clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Fantasy Football Trading - Running Backs

New, comments

So far, this has been a frustrating fantasy football season for trading.  I don't know if this has always been the case, but it is certainly the impression I get.  I listen the Rotowire Fantasy Sports Hour with Chris Liss on XM Radio every day, and his advice always seems to focus on the robbery trade.  Recently, he admitted that he wanted to deal Maurice Jones-Drew for Reggie Wayne and based his offer on the belief he didn't need to make a trade so any trade he did do should be clearly in his favor.  That seems to be the kind of action that crushes trade discussion instead of facilitating it - now or in the future.

During Scott Engel's fantasy football chat this morning, he was asked a question that supported my impression of the trade market in fantasy football.  This questioner asked:

King (TX): Scott in years past the ESPN fantasy folks (you included) have really promoted fair trading. This year it seems that you guys are promoting trying to rip other folks off. Why the change?

Scott Engel: I don't think you are referring to me - I am a strong backer of fair trades

Is the questioner lumping everyone together at ESPN or does answering trade questions in and "expert" forum only give that impression if the expert does not explicitly state the offer is lopsided?  Often, the answer seems to be, "Do it if you can."

My own guess is that RBs are so precious that they are unobtainable via trade, and their owners absolutely fearful of dealing a potential 12-TD RB.  Is this clearly irrational or a rational responseto the randomness of football performance?