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**** (20 Viewers)
- Thread starter Gottabesweet
- Start date
Possibly, but I'm still a huge fan long-term. And if he isn't traded(there were rumblings to possibly Philly) it wouldn't shock me if he's the head of the SF committee. I think he's that good. Just gotta stay on the field.
JohnnyU
Footballguy
Coleman and McKinnon both are pretty good too. I wouldn’t want any part of it, even if there were only two. Coleman is guaranteed 50% of the snaps IMO and probably more if there were only two. But there are three.
He's still a strong dynasty hold for me, regardless of how bad his current situation appears. Certainly worth dropping back four spots in the 2nd round in my opinion. But maybe I'm higher on him than most.
JohnnyU
Footballguy
He needs to put on at least 10lbs. At 5’11” 190 is light. It could help his durability, even though his latest injury was an ankle. He may always be a committee back.
Last edited by a moderator:
bostonfred
Footballguy
Coleman had 20 and 28 percent of the carries when working with Shanahan in atlanta. He's had 36 and 47 percent of the team carries the last 2 years, including a career high 800 yards rushing last year.
He just signed a 2 year deal worth 3.6 million the first year with 0 penalty for cutting him after year 1 and a 2 million dollar roster bonus April 1st 2020 so it's basically a 1 year 3.6 million dollar contract with a team option next year.
I don't see any indication that coleman was ever getting 50 percent guaranteed.
NE_REVIVAL
Footballguy
Its cut down season so if u have room its not a bad deal; conversely breida might have been cut candidate for other owner and could be win there as well.
Last edited by a moderator:
NE_REVIVAL
Footballguy
FFPC (very minor deal I know but speaks to cut down crunch time and qb value in ffpc)
Gave 2020 4th Round
for
Roethlisberger, Ben
Already have Wilson and with cut down looming it is pretty meh. Normally not worried much about backup qb but price so cheap (ben was his 3rd qb). (fwiw, it likely means cutting Edwards or Doctson (um ya, not my strongest tm))
Gave 2020 4th Round
for
Roethlisberger, Ben
Already have Wilson and with cut down looming it is pretty meh. Normally not worried much about backup qb but price so cheap (ben was his 3rd qb). (fwiw, it likely means cutting Edwards or Doctson (um ya, not my strongest tm))
JohnnyU
Footballguy
Looking at the rookies available this year the cutoff for a chance at someone I would trade Brieda for in a 12 team league is between 17 and 20 players (2.5 - 2-8). The 2.10 in the deal puts that threshold at 22 players, which IMO has a lot higher bust factor given this rookie class.
Last edited by a moderator:
Flying Elvis
Footballguy
Yeah, that has to be one of the easiest accepts ever. Top 25 RB at the cost of 4 slots is great value.
JohnnyU
Footballguy
He may be 3rd string on his team and doesn't seem to be able to stay healthy. Tevin Coleman will probably get the most carries in that 3 headed monster.
Last edited by a moderator:
Flying Elvis
Footballguy
He was top 25 last season and I don't expect his usage to be much different. I've never been a believer in McKinnon, don't see Coleman as a big threat, and think that injury is the only thing that prevents Breida from improving on his numbers from last season. I really like what that SF offense has going on (scheme-wise) so I expect the entire offense to improve on last year's numbers, especially if they can add an impact WR to help balance the offense. SF DST wasn't great and I'm not sure I see a big jump this year so they should continue to have higher scoring games. I'm buying on SF offensive pieces, and think Breida is the guy to get in that backfield.
I think players like Breida and Lindsay are bargain adds b/c they don't have the name recognition, draft pedigree, contract size, or clear-cut depth chart status so the "other guy" gets the higher value. Even if I'm wrong, getting an RB with the potential to be the top guy in that offense for a mere 4 slots from mid-second to late-second is a great roster move.
