fanofchiefs
Footballguy
One of my leagues never seems to trade. I'm looking for ways to get everyone involved.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
How does your league promote trading? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter fanofchiefs
- Start date
FantasyTrader
Footballguy
All parties involved in a trade get a Blow Pop sucker. 
ImTheScientist
Footballguy
1. Helps if you know everyone in your league2. We have about 4-5 teams who offer up A LOT of trades and thats why things eventually get done IMO.3. Some owners just don't like to trade....EVER
Buddy Ball 2K3
Footballguy
Become a keeper league with contracts that expire after 3 years but are renewed for 3 years once they go to a new team.
jdoggydogg
Footballguy
This is frustrating. My league also has very little trading. Two ways we promote trading:1) While adding players via free agency costs $, trades are free.2) In our dynasty salary cap league, pre-season trades can be sweetened by trading salary cap relief. So if you want to trade Shaun Alexander but the other owner doesn't like SA's high cap figure, you can offer the other owner $15 of your cap space as enticement.
dirtyhalos
capital letter hater!
trading breeds more trades, i just suggest sending out as many offers as you can.......as people start to look at and examine their rosters, the offers and deals should go up in general
videoguy505
Footballguy
My league is full of morons. I'll offer a fair trade for a backup WR and they'll say no, "unless I throw in Rudi Johnson."
About 3 trades happen all season.
[rant] It's also a keeper league, keep 3, any position, no restrictions, no cost, nothing else, just every team keeps 3 players and then we draft. Some idiot kept Tony Romo instead of Travis Henry or McNabb. Another one almost kept Leinart in addtion to Tom Brady and Hines Ward, and was going to drop McAllister instead. Morons. We allow trading draft slots, but no one bit this year. I was offering Moss and/or Burress to switch out of the #12 slot (yeah, I was the champ last year). No takers. Another guy offered Portis a month ago, before tendinitis showed up (he was already keeping Carson Palmer, Addai, and Ronnie Brown, so Portis was expendable) to move from #9 to #6, and was refused. [/rant]
About 3 trades happen all season.
[rant] It's also a keeper league, keep 3, any position, no restrictions, no cost, nothing else, just every team keeps 3 players and then we draft. Some idiot kept Tony Romo instead of Travis Henry or McNabb. Another one almost kept Leinart in addtion to Tom Brady and Hines Ward, and was going to drop McAllister instead. Morons. We allow trading draft slots, but no one bit this year. I was offering Moss and/or Burress to switch out of the #12 slot (yeah, I was the champ last year). No takers. Another guy offered Portis a month ago, before tendinitis showed up (he was already keeping Carson Palmer, Addai, and Ronnie Brown, so Portis was expendable) to move from #9 to #6, and was refused. [/rant]
Last edited by a moderator:
Make good trade offers.
I turn down 99% of the offers I get because many owners don't seem to analyze a trade very well. Look at the other guy's team and see if you can put a package together that actually improves his team on paper. If you make an offer that only benefits your team, then don't complain about a lack of trades when the guy turns you down.
Bottom line is that if teams are making crappy offers over and over, then very few trades will ever get done.
I turn down 99% of the offers I get because many owners don't seem to analyze a trade very well. Look at the other guy's team and see if you can put a package together that actually improves his team on paper. If you make an offer that only benefits your team, then don't complain about a lack of trades when the guy turns you down.
Bottom line is that if teams are making crappy offers over and over, then very few trades will ever get done.
turnit643
Footballguy
Restrict the number of FA transactions each team can use each season.
I realize that may be a bit dramatic and that the WW hawks out there are cringing at the thought, but if you really want to drive people towards trading, it needs to be hammered into the league's mindset that trading is the way to acquire talent after the draft. As a by-product, rights to FA pick-ups become a commodity as well. One league of mine uses this (each team gets only 5 cuts for the year) ... trade talk continues year round, 16 teams and around 40 trades last season involving players, picks, cuts and cap dollars.
I realize that may be a bit dramatic and that the WW hawks out there are cringing at the thought, but if you really want to drive people towards trading, it needs to be hammered into the league's mindset that trading is the way to acquire talent after the draft. As a by-product, rights to FA pick-ups become a commodity as well. One league of mine uses this (each team gets only 5 cuts for the year) ... trade talk continues year round, 16 teams and around 40 trades last season involving players, picks, cuts and cap dollars.
