How to trade with CPU.

[dyzerman]

So I just started playing FOF2004 and I am finding it hard to pull off any trades. The reply is always that the player is a fan favorite, that there would be to much dead cap money or they are just plain not interested. The only trades I can do it seems is for draft picks. Can ya all help me out here?
Thanks.

[stevew]

Really, i hate to say it, but if you want to trade, you need to find guys that arent fan faves and don't have huge salaries and bonus's. Also the computer seems to want an arm and a leg for players....wanting way way more than you would think. If I want to trade for guys, i usually look for underdeveloped guys that have 3 years of experience or less, and guys that were late round picks. If you can trade for some of the "boom" players after the draft it works out. Most of the time i try to avoid trading altogether cause you can just destroy the computer in trade equity and its just not all that fun.

[dyzerman]

Thanks for the input. I just wanted to see if I was crazy or if everyone has trouble trading with the cpu. Thanks

[CraigSca]

On a related topic - are there any strategies for trading draft picks with the CPU? I run into the same problem as the first poster - it seems I can never get the CPU to accept a deal that involves draft picks (even something as small as moving up a few spots in the draft).

[dyzerman]

I have found that the cpu really wants the world from you but will not give up on its picks very easily. I have been able to trade players for like 2nd or 3rd round draft picks but never picks for players with the cpu. I will keep you posted on any success that i have.

[revrew]

A few rules that I play by that enable me to enjoy the trading:

#1. As far as I can tell, it is NOT POSSIBLE to trade for a player who is a fan fave or idolized.

#2. As far as I can tell, it is NOT POSSIBLE to trade for a player who has a big bonus left over a long contract. Unless the guy has only 1 or 2 years left, forget it. Keep scrolling.

#3. The best way to pull a trade is to determine who on your team is expendible (read: 1 year left on the contract, and you probably won't have the dough to re-sign him). Then shop him. The cpu will be more generous in a trade when it actually wants the player you're offering. This is a far more reliable guage of a team's trade willingness than needs that you or the "primary" needs list identifies. Find the teams you can work with and forget the rest.

#4. Picks for picks is rarely possible. It's usually inequitable to one team or the other, anyway. If you're going into the offseason wanting to trade, get your bait players ready.

#5. If you want to trade up in the first, you'd better be ready to pay through the teeth. Think Herschel Walker or Mike Vick. You'll drop 2 or 3 years of first-rounders to move up.

[Saucy]

Not sure where my experience fits in... one poster says both that the cpu wants an arm and a leg for players yet also that you can 'destroy the cpu' in trade equity.

I've personally made three CPU trades very early in my first SP game. The first was a ridiculous trade in the AI's favour, when to some extent I was just experimenting, but the other two seemed quite fair to me. I traded a high pick plus a mediocre defensive tackle (I was overstocked there) for a top quality guard in his late twenties, and a low pick for a veteran linebacker to improve a desperately weak position on my roster.

It may be that my concept of fair and realistic trades is very weak, and also that I have taken quite a short-term approach to make some urgent improvements, sacrificing picks in the process. Then again, I am fairly happy to pick up a solid, proven player who is already doing it in the pro game, in exchange for the opportunity to pick a youngster who may or may not make it.

(I guess I have a lot to say, for someone who hasn't even played a full season yet!)

[stevew]

Not sure where my experience fits in... one poster says both that the cpu wants an arm and a leg for players yet also that you can 'destroy the cpu' in trade equity.

I've personally made three CPU trades very early in my first SP game. The first was a ridiculous trade in the AI's favour, when to some extent I was just experimenting, but the other two seemed quite fair to me. I traded a high pick plus a mediocre defensive tackle (I was overstocked there) for a top quality guard in his late twenties, and a low pick for a veteran linebacker to improve a desperately weak position on my roster.

It may be that my concept of fair and realistic trades is very weak, and also that I have taken quite a short-term approach to make some urgent improvements, sacrificing picks in the process. Then again, I am fairly happy to pick up a solid, proven player who is already doing it in the pro game, in exchange for the opportunity to pick a youngster who may or may not make it.

(I guess I have a lot to say, for someone who hasn't even played a full season yet!)


I realize the contradiction. The CPU will want a 2nd rounder it seems for a 50/50 type guard, but in turn, you can get 3 #1s for a 65/65 type QB. And then in turn, the QB will invest all those #1s into that QB and won't bother to try to resign him.

[QuikSand]

I don't share the general pessimism about being able to trade picks for picks with the CPU teams. I generally find this system to be pretty reasonable -- it seems to value picks in a fashion that is generally consistent with the way I would, or with the way that any of the many "draft pick value" charts out there does.

I think the weaknesses in pick-for-pick trades tend to lie where the space in movement is small --- that's where I tend to fine some real fault. But in general, if I'm reying to move up from #28 to #15 in the draft (a fairly comon thing for me) I find the price to be pretty reasonable. Moving to #1 overall does cost an arm and a leg - but it ought to.

The CPU is not, however, sharp at recognizing the "cliffs" in the draft the way you might -- and that is certainy one way you can take great advantage. (It seems to just blindly value picks based on their place in the draft, while you might really value pick #7 much more than #10 because that standout CB you covet is still there at that point)

Also, there is a real weakness in trading for future year picks -- enough so that most sensible players just exclude that from any of their considerations. It's way too easy to swap first rounder next year with the team picking first this year -- practically ensuring you get a higher pick than you would have otherwise.

Overall, I don't think pick for pick trading is badly broken.

[QuikSand]

I agree with many that trading players is frought with problems. In solo play, I generally "house rule" that element of the game away, as I find it too unrealistic -- QB are overvalued in trade dealings, teams fail to properly consider salary sometimes, and so forth.

[cthomer5000]

I agree with everything QuikSand said. You have to (rightfully) pay a ton to move up very high in the first round. But moving fromr 24 to 21 is very reasonable. I think the computer does a pretty solid job with draft-pick for draft-pick trades, although I certainly agree that they undervalue future draft picks.

[Jabbason]

I don't think it is too hard to make a trade. This is football, not baseball, and trades should be difficult.<O:p</O:p

Trading way up in the draft should cost an arm and a leg. I like to take over the worst team in a solo league and build. I usually get 3 1st rounders and two second rounders to move down to forth to sixth over all. that may be a little too generous on the AIs part.<O:p</O:p

Moving up is not as expensive as I just got the 2nd overall pick for the 29th, a future 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and a 8th year QB 54/56. <O:p</O:p

Remember the AI might want the same player you want to move up to get. There are huge differences in even a few spots at some points in the draft. Why would the AI pass up that great player for a few mid round draft pics.<O:p</O:p

On value. I think a QB should be overvalued. There are probably 60-90 OL men in my solo league that re 48 + in ratings. There are only 6QBs 65+ and under 35 in age. That makes them much more valuable. Does the AI still offer too much, maybe, but compared to a 50/50 guard they should.<O:p</O:p

I haven't had a 65+QB in the past 20 seasons with 6 different teams in my league, yet I usually have 4 OL men at 50+, that’s 80 of them. <O:p</O:p

<O:p</O:p

If you are wondering why the AI won't make a trade with you look at it from his perspective. is that second rounder you offering really worth him giving up the leader of his secondary?? Even a first rounder.<O:p</O:p

<O:p</O:p
I am looking at my team right mow and there are about 15 players I would not trade for a first round pick and 6 that I would not even trade for the first overall pick.<O:p</O:p

The trade has to make sense to both sides.

[WebEwbank]

Trading down in the draft usually makes sense from both sides' value perspective. Trading up is pricey.