I think players like Breida and Lindsay are bargain adds b/c they don't have the name recognition, draft pedigree, contract size, or clear-cut depth chart status so the "other guy" gets the higher value. Even if I'm wrong, getting an RB with the potential to be the top guy in that offense for a mere 4 slots from mid-second to late-second is a great roster move.
JohnnyU
Footballguy
It's probably a great roster move for both teams. One gets a player that has potential but is stuck in a RBBC and has injury issues and the other trims their roster size due to roster limits. Like I said earlier, I think the drop off point in this draft is player 20. Getting player 18 instead of 22 is a big deal IMO. Do me a favor and go to your league page, go to reports/ players / free agents. Then click rookies and then owned. Then scan the list an you will see what I mean. It's not a reach to think Breida has an uphill climb to be fantasy relevant in 2019. Saying Coleman isn't a threat is something I don't buy. Coleman is every bit as good and probably better than Breida. Then there's McKinnon.....
Last edited by a moderator:
I’d buy Breida at that price, but I don’t get how anyone can view Breida objectively and believe he’ll get 180 touches again with the Coleman signing and McKinnon returning. On top of that he averaged 5.3 yards per carry and 9.7 yards per catch, efficiency numbers which I think he’ll be hard pressed to match. I can’t rationalize how he could be inside anyone’s top 25 dynasty RBs.
Breida is easy buy at that cost, a cost which in the end could end up being free because I'm sure in a lot of drafts I'd pick a guy at 18 I could have picked at 22. What I view as a 66% chance he outright wins job as half of a two man RBBC, injury to one of two RB's would all but assure him of this role, he is young, not under contract in 2020 and as someone alluded to earlier it's possible could get traded before. Who with free roster space does not take that for a move back of 4 picks when we have no idea how our draft boards will look?
Last edited by a moderator:
Hankmoody
Footballguy
bostonfred
Footballguy
Coleman was a backup for Shanahan who signed for backup money to play for Shanahan. When he played for Shanahan he got 20 and 28 percent of the carries.
While breida missed time with injuries, he still had more yards on fewer carries, and was the clear and obvious starter last year.
McKinnon is getting more than twice as much as coleman per year to be the "starter".
Why do you think coleman will "probably" get the most carries?
JohnnyU
Footballguy
I traded Breida in the league I won last year. Im serous what I said about the rookie cutoff being between player 17 and 20.. Of course he got a good deal on Breida. I intended for him to get s good deal on Breida and knew this was an easy trade to make. My focus was on the best 18 players in this draft. Breida didn't concern me because he carried as much risk as the players I like in the first 18 picks
JohnnyU
Footballguy
Not sure he will because Mckinnon is pretty good too. My freling is that SF knows none of the RBSs on their team are workhorse backs and they will keep all three.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
But you’re talking about dropping a few slots in the second round where it starts to become a crapshoot anyway. It’s not far fetched to think the player taken at 2.10 will end up being the better player than the one taken at 2.06.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
That seems like a specifically small window to act so strongly on at this point in the process. In some rookie drafts I’d guess the guy that went at 18 went at 22 in some other rookie drafts.
JohnnyU
Footballguy
Perhaps, but I trust what I see as the cut off is between 17-20. I don't care enough about Breida to not make that deal on a strong team that won the league last year and is positioned to win again.
JohnnyU
Footballguy
I wouldn't call trading Breida acting strongly. Especially on a team that has Tevin Coleman and J McKinnon. The 49'ers know they don't have a workhorse back and will keep all 3 IMO.
Last edited by a moderator:
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
JohnnyU
Footballguy
Frankly I don't see it as a big deal. One guy gets a player he wants, I trade an expendable player in a bad situation, with an injury history, for a pick that I feel is within my range of players I wish to draft. I'm fine with giving trade partners a good deal if it fits my team plans and I don't think losing Breida is the end all. This is also good will for future trades.
Last edited by a moderator:
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
It’s not a big deal - you’re the one making it so. I think most would agree Breida at that price is a no brainer and I’m not even particularly high on him. If you are happy with your deal that’s fine. Most are just saying the price was very favorable for the guy on the other side.
