Recently, one of my leagues was set to announce a blockbuster trade among two of my fellow managers. Both parties agreed in principle on the deal, and the formality of league approval was the only obstacle that remained before the transaction could be finalized. In the case of this Yahoo! league, that meant less than four votes against and the deal would pass. Well, that’s when the process hit a snag, as the deal was halted when no less than four votes were cast in favor of veto, overriding the pending trade and sending the two owners involved to the message board, looking for an explanation.

To give you a vivid picture of what transpired, I’ll start by including the trade in question, so you can get an initial impression regarding what the two teams agreed upon before other owners intervened.

Team A receives:

• Jose Reyes
• Francisco Cordero

Team B receives:

• Bobby Crosby
• Willy Taveras
• Xavier Nady
• Dan Haren

Following the veto, and after the two owners expressed their outrage at the decision via the message board, two other owners took it upon themselves to chime in with their thoughts on the matter. Both felt that “Team B” was getting the raw end of the deal, and felt that even though collusion would be too harsh an accusation, “Team B” clearly was getting taken advantage of, and possibly needed other owners to save him from himself. Both also insisted that they did not vote against the deal, and if you take their word that they were not the ones who stepped in, that indicates at least six of the twelve teams had a problem with the transaction. Both sides still maintained that they were acting in the best interest of their teams, were content with the players being swapped, and felt that intervention was not necessary.

I’m sure many of you have come across a similar situation in your leagues. In the case of this standard Yahoo! league, certain beliefs regarding gameplay are common. Judging by the reactions of the owners who presented their opinions, including one owner who did fess up to being one of the votes cast against, the consensus was that Jose Reyes, a top-10 pick across the board this year, is far too valuable even in a slow month to be dealt for a four-player package in which Dan Haren is the centerpiece. This is not some deep keeper league where stockpiling players for long term plans is a smart investment; if you spent a first round pick on a guy, the expectation is that you shouldn’t part with him unless he’s done for the year, or you’re offered a similarly-coveted first or second round player. Add to that an undisputed closer when even sporadic saves earners like Scott Downs and Manny Acosta tend to get claimed immediately when they get a single ninth inning chance, and the attitude is that “Team B” was allowing two players who are the cornerstone of a team to be replaced by two good-but-not-great outfielders, a historically disappointing and injury-prone shortstop, and a decent starting pitcher, albeit one who isn’t even the ace on his own real-life team.

From the perspective of “Team B,” he felt that Haren would have been a huge acquisition for him, he was willing to punt the saves category in offering up Cordero, and insisted this was the best combination he’d been offered in trying to improve his roster at several spots, while aiming to modestly finish in the top half of the league. I don’t buy into several of those goals, namely punting categories or being content with middle of the standings, especially when it’s only May. For both teams involved, I hope they aren’t jaded by the league’s decision, and they continue to explore other trade and free agent options as they try to remain competitive through September. Maybe instead of Haren, Nady, or Crosby, someone like Brandon Webb, Alfonso Soriano, or Hanley Ramirez will slot into a proposal to counteract the relative value of Reyes or Cordero. Regardless, this trade in its current form did not happen, and that says a lot about where players from Reyes to Crosby fall on the fantasy spectrum, and how even the most well-intentioned fantasy owners have extremely contrasting views about what moves can do the most for their fantasy results.