What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Are trades essential to fantasy championships or just coincidence? (1 Viewer)

nromanas

Footballguy
I noticed a trend in my league, we've had the same group of guys for the past 5 years and every year the champion made no less than 3 trades during the season. Is this just a coincidence, or do you think it is very difficult to win a league with just your drafted players and the WW? I am more inclined to believe that making trades are vital for a fantasy team to win a championship. Of course the trades can't be obviously bad, but I hope you guys know what I am trying to say. Has anyone noticed this trend in their own league?

 
I think a great fantasy owner will do everything he or she can to make his team better. Draft well, do solid in free agency, and trade at the right times-- buy low, sell high..etc. Even with this--there is always a certain amount of luck required too--but I would probably assume that an owner that does trade is one that really does invest some time and equity into "strategizing" ways to improve their team. I don't think that trading is required to win--but I do think that trades are representative of an owner who is thinking about ways to make their teams better--and I do think that teams with good owners do have a better chance to win.

 
I have seen many deals that look so lopsidedly in favor of one owner than the other. Some times it does indeed work out that way. Other times the opposite.

I think trades are too important actually. Something I still have bad memories of. Not deals that I made so much as deals I have seen other making that just turns the league upside down.

 
No, I don't think trades vital.

It's more likely that the people that care the most trade the most.

Personally, I don't see the point in trading that often in fantasy football, particularly in auction leagues. Unlike fantasy baseball, winners are determined by one factor (points). In trading, you are always trading points for points.

Sure, most trades take place because of differences in depth at different positions, but you can build your team however you like in the auction.

My leagues don't do a ton of trading (generally less than 5 total for a season). The general feeling is that if people like a player, they buy them at auction. The player is almost always on their team because they valued them higher than everyone else. If depth at a certain position is important, they build the team with it.

Obviously, injuries will be a big catalyst and I know I'm in the minority, but I don't do much trading in fantasy football.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Couple of leagues:

League 1: Last 3 champions traded 8, 1, 0 times

The "8" had 5 with the same trade partner.

League 2: Last 3 champions traded 4, 4, 1 times

 
Last edited by a moderator:
trades are intergral. If you win with no trading you got lucky. no one can predict injuries or down years for every player. You analyze the data as the season progress and make adjustments.

My worse year ever was a year when I decided not to spend freely on waivers and kept trades at a minimum. Last couple ofyear I turned over 60-70% of my team. I will say some trades were sideways, some were bad, in the end but you make choices. I locked up my division week 11 but lost week 15,

unfortunately key players had a bad game week 15 (Charles, and I think Martin)

Ive made 3 trades already this year. Graham/Tate for Gronk/Lacy; Hillman for Sproles, And JBell for JThomas. Hillamn for Sproles I did not initiate, the guy screwed up IMO but I wasnt saying no

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't think trades are a vital factor in winning a ReDraft League, but I think it can help if you're clever, charismatic, or have good timing.

Or you're just a good guesser.

But more than that, I would say that trading is the most fun (and perhaps most stressful) part of Fantasy, and is essentially to long term and repeated success in Dynasty formats. Trades are what ensures that the Dynasty game is always 'on', which is why it proves more popular all the time.

 
Wow, I am really surprised at how many think trading is not important. The 2 for 1 trades late in the season to get the best staring lineup possible, or key timed trades to avoid important bye weeks are key. Trades to recover from injuries are also a mjor factor. I agree many trades are sideways, trading Marshall for Green doesnt mean much but tradng your WR3/4 that is performing like a WR2/3 and a RB2/3 for a WR1 or RB1 wins championships. Trading a stud for another with an easy playoff schedule a sound strategy, trading a studs on teams that may sit players week 16 is strayegy. Doesnt always work but increases your probability of wining

 
Every time I've won my most competitive league I made a key trade at some point in the season.

I've won others without trades...but I think trades are a very important part of the game in a very competitive league.

 
Wow, I am really surprised at how many think trading is not important. The 2 for 1 trades late in the season to get the best staring lineup possible, or key timed trades to avoid important bye weeks are key. Trades to recover from injuries are also a mjor factor. I agree many trades are sideways, trading Marshall for Green doesnt mean much but tradng your WR3/4 that is performing like a WR2/3 and a RB2/3 for a WR1 or RB1 wins championships. Trading a stud for another with an easy playoff schedule a sound strategy, trading a studs on teams that may sit players week 16 is strayegy. Doesnt always work but increases your probability of wining
Those sort of illustrate my point about trading in FFB not making a ton of sense in many cases.

A win/win trade in FFB is pretty rare. 2 for 1's and buy low/sell high are by their very nature going to have a fairly clear winner and loser. Getting the "2-side" of a trade is almost always a bad idea, and of course, buying a player for more than he's worse (and vice versa).

