Apology

[irabowman]

I know I have talked to several people moving both up & down. I misread the trade value charts or where my pick is at times. This is mainly due to my eyes seeing things blurry. Also judging what a future year draft pick is worth there is no chart for that so I make a wild guess where I think a person will finish the next season. I know I have offended at least 1 person in the last few days. I truly do not mean to offend any of you, that is why I usually prefer you make a offer. So to anyone I have offended or offend in the future that is not my intentions. It really bothers me when I do so.

[Guest]

I just assume I'm going to be offended every time I open a trade offer and assume I'm going to offend someone when I send a trade offer.

Except with Aston, that dude is pure class.

[Guest]

Yep, offend away.

I love to get offers no matter how ridiculous. I would have liked to have traded with you today but I couldn't be on very much.

[Cory]

To hell with anybody that's offended by any trade offer. If you do them the honor of showing interest in something that they have and sending them a message telling them that there's value in what they possess the least they can do is take it at face value and say no thank you if they don't feel it's in their best interest. To do any more than that just means that they're not worth the time you put into the first offer, much less the post that you made to start this thread. You're a very easy person to deal with, Ira. If you offended somebody that's on them, not you.

[Aston]

Don't worry about offending. Your job is to propose a deal that makes sense for your team, not to make it work for the other guy!

If there's not a match and you're too far apart to negotiate about it, then the team seeking the deal will just have to find another partner if they can. Ultimately, you're the judge for what counts as "reasonable" for your own team.

I take it kind of as a given that it's unlikely to find a match. Often what one team is looking for is going to be very different than what the other team is looking for. It's not for want of niceties, it's just different goals that stops a deal from being done.

[macroguru20]

I look at it this way. Trades are base negotiations, if they are not offended by your initial offer, then you are giving up way to much.

[IrishGuy65]

While I completely disagree with macro's viewpoint, I do agree that no one should get upset about it. And, if someone's going off on you in PMs, then maybe you should bring it to the attention of the league offices. No one should be mistreated.

Sometimes people will say things as a way of getting the upper hand in either current, or maybe working for future, negotiations. People tell me all the time I'm clueless, but I know what I value a player or pick for, and if they have a different value, I'm OK with it... I'm just not going to make a trade and I'll explain why I have the value in mind that I have.

Finally, macro... don't bother to try to trade with me if that's your tactic. If I'm looking to get offers, I'll only work with an offer that is reasonable. Lowball offers get no counters, and usually increase my initial value of the trade... When I'm making an offer to someone, I find what I think is a fair range, and try to make an offer within that range. It all depends on who I am dealing with and how important the trade is to me. If it's someone I've worked with before, and they dealt fairly with me (or someone I feel isn't going to try to grind out the negotiations), I'll usually go near the middle of the range. If it's an important trade to me, I'll go towards the upper part of the range. If it's someone who is generally a hard negotiator, I'll go for the lower part of the range. Finally, if it's a known lowballer or just someone I don't generally like, this is the only time I will lowball. Otherwise, I'm always in what I consider a fair range of value.

Now, understand that all people have different values, and what might be in the middle of a fair range in my perspective, could be a lowball offer to another GM. I'm OK with that. For example, I know with 100% certainty that there are a couple of positions I value very low that most value much higher. I generally can't find a deal at these positions because of this. I know that going in.

Overall, ira, I think my way is the best way. If you don't know the person you are talking with about a trade, you should really work near the middle of your value range. You'll quickly learn about the GM you are working with.

Again, it's important to remember every GM has a different value system. This is why I always try to explain my point of view in a negotiation about value. If the other person disagrees with my viewpoint, we can't make a trade and I'm OK. If they agree, then we have common ground to work from. So always try to learn why the other GM thinks their offer is fair, and always know what you want and what you think is fair and WHY. If you can discuss your opinions, you can learn if a trade is possible, and at least know each other's point of view for future trade possibilities. THIS is my pet peeve in trading... often people only tell me that I'm an idiot or whatever but never want to explain their viewpoint... so there is no opportunity to find common ground or understand each other for the future. If you feel something is worth a set price, then know why you feel that way.

[Guest]

I don't know why you would hold "past injustices" for trade talks. If I did that I would never deal with bomber. Everyone has a different style and you just have to roll with it. Most people have no idea of a player's value so you shouldn't hold it against them if they give what you perceive as crap offers.

I know Macro from before and never had any issues dealing with him.

[IrishGuy65]

I don't know why you would hold "past injustices" for trade talks. If I did that I would never deal with bomber. Everyone has a different style and you just have to roll with it. Most people have no idea of a player's value so you shouldn't hold it against them if they give what you perceive as crap offers.