GregR_2
Footballguy
Structuring things so that players at some point will have more value to other teams than to you would be one thing you can do. For instance, a team can keep the player at the round he was drafted minus 2, or he can trade him to another team who can keep him at the round he was drafted.
In my dynasty league, with hard salary cap, player contracts, and options to extend them 1 year before they expire, there is a huge amount of movement as teams can't afford raises to extend everyone they want, so end up looking to move choice players for the cap room to give another guy an extension. We also have a rookie draft so there is a great option for balancing out trades or getting something for a player. I have been amazed how much this setup has encouraged trading. There have been 23 trades since May 14 which was right before our rookie draft, or about 2.5 trades every week, and that's over the summer!
In my dynasty league, with hard salary cap, player contracts, and options to extend them 1 year before they expire, there is a huge amount of movement as teams can't afford raises to extend everyone they want, so end up looking to move choice players for the cap room to give another guy an extension. We also have a rookie draft so there is a great option for balancing out trades or getting something for a player. I have been amazed how much this setup has encouraged trading. There have been 23 trades since May 14 which was right before our rookie draft, or about 2.5 trades every week, and that's over the summer!
BigSteelThrill
Footballguy
Good answer. I've always found limited keeper to be more fun then dynasty or redraft. Including the trading aspects.
jdoggydogg
Footballguy
Also, I think some owners don't want to / or don't know how to make counteroffers. I am never insulted by a lopsided trade offer. If that owner has a player I covet, I simply counteroffer with the player I want.
Bizkiteer
Footballguy
Major contributor to roster movement has to do with Roster Size and amount of Teams. If the rosters are too large and it's a 10 team league, then there is a problem. Teams are too deep and no movement is even needed when injuries happen. When rosters are not as deep and bigger league, most teams always have holes...so they always looking to make moves.
BigSteelThrill
Footballguy
Just one of many reasons that 10 team leagues are simply way too small.
GregR_2
Footballguy
I disagree with you on big rosters mean little trading. I would say that scarcity of quality players on waivers promotes trading. When you can't go out to waivers to get the players you most want who aren't already starting for another team, is when you're going to have to trade.That means more teams = more trading, and more roster spots = more trading. Because though you may have more roster spots yourself, the odds are greater that the players you most want are on those 11 other rosters than on your own. And if they are on your own, then someone else probably is in a situation to want them from you.
BigSteelThrill
Footballguy
BTW: IDPs greatly increase trading.
Can't be overstated, as long as you start a decent amount of them.
Can't be overstated, as long as you start a decent amount of them.
crnerblitz
Footballguy
Increasing roster size is counter intuitive to what you would think would increase trading. While I would tend to agree I'm not entirely sold on the premise though. I think league makeup affects trades much more than roster size.Slight hijack Greg. You called your league a Dynasty yet it has contracts. Isn't it really a Salary Cap Contract League and not a Dynasty Keep All type league? The two leagues have entirely different stratagies and mechanics to them.Hijack over.
GregR_2
Footballguy
On the Hijack, yes it's a salary contract league, but if I'm just going to briefly describe it, Dynasty is what I'd say, as it is a league where you keep your entire roster unless their contract is up. Which generally means you're keeping about 70-75% of your roster.On the roster size, think of it like this. Let's say we both have 6 bench spots. You have your bench players 1-6 on your bench, and I have my bench players 1-6 on my bench. Now we change the rules and we only get 3 bench spots, so you keep your players 1-3 and I keep my players 1-3, and we both cut our 4-6th best bench players.Ok, now you have an injury to a starter. Your bench player 4 was the best guy to plug in. When we had big rosters he was already on your team so no trade. With small rosters, he's on waivers so you pick him up, no trade. Now let's say you have that injury, but MY bench player 4 was the best guy to plug in. With big rosters you would have had to trade me for him. With small rosters he's on waivers so you pick him up, no trade.That's an illustration of why small rosters do not facilitiate more trades. Some of the guys you would have had to trade for before are now sitting on waivers where you can pick them up without trading.
Last edited by a moderator:
I have to agree here with GregR. I've been in a 10 team league for about 5 years now. The rosters are very small and you can always pick up a decent player off the waver wire. I don't think there has even been 6 trades in this league in 5years.