JohnnyU
Footballguy
I agree and I like that it was favorable for the guy on the other side. Makes for good will for future trading. It's not about "winning" a trade, it's about what you want for your team vs what he wants for his team. Someone early on made a dumb comment "You robbed him", without knowing reasons for the trade and reasons for wanting to trade Breida for a pick within an acceptable range of players available in this draft bucket.
Last edited by a moderator:
Pwingles
Footballguy
well in defense of that comment, which i didnt make, but also thought;
without context it does look lopsided in the sense that it cost very little to acquire a player that has shown promise
most peoples opinion of the gap in the 2.06 vs the 2.10 is a lot less than Breida, however your explanation makes sense given the context of your position in the league and your teams makeup
-OZ-
Footballguy
12 team PPR
A traded Jameus Winston
B traded Michael Gallup
Fwiw, B's QBs before the trade were Tom Brady, case keenum and Sam Darnold. He had Darnold in his lineup now has Winston (it's entirely possible he starts Brady but isn't in the standing lineup).
As other QBs are Goff and Prescott. Gallup won't start without injuries.
A traded Jameus Winston
B traded Michael Gallup
Fwiw, B's QBs before the trade were Tom Brady, case keenum and Sam Darnold. He had Darnold in his lineup now has Winston (it's entirely possible he starts Brady but isn't in the standing lineup).
As other QBs are Goff and Prescott. Gallup won't start without injuries.
Someone's sensitive.JohnnyU said:
So, who are you targeting at the 2.06 that you don't think was going to be there at the 2.10? You're talking about 15 rookies already off the board. That's such a wide range it's impossible to know who's going to be there and who's not. My point is, I wouldn't even move Breida alone for a late second. You traded him along with a pick to jump up four spots in the second round. I hate the move, personally, but opinions and stuff. No need to get personal.
You keep harping on Mckinnon and Coleman, but in reality, what have the two of them really done? Coleman had the Falcons backfield gifted to him last year and he struggled to really pull away from Ito Smith. McKinnon is a physical freak, but he's done nothing to demonstrate he can carry anything close to a full workload for a team. Breida averaged 5.3 ypc last year, and that was playing nearly the entire season injured. Regardless of whether or not he stays in SF this year in a rotational role or not, I'm a firm believer in talent eventually rising to the top, and believe he'll get another shot to head a backfield whether that's with the Niners or not.
JohnnyU
Footballguy
A lot of my league mates frequent this board so I can't be too specific. Let's just say I went though the list and decided beyond 2.08 I wasn't interested in giving up Breida for. There's a little wiggle room there and I believe the number will shrink some after the NFL draft. Hopefully the 2.06 still has one of the players I valued in the top 20 that has an OK landing spot. I believe I said earlier that SF knows they don't have a workhorse RB and will probably keep all three in a 3 headed RBBC. Best case scenario for Breida is if they cut McKinnon to save 3.75M, but that still would only gain him a 50/50 split with Coleman, who I think is just as good as Breida. Besides, SF will be extra careful with Breida's work load because of his propensity to get injured. I believe keeping McKinnon at his current rate is fine with them. I knew when I traded Brieda that I was giving the other owner a win, but that didn't concern me. Hell, I welcomed it. It suited a need for both of us and I hopefully it makes it easier to trade with this owner in the future. Also, "robbed" isn't the word I would have used.
Last edited by a moderator:
Also worth mentioning is 9ers also paid mostert fairly well after he had those couple good games and he stayed with the 9ers over other teams, so even if McKinnon is cut they may use mostert as well.
