So...what is the point of trading?

[briank]

Someone on another thread made a statement that "trading is essential to dynasty". I disagree strongly with this statement, and rather than hijack that thread, thought I'd make another one to further discussion on this topic.

My opinion is that trading is decidedly an non-essential part of this game. What I've found, especially in the past couple of years, is that people only want to close trades when those trades are a decisive "win" for them and a decisive "lose" for the other party, in other words a "zero sum" game. Very few people seem to have the skill or willingness to put together and accept "win/win" deals that benefit both sides. My best trade partners are those who do not see trades as a zero sum process.

In addition, more people seem to find it acceptable to outright deceive trade partners as to how they value players or in the information they give in a trade. Many owners blur the lines between playing things "close to the vest" and unethical practices like "bait and switch" or outright deceiving people. Normally the markets filter out those types organically, but these owners just don't care about that any longer. Most owners however, end up turning the whole process of trade discussions into a completely unpleasant and argumentative experience.

For example, in one of my leagues, an owner on Tuesday listed E. Sanders on the block, stated he was looking for "a 3rd round pick". Wednesday I put together an offer of MVS and a mid to late 3rd for Sanders which met his requested price. He rejected it and countered asking for my (mid to late) 1st round pick. I rejected and did not counter. Led to an exchange that ended up with the other owner resorting to name calling and cursing me out for not furthering discussions with him after I called out his bait and switch scam.

Rather than dealing with these abusive responses and name calling when these guys don't get their way, I've changed to a process of building a significant number of my teams through the draft and free agency.

I didn't read your diatribe, but I will say that you are putting yourself at a significant disadvantage if you are unwilling, or even less inclined to trade.

[Mephistopheles]

Sometimes people have stupid opinions. Best thing you can do is point them out and try to work around them. If they have stupid opinions and they continue to lose, there will always be these types of people in leagues.

A leaguemate of mine once said, if you don't know who the fish is, you are the fish (he's also a poker player, but I found this funny).

In this scenario, if someone is so big on second round picks, try to procure their mid 1st for a 2nd+. Forget about Sanders until another day.

This made me laugh
Used to play poker in the poker rooms in Vegas fairly regularly. Remember telling this to my oldest when she turned 18, I took her to Vegas for the first time, and she played her first "Real" poker tournament. Good memories.

[honcho55]

Kinda beating a dead horse but whatever.

I find trading to kinda be the point of playing dynasty. It’s why I prefer auctions to snakes too.

If there’s a guy you really want, go get him. In dynasty, overpay on a trade. In an auction, over bid. He’s yours. Redraft/snake I got tired of missing guys by a spot or two and not liking my team much. And then redraft leagues are just overall less active in my experience, and often times if there’s a guy you’d really like to target, you can’t make it happen because A: it’ll ruin your team balance, B: trade partner won’t do it because it’ll ruin his, C: people are skiddish on trading at all.

Also now that I’m typing this up, it occurs to me that there’s a huge correlation to success in my leagues that are more keeper/dynasty when it comes to trade activity. Not even talking my teams, just overall.

[Mephistopheles]

I didn't read your diatribe, but I will say that you are putting yourself at a significant disadvantage if you are unwilling, or even less inclined to trade.

Mind elaborating, please? Where is the "significant disadvantage"?
Two of my best teams are built 95-99% through the draft and free agency. One is going to win a 3rd straight chip this year.
I just see no advantage to trading other than the enjoyment of getting a shiny new toy, and when leaguemates suck the fun out of that, it almost becomes pointless.

[Mephistopheles]

Kinda beating a dead horse but whatever.

I find trading to kinda be the point of playing dynasty. It’s why I prefer auctions to snakes too.

If there’s a guy you really want, go get him. In dynasty, overpay on a trade. In an auction, over bid. He’s yours. Redraft/snake I got tired of missing guys by a spot or two and not liking my team much. And then redraft leagues are just overall less active in my experience, and often times if there’s a guy you’d really like to target, you can’t make it happen because A: it’ll ruin your team balance, B: trade partner won’t do it because it’ll ruin his, C: people are skiddish on trading at all.

