Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
spider321

Dynasty Value Discussion Thread

Recommended Posts

30 minutes ago, Zyphros said:

Can't speak for others but he was one of my favorites of last years class of WR's.  Solid all across the board and I expect that offense to continue its leap forward since the Amari deal.  Once he came aboard, Gallup could play his role rather comfortably, and he did well.  No reason not to expect a 2nd year jump from a guy that came into the league at 22 and showed well.  I get the reasons of concerns about Dak or feeding Zeke, but he was miscast as a #1 going into the year after they drafted him, solved that issue by trading for Amari, and then he started improving.  If he were 24-25 coming into the league sure I would think he was capped as that, but he recently turned 23 with room to grow.  

No way that offense can support two startable wide receivers.  Personally I think he's a compentant TE away from being rendered irrelevant completely.  Dallas opened up a little bit last year and I think that's the direction they're headed, but they'll primarily be a between the hashmarks team as long as Dak is running things. 

I saw somewhere you called him a top 60ish player, not counting rookies, which is half of his current adp according to Mizelle.  You can like him but going way over market value for that situation (WR2 on Dallas) regardless of his ability (which was not all that prolific coming out besides the point) seems nuts to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Biabreakable said:

As far as Ninjas claim that you can't find good players like this with those 2nd round picks.. well Ian Thomas was a 3rd round pick in rookie drafts, Gallup 2nd rounder and Shephard was a 1st rounder but imo overdrafted.

You're twisting my words. I said 2nd round picks are dart throws. I didn't say you can't hit with them. People have gone back and studied years of rookie drafts. If memory serves, second round picks have a 25% or lower hit rate. Early 1st round picks were close to 50%.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Biabreakable said:

As far as Ninjas claim that you can't find good players like this with those 2nd round picks..

That clearly was not his claim.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, skinfanjon said:

Personally I think he's a compentant TE away from being rendered irrelevant completely.

That's a pretty strong take for a player entering his 2nd season with a young QB, stud WR1 and ultra-stud RB.  Yes, the offense rolls through Zeke, but they can (and probably will) be far more balanced than they have been the past two seasons.

Also, I'm not certain that Witten qualifies as a competent TE these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, skinfanjon said:

No way that offense can support two startable wide receivers.  Personally I think he's a compentant TE away from being rendered irrelevant completely.  Dallas opened up a little bit last year and I think that's the direction they're headed, but they'll primarily be a between the hashmarks team as long as Dak is running things. 

I saw somewhere you called him a top 60ish player, not counting rookies, which is half of his current adp according to Mizelle.  You can like him but going way over market value for that situation (WR2 on Dallas) regardless of his ability (which was not all that prolific coming out besides the point) seems nuts to me.

I think you’re being a bit harsh on his situation. Who’d have thought Dalton’s Bengals could support two top 20 guys? If Gallup is the real deal - if he’s getting open regularly - he’ll score points. 

I’m not a big Gallup guy, but his situation wouldn’t scare me off if I was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, tangfoot said:

Also, I'm not certain that Witten qualifies as a competent TE these days.

I don’t think he does, which is why I believe skinfan was saying that he’s a competent TE away from being nonrelevant.  I don’t think he’ll be nonrelevant, but if they add a better TE it’ll be all the more mouths to feed in an offense that doesn’t feed many mouths.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me, Gallup is the kind of guy whose end of year stats look pretty decent but you frustratingly chase that production on a weekly basis.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, SayWhat? said:

I don’t think he does, which is why I believe skinfan was saying that he’s a competent TE away from being nonrelevant.  I don’t think he’ll be nonrelevant, but if they add a better TE it’ll be all the more mouths to feed in an offense that doesn’t feed many mouths.

They had a couple competent TEs last year, in terms of receiving ability. They need better blocking from the position. And I think they’d love to cut Elliott’s targets by at least 25.

“Cowboys tight ends in 2018: 68 catches, 710 yards, 4 TDs
Cowboys tight ends in 2017: 69 catches, 673 yards, 6 TDs”

Edited by Concept Coop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Concept Coop said:

They had a couple competent TEs last year, in terms of receiving ability. They need better blocking from the position. And I think they’d love to cut Elliott’s targets by at least 25.

“Cowboys tight ends in 2018: 68 catches, 710 yards, 4 TDs
Cowboys tight ends in 2017: 69 catches, 673 yards, 6 TDs”

Jarwin, Schultz, and Swaim may be “competent” in the truest definition of the word, sure.  I would say this, that trio is very easily replaceable by a TE that’s more of a threat for targets than guys of their caliber have been.  And when (not if) that happens, that upgraded TE will be more of a threat for targets than they have collectively been.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, skinfanjon said:

No way that offense can support two startable wide receivers.  Personally I think he's a compentant TE away from being rendered irrelevant completely.  Dallas opened up a little bit last year and I think that's the direction they're headed, but they'll primarily be a between the hashmarks team as long as Dak is running things. 

