Anyone else having this issue?

[Shankopotamus]

I'm in a 12 team league that must start 3 rbs every week and I feel your pain. Gotta sell your soul to acquire a rb.

[FiremanEd]

RB scarcity is a thing, but I’d snap accept Boyd and a 1st for Drake.

Indeed. With you on that one. I’ll hold Boyd/1st rather easily.

[Pet_Smith]

agreeing with the others here, I'd be snap accepting Boyd/1st for Drake.

But then for the other two I wouldn't be accepting for that. It seems like you value Landry highly in fantasy (or maybe assume that everyone else should, hence including him in the offers) but everyone has different values. Might just need some further conversations with the other people in your league to gauge how they value their rosters - there's a good chance they're much lower on someone they have than you think possible. It's just identifying who that is so you both get a good deal

[Ski mask ready]

most owners are not in the game to sell rbs... basically the one spot most owners taking risk on long shots. Even a PPR darling like cohen, most likely will come at a slight over payment on your end... Just the nature of the beast bro.

[Shoreline Steamers]

Every year in my league. You simply can't get a starting RB in trade without overpaying. I was looking to add some RB depth in-season last year, and had to give a 2nd for a guy like Latavius Murray. I figured he'd be of use if anything happened to Kamara. And if I had to start him in a pinch to cover BYE's and/or injuries, I could at least hope that he might get a couple of goal line carries and maybe a TD.

That was the best deal I could swing.

[DLF3000]

Good starting RBs always cost an arm and a leg in trades, but I mean, come on, nothing new there.

But yes, it's gotten even more out of control recently, extending to dudes who don't even start or are clearly in a huge timeshare - which is hilarious.

Last giant starting RB mega-trade in my league was Bell, twice, back to back years. How's that working out?