Yahoo trade review doesn't work. A manager can admit to forfeiting and trade players for pennies on the dollar and Yahoo does nothing even when reported.

Here are some reasons to disable trades in Pro leagues

1-Minimize collusion. It is not difficult to join the same league with your friends to collude if you want. I have seen this happen many times.

the following two managers are just one example

https://profiles.sports.yahoo.com/user/2CGFK3LGHZ7GAK4IVAE6QUV4XE

https://profiles.sports.yahoo.com/user/ZQZQPMYWHW2IGQAG3U566HK4AE

These managers just happen to join the same pro leagues year after year. They both suck so they need to collude to give themselves a chance at winning. Near the end of the regular season, one of them is usually out of playoff contention and if matched up with the other, will bench players with games to give the other an easy victory. They also help one team with trades.

Even when reported to Yahoo, Yahoo takes no action.

2-Managers giving up. This is also against Yahoo rules but when reported no action is taken. It is fairly obvious when a manager has given up. They make one sided trades with no intention of improving the team. Even when the manager admits to giving away players, Yahoo takes no action when directed to the admission.

3-The few legitimate trades that are made don't have a huge impact on the league. Keeping trades and allow cheaters to collude is far worse imo.

4-As a benefit for Yahoo, no one will have to review trades. I do not know how much time and effort is put into evaluating trades so if a significant amount of time is invested in reviewing trades, this would free up time to focus on other important matters.

I agreed to a trade with an owner yesterday where I gave up Bregman/Junis for Suarez in a $500 Yahoo Pro league where I need HR/RBI.Today I get an email from Yahoo saying my trade has been vetoed with no explanation. There is a lot of money at stake in this leagues and there should be some accountability on Yahoo's part to provide valid reasoning for vetoing a reasonable trade unless collusion is involved.

Too often in trading these days vetoes are used for the simple reason of not wanting to see other teams potentially improving b/c your team is not involved in the process. I would suggest that requiring unanimous votes be required to veto a trade as it's not fair for a couple owners to complain while the majority of league has no problem with it and then have to pay the consequences for it.

A team missed innings by .1 and realized they had a starter on bench before a pitch was thrown but the player was already locked onto the bench.
As commissioner you should be able to edit a roster or a stat after the players are locked in if need be.
While I understand why it would be unfair in certain circumstances (ie a public league) this is a private league where we vote on issues like this one. There should be a way to make your own stat corrections to provide a team with 1 more out to reach innings?
We had issues last year where the missed innings completely reshaped the postseason and we are trying to avoid anyone getting free categories whenever we can.
In a private league I don't see a downside to implementing a feature like this for the future.

Add MAXIMUM innings pitched PER WEEK in Head 2 Head leagues. This way managers can not "stream" pitchers.
They can not add and drop pitchers every single day just to inflate their K's and W's to take those categories (ERA and WHIP may not be cared about).
Especially with a cap on player acquisitions... if one team is capped it is unfair advantage for another team to abuse pickups only to gain stats the other team can not reciprocate.
Teams should try to win with their team and not pickups daily.

Also, would like to adjust settings for ONLY PLAYOFFS as well. As commissioner, i watch pickups during playoffs because we agreed to only allow 2 pitchers per week and 5 batters per week.. This has helped streaming a little but having the option in league settings is vital.

both of these settings together should stop everything.

PLEASE MAKE THIS CHANGE ASAP!!!

Although there is a "minimum innings pitched" option available for head to head leagues, I believe there needs to be one instituted for Rotisserie as well. ESPN has already adopted this feature and I believe the season long minimum should be set at 1000 innings.

The reason this is necessary is because someone in my league employed a strategy of only drafting batters early then going after all the elite relief pitchers without having a single starting pitcher on his team. He also has many relief pitchers on his bench that he can activate during off days and some relief pitchers with starting pitching eligibility to put in his SP slots.

The result is he will go on to dominate the Saves category along with ERA and WHIP because of the low amount of innings he will utilize with only elite relievers. It seems he is primed to win by finding a way outside of the system which I believe is outside of fair play. At the very least, he has guaranteed himself a top 3 finish. This is a loophole that needs to be addressed.

This is more of a question. Throughout this whole year and in previous years, as the commish if a trade came through after games had started that day, I would not be permitted to let it process until the following day. EXCEPT, when I (the commissioner) made a trade after games had already been played that day, it processed immediately and I was able to use my new players in that nights games. Because of this, manager's in the league think I'm using special powers as it looks like only the commish's deal was able to be processed immediately. I have no explanation for this. Is it a glitch??