I saw somewhere you called him a top 60ish player, not counting rookies, which is half of his current adp according to Mizelle.  You can like him but going way over market value for that situation (WR2 on Dallas) regardless of his ability (which was not all that prolific coming out besides the point) seems nuts to me.

Competent TE away, but they're likely not to address that issue.  All of Jarwin, Swaim, and Shultz showed something last year and they re-signed Witten for his "leadership" not his pass catching skills.  So I don't see that as a priority at all.  Just saying if you don't think a 500 yard season on limited targets isn't a good start, then I think you're mistaken.  If you expect offensive improvement, you're almost obligated to say Gallup will improve as well.  There isn't anyone else.  Beasley is gone and Witten should of stayed retired.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, SayWhat? said:

Jarwin, Schultz, and Swaim may be “competent” in the truest definition of the word, sure.  I would say this, that trio is very easily replaceable by a TE that’s more of a threat for targets than guys of their caliber have been.  And when (not if) that happens, that upgraded TE will be more of a threat for targets than they have collectively been.

If Jarwin could block like Swaim, he’d be a very promising prospect and the Cowboys would be set. I agree that the TE group is a mess, but only because they don’t have one complete guy who can get open, catch, and block. So yes, it will be easily for Dallas to drastically improve the position, but it won’t be so easy to drastically improve the receiving aspect of the position.

I hope I’m making sense. I’m sure there’s a better way to put it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Quick rant. 

PFF is using Yards Before Contact as a measure of offensive line performance. On the surface, that sounds reasonable. Except that they're using it to suggest that Philip Lindsay received more help from his offensive line than Royce Freeman did. The same offensive line...against the same defenses...on the same downs.

Yards before Contact
Lindsay: 3.2
Freeman: 0.8

It's baffling to me that they're going with this - and it's not just one analyst either. How in the world do you take these data to be a comment on offensive line performance, rather than running back performance (edit: when using it to compare Lindsay and Freeman)?! This is something I'd expect to see a guest writer on one of the small fantasy sites push. Not PFF. (Especially when their player grade loved Lindsay and not Freeman.) 

The more likely answer is that Lindsay was better at getting those yards. He was more patient, displayed better vision, was harder for defenders to identify (smaller), and much quicker through the hole. 

Anyway, this will likely cause me to be more careful about using metrics like this. I let YAC play a big role in my targeting Ajayi and Drake recently, and was burned in both cases. 

Edit: I still like PFF's player grade. I just think we can get in trouble trying to treat football like we do baseball, in terms of analytics. 
 

Edited by Concept Coop
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Concept Coop said:

Quick rant. 

PFF is using Yards Before Contact as a measure of offensive line performance. On the surface, that sounds reasonable. Except that they're using it to suggest that Philip Lindsay received more help from his offensive line than Royce Freeman did. The same offensive line...against the same defenses...on the same downs.

Yards before Contact
Lindsay: 3.2
Freeman: 0.8

It's baffling to me that they're going with this - and it's not just one analyst either. How in the world do you take these data to be a comment on offensive line performance, rather than running back performance?! This is something I'd expect to see a guest writer on one of the small fantasy sites push. Not PFF. (Especially when their player grade loved Lindsay and not Freeman.)

The obvious answer is that Lindsay was better at getting those yards. He was more patient, displayed better vision, was harder for defenders to identify (smaller), and much quicker through the hole. 

Anyway, this will likely cause me to be more careful about using metrics like this. I let YAC play a big role in my targeting Ajayi and Drake recently, and was burned in both cases. 

It would be interesting to see if they were really running out of the same formations and against the same sized boxes. Also keep in mind that Freeman was dealing with a HAS. As a loose rule of thumb, I always buy players coming off a high ankle sprain. They always perform poorly when they return from injury in-season and people always attribute it to a lack of skill.

P.S. *Meaningless conjecture disclaimer* I get a strong Andre Ellington vibe from Lindsay. Maybe it's just a lazy comp because they were both small, old rookies. But Ellington looked like the real deal his rookie year, got one crack at the starting gig, got injured, never got another shot. Such is the plight of small UDFA/late round RBs. They don't have 9 lives like bigger backs with more pedigree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, FF Ninja said:

It would be interesting to see if they were really running out of the same formations and against the same sized boxes. Also keep in mind that Freeman was dealing with a HAS. As a loose rule of thumb, I always buy players coming off a high ankle sprain. They always perform poorly when they return from injury in-season and people always attribute it to a lack of skill.

