend their deal against the raised concerns.  Conversation ensues and the commisioner dispenses justice.

Sure... There are still arguments, but not "after the fact" when it is already too late for the commish to handle it fairly.

This year we allow other managers to counter an accepted trade during the wait period... in order to further cut down on some of the "i don't think he's giving up enough" arguments.

Involving a 3rd party moderator is hardly ever a good idea, especially if you don't use the cookie cutter default settings for your league.

andrewfr (33 posts)  6/21/2013 10:29 PM

Yeh the issue is that im commsisoner and when I approved trades people thought I was somehow taking advantage or thought some trades were unfair. Then I turned on league vetoes and 4 trades gor vetoed simultaneously within a few hours so its obvious people were just vetoing cause they could. I try to ask why trades were vetoed and only one oit of four ppl were willing to come out and defend it, and the real reason why is because he wanted cargo and the team I got cargo from didnt like his deal but traded withme instead. Someone is gonna be unhappy regardless, im happy to pay yahoo 15 bucks and have them do the trade reviews. This way its an unbiased view with no agenda. Its not perfect but I thinks its the best ssolution for our situation

descender (177 posts)  6/22/2013 10:20 AM

The league's members trusting the commissioner, that he won't try to cheat them in any way is essential to the long term standing of any league.

If they are really that childish and spiteful, I would suggest finding some new managers next season.

andrewfr (33 posts)  6/22/2013 4:07 PM

Yeh, sometimes people make trades out of desperation or for whatever the reason that aren't that smart, but it's nothing that is ridiculous.  I don't think you should keep people from making unwise decisions, just keep people from working together or knowingly making trades when they don't believe it will help their team.  I think we might have to find some new managers, or just implement a new system from the get go next year

HK-47 (15 posts)  6/22/2013 4:44 PM

Unfortunately, it's hard to find a good group of managers that won't veto out of spite ( or favoritism), and or a commissioner that doesn't abuse his power. You aren't doing that here of course. I had to leave a local league a couple years back because both problems were going on...things got rather messy in there, but I won't get into it. I knew mid season I wouldn't be back, and made it my mission to win that league and collect my nice payday. I did exactly that, and it felt great. There are currently 3 leagues that I have been in for years...they are run great, have a great group of managers, and are very competitive/challenging....I feel lucky and or grateful to be a part of those.

andrewfr (33 posts)  6/25/2013 1:11 PM

Yeh, this is the 3rd year I've been commisioner of any league and the first league that I've had any issues at all with trades....normally I just let all trades go thru, cause I know all the managers and unless it's something ridiculous I feel you should be responsible for your own team.  I should have went straight to the trade review service once there was an issue, because it just got everyone more upset when they vetoed every trade and I took the league Veto button away.  You live and you learn though; for some reason I've got a lot of generous trade offers in this league and I can't turn them down just because someone might be jealous or whatever...We have a few managers who just trade for the heck of it so I think that was getting on people's nerve's too...I really like the review service because I know that Yahoo is pretty lenient and fair about letting most reasonable trades thru (and BTW all the trades mentioned above that my league vetoed went through after I set up the trade review) so I'll probably just shell out the $15 ahead of time this football season, especially for the bigger money leagues itll be worth it.