JAX-BUF Trade

[Jacksonville Jaguars (Ryan)]

Just wanted to post something real quick about the trade that was posted.  I am not going to defend the trade and tell anyone why you should approve the trade.  I know I was losing in the deal but I was comfortable with that and I don't necessarily want to discuss that fact here.

My concern about the initial veto is the fact that a narrative was written on why it was vetoed and potentially skewing others votes.  It is fine that you did your research on the value (which is the whole purpose of the trade review committee), but let others determine that on their own.  

I am not mad or frustrated with anything in any way, but just wanted to express my concern about the initial vote.  

[Buffalo Bills (Travis)]

I agree here. I knew I was getting the best player in the deal, and in our trade discussions JAX said he was looking for depth. I feel I was providing good depth to his team. Dowdle is the best RB in Dallas, and McLaughlin is a great PPR back.

Honestly vetoes should only be used if there is clear collusion happening - I didn’t see that happening in this deal

[New England Patriots (Brian)]

I have probably vetoed 2 or 3 trades at most in 4 years in this league. I think the veto is underused not overused if anything. It is not right to approve every trade without “collusion” because otherwise there’d be no real point in a trade review committee. I know we would all veto Marvin Harrison Jr for Kashon Boutte for example even if there is no proven “collusion” between two owners. I also thought it was helpful to explain my veto - a major decision, as both owners point out and I know given I only have done it a couple times in nearly 5 years - rather than not explain my veto. I have been in leagues where owners are required by the rules (soft if not hard) to post their reasons for accepting trades or vetoing trades. I’m not aware of any rule so I think it’s fine to explain your decision (accepting by an owner or vetoing by the trc).

I am most concerned by JAX’s statement that he knew he was losing this trade. I don’t see how an owner could accept a trade they know they are losing or how a TRC member would be expected to approve a trade one of the owners says they are losing. This is clearly not a made up veto as one other veto has already happened. We can either approve all trades or have a trade review committee with veto power and this league has the second thing. In my experience in this league, all owners (trc and non trc) have been reasonable, and I think it’s also reasonable to understand why this trade would be vetoed.

It’s a top 20 player for 2 fringe starters and a 3rd. I said I would approve if the 3rd goes to a 1st so that is BUF’s choice if he wants to do a trade that would be approved (for me, at least). I appreciate that everyone is putting their thoughts out there in the open.

[Jacksonville Jaguars (Ryan)]

I will reiterate that I am not mad about the veto.

My question about your concern….doesn’t someone lose every trade whether it’s glaring at the beginning or over time but trades are never even.

[Pittsburgh Steelers (Malachi)]

So while I also don't love the big explanation on the veto in the actual trade thread, I do trust the members on this trade review committee to be able to sift through the information on their own as I know all of them and have been in leagues with them all for years and have seen their knowledge of the fantasy games.

Moving forward an explanation of a veto like that should be posted in the discussion thread like Jax did here to voice his concern on it and I think him for the civil response and discussion on that fact.