P.S. *Meaningless conjecture disclaimer* I get a strong Andre Ellington vibe from Lindsay. Maybe it's just a lazy comp because they were both small, old rookies. But Ellington looked like the real deal his rookie year, got one crack at the starting gig, got injured, never got another shot. Such is the plight of small UDFA/late round RBs. They don't have 9 lives like bigger backs with more pedigree.

The stacked box rate was about the same for both guys - and both guys got most of their work on 1st and 2nd down. From what I remember watching, they were used similarly.

If their situations - same line, same games, same downs, same defenses - aren't comparable enough, then no two situations are and the stat is worthless. How do you even start to compare Zeke to Gurley, then? (And that's kind of my point: maybe we shouldn't use these kind of metrics to do so.)

I don't mean to use this as an argument for or against either guy moving forward, necessarily. Just pointing out how silly their conclusion was. 

Edit: And Freeman had a better YAC, FTR. 

Edited by Concept Coop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What don't people get about replacement value?

In an IDP Zealots league, a guy sends on offer of the 4.09 for Danielle Hunter.

Of course I reject saying he's arguably a top 5 d-lineman.

He replies with "Very true....but he's still a DL. Not a lot of value there."

Me: But the odds of replacing his value with a fourth round pick are nearly zero.

Him: 1st DL in last year's rookie draft went 3.10, and Hunter wasn't even drafted in the 2015 rookie draft, so the odds are WAY better than zero.

 

I stopped there but, isn't it obvious that has nothing to do with it? D-linemen go late because of both position and difficulty predicting protection. That just means that when a guy's an actual producer that his value has appreciated. He basically wanted me to trade him a known asset for the chance at getting lucky. 

This is the reason I'm just about done with dynasty leagues. Trading is necessary but almost always ends up stupid.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lindsay.....was a nice F/A pick up last year, almost impossible to trade him at this point, best offer I got is 2020 2nd (and most likely late 2nd) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Drezden said:

Lindsay.....was a nice F/A pick up last year, almost impossible to trade him at this point, best offer I got is 2020 2nd (and most likely late 2nd) 

I feel you. I was able to offload him in one league for a good deal but can't give him away in another.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Drezden said:

Lindsay.....was a nice F/A pick up last year, almost impossible to trade him at this point, best offer I got is 2020 2nd (and most likely late 2nd) 

I traded him straight up for Kupp about 2-3 months ago in one of my PPR dynasty leagues. Yes there are Lindsay doubters (probably those that drafted Freeman mostly ;) ) but there are lots of believers (like me) who will absolutely give a 1st rounder for him. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
47 minutes ago, Concept Coop said:

The stacked box rate was about the same for both guys - and both guys got most of their work on 1st and 2nd down. From what I remember watching, they were used similarly.

Are you sure? I saw this on reddit: 14% 8 man boxes compared to 36% (2nd most in the NFL) by Freeman

https://www.reddit.com/r/DynastyFF/comments/bei31t/discussion_in_relation_to_the_phillip_lindsay_post/

Edited by FF Ninja

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, FF Ninja said:

Are you sure? I saw this on reddit: 14% 8 man boxes compared to 36% (2nd most in the NFL) by Freeman

https://www.reddit.com/r/DynastyFF/comments/bei31t/discussion_in_relation_to_the_phillip_lindsay_post/

According to playerprofiler:

Lindsay:
Stacked rate: 24.0%
Avg def in box: 6.9

Freeman
Stacked rate: 24.6%
Avg def in box: 7.0

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, FF Ninja said:

Are you sure? I saw this on reddit: 14% 8 man boxes compared to 36% (2nd most in the NFL) by Freeman

https://www.reddit.com/r/DynastyFF/comments/bei31t/discussion_in_relation_to_the_phillip_lindsay_post/

It looks like that redditor got his info here: https://nextgenstats.nfl.com/stats/rushing#yards

I'm going with Playerprofiler - a lot of these numbers don't pass the smell test. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Andy Dufresne said:

What don't people get about replacement value?

In an IDP Zealots league, a guy sends on offer of the 4.09 for Danielle Hunter.

Of course I reject saying he's arguably a top 5 d-lineman.

He replies with "Very true....but he's still a DL. Not a lot of value there."

Me: But the odds of replacing his value with a fourth round pick are nearly zero.

Him: 1st DL in last year's rookie draft went 3.10, and Hunter wasn't even drafted in the 2015 rookie draft, so the odds are WAY better than zero.

