My thoughts on Fantasy trading (1 Viewer)

[JohnnyU]

Most of guys in my league know that my first offers are about as close to the final offer as it gets. Yes, there can be some tweaking, like swapping players of similar talent, but they know that I don't low ball (in my mind) with my first offer with the hopes of getting a counter. You have to know your trading partner. Now that's not to say that others not involved in the trade haven't considered my trades unbalanced, either for or against me, but at the time of the trade it seemed fair to those involved in the trade.

I don't know why in some people's mind they think that haggling has to be involved in every trade.

I look to trade for players that can help my team and IMO help the other team. I know ahead of time how much value I'm willing to offer for that player and I try to make the first offer the right offer. What is good about this method is that you don't insult others with ridiculous offers. Those who like to low ball with the first offer in hopes of initiating dialog for trading, only stymie trade negations with some owners.

Edited to add some thoughts that I posted in this thread, but would like in the initial post.

I believe the team wanting to trade is obligated to make the initial offer (and not a low ball one).

I hate the initial trading email saying, "What would you want for LT?". Hell, if LT was on the market I would be shopping him. Owners send out these emails for the reason of not wanting to make an offer, but instead wanting you to make the offer. They want to trade, but are afraid to make a good initial offer. If you want LT, offer me something. Of course the rebuttle to that is always, "I'm saving myself and you time by guaging whether you are interested in trading a particular player". When really all they are doing is getting you to offer LT for something. It's a cat and mouse game that I don't play. When I'm interested in trading for a player I go after him, and that means me making a good offer for that player.

What I find amusing is there are so many owners who feel that if they make a good first offer and you accept it, they somehow got cheated. It's called insecurity about their own abilities to trade I guess. There are so many who take the approach start low, get a counter, and meet somwhere in the middle. That approach IMO causes a lot of trades to not happen. If you like the deal, accept it, instead of trying to "one up" for the sake of having to "WIN" the trade. The guy you are trying to "One Up" will remember you being a difficult person to trade with, and the offers will not come as often in the future.

By making a good initial offer I may not always win the trade, but if I have confidence in my abilities as an owner I will win my share. The point is not to have to "win the trade", but to help your team. This makes others want to trade with you IMO.

 

[fruity pebbles]

Beats me. Lowballing me is the quickest way to get me to ignore you.

 

[diesel7982]

I don't get the fascination with trading. I can see making a move if you need a player, or you think you know a guy is going to have a big year.But constantly sending out offers and trying to make moves....whats the point?

 

[Lord of the Rings]

Beats me. Lowballing me is the quickest way to get me to ignore you.

I have a pretty wide strike zone when it comes to trading. I'll consider most anything. But if an owner consistently throws garbage at me, then I don't even mess with a reply. Give me something to swing at.

 

[elpasotexan]

I think it's psychological. I work in an industry when we negotiate 24/7. If you offer the "true" price right off the bat, there is a skepticism, a cynicism that somehow they are being duped. Therefore, at work, I negotiate within a few percentage points of where I deem "true value" is, so the other side can counter to what TV is. It's kinda like when stores can't sell a widget for $1, but if they jack it up to $2 and say it's 50% off, more people buy it. Everone wants a deal. You also are assuming that your perception of true value is the same as the person sitting across from you. If I think my potential trding partner has a weak corps of WRs with B. Edwards, B. Engram and S. Parker, but he thinks they all have BOOM or long term potential, he may not think he needs a WR as much as I do. Therefore if I offer him a WR, he may think he does not need one as bad and may reject any offer short of raping me. Humans tend to perceive (usually) that they are in a better situation than they truly are. Just as everyone thinks they kicked butt the day of the draft, and just as some people held on to K JOnes all year in hopes of him rebounding, people over estimate the value of their teams. Hence the haggling. It's human nature.

 

[gman8343]

I think it's psychological. I work in an industry when we negotiate 24/7. If you offer the "true" price right off the bat, there is a skepticism, a cynicism that somehow they are being duped. Therefore, at work, I negotiate within a few percentage points of where I deem "true value" is, so the other side can counter to what TV is. It's kinda like when stores can't sell a widget for $1, but if they jack it up to $2 and say it's 50% off, more people buy it. Everone wants a deal. You also are assuming that your perception of true value is the same as the person sitting across from you. If I think my potential trding partner has a weak corps of WRs with B. Edwards, B. Engram and S. Parker, but he thinks they all have BOOM or long term potential, he may not think he needs a WR as much as I do. Therefore if I offer him a WR, he may think he does not need one as bad and may reject any offer short of raping me. Humans tend to perceive (usually) that they are in a better situation than they truly are. Just as everyone thinks they kicked butt the day of the draft, and just as some people held on to K JOnes all year in hopes of him rebounding, people over estimate the value of their teams. Hence the haggling. It's human nature.

That's what I was gonna say, except much less eloquently.

 

[Keys Myaths]

My strategy is simple when it comes to this...I won't make the first offer...period.We'll go back and forth over e-mail about 5 times before they give in, but I won't do it. Too many people are "insulted" because I think their needs are different than theirs, etc. Basically, that thin skin (seriously, it's a fantasy football trade) caused me to have to do it this way. But, it's extremely effective.I'm often surprised at how little people want for a certain player...which is a huge advantage to doing it this way...Just hope you don't run into someone who has this same policy...or else the e-mails get pretty funny trying to bait an offer out of the other person.

 

[Exile]

Yeah, low ball trade offers are a real turn off. On the other hand, everyone values players differently, and I hate wondering if I could have gotten more/given less in a trade. So generally, rather than starting with a specific offer, I'll start with just the principles. I might send an email where I say "Any interest in a trade centering around Player A and Player B?" Since there is no specific offer at this point, there's no danger of a feeling of low-balling. The response I get tells me a lot about how the other owner values the two players and the haggling starts from there (unless there is no interest at all).

