would you approve or deny this deal?

There\'s some debate in my league over whether the following deal should be put through:

Team A: M. Michalek, Weber and a 12th round pick

for

Team B: Nylander, Boyle a roster spot and a 7th round pick

Team A is re-building and doesnt need all of its roster spots.

My position on the deal is that Team A didnt need to give up so much for weber and michalek, and that he got ripped off, but I do not believe that this deal is so bad that it should be denied.

Just as reference I offered Team A Hemsky, Boyes and the &th overall pick for the roster spot and the 1st overall pick.

Hard to make a decision without knowing whether or not you need a minimum number of defencemen, how many roster spots you need or how many teams are in the pool.

It does seem like a lot to give up, but unless I smell collusion I tend to approve even bad trades. Both Nylander and Boyle are over 30 and Michalek and Weber are in their early 20\'s. As you say, Team A is rebuilding and who\'s to say that in 2-3 years maybe Nylander and Boyle don\'t look so great anymore and Michalek/Weber are having career years?

As for your offer of Hemsky/Boyes/7th overall, it could be as simple as he didn\'t want to give up the first overall pick. Again, it depends on who was available with that pick. Dropping 6 draft positions and gaining both Hemsky and Boyes would have been better as both are young and will likely be having career years soon. You have to allow for individual preferences. Some guys don\'t think Hemsky is all that special, some think he\'s going to finish in the top ten of the scoring race in the near future.

I\'d allow the trade as long as there doesn\'t seem to be any collusion.

__________________
12 Team "Experts" Roto representing Dobberhockey 2nd
G,A,PPP,+/-,SOG,Hits,Blocks,Wins,GAA,SV% - Keep 4
4C-Kopitar,M.Koivu,Stepan,Matthias,Prospal
4L-Marleau,Steen,M.Foligno,N.Foligno,Morrow,Umberger
4R-Hossa,Hornqvist,Little,Alfredsson,Oshie
6D-Byfuglien,Phaneuf,Doughty,J.Johnson,Burns,Wideman, Kostka,Methot
2G-M.Smith,Backstrom,Reimer

12 Team Salary Cap Roto Dynasty 3rd (G,A,Pts,FPts,DPts,Pim,SOG,H,BS,W+OTL+SO,GAA,SV%)
12F-Ovechkin,Kopitar,P&E Kane,Kessel,Ryan,M&N Foligno,Ennis,Hodgson,Killorn,Horton,Wolski,Morrow ,Bonino
6D-Subban,J.Johnson,Carle,Wizniewski,Franson,Spurgeon ,Kostka,M.Fraser
2G-Rask,Anderson,Emery
Farm-Markstrom,Scrivens,Brunner,Nyquist,G.Bourque,B.Con nolly,T.Barrie,Brennan,Barberio,Orlov

There are 25 roster spots and each team has 10 keeper spots. of the 25 roster spots you must start 5 d-men. There are 12 teams in the league, it\'s roto, so its a pretty deep league.

seems we\'ve had some similar talks on this subject a few times now. it still amazes me how much other people feel they need to get involved to veto a trade. imo if the trade hasn\'t been used to \"stack\" a buddies team or to \"tank\" a team so that they can get to last place then leave it alone. if someone wants to make a trade that they feel benefits them then who is anyone else to say no. id be dropping out of a league right quick if i knew that evrytime i tried to make a trade it was going to be vetoed beause someone in the league didn\'t like it. the whole point of fantasy hockey is to be able to conduct your team the way you want to, not to have to run every decision thru the bettman wannabe commision. in closing lol, i don\'t see any Ovechkin for Gratton players involved in this deal so it wouldn\'t cause no red flags for me. it\'s also off season so there is no threat of one guy stacking another to win or to tank here. one guy looks like he\'s getting younger, the other looks like he might be taking a shot at it this year, simple as that.

__________________
H2H Points
Protect- roster:18 + prospects:7
F- Tavares, M.Richards, Lecavalier, Kovalchuk, Horton, Hossa, Purcell, Hartnell, Pominville, Simmonds
D- Doughty, Hedman, Boyle, Meszaros, Wideman
G- Fleury, Halak, Vokoun


Prospects-
F- Bowman, Coyle, Adam, Zibenajad, Geoffrion
D- Savard, Wishart
G- Hackett, Jones

i agree whole heartedly. if the trade isnt ridiculous there\'s no need to veto. the trade veto shouldnt be used to protect people from making bad trades it should be used to protect from collusion/cheating.

I wouldn\'t consider that there was a \'rip off\'. I might not agree on the trade but, outwardly, there is nothing to suggest that this would jeopardize the integrity of the pool. GM\'S always disagree on the value of players. It is usually difficult to facilitate trades let alone then have to explain to every GM, in your pool, why you did it. We all make trades that we question, in hindsight. Some we are happy with and some we wonder what the hell we were thinking. That\'s part of the fun.

big_dl wrote:
Even if the trade IS ridiculous, it should not be vetoed. Ridiculous ripoff trades happen, that\'s part of the fun. It\'s the only way they\'ll learn.

Trades should only be vetoed if 1) someone is quitting the pool and is just dumping, or 2) it is a buddy deal clearly orchestrated to give one person the win, and the two of them would then split the prize.



Besides, if your pool counts multiple stats, Weber is going to be gold and will be impossible to get next summer in pools.

__________________
DobberHockey Rules
14 Team Keeper, points only, best 12 skaters 2 dman 2 G count. Playoffs count.
F - Crosby, C.Smith, Wheeler, Parenteau, Hudler, Clowe, Grabovski, Atkinson, Frolik, S. Kostitsyn, Marchand, Peverley, Tavares, Read, Brouwer, Bickell, Gionta, Setoguchi
G - Anderson, Hiller, Markstrom, Brodeur
D - Letang, Del Zotto, I. White, Kronwall, Brodin, Nikitin

I agree, unless there is clear collusion or cheating, it is the only way some guys will learn not to make bad trades.

At our draft last year, we had one guy trade Andy McDonald and Wolski for the 7th pick in our Entry Draft. He ended up picking Benoit Pouliot. We had one manager very upset that he greatly overpaid for the pick, which is true, but he was willing to give up those two players and who are we to protect some managers from themselves.

big_dl wrote:
IN my opinion, I see nothing wrong with this deal at all...it seems pretty fair all around...certainly not anywhere near one-sided enough to even warrant consideration for a veto!!

Dobber wrote:
Dobber is right...I would have done this deal myself just to get Weber....love the guy!!!