Hello, we have a commissioner who decides to approve or veto trades on his own. I would love your opinion on a couple of things.
- When should trades be vetoed? For lopsided trades or just for collusion and how is this determined?
- I would really appreciate a third party perspective on these series of trades.
a) Team A, 0-2 team with lowest points, trades Melvin Gordon to Team B, which is a top team in the league) for Hyde and AP. I don’t have an issue with the validity of this trade due to the risk.
b) When it is announced he is coming back, the trading parties above show screen shots of text saying it was a contingent trade and do a reverse trade. League Manager pushes it through immediately. I think he only did this because it benefits him due to Team B, which is a serious contender, losing Melvin. I think contingent trades should be disallowed and this trade should have been evaluated in isolation. Knowing Gordon is back, there is no way Hyde and AP is a fair trade.
c) Team C (me) trades Team D, which is 1-3 and already lost AB, Shady for Barkley. Team D needs starters immediately and does not want to get last place. To me this trade is similar to the trade A, but the LM vetoes it immediately without comment.
Additional note: At the same time, the LM trades Team D Lindsay for David Montgomery and pushes it through immediately (no issue with the validity of this trade just noting the timing).
What is your take on the above? Am I out of line for calling out the LM and asking him to provide guidelines for vetoes and to explain why trades A and B were allowed and not C?