 

[fruity pebbles]

Yeah, low ball trade offers are a real turn off. On the other hand, everyone values players differently, and I hate wondering if I could have gotten more/given less in a trade. So generally, rather than starting with a specific offer, I'll start with just the principles. I might send an email where I say "Any interest in a trade centering around Player A and Player B?" Since there is no specific offer at this point, there's no danger of a feeling of low-balling. The response I get tells me a lot about how the other owner values the two players and the haggling starts from there (unless there is no interest at all).

that's exactly what I do and it works great.

 

[JohnnyU]

My strategy is simple when it comes to this...

I won't make the first offer...period.

We'll go back and forth over e-mail about 5 times before they give in, but I won't do it. Too many people are "insulted" because I think their needs are different than theirs, etc. Basically, that thin skin (seriously, it's a fantasy football trade) caused me to have to do it this way. But, it's extremely effective.

I'm often surprised at how little people want for a certain player...which is a huge advantage to doing it this way...

Just hope you don't run into someone who has this same policy...or else the e-mails get pretty funny trying to bait an offer out of the other person.

I also have a simple rule, that if someone wants to trade with me, and I'm not the one wanting to trade, t's up to them to make the offer. If I'm the one wanting to trade initially, then I make the offer.

 

[Kleck.]

I'm the same way JohnnyU. If I'm looking to trade, there is a reason why I want to trade for or trade away that player or draft pick and I like to get a good offer on the table and get it done. No hassles, no low-balls. I make a few trades in my dynasty league and I'm always happy with what I get at the time and I want the other side to feel the same way. I may want to go back to that owner someday and don't want to ever leave some burning bridges.As long as you find the system that works best for you is all that really matters. This one does me, and I have the respect from all of the other owners because of it.

 

[nightshift]

Most of guys in my league know that my first offers are about as close to the final offer as it gets. Yes, there can be some tweaking, like swapping players of similar talent, but they know that I don't low ball (in my mind) with my first offer with the hopes of getting a counter. You have to know your trading partner. Now that's not to say that others not involved in the trade haven't considered my trades unbalanced, either for or against me, but at the time of the trade it seemed fair to those involved in the trade.

I don't know why in some people's mind they think that haggling has to be involved in every trade. I point this out to those who don't understand my method of trading, and if they don't like it, tuff s--t. I look to trade for players that can help my team and IMO help the other team. I know ahead of time how much value I'm willing to offer for that player and I try to make the first offer the right offer. What is good about this method is that you don't insult others with ridiculous offers. Those who like to low ball with the first offer in hopes of initiating dialog for trading, only stymie trade negations with some owners.

Do not forget this a GAME we are playing. Where's the excitment, the sport, the thrill of the deal in making a first and final offer?I have use low-ball, high- offer, fair-offer, ask what you are looking for, etc. etc. etc.

The point is: IF THEY REPLY, THEY ARE A TRADE WAITING TO HAPPEN! You have to make the deal.

IF they do not repsond to your pre-conceived notions of value or how the deal should go down, so what? They are not you. Everyone trades by their value system, their trading style, etc.

If you want a deal to happen, it's up to YOU (trader) to determine what makes this player tick. What trips this person's deal making trigger. You need to know that to make not just a deal, but a great deal!

So how do find that out? Listen, ask, listen some more, ask again, etc. COMMUNICATE. Determine the other's fantasy football strategies, likes, dislikes, etc. Pay attention to what info they give and use it to your advantage.

You can't do that if you are going to limit yourself with carved in stone, self-imposed restrictive trading policies.

If someone lowballs a deal, consider it an offer. Not one you may want (of course, your idea of a low ball deal might be another's great deal), but as a signal that THIS PERSON IS OPEN FOR TRADE TALKS.

Or you could just stick with the best and final approach. Saturn (Car company) must love you guys.

Personally, I have yet to pay over invoice on a new car and I have made championship level runs by trading.

 

[coolnerd]

I have found that I work better with a solid offer in front of me. I actually don't like the back and forth e-mails and usually find that I get nothing accumplished that way. Not much for talking trade, put your offer on the table and let me figure out if it improves my team. If it is something I am interested in I will counter. If not i will thank you and tell you why I am not trading at the moment.

 

[squistion]

A low ball offer pretty shoots the credibility of that owner from that point on, as future offers are viewed with complete skeptism as I think he must be trying to get something over on me again.I have had success with starting with a firm offer, and also exchanging multiple emails of "feelers" before an offer is tendered- it turns on who you are dealing with.Usually I can work out a deal with anyone if I have a player they really want (after a few tweeks). I have not found the coverse to be true, as I have emailed owners with a "name your price" query for a certain player and have not even received the courtesy of a response.

 

[Chaos]

I don't know why in some people's mind they think that haggling has to be involved in every trade.

If you know anything about the art of negotiating you know that concession or the appearance of concession is important. I'm not talking about lowballing but I typically offer slightly less than I would consider and than concede that upon counter. It works like a charm.

I point this out to those who don't understand my method of trading, and if they don't like it, tuff s--t.

I would think this attitude would turn off more potential trade mates than offering slightly less than ideal.Keep in mind that I'm not talking LOWBALLING but I certainly don't come in initially with my best offer and a "take it or leave it" mentality. But hey, thats just me.

 

[JohnnyU]

I would think this attitude would turn off more potential trade mates than offering slightly less than ideal.

Keep in mind that I'm not talking LOWBALLING but I certainly don't come in initially with my best offer and a "take it or leave it" mentality. But hey, thats just me.  

Maybe so, but it does prevent the initial low ball offer if they know where I'm coming from. Like I said, I'm all for tweaking an offer to make the deal happen, but I also said that I have an idea of what value I want to give up for a player. If that tweaking involves players of similar value of players that I was willing to give up initially, and it works for my team, then all the better.

