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.
1.01 rookie pick market value (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter FantaC1
- Start date
Athletic Supporter
Footballguy
Significantly less than it will be in May.
FantaC1
Footballguy
Obviously. I have an owner shopping the pick to me and I am deciding what to offer.
steelers1080
Footballguy
In my league the asking price is incredibly high since Zeke feels like the only "sure thing" in this draft. I know 1.06, Carlos Hyde, Kevin White, and Yeldon were offered and turned down.
Alex P Keaton
Footballguy
Bracie Smathers
Footballguy
This might not help because I am not your typical fantasy player and this is not your typical fantasy deal but I am considering moving up for the top pick.
Obviously, the owner of the top pick has a poor team and needs a lot of help in many areas. He needs, RBs, WRs, and a QB.
I am considering giving up:
Threefold strategy:
So I'm basically trading the 6th and 12th picks for a player with potential to secure my team an advantage for years.
The bonus is I help out the worst team which also helps my team because he and I form a good trading relationship. I gain trust with an owner who can start to knock off better fantasy players than he is but not make him soo strong that he overpowers my team.
Helping out the worst teams/owners can pay dividends if your team is strong and has depth.
Those are the reasons why I am considering the above deal. Seems like overpaying and it is but taking a short term loss has the potential for a long term gain.
Obviously, the owner of the top pick has a poor team and needs a lot of help in many areas. He needs, RBs, WRs, and a QB.
I am considering giving up:
- 2 starting RBs (won't say who but an older back expected to log 300 carries and a young RB who is just taking over)
- 2 backup flyer-type RBs with upside (one has legit upside but the other is a throw in)
- 1 QB who is projected to start (should rank in the 16 to 20 range so a #2 QB, he needs a QB badly)
- both of my 1st round draft picks (6th and 12th)
- the top pick of 2016
- his 1st round pick in 2017 (almost certain to be a top 6 pick)
Threefold strategy:
- By making the worst team in our league better other teams won't have an easy layup win when they play him
- I get a player in this year's draft who should be a quality starter for years
- I likely land a top 6 pick in next year's draft
So I'm basically trading the 6th and 12th picks for a player with potential to secure my team an advantage for years.
The bonus is I help out the worst team which also helps my team because he and I form a good trading relationship. I gain trust with an owner who can start to knock off better fantasy players than he is but not make him soo strong that he overpowers my team.
Helping out the worst teams/owners can pay dividends if your team is strong and has depth.
Those are the reasons why I am considering the above deal. Seems like overpaying and it is but taking a short term loss has the potential for a long term gain.
Last edited by a moderator:
So you are talking something like...
Matt Forte, Thomas Rawls, Tevin Coleman, Spencer Ware, Ryan Tannehill the 1.06 and 1.12
For
1.01 and 2017 1st that's likely top 5
Literally a 4 quarters for a dollar type deal. Maybe more like 3 quarters for a dollar. If I'm holding the 1.01 there is no way I take this even though it "could" pay dividends across more positions. There is too much risk that all the pieces I get are irrelevant in another couple years while Elliott and let's say Fournett go on to have productive 5 year+ careers. On the flipside, I know many guys who would jump all over this deal because of the combined "value".
I inquired about moving up from 1.03 to 1.01 so I can pair Gurley with Elliott. The other team wanted Cobb and my 2017 1st along with the 1.03. I probably won't do it, but I can understand why he would ask that price. You need to get at least one sure starter with top potential out of the deal when moving a piece that valuable.
Bracie Smathers
Footballguy
The deal is massively stacked in his favor on the short term.
- He lacks one starting RB, with this deal he would get 2 starters (one should be top-10 with top-5 potential the other a #2 RB)
- He lacks RB depth with upside, with this deal he would get 1 RB to provide depth who has legit upside
- He lacks a backup QB who could start, the QB I am offering has top-five potential but conservatively I'm ranking him in the 16 to 20 range
- He needs WRs and with the 6th pick he has a legit shot at one of the top-3 rookie WRs of this class
- With the 12th pick he has a legit shot to land one of the top-3 rookie QBs of this draft class or take a shot on another WR
He instantly would get better and vie for the playoffs. I would gamble he would not make the playoffs assuring me a top-6 pick next year.