Also now that I’m typing this up, it occurs to me that there’s a huge correlation to success in my leagues that are more keeper/dynasty when it comes to trade activity. Not even talking my teams, just overall.

Okay, thanks for responding.
I don't disagree with you, except on the last sentence. My experience is that my more successful teams are built through the draft. That to me has become more the point of playing the game - scouting the college games, finding that talent that will fall to the 2nd or 3rd or 4th round or FA, and sitting on it till it either breaks out or doesn't. Guys like Diggs, Tyreek, DJ Chark, Ekeler, Lindsay, Mahomes, Chris Godwin, and others, are the heart of my teams. All drafted in the 3rd or later round or picked up on waivers. I've taught my kids that play dynasty the same way. Trade only when you absolutely have to.

If there's a guy I really want, I agree, be willing to overpay! But here's the problem with that (and part of why I say 80% of dynasty owners in my experience are clueless): it seems like no matter what you offer, most people don't accept it. One of my friends offered two firsts (one early, one mid) for Chris Godwin in one of his leagues, the guy turned it down and wanted the two firsts plus Lamar Jackson (SF league). This is not an unusual experience among our group. It gets to the point that no matter what we offer, it seems like it's never enough, and it seems like no matter what we ask for when someone wants to trade for our players, it's always way too much. It's just become kind of pointless in our eyes for the most part.

[Cult of Dionysus]

Someone on another thread made a statement that "trading is essential to dynasty". I disagree strongly with this statement, and rather than hijack that thread, thought I'd make another one to further discussion on this topic.

My opinion is that trading is decidedly an non-essential part of this game. What I've found, especially in the past couple of years, is that people only want to close trades when those trades are a decisive "win" for them and a decisive "lose" for the other party, in other words a "zero sum" game. Very few people seem to have the skill or willingness to put together and accept "win/win" deals that benefit both sides. My best trade partners are those who do not see trades as a zero sum process.

In addition, more people seem to find it acceptable to outright deceive trade partners as to how they value players or in the information they give in a trade. Many owners blur the lines between playing things "close to the vest" and unethical practices like "bait and switch" or outright deceiving people. Normally the markets filter out those types organically, but these owners just don't care about that any longer. Most owners however, end up turning the whole process of trade discussions into a completely unpleasant and argumentative experience.

For example, in one of my leagues, an owner on Tuesday listed E. Sanders on the block, stated he was looking for "a 3rd round pick". Wednesday I put together an offer of MVS and a mid to late 3rd for Sanders which met his requested price. He rejected it and countered asking for my (mid to late) 1st round pick. I rejected and did not counter. Led to an exchange that ended up with the other owner resorting to name calling and cursing me out for not furthering discussions with him after I called out his bait and switch scam.

Rather than dealing with these abusive responses and name calling when these guys don't get their way, I've changed to a process of building a significant number of my teams through the draft and free agency.

First, I want to give you props for this topic and thread. While I don't necessarily agree with your conclusion, I love the topic and it is these kinds of discussions that bring me back here, not pissing contests whether Lamar Jackson is better than Mahomes.

I think you make two points in your OP.

First, that trading is not essential. This I disagree with. While it is possible to avoid trading altogether, you are really hamstringing your management efforts if you solely rely on drafting and free agency. Not saying it can't be done, but it's basically like playing 18 holes of golf and not taking a putter with you.

Second, trading and trade negotiations can be extremely frustrating. This I totally concur with. However, I think these elements can be MITIGATED in large part by joining leagues with very experienced owners. All of my leagues in recent years are wholly comprised of DLF posters, most of which have been here for a few years and have 500+ post counts. They generally know what is fair and typically don't pull "stunts". Sure, a few take very aggressive positions on player valuations... But I've only seen one instance of trickery/subterfuge or otherwise unethical behavior. So I would encourage you to seek out a league stocked with knowledgeable owners, it will make a world of difference. FYI, my USFL Superflex has a vacancy with Philadelphia. Its a pretty complicated salary cap / contract league, but it's a good group of owners and you might rehabilitate your interest in trading with it.