 

[-OZ-]

I'm currently reading "Getting to Yes" for a class, it might be a good read for those who enjoy trading. I know I do, next to draft day, trading is one of the top reasons I enjoy FF. If it weren't for trading, I'd just bet on games. If I'm understanding the book right, it's basically saying don't lowball, but send an email asking for what you want, explain why they can give it up, and explain briefly why you can help them. I wouldn't get into "Frank Gore is the next LT... I'll trade him for David Carr..." but "You need RBs, I have a few extra, I need QBs, you have a couple nice ones, I happen to like Carr..."

 

[JohnnyU]

If I'm understanding the book right, it's basically saying don't lowball, but send an email asking for what you want, explain why they can give it up, and explain briefly why you can help them. I wouldn't get into "Frank Gore is the next LT... I'll trade him for David Carr..." but "You need RBs, I have a few extra, I need QBs, you have a couple nice ones, I happen to like Carr..."

The problem I have with the part I bolded, is that owners send out these emails for the reason of not wanting to make an offer, but instead wanting you to make the offer. They want to trade, but are afraid to make a good initial offer. Like I said in one of my posts, I believe the team wanting to trade is obligated to make the initial offer (and not a low ball one).I hate the initial trading email saying, "What would you want for LT?". Hell, if LT was on the market I would be shopping him. If you want LT, offer me something. Of course the rebuttle to that is always, "I'm saving myself and you time by guaging whether you are interested in trading a particular player". When really all they are doing is getting you to offer LT for something. It's a cat and mouse game that I don't play. When I'm interested in trading for a player I go after him, and that means me making a good offer for that player.

 

[wannabee]

I think it's psychological.  I work in an industry when we negotiate 24/7.  If you offer the "true" price right off the bat, there is a skepticism, a cynicism that somehow they are being duped.  Therefore, at work, I negotiate within a few percentage points of where I deem "true value" is, so the other side can counter to what TV is.  It's kinda like when stores can't sell a widget for $1, but if they jack it up to $2 and say it's 50% off, more people buy it.  Everone wants a deal.  You also are assuming that your perception of true value is the same as the person sitting across from you.  If I think my potential trding partner has a weak corps of WRs with B. Edwards, B. Engram and S. Parker, but he thinks they all have BOOM or long term potential, he may not think he needs a WR as much as I do.  Therefore if I offer him a WR, he may think he does not need one as bad and may reject any offer short of raping me.  Humans tend to perceive (usually) that they are in a better situation than they truly are.  Just as everyone thinks they kicked butt the day of the draft, and just as some people held on to K JOnes all year in hopes of him rebounding, people over estimate the value of their teams.  Hence the haggling.  It's human nature.

That's what I was gonna say, except much less eloquently.

:remembered:

 

[nightshift]

If I'm understanding the book right, it's basically saying don't lowball, but send an email asking for what you want, explain why they can give it up, and explain briefly why you can help them. I wouldn't get into "Frank Gore is the next LT... I'll trade him for David Carr..." but "You need RBs, I have a few extra, I need QBs, you have a couple nice ones, I happen to like Carr..."

The problem I have with the part I bolded, is that owners send out these emails for the reason of not wanting to make an offer, but instead wanting you to make the offer. They want to trade, but are afraid to make a good initial offer. Like I said in one of my posts, I believe the team wanting to trade is obligated to make the initial offer (and not a low ball one).I hate the initial trading email saying, "What would you want for LT?". Hell, if LT was on the market I would be shopping him. If you want LT, offer me something. Of course the rebuttle to that is always, "I'm saving myself and you time by guaging whether you are interested in trading a particular player". When really all they are doing is getting you to offer LT for something. It's a cat and mouse game that I don't play. When I'm interested in trading for a player I go after him, and that means me making a good offer for that player.

Man, sounds like you don't like trading very much! Here's the point: IT IS ALL SUBJECTIVE. What you consider a good offer may or may not be the same for the person you are sending it to. OR, for that matter, receiving from!

When someone looks at your team and gauges it's trading potential, AGAIN, subjective. They may see LT as the only decent player on a weak squad and they may be willingly to offer up multiple players, draft picks, etc. to make the deal happen. I can assure you that it is a very LOW PERCENTAGE that a deal for LT will happen out of the gate. It will take negotiations.

When I'm interested in trading for a player I go after him, and that means me making a good offer for that player.

And what do you think the other players are doing? Trading can be a fun part of the game, if you are willingly to have fun with it.AGAIN, TRADING IS VERY SUBJECTIVE. Keep an open mind and take a page from a master negotiator, Donald Trump.

It's not personal, it's just business.

 

[-OZ-]

If I'm understanding the book right, it's basically saying don't lowball, but send an email asking for what you want, explain why they can give it up, and explain briefly why you can help them. I wouldn't get into "Frank Gore is the next LT... I'll trade him for David Carr..." but "You need RBs, I have a few extra, I need QBs, you have a couple nice ones, I happen to like Carr..."

The problem I have with the part I bolded, is that owners send out these emails for the reason of not wanting to make an offer, but instead wanting you to make the offer. They want to trade, but are afraid to make a good initial offer. Like I said in one of my posts, I believe the team wanting to trade is obligated to make the initial offer (and not a low ball one).I hate the initial trading email saying, "What would you want for LT?". Hell, if LT was on the market I would be shopping him. If you want LT, offer me something. Of course the rebuttle to that is always, "I'm saving myself and you time by guaging whether you are interested in trading a particular player". When really all they are doing is getting you to offer LT for something. It's a cat and mouse game that I don't play. When I'm interested in trading for a player I go after him, and that means me making a good offer for that player.

Let me clarify. One technique, adapted from the book, would be something like this:

1. Analuze your team

2. Analyze the other team

3. See where you can help each other

4. Send an email similar to this:

"Hi _____,

(brief intro, depending on how well you know the person)

I'm looking at our teams and I know I can use a better QB. I looked at your team and see you have a couple I like.