- He lacks one starting RB, with this deal he would get 2 starters (one should be top-10 with top-5 potential the other a #2 RB)
- He lacks RB depth with upside, with this deal he would get 1 RB to provide depth who has legit upside
- He lacks a backup QB who could start, the QB I am offering has top-five potential but conservatively I'm ranking him in the 16 to 20 range
- He needs WRs and with the 6th pick he has a legit shot at one of the top-3 rookie WRs of this class
- With the 12th pick he has a legit shot to land one of the top-3 rookie QBs of this draft class or take a shot on another WR
He instantly would get better and vie for the playoffs. I would gamble he would not make the playoffs assuring me a top-6 pick next year.
That stuff sounds good in theory, but I've seen this kind of deal take place over the years and it rarely works. It's more of a trap to set yourself up for mediocrity over the next few years, then in rebuild mode again. I'm not arguing that it couldn't work out for him, but I don't like my odds if I am him.
Now, I also don't know the number of teams in the league, starter requirements, bench sizes etc., so that could change things. I assume it's 12-14 team league 1QB, 2RB, 2-3WR, TE, maybe a flex. If that's the case, I would prefer to build with two top prospects over the next two years and fill the other gaps with small scale trades and wiaver wire lottery.
Now, I also don't know the number of teams in the league, starter requirements, bench sizes etc., so that could change things. I assume it's 12-14 team league 1QB, 2RB, 2-3WR, TE, maybe a flex. If that's the case, I would prefer to build with two top prospects over the next two years and fill the other gaps with small scale trades and wiaver wire lottery.
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
Given the unwillingness to mention the players by name I'm guessing the young RB is less likely to be someone like Rawls and more likely a Matt Jones/Jay Ajay type. Someone who's value may be shot by early May.
It's hard to say for sure without player names but this deal and the lengthy explanation behind it sound the typical stretch of an explanation you often see behind a weak offer where the person is trying to talk themselves into the idea that a trade they wouldn't take if they were the other owner is a good deal.
Not saying this is a weak offer per say but it's not some big overpay like is being presented.
Many of the ideas tossed around in the explanation are very large stretches. The idea that an old RB is of interest to a last place team. The idea that a QB in the 16-20 range in a 1qb league has ANY value at all in a deal that involves players of actual value. The idea that a top 3 rookie QB in a mediocre QB class (or any rookie QB prospect not of the Andrew luck variety) would amount to anything more than a throw-in in a deal that could involve the other team giving up two top tier dynasty assets.
The reality is that the other guy likely has no interest in the old RB or the lowsy QB2 so we're really talking about a potentially longish shot RB prospect and 1.06/1.12 for 1.01 in a draft where 1.01 is in a tier of its own and a likely early pick in what looks to be a loaded draft at the top next year.
It's a long shot that the other guy would accept this and certainly is not some huge over pay like you're making it out to be, unless the other guy's goal is to give up his best chances at actually rebuilding in favor of spending a few years where he's elevated his team up to simply below average.
Not to pile on but this concept of intentionally making another team better so he's a tougher match up for the rest of the league seems a bit odd too since presumably your team is included in "the rest of the league" and you miss out on that "easy win" just as much as everyone else does (not that I think this deal even necessarily makes his team that much better this year). Just kind of seems like one of those "outside the box just to be outside of the box" type things.
Didn't mean to be too harsh in this post but I feel like we see this a lot. Putting false perspective on the other owner to convince yourself it be'd great for them. Depending on the actual player names it may end up being fair but unless that young RB is David Johnson there's no way this is some massive overpay.
It's hard to say for sure without player names but this deal and the lengthy explanation behind it sound the typical stretch of an explanation you often see behind a weak offer where the person is trying to talk themselves into the idea that a trade they wouldn't take if they were the other owner is a good deal.
Not saying this is a weak offer per say but it's not some big overpay like is being presented.
Many of the ideas tossed around in the explanation are very large stretches. The idea that an old RB is of interest to a last place team. The idea that a QB in the 16-20 range in a 1qb league has ANY value at all in a deal that involves players of actual value. The idea that a top 3 rookie QB in a mediocre QB class (or any rookie QB prospect not of the Andrew luck variety) would amount to anything more than a throw-in in a deal that could involve the other team giving up two top tier dynasty assets.