I’d agree that I don’t think I’d do the trade and I would hope that breida just looks good early so I can trade him later but I don’t think it’s anything that bad and the 4 pick difference could be helpful
I’d agree that I don’t think I’d do the trade and I would hope that breida just looks good early so I can trade him later but I don’t think it’s anything that bad and the 4 pick difference could be helpful
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
They kept Mostert because he's good on special teams. He's likely only seeing meaningful work as a RB in emergency situations where several other guys are injured.
voiceofunreason
Footballguy
-OZ-
Footballguy
Basically, like brieda.
I think he has some talent but mostly he's JAG. Those guys can do well for a year or two but he's highly replaceable.
-OZ-
Footballguy
Basically, like brieda.
I think he has some talent but mostly he's JAG. Those guys can do well for a year or two but he's highly replaceable.
JohnnyU
Footballguy
Neither is Breida when they try to force too much out of him. I do like him in short stints however. I think the 49'ers feel the same way. I think he needs to add some weight and muscle. 5'11" 190 doesn't really cut it for a workhorse back most of the time and perhaps that would help his durability.
Last edited by a moderator:
Seems like most of you weighing Breida’s value here are discounting the possibility of a back being traded. I think SF deals one of these guys.
In which case, either Breida is traded to a team that likely has a better situation, or his committee is down to 2 and he can repeat his market share if he can stay healthy.
His injury risk argues against banking on him as a feature guy, but he has done enough with split touches before to be a strong bye week guy at minimum.
In which case, either Breida is traded to a team that likely has a better situation, or his committee is down to 2 and he can repeat his market share if he can stay healthy.
His injury risk argues against banking on him as a feature guy, but he has done enough with split touches before to be a strong bye week guy at minimum.
JohnnyU
Footballguy
Why would they trade him when his contract his cheap and all of their backs, including Breida, are not 3 down backs? Why wouldn't they just keep all three of them? I think SF knows this and having 3 backs is a lot safer than 2 considering who they are trotting out there and the injury history of two of them, and the cost of doing so.
ETA: I was talking about McKinnon at 3.75M not Breida. Not sure what his cost is. They could cut McKinnon, but IMO his contract is cheap unless they know something medically returning from his injury that we're not privy to.
ETA2: Just looked and Breida's contract status is very cheap, so why would they trade him?
Last edited by a moderator:
Why does anyone make a trade? To gain value somewhere else for a cost they can afford. Having three comparable backs doesn’t add much to the roster compared to a draft pick or a defensive player or some other asset where they aren’t three deep already.
I think one of the three gets moved for an asset that can help the team while the other two cover the running duties. The cheap contracts actually make a trade more likely since the players would be more easily fit under the acquiring team’s cap.
JohnnyU
Footballguy
...except when you know all three are NOT workhorse backs. I can see SF running all three out there every Sunday and that's not a bad thing for them, especially at the cost.
Last edited by a moderator:
They could...but the dropoff from those guys to Mostert isn’t steep enough for me to see a lot of value in using three vs 2 vs 2.5...
JohnnyU
Footballguy
I think the disconnect is nobody (IMO) is trading anything of value for any of McKinnon, Coleman, or Breida, for various reasons (McKinnon’s contract, Coleman was just a FA and available to all, and Breida was an UDFA a year ago). It wouldn’t shock me if SF dealt one of them, but it would be for something equivalent to a 7th round draft pick (i.e. nothing). So if SF moves one, it’ll likely because they feel that 2 of the 3 plus Mostert is sufficient. Based on the history of those three RBs, I’d be surprised if SF felt that way.
JohnnyU
Footballguy
Again, I must ask, with 3 RBs, none of which are 3 down backs and all 3 at a reasonable cost, why should SF trade one of them? Unless of course they get an offer they can't refuse (Michael Corelone reference), which I doubt. Most teams feel RB is a very easy replaceable position and can be done cheaply, usually by the draft. Why wouldn't someone like the Eagles take a RB like Snell Jr, Singletary, T Williams, or Justice on day 3 of the draft?
wgoldsph
Footballguy
I was talking about the fantasy trade, not a hypothetical real life trade. I personally think SF keeps all it's backs at least until opening day.
