Why doesn’t anyone wanna trade?

[yupper 6]

Im frustrated with the league Ive been in for 10 years. Im sitting at 3-5 and Ive been trying to trade some of my depth. The guys in my league hold onto there players for dear life. Been looking to do a 2 for 1 type trade. Ive made several offers to various people within the league and nobody wants to trade at all. I feel like my offers have been reasonable too. Ex. I offered one M. Ingram OR S. Michel and E. Sanders OR B. Cooks for Julio. Declined! Just trying to make a push and try and get some wins. Im not looking to get put on blast. I just wanted to vent to others that can probably relate to some degree. Thanks.

 

QB: Cousins, Mayfield

RB: M. Gordon, Fournette, Michel, Ingram, Drake, Eckler

WR: T. Hill, B. Cooks, E. Sanders, C. Hogan, T. Smith

TE: Njoku, Doyle

 

10 team .5 ppr

[Brutal Brutus 182]

Trading depth in 2 for 1s only works for the other guy if they'd start for him.

[yupper 6]

I think the players that Ive offered to others would be able to start on there teams. The one dude I offered for Julio, his best RB is M. Mack. Hes been good the past couple games but I thought I was offering an upgrade.

[LaChup 154]

I think Sony Michel is hurt.

[Ehlana 25]

Trading's hard. People are people and their emotions get in the way. They like this guy or don't like that guy, or they overvalue a guy just b/c he or she is on their team. In my particular case I've been trying to trade a RB for a WR but no one wants to trade a 17 ppg WR for a 17 ppg RB. Not sure if it's my evaluation of the relative values or what but I think relatively equal point total RBs are equivalent to equal point total WRs.

 

Some people are also afraid of looking stupid, especially in keeper leagues since it can bite you in the ass if you make a bad trade. Not that I'd know, I certainly didn't trade away Corey Kluber for Miguel Sano in my baseball league.

 

And then the irrationality enters into. In my pursuit of a WR for a RB I was offered Antonio Brown for Kareem Hunt, but b/c I only win championships when I have a good KC running back (Holmes, Johnson, Charles, and now Hunt) I'm not really willing to pull the trigger even though a 20 ppg RB for a 20 ppg WR is exactly what I'm trying to do.

 

It is what it is, you just gotta keep plugging away at things.

[Brutal Brutus 182]

Trading is like any other sale, you need to convince the person that what you have is better than what the current status quo is, and since people naturally resist change, typically it has to offer a clear upside for them.

 

I also usually look at rest of season rankings and trade value charts to make sure my personal view isnt completely off base and distorted because of the natural bias I have.

[weepaws 2,452]

It’s hard for some owners to revalue players.

 

They still hold faith that the players they have will bust out.

 

And watch someone else get the reward.

[BobSanders_33 127]

Ingram is a flex play right now with AK getting quality touches and nobody knows when Sony will be back and if he will be effective. I own Ingram in a league and have tried to shop him with no takers. Can't blame them. One of those guys + Sanders won't get you Julio.

[SaintsInDome2006 128]

Biggest factor is really differing ideas of worth. People want what they thought they would be getting not what a player is really worth now.

[yupper 6]

I like to take into account trade value charts from CBS Sports as well as FantasyPros... I also like to use FantasyPros trade analyzer before making any offers.

[Einstein's Dog 20]

Trading's hard. People are people and their emotions get in the way. They like this guy or don't like that guy, or they overvalue a guy just b/c he or she is on their team. In my particular case I've been trying to trade a RB for a WR but no one wants to trade a 17 ppg WR for a 17 ppg RB. Not sure if it's my evaluation of the relative values or what but I think relatively equal point total RBs are equivalent to equal point total WRs.

 

Some people are also afraid of looking stupid, especially in keeper leagues since it can bite you in the ass if you make a bad trade. Not that I'd know, I certainly didn't trade away Corey Kluber for Miguel Sano in my baseball league.

 

And then the irrationality enters into. In my pursuit of a WR for a RB I was offered Antonio Brown for Kareem Hunt, but b/c I only win championships when I have a good KC running back (Holmes, Johnson, Charles, and now Hunt) I'm not really willing to pull the trigger even though a 20 ppg RB for a 20 ppg WR is exactly what I'm trying to do.

 

It is what it is, you just gotta keep plugging away at things.

You're part of the problem. Some people (like you) try to initiate trades and then when presented with exactly what they are looking for - back off. An extremely fair trade, covering the exact parameters -good WR for good RB, and then you pull away for BS reasoning.

 

If you have good RB depth and need a top WR and the other team has the opposite, you had a great deal for both teams in hand.

 

Can't blame that team for not wanting to deal with you again. Floating out trade ideas that get pulled when taken up on is frustrating and really a waste of time.

[Quickolas1 80]

Ex. I offered one M. Ingram OR S. Michel and E. Sanders OR B. Cooks for Julio. Declined!

 

It's a no-brainer decline when the net effect is Ingram/Michel for Mack and Sanders/Cooks for Julio.

 

Most people want to make 2-for-1 deals in a shallow 10 team league, not 1-for-2. (Unless you start 80+ RB/WR/TE instead of 60.)

Improve your offers or find a 14-16 team league.

[Law 220]

I find any 2-for-1 or, worse, 3-for-1 deals problematic and never offer and rarely entertain accepting one. Generally, what they mean is that one team, the team receiving more players than they are giving, will have to drop unnamed players. I rarely want to do this. The players on my bench are usually there for a reason. Why would I trade 1 player for 2 when I will then have to drop 1 of these players?

 

I only offer 1-for-1 or 2-for-2 type deals. Usually, for example, one team would get the better of two player while the other team gets the better of the other two.

 

What I've seen this year in two of my leagues are a lot of these one-sided 3-for-1 offers to me and similar trades accepted by others. They are crap trades, but if that's what people want to do....

 

 

I had a guy offer me 2 minimal players yesterday for Jordan Howard. Now Howard is no gem, but he's better than Duke Johnson, Reddick, and Michael Gallup. Especially when I'd have to drop 2 more of my bench players that are better than these guys and I'd never play any of the 3. Makes no sense. I rejected that offer. Then, later that day, this same owner trades away Golden Tate for 3 garbage players! he went from sending me a bad offer to taking a bad offer himself! LOL

[TennisMenace 156]

I quit even making proposals. No one wants to so if e had it.

 

Your trade for Julio was very good. Michel plus good wr (sanders or Cooks) for Julio is very respectable. The opponent loses a little at wr but look at the gain in RB. Michel should play this week, if not, probably week 10 for sure. Ingram is not as appealing because kamara is still top dog there. I’m never sure about Ingram’s production.

 

I agree with you.....some people are afraid because they think if you want their player and are so willing to give up your players, you must know something they don’t know. It is just insecurity on their part.

[TennisMenace 156]

I find any 2-for-1 or, worse, 3-for-1 deals problematic and never offer and rarely entertain accepting one. Generally, what they mean is that one team, the team receiving more players than they are giving, will have to drop unnamed players. I rarely want to do this. The players on my bench are usually there for a reason. Why would I trade 1 player for 2 when I will then have to drop 1 of these players?

 

I only offer 1-for-1 or 2-for-2 type deals. Usually, for example, one team would get the better of two player while the other team gets the better of the other two.

 

What I've seen this year in two of my leagues are a lot of these one-sided 3-for-1 offers to me and similar trades accepted by others. They are crap trades, but if that's what people want to do....

 

 

I had a guy offer me 2 minimal players yesterday for Jordan Howard. Now Howard is no gem, but he's better than Duke Johnson, Reddick, and Michael Gallup. Especially when I'd have to drop 2 more of my bench players that are better than these guys and I'd never play any of the 3. Makes no sense. I rejected that offer. Then, later that day, this same owner trades away Golden Tate for 3 garbage players! he went from sending me a bad offer to taking a bad offer himself! LOL

Lol. Funny stuff. Why would anyone think you are happy with their garbage? I guess tjey think you will be impressed with the QUANTITY of players you are receiving. Yeah right.....NOT

[jimaveli 119]

Biggest factor is really differing ideas of worth. People want what they thought they would be getting not what a player is really worth now.

This is it. If you can find a difference of opinion, you may be able to find a trade. In this way, trading names for folks who are playing well without blowing up yet is usually the best way to get something. That and the right kind of sell high.

[TBayXXXVII 2,106]

I think the players that Ive offered to others would be able to start on there teams. The one dude I offered for Julio, his best RB is M. Mack. Hes been good the past couple games but I thought I was offering an upgrade.

 

Neither Ingram or Michel are upgrades over Mack right now. Ingram has been used no where near how they used him last year and Michel's season is a complete mystery. Sure, at this point, Sanders is a the #7 WR, but he hasn't had his bye week yet while Jones has. Cooks isn't even a top 20 WR when you consider that he hasn't had his bye week yet. NO WAY would I ever make that trade.