The reality is that the other guy likely has no interest in the old RB or the lowsy QB2 so we're really talking about a potentially longish shot RB prospect and 1.06/1.12 for 1.01 in a draft where 1.01 is in a tier of its own and a likely early pick in what looks to be a loaded draft at the top next year.
It's a long shot that the other guy would accept this and certainly is not some huge over pay like you're making it out to be, unless the other guy's goal is to give up his best chances at actually rebuilding in favor of spending a few years where he's elevated his team up to simply below average.
Not to pile on but this concept of intentionally making another team better so he's a tougher match up for the rest of the league seems a bit odd too since presumably your team is included in "the rest of the league" and you miss out on that "easy win" just as much as everyone else does (not that I think this deal even necessarily makes his team that much better this year). Just kind of seems like one of those "outside the box just to be outside of the box" type things.
Didn't mean to be too harsh in this post but I feel like we see this a lot. Putting false perspective on the other owner to convince yourself it be'd great for them. Depending on the actual player names it may end up being fair but unless that young RB is David Johnson there's no way this is some massive overpay.
Last edited by a moderator:
Baeddel Moon
Footballguy
In one of my leagues, the 1.1 and Buck Allen were sent straight up for Amari Cooper.
I then went out in another league, and sent 1.4, my 2017 1st, Sammie Coates, and Dwayne Allen to get the 1.1 and a future 3rd and 4th. It was a steep price but I still feel good about it. My 1st is from one of the stronger rosters and Coates was the definition of a quickflip.
I then went out in another league, and sent 1.4, my 2017 1st, Sammie Coates, and Dwayne Allen to get the 1.1 and a future 3rd and 4th. It was a steep price but I still feel good about it. My 1st is from one of the stronger rosters and Coates was the definition of a quickflip.
steelers1080
Footballguy
This sounds a lot like when I offer trades haha. "It's good for you for these reasons! ..." But, if they accept then it works out in your favor. Like when I traded away Hillman and a 2nd for Lacy when he was benched, or Denard Robinson to the Yeldon owner for a 2nd when Yeldon was hurt and that owner needed a win. Both times I was like, this is good for you for these reasons! But in reality I just convinced them to take a deal that wasn't necessarily great for them.
But back to the main point, unless someone was giving a high 1st AND a great player, I'd stick with 1.01 this year. Elliott is a can't miss prospect right now and unless you can get a top 5 pick and a solid starter, I'd pass. You only start so many players, there's no real need for 2-3 backup RBs.
fruity pebbles
Footballguy
People paying a steep price to move up a couple spots. Think id want to know where these guys land before doing something like that.
voiceofunreason
Footballguy
Hankmoody
Footballguy
Plenty of ways it could be a good offer. If the 300 carry guy is Martin/Ingram and the next-gen starter is David Johnson with an Ajayi at flier RB I could see that trade having merit. A #2 QB is a non-factor in a trade of this level, and the picks are just more fliers when talking about EZE and a top 2017 pick.
squistion
Footballguy
That would be my guess. If the players were as good as he represents, it should be apparent to just about everyone if he named them. Instead we are getting a sales pitch and spin that I see all the times from some owners telling me what an great deal they offering me and I would be foolish not to accept it (which in reality is lopsided in their favor).smoke monster said:
My take on this could be completely wrong, but the failure to name names makes me skeptical.
RC94
Footballguy
The deal seems to be massively stacked in your favor in a dynasty. I would very easily reject it if I were him.
Bracie Smathers
Footballguy
People assume the worst but doubt the best so this is par for the human condition.
No. I don't give in to peer pressure, lol, but I find it amusing.
To be fair, I will point out the value of the two RBs I hinted that I would deal.
Per ESPN's early fantasy rankings. http://espn.go.com/fantasy/football/story/_/id/14765088/matthew-berry-very-early-2016-fantasy-football-rankings-nfl
I am 'considering' offering a RB1 ranked in the top-12. He is under the age of 30 and he is starting and projected for over 300 carries for 2016.
The second RB I'm considering offering is ranked in the top-20. He is a young RB1 starter.
