In larger leagues, studs become even more important. Depth is so tough that having a week winning stud you can roll out there is imperative in order to have a shot to win the title. Having no studs really hurts the larger the league becomes.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
****OFFICIAL DYNASTY TRADES**** (9 Viewers)
- Thread starter Gottabesweet
- Start date
-OZ-
Footballguy
From what I’ve seen, number of starters matters far more than league size.
Blick
Footballguy
I think it's the opposite, specifically for large starting rosters. The larger the league, the more depth becomes important. There are more starting spots, more chance of injury, more bye week issues, etc. Points from a "week winning stud" are a smaller percentage of the team's total scoring potential.
The more players that have to start the more "0's" will be in the lineup. Depth becomes so thin across all teams where there are one or two essentially 0's in the lineup that can be overcome with week winning studs. In a 16 team league having CMC is a much bigger impact than having him in an 8 team league where everyone is starting multiple studs and you just hope you pick the right one for that week that goes off.
Wigglytuff's Gruff
Footballguy
Studs matter in every format. In 8 man leagues if you don't have a selection of top guys, everyone else does and you're a loser. And it's even harder to acquire them because it makes more sense to prevent you from having them than it does to sell.
You want studs if you play fantasy football. That's the bottom line, regardless.
You want studs if you play fantasy football. That's the bottom line, regardless.
I think they go hand in hand. Essentially I am basing this on total number of starting players. So a 16 team league with 5 starting players would be the same as an 8 team league with 10 starting players. But if that 16 team league jumps to 10 starting players that super stud is gonna matter a lot more to the 16 team league than the 8 team league that starts half the players.
True but it's much easier to draft multiple studs in an 8 team league as most teams (unless an owner is just clueless) usually have a roster full of them and you are stuck guessing which of your studs is going to have a ceiling week as opposed to just a very good week. Lineup decisions matter a lot more in that smaller league than having a single week winning stud.
-OZ-
Footballguy
I think we have just seen different methods to winning. We start 22 players including IDP in my 32 team league (players available twice). Depth has proven key over the season, more so than studs many years.
In a league that starts that many players and you roll in IDP's then I agree. You need depth and a stud isn't as important because of the 22 starting players. But IDP changes things a lot especially if they are meaningful in quantity and scoring equivalency. That changes the game quite a bit.
For me would depend on where I thought that 1st would land next year. If I thought that would be the 1.05 or better again I would be awfully tempted to take the package.
I'd then be wondering if I could package something like the 5+6 or one of those plus something else on my team to move back up to 1.02 or 1.03. In my case I like Nabers & Rome almost as much as I do MHJr.
Dez
Footballguy
What about now ?
I gave up Hall, R White and a 1st round pick for Chase in 2022.
Not looking so hot these days is it. This is why when a trade is made you can't really judge it all you can do is judge it by "current" value but if you don't overpay a little for what you want in a year or two you are going to be overpaying a lot more if you want the same thing sometimes. Note while I gave up Skyy Moore I would not have drafted him I gave up the 1,10 pick so had I not made the trade I would have not been able to trade Moore he was gone. So thus why I said I gave up Hall, R White (who I would 100% drafted at 2.01) and whoever I would taken at 1.10.
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
I’m confused. I said “nice job” at the time.
I still like the deal for you as I’m not a big believer in White’s longevity and believe Chase is a top 3 WR. So yes, I still like the deal for you. I’d prefer a WR to a RB.
As for the part about judging trades, of course - that’s all we do in here is judge it by the context of that slice of time. Trades might end up better or worse in a year or 3, but that’s irrelevant to what we say at the time of the deal.
If people want immediate feedback, that’s all anyone can base it on. 20-20 hindsight doesn’t mean anyone was wrong at the time - just that they made the best eval they could At the time they did with the info at hand.
This isn’t a paid service. No refunds will be issued, sir.
lol
Last edited:
You'd think this would be the case, and granted this is a very crude approach, but given that it's 3 flex, so essentially 1-4 RBs and 1-4 WRs, I took a look at the top 70 scorers by year (14 teams x 5 positions) for the last 10 years, and also at the top 14 each of those years.
In the 10 year period, the top 14 breaks down to essentially 9 RBs and 5 WRs - only twice in the ten years has a TE (which is lumped with WR in this league) cracked the top 14.
The top 70 breaks down to 44% RB (31), 48% WR (34) and 8% TE (5), with the TEs generally in the lower scoring area and the RBs at the top.
So while it is possible to build a contending lineup with strong WRs, and has been done, those lineups tend to be much more volatile as you don't get the safe floor that PPR gives WRs. What would generally be considered a mediocre RB starter in PPR is now squarely in the weekly start bucket.