Also, I have found that in all of my leagues, there's a few guys who become "trade partners" of mine, guys who I know are fair and direct. I have a somewhat unique approach to trade negotations in that I don't make offers. I typically send a PM telling an owner I'm interested in a certain player of theirs. Sometimes I tell them what I think the player is worth and what I'd think would be a fair offer. But I usually phrase it in a way that they can basically let me know if anyone or a package of my guys might be of interest to them. And they know that i"m looking for a win-win type of deal, so usually with my trade partners, we quickly figure out whether a deal is possible or not. No one tries to screw the other. Sometimes we disagree on a player or set of players, and we move on. It's quite nice actually.

[Ice]

Running a fantasy football team is like being a GM. Playing the game is being the coach.

Trading in complex leagues with salary caps and contract years is critical to success.

Don’t care if an owner trades or not but I have never met an experienced owner that is so dumb they don’t use the tools available to better their team.

Trades should never be about winning a deal but improving your team.

IMO anyone that doesn’t understand the GM component doesn’t understand a basic tenant of Dynasty football.

The Walmart reference is silly. While I hate shopping their personally, there still are good deals there.

The better the competition in a league the better the trades as smart owners see the value in balancing their rosters through trades when needed.

It is ridiculous for anyone to believe in an either/or scenario when it comes to fantasy football.

The point is: UP YOUR GAME and that starts with approaching this game from a chess perspective.

[Slackalacker]

I guess if you draft perfectly and other players never steal prospects away from you then you wouldn’t need to trade. I can say through experience many of my rebuilds that were quick turnarounds (1-2 years) would have easily been double the length without trading.

Personally trading is one of my favorite parts of dynasty FF, it’s lame playing against owners who wouldn’t even attempt to have talks outside of certain players being considered “untouchable”.

[briank]

I didn't read your diatribe, but I will say that you are putting yourself at a significant disadvantage if you are unwilling, or even less inclined to trade.

Mind elaborating, please? Where is the "significant disadvantage"?
Two of my best teams are built 95-99% through the draft and free agency. One is going to win a 3rd straight chip this year.
I just see no advantage to trading other than the enjoyment of getting a shiny new toy, and when leaguemates suck the fun out of that, it almost becomes pointless.

Sure. Simply, trading is by far the best way to build value in dynasty. Maybe you're just not very good at trading.

[CGW]

I didn't read your diatribe, but I will say that you are putting yourself at a significant disadvantage if you are unwilling, or even less inclined to trade.

Mind elaborating, please? Where is the "significant disadvantage"?
Two of my best teams are built 95-99% through the draft and free agency. One is going to win a 3rd straight chip this year.
I just see no advantage to trading other than the enjoyment of getting a shiny new toy, and when leaguemates suck the fun out of that, it almost becomes pointless.

You've been blessed by having a fantastic draft or a league made of terrible players. At some point, your team will age and get injured faster than you can draft. If you refuse to sell aging assets you will eventually lose and have zero way to recover.

Unless maybe you play in a super shallow league with minimal starting requirements and can pick up startable assets from waivers.

[Mephistopheles]

I didn't read your diatribe, but I will say that you are putting yourself at a significant disadvantage if you are unwilling, or even less inclined to trade.

Mind elaborating, please? Where is the "significant disadvantage"?
Two of my best teams are built 95-99% through the draft and free agency. One is going to win a 3rd straight chip this year.
I just see no advantage to trading other than the enjoyment of getting a shiny new toy, and when leaguemates suck the fun out of that, it almost becomes pointless.

Sure. Simply, trading is by far the best way to build value in dynasty. Maybe you're just not very good at trading.

Yeah, it must be that...I'm a shitty trader because I won't trade DeAndre Hopkins for a 2nd round pick (which BTW I was offered earlier this year)...SMFH.

Plus, if I draft Wilson and Hopkins in a startup, draft Tyreek in the 4th, Diggs in the 3rd, Mahomes in the 3rd, McLaurin in the 3rd, Aaron Jones in the 3rd (or 4th I don't remember which), Marlon Mack in the 2nd, and pick up Chris Godwin, Lindsay, Austin Hooper, and James Conner from waivers, plus all my first round picks..all while doing one trade in 7 years (DJ for M. Thomas and a pick after DJ's big year)...that must be one hell of a shitty team, huh?

The thesis is that trading is not essential to success in the game, rather it is ancillary to success. In essence, if somebody wants to not trade (or severely cut back the efforts required to trade), they can focus efforts in other areas (i.e. scouting college talent) and achieve the same levels of success in this game without the frustration and aggravation of having to argue over player values (especially when leaguemates consistently lowball and understate player values).

So as an example. If someone will only give me a 3rd round pick for Gurley (as was offered to me earlier this year) and that's the only return I can get for Gurley...but the odds are, say 90%, that Gurley projects to provide a starter quality production over the next 3-5 years (which is the cycle on which I structure my teams) but only, say 10%, that the 3rd rounder produces at the same level, why would I not keep the player - assuming I'm in it to win it?

The problem lies not within whether trading is a part of a strategy...it is...but rather whether it is absolutely essential to a strategy, which I think it is not and those efforts that owners devote to trades are much better diverted to team structure through the draft and FA. That's potentially dangerous thinking for people who are used to taking advantage of people in trades.

[CGW]

So what you mean is, "if you are in a shallow league with poor owners, then there is no reason to trade." I can get on board with that.

In 99% of leagues, that is not the case, unfortunately. Those waiver pickups are not a thing in competitive leagues. Top players on my FA waivers are guys like JD Mckissic, ty johnson, brandon bolden, jeff wilson. Every blue moon you catch a guy like Mark Andrews or Slayton if you pick them up before they play a snap in the NFL.

[bjd5211]

You aren't going to continue that level of hit rate on your draft picks though, especially when you only have your natural 3-4 draft picks per year because you never trade for more/higher picks. If you are consistently having problems trading across multiple leagues, maybe you're the problem and you're just cherry picking the examples that best fit your narrative for this post.

[jenkins.math]

Mind elaborating, please? Where is the "significant disadvantage"?
Two of my best teams are built 95-99% through the draft and free agency. One is going to win a 3rd straight chip this year.
I just see no advantage to trading other than the enjoyment of getting a shiny new toy, and when leaguemates suck the fun out of that, it almost becomes pointless.

Sure. Simply, trading is by far the best way to build value in dynasty. Maybe you're just not very good at trading.

Yeah, it must be that...I'm a shitty trader because I won't trade DeAndre Hopkins for a 2nd round pick (which BTW I was offered earlier this year)...SMFH.

Plus, if I draft Wilson and Hopkins in a startup, draft Tyreek in the 4th, Diggs in the 3rd, Mahomes in the 3rd, McLaurin in the 3rd, Aaron Jones in the 3rd (or 4th I don't remember which), Marlon Mack in the 2nd, and pick up Chris Godwin, Lindsay, Austin Hooper, and James Conner from waivers, plus all my first round picks..all while doing one trade in 7 years (DJ for M. Thomas and a pick after DJ's big year)...that must be one hell of a shitty team, huh?

That right there tells me you are either in a super shallow league or play with a bunch of morons. Or both. Godwin, Hooper, and Conner being day 2 picks and having decent success early in their careers should have never hit the waiver wire. Maybe 1 out of 3, but not all 3.

[killer_of_giants]

Yeah, it must be that...I'm a shitty trader because I won't trade DeAndre Hopkins for a 2nd round pick (which BTW I was offered earlier this year)...SMFH.

touchy, aren't we?

you drafted well, are winning three on the spin, well done, congratulations.
on the other hand, you picked up 5 rebuild jobs and you're leaving 4 of them, because you didn't manage to get trades done, and so you couldn't improve those teams. that's your answer right there.