Our league is a 12 team league. The highest RB on the roster of the owner I am consider making the offer to is ranked 38th on this list. He has no other RBs ranked in the top fifty on this list. His RB situation is dire.
Just on the basis of those two RBs he would instantly have two viable RBs in our league as he would be on pace with the other 11 teams by having 1 RB ranked in the top-12 and also gain a leg-up on many teams by having his 2nd RB ranked in the top-20. Factor in minimal gain by adding the 2 other RBs, one with upside.
The starting QB I am offering conservatively ranks in the top-20. His top ranked QB is ranked lower than 15 and he has no other QBs ranked. His QB situation is dire.
He has 1 WR ranked in the top-12 who is over the age of 30 and coming off an injury where he hasn't played in over a year. His WR situation is dire. So the 6th pick in this draft gives a legitimate shot to land one of the top-3 rookie WRs from this draft. He really needs a viable rookie WR to start developing ASAP.
The 12th pick in the draft could address his need at QB or WR. He would have a legitimate shot to land one of the top-3 QBs from this draft class or he could take a flyer on another WR to have two rookie WRs developing but I think he would be best served by trading that 1st round pick for a solid veteran WR to firm up that position. Then he could turn around and offer his high 2nd round pick for a 2017 1st round pick to recuperate the 1st round pick he traded to me. So he could significantly improve his, RBs, WRs, and QB position and still come away with a 2017 1st round pick.
So he could keep his one pick and take RB Ezekiel Elliot who should rank in the 5 to 10 range and pair him with his 38th ranked RB and his 30+ yr. old WR with his low ranked starting QB.
If he hits on two players and one of the two draft picks, IMHO he will make the playoffs meaning the first round pick he would pay in 2017 would, at worst, be the 7th pick but could go as low as the 12th pick if he won the championship.
No. I don't give in to peer pressure, lol, but I find it amusing.
To be fair, I will point out the value of the two RBs I hinted that I would deal.
Per ESPN's early fantasy rankings. http://espn.go.com/fantasy/football/story/_/id/14765088/matthew-berry-very-early-2016-fantasy-football-rankings-nfl
I am 'considering' offering a RB1 ranked in the top-12. He is under the age of 30 and he is starting and projected for over 300 carries for 2016.
The second RB I'm considering offering is ranked in the top-20. He is a young RB1 starter.
Our league is a 12 team league. The highest RB on the roster of the owner I am consider making the offer to is ranked 38th on this list. He has no other RBs ranked in the top fifty on this list. His RB situation is dire.
Just on the basis of those two RBs he would instantly have two viable RBs in our league as he would be on pace with the other 11 teams by having 1 RB ranked in the top-12 and also gain a leg-up on many teams by having his 2nd RB ranked in the top-20. Factor in minimal gain by adding the 2 other RBs, one with upside.
The starting QB I am offering conservatively ranks in the top-20. His top ranked QB is ranked lower than 15 and he has no other QBs ranked. His QB situation is dire.
He has 1 WR ranked in the top-12 who is over the age of 30 and coming off an injury where he hasn't played in over a year. His WR situation is dire. So the 6th pick in this draft gives a legitimate shot to land one of the top-3 rookie WRs from this draft. He really needs a viable rookie WR to start developing ASAP.
The 12th pick in the draft could address his need at QB or WR. He would have a legitimate shot to land one of the top-3 QBs from this draft class or he could take a flyer on another WR to have two rookie WRs developing but I think he would be best served by trading that 1st round pick for a solid veteran WR to firm up that position. Then he could turn around and offer his high 2nd round pick for a 2017 1st round pick to recuperate the 1st round pick he traded to me. So he could significantly improve his, RBs, WRs, and QB position and still come away with a 2017 1st round pick.
So he could keep his one pick and take RB Ezekiel Elliot who should rank in the 5 to 10 range and pair him with his 38th ranked RB and his 30+ yr. old WR with his low ranked starting QB.
- RB Ezekiel Elliiot nothing else, no upgrade to his 2nd RB, his WRs, his QB situation, just Zeke with no shot at next year's playoffs
- a top 12 ranked RB projected to get over 300 carries
- a young RB1 ranked in the teens plus two flyer RBs for added depth to his weak RB position
- a starting QB conservatively projected as a QB2
- the 6th pick in a rookie draft where he has a legitimate shot to land one of the top-3 rookie WRs
- the 12th pick in a rookie draft where he has a legitimate shot to land one of the top-3 rookie QBs
If he hits on two players and one of the two draft picks, IMHO he will make the playoffs meaning the first round pick he would pay in 2017 would, at worst, be the 7th pick but could go as low as the 12th pick if he won the championship.