The players just outside the top 70 are very heavily skewed towards WRs so they can make the foundation of your bye week/injury coverage, but they are all essentially JAGs in this particular format. Even a 1B RB has great value. Cherry picking some names to illustrate this, last season Devin Singletary scored within 2 points of Jaylen Waddle - not 2 PPG, but 2 points on the season. Same with Chuba Hubbard and Chris Olave - within 2 points of each other.
That's how I came to the conclusion that it's a very friendly RB set up - that position is providing not only the safe floor to fill in the back end starters, but also the vast majority of the elite upside. It's why in this league in rookie drafts no WR has gone earlier than the #4 or #5 draft pick in the last I believe 8-10 years. Now, unless an RB goes to a prime location with enough draft capital, this may be the year WR goes #1 overall and possibly even the top 2, but I'd still be fairly shocked if that is what happens. And being that it is a 1 QB league, well, QBs are not exactly high values, though I still expect Williams to go at #4 in this league for a variety of reasons, and then maybe 1 or 2 other QBs at the back end of the 1st/early 2nd.
Which puts me back to my dilemma - the guys at 2 and 3 are open to dealing. I have the 6, 7 and 8 picks. I'm not opposed to moving up, but is moving up in this league to get a Nabers or MHJ if he doesn't go at #1 even worth it (or if I can only move up to 3), when given the track history of the draft and the scoring history of the league, I may still be looking at one of the "big" 3 WRs at my picks as well as being able to take a more shotgun approach to this year's RB class, even if 2-3 go ahead of me?
Yeah, I'm in a 14 team (redraft) league with similar starting line-ups, but it's ppr. So only 12 of the top 30 are RBs.
Really, I think they answer is league specific and your opinion of the prospects who will be available to you. If you are sure 3 RBs and a QB will go in the first 5 picks, as you implied, one of those 3 WRs will be there. And with the next 2 picks, you can grab a RB and whomever is your preference. The RB class will get a bit clearer after the draft, but it's still weak compared to the WR prospects. This year, your hit rate is likely to be better taking WR over the RB. But with 3 sequential picks you have the capital to take a shot at RB. On the flip side, if the top 3 WRs go maybe you can take 2 shots at RB if the draft shakes out well for you. Lastly, how much do you need those three firsts? Are you better off ensuring MHJR or Nabers, but packaging 2 of them? Sorry, all of the cuff and a bit all over the place. I'd probably try to get to 2 if the price was reasonable, so I would be assured of one of those two WRs. They are as good of a sure thing as can be had and picks 6-8 are likely more of a gamble.
This describes my feeling for this league to a tee. Far from a guarantee that many RBs go in the top 5 - now, if things shake out such that the RBs land in very favorable positions and trends hold, then it is not out of the realm of possibility that 3 RBs go. I think if I approach with the mindset that MHJ, 2 RBs and Williams are gone for sure, then most likely Nabers, I can plan from there and be looking at Odunze and a couple of the tier 2 RBs, or if one of the next tier of WRs goes somewhere very favorable, look to take one of them.
I've had moments where I tell myself that packaging up makes the most sense, but then looking at history these WRs really need to hit hard to reclaim the value I'd give up. Then I say keep the picks and take the shotgun approach. I do have at least one owner asking about moving for one of these picks offering up 2025 picks - the 1.05 was just traded for a 2025 1st, 2nd and 2 3rds, but the first involved there projects to be a much better pick than the 1st I would likely be getting from the owner that approached me (though the 2nd and 3rds should be later picks), so it's really hard to justify sending one of the 6-8 picks for the current offer. I do have the 12 as well, and the offer from this particular owner makes more sense if it was for the 11.
Back to overthinking this
The Future Champs
Footballguy
Gotta disagree with this.
Try gaming this out. Imagine a 32 team league with every team having 20 starting slots. Yes, studs will be Uber important, but having guys who play every week is also important. The 1.05 and 1.06 represent two players who (should) be important weapons in the NFL. Hell, the 1.05 might get you something like Brian Thomas on the Buffalo Bills. The 1.06 could be Mitchell/Chiefs. There’s going to be plenty of goodness in the middle of the first this year. Would you rather start those two vs MHJ/Cardinals and Ihmir Smith-Marsette/Panthers? Cause I really don’t want the likes of Smith-Marsette in my lineup.
Now flip the table. Imagine a two team league where you start 1 WR. Yes, I’d rather have MHJ than Thomas & Mitchell in that league.
Uber studs matter more in small leagues b/c non studs don’t matter at all.