I also see a lack of young RBs on your team, and feel I have a fair amount, so we can probably help each other here.

Off your team, I like David Carr's potential.

From mine, I feel the most comparable RB that can help you is Frank Gore.

Seems to me that this would be a fair, mutually beneficial trade.

I can trade X, Y, or Z if you don't like Gore, and have some interest in A and B.

This does a few things.

First, it lets the other owner know why you want this deal without giving the impression of ripping him off.

Second, it makes the initial offer.

Third, it allows flexibility.

I think this lines up with your thinking, but it allows more flexibility than I'm reading from your post.

 

[wannabee]

so, what do you guys think of the practice many utilize:Send out a PM or e-mail "I am interested in so and so, what would you want for him?"I getting these much, much more than this one:"I want so and so, look at my roster and tell me what you want".

 

[JohnnyU]

If I'm understanding the book right, it's basically saying don't lowball, but send an email asking for what you want, explain why they can give it up, and explain briefly why you can help them. I wouldn't get into "Frank Gore is the next LT... I'll trade him for David Carr..." but "You need RBs, I have a few extra, I need QBs, you have a couple nice ones, I happen to like Carr..."

The problem I have with the part I bolded, is that owners send out these emails for the reason of not wanting to make an offer, but instead wanting you to make the offer. They want to trade, but are afraid to make a good initial offer. Like I said in one of my posts, I believe the team wanting to trade is obligated to make the initial offer (and not a low ball one).I hate the initial trading email saying, "What would you want for LT?". Hell, if LT was on the market I would be shopping him. If you want LT, offer me something. Of course the rebuttle to that is always, "I'm saving myself and you time by guaging whether you are interested in trading a particular player". When really all they are doing is getting you to offer LT for something. It's a cat and mouse game that I don't play. When I'm interested in trading for a player I go after him, and that means me making a good offer for that player.

Man, sounds like you don't like trading very much! Here's the point: IT IS ALL SUBJECTIVE. What you consider a good offer may or may not be the same for the person you are sending it to. OR, for that matter, receiving from!

When someone looks at your team and gauges it's trading potential, AGAIN, subjective. They may see LT as the only decent player on a weak squad and they may be willingly to offer up multiple players, draft picks, etc. to make the deal happen. I can assure you that it is a very LOW PERCENTAGE that a deal for LT will happen out of the gate. It will take negotiations.

When I'm interested in trading for a player I go after him, and that means me making a good offer for that player.

And what do you think the other players are doing? Trading can be a fun part of the game, if you are willingly to have fun with it.AGAIN, TRADING IS VERY SUBJECTIVE. Keep an open mind and take a page from a master negotiator, Donald Trump.

It's not personal, it's just business.

I love trading, my way. Like I said, if I want a player I go after him with a good offer initially. If someone wants a player from my team (initial trade interest), then don't try the sly "what would you want for so and so". Make your play for that player, and make it a good one. After all, I'm not the one seeking the trade.

 

[Mr. Vegas]

JohnnyUFirst that's the way you trade.Second not everyone trades like you do.We have made alot of trades with each other.I always start out 'what would you give for player A'.In every League I've played in I make more trades then anyone else.Point,every one has there way of making trades no way is 'The Best way' or'The only way'.By the way Chuck what would you give for Collins? Nice trend by the way.

 

[-OZ-]

so, what do you guys think of the practice many utilize:

Send out a PM or e-mail "I am interested in so and so, what would you want for him?"

I getting these much, much more than this one:

"I want so and so, look at my roster and tell me what you want".

What's the difference?

 

[JohnnyU]

If I'm understanding the book right, it's basically saying don't lowball, but send an email asking for what you want, explain why they can give it up, and explain briefly why you can help them. I wouldn't get into "Frank Gore is the next LT... I'll trade him for David Carr..." but "You need RBs, I have a few extra, I need QBs, you have a couple nice ones, I happen to like Carr..."

The problem I have with the part I bolded, is that owners send out these emails for the reason of not wanting to make an offer, but instead wanting you to make the offer. They want to trade, but are afraid to make a good initial offer. Like I said in one of my posts, I believe the team wanting to trade is obligated to make the initial offer (and not a low ball one).I hate the initial trading email saying, "What would you want for LT?". Hell, if LT was on the market I would be shopping him. If you want LT, offer me something. Of course the rebuttle to that is always, "I'm saving myself and you time by guaging whether you are interested in trading a particular player". When really all they are doing is getting you to offer LT for something. It's a cat and mouse game that I don't play. When I'm interested in trading for a player I go after him, and that means me making a good offer for that player.

Let me clarify. One technique, adapted from the book, would be something like this:

1. Analuze your team

2. Analyze the other team

3. See where you can help each other

4. Send an email similar to this:

"Hi _____,

(brief intro, depending on how well you know the person)

I'm looking at our teams and I know I can use a better QB. I looked at your team and see you have a couple I like.

I also see a lack of young RBs on your team, and feel I have a fair amount, so we can probably help each other here.

Off your team, I like David Carr's potential.

From mine, I feel the most comparable RB that can help you is Frank Gore.

Seems to me that this would be a fair, mutually beneficial trade.

I can trade X, Y, or Z if you don't like Gore, and have some interest in A and B.

This does a few things.

First, it lets the other owner know why you want this deal without giving the impression of ripping him off.

Second, it makes the initial offer.

Third, it allows flexibility.

I think this lines up with your thinking, but it allows more flexibility than I'm reading from your post.

That's fine. All I'm saying is that if someone wants a player, go after him. Have some balls. Don't try to dance around it hoping the other owner will offer you a great deal for the player you want. Also, when an owner does somehow gain some balls and makes the initial offer, hopefully they don't make it worse by offering junk on the initial offer. I believe owners remember who makes these offers and tend to want to deal with those that try to make the first offer a good one.

 

[-OZ-]

what would you give for Collins?

This is the technique I've seen a lot more recently - either a mass email or post on the league site saying "I'm shopping X"

 

[nightshift]

If I'm understanding the book right, it's basically saying don't lowball, but send an email asking for what you want, explain why they can give it up, and explain briefly why you can help them. I wouldn't get into "Frank Gore is the next LT... I'll trade him for David Carr..." but "You need RBs, I have a few extra, I need QBs, you have a couple nice ones, I happen to like Carr..."

The problem I have with the part I bolded, is that owners send out these emails for the reason of not wanting to make an offer, but instead wanting you to make the offer. They want to trade, but are afraid to make a good initial offer. Like I said in one of my posts, I believe the team wanting to trade is obligated to make the initial offer (and not a low ball one).I hate the initial trading email saying, "What would you want for LT?". Hell, if LT was on the market I would be shopping him. If you want LT, offer me something. Of course the rebuttle to that is always, "I'm saving myself and you time by guaging whether you are interested in trading a particular player". When really all they are doing is getting you to offer LT for something. It's a cat and mouse game that I don't play. When I'm interested in trading for a player I go after him, and that means me making a good offer for that player.

Let me clarify. One technique, adapted from the book, would be something like this:

1. Analuze your team

2. Analyze the other team

3. See where you can help each other

4. Send an email similar to this:

"Hi _____,

(brief intro, depending on how well you know the person)

I'm looking at our teams and I know I can use a better QB. I looked at your team and see you have a couple I like.

I also see a lack of young RBs on your team, and feel I have a fair amount, so we can probably help each other here.

Off your team, I like David Carr's potential.

From mine, I feel the most comparable RB that can help you is Frank Gore.

Seems to me that this would be a fair, mutually beneficial trade.

I can trade X, Y, or Z if you don't like Gore, and have some interest in A and B.

This does a few things.

First, it lets the other owner know why you want this deal without giving the impression of ripping him off.

Second, it makes the initial offer.

Third, it allows flexibility.

I think this lines up with your thinking, but it allows more flexibility than I'm reading from your post.

I have seen what an entire league thought was a lopsided trade turn into a really great deal (present company included).Your Carr/Gore trade is subjective. I might be a Carr fan or I think the new coaching will make him a stud or I have taken such a beating on value with this guy that I will let him rot on my bench. Who knows?

Same thing with Gore. He could be fantastic next season or remain a back-up RB for his NFL career. You don't know and I don't know. We're takin' SWAGs at this and hopin' for the best.

Last season, I offered many deals in one league to get TO at mid-season. I thought he would be the stud that would make a SB run possible. The guy with TO wanted to trade but his price was too hig (IMO) and I settled on a trade for Santana Moss. Most thought the trade I made for Moss was too high, but it got me into the playoffs and the SB.

 

[Mr. Vegas]

what would you give for Collins?

This is the technique I've seen a lot more recently - either a mass email or post on the league site saying "I'm shopping X"

Been doing it that way for years.Best way to go.

At least I don't offer Collins for P.Manning. I'm sure we have all seen those.

 

[wannabee]

I guess I see the difference in that one assumes you have an idea of what you want. Case in point:

If I am in a dyansty and I have Andrew Walter on my Developmental Squad, here are the two scenarios:

Scenario 1:

Person A: Hey, I like Walter, what are you looking to get for him (broad question)?

Me: I am set at QB, I want 2007 picks.

In this situation, they care what I want and are trying to get a deal done.

Sceario 2:

Person A: Hey I like Walter, look at my roster and tell me who you want.

Me: I want picks, not players.

I guess, OZ, it is the approach in that the first scenario actually cares what you want in return. Since they are approaching you, I think it is rude to say you want so and so and then ask for their best offer without knowing what they want in return.

so, what do you guys think of the practice many utilize:

Send out a PM or e-mail "I am interested in so and so, what would you want for him?"

I getting these much, much more than this one:

"I want so and so, look at my roster and tell me what you want".

What's the difference?

 

[-OZ-]

I have seen what an entire league thought was a lopsided trade turn into a really great deal (present company included).

I think we all have.

Your Carr/Gore trade is subjective. I might be a Carr fan or I think the new coaching will make him a stud or I have taken such a beating on value with this guy that I will let him rot on my bench. Who knows?

Same thing with Gore. He could be fantastic next season or remain a back-up RB for his NFL career. You don't know and I don't know. We're takin' SWAGs at this and hopin' for the best.

Yes, of course it's subjective - when isn't a trade subjective?

 

[wannabee]

what would you give for Collins?

This is the technique I've seen a lot more recently - either a mass email or post on the league site saying "I'm shopping X"

I see this as a good move, too. Send out a mass e-mail saying that I am looking to move player X, looking for offers.

 

[nightshift]

what would you give for Collins?

This is the technique I've seen a lot more recently - either a mass email or post on the league site saying "I'm shopping X"

Been doing it that way for years.Best way to go.

At least I don't offer Collins for P.Manning. I'm sure we have all seen those.

But if you are offered Coliins for Manning ( I assume you have Manning), what do you do?a. get pissed off and never trade with that SOB

b. ignore it and never answer those kind of offers

c. fire back " a thanks for the offer, but it will take a little more than Collins to get Manning"

d. pout and turn on Oprah

 

[faulkfan]

Most of guys in my league know that my first offers are about as close to the final offer as it gets. Yes, there can be some tweaking, like swapping players of similar talent, but they know that I don't low ball (in my mind) with my first offer with the hopes of getting a counter. You have to know your trading partner. Now that's not to say that others not involved in the trade haven't considered my trades unbalanced, either for or against me, but at the time of the trade it seemed fair to those involved in the trade.

I don't know why in some people's mind they think that haggling has to be involved in every trade. I point this out to those who don't understand my method of trading, and if they don't like it, tuff s--t. I look to trade for players that can help my team and IMO help the other team. I know ahead of time how much value I'm willing to offer for that player and I try to make the first offer the right offer. What is good about this method is that you don't insult others with ridiculous offers. Those who like to low ball with the first offer in hopes of initiating dialog for trading, only stymie trade negations with some owners.

Edited to add some thoughts that I posted in this thread, but would like in the initial post.

I believe the team wanting to trade is obligated to make the initial offer (and not a low ball one).

I hate the initial trading email saying, "What would you want for LT?". Hell, if LT was on the market I would be shopping him. Owners send out these emails for the reason of not wanting to make an offer, but instead wanting you to make the offer. They want to trade, but are afraid to make a good initial offer. If you want LT, offer me something. Of course the rebuttle to that is always, "I'm saving myself and you time by guaging whether you are interested in trading a particular player". When really all they are doing is getting you to offer LT for something. It's a cat and mouse game that I don't play. When I'm interested in trading for a player I go after him, and that means me making a good offer for that player.

This is the most important point plain and simple. You have to know your trading partner. If the owner you are targeting tends to undervalue his players and is a bit of a guppie then I sure as heck am not going to offer the same as I would a shark.There are some guys who will take the 1st offer and summarily accept it or reject while other owners will undoubtedly counteroffer no matter what you have on the table. You can offer LT and Alexander for Gado and D. Foster and he'll come back with Gado and T. Fisher instead. I always give myself room to upgrade a player or two if necessary AND I also usually have a couple different combinations at the ready to work with.

I agree that you can't lowball, but I disagree that the first offer should be dang near what the finished deal should be. If you know your trading partner you will know which style to use and sometimes, quite honestly, it is the start low and work up method. I'm of the mind that I never want to overpay if I don't have to.

 

[nightshift]

I have seen what an entire league thought was a lopsided trade turn into a really great deal (present company included).

I think we all have.

Your Carr/Gore trade is subjective. I might be a Carr fan or I think the new coaching will make him a stud or I have taken such a beating on value with this guy that I will let him rot on my bench. Who knows?

Same thing with Gore. He could be fantastic next season or remain a back-up RB for his NFL career. You don't know and I don't know. We're takin' SWAGs at this and hopin' for the best.

Yes, of course it's subjective - when isn't a trade subjective?

NEVER!and that's the point ,OZ. You cannot expect your trading methodolgy to be the "right" one becuase there really isn't right one.

The only truth to trading is your methods and valuations are yours and mine are mine.

 

[JohnnyU]

what would you give for Collins?

This is the technique I've seen a lot more recently - either a mass email or post on the league site saying "I'm shopping X"

Been doing it that way for years.Best way to go.

At least I don't offer Collins for P.Manning. I'm sure we have all seen those.

But if you are offered Coliins for Manning ( I assume you have Manning), what do you do?a. get pissed off and never trade with that SOB

b. ignore it and never answer those kind of offers

c. fire back " a thanks for the offer, but it will take a little more than Collins to get Manning"

d. pout and turn on Oprah

Those who offer Collins trying to get Manning don't deserve a reply. I'm not saying never trade with these guys, because they might actually be reasonable in the future, but some offers don't deserve a response. I know, some will say "ALL" offers deserve a response, but that isn't true IMO. I would say that 99% of all offers deserve a response. There are not too many people out there in shark leagues making those types of offers. Again, if someone wants a player from my team, look at my roster to see what they think I might need, then make a good offer initially. None of this "What would you want for so and so?" crap on the initial trading email.

 

[-OZ-]

I have seen what an entire league thought was a lopsided trade turn into a really great deal (present company included).

I think we all have.

Your Carr/Gore trade is subjective. I might be a Carr fan or I think the new coaching will make him a stud or I have taken such a beating on value with this guy that I will let him rot on my bench. Who knows?

Same thing with Gore. He could be fantastic next season or remain a back-up RB for his NFL career. You don't know and I don't know. We're takin' SWAGs at this and hopin' for the best.

Yes, of course it's subjective - when isn't a trade subjective?

NEVER!and that's the point ,OZ. You cannot expect your trading methodolgy to be the "right" one becuase there really isn't right one.

The only truth to trading is your methods and valuations are yours and mine are mine.

EVERYTHING IS SUBJECTIVE in FF.

When did I ever say my way is right and yours is wrong? JohnnyU made that statement, not me. I gave one technique from the book, that's it.

 

[nightshift]

Most of guys in my league know that my first offers are about as close to the final offer as it gets. Yes, there can be some tweaking, like swapping players of similar talent, but they know that I don't low ball (in my mind) with my first offer with the hopes of getting a counter. You have to know your trading partner. Now that's not to say that others not involved in the trade haven't considered my trades unbalanced, either for or against me, but at the time of the trade it seemed fair to those involved in the trade.

I don't know why in some people's mind they think that haggling has to be involved in every trade. I point this out to those who don't understand my method of trading, and if they don't like it, tuff s--t. I look to trade for players that can help my team and IMO help the other team. I know ahead of time how much value I'm willing to offer for that player and I try to make the first offer the right offer. What is good about this method is that you don't insult others with ridiculous offers. Those who like to low ball with the first offer in hopes of initiating dialog for trading, only stymie trade negations with some owners.

Edited to add some thoughts that I posted in this thread, but would like in the initial post.

I believe the team wanting to trade is obligated to make the initial offer (and not a low ball one).

