I am curious to hear people who are involved with Fantasy Sports on what the think if all trades that are propsed should go through without being vetoed...

KG4LVP wrote:
It obviously depends on if the trade is within reason or not.

If it's something like 1 good player for 5 good players, then \"No.\" Other than that, I would rarely, if ever, veteo a trade in a \"serious\" fantasy league.

I've been a successful fantasy football commissioner for seven years with a very simple trade rule: if it's not obvious collusion, it goes through...and I've never had to veto a trade to this point.

If you have a reasonably placed trade deadline where, unless your team is 0-6, 0-7, everyone should mathematically still be in it.

The worst system of all-time is allowing fantasy owners to vote on trades. I highly, highly recommend a \"fantasy league constitution\" for your leagues. It establishes the rules each year and it can be amended as a group at the beginning of each year prior to making a financial commitment.

Every league I've ever been in, we have a commissioner, who has authority to veto trades. As long as you've got a strong commissioner, who can understand the difference between someone making a dumb trade, and someone openly trying to give another team a championship by giving away superstars, it works great.
Under no circumstances should there be totally unsupervised trading. My brother was in a league like that, and it became a joke. Teams that started poorly would be basically selling their best players, for draft picks in the next season, and/or cash. It was insane.

Dreaming71