I am sure this has been discussed, but I searched and couldnt find it.

I tried last year, and again this year to make a trade where I would offer a bad player with a larg contract and a prospect for very little. It was veoted last year and some people are complaining about this years trade.

I need to drop cap in a serious way. It is well worth the prospect to me.

I am getting angry that people that will not make a trade with me, will veto a trade crucial to my teams success.

What is the accepted HBD Dogma on this topic?

I have succesfully done those kind of trades before (when I took over a bad team), and never had a problem getting it through, I dont know why it didnt work for you.  Maybe if you put up links for the players involved in the trades maybe you can get a better answer?

I think veto's should only be used if there is apparent collusion, or a vet is exploiting a new owner. If both owners are trying, in good faith, to improve their teams then it shouldn't be a problem. Of course, owners have the right to veto for any reason they want, but i probably wouldn't stick around a league like that for long.

By the way, did you explain your trade on world chat before the trade was veto'd?

I dont know if I posted the trade right.

It all comes down to your definition of "very little".

Posted by swamphawk22 on 10/17/2010 6:47:00 PM (view original):
I dont know if I posted the trade right.

No. you didn't.  Nobody can see another owners proposed trades.  You would have to post the players.

ok...sorry

my guys offering....

http://www.whatifsports.com/HBD/Pages/Popups/PlayerProfile.aspx?pid=3338956 and http://www.whatifsports.com/HBD/Pages/Popups/PlayerProfile.aspx?pid=1108972

Getting http://www.whatifsports.com/HBD/Pages/Popups/PlayerProfile.aspx?pid=2447505 

note length of Kennedy Contract.

Three more season at $7.2m, with the last season being a mutual option, for a 31 year old guy is hardly an onerous contract.  He's also certainly not a bad player.

You should be able to get value for him without sending a prospect along.  I'd veto this deal.  Too much going in return for too little.

Agreed

I'd call you a goddam retard and approve the deal assuming you're not a n00b and not including a pile of cash.   Only because the catcher you're getting a BL-quality D catcher.

that is a bad bad deal swamp.  The 2 guys you are giving up are better then the 1 guy you are getting back.  And like Tec said, the 7.2 M Pitcher aint all that bad.  He is actually pretty good.  Maybe not worthy of a 7.2 mill contract, but certainly not the type of guy that you have to incentivise to get rid of.  Besides why would you want to give him up?  He can clearly help your team win no?

Apparently it didn't get vetoed anyway, but it should have.  You're now $20M under the cap, it's not like you had to make room.  You also just traded for the guy last season, did you not realize he had a "bad" contract before you traded for him?  To include a prospect just to remove a solid 200 inning pitcher is freakin stupid.  You could have always tried to pass him through waivers.  I'd bet the guy who traded for him would have been willing to pick him up, but somehow you let yourself get snookered into giving up a legit prospect as well.

yeah - really the guy you gave up should not need a prospect to go with him.  A team in contention would jump at a chance to have that guy as a 4 or 5 sp to strengthen their rotation imo.  I know I would.