That said, I’d rather have the MHJ side in my main league, b/c I already have Jefferson Nacua Olave Higgins JSN CWatson and Jamo, and I can only keep 7 WRs.
-OZ-
Footballguy
Interesting. I understand wanting the 2, but in a 2 QB league the 5 and 6 are worth a lot more imo.Had two go down in one league tonight. Not involved.
Team A gives: 1.04, 1.06, 2.04, 2.06
Team B gives: 1.01, 3.03
Team A gives: 1.02
Team B gives: 1.05, 1.06
Team B is the same team in both trades
Edit: I should add it’s a 2QB league
The combination of trades looks really odd. Seems to be
1.01, 1.05, 3.03
for
1.02, 1.04, 2.04, 2.06
Overall I guess that’s balanced decently enough but he seems to have different intentions in each trade. Unless he really doesn’t like Caleb.
King of the Jungle
Footballguy
This is definitely an arguable take, and I do not necessarily disagree greatly. But as @-OZ- mentioned before:
“I think that’s as close as it gets.
Assume Thomas, Caleb, next year’s first but that can look like trading Jamar Chase for Kadarius Toney, Trevor Lawrence and something rather quick.”
This would be my fear, looking back and getting subpar players in return for a stud. Of course there are no guarantees with any pick and current roster plays a role. My philosophy is to stockpile studs however and in a deep draft that 2.10 is not a bad pick either. I can see but ways but ultimately it would come down to my current roster strength in this case, if weak I can see taking the lower pick package.
InDitkaWeTrust
Footballguy
The only reason to make such a trade is to get 2 starting QBs and maybe a 3rd tier WR and 1st tier RB in a full blown rebuild. Two of Daniels, Maye, and JJ will be available at player B's 1st two picks. Then again, the possibility of getting Caleb at 1.01, MHJ at 1.05, and Nabers/Bowers at 1.06 is hard to turn down. The more I consider it, the more I'm scratching my head here. It ends up trading "down" in the first round to pick up 2.04 and 2.06.Interesting. I understand wanting the 2, but in a 2 QB league the 5 and 6 are worth a lot more imo.Had two go down in one league tonight. Not involved.
Team A gives: 1.04, 1.06, 2.04, 2.06
Team B gives: 1.01, 3.03
Team A gives: 1.02
Team B gives: 1.05, 1.06
Team B is the same team in both trades
Edit: I should add it’s a 2QB league
The combination of trades looks really odd. Seems to be
1.01, 1.05, 3.03
for
1.02, 1.04, 2.04, 2.06
Overall I guess that’s balanced decently enough but he seems to have different intentions in each trade. Unless he really doesn’t like Caleb.
JohnnyU
Footballguy
I like the "for" side of that trade.Interesting. I understand wanting the 2, but in a 2 QB league the 5 and 6 are worth a lot more imo.Had two go down in one league tonight. Not involved.
Team A gives: 1.04, 1.06, 2.04, 2.06
Team B gives: 1.01, 3.03
Team A gives: 1.02
Team B gives: 1.05, 1.06
Team B is the same team in both trades
Edit: I should add it’s a 2QB league
The combination of trades looks really odd. Seems to be
1.01, 1.05, 3.03
for
1.02, 1.04, 2.04, 2.06
Overall I guess that’s balanced decently enough but he seems to have different intentions in each trade. Unless he really doesn’t like Caleb.
Tau837
Footballguy
Gold Dynasty League: 12 team Superflex; variable PPR (0.75 RB, 1 WR, 1.25 TE); depressed QB scoring; start 1Q 1R 2W 1T 1K 1D 1SF (QRWT) 4F (RWT)
Haven't been in this thread much over the past several weeks, but these two trades occurred on March 8 (not involved):
Team A gave up Chubb, Nick CLE RB; Kamara, Alvin NOS RB
Team B gave up 2024 3.09; 2025 Round 2 Draft Pick; 2025 Round 3 Draft Pick; 2026 Round 3 Draft Pick
Team A gave up Waddle, Jaylen MIA WR
Team C gave up Dowdle, Rico DAL RB; 2024 Draft Pick 1.10; 2024 Draft Pick 2.12; 2025 Round 2 Draft Pick
For context, in 2023:
Haven't been in this thread much over the past several weeks, but these two trades occurred on March 8 (not involved):
Team A gave up Chubb, Nick CLE RB; Kamara, Alvin NOS RB
Team B gave up 2024 3.09; 2025 Round 2 Draft Pick; 2025 Round 3 Draft Pick; 2026 Round 3 Draft Pick
Team A gave up Waddle, Jaylen MIA WR
Team C gave up Dowdle, Rico DAL RB; 2024 Draft Pick 1.10; 2024 Draft Pick 2.12; 2025 Round 2 Draft Pick
For context, in 2023:
- Team A was 7th in the regular season and 0-3 in playoffs, finishing 8th overall (league has 11 week regular season, then unusual double elimination playoffs that run up to 7 weeks) -- apparently looking to rebuild in 2024
- Team B was tied for 4th in the regular season and 2-2 in the playoffs, finishing 4th overall -- presumably looking to contend in 2024
- Team C was 11th in the regular season and 0-1 in the playoffs, finishing 11th overall
InDitkaWeTrust
Footballguy
What in the world is team A thinking? Looks more like a tank situation than a rebuild.