I hate the initial trading email saying, "What would you want for LT?". Hell, if LT was on the market I would be shopping him. Owners send out these emails for the reason of not wanting to make an offer, but instead wanting you to make the offer. They want to trade, but are afraid to make a good initial offer. If you want LT, offer me something. Of course the rebuttle to that is always, "I'm saving myself and you time by guaging whether you are interested in trading a particular player". When really all they are doing is getting you to offer LT for something. It's a cat and mouse game that I don't play. When I'm interested in trading for a player I go after him, and that means me making a good offer for that player.

This is the most important point plain and simple. You have to know your trading partner. If the owner you are targeting tends to undervalue his players and is a bit of a guppie then I sure as heck am not going to offer the same as I would a shark.There are some guys who will take the 1st offer and summarily accept it or reject while other owners will undoubtedly counteroffer no matter what you have on the table. You can offer LT and Alexander for Gado and D. Foster and he'll come back with Gado and T. Fisher instead. I always give myself room to upgrade a player or two if necessary AND I also usually have a couple different combinations at the ready to work with.

I agree that you can't lowball, but I disagree that the first offer should be dang near what the finished deal should be. If you know your trading partner you will know which style to use and sometimes, quite honestly, it is the start low and work up method. I'm of the mind that I never want to overpay if I don't have to.

On my squads, no player is untradeable. Every player has a price and can be traded anytime.

 

[JohnnyU]

I have seen what an entire league thought was a lopsided trade turn into a really great deal (present company included).

I think we all have.

Your Carr/Gore trade is subjective. I might be a Carr fan or I think the new coaching will make him a stud or I have taken such a beating on value with this guy that I will let him rot on my bench. Who knows?

Same thing with Gore. He could be fantastic next season or remain a back-up RB for his NFL career. You don't know and I don't know. We're takin' SWAGs at this and hopin' for the best.

Yes, of course it's subjective - when isn't a trade subjective?

NEVER!and that's the point ,OZ. You cannot expect your trading methodolgy to be the "right" one becuase there really isn't right one.

The only truth to trading is your methods and valuations are yours and mine are mine.

EVERYTHING IS SUBJECTIVE in FF.

When did I ever say my way is right and yours is wrong? JohnnyU made that statement, not me. I gave one technique from the book, that's it.

I never said my way is the right way. I said I like to trade my way. It's also up to others to know what "my way" is when deciding to make a trade with me. I in turn need to know how they negotiate. So I guess what I'm saying is that I have to be flexible, but I do want the owners in my league to know how I approach trading. They do know, and I have no problems trading.

 

[nightshift]

I have seen what an entire league thought was a lopsided trade turn into a really great deal (present company included).

I think we all have.

Your Carr/Gore trade is subjective. I might be a Carr fan or I think the new coaching will make him a stud or I have taken such a beating on value with this guy that I will let him rot on my bench. Who knows?

Same thing with Gore. He could be fantastic next season or remain a back-up RB for his NFL career. You don't know and I don't know. We're takin' SWAGs at this and hopin' for the best.

Yes, of course it's subjective - when isn't a trade subjective?

NEVER!and that's the point ,OZ. You cannot expect your trading methodolgy to be the "right" one becuase there really isn't right one.

The only truth to trading is your methods and valuations are yours and mine are mine.

EVERYTHING IS SUBJECTIVE in FF.

When did I ever say my way is right and yours is wrong? JohnnyU made that statement, not me. I gave one technique from the book, that's it.

my bad...I was using you but not directing at "you". Rephrase:

No coach can expect their trading methodolgy to be the "right" one becuase there really isn't right one.

Better?

 

[Keys Myaths]

my bad...

I was using you but not directing at "you". Rephrase:

No coach can expect their trading methodolgy to be the "right" one becuase there really isn't right one.

Better?

But one can be more successful than another, and that's what most people are looking for. Just because there is no "right" one, doesn't mean that mine can't be better than yours, or vice versa.

 

[-OZ-]

my bad...

I was using you but not directing at "you". Rephrase:

No coach can expect their trading methodolgy to be the "right" one becuase there really isn't right one.

Better?

:hug:I as just a tad confused there. First to say trades aren't subjective, then accusing me like that.

 

[nightshift]

my bad...

I was using you but not directing at "you". Rephrase:

No coach can expect their trading methodolgy to be the "right" one becuase there really isn't right one.

Better?

But one can be more successful than another, and that's what most people are looking for. Just because there is no "right" one, doesn't mean that mine can't be better than yours, or vice versa.

Let's make a trade and find out!

 

[Bears_Man2]

I don't know why in some people's mind they think that haggling has to be involved in every trade. I try to make the first offer the right offer. What is good about this method is that you don't insult others with ridiculous offers.

Those who like to low ball with the first offer in hopes of initiating dialog for trading, only stymie trade negations with some owners.

I believe the team wanting to trade is obligated to make the initial offer (and not a low ball one).

I hate the initial trading email saying, "What would you want for LT?". Hell, if LT was on the market I would be shopping him. Owners send out these emails for the reason of not wanting to make an offer, but instead wanting you to make the offer. They want to trade, but are afraid to make a good initial offer. If you want LT, offer me something. Of course the rebuttle to that is always, "I'm saving myself and you time by guaging whether you are interested in trading a particular player". When really all they are doing is getting you to offer LT for something. It's a cat and mouse game that I don't play. When I'm interested in trading for a player I go after him, and that means me making a good offer for that player.

What I find amusing is there are so many owners who feel that if they make a good first offer and you accept it, they somehow got cheated. It's called insecurity about their own abilities to trade I guess. There are so many who take the approach start low, get a counter, and meet somwhere in the middle. That approach IMO causes a lot of trades to not happen. If you like the deal, accept it, instead of trying to "one up" for the sake of having to "WIN" the trade. The guy you are trying to "One Up" will remember you being a difficult person to trade with, and the offers will not come as often in the future.

By making a good initial offer I may not always win the trade, but if I have confidence in my abilities as an owner I will win my share. The point is not to have to "win the trade", but to help your team. This makes others want to trade with you IMO.

