Would you veto this trade? Mendenhall/Dwyer/Washington for Wed Welker

[Lazy-Man]

Is this extremely lopsided enough to be vetoed

[Lazy-Man]

Wes*

[GamblerSpirit]

I think so. I rather have the side with 3 players but it seems like mendenhall for wes SU with added rubbage

[Cross]

Can't veto, but prob more value on Welker.

[greenhippo]

I'd make the trade on both sides, all depends on what your team needs.

[dudekid]

no i dont think this is a trade to veto...you have to think of mendenhall and dwyer as one player because once one comes back the other is useless...so its kinda like mendenhall and washington for welker, which i think is a fair enough trade

[koz-man]

Agree, I would not veto this trade.

[Speedy88]

I'd take Welker all day. Other than last week, Nate Washington has pretty much been invisible all season long. I'm sure there are plenty of WR's on the waiver wire who are better/coparable to Washington, such as Josh Gordon or Titus Young.

People are still overvaluing Mendy because of his name recognition. Steelers O-line is a mess, and I doubt Mendy will see heavy workloads the rest of the year.

I'd much rather have Welker. Not to mention, who ever gets Mendy, Dwyer, and Washington will have to drop 2 players.

[dlunc3]

trade extremely lopsided... with that said, no trade should be vetoed unless you suspect collusion.. if both teams feel this helps them, unfortunately you should let it stand

[Jrod124]

What are the rosters? If the guy needs help at RB this trade makes sense, if this is a non PPR league then it is actually a fair trade. In PPR I would never trade Welker but its desperate times for some owners at the RB position. I am in a 12 team league where someone's RB's are Daryl Richardson, Michael Bush, William Powell and DeMarco Murray. People are hurting out there.

Above post is also correct, who are you to decide what another owner needs? If he paid his entry and its not cheating you can't veto period.

[ttwarrior1]

veto that plus the guy has to drop 2 guys to do the damn trade