>Even Ernie who continues to hate my trade said it isnt
>Veto-able.

I agree, mainly because of 2 things...1)I was sick and didn't have the wherewithal to address it real time and 2) Most of the league was indifferent or actually agreed with letting it ride.

>Nobody sided with you publicly until Basa changed his mind
>that my trade was something that was okay for you to go around
>and change.

I didn't say the trade needed to be vetoed did I? The trade was in poor taste and was in direct conflict with the reason the rule was created which was to prevent 'bad'/lopsided deals that allow top shelf talent to be hoarded (not simply to protect rookies).

You didn't give up top shelf talent to get top shelf talent and there in lies the problem. You weaseled your reasoning based on slow starting numbers before even a fourth of the season was completed while ignoring track record/draft position, etc. and capitalized on OKC's injuries inflating Reggie's stats knowing he doesn't produce regularly at the clip you traded him at.

And had I been healthy, at worst, I would have put the trade up for vote with my framing of the deal and how it mocks the rule and I think you would have lost that vote.

>You were the one trying to make up a rule to go back and
>retroactively veto a deal a week after the fact. Thats some
>made up shit LMAO.

Actually, I wasn't. I said the trade was reviewable because we actually don't have a 'written' rule that says there's a time frame. And had there been more sentiment, I would have put it up for vote.

There wasn't so I didn't.

But in turn, it set a crappy precedent and I no longer wish to manage the rule because the precedent makes it obsolete IMO. And the process by which it became so (with it's own post even) has soured regulation. Sometimes it's better to be a diplomat than a trailblazer.

You won the trade, got what you wanted, that much won't change.

Enjoy it.

I'm gonna point out it's slimey outcomes until I'm done.