 

I stopped there but, isn't it obvious that has nothing to do with it? D-linemen go late because of both position and difficulty predicting protection. That just means that when a guy's an actual producer that his value has appreciated. He basically wanted me to trade him a known asset for the chance at getting lucky. 

This is the reason I'm just about done with dynasty leagues. Trading is necessary but almost always ends up stupid.

It's less about replacement for me and more about why would I possibly trade a guy I believe in or has proven their worth as a valuable piece on my roster for a rookie I MIGHT believe in if I even get who I want at that pick 30 spots away or more.  It's across leagues. 

I refuse to send offers of a 3rd or 4th round pick (or later) straight up for someone unless they're about to get cut by a team.  Nobody is worth those picks for the owner of the player.  Just to use an example, I own Curtis Samuel a lot and people want him for a minimal pick but why would I trade him for a 3rd or 4th?  He's obviously a favorite of mine (or I wouldn't roster him), and all I'd be doing is getting a minimal pick flier in return instead of thinking my own player will pan out.  There's risk for both sure, maybe even more on my end believing in my own player, but nobody is willing to trade their end of bench guys for minimal picks. 

You have to mitigate that risk by offering something of value.  The only exception to that is if there are roster cuts.  FFPC you see deals like that all the time, 6th for this guy, 4th and 7th for that guy which is understandable, but if I have players on my team, they're either worth 2nds or more I don't care how bad a player he might be.  I own Chris Warren in a couple of those leagues, would I trade him for a 3rd or 4th?  Hell no.  Give me value in return or get out of my inbox.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Zyphros said:

It's less about replacement for me and more about why would I possibly trade a guy I believe in or has proven their worth as a valuable piece on my roster for a rookie I MIGHT believe in if I even get who I want at that pick 30 spots away or more.  It's across leagues. 

I refuse to send offers of a 3rd or 4th round pick (or later) straight up for someone unless they're about to get cut by a team.  Nobody is worth those picks for the owner of the player.  Just to use an example, I own Curtis Samuel a lot and people want him for a minimal pick but why would I trade him for a 3rd or 4th?  He's obviously a favorite of mine (or I wouldn't roster him), and all I'd be doing is getting a minimal pick flier in return instead of thinking my own player will pan out.  There's risk for both sure, maybe even more on my end believing in my own player, but nobody is willing to trade their end of bench guys for minimal picks. 

You have to mitigate that risk by offering something of value.  The only exception to that is if there are roster cuts.  FFPC you see deals like that all the time, 6th for this guy, 4th and 7th for that guy which is understandable, but if I have players on my team, they're either worth 2nds or more I don't care how bad a player he might be.  I own Chris Warren in a couple of those leagues, would I trade him for a 3rd or 4th?  Hell no.  Give me value in return or get out of my inbox.  

I don't at get your stance at all.   I roster plenty of players I don't believe in fully, or even want to really roster.  You can't possibly claim that every player you roster is "obviously a favorite of mine, or I wouldn't roster him."   I don't at all believe that to be realistically possible.  More realistically is I would guess that some of the players you roster simply have more value than what's left on the waiver wire.  Or some of those player's you may have once believed in have had injuries, lack of production, or a situational change that has impacted your valuation of that player.  But to say the players you roster "are all worth 2nds or more" is out there in fantasy land IMO.

Both of the players you've listed are great examples.  For Warren, I don't fault anyone for holding.  But for the sake of argument let's say you were high on him last preseason before he got hurt.  Now he's sat the whole year, his team signed a respectable veteran RB (Crowell), and it now holds three picks in the range that the top RB may be selected in the NFL draft...well, let's just say that I own Warren and I'd insta-accept a 3rd and would likely take a 4th for him.  Samuel?   Let's say you drafted him two years ago in the early 2nd round of your rookie draft because you loved his college tape and what he brought to the table.  Big time ppr upside as an underneath safety net for Newton.  Two years later, he's had 54 total receptions, his team brought in a 1st round WR last year whom looks like the real deal, they have a RB that's a lock for 100+ targets, and even when Samuel finally started to get integrated into the offense he just as often had 4 targets or less per game than he did more.  While I likely wouldn't accept a 3rd if I held him, it's not out of line with what I'd consider.  Sure, 3rd and 4th round rookies are no guarantees for success.  But sometimes having your pick of what's on the board is better than being stuck with a prospect with little hope for viable fantasy production looking forward.  I'd throw both Warren and Samuel into that category.  Warren I think has very little chance of ever being "the guy" on an NFL team.  And I think Samuel is going to find it hard to carve out enough of a target share anywhere that provides enough volume to be a difference maker.   I guess your definition of what a "valuable piece on my roster" is (Warren and Samuel are not even close in my book) and "why would I possibly trade that piece for a rookie I MIGHT believe in" is just vastly different than mine.  And you seem overly offended by the notion of those offers.  Guess it's just a eye of the beholder thing, but just wanted to provide a vantage point from why the other side sometimes makes sense. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Drezden said:

Lindsay.....was a nice F/A pick up last year, almost impossible to trade him at this point, best offer I got is 2020 2nd (and most likely late 2nd) 

In one of my leagues a few weeks ago he was traded along with Royce and Russell Wilson for Baker and the 1.4. In another league a few days ago: Lindsay, Gus Edwards, and Hayden Hurst for Hyde, Yeldon and Ebron. i wasn't involved in either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, SayWhat? said:

I roster plenty of players I don't believe in fully, or even want to really roster.  You can't possibly claim that every player you roster is "obviously a favorite of mine, or I wouldn't roster him."   I don't at all believe that to be realistically possible.  More realistically is I would guess that some of the players you roster simply have more value than what's left on the waiver wire.  Or some of those player's you may have once believed in have had injuries, lack of production, or a situational change that has impacted your valuation of that player.  But to say the players you roster "are all worth 2nds or more" is out there in fantasy land IMO.

 And you seem overly offended by the notion of those offers.  

That still leads to the belief in a player.  It isn't fantasy land when late round picks are literally useless cloggers.  Someone is going to point to all these great picks you can find in those rounds, but it isn't a viable strategy to stock pile these picks.  You want talented players and studs at all positions.  That's basically the name of the game right?  How are you going to do that if you continually flip flop your end of bench spots for 3rds and 4ths or later?  It's a constant cycle if you do that.  What's the point in me selling a guy for a late round pick?  Maybe you like a guy at that point in time OTC or something, but your just exchanging 1 flier for another.  And then a year later nothing's changed or their situation is worse so you do it again.  Oh look at that you're 2 years in and still did nothing with your roster.  

It's a tedious process.  Accumulate late round picks, wait for them to hit or situation to damper, if they hit, great you can sell for something more valuable or keep them and hope it continues.  If their situation dampers go get a late round pick again and do the process over again?  Seems like a never ending cycle to me.  I find that to be a waste of time and valuable roster space.  

I'm holding guys because I believe in their opportunity and their talent, if you're not doing it that way, then why are you holding them at all?  I think Samuel clearly has more value than Warren does at this point, but who's to say Warren doesn't surprise people.  Some thought he was the better college RB at Texas than D'Onte Foreman on super limited touches.  

If someone comes to me with that offer (3rd or 4th for Warren or Samuel or any other flier), the only way I consider giving them up is if I'm cutting them anyways, otherwise they're worth more.  It's as simple as that.  I absolutely am offended if someone comes to me with that type of draft pick for a player on my team that I won't cut.  I don't value late round picks.  

It all comes down to this question though.  Why add minimal value to your team for a flier?  If a guy is interested in that flier then he can pay a price that would be worth it for me to sell.  A later pick isn't worth it for me to sell.  Call it an overpay if you want, but there's no reason for me to gift a player to someone else because their outlook may look bleak.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Buckna said:

In one of my leagues a few weeks ago he was traded along with Royce and Russell Wilson for Baker and the 1.4. In another league a few days ago: Lindsay, Gus Edwards, and Hayden Hurst for Hyde, Yeldon and Ebron. i wasn't involved in either.

That 1st trade is interesting. I can see a case for either side, but would probably slightly prefer Mayfield and the 1.4.

The 2nd deal is basically giving Lindsay away. Good sell high on Ebron by that owner.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Zyphros said:

That still leads to the belief in a player.  It isn't fantasy land when late round picks are literally useless cloggers. 

It all comes down to this question though.  Why add minimal value to your team for a flier? 

Yeah, I'm still baffled by the logic.  Guess it's just a difference of opinion on the value of players already on your roster vs future picks.  Warren was one of those "late round useless cloggers" just a year ago (even  undrafted in some rookie drafts), so just the fact that he's now on your roster now doesn't mean he's magically in some different value tier than the rookies in that range in this year's draft.   But your stance is that he's worth at least a 3rd to you, because you're rostering him and believe in him as an UDFA and late round rookie pick that did zero on the field in Year 1?  That's your prerogative, but you're in the tiny minority that wouldn't trade Warren for a 3rd in this year's draft.  Because when you make that trade, you're trading a very specific asset with minimal value (an undrafted free agent RB that's proven nothing one year into his career, on a team that has and will continue to undoubtedly upgrade at the position) for a rookie pick that gives you numerous options (drