Does dealing with bad traders ever frustrate you? (1 Viewer)

[Tony Reali]

Like if you're targeting a player on a team, and the owner asks for an unreasonable amount for him, so much so it isn't even worth talking to him?

Or if you post about a players(s) being available and people go through a series of communications only to give you such a complete lowball offer that you feel like it was just a complete waste of time?

 

[shortbow]

My favorite is when you make an offer for someone, they tell you its a lateral move, then ask you to throw in a first round pick (redraft with keepers comes out to 2-3 round pick)

I made a trade last season Ray Rice, Sidney Rice and Antonio Gates for Ahmad Bradshaw, MJD and Hakeem Nicks. Ask them again at the end of the season if he would be interested in trading Rice back for MJD (knowing that he knows im a Rice fan and he is a MJD fan). "Dont think I can make a lateral move like that without a late first round incentive" I happened to be flush with second and third round picks by selling off my keepers, and thats the story of how I ended up with MJD instead of Ray Rice.

 

[GregR]

Like if you're targeting a player on a team, and the owner asks for an unreasonable amount for him, so much so it isn't even worth talking to him?Or if you post about a players(s) being available and people go through a series of communications only to give you such a complete lowball offer that you feel like it was just a complete waste of time?

That doesn't bother me much. It just tells me that they value that player more than I do. One of the only things that really bothers me is when someone says no but doesn't give any kind of counter offer or input at all on what they would consider a workable trade.

 

[zilladog]

Or how about spending lots of time coming up with an offer that you hope works well for both parties only to find out that the other owner has no clue who any of the players are because he hardly watches football and hasn't logged in to look at his team since the Clinton years?

 

[Tony Reali]

Or how about spending lots of time coming up with an offer that you hope works well for both parties only to find out that the other owner has no clue who any of the players are because he hardly watches football and hasn't logged in to look at his team since the Clinton years?

Some guy told me he had interest in Greg Jennings. I needed RB help and he had McCoy. After about 10 emails trying to come up with a good deal, he starts backing out and then says he'd offer me a 6th round pick for Jennings in a 12 team 3 keeper league.I almost threw my laptop out the window

 

[Dragon1952]

Player value is so subjective and owners tend to value their guys maybe more than others, it's hard to say whether an offer was fair or not in both owner's eyes. I've certainly made offers I thought were no-brainers for the other team that got declined. I don't necessarily think you are entitled a counter or explanation in return either. I've certainly run into countless situations where I thought an offer was ridiculous only to find the other party was incredulous to find out I thought so. Some people are traders and some are satisfied with what they've got. There doesn't necessarily have to be a rhyme or reason, so no...I don't let it bother me.

 

[eakfootball]

There is a guy in my league who hasn't made a trade in years. He values every one of his players extremely high and wants crazy value for them (McCoy, McFadden, and Stewart for ADP, (McCoy, Keller, and a first for Kenny Britt) I can go on and on with them. Check out the what is the worst trade you have been offered thread to see more of them.

 

[SSOG]

Like if you're targeting a player on a team, and the owner asks for an unreasonable amount for him, so much so it isn't even worth talking to him?

Or if you post about a players(s) being available and people go through a series of communications only to give you such a complete lowball offer that you feel like it was just a complete waste of time?

Humans are such an unbelievably compelling collection of biases that it's really a wonder that we ever manage to make any trades at all.I mean, just in these two scenarios you mentioned, you've got evidence of endowment effect, mere exposure effect, and status quo bias. Like I said, given our disturbingly faulty processing skills, it's a minor miracle we can ever reach an agreement over anything.

I have a leaguemate who is the perfect example of the endowment effect. We're in two leagues together. In one of them, I approached him last offseason about acquiring Crabtree. He told me that he'd be willing to sell, but he viewed Crabs as a slam-dunk top-10 dynasty receiver. I told him that was too rich for my blood, but I happened to have Crabtree in our other league together, and I'd be happy to sell him. My leaguemate told me flat-out that he had zero interest in acquiring Crabtree (didn't even inquire about the cost).

 

[Runningman]

To many people trade on feelings and I can't keep my mouth shut in drafts, so then no one will trade with me and then I get a reputation for being a gfuy that won't make trades. Still cdan't give up drinking at the drafts though.

 

[DoubleG]

Honestly, I only have an issue with someone if I send them a trade offer and they don't respond at all. That's frustrating and rude. Other than that, how people value their players is really no big deal.

 

[Bayhawks]

My favorite is when you make an offer for someone, they tell you its a lateral move, then ask you to throw in a first round pick (redraft with keepers comes out to 2-3 round pick)I made a trade last season Ray Rice, Sidney Rice and Antonio Gates for Ahmad Bradshaw, MJD and Hakeem Nicks. Ask them again at the end of the season if he would be interested in trading Rice back for MJD (knowing that he knows im a Rice fan and he is a MJD fan). "Dont think I can make a lateral move like that without a late first round incentive" I happened to be flush with second and third round picks by selling off my keepers, and thats the story of how I ended up with MJD instead of Ray Rice.

Well, with all due respect, you seemed to have gotten the better end of the trade last season (the #12 & #13 RB, plus the #8 WR for the #11 RB and #2 TE), and now Rice's situation has improved even more, with the addition of Leach & the loss of McClain and McGahee, so I don't know if him being opposed to a straight swap is unrealistic.

 

[shortbow]

My favorite is when you make an offer for someone, they tell you its a lateral move, then ask you to throw in a first round pick (redraft with keepers comes out to 2-3 round pick)I made a trade last season Ray Rice, Sidney Rice and Antonio Gates for Ahmad Bradshaw, MJD and Hakeem Nicks. Ask them again at the end of the season if he would be interested in trading Rice back for MJD (knowing that he knows im a Rice fan and he is a MJD fan). "Dont think I can make a lateral move like that without a late first round incentive" I happened to be flush with second and third round picks by selling off my keepers, and thats the story of how I ended up with MJD instead of Ray Rice.

Well, with all due respect, you seemed to have gotten the better end of the trade last season (the #12 & #13 RB, plus the #8 WR for the #11 RB and #2 TE), and now Rice's situation has improved even more, with the addition of Leach & the loss of McClain and McGahee, so I don't know if him being opposed to a straight swap is unrealistic.

This was before Gates was injured and the second trade offer was also before Rices situation changed and it was popularized that MJD is struggling with an injury. I offered some sweeteners to the trade hard to do during the off season with keepers involved, but I offered him an early 4th + MJD for Rice and his counter was Rice for MJD+ the first pick in the second round lol. It was only annoying because hes a MJD fan and im a Rice fan and his vocabulary was killing me (lateral move, incentive)

 

[Bayhawks]

My favorite is when you make an offer for someone, they tell you its a lateral move, then ask you to throw in a first round pick (redraft with keepers comes out to 2-3 round pick)I made a trade last season Ray Rice, Sidney Rice and Antonio Gates for Ahmad Bradshaw, MJD and Hakeem Nicks. Ask them again at the end of the season if he would be interested in trading Rice back for MJD (knowing that he knows im a Rice fan and he is a MJD fan). "Dont think I can make a lateral move like that without a late first round incentive" I happened to be flush with second and third round picks by selling off my keepers, and thats the story of how I ended up with MJD instead of Ray Rice.

Well, with all due respect, you seemed to have gotten the better end of the trade last season (the #12 & #13 RB, plus the #8 WR for the #11 RB and #2 TE), and now Rice's situation has improved even more, with the addition of Leach & the loss of McClain and McGahee, so I don't know if him being opposed to a straight swap is unrealistic.

This was before Gates was injured and the second trade offer was also before Rices situation changed and it was popularized that MJD is struggling with an injury. I offered some sweeteners to the trade hard to do during the off season with keepers involved, but I offered him an early 4th + MJD for Rice and his counter was Rice for MJD+ the first pick in the second round lol. It was only annoying because hes a MJD fan and im a Rice fan and his vocabulary was killing me (lateral move, incentive)

I understand, but what I meant was, that in hindsight, you got the better end of their previous trade. Therefore, while the second trade offer may have been before McGahee and McClain officially were gone, it was widely known that McGahee wasn't returning to the Ravens unless he restructured his contract & McClain was a FA. Furthermore, Rice and MJD have (for the past few years) usually been ranked pretty closely, and have finished the season pretty close in FF production. So the terms lateral move and incentive were appropriate, IMO. Trading Rice for MJD didn't improve his team (didn't hurt it either), and for him to make the trade, and incentive was needed. Personally, I don't think the incentive should have been a first-round pick, but that goes back to the idea of over-valuing your own players and wanting to "win" the trade.

 

[mjr]

I used to get frustrated, especially when someone expects me to give up a solid starter for a short list of scrubs, but at this point Im numb to it. I've forgotten all about it 3 minutes after I hit the reject button.

 

[Pickle Rody]

Years ago it used to frustrate me to no end. Even now sometimes it does, but I try hard not to let it. It's rare that I get upset about failed dealings anymore. It basically comes down to what some others have already stated - folks value players differently. Especially players they already own. To get deals done I've learned I generally have to give up a little more than what I perceive that targeted players value to be. If I'm later proven correct on my player projections it is a win for me.

 

[renesauz]

Like if you're targeting a player on a team, and the owner asks for an unreasonable amount for him, so much so it isn't even worth talking to him?Or if you post about a players(s) being available and people go through a series of communications only to give you such a complete lowball offer that you feel like it was just a complete waste of time?

That doesn't bother me much. It just tells me that they value that player more than I do. One of the only things that really bothers me is when someone says no but doesn't give any kind of counter offer or input at all on what they would consider a workable trade.

It shouldn't. If you make an offer on a player out of nowhere, the other owner shouldn't feel compelled to tell you why he's turning you down...nor should he feel compelled to tell you what it will take.Guys are usually on my roster for a reason. I like them, or expect something from them. Personally, I try to never overpay for a guy. So....I don't expect my trade partners to overpay dramatically (a little is ok! ) and sometimes, the fair price simply isn't enough. I shouldn't have to justify my "no" answer.Guys who never respond at all are the ones that frustrate me.

 

[AmosMoses]

Like if you're targeting a player on a team, and the owner asks for an unreasonable amount for him, so much so it isn't even worth talking to him?Or if you post about a players(s) being available and people go through a series of communications only to give you such a complete lowball offer that you feel like it was just a complete waste of time?

That doesn't bother me much. It just tells me that they value that player more than I do. One of the only things that really bothers me is when someone says no but doesn't give any kind of counter offer or input at all on what they would consider a workable trade.

It shouldn't. If you make an offer on a player out of nowhere, the other owner shouldn't feel compelled to tell you why he's turning you down...nor should he feel compelled to tell you what it will take.Guys are usually on my roster for a reason. I like them, or expect something from them. Personally, I try to never overpay for a guy. So....I don't expect my trade partners to overpay dramatically (a little is ok! ) and sometimes, the fair price simply isn't enough. I shouldn't have to justify my "no" answer.

 

[Warhogs]

I get the frustration part of putting out an offer and not hearing yes or no or anything because you don't know if they have any interest and if it is worth your time to continue down that path. Outside of that I don't really get frustrated over any trade activities. I don't get frustrated if an offer is rejected with no counter offer. It's not like an owner must make a counter offer to each offer. I don't even really get frustrated by the owner that continually makes the lowball offers as long as it's not 15 horribly lopsided offers every day.

 

[Sweet Love]

I am the kind of person who tends to let little things bother him, but I can tell you, never has a FF trade offer worried me in the least. I get dumb, low-ball offers all the time, and honestly don't think twice about them. There are a couple of things at work during a trade that I think turn people off. I am in a 12 team, Keep 3 league, so I can use that as an example:

(1) I recently received an offer of a 3.3 pick in our upcoming draft (it is equal to a 6.3 in a traditional redraft when you consider the keeper aspect) for Ray Rice and my 3.9. Now why on Earth would I make this trade? I do believe the owner was trying to "get the ball rolling", but this is a guy who has a slew of picks...why not start with a first and two seconds? Now he would have my attention and we could go from there. But when people start with these types of offers, it tells me that their sense of value is so skewed, it is not even worth my time to negotiate. Try coming like Saturn (the car company) and throw your best offer out first. You may find that people don't want to go back and forth, they just want a good offer first.

(2) I don't want to trade Ray Rice...just don't. There is a very good chance you would have to pay 125%-150% to take him from me...and usually people are only interested in giving away 75%-90% of a players worth.

(3) This goes to the "Trading is fun" crowd. The type of people who just trade for the sake of trading. When someone has drafted a decent team and tears it up by week 3, it sends me a signal that this person does not value players like I do and it will be hard to make a deal that works for both sides (i.e. the kind of person who keeps attempting to peddle you a TE when you already have two really strong TEs).

(4) If you really want to get a deal done, offer 110% of the value (i.e. an extra 10%) of the player you are trying to acquire. This will mean that in order to get the guy you want you are going to have to give a little more in return. It goes back to how people value their players (they wouldn't be on their team unless they saw something in them) and it also means you will do fewer, yet more focused trades. If you do your homework, you will get more in return in the end, as long as you have done your research.

As you can tell, I don't trade a ton...maybe 3 trades a year per league. I put a lot of time into my draft prep and unless all goes arry, I just need to tweak and I find that most people want to make blockbusters and aren't concerned with Ricky Williams for Massaquoi type trades. I can tell you in one league I am in (a competitive 12 team PPR), I won 2 out of the last 3 years due to a good trade I made. In the year I did not win, I made a bad trade and the guy who got Fitz from me, won it. So I take trading pretty seriously as I have a strong recent memory of how it can sway a team from very good to best with just one move.

 

[GregR]

Like if you're targeting a player on a team, and the owner asks for an unreasonable amount for him, so much so it isn't even worth talking to him?Or if you post about a players(s) being available and people go through a series of communications only to give you such a complete lowball offer that you feel like it was just a complete waste of time?

That doesn't bother me much. It just tells me that they value that player more than I do. One of the only things that really bothers me is when someone says no but doesn't give any kind of counter offer or input at all on what they would consider a workable trade.

It shouldn't. If you make an offer on a player out of nowhere, the other owner shouldn't feel compelled to tell you why he's turning you down...nor should he feel compelled to tell you what it will take.Guys are usually on my roster for a reason. I like them, or expect something from them. Personally, I try to never overpay for a guy. So....I don't expect my trade partners to overpay dramatically (a little is ok! ) and sometimes, the fair price simply isn't enough. I shouldn't have to justify my "no" answer.Guys who never respond at all are the ones that frustrate me.

Can you help me to understand your mind set on this better?I sense from the language you chose there is something totally different in how you view this. "The owner shouldn't feel compelled to tell you what it would take". "I shouldn't have to justify my 'no' answer." It sounds almost like you're saying the owner doesn't reply because he feels there's pressure or something to fear in a reply? There is one particular owner in my league that I wouldn't be surprised to hear that from, but he is afraid of trading because he lacks confidence in his FF abilities, and so is afraid of looking bad. I know you well enough from the boards that I don't think that's the case with you at all, so I'm confused.From my standpoint, I ask why would an owner not want to negotiate? How is being completely silent on it in his own best interest? When he does this, is he hoping the other owner does not make another offer? Is he hoping the other owner continues to blindly throw offers at him? I'm not sure how either of those helps one get to the kind of fair trade you said you like?

 

[Lash]

My favorite is when you make an offer for someone, they tell you its a lateral move, then ask you to throw in a first round pick (redraft with keepers comes out to 2-3 round pick)I made a trade last season Ray Rice, Sidney Rice and Antonio Gates for Ahmad Bradshaw, MJD and Hakeem Nicks. Ask them again at the end of the season if he would be interested in trading Rice back for MJD (knowing that he knows im a Rice fan and he is a MJD fan). "Dont think I can make a lateral move like that without a late first round incentive" I happened to be flush with second and third round picks by selling off my keepers, and thats the story of how I ended up with MJD instead of Ray Rice.

our league doesn't allow "tradebacks"allowing them promotes player rentals and "future considerations" trading

 

[NeverEnough]

What frustrates me are the aholes that respond with insults or get defensive etc instead of offering a counter or explaining what they would feel comfortable trading.

 

[Runningman]

Also the people who play hard ball with everyone but their buddies. Make soft trades back and forth and then play hard ball with any one else. all I can do. Apparently while posting too.

 

[Doug B]

To get deals done I've learned I generally have to give up a little more than what I perceive that targeted players value to be. If I'm later proven correct on my player projections it is a win for me.

Especially true of you initiate the trade talks. The best thing is if your own team has an extra productive player that sits behind a no-brainer starter. An example with my main money team last year was having a fire-hot Kyle Orton sitting behind never-benchable Peyton Manning.

One thing I always try to do now is to plan out the whole proposed trade, e-mail it to the other owner, and have complete realistic synopses of why the trade works for both parties. I bend over backwards not to blow smoke -- if I wouldn't do the deal from the other end, I don't propose it. I also try to work something out with owners who have had injuries to starters (e.g. moving Orton to the Romo owner last year).

 

[Lash]

i try to answer with a reason on 95% of offers where i reject

but the extreme lowball ones DO NOT get any answer

that is my "payback"

the funniest part is where you happen to be checking your emails when you get one of these and you reject it less than 30 seconds after the offer (before the chap even has time to go back and look on the MFL trade page to see his offer)

other than that nothing bothers me in trading except for the guy who constantly bugs you 3 times a day to look at a trade that you are already contemplating, these guys try to wear you out with a war of attrition LOL ... if you are THAT anxious then only give a one or two day deadline on the MFL offer page ... YOU control the speed in which i have to make a counter offer or accept/reject so it is up to YOU to set the deadline

 

[Doug B]

From my standpoint, I ask why would an owner not want to negotiate? How is being completely silent on it in his own best interest? When he does this, is he hoping the other owner does not make another offer? Is he hoping the other owner continues to blindly throw offers at him? I'm not sure how either of those helps one get to the kind of fair trade you said you like?

If the owner has no interest in trading, overall, then the negotiation process is a waste of his time. It's also possible your opening offer targeted one of his never-trade guys, and so again, you're wasting his time. Why counter-offer when you don't want to make a move at all?I can agree that in a perfect world, the other owner replies to you that he's not open to a trade. But if instead you get the silent treatment, interpret that as a clear "NO" and move on.

 

[mcd]

My favorite, a guy e-mails me with interest in a player. We go back & fourth in e-mails & get floorwork done on deal. I send him the deal offer & don't hear a word for 2 days. I then receive another e-mail of interest from a 2nd owner, so I pull the trade offer on the league site. Within 15 minutes I get an e-mail asking why I pulled the offer, he was very interested in deal, what's up, etc.

I figure ok, talked to the owner & decided I'll remake the offer & just go with the deal rather than trying to work through something with second owner. Offer resent & sat for a week with no reply before I decided to pull it, upon which I get another email asking why I pulled it.

 

[Sweet Love]

To get deals done I've learned I generally have to give up a little more than what I perceive that targeted players value to be. If I'm later proven correct on my player projections it is a win for me.

Especially true of you initiate the trade talks. The best thing is if your own team has an extra productive player that sits behind a no-brainer starter. An example with my main money team last year was having a fire-hot Kyle Orton sitting behind never-benchable Peyton Manning.

One thing I always try to do now is to plan out the whole proposed trade, e-mail it to the other owner, and have complete realistic synopses of why the trade works for both parties. I bend over backwards not to blow smoke -- if I wouldn't do the deal from the other end, I don't propose it. I also try to work something out with owners who have had injuries to starters (e.g. moving Orton to the Romo owner last year).

I missed Ruff's post, but this is what I was getting at during one of my rants. When you trade, you have to "set the scene", and explain why it is good for both parties. If you can't do that, then you need to take a step back and realize it is not a good trade and most likely won't get a response.

 

[Doug B]

I missed Ruff's post, but this is what I was getting at during one of my rants. When you trade, you have to "set the scene", and explain why it is good for both parties. If you can't do that, then you need to take a step back and realize it is not a good trade and most likely won't get a response.

Yep. Can't stand the "whaddaya want for Peyton Manning?" openings. Like I'm supposed to work out all the trade parameters. For one of my franchise cornerstones, no less.

 

[newteech]

I'm not a fan of the "shotgun" traders.

That is, guys who continually spray ridiculous low-ball offers to every team in the league at once, hoping someone will eventually bite.

 

[bengalbuck]

To get deals done I've learned I generally have to give up a little more than what I perceive that targeted players value to be. If I'm later proven correct on my player projections it is a win for me.

Especially true of you initiate the trade talks. The best thing is if your own team has an extra productive player that sits behind a no-brainer starter. An example with my main money team last year was having a fire-hot Kyle Orton sitting behind never-benchable Peyton Manning.

One thing I always try to do now is to plan out the whole proposed trade, e-mail it to the other owner, and have complete realistic synopses of why the trade works for both parties. I bend over backwards not to blow smoke -- if I wouldn't do the deal from the other end, I don't propose it. I also try to work something out with owners who have had injuries to starters (e.g. moving Orton to the Romo owner last year).

I agree with this view as well. If there's not some other obvious benefit (one team weak at RB, the other team weak at WR), then if you're making an offer, it should be an overpay of the consensus rankings.For example, if you are going to target a guy who is the consensus WR 20, you probably need to make an offer that compensates the other owner as if you are getting WR 15 or 16. If you have the guy as WR12 in your rankings, you should be able to make an offer that is "overpaying" in terms of ADP/consensus rankings, but still has you coming out ahead on your own rankings.

To me, I mostly only target guys in trades if I'm much higher on the player than consensus. Using the previous example, if I have the guy whose consensus is WR20 at WR18 in my rankings, it leaves very, very little margin for error in trying to make a deal that makes sense for both parties.

Occasionally, I find that the other person also has their guy way higher than consensus rankings and a deal just isn't possible, which is fine. No hard feelings and I move on. (For example, I'm much higher on Jacoby Ford than his ADP or consensus ranking so I've put out offers that overpay based on those rankings but I find his owner actually likes him even more than I do, so its just impossible to find that win-win type deal.)

The thing that makes trading hard is that most people value their own guys more than consensus rankings or else they'd never be on their team in the first place. (If you have the 40th pick in a draft, you aren't taking guy #40 on your board, you're probably taking guy #32 or so...)

 

[Nate]

I get annoyed when people

A) Don't respond

B) Consider your offer an insult

C) Refuse without explanation

But I only get really frustrated when someone nickel and dimes the fill-ins for a stud-for-stud deal for days and days and then pulls the whole deal off the table.

 

[renesauz]

Like if you're targeting a player on a team, and the owner asks for an unreasonable amount for him, so much so it isn't even worth talking to him?

Or if you post about a players(s) being available and people go through a series of communications only to give you such a complete lowball offer that you feel like it was just a complete waste of time?

That doesn't bother me much. It just tells me that they value that player more than I do. One of the only things that really bothers me is when someone says no but doesn't give any kind of counter offer or input at all on what they would consider a workable trade.

It shouldn't. If you make an offer on a player out of nowhere, the other owner shouldn't feel compelled to tell you why he's turning you down...nor should he feel compelled to tell you what it will take.Guys are usually on my roster for a reason. I like them, or expect something from them. Personally, I try to never overpay for a guy. So....I don't expect my trade partners to overpay dramatically (a little is ok! ) and sometimes, the fair price simply isn't enough. I shouldn't have to justify my "no" answer.

Guys who never respond at all are the ones that frustrate me.

Can you help me to understand your mind set on this better?I sense from the language you chose there is something totally different in how you view this. "The owner shouldn't feel compelled to tell you what it would take". "I shouldn't have to justify my 'no' answer." It sounds almost like you're saying the owner doesn't reply because he feels there's pressure or something to fear in a reply? There is one particular owner in my league that I wouldn't be surprised to hear that from, but he is afraid of trading because he lacks confidence in his FF abilities, and so is afraid of looking bad. I know you well enough from the boards that I don't think that's the case with you at all, so I'm confused.

From my standpoint, I ask why would an owner not want to negotiate? How is being completely silent on it in his own best interest? When he does this, is he hoping the other owner does not make another offer? Is he hoping the other owner continues to blindly throw offers at him? I'm not sure how either of those helps one get to the kind of fair trade you said you like?

You may be reading into my response too much. If I receive an unsolicited offer out of the blue for a player I have rostered, why do I HAVE to negotiate a deal? Usually, the player in question is not a stud, but a piece. Usually, I have that player rostered because I think he's going to grow...get better...RISE in value. If I believe in them, believe they'll rise, I'm not interested in selling at their market price. I don't beleive in trying to get over people on trades. I'll pay market prices, and when I deal, it will generally be at market price. Even if you send me a market price for a young player (say...a Mike Thomas) that I happen to like, I'm not interested in a deal. Sure there's a workable trade, but I don't believe in sending unfair offers. I'll take two firsts and an aging vet I can fill in with, but I know thats unfair and don't expect you to pay it...SO I WON'T SEND IT! I'll just reject your offer.Out of the blue offers which have no explanation attached don't necessitate an explanation (Like an offer of a 2nd round pick for Jacoby Ford). If you like sending these offers, that's fine, but you shouldn't expect the other owner to counter, or even explain. WHY SHOULD YOU EXPECT AN EXPLANATION OR COUNTER WHEN YOU SEND NO EXPLANATION OR OPTIONS WITH THE OFFER????!!!!!

Other deals do deserve more of an explanation:Say your deal comes with this explanation: "Hey...I'm fat at RB and you seem to need one while I could use some WR help. If you don't like these players is there something else that works?" I WILL either counter, or explain. It might be as simple as "I think my backup RB will be OK...I expect him to win the job so I'll hang tight for now" or "I'm not really in love with any of your RBs", but I will respond. You should expect a response when you explain your thinking behind the offer.

It's unreasonable to expect another owner to counter or negotiate every out opf the blue offer you send. (It is NOT unreasonable to expect them to hit the accept or reject button within a few days.) It's also not unreasonable to expect at least a short response if you've put more effort into a complicated deal, but only if that deal comes with some explanation. Send me a blockbuster 5 player for 4 player, multi stud involved deal, out of the blue, and I'm rejecting almost immediately unless it's obviously slanted towards me. Those are the offers that annoy me.

 

[SouthJersey]

I hate the guys who send offers along with an explanation of why this is an awesome deal for me, and a risky deal for them....especially when they're trying to get one of my studs in exchange for 2 average guys.

 

[renesauz]

My favorite is when you make an offer for someone, they tell you its a lateral move, then ask you to throw in a first round pick (redraft with keepers comes out to 2-3 round pick)I made a trade last season Ray Rice, Sidney Rice and Antonio Gates for Ahmad Bradshaw, MJD and Hakeem Nicks. Ask them again at the end of the season if he would be interested in trading Rice back for MJD (knowing that he knows im a Rice fan and he is a MJD fan). "Dont think I can make a lateral move like that without a late first round incentive" I happened to be flush with second and third round picks by selling off my keepers, and thats the story of how I ended up with MJD instead of Ray Rice.

our league doesn't allow "tradebacks"allowing them promotes player rentals and "future considerations" trading

Is it really a "tradeback" if it happens several months later? just because I sent Ray Rice to a guy last summer shouldn't prevent me from getting him back in trade this summer.

 

[renesauz]

Help me to understand:

Why does a simple deal out of the blue require an explanation when it's rejected?

I'm not trying to be obtuse. I really don't understand. Sometimes I CAN'T explain. Sometimes I simply want the guy I aquired. Why does this make me a "bad trader"?

 

[SouthJersey]

Help me to understand:Why does a simple deal out of the blue require an explanation when it's rejected?I'm not trying to be obtuse. I really don't understand. Sometimes I CAN'T explain. Sometimes I simply want the guy I aquired. Why does this make me a "bad trader"?

Agree. Nobody owes an explanation if they reject an offer.

 

[Late225]

I'm not a fan of the "shotgun" traders.That is, guys who continually spray ridiculous low-ball offers to every team in the league at once, hoping someone will eventually bite.

I hate the guys who bite.

 

[Instinctive]

Help me to understand:Why does a simple deal out of the blue require an explanation when it's rejected?I'm not trying to be obtuse. I really don't understand. Sometimes I CAN'T explain. Sometimes I simply want the guy I aquired. Why does this make me a "bad trader"?

The least you could do (and what I do here) is just say you really like the guy and are not interested in moving him.I usually add that all my guys are available for the right price...but his price is 2x or 3x his consensus value.I mean come on...I won't shut the door entirely if perhaps a guy wants to drastically overpay.

 

[GregR]

Help me to understand:Why does a simple deal out of the blue require an explanation when it's rejected?I'm not trying to be obtuse. I really don't understand. Sometimes I CAN'T explain. Sometimes I simply want the guy I aquired. Why does this make me a "bad trader"?

Maybe we're on slightly different pages. You're talking about requiring "an explanation". As a potential trade partner, I don't need to know details why you value him as you do. I just need an idea of what you value him at so I have an idea on how to proceed in talking about a trade, or if it's worth pursuing.Here's how it feels on the other end of someone who just hits the "reject" button. Picture yourself going into a store and trying to buy something and having it go like this.You: I'd like to buy this.Clerk: Ok.You: Um... ok, can I buy it for $2?Clerk: No.You: Can I buy it for $3?Clerk: No.You: Can I trade in my old one and buy it for $1.50?Clerk: No.You: How about you work with me and give me an idea of what it costs?Clerk: It costs $3.25. -or- That object isn't for sale.I don't really care why it costs $3.25 or isn't for sale. Just tell me, it isn't that hard to type, "I can't see a win-win trade for him that both of us would accept." Or even better, "I'm most interested in improving at WR3 and back up QB, but I don't see a win-win trade between us there."To me half of it is simple common courtesy and half of it is working in your own self-interest. For all you know the guy may say, "I don't like Matt Schaub at all this year and would trade him if you think he'd be an improvement at back up QB."I'll also add, you seem to be taking this as owners sending a trade out of the blue only. That isn't the case when I run into it. I always call, email, or send a blurb on the trade offer. Because I think that is also both common courtesy, and again, in my own best interest.

 

[JAA]

What frustrates me are the aholes that respond with insults or get defensive etc instead of offering a counter or explaining what they would feel comfortable trading.

 

[renesauz]

Help me to understand:Why does a simple deal out of the blue require an explanation when it's rejected?I'm not trying to be obtuse. I really don't understand. Sometimes I CAN'T explain. Sometimes I simply want the guy I aquired. Why does this make me a "bad trader"?

The least you could do (and what I do here) is just say you really like the guy and are not interested in moving him.I usually add that all my guys are available for the right price...but his price is 2x or 3x his consensus value.I mean come on...I won't shut the door entirely if perhaps a guy wants to drastically overpay.

There's nothing that says you can't send a second, more aggressive offer for the same player with a note that says "I am very high on this player...what can I get him for?"Nobody (reasonable) is going to be offended by that. A second FAIR or better than fair offer for the same player with such a note deserves an explanation or counter. Trust me...if the player is remotely available...you'll get a response.The unsolicited market or slightly below market offer shouldn't require an explanation for rejection. The reason should be inferred to be either "my offer is far lower than he believes the guy is worth". Sned me an out of the blue offer of a 2nd for a young backup WR, with no explanation or alternatives...you don't "deserve" an explanaiton or counter.

 

[renesauz]

What frustrates me are the aholes that respond with insults or get defensive etc instead of offering a counter or explaining what they would feel comfortable trading.

I understand this....but that shouldn't include a simple rejection.

 

[mbuehner]

I just get frustrated when somebody offers you a trade and after a bunch of negotiations it becomes clear that he just isnt going to give up anything that will downgrade any positions, no matter what. I mean- unless you're trading backup kickers any deal worth talking about you are going to lose in one spot to gain somewhere else (unless you are absolutely stacked somewhere and trading depth). A stud is worth more than 2 schleps- im not going to give you the missing piece to your puzzle in exchange for guys that wont make my starting roster (unless i have a really good reason). Pro tip- if they arent starting for you, they probly arent starting for me.

 

[Instinctive]

Help me to understand:Why does a simple deal out of the blue require an explanation when it's rejected?I'm not trying to be obtuse. I really don't understand. Sometimes I CAN'T explain. Sometimes I simply want the guy I aquired. Why does this make me a "bad trader"?

The least you could do (and what I do here) is just say you really like the guy and are not interested in moving him.I usually add that all my guys are available for the right price...but his price is 2x or 3x his consensus value.I mean come on...I won't shut the door entirely if perhaps a guy wants to drastically overpay.

There's nothing that says you can't send a second, more aggressive offer for the same player with a note that says "I am very high on this player...what can I get him for?"Nobody (reasonable) is going to be offended by that. A second FAIR or better than fair offer for the same player with such a note deserves an explanation or counter. Trust me...if the player is remotely available...you'll get a response.The unsolicited market or slightly below market offer shouldn't require an explanation for rejection. The reason should be inferred to be either "my offer is far lower than he believes the guy is worth". Sned me an out of the blue offer of a 2nd for a young backup WR, with no explanation or alternatives...you don't "deserve" an explanaiton or counter.

Aren't all offers unsolicited? Putting a guy on the block basically says "Hey, I don't want this guy!"Well I kind of assume any offer comes with an "I was thinking......blah blah blah" note. The least you can do for any trade is a simple "No thanks" or " he's worth way more to me than that." No matter what - just because another guy likes manners doesn't mean you shouldn't use yours

 

[renesauz]

Help me to understand:Why does a simple deal out of the blue require an explanation when it's rejected?I'm not trying to be obtuse. I really don't understand. Sometimes I CAN'T explain. Sometimes I simply want the guy I aquired. Why does this make me a "bad trader"?

Maybe we're on slightly different pages. You're talking about requiring "an explanation". As a potential trade partner, I don't need to know details why you value him as you do. I just need an idea of what you value him at so I have an idea on how to proceed in talking about a trade, or if it's worth pursuing.Here's how it feels on the other end of someone who just hits the "reject" button. Picture yourself going into a store and trying to buy something and having it go like this.You: I'd like to buy this.Clerk: Ok.You: Um... ok, can I buy it for $2?Clerk: No.You: Can I buy it for $3?Clerk: No.You: Can I trade in my old one and buy it for $1.50?Clerk: No.You: How about you work with me and give me an idea of what it costs?Clerk: It costs $3.25. -or- That object isn't for sale.I don't really care why it costs $3.25 or isn't for sale. Just tell me, it isn't that hard to type, "I can't see a win-win trade for him that both of us would accept." Or even better, "I'm most interested in improving at WR3 and back up QB, but I don't see a win-win trade between us there."To me half of it is simple common courtesy and half of it is working in your own self-interest. For all you know the guy may say, "I don't like Matt Schaub at all this year and would trade him if you think he'd be an improvement at back up QB."I'll also add, you seem to be taking this as owners sending a trade out of the blue only. That isn't the case when I run into it. I always call, email, or send a blurb on the trade offer. Because I think that is also both common courtesy, and again, in my own best interest.

You're talking about something entirely different here. Your scenario is not a simple out of the blue offer. I'm not saying that counters and negotiations are NEVER required. I'm saying they shouldn't be expected for every simple unsolicited offer, ESPECIALLY when such offers have no explanation or alternatives attached. IN my experiance, 9 of 10 offers are both simple and unsolicited. 7 of 10 are BELOW market value. Why should I bother responding to an unsolicited below market offer for a guy I probably value above the market? My simple check of the rejection button is enough. If you're willing to pay above market...you'll offer again or ask. ETA: If an offer comes with any kind of alternative or explanation, I'll respond with SOMETHING (a counter or explanation) virtually every time. We aren't that far apart.

 

[Instinctive]

I guess the bottom line is that I don't give a #### what you do in trades...but the way you describe is not doing yourself any favors. I want to make it as easy as possible for me to improve my team - that means giving info to the other team even if they make a poor offer.

 

[mbuehner]

Help me to understand:Why does a simple deal out of the blue require an explanation when it's rejected?I'm not trying to be obtuse. I really don't understand. Sometimes I CAN'T explain. Sometimes I simply want the guy I aquired. Why does this make me a "bad trader"?

Maybe we're on slightly different pages. You're talking about requiring "an explanation". As a potential trade partner, I don't need to know details why you value him as you do. I just need an idea of what you value him at so I have an idea on how to proceed in talking about a trade, or if it's worth pursuing.Here's how it feels on the other end of someone who just hits the "reject" button. Picture yourself going into a store and trying to buy something and having it go like this.You: I'd like to buy this.Clerk: Ok.You: Um... ok, can I buy it for $2?Clerk: No.You: Can I buy it for $3?Clerk: No.You: Can I trade in my old one and buy it for $1.50?Clerk: No.You: How about you work with me and give me an idea of what it costs?Clerk: It costs $3.25. -or- That object isn't for sale.I don't really care why it costs $3.25 or isn't for sale. Just tell me, it isn't that hard to type, "I can't see a win-win trade for him that both of us would accept." Or even better, "I'm most interested in improving at WR3 and back up QB, but I don't see a win-win trade between us there."To me half of it is simple common courtesy and half of it is working in your own self-interest. For all you know the guy may say, "I don't like Matt Schaub at all this year and would trade him if you think he'd be an improvement at back up QB."I'll also add, you seem to be taking this as owners sending a trade out of the blue only. That isn't the case when I run into it. I always call, email, or send a blurb on the trade offer. Because I think that is also both common courtesy, and again, in my own best interest.

You're talking about something entirely different here. Your scenario is not a simple out of the blue offer. I'm not saying that counters and negotiations are NEVER required. I'm saying they shouldn't be expected for every simple unsolicited offer, ESPECIALLY when such offers have no explanation or alternatives attached. IN my experiance, 9 of 10 offers are both simple and unsolicited. 7 of 10 are BELOW market value. Why should I bother responding to an unsolicited below market offer for a guy I probably value above the market? My simple check of the rejection button is enough. If you're willing to pay above market...you'll offer again or ask.

I pretty much agree with this- if you want to negotiate, send an email. If you just send an offer out of the blue, i could well just hit reject if i see no prospect in it. Of course if there is something i see that is close, i'll counter or send an email myself. Just sending an offer without comment seems to me to just be fishing.

 

[GregR]

From my standpoint, I ask why would an owner not want to negotiate? How is being completely silent on it in his own best interest? When he does this, is he hoping the other owner does not make another offer? Is he hoping the other owner continues to blindly throw offers at him? I'm not sure how either of those helps one get to the kind of fair trade you said you like?

If the owner has no interest in trading, overall, then the negotiation process is a waste of his time. It's also possible your opening offer targeted one of his never-trade guys, and so again, you're wasting his time. Why counter-offer when you don't want to make a move at all?I can agree that in a perfect world, the other owner replies to you that he's not open to a trade. But if instead you get the silent treatment, interpret that as a clear "NO" and move on.

I realize that for you specifically and maybe some other people, a rejection without comment might be meant as a clear "no".But it definitely isn't the case for everyone. I've completed a lot of trades over the years where a first offer was met with a silent rejection but I finally got them to open up on what they perceived the value of the player to be, as well as what they felt their team's needs were.

I'll go so far as to say a lot of owners don't reply to an email about a potential trade, or reply with "I'll look at it later" and never do. I've found that a lot of the time, making an actual offer is the only way to get them to start really considering things. They'll silently reject, but then my next email gets some feedback and starts a trade negotiation.

 

[renesauz]

Aren't all offers unsolicited? Putting a guy on the block basically says "Hey, I don't want this guy!"Well I kind of assume any offer comes with an "I was thinking......blah blah blah" note. The least you can do for any trade is a simple "No thanks" or " he's worth way more to me than that." No matter what - just because another guy likes manners doesn't mean you shouldn't use yours

I really do understand what you're saying....but I don't understand why guys would routinely send below market offers out for players on my roster. And it's the same guys all the time. You know the ones...they aren't happy unless they make a roster move weekly. They send out 4 or 5 trade offers almost every week....the overwhelming majority of them below market.I'll be honest...if it irritates you and keeps you from sending stupid below market offers to me every other week...I'm OK with that. I make $$$ every year on this hobby. There are 3 or 4 trade partners in every league I can make reasonable deals with that are usually win-win. If you want better responses...send better offers. Send something besides a straight up draft pick for player trade out of the blue with no explanation. Hell...simply ASK what the selling price would be. Most offers feel like someones trying to get over on me. Most are WR40-45 pricetag for a guy I rank in the low 20s.IE: I'm irritated by constant unsolicited lowball offers!