If you've been reading this blog for a while, or if you skimmed through the book FF4W, you know I'm a big fan of the psychological aspects of fantasy trading. How do I get inside an opponent's head, understand his/her biggest concerns and hopes about their team, and construct trade offers that play into those concerns or hopes? And of course, some opponents are trying to capitalize on my own concerns and hopes. That's why we need to be careful about what we say and do.
Yesterday, longtime FF4W community member Lincoln Lilley asked me whether this week he should start Jay Cutler over Cam Newton, who he's actively trying to trade. Imagine you're one of Lincoln's opponents. You receive an offer: Cam and a starting WR for one of your starting RBs and your starting TE. If you're like me, you check out his roster. Beyond the merits of the trade, what is he trying to get out of this? What might be his concerns and hopes?
Then you see Cam stashed on his bench.
Lincoln is trying to trade you bench fodder. (Lincoln's a great guy, by the way, so don't fault him.) He's trying to pawn off a guy he's not even planning to play this week. What does that do to Cam's value? Even if it doesn't impact your view of Cam, it certainly impacts what Lincoln thinks of him.
Trading isn't just about what's "fair." It's about whether your opponent is giving up as much as s/he's willing to. In this scenario, if Lincoln keeps Cam in his starting lineup while shopping him, it demonstrates that Cam's his #1 QB--that parting with him would be a sacrifice.
Similarly, be wary of offering a player who wasn't in your lineup last week. If you offer me Player ABC, I'll always check to see if he's been starting. If he sat on your bench the last couple of weeks, I'll lightly call you out: "I'm not giving up my WR3 for a guy you're probably going to drop soon." If you expect me to give up someone I need, I expect you to give up someone you need.
Another example: Adding a guy off waivers and then immediately offering him in a trade. Psychologically, if I know you just picked someone up, that player isn't as valuable as if he'd been on your team for a week or more. It's obvious what you're trying to do. That player might have been a terrific acquisition. But knowing you sacrificed virtually nothing to get him makes him seem less valuable to you than if you drafted him and have been starting him every week.
So if you just added a good player this morning, be wary of the optics of trying to immediately trade him. Some opponents might not notice; more power to you. But those that do might reject it outright, and might be a little more suspicious the next time you make an offer.
In the end, an effective trade is one your opponent thinks is fair, and which your opponent believes *you* think is fair . . . but which you know slightly favors your team. We achieve this by manipulating the positioning and timing of our offers to capitalize on our opponents' concerns and hopes.
Yesterday, longtime FF4W community member Lincoln Lilley asked me whether this week he should start Jay Cutler over Cam Newton, who he's actively trying to trade. Imagine you're one of Lincoln's opponents. You receive an offer: Cam and a starting WR for one of your starting RBs and your starting TE. If you're like me, you check out his roster. Beyond the merits of the trade, what is he trying to get out of this? What might be his concerns and hopes?
Then you see Cam stashed on his bench.
Lincoln is trying to trade you bench fodder. (Lincoln's a great guy, by the way, so don't fault him.) He's trying to pawn off a guy he's not even planning to play this week. What does that do to Cam's value? Even if it doesn't impact your view of Cam, it certainly impacts what Lincoln thinks of him.
Trading isn't just about what's "fair." It's about whether your opponent is giving up as much as s/he's willing to. In this scenario, if Lincoln keeps Cam in his starting lineup while shopping him, it demonstrates that Cam's his #1 QB--that parting with him would be a sacrifice.
Similarly, be wary of offering a player who wasn't in your lineup last week. If you offer me Player ABC, I'll always check to see if he's been starting. If he sat on your bench the last couple of weeks, I'll lightly call you out: "I'm not giving up my WR3 for a guy you're probably going to drop soon." If you expect me to give up someone I need, I expect you to give up someone you need.
Another example: Adding a guy off waivers and then immediately offering him in a trade. Psychologically, if I know you just picked someone up, that player isn't as valuable as if he'd been on your team for a week or more. It's obvious what you're trying to do. That player might have been a terrific acquisition. But knowing you sacrificed virtually nothing to get him makes him seem less valuable to you than if you drafted him and have been starting him every week.
So if you just added a good player this morning, be wary of the optics of trying to immediately trade him. Some opponents might not notice; more power to you. But those that do might reject it outright, and might be a little more suspicious the next time you make an offer.
In the end, an effective trade is one your opponent thinks is fair, and which your opponent believes *you* think is fair . . . but which you know slightly favors your team. We achieve this by manipulating the positioning and timing of our offers to capitalize on our opponents' concerns and hopes.