I know Macro from before and never had any issues dealing with him.

Where did I say 'past injustices'?

Edit: Bomber is the exact guy I was thinking of when I said 'hard negotiator'. But I never said anything, nor inferred anything, about past injustices.

[Guest]

Sorry, I thought you were implying that you alter your trade offers based on previous trade talks.

Personally I just have no idea how to work deals so I just throw around offers and wait and see what sticks. If I am making draft pick trades and think I can get better value through drafting, I don't do the deal.

[IrishGuy65]

Sorry, I thought you were implying that you alter your trade offers based on previous trade talks.

Personally I just have no idea how to work deals so I just throw around offers and wait and see what sticks. If I am making draft pick trades and think I can get better value through drafting, I don't do the deal.

I do alter my trade offers depending on many things, including past trade talks. But 'past injustices', to me, means someone did a wrong against me in the past, and I'm trying to screw them in some way in the future.

What I am saying is I have a range, and where my offer comes from within that range depends on factors like the GM I'm dealing with and the importance of the trade to me. Bomber is going to try to squeeze everything he can out of a trade. Since I know that, I'm going to start very low in my range, but I still would consider that a fair offer, albeit at the very bottom of the scale of what I'd think is fair.

As far as the last category, if I don't like someone, I'm going to be bomber in negotiations with them. I'm going to lowball, and come at the trade from 10 different angles to get maximum value, as well as continue to pound a minimal offer. Same with someone who likes to lowball, and does it knowingly. I have an example of this from a league I played in years ago. Every time a new GM would come into the league, this one guy would try to rake him over the coals. And sometimes the guy would be experienced and not make a deal, but the inexperienced new players would get killed in the trade. I made one trade with the guy through all the years in several leagues we played together, and I am sure I raked him over the coals. Looking back at the trade (I don't remember all the details), but I came out far ahead after all the draft picks were made and players could be evaluated.

But there are very few people in my don't like/lowballer list, and I can't think of any here in this league. Bomber is the guy who would get the lowest offers from me. But again, I believe the offers I would give are in the 'fair' category in my point of view.

[irabowman]

I have made couple trades with Bomber and he may have came out ahead but I felt I got very fair value out of the trade. I can think of two trades I have made that I think came up short on with other players. One of those players I should of never traded but did not understand that I could redo other players contracts that might of freed up some cash might not of. I am learning though, and most importantly having fun doing so.

[IrishGuy65]

With bomber, it depends on the trade how hard he negotiates. I like bomber, he's a good guy and a very good GM. But sometimes, he tries so hard to find a trade where there may not be one. Sometimes, you just have to let it go.

I remember one negotiation with him, I'm not sure what league it was, where he kept coming back to my counter offers with offers that were completely different, but the same basic value. Like he'd offer picks, then picks and some players, then all different players, then all different picks, then mix and match.. and on both sides of the trade. And I'm not a sophisticated trader. if I'm trading, I want something specifically, either a specific player, or value of picks. I'll throw in a pick on one side or the other to compensate for too much value, but I don't usually look to put together a trade with 5 items per side.

One of my problems in trading is I'm usually happy with how my team is set up, and I don't want to give up a lot of players, unless there is a way to replace them (draft picks, FA, or trade in return). Once the season starts, it is rare for me to make a deal that involves players.

[Cory]

I guess I'm not much of a negotiator. If I'm proposing a trade I offer as much as possible while still leaving it with something I'd be happy about if it's accepted. If it's not accepted I move on. If there's a counter offer I make the decision on whether I'd be happy with it or not and yay or nay the deal. I don't really care how fair it is or how it looks from the other guy's perspective.

I take a similar approach if somebody offers me a deal. I either accept it or counter with as much as I'd be willing to give and still be happy. Either they accept or deny and I move on.

I don't take the other person into consideration at all, whether it's to make the deal fair or to alter my offers based on who they are. Sometimes the trade is unfair in my favor, sometimes it's unfair in the other person's favor. That doesn't really concern me at all. I'm concerned with how happy I am with the deal I got.

[Guest]

I don't know why you would hold "past injustices" for trade talks. If I did that I would never deal with bomber. Everyone has a different style and you just have to roll with it. Most people have no idea of a player's value so you shouldn't hold it against them if they give what you perceive as crap offers.

I know Macro from before and never had any issues dealing with him.

I actually LOVE LOVE trading with CHUCK.. or trying to trade with Chuck.. i think we talked maybe 10 different trades and completed 1 trade (the DT trade last year where Chuck rip me off).

Honestly, the best traders are not easy traders.. they do poke and pull to figure out an angle to get the best deal (chuck!!) and they are firm with saying no (chuck!!)..