[Ehlana 25]

You're part of the problem. Some people (like you) try to initiate trades and then when presented with exactly what they are looking for - back off. An extremely fair trade, covering the exact parameters -good WR for good RB, and then you pull away for BS reasoning.

 

If you have good RB depth and need a top WR and the other team has the opposite, you had a great deal for both teams in hand.

 

Can't blame that team for not wanting to deal with you again. Floating out trade ideas that get pulled when taken up on is frustrating and really a waste of time.

I don't think it's that simple. I left out the part of it being a keeper league and that when I went looking to trade a RB for WR I was never interested in trading Hunt, so it wasn't "exactly what I was looking for." But that is getting into specifics of that trade, not generalities of why it's hard to trade, most of which have been touched on.

[rallo 132]

The problem is that people overvalue their players... and I mean this on both sides.

[jrokh 567]

The problem I run into is Draft value vs Market Value. Owners generally don't want to part with players they drafted high, who underperformed unless they feel they are getting back similar value to draft position.

[weepaws 2,452]

The problem I run into is Draft value vs Market Value. Owners generally don't want to part with players they drafted high, who underperformed unless they feel they are getting back similar value to draft position.

And to then see that player go off the very next weekend, oh that’s a killer.

[jgcrawfish 232]

it sucks, because everybody values their players more than they value your players, even if their players suck. they do so because of the emotional attachment to them (which is weird, because by trade deadline half the players on their rosters are waiver claims anyway). There are no trades really in any of the leagues I play in. The one trade that did happen was so lopsided that I may not play in it anymore going forward.

 

often, to get any trades going, you have to severely overpay the first time, sort of a greasing of the skids (no, not you Jerry if you're still around). You also can't start with a lower offer, sometimes you just have to lay it all out there right from the start. Earlier this season (around week 3) I was hurting at WR and offered a guy James Conner/John Brown for Carlos Hyde (still in Cleveland at the time) and T.Y. Hilton. I was lacking a WR1 because Baldwin was out (and still continues to stink) and i was trying to land a homerun hitter in HIlton for the long run. He declined, and looking back, that trade would have murdered me just at the loss of Conner.

[cavern 70]

sort of. this guy does not appear to be making offers that look all that appetizing. the one he complained about (ingram and sanders for julio -- he tries to make it look better in that michel and cooks were also options but michel is hurt, no guarantee he even plays any more and cooks is < sanders)). is not one i would be interested in the least as a julio owner. the winner of the trade is the one that gets the best player in the deal. the old 2 for 1 is something i used to be able to pull off against new players, but everyone in my leagues are now too seasoned to fall for that

it sucks, because everybody values their players more than they value your players, even if their players suck. they do so because of the emotional attachment to them (which is weird, because by trade deadline half the players on their rosters are waiver claims anyway). There are no trades really in any of the leagues I play in. The one trade that did happen was so lopsided that I may not play in it anymore going forward.

 

often, to get any trades going, you have to severely overpay the first time, sort of a greasing of the skids (no, not you Jerry if you're still around). You also can't start with a lower offer, sometimes you just have to lay it all out there right from the start. Earlier this season (around week 3) I was hurting at WR and offered a guy James Conner/John Brown for Carlos Hyde (still in Cleveland at the time) and T.Y. Hilton. I was lacking a WR1 because Baldwin was out (and still continues to stink) and i was trying to land a homerun hitter in HIlton for the long run. He declined, and looking back, that trade would have murdered me just at the loss of Conner.

[Super Cubs 132]

 

My main league use to be a trading machine when we had limited waivers. Went to unlimited waivers and now there is very little trading going on.

 

In my dynasty we have a owner hording RB with 5 in top 20. His team is 4-4 because the rest of his team is just ok at best. He offered me Alex Collins for Michael Thomas. I counterred with Thomas for McCaffrey (his 3rd best RB). He told me to f--- off.

[jgcrawfish 232]

My main league use to be a trading machine when we had limited waivers. Went to unlimited waivers and now there is very little trading going on.

 

In my dynasty we have a owner hording RB with 5 in top 20. His team is 4-4 because the rest of his team is just ok at best. He offered me Alex Collins for Michael Thomas. I counterred with Thomas for McCaffrey (his 3rd best RB). He told me to f--- off.