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
So the "young" guy is almost certainly Jeremy Langford then. The other guy probably Murray.
Just keeps getting worse. You link us to redraft rankings and tell us about how great this is that he could have an outside shot at the playoffs next year. You think a rebuilding team is going to give up two extremely strong dynasty assets for a below average chance of making the playoffs for a year or two while wrecking his team for the long-term? And you act like you're doing him a favor for it. Yikes.
That's not to say he won't take it. There are plenty of bad dynasty owners out there that are happy to sell their best assets to perpetually keep their team in below average status, but those aren't good owners and taking advantage of them is no special skill. These roundabout logic stretches tend to work great on those people, but the folks here are well above that which is why you're not being met with nearly the excitement over the deal that you thought you would be.
The path to a terrible team rebuilding is through exactly the kind of players he can get with his 1.01 this year and his early pick next year, not a bunch of mediocre guys that he'll have to replace again before he can actually contend for a title anyway. This need to justify it with these extreme stretches just shows that you're insecure about the offer being a great one yourself.
Save these roundabout talk-em-up tactics for the guy you're trying to fleece, don't try and sell it here to people that know better. No offense intended here, but the fact that you are trying to convince us that this is not only a fair offer, but is actually an OVERPAY on your part does not reflect strongly on your alleged expertise in the field. You're damaging your own reputation to try and stubbornly justify an offer that even you probably know to be poor and far from an "overpay".
If you were the other team and got this offer, would you take it?
Just keeps getting worse. You link us to redraft rankings and tell us about how great this is that he could have an outside shot at the playoffs next year. You think a rebuilding team is going to give up two extremely strong dynasty assets for a below average chance of making the playoffs for a year or two while wrecking his team for the long-term? And you act like you're doing him a favor for it. Yikes.
That's not to say he won't take it. There are plenty of bad dynasty owners out there that are happy to sell their best assets to perpetually keep their team in below average status, but those aren't good owners and taking advantage of them is no special skill. These roundabout logic stretches tend to work great on those people, but the folks here are well above that which is why you're not being met with nearly the excitement over the deal that you thought you would be.
The path to a terrible team rebuilding is through exactly the kind of players he can get with his 1.01 this year and his early pick next year, not a bunch of mediocre guys that he'll have to replace again before he can actually contend for a title anyway. This need to justify it with these extreme stretches just shows that you're insecure about the offer being a great one yourself.
Save these roundabout talk-em-up tactics for the guy you're trying to fleece, don't try and sell it here to people that know better. No offense intended here, but the fact that you are trying to convince us that this is not only a fair offer, but is actually an OVERPAY on your part does not reflect strongly on your alleged expertise in the field. You're damaging your own reputation to try and stubbornly justify an offer that even you probably know to be poor and far from an "overpay".
If you were the other team and got this offer, would you take it?
Last edited by a moderator:
Bracie Smathers
Footballguy
I imagine that pretty much everyone in the Shark Pool is a great fantasy owner even if they lack the ability to believe that anyone could make a trade that would help out another owner.FreeBaGeL said:
This guy is a bad fantasy owner. He is not a bad guy but his performance as a fantasy owner hurts the league I play in. He needs help. He couldn't get two starting RBs, a top-3 rookie WR, a starting caliber QB in the next three drafts let alone this one because he is not a good fantasy player.
I have to think by the way you attack me that you are a good fantasy owner. You could build a good team but your competence doesn't mean that this guy is a good fantasy owner. Although you don't need help, he needs help.
I haven't made any offers to him but I know that if I don't that he will take Zeke and his team will continue to suck because he doesn't have any WRs or RB depth or QB depth and he doesn't know how to build a team to compete even with Zeke as a cornerstone to build from.