SSOG
Moderator
Establish a reputation as a fair trader, and more trades will follow. The key to establishing such a reputation is to constantly be on the lookout for WIN-WIN trades. Don't be afraid to improve your opponent's lineup, as long as yours improves, too. Heck, don't be afraid to improve the other team more than you improve your own. If I make a trade that improves the other team by 4 points per game and my team by 2 points per game, I still look at it as a successful trade, since I improved my team (while the quality of my team compared to the other team declined, the quality of my team compared to every other team in the league increased, resulting in a net improvement of my team compared to the league as a whole). Don't be afraid to "lose" some trades (i.e. give up way more than you get in return) as long as you improve your team in the process.For some examples, I play in a keep-3 league where everyone keeps for their cost last season + 2 rounds (so if paid a 5th rounder for a player last year, this year he keeps for a 3rd). In this league, I have made some fabulous trades (in the first year I traded Duce Staley for Antonio Gates back when he was still much of an unknown, and have kept him for a double-digit draft pick every year since)... but I have also intentionally gotten hammered on some trades, too. For instance, I had Chester Taylor (who kept for a 22nd rounder) last year after he got traded to Minnesota, but I couldn't keep him. I traded him away for an 8th rounder, which was *WAAAAAY* less than he was worth... but I didn't mind, because I improved my team (I wasn't going to keep him anyway, so it was a free 8th rounder), and because I helped reinforce my reputation as a fair trader. In the same league, I traded Ladell Betts last year for someone's backup kicker, and I traded Laurence Maroney (who keeps for an 11th, iirc) for Anquan Boldin (who was drafted in the 2nd round and was therefore unkeepable). In every single one of those trades, I definitely got significantly less value than the other owner... but every one of those trades improved my team (which wound up winning the Superbowl in large part thanks to those moves, which netted me my kicker and two of my starting WRs in exchange for three RBs that I couldn't start and wouldn't keep)... and most importantly, every one of those trades proved that I wasn't someone who was looking to "win" every trade and make the other person look foolish. People trade with me because they think they can "win" the trades with me and make ME look foolish... and I'm more than happy to let them, as long as my team gets improved as a result.As a good example, there's a story I once heard about a "village idiot". He was famous for miles around because if you gave him the choice between a nice, shiny quarter and a crumpled up $5 bill, he took the quarter every single time. Everyone made fun of him for it, but he was actually very smart- if he ever took the $5 bill, he would no longer be such an oddity, and people would stop offering him the choice. In the end, he became the richest man in town because thousands of quarters are worth more than a single $5 bill. I like to think that I run my team that way- I'd rather make a lot of little trades that result in minor improvements but increase my good-faith capital than one blockbuster trade where I rip off someone else and improve my team a ton, but establish a reputation as someone that no one ever wants to trade with again.As an example of the philosophy in action... I recently made a trade in this league that wound up netting me a 2nd round draft pick. Initially, the other owner was leery of making the trade because he still bitterly remembers the Staley-for-Gates trade I made with him a couple of years ago, and was worried that I was going to make him look bad again. Once I reminded him about how he managed to "sneak one by me" and "totally steal" Chester Taylor away from me for an 8th round pick, and that Chester was a top-10 RB in our scoring system last year, he softened and agreed to the trade. That Chester Taylor trade didn't result in that much value at the time, but after everything was said and done, he more than justified the perceived "loss" I took on him.brbarnhart
Footballguy
Some one has to explain to me why lots of trades make a league more fun. One suggestion above was to basically pay people to make trades. Very strange idea to me. I know I swim upstream on this issue, but I don't understand the infatuation with being in a league with lots of trades.
I personally don't make a lot of moves. I make trades if they make sense. If I am weak at one position, but strong at another position, then I will seek out a trade. I don't understand the mindset of those who want to trade players around just for the sake of making a trade. For me, the draft is the most fun day of the year. I do extensive planning and make decisions to pick players that I like and think will do well. I am not sure why I should trade them for new players every few days. I just don't get it. But I seem to be in the minority and that is ok. I don't have a problem if other teams in the league make trades, but it certainly doesn't make a league better to me. In fact, most of the situations that spring to mind make the league a whole lot worse. One owner will completely take advantage of another owner in a lopsided trade and then the league either becomes embroiled in controversy, or the competitive balance is ruined. How is this improving my experience? I just don't get it.
