Trade Tactics...

[blayze]

Best thread ever.

[fulcrum]

Yeah, they're being lazy.

I have no interest in making a deal - why would I do work?
They have an interest in making a deal - they should do work to accomplish it.

If they succeed in getting me interested, then I'll do work. But why would I embark on a bunch of effort if I have yet to have any interest in embarking on effort? I wouldn't!

Exactly the way I feel......

[Pengwin7]

If I'm the GM with the desirable asset, I'm the pretty girl. You wanna dance? You buy me a drink!

If I'm interested in getting a dance with the pretty girl, I ask her what she's drinking instead of assuming I know her tastes.

When you say "buy me a drink", YOU (as the recipient of offer) have countered with exactly what you would like in return. (My point.)

When you say you "ask her what she's drinking"... that's "asking her what she wants?".
She's going to give you a reply, right? Beer, wine, cooler. She'll even tell you the exact type of beer, wine, or cooler. (My stance.)
Or will she say: "Well, I have a weakness at sobriety, had a long day, and my mouth is between parched & cottony... figure out the perfect drink for me?" (Your stance.)

A-ha!
Pretty soon I'll have you moving your zero!

[DerekReese]

All very good points from all of you. From my experience, I always end up over paying because there's always one piece from his side that's worth paying a lot for. I need the other guy to PERCEIVE that he's getting the upper hand on me, otherwise he won't deal. I just find that if both parties end up with a deal that breaks even in value or washes out, then there's no incentive to make an offer in the first place. Over paying and forcing the accept will save a lot of time in most cases.

Sounds great! I will trade my 2nd rd pick for your 1st rd pick.

[Pengwin7]

And that's why you don't "consummate the deal" as often (by your own admission) - you're only focused on your needs. Typical man. :P

deleted. i am an idiot.

[fulcrum]

And that's why you don't "consummate the deal" as often (by your own admission) - you're only focused on your needs. Typical man. :P

hahaha, awesome.

[DerekReese]

i think it all depends on how your team looks. If you have great players on your team you can get away with asking "what do you want?" but if you are rebuilding or have a shitty team that wont work as there will be nothing that the other GM wants from you. That is when you start with the first offer and and wait for a response and negociate from there.

[Pengwin7]

Well... I did finish regular seasons as 1st/13, 2nd/12, 4th/12 in my keepers last year.
Those are my trading leagues where I do 1-2 trades per year.
The latter two are adopted teams.
So, I have no doubts about my own trade tactics.

Anyways, I'm just still trying to help the OP.
I think my way is good... but it's time for me to exit the thread.
LAST POST. (all you guys from here)

Kisses & hugs, XOXO.

[ericdaoust]

I think in the end it all depends on the situation. I can see some instances where one approach works better than the other. In the case of owning Malkin, the other GM would be an idiot not to know that you're expecting a castle in return. If punts to you without making an offer thinking you're going to make him an offer where you lose Malkin, you can either play his game or realize what's really going on.

On the other hand, if it's a prospect like Kabanov who has mixed opinions, then I can see tire kicking being better. I also do this sometimes when the person's trade block is very ambiguous. But in that case I like to clarify what the person wants and then I'll either reply with an offer or I'll just tell him I don't have what he wants and move on.

[DerekReese]

And that's why you don't "consummate the deal" as often (by your own admission) - you're only focused on your needs. Typical man. :P

But isnt this really the point of making a trade? You dont care what the other team wants or needs all you care about is making your team better/stronger. So yes you need to be focussed on your own needs.

There is no point making a trade if your team doesnt get better by it.

[DerekReese]

Best thread ever.

Agreed, Great thread!

[fantasyhockeygeek]

When you say "buy me a drink", YOU (as the recipient of offer) have countered with exactly what you would like in return. (My point.)

When you say you "ask her what she's drinking"... that's "asking her what she wants?".
She's going to give you a reply, right? Beer, wine, cooler. She'll even tell you the exact type of beer, wine, or cooler. (My stance.)
Or will she say: "Well, I have a weakness at sobriety, had a long day, and my mouth is between parched & cottony... figure out the perfect drink for me?" (Your stance.)

When I'm the girl, I don't know what the bar has to offer because if someone wants to buy me a drink, they'll walk over and find out. It is not possible for me to tell them exactly what I want. Maybe I know I want a tequila but I don't know what brands the place has; I can say that I want a tequila, and I will. If the guy wants to get somewhere with me and get my attention, he'll go to the bar, find out what brands are available, and come back and ask me if I'd rather have a Don Julio Añejo or a Patron Reposado.

When I'm buying a drink, I need to know my audience so I can succeed. Exactly the same principle.

Specific players != win criteria. If you tell me what you want to accomplish in a trade rather than just what players you want, then I might come up with something you haven't thought of. I could engineer a 3-way trade. I could find other creative ways to get you what you want. If you just come back to me with "Players X, Y, and Z" then a number of the options have been eliminated before the discussion even starts. I see it as taking too narrow a view on the possibilities. If your win criteria is "receive more player value than I send" then your approach is bang on, but I think that's a pretty narrow view.

Like I said, I consummate a lot of deals. Each one is different, and all are good experience that set me up to satisfy more partners in the future. All the while, my skill improves and my results get better. I think it's a much better way to go than "this is how I want to get off".

LOL, awesome.

A-ha!
Pretty soon I'll have you moving your zero!

Awesome!

[lucifer316]

All very good points from all of you. From my experience, I always end up over paying because there's always one piece from his side that's worth paying a lot for. I need the other guy to PERCEIVE that he's getting the upper hand on me, otherwise he won't deal. I just find that if both parties end up with a deal that breaks even in value or washes out, then there's no incentive to make an offer in the first place. Over paying and forcing the accept will save a lot of time in most cases.

i totally agree with this

in a limited keeper i am making sure that he is getting at minimum 1 keeper more from me than i am from him

also to me its important to not peddle junk

at a minimum 2 pieces should be only 1 tier lower and none of the pieces should be more than 2 tiers lower

and goalies and defensemen offered should never be more than 1 tier lower you just arent offering worthwhile value at that point

if he asks for something 3 tiers lower thats his business but i dont like insulting someone by offering it because i know i hate it when it is done to me

also if i am not trading for an elite piece but the next tier then i have no problem offering another position in the same tier if i can make it work for me

other gms are much more inclined to deal with gms who dont try to jerk them around

also other gms who feel like they 'won' the deal are more likely to deal with you in the future thinking the can 'win' again giving you the ability to make their 'wins' smaller and smaller as time goes on

[Johner]

I dont ever start negotiations without a Beer. I get bored with fantasy sports so I typically look for trades just to be trading. Its my favorite part of being a poolie. The more beer i have the more offers i send out

I typically try to find players on my roster that have more name value then actual value then look for a team that has a need for that type of player. If they are a GM that is a fan of that team i consider it a bonus!

I dont typically make 2 for 1 offers because most people are wise of such trickery, however i will throw in a prospect as a bonus if there is an age difference between the players favoring my side

The one "tactic" i find works the best is to target the other teams weakest (but not droppable) player and fit them in on the trade. I find everyone wants to upgrade their depth so if i can include that player in a deal i can usually end up with the player i am targetting.

I do have one new angle i have been wanting to try this past week but Mr.Scot Beckenbaugh wont return my calls!

[lucifer316]

I dont typically make 2 for 1 offers because most people are wise of such trickery

2 for 1 doesnt have to be trickery

lets ignore injuries for a second and just consider talent

offering backstrom and weber for stamkos would hardly be trickery