Why would a commissioner deny a trade, although both teams agreed to the trade?

Question

Just wondering, I was offerred a trade and agreed but the commissioner denied it. Why would they do that?

Answer 1

It depends on what type of league you are in to be honest.

Im in a league that nobody is allowed to veto trades. It still happens, but its because we all know what we are doing and that if you want to make that stupid trade, then its your own d**n fault.

I am also in a league that allows you to never have any say in the trade because they all go through the commish. The commish has the only say in the d**n trade, and it pisses me off.

Some of the trades can be extremely hurtful to all teams in the league. You can at this point be trading like this....

You trade:

Bruce

Jacobs

Gomez

For:

Berkman

Utley

Santana

The trade needs to be fair for both sides and it needs to still keep up the competition. Most commishs have the feeling that some teams are trying to create an unfair enviorment when doing trades, but its really not.

I would suggest talking to your commish about why the trade was rejected by him, and then see if there is a way you can make it go through.

Good luck!!

Answer 2

The commish can do this if it's set up that way.  Why don't you just ask?

Most leagues have trade deadlines,, for example, although this seems early.

Answer 3

The simpliest answer is a balance of power. Whereas, "Ya'll" may have said yes, the commish can put the kabosh on it.

The other answer is he's being a horse's patoot.

answer these questions and you be the judge

1. What place is the commish in?

2. If it is a 2 division league, who get the benefit from the trade and are they in his division?

If its a close league and this trade could "tip the balance", then you should have expected a veto.

sorry. wish I had better answers, but, think on it.

Answer 4

Ah, welcome to Wide World of Trade Disputes.

Some leagues allow the commissioner final say in trades.

There are only a few valid reasons a commissioner SHOULD veto a trade:

1. Collusion between managers.

2. A team is dumping players intentionally, a "fire sale."

3. An inactive team suddenly makes a blockbuster deal.

4. Any suspicious circumstance, or evidence of compensation outside the deal itself.

5. A horribly unbalanced trade, such that the competitive nature of the league is lost.

For the most part, the commissioner should stay out of it, if two teams agreed.

Commissioners are often noted for protecting their own self-interest, or not wanting "one team to get too good."

Even bad trades, so long as there is no collusion must pass.  Sometimes trades that don't look great on paper work out, particularly if there are injuries involved.

Both owners need to make some noise on this.

Answer 5

They denied the trade if they thought the trade was lopsided, or one team was getting a way better deal.

If the trade is A-rod for J.D Drew, the commish is probably not going to allow it.

If its something like Santana for Peavy, most commishes would let that trade go through.

Answer 6

They see the trade as a bad thing for them. Maybe the trade does not make any sense. ex. A. Rodriguez for J. Varitek

If you get traded a good player to help you against him.

he see's that as a perennial threat to him.

he will veto anything that is not at his best interest.

even if it makes sense for both parties.

Jack

Answer 7

There are really only 2 justifications for why this would happen.  He may have seen the trade as being unfair, which even if both teams accept a trade it doesn't necessarily mean a trade was fair to begin with.  As I'm sure you know there is ALWAYS atleast one guy in every league whom doesnt really know what he is doing, and therefore can be ripped off fairly easily.  I have to wonder if this was the case, because it seems like you would have posted the trade along with your question if you wanted someones opinion on it.  The only other option would be that your commissioner is a cheater and thought the trade would give him less of an opprotunity to win.

Answer 8

It really comes down to this, if everyone was ethical with their trades, vetos wouldn't be necessary.

I was in a league last year with a guy, his brother and his girlfriend.  I suggested that the next time they play together, to let people know.  I wouldn't have played had I known.

They countered with the concept that people should want to play in that league more because brothers are always competitve.

Yah, right.

Pre season trade, Grady Sizemore for Ortiz and Santana.

The one brother said "well, I know my brother really likes Sizemore so he will trade anything to get him".  "Then why didn't he take Sizemore with the 2nd overall pick then"

We tried to get that trade veto'd but not enough people were paying attention pre-season.

Another issue some commissioners have is that if you are trading a buy low candidate with a sell high, they may say that you aren't actively looking for the most competitve deal.

Statistically, trading Cliff Lee for Johan Santana favours the person getting Cliff Lee, but realistically, we are aware that Santana is the better pitcher.  Unless Lee demonstrates dominance over time, he can't be considered in the same class.

I hope I've helped.

Answer 9

He was a corrupt man

Answer 10

There are many reasons to veto a trade.  The obvious one being that the players involved in the trade does not have equal or near equal value.

For example, if I traded away C. Blake and got back A. Pujols in return.......well that trade would be denied because A. Pujols is a Billion times better than C. Blake.

Other reasons for a veto is collusion.......