I personally don't make a lot of moves. I make trades if they make sense. If I am weak at one position, but strong at another position, then I will seek out a trade. I don't understand the mindset of those who want to trade players around just for the sake of making a trade. For me, the draft is the most fun day of the year. I do extensive planning and make decisions to pick players that I like and think will do well. I am not sure why I should trade them for new players every few days. I just don't get it. But I seem to be in the minority and that is ok. I don't have a problem if other teams in the league make trades, but it certainly doesn't make a league better to me. In fact, most of the situations that spring to mind make the league a whole lot worse. One owner will completely take advantage of another owner in a lopsided trade and then the league either becomes embroiled in controversy, or the competitive balance is ruined. How is this improving my experience? I just don't get it.
1huskerfan
Footballguy
aka 'the Mike Damone' approach
BigSteelThrill
Footballguy
Increased owner interaction makes the game fun.Of course some don't want fun, they just want to win or to just play. But most prefer to have fun with fantasy football and trading can be a big boost to owner participation and interaction.
SSOG
Moderator
To be honest, I think trading is fun for the exact same reason that Drafting is fun- it lets you play "What If?" with your team, although this time instead of saying "What if I go with RB1 here, will WR1 still be available in the next round or will I have to settle for WR2, and would I rather have RB1 and WR2 or WR1 and RB2?", you're saying "What if I trade RB1 here, will WR1 be fair value? Would I rather keep RB1 paired up with WR2, or would I rather trade him, fall back to RB2, and then start a corps of WR1 and WR2?"Trading involves many of the same fun aspects as drafting- evaluating talent, reading other owners, making decisions based on what gives you the strongest roster, playing games of chicken to see who is going to blink first, and dreaming about what players you could acquire or what rosters you could put together- but unlike the draft, Trading is a year-round activity. Why restrict your "let's play GM" fun to a single day of the year when the other 364 days are perfectly good, too?I'm not one to trade just for the sake of trading- every trade must result in a clearly defined improvement in my roster (in my mind), I don't go for lateral trades that neither help me nor hurt me- but at the same time, I'm always of the opinion that, as good as my team is, there's always some way to make it better. Besides, every year I wind up with players on my team that I simply don't need (for instance, if I have 5 usable runningbacks), so what better thing to do with those pieces than trade them for other pieces that I *DO* need? To me, trades are simply a tool much like the waiver wire- something whose sole purpose is to aid me in bettering my team.
GregR_2
Footballguy
I agree with what BigSteelThrill and SSOG just said. I don't trade for the sake of trading, every trade is an attempt to improve my team.
But that said I've been in one or two leagues over the years where I didn't know the other owners and never saw any interaction between them. I could have gotten as much out a league with a well done set of computer AI opponents as I did from those leagues.
The negotiating and finding new ways to improve my team add a dimension every bit as fun and satisfying as drafting or auctioning. The interaction with other owners also makes the games mean a little more when I'm playing a person I interact with frequently and not just some name associated with a roster.
But that said I've been in one or two leagues over the years where I didn't know the other owners and never saw any interaction between them. I could have gotten as much out a league with a well done set of computer AI opponents as I did from those leagues.
The negotiating and finding new ways to improve my team add a dimension every bit as fun and satisfying as drafting or auctioning. The interaction with other owners also makes the games mean a little more when I'm playing a person I interact with frequently and not just some name associated with a roster.
JuSt CuZ
Footballguy
People don't trade because there scared to take a chance........ and if they do trade they r to busy trading for names instead of actual production. i'm sick of people saying they know something about football, yet when you offer a trade of deshaun for lamont straight up and they already have deangelo so they might want to hand cuff and they say "stupid trade" it makes me wonder if they know anything at all......SNIFFER!!!!
But trading is never gonna be promoted well, too many panzees play. they put in the lineup and dont care, but lets ask.......... will you ever make a superbowl if you dont make any moves at all mcsteelers? I lead my league in add drops and trades and i'm holding the trophy (and the ring) so you do the math.
just cuz saying now you hear me, now ya...........
But trading is never gonna be promoted well, too many panzees play. they put in the lineup and dont care, but lets ask.......... will you ever make a superbowl if you dont make any moves at all mcsteelers? I lead my league in add drops and trades and i'm holding the trophy (and the ring) so you do the math.
just cuz saying now you hear me, now ya...........
Warhogs
Footballguy
I agree here. If you want to increase trading then increase roster sizes and starting requirements and limit the number of FA claims each taem has during the year.
george
Footballguy
Best answer. Large rosters and limit waiver/FA moves. If there are less startable players on waivers and teams have needs they will have to trade to meet them. My league limits FA moves to ONE per week. 12 teams. Roster is 18 with 9 starters.Most teams are okay, until an injury occurs. Then you have to decide whether to use your waiver pick for a filler or whether or not to pick up a K/D/TE if your starter is on bye. Our league trades frequently. Probably 15-20 per year.
Bizkiteer
Footballguy
If you're not playing with a bunch of tools, then bigger rosters usually means FA pool is limited. Other than the freak bust out player from nowhere...bigger rosters cut down the pool greatly. Then again, many people play in free dunce type leagues and wonder why a starting RB is still on the waiver wire. Also, bigger roster usually means that you have more in the wings. I played in a 10 team league about 10 yrs ago and will never do it again, everyone had all stars throughout their roster. So, if a guy went down...who cares there were plenty on their own roster so they didn't even need to go to the FA wire, let alone make a trade.
Bizkiteer
Footballguy
I agree because there is much more value all over and more holes to fix than playing without IDP. Though it's always easier to find defensive talent in the FA pool than offensive.
Bizkiteer
Footballguy
In all honesty, depending on size of league...the best solution is to have not too smal or not too big rosters. This way, there is not a great deal of talent in the FA pool and not great deal of depth on your roster. That way, when an injury does happen, the owner can't fix it easy by picking up or inserting another all star. If they can, then injury is not a concern and no need to look elsewhere.I'd also point out as being discussed by others, trading doesn't have to occur. I never understand an owner who doesn't attempt to fix their team though and almost every league has an owner like that. Maybe they are scared to pull the trigger or maybe they have inflated views on their other players and the ability to perfom weekly...who knows. You can't make people trade, but roster size has impact on FA moves.Smaller roster, makes owners not be able to store 2 PK's, 2 TE's, or 2 DEF's. Thus, come bye week they have to make at least one move there.
plymkr
Footballguy
My experience exactly. Why go through the hassle of trying to make a trade when you can pick someone up on the waiver wire who is comparable. We have a 10 team league...the perfect sizein my opinion, but we need 18 roster spots instead of 16.
GregR_2
Footballguy
Not exactly. If you have 4 more roster spots, you have exclusive access to those 4 players, and you have good access to everyone on waivers. Take away those 4 roster spots and you lose the EXCLUSIVE access to them. But you still have access to them if you are in a situation you need to replace a player, because they are on waivers. In addition, the other 11 teams had to cut 4 players meaning now you have waiver access to 44 other players you had zero access to before, short of trading.So one could technically say you have more in the wings in that you have more exclusive players. But with bigger rosters you actually have less players in the total pool of players you can access. Which is more likely to force you to trade.
Last edited by a moderator:
NYGus
Footballguy
I disagree. I've been in a 10 team for 17 years and it's a great league. The competition is excellent, plenty of trades- blockbusters in fact-many including future draft picks. We have set rosters of 17 and everyone must carry 2QB,4RB,5WR,2TE,2PK,2DF. This way people don't stockpile one position on their bench. Also each team is only allowed 1 pick up per week (excluding IR moves)As for "promoting trading"-we don't promote it, it just happens. Some owners are more into it than others but every owner in my league has made trades over the years.
Last edited by a moderator:
BigSteelThrill
Footballguy
Your league would be the exception, not the rule. Having 17 years states something very positive about your league and owners beyond any size or format.There, of course, will always be exceptions to any generality.I disagree. I've been in a 10 team for 17 years and it's a great league. The competition is excellent, plenty of trades- blockbusters in fact-many including future draft picks. We have set rosters of 17 and everyone must carry 2QB,4RB,5WR,2TE,2PK,2DF. This way people don't stockpile one position on their bench. Also each team is only allowed 1 pick up per week (excluding IR moves)As for "promoting trading"-we don't promote it, it just happens. Some owners are more into it than others but every owner in my league has made trades over the years.
fanofchiefs
Footballguy
My league is 12 teams with rosters of 17. Maybe it should be reduced to ~15. But then talent will be available via WW.
GregR_2
Footballguy
As said elsewhere in the thread and as you noted as well, cutting roster size would reduce the need to trade. Make your rosters larger if you want more trading.