Not there's anything wrong with having a loser in most trades, but it also means that in most cases, one of the parties should not be trading.

Not that that's the case in every trade, but in FFB, it's a whole bunch of them.

Sometimes 2 owners are just going to value the players involved different, but that really should be pretty rare. After all, it wasn't so long ago (the auction) that the current owner valued his player more highly. You'd need 2 owners flip-flopping in their valuations of each others players. Happens, but it really shouldn't happen that often.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I have traded every year I've played.....20+ years. First off, I love the art of the deal. Second I find if you invest your time you find the best value for players. The waiver wire turns into a crap shoot especially in larger leagues. Now with trading you can gauge other teams weaknesses and take advantage of those opportunities to bolster your own positions that need help or depth. I find trading integral to a strong team.I don't win championships year after year but I would say I remain very competitive and make the playoffs at an 80% clip. Injuries to your team will always leave you with less leverage, but that's the nature of the game but on the flip side you should always look to offer owners who have recently received bad injury news with a possible deal to strengthen your standing.

 
Depends from league to league. If you have large benches, then trading is usually the only way to improve. Short benches means the WW usually has what you need.

 
The redraft I play in no one trades. It sucks.
This. The problem is I get so frustrated with the lack of trading that I usually wind up making a trade for the sake of trading that winds up killing me...and still doesn't open up the trading floodgates the way I thought it would. Last year I GAVE away Randall Cobb and Demarco Murray for McFadden and some IDP guy just to set up another trade that never happened. Cobb goes on to be a stud and McFadden is gone the next week. Finished 3-11, worst record ever.

 
Wow, I am really surprised at how many think trading is not important. The 2 for 1 trades late in the season to get the best staring lineup possible, or key timed trades to avoid important bye weeks are key. Trades to recover from injuries are also a mjor factor. I agree many trades are sideways, trading Marshall for Green doesnt mean much but tradng your WR3/4 that is performing like a WR2/3 and a RB2/3 for a WR1 or RB1 wins championships. Trading a stud for another with an easy playoff schedule a sound strategy, trading a studs on teams that may sit players week 16 is strayegy. Doesnt always work but increases your probability of wining
Those sort of illustrate my point about trading in FFB not making a ton of sense in many cases.

A win/win trade in FFB is pretty rare. 2 for 1's and buy low/sell high are by their very nature going to have a fairly clear winner and loser. Getting the "2-side" of a trade is almost always a bad idea, and of course, buying a player for more than he's worse (and vice versa).

Not there's anything wrong with having a loser in most trades, but it also means that in most cases, one of the parties should not be trading.

Not that that's the case in every trade, but in FFB, it's a whole bunch of them.

Sometimes 2 owners are just going to value the players involved different, but that really should be pretty rare. After all, it wasn't so long ago (the auction) that the current owner valued his player more highly. You'd need 2 owners flip-flopping in their valuations of each others players. Happens, but it really shouldn't happen that often.
In my 17 year redraft, 2 for 1 offers get rejected 95% of the time. Who wants depth when it costs you the best player involved? Just doesn't happen in competitive redraft (easier to justify in dynasty).

 
I noticed a trend in my league, we've had the same group of guys for the past 5 years and every year the champion made no less than 3 trades during the season.
Wow, no less than three trades? I've been in the the same league with the same guys for fourteen years and I swear some of the owners haven't made three trades that entire time. You have a very active trading league.To answer your question -- no, trades are not essential to winning the championship. Good drafting a good waiver wire management can accomplish the same end as trading. And, of course, a healthy dose of luck is required for a championship.

 
Wow, I am really surprised at how many think trading is not important. The 2 for 1 trades late in the season to get the best staring lineup possible, or key timed trades to avoid important bye weeks are key. Trades to recover from injuries are also a mjor factor. I agree many trades are sideways, trading Marshall for Green doesnt mean much but tradng your WR3/4 that is performing like a WR2/3 and a RB2/3 for a WR1 or RB1 wins championships. Trading a stud for another with an easy playoff schedule a sound strategy, trading a studs on teams that may sit players week 16 is strayegy. Doesnt always work but increases your probability of wining
Those sort of illustrate my point about trading in FFB not making a ton of sense in many cases.

A win/win trade in FFB is pretty rare. 2 for 1's and buy low/sell high are by their very nature going to have a fairly clear winner and loser. Getting the "2-side" of a trade is almost always a bad idea, and of course, buying a player for more than he's worse (and vice versa).

Not there's anything wrong with having a loser in most trades, but it also means that in most cases, one of the parties should not be trading.

Not that that's the case in every trade, but in FFB, it's a whole bunch of them.

Sometimes 2 owners are just going to value the players involved different, but that really should be pretty rare. After all, it wasn't so long ago (the auction) that the current owner valued his player more highly. You'd need 2 owners flip-flopping in their valuations of each others players. Happens, but it really shouldn't happen that often.
In my 17 year redraft, 2 for 1 offers get rejected 95% of the time. Who wants depth when it costs you the best player involved? Just doesn't happen in competitive redraft (easier to justify in dynasty).
Yeah, it seems dynasty with draft pick trading would help grease the wheels to get the right trade done. You aren't just swapping points for the next 10 weeks.

I also think auction plus FAAB can slow down trading a bit. Both means better put players originally on the roster of the guy that values them most highly.

Draft slot and unexpected runs aren't going to prevent someone from building the team the way they want. If a guy loses his stud RB to injury, the back-up isn't going to go to a team with high waiver priority or whoever hit the wire first, it's more likely to go to the guy who needs him the most.

 
I forget where I saw it, but I recall seeing an article that showed the more trades on average an owner did ( to a point) the greater chance of winning a championship. Totally forget the methodology on how they got the data, but I always remembered the lesson of what I read.

Now, I also don't know how much of that is cause and effect as a trading owner is probably more inolved, maybe on average more experienced, I don't know.

But my opinion is that you are going to be better of tweaking your team to improve than just stand put, especially considering the fluid nature of the season. One week in and already guys are hurt, stars emerge, others decline - it would make sense that its in your interest to adjust to the changing landscape

 
My redraft league rarely trade.

Not because some teams do not need to, but some owners are so inept at understanding value, they much rather not make trades then make a trade that can better their team because they do not know if the value is there.

Dynos are a different story, lots of trades in those leagues I'm in, but they are needed to win dyno titles.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
It all depends on the league. All leagues are different. Some have established a culture of trading, to the point where the whole league joins in, and very few owners are scared of "getting burned."

Some leagues, usually newer leagues, or groups that don't know each other too well, are hesitant to trade because they don't wanna be the goon that made a huge mistake.

So my answer is basically -- it depends on your league and your culture of trading. I LOVE trading, and won't play in any league that doesn't allow it, or has a veto system.

 
trades are intergral. If you win with no trading you got lucky. no one can predict injuries or down years for every player. You analyze the data as the season progress and make adjustments.

My worse year ever was a year when I decided not to spend freely on waivers and kept trades at a minimum. Last couple ofyear I turned over 60-70% of my team. I will say some trades were sideways, some were bad, in the end but you make choices. I locked up my division week 11 but lost week 15,

unfortunately key players had a bad game week 15 (Charles, and I think Martin)

Ive made 3 trades already this year. Graham/Tate for Gronk/Lacy; Hillman for Sproles, And JBell for JThomas. Hillamn for Sproles I did not initiate, the guy screwed up IMO but I wasnt saying no
Pretty easy to win when you find suckers like that.

 
It depends. If a couple other good owners in your league are making a lot of ripoff type of deals, then it severely decreases your championship chances if you just stand pat

 
Last edited by a moderator:
My redraft league doesn't trade, it comes down to a couple reasons. First it is a local league and they aren't into fantasy football much, most of them get online once or twice a week to set lineups and maybe put in a waiver claim, the other reason is because they don't have any idea on value, so when they do offer you a trade it is very lopsided because they always want to "win" the trade.

My dynasty league is in its 4th year and trading is increasing, it is because the teams that have built good teams are going for titles and the other owners realize they can't compete and they are starting to rebuild.

 
I don't think trading is vital myself. I find for me just making 1 or 2 trades a year and not necassirely for a big time player but even just for a role player seems to be enough for me, other then working the waiver wire and making good draft picks.

I think there is such a thing as too much trading to be honest with you. Some people just can't seem to help themselves and every week they seem to want to trade, trade, trade. I have seen teams actually ruine what to me looked like a good team that could contend for a championship into a bad team by over trading.

 
Trades are irrelevant.

I've won plenty of championships without making them. Plenty after making trades.

In my main league, there is, on average, one trade a year. In the entire league. The trading teams don't win often if at all.

Sometimes it's better not to trade, make the guys who drafted poorly stick to their crap players while you block them by being better on the waiver wire. Pick up a flyer a week early, an injured player the week before he returns, and cruise to victory. I've already got a calendar reminder set to pick up the recently-dropped Shane Vereen on the Pats bye week. No one will think to grab him until the week after, so I'll have him fresh for the playoffs.

Being more prepared is more important than trading.

 
I think the most important thing is just keeping up with NFL news, daily, from multiple sources so you know who draft in the later rounds & being ahead of others on breakout players so you can get them first off the WW.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top