Also, love your avatar. Go Pack!
ADP in Superflex has MHJ at 2, so i'm assuming he didn't like Caleb and wanted MHJ and then the choice of Daniels or Maye or maybe even Nabers if his team is all set at QB, and then he's getting a couple mid 2nd rounders in a very deep draft. Personally I would have stayed pat and gone w/ Caleb and taken the 5th guy left out the other guys.The only reason to make such a trade is to get 2 starting QBs and maybe a 3rd tier WR and 1st tier RB in a full blown rebuild. Two of Daniels, Maye, and JJ will be available at player B's 1st two picks. Then again, the possibility of getting Caleb at 1.01, MHJ at 1.05, and Nabers/Bowers at 1.06 is hard to turn down. The more I consider it, the more I'm scratching my head here. It ends up trading "down" in the first round to pick up 2.04 and 2.06.Interesting. I understand wanting the 2, but in a 2 QB league the 5 and 6 are worth a lot more imo.Had two go down in one league tonight. Not involved.
Team A gives: 1.04, 1.06, 2.04, 2.06
Team B gives: 1.01, 3.03
Team A gives: 1.02
Team B gives: 1.05, 1.06
Team B is the same team in both trades
Edit: I should add it’s a 2QB league
The combination of trades looks really odd. Seems to be
1.01, 1.05, 3.03
for
1.02, 1.04, 2.04, 2.06
Overall I guess that’s balanced decently enough but he seems to have different intentions in each trade. Unless he really doesn’t like Caleb.
InDitkaWeTrust
Footballguy
That seems really high for mhj in super flex. I'd be surprised if he goes that high in any of my leagues since most of the 1.01-1.04 teams don't have two (or even 1) solid starting QB.ADP in Superflex has MHJ at 2, so i'm assuming he didn't like Caleb and wanted MHJ and then the choice of Daniels or Maye or maybe even Nabers if his team is all set at QB, and then he's getting a couple mid 2nd rounders in a very deep draft. Personally I would have stayed pat and gone w/ Caleb and taken the 5th guy left out the other guys.The only reason to make such a trade is to get 2 starting QBs and maybe a 3rd tier WR and 1st tier RB in a full blown rebuild. Two of Daniels, Maye, and JJ will be available at player B's 1st two picks. Then again, the possibility of getting Caleb at 1.01, MHJ at 1.05, and Nabers/Bowers at 1.06 is hard to turn down. The more I consider it, the more I'm scratching my head here. It ends up trading "down" in the first round to pick up 2.04 and 2.06.Interesting. I understand wanting the 2, but in a 2 QB league the 5 and 6 are worth a lot more imo.Had two go down in one league tonight. Not involved.
Team A gives: 1.04, 1.06, 2.04, 2.06
Team B gives: 1.01, 3.03
Team A gives: 1.02
Team B gives: 1.05, 1.06
Team B is the same team in both trades
Edit: I should add it’s a 2QB league
The combination of trades looks really odd. Seems to be
1.01, 1.05, 3.03
for
1.02, 1.04, 2.04, 2.06
Overall I guess that’s balanced decently enough but he seems to have different intentions in each trade. Unless he really doesn’t like Caleb.
I've seen him at 2 at all the sites I've looked at. I'd prob take him at 2, not discounting the value of QB's in superflex but the difference in the likelihood of the other QBs busting vs. MHJ busting is pretty wide.That seems really high for mhj in super flex. I'd be surprised if he goes that high in any of my leagues since most of the 1.01-1.04 teams don't have two (or even 1) solid starting QB.ADP in Superflex has MHJ at 2, so i'm assuming he didn't like Caleb and wanted MHJ and then the choice of Daniels or Maye or maybe even Nabers if his team is all set at QB, and then he's getting a couple mid 2nd rounders in a very deep draft. Personally I would have stayed pat and gone w/ Caleb and taken the 5th guy left out the other guys.The only reason to make such a trade is to get 2 starting QBs and maybe a 3rd tier WR and 1st tier RB in a full blown rebuild. Two of Daniels, Maye, and JJ will be available at player B's 1st two picks. Then again, the possibility of getting Caleb at 1.01, MHJ at 1.05, and Nabers/Bowers at 1.06 is hard to turn down. The more I consider it, the more I'm scratching my head here. It ends up trading "down" in the first round to pick up 2.04 and 2.06.Interesting. I understand wanting the 2, but in a 2 QB league the 5 and 6 are worth a lot more imo.Had two go down in one league tonight. Not involved.
Team A gives: 1.04, 1.06, 2.04, 2.06
Team B gives: 1.01, 3.03
Team A gives: 1.02
Team B gives: 1.05, 1.06
Team B is the same team in both trades
Edit: I should add it’s a 2QB league
The combination of trades looks really odd. Seems to be
1.01, 1.05, 3.03
for
1.02, 1.04, 2.04, 2.06
Overall I guess that’s balanced decently enough but he seems to have different intentions in each trade. Unless he really doesn’t like Caleb.
-OZ-
Footballguy
I have the 2 in my SF and leaning MHJ. My QBs are Carr, Dak and Watson (also stidham, Darnold, Winston and Flacco) so at least they should start.
Last edited:
Yeah, i would call that a good discount in a regular PPR league (I offered the 1.10 + Goedert in one league and was turned down), since this is 1.5 for TE thats stupid cheap.
titusbramble
Footballguy
I would also be taking MHJ at 2. If I had a huge QB need I would be sorting it via trade and not reaching for Daniels/Maye/whoever with the pick itself
smbkrypt24
Footballguy
I was considering MHJ at 1 before I also acquired pick 2. Now I don’t have to make that choice.That seems really high for mhj in super flex. I'd be surprised if he goes that high in any of my leagues since most of the 1.01-1.04 teams don't have two (or even 1) solid starting QB.ADP in Superflex has MHJ at 2, so i'm assuming he didn't like Caleb and wanted MHJ and then the choice of Daniels or Maye or maybe even Nabers if his team is all set at QB, and then he's getting a couple mid 2nd rounders in a very deep draft. Personally I would have stayed pat and gone w/ Caleb and taken the 5th guy left out the other guys.The only reason to make such a trade is to get 2 starting QBs and maybe a 3rd tier WR and 1st tier RB in a full blown rebuild. Two of Daniels, Maye, and JJ will be available at player B's 1st two picks. Then again, the possibility of getting Caleb at 1.01, MHJ at 1.05, and Nabers/Bowers at 1.06 is hard to turn down. The more I consider it, the more I'm scratching my head here. It ends up trading "down" in the first round to pick up 2.04 and 2.06.Interesting. I understand wanting the 2, but in a 2 QB league the 5 and 6 are worth a lot more imo.Had two go down in one league tonight. Not involved.
Team A gives: 1.04, 1.06, 2.04, 2.06
Team B gives: 1.01, 3.03
Team A gives: 1.02
Team B gives: 1.05, 1.06
Team B is the same team in both trades
Edit: I should add it’s a 2QB league
The combination of trades looks really odd. Seems to be
1.01, 1.05, 3.03
for
1.02, 1.04, 2.04, 2.06
Overall I guess that’s balanced decently enough but he seems to have different intentions in each trade. Unless he really doesn’t like Caleb.
-OZ-
Footballguy
Yep. I like Daniels enough but the bust risk is enough that I’d be more inclined to trade the pick for Jordan Love, or more likely a later pick or solid RB for a lesser QB.
King of the Jungle
Footballguy
Dez
Footballguy
Everyone would except 1 person apparently
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
l
That all seems pretty lopsided. Team A made 2 rough trades, IMO
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
send both emojis and a gif of someone laughing uproariously if I received that offer in any league.
titusbramble
Footballguy
Can't say I remember what my max offer was. But a lot more than that.
-OZ-
Footballguy
‘Tis the season where every first round pick is a stud.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Tau837
Footballguy
Yeah, particularly the first trade. In a rebuild, I get cashing out on Chubb and Kamara before their value further declines, but he didn't get much value out of it. It seems likely that those picks he got from Team B will all be late round picks.
Last edited:
ghostguy123
Footballguy
FFPC 1 QB
Garrett Wilson
For
Njigba and Davante Adams
Garrett Wilson
For
Njigba and Davante Adams
Instinctive
Footballguy
10 team Superflex
1.05 for Jonathan Taylor
1.05 for Jonathan Taylor
King of the Jungle
Footballguy
I guess I am not as high on Njigba as the consensus based on some recent trades, give me Wilson.