His offer was low, yours was pretty fair in my book. IMO dynasty leagues are the best for it because of the long run game you have to play. I took over a dynasty league a few years back, was pretty bad when i got it. Convinced myself I could turn it around immediately, got knocked on my ass. I think i drafted top 3 for 3 years straight, but i also traded away some players, packaged some and ended up over 3 years with something like 5 1st rounders (3 of my own early ones and 2 late firsts via trade), and 6 2nd's (4 early, 1 mid, 1 late if I recall). Did lots of homework (moment to plug Waldman and his RSP) and had what was looking like a juggernaut of a team. Then the league just kind of folded. But the wheeling and dealing was fun.

[Super Cubs 132]

For me trading is easier and more fun in keeper and dynasty over redraft. Something about being able to sweeten the deal with picks seems to make owners want to trade.

[weepaws 2,452]

For me trading is easier and more fun in keeper and dynasty over redraft. Something about being able to sweeten the deal with picks seems to make owners want to trade.

When I was in keeper leagues I found this to be true.

 

Thanks.

[jgcrawfish 232]

For me trading is easier and more fun in keeper and dynasty over redraft. Something about being able to sweeten the deal with picks seems to make owners want to trade.

It gives the guys with strong teams the opportunity to make a championship run, and the guys with weaker teams the chance to stockpile the picks for next year to rebuild. Much easier to move things along.

[weepaws 2,452]

Im frustrated with the league Ive been in for 10 years. Im sitting at 3-5 and Ive been trying to trade some of my depth. The guys in my league hold onto there players for dear life. Been looking to do a 2 for 1 type trade. Ive made several offers to various people within the league and nobody wants to trade at all. I feel like my offers have been reasonable too. Ex. I offered one M. Ingram OR S. Michel and E. Sanders OR B. Cooks for Julio. Declined! Just trying to make a push and try and get some wins. Im not looking to get put on blast. I just wanted to vent to others that can probably relate to some degree. Thanks.

QB: Cousins, Mayfield

RB: M. Gordon, Fournette, Michel, Ingram, Drake, Eckler

WR: T. Hill, B. Cooks, E. Sanders, C. Hogan, T. Smith

TE: Njoku, Doyle

10 team .5 ppr

Maybe your the problem.

 

Just kidding.

[ralphster 274]

trading in redraft is tough. always has been.

 

dynasty leagues are better for trading; the ability to throw in a pick to sweeten the deal helps a lot.

 

several of my dynasty leagues also have 3-5 year contracts, so it forces trades when your players contracts are expiring - another nice wrinkle imo.

 

the hard part that we're all guilty of is the high pick bias. "I drafted this guy at 1.04 and I need to get at least that value back if I move him". plenty of teams will be picking early next year because of how they've handled Leveon Bell.

[Brutal Brutus 182]

 

the hard part that we're all guilty of is the high pick bias. "I drafted this guy at 1.04 and I need to get at least that value back if I move him". plenty of teams will be picking early next year because of how they've handled Leveon Bell.

I think part of that aspect is a lot teams are better off hoping the guy turns it around rather than accepting current market value. Getting RB 2 value for DJ probably doesn't give much help to the team who drafted him. Him turning it around is about the only thing that can save some of those teams.

[jimaveli 119]

It is so hard to cut your losses/admit defeat. But sometimes that is the way to go. And the sooner you do it, the better player you get back.

[jackjohn 31]

Communication is the key for me. I've made a few trades this year and it has been trying at times. First I try to figure out my strengths and weaknesses. I've been very strong at rb most of the year. Then in look for the team with the opposite strengths and weaknesses. A lot of times its trading my 3rd rb for their 3rd wr. But after talking with them I give up my 3rd rb and 3rd wr for their 2nd wr, or rb 3 and 4. I generally like to target someone on the other teams roster and ask if they would deal them. 90% of the time I get a "maybe", I then follow that up with a "who would you be interested in?" If they dont answer, you're probably wasting your time. Always be ready to give a knowledgeable answer.

 

Oct 4th

I was interested in Mixon when he was injured yet. That team was in a tough spot. He had Mixon (inj), Carson(inj), and Buck Allen. He said he wanted Hunt for Mixon, I said ok, but we have to even this out a bit. After going back and forth, I gave Hunt, Kupp, Hines, and Olsen for Mixon, Julio, and Njoku. He got what he needed, some rb depth and players for that week. I got what I needed, a rb for the bye weeks and a solid wr. Njoku was the nugget for me, I thought he would be a top 10 te this year, easily.