Mike has asked for opinions re Commish approval of trades. My suggestion is that he carefully consider magnatude of the players and the experience of the owners in the approval process. There have been some posts of owners complaining of heavy-handedness, and I think rightfully so. In one instance an owner was blocked from getting John Burkett because Mike didn't think he was giving up enough. Personally, I thought the deal was one-sided in the other direction and Burkett's performance then proved that out. This suggests how hard it is to judge a trade, and that people will have different opinions. But most importantly, this example involved two experienced first-place owners and two marginal players. In this kind of case, the commish should just let the guys play.

But in another case, in my league, a first place owner acquired Vlad from a brand new owner. The new owner may have been experienced and picking up another team, I don't know. But I believe the new owner over-valued rookie draft picks in his attempt to build a previously neglected orphan team. Personally, I don't think that Vlad's young age was appropriately considered by either the manager or Mike. The guy is not yet in his prime, and it is unlikely that anybody drafted will EVER be as good as he is now. This may again show that the fun of trading is having different opinions/projections (there were other good players involved here), but given the owners and the name-players involved, this is the type of trade that should be carefully considered by the Commish.

My suggestion to Mike: 1) try to just let them play, only block a clear problem. 2) Check the owners; never block an experienced, successful owner even if you think he's getting screwed. 3) Worry about the Vlad's not the Burkett's. Anybody may disagree my my accessment of this particular trade; my point is that Big Names and New Managers should be what attacts the Commish' extra attention.