Trade Veto Guidelines

[chrisetc21]

Just wanted people's thoughts on this because there are no guidelines here on voting for trades.

In my opinion, the best trades help both teams but there are cases in which one team "wins" a trade another team "loses" the trade.  This a lot of times is a matter of opinion but sometimes it's fairly clear cut.  I don't think that type of situation calls for a veto necessarily unless it's an undisputed and completely lopsided trade.  I think all of us have a mental scorecard we look at when we gauge a trade.

One thing I think is certain though, any trade that is vetoed needs to have actual reasons backed up with facts for that veto.  Statistics, contract status, age, injury history, talent level, organizational makeup can all be reasons for a trade to be vetoed.  Perhaps there are others as well but just because or that's not fair aren't valid reasons.  I want this to become a less bitter process and a more factual one.  I think everyone benefits from that.  Thoughts?

[limeygreen]

Agreed - as shown in earlier posts on other threads I do find, sometimes, that vetoes are used in a subjective and arbitrary way and I wonder if this actually ends being counterproductive to the league as a whole. To recycle a previous post..

--


Comments tie in with previous thoughts I have had around trade discussions. Surely a trade should only be vetoed if:

(A) There is obvious/provable collusion between owners
(B) There is obvious distortion on the overall competitiveness of the league
(C) One (experienced) owner is clearly taking advantage of a (newer) owner

I suppose you could add
(D) the trade is extremely (and factually provably) lopsided (and in some ways this ties in with all of the above)

I have an issue where people veto trades because they feel that it is unbalanced in some way, without fully appreciating the reasons why the owners are deciding to trade this way. I understand this is generally done in the supposed best interests of the league but unless it qualifies for any the above conditions, then surely owners should be able to make the trades they wish to and deal with the consequences from there?


Rant over
Chris

[chrisetc21]

Agreed - as shown in earlier posts on other threads I do find, sometimes, that vetoes are used in a subjective and arbitrary way and I wonder if this actually ends being counterproductive to the league as a whole. To recycle a previous post..

--


Comments tie in with previous thoughts I have had around trade discussions. Surely a trade should only be vetoed if:

(A) There is obvious/provable collusion between owners
(B) There is obvious distortion on the overall competitiveness of the league
(C) One (experienced) owner is clearly taking advantage of a (newer) owner

I suppose you could add
(D) the trade is extremely (and factually provably) lopsided (and in some ways this ties in with all of the above)

I have an issue where people veto trades because they feel that it is unbalanced in some way, without fully appreciating the reasons why the owners are deciding to trade this way. I understand this is generally done in the supposed best interests of the league but unless it qualifies for any the above conditions, then surely owners should be able to make the trades they wish to and deal with the consequences from there?


Rant over
Chris

An opinion and by extension an approval or veto is inherently subjective.  Claiming people are being arbitrary in their vetoes when they post reasons that are anything but arbitrary doesn't really accomplish much.

  I'll try to post a set of guidelines for this all soon and everyone can comment.

[limeygreen]

And here's me thinking that the point of this thread was to generate ideas….. Dismissing my first comment without addressing any of the ideas I raised also seems a bit unproductive.

The point I was trying to make was that, on previous trade discussions, it seems to me that vetoes have been raised with paper thin contexts and without any objective basis (fine we can say that all opinion is subjective, however what changes the debate is having facts and figures to back up your views, these though are often missing from veto posts).

However It seems that you are trying to change the overall situation and thus you have my support.