A word about fantasy trades. The book FF4W devotes an entire chapter (although it's a pretty short chapter) to the art of trading: "Executing Uneven Trades That Seem Fair."
Those of you who have drafted one, two, or 35 teams might have already initiated some trade conversations with your friends-turned-enemies. Great. I'm a huge proponent of trading. Championships are built on the backs of stupid trading partners. So our job is to bring out the stupid in our competitors--make them think they're getting a good deal when really we're taking advantage of them. (Note to MD: I was not trying to take advantage of you in that last trade. Trust me.)
However, some smart fantasy people try to hit a home run (mixing metaphors here), when the name of the game is base hits. My trades with opponents always seem fair. I've lined up each player and evaluated the probabilities that each of us will get the better end of the deal in the short and long term. If I just barely come out ahead, I'm doing the deal. If I pretty clearly come out ahead, no deal--not because I'm backing down, but because my opponent usually sees the obvious--that I'm trying to take advantage of him.
So use your knowledge to your advantage. You might try to swap RB2a for RB2b, knowing that they're essentially equal, except RB2b has a far more favorable fantasy playoff schedule. There are dozens and dozens of variables you can research in a matter of minutes to figure out which way the trade needle's pointing.
That said, there's one misstep to avoid, especially when playing with smart people: Never offer an uneven trade (e.g. 2-for-1). To many people, it's perceived as an insult. For example, if I offer someone a WR3 and an RB3 for his RB2, it's a joke. Forget it. I'm not hearing back if they're the least bit savvy at fantasy football. But if I offer him a WR3 and an RB3 for his RB2 and WR6, it *seems* fairer. Not that it is fairer; it's still garbage. I'm asking for a crappy player I'll drop the moment the trade goes through.
But here's the key: He hasn't dropped the WR6. He still thinks the WR6 has value. So the trade proposition is essentially, "You're giving me a slight upgrade (RB3 to RB2), and I'm giving you a bigger upgrade (WR6 to WR3)." I get the higher ceiling upgrade, and he gets the higher floor player upgrade. There's something in it for both of us.
I've made a lot--*a lot*--of 2-for-2 and 3-for-3 trades with this strategy. One player at a time, I've built teams comprised largely of 3s and 4s into 1s, 2s, and 3s.
It's about timing, messaging, and embracing base hits.
Those of you who have drafted one, two, or 35 teams might have already initiated some trade conversations with your friends-turned-enemies. Great. I'm a huge proponent of trading. Championships are built on the backs of stupid trading partners. So our job is to bring out the stupid in our competitors--make them think they're getting a good deal when really we're taking advantage of them. (Note to MD: I was not trying to take advantage of you in that last trade. Trust me.)
However, some smart fantasy people try to hit a home run (mixing metaphors here), when the name of the game is base hits. My trades with opponents always seem fair. I've lined up each player and evaluated the probabilities that each of us will get the better end of the deal in the short and long term. If I just barely come out ahead, I'm doing the deal. If I pretty clearly come out ahead, no deal--not because I'm backing down, but because my opponent usually sees the obvious--that I'm trying to take advantage of him.
So use your knowledge to your advantage. You might try to swap RB2a for RB2b, knowing that they're essentially equal, except RB2b has a far more favorable fantasy playoff schedule. There are dozens and dozens of variables you can research in a matter of minutes to figure out which way the trade needle's pointing.
That said, there's one misstep to avoid, especially when playing with smart people: Never offer an uneven trade (e.g. 2-for-1). To many people, it's perceived as an insult. For example, if I offer someone a WR3 and an RB3 for his RB2, it's a joke. Forget it. I'm not hearing back if they're the least bit savvy at fantasy football. But if I offer him a WR3 and an RB3 for his RB2 and WR6, it *seems* fairer. Not that it is fairer; it's still garbage. I'm asking for a crappy player I'll drop the moment the trade goes through.
But here's the key: He hasn't dropped the WR6. He still thinks the WR6 has value. So the trade proposition is essentially, "You're giving me a slight upgrade (RB3 to RB2), and I'm giving you a bigger upgrade (WR6 to WR3)." I get the higher ceiling upgrade, and he gets the higher floor player upgrade. There's something in it for both of us.
I've made a lot--*a lot*--of 2-for-2 and 3-for-3 trades with this strategy. One player at a time, I've built teams comprised largely of 3s and 4s into 1s, 2s, and 3s.
It's about timing, messaging, and embracing base hits.