 

[Keys Myaths]

my bad...

I was using you but not directing at "you". Rephrase:

No coach can expect their trading methodolgy to be the "right" one becuase there really isn't right one.

Better?

But one can be more successful than another, and that's what most people are looking for. Just because there is no "right" one, doesn't mean that mine can't be better than yours, or vice versa.

Let's make a trade and find out!

 

[cstu]

One way I like to initiate a trade is by first sending out a league-wide email stating that I'm looking to improve at a certain position and mention the players I'm willing to trade. If I don't receive an offer from a team with the player I'm specifically interested in, I'll make the initial offer. I think it's better to let everyone know you're interested in trading, rather than going after the player you want right off the bat. People are very hesitant to trade anyway and the more it looks like you know something about a player that they don't, the owner is going to usually turn down a trade.

 

[Challenge Everything]

The hypocrisy of trading can be summed up in the initial post of this thread. No matter what happens there is ALWAYS a low ball offer. If you are sending trade requests you never send an even offer initially. NO BODY DOES. Why would you send player A for player B if you think they are equal? Makes no sense and to say fair offers are always sent right away is plain wrong.The best method is to inquire about a player and then come to a conclusion. Whether that be no trade or a compormise somewhere. While low balling offers should be a good conversation starter, the high ball offers are conversation killers. If I inquire about Andre Johnson dont sent me a reply that "I must give up a 2006 1st round pick and a 2007 1st round pick" to get him. If you dont want to trade him then fine. We all overvalue our players as well but real time value is always lower. So, if a reply about Andre Johnson comes back as I stated above, take into account his real time value and see where your offer stands. The above offer is way over valuing that player.What pisses me off when trading is when a team will shop a player and reject offers you make and then go make an absurd trade soon after. Now, we all value trades different but the absurd trades I refer to are the ones where they might be shopping a top 10-15 RB and claim to want 2 RB's in return for theirs yet when the trade goes down they end up taking much less then what they said they wanted from you. Again, it is difficult to plug players names in here as they are all subjective but if you need a #1 WR on a team, dont start offering the #2 and #3 RB's on a team.All in all, I rarely trade and this alleviates the headaches that I am reading about. To recap quickly:ALL TRADES ARE LOW BALL OFFERSSome compromise needs to take place and if their is no compromise you are only fooling yourselfTrade less frequently and you wont have headaches

 

[JohnnyU]

The hypocrisy of trading can be summed up in the initial post of this thread.  No matter what happens there is ALWAYS a low ball offer.  If you are sending trade requests you never send an even offer initially.  NO BODY DOES.  Why would you send player A for player B if you think they are equal?  Makes no sense and to say fair offers are always sent right away is plain wrong.

I disagree with this. You are going on the assumption you have to WIN the trade value wise. Maybe, just maybe if you help your team you are "wiinning the trade". Like obtaining a top 10 WR for Rudi Johnson when you also have LT, LJ, and TJ. You statement "there is ALWAYS a low ball offer" is an over generalization of trades. I've made plenty of trades where I didn't low ball and the trade helped both teams.Edited to say that I didn't say "fair offers are always sent right away". I believe the purpose of this thread is to note they are not sent right away. My motto is to haggle as little as possible, thus the reason to make a good offer initially. Yes, there may be some tweaking, and there almost always is, but I hope you get my point.

 

[Challenge Everything]

I disagree with this. You are going on the assumption you have to WIN the trade value wise. Maybe, just maybe if you help your team you are "wiinning the trade". Like obtaining a top 10 WR for Rudi Johnson when you also have LT, LJ, and TJ. You statement "there is ALWAYS a low ball offer" is an over generalization of trades. I've made plenty of trades where I didn't low ball and the trade helped both teams.

Edited to say that I didn't say "fair offers are always sent right away". I believe the purpose of this thread is to note they are not sent right away. My motto is to haggle as little as possible, thus the reason to make a good offer initially. Yes, there may be some tweaking, and there almost always is, but I hope you get my point.

Yeah, I get your point but it to is an over generalization. A trade that helps both teams is a good trade, but the player(s) involved could have also been traded to other teams to possibly have a more even trade. Again, it is subjective, but to say what you are saying you too are over generalizing as well. Care to share some of your trade offers and reasons why they were fair for both teams to simply gauge where you are coming from?

 

[JohnnyU]

I disagree with this.  You are going on the assumption you have to WIN the trade value wise.  Maybe, just maybe if you help your team you are "wiinning the trade".  Like obtaining a top 10 WR for Rudi Johnson when you also have LT, LJ, and TJ.  You statement "there is ALWAYS a low ball offer" is an over generalization of trades.  I've made plenty of trades where I didn't low ball and the trade helped both teams.

Edited to say that I didn't say "fair offers are always sent right away".  I believe the purpose of this thread is to note they are not sent right away.  My motto is to haggle as little as possible, thus the reason to make a good offer initially.  Yes, there may be some tweaking, and there almost always is, but I hope you get my point.

Yeah, I get your point but it to is an over generalization. A trade that helps both teams is a good trade, but the player(s) involved could have also been traded to other teams to possibly have a more even trade. Again, it is subjective, but to say what you are saying you too are over generalizing as well. Care to share some of your trade offers and reasons why they were fair for both teams to simply gauge where you are coming from?

I'm not speaking for any trades in particular, and the thread is about making a good initial offer (with less haggling) more than it is about trades having to be even. That is subjective. Like I said earlier, I've made trades where others in the league thought I got the best end of it, and other trades where they thought the opposite. The point is, is that if I want to make a trade with someone I offer a good initial trade. If someone wants to trade with me, then they should look at my team and make an educated effort in making me a good offer. Less haggling is a good thing, IMO, and Low-balling in the sense of what most consider low-balling (without going into scenarios, and with the understanding that trades are subjective) is not a good thing.