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
This deal is not helping him. It is a classic "take advantage of a bad owner" deal. If these kinds of deals helped bad owners, then people on this board wouldn't constantly be making "and that's why that guy had the 1.01 pick to begin with" type comments when they are accepted. And that's the kind of response you'll see to this deal if you post it in the trade thread after doing it. If you actually believed that you were helping him then instead of stubbornly defending this offer you would be listening to the unanimous voice of, by your own definition, good dynasty owners that are telling you that this is a bad deal for the other guy.
If he just stands pat, he's on a reasonable course to have two of the top five or so dynasty (not redraft) players by the start of the 2017 season. No guarantees obviously, but Elliot and a high chance of landing Fournette next year (based on your description of his team) are how you rebuild terrible teams. Not a small handful of decent assets that would look somewhat OK on a redraft team.
On its own, this trade looks like a classic shark taking advantage of a guppy scenario. That means we're left with two possibilities here. Either you truly believe that this deal helps the other team and hence, that these classic "ripoff the guppy" mistakes are actually diligent moves. Or you are the shark here trying to talk the guppy out of his best assets.
If it's the latter, that's fine. That's what sharks do. That's what I assumed it was all this time and I'm guessing that's why you dodged the question about whether you would accept the deal if you were the owner of the other team and got this offer in your inbox. But in that case, let's drop the act like you're some benevolent fantasy owner trying to make the other guy better with no benefit to yourself (which strangely you've decided to do by hurting the other guy's team and hugely benefitting your own). If it's the former, that's a bit scary because you're supposed to be one of the sharks. Again I'm not trying to be a jerk here even though it's tough to properly word this without it sounding that way, but I think most people would be tentative of taking fantasy advice from someone that thinks this deal is actually helpful to the bad team.
And if it is the former, and you are actually trying to help the other guy, then for goodness sake take the advice of literally every other person that's seen the offer and don't trick the other guy into doing it. You're hurting him, not helping him.
Bracie Smathers
Footballguy
You don't know me. You have no clue about me.
When this guy entered our league he took over a good team. He didn't listen to me when I cautioned him about making trades with owners who like to take advantage of nubies.
He didn't listen and a few of the sharks raped him.
They stole all of his RBs and a top-5 QB.
His stupidity as a fantasy owner cost me a championship because he basically gave two top-5 fantasy players to my main competition.
He drove his team into the ground and he has gotten worse every year.
I didn't come back to him with an, 'I told you so' sermon. I haven't mentioned it to him but he did the exact opposite of what I advised. He traded away all of his RBs and a solid starting QB and didn't draft WRs. He did something truly stupid, he decided he was smarter than the rest of us and went all IDPs. I told him that you can find good IDPs on the wire but he didn't listen.
Everything I cautioned him about when he took over his team has come to light.
I still have not made this offer because I don't have to. My team is LOADED at RB. I don't need Zeke, its not about me gaining.
His poor performance is fouling up the league and the other guys might try to come in with a low-ball offer that couldn't come close to my offer.
If anything I will make an offer and tell him to not take anything lower than what I'm offering so he won't get ripped off again. I don't rip people off because I don't have to and most importantly I don't want to.
When this guy entered our league he took over a good team. He didn't listen to me when I cautioned him about making trades with owners who like to take advantage of nubies.
He didn't listen and a few of the sharks raped him.
They stole all of his RBs and a top-5 QB.
His stupidity as a fantasy owner cost me a championship because he basically gave two top-5 fantasy players to my main competition.
He drove his team into the ground and he has gotten worse every year.
I didn't come back to him with an, 'I told you so' sermon. I haven't mentioned it to him but he did the exact opposite of what I advised. He traded away all of his RBs and a solid starting QB and didn't draft WRs. He did something truly stupid, he decided he was smarter than the rest of us and went all IDPs. I told him that you can find good IDPs on the wire but he didn't listen.
Everything I cautioned him about when he took over his team has come to light.
I still have not made this offer because I don't have to. My team is LOADED at RB. I don't need Zeke, its not about me gaining.
His poor performance is fouling up the league and the other guys might try to come in with a low-ball offer that couldn't come close to my offer.
If anything I will make an offer and tell him to not take anything lower than what I'm offering so he won't get ripped off again. I don't rip people off because I don't have to and most importantly I don't want to.
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
But if you make this offer, you are.
If your intentions are truly pure, then more power to you. But it means you should take the advice of everyone here who is telling you it's a bad deal for the other guy.
"You need help, and I want to help you, so here take this offer where I'm ripping you off" just doesn't compute.
You've also completely changed your narrative from your latest post where you're saying your goal isn't to make your team better, versus your original post where you laid out the reasons why you made the offer because you thought it made your team better.
Last edited by a moderator:
Bracie Smathers
Footballguy
My goal is to win my league but I do it my way.
I don't offer trades that take advantage of people. A short term loss can still be a long-term gain.
This deal would help his team win more games both short term and long term if he makes the right moves with the picks in the deal than one player would. The risk is that some shark will come in with a low-ball offer and steal Zeke. At least with an offer on the table he knows not to go lower than this.
If I wanted to rip him off I would dangle a few IDPs and throw in late round picks and old name players who were on their last legs like the other guys did.
I don't have any need at RB and the rest of his team has been picked clean. He's got nothing that I want. I would never make this offer if I was all about short-term gain even if I wanted to rip him off.
It is a blocking move and maybe he will listen the next time I give advice. Bad fantasy players are unpredictable. I don't know what this guy will do with the first pick, he may not even take Zeke or he might make another bad trade.
Ripping people off looking for a short term gain is checkers and destroys trust and creates suspicion instead of building trust and a good trading relationship. Helping out a bad team doesn't hurt a strong team but is a solid long-term strategy planning multiple steps ahead like chess. The goal is to win but you don't have to take advantage of bad owners. You can even coach them up and turn them into good owners. They become more competitive which makes playing fantasy football more fun. I'd rather beat a good team with a good owner any day of the week than beat a bad team with a bad owner.
I don't offer trades that take advantage of people. A short term loss can still be a long-term gain.
This deal would help his team win more games both short term and long term if he makes the right moves with the picks in the deal than one player would. The risk is that some shark will come in with a low-ball offer and steal Zeke. At least with an offer on the table he knows not to go lower than this.
If I wanted to rip him off I would dangle a few IDPs and throw in late round picks and old name players who were on their last legs like the other guys did.
I don't have any need at RB and the rest of his team has been picked clean. He's got nothing that I want. I would never make this offer if I was all about short-term gain even if I wanted to rip him off.
It is a blocking move and maybe he will listen the next time I give advice. Bad fantasy players are unpredictable. I don't know what this guy will do with the first pick, he may not even take Zeke or he might make another bad trade.
Ripping people off looking for a short term gain is checkers and destroys trust and creates suspicion instead of building trust and a good trading relationship. Helping out a bad team doesn't hurt a strong team but is a solid long-term strategy planning multiple steps ahead like chess. The goal is to win but you don't have to take advantage of bad owners. You can even coach them up and turn them into good owners. They become more competitive which makes playing fantasy football more fun. I'd rather beat a good team with a good owner any day of the week than beat a bad team with a bad owner.
Last edited by a moderator:
[original thread topic: I offered the 1.03, 2.03 and Dorsett for the 1.01 and was shot down quickly]
the nebulous trade being bandied about doesn't really help a rebuild, it makes them a little bit more competitive for a year, but you build around studs... and why anyone would consider that trade BEFORE the NFL draft where I'm guessing some of the values will be altered is crazy.
on rebuilds, you build around studs. take your lumps for a year or three, and embrace the high picks you "earned". I traded out of the 1.01 in a devy/rookie draft because I needed lots of picks (got the 1.05, 2.06 and 2017 first, already had the 1.03 and now have 7 of the top 15 and 9 of the top 20 in a draft where 7 devy players can be picked)
bad owners who get fleeced by "sharks" don't help the integrity of the league.
the nebulous trade being bandied about doesn't really help a rebuild, it makes them a little bit more competitive for a year, but you build around studs... and why anyone would consider that trade BEFORE the NFL draft where I'm guessing some of the values will be altered is crazy.
on rebuilds, you build around studs. take your lumps for a year or three, and embrace the high picks you "earned". I traded out of the 1.01 in a devy/rookie draft because I needed lots of picks (got the 1.05, 2.06 and 2017 first, already had the 1.03 and now have 7 of the top 15 and 9 of the top 20 in a draft where 7 devy players can be picked)
bad owners who get fleeced by "sharks" don't help the integrity of the league.
True, but Bracie's post really didn't offer any insight to the value of the 1.01 without naming any players. I merely added names in for the sake of attaching a value to the deal and giving my opinion that it's not a good return for the guy giving the 1.01.
We could throw a combination of names in there all day to make the value better or worse. I think the conclusion is that in order to even consider moving the 1.01 you need at least a solid young piece and a young, high upside piece.
Also, someone mentioned earlier that the 1.01 will be way more valuable after the draft. I disagree there as well. It may be, but if Elliott gets drafted by someone like Cleveland and Henry goes to the Cowboys or Texans, I think it complicates things a bit.
Something that needs to be addressed when valuing the 2016 1.01, the value of Elliot relative to the top incoming rbs in 2017.
Can we agree that it's a ridiculous assumption to assume 3 or 4 (which is the number I've seen tossed around) rbs will be better prospects than Elliot? As in, drafted higher than Elliot
Can we agree that it's a ridiculous assumption to assume 3 or 4 (which is the number I've seen tossed around) rbs will be better prospects than Elliot? As in, drafted higher than Elliot
I can't agree on that just yet. I don't think Elliott is a better prospect than Gurley was, which is an opinion I see floating among some of the "experts". I can't say that he is better than Cook, Chub or Fournette. Those guys all looked pretty amazing. It will depend on how they play this year and all of their landing spots, but to me it's not ridiculous to think they might all be equal or better than Elliott.
I said "that trade" because I am assuming the pieces he was offering may be effected by the draft (say Langford, Ajayi or Jones).
I think Zeke's value could only go up from here in a one or two spots (DAL being the best). I place his value as a Top 5 RB right now, so not much room to go up
I think Zeke's value could only go up from here in a one or two spots (DAL being the best). I place his value as a Top 5 RB right now, so not much room to go up
Deranged Hermit
Not cool & Pissed
Wow, the guy who turned that down is gonna to regret that.steelers1080 said:
massraider
Footballguy
Yeah, this is getting silly.
There is no doubt in my mind that Zeke is getting overrated in fantasy at this point.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
So someone who sucks and can't compete should trade pick #1 AND their 2017 1st so that they can go from a zero % chance of winning this year to a 1% chance of winning this year? While also ruining their future even more than it already is?
That's kinda funny, cause I have seen terrible teams do this several times, which is why they stay terrible.
That's kinda funny, cause I have seen terrible teams do this several times, which is why they stay terrible.
Last edited by a moderator:
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Yeah, Elliot is probably pretty overrated. Definitely overvalued in dynasty circles it seems.
fruity pebbles
Footballguy
Visions of Gurley dancing in peoples heads
ghostguy123
Footballguy
A couple years back I decided I am not giving up a ton of value for a RB anymore. Things have gone MUCH better since then
fruity pebbles
Footballguy
JohnnyU
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Madden Curse
Footballguy
This is the first time in years I'm not even bothering to send out offers for the 1.1 in dynos. I just don't see any players who justify the overpayment it normally takes to pry the 1.1 from an owner. I'm totally comfortable trading away picks for veterans and future picks this year, or just taking whoever falls to me (and expecting very little out of them).
Biabreakable
Footballguy
I dunno.
Pick 6 for me would be Derrick Henry, SF is in rebuild and I am not sure where Hyde will fit into that. Kevin White might be great but we have not seen a glimpse of what he can do at the pro level yet and not much of a track record in college to project from. I think Yeldon is ok but not a RB I would count on as a long term starter.
I can understand keeping Elliot over these spare parts. He has to find roster space for the trash as well. If he already has good depth already some of these parts could be bubble players.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
You're not helping him though. You're trying to take advantage of a poor dynasty owner by "pretending" that you're helping him. (ETA: I'm not implying nefarious intents, but just that you're to the point of trying to justify this move by convincing yourself its an overpay).
If he takes an offer of say McCoy, Langford, Tannehill the 1.06 and 1.12 for the 1.01 and a 2017 first (which could be top 5) - his team will be in MUCH worse shape over the long haul even if he manages to cobble together enough wins this season to maybe make the playoffs - and get knocked right out after one game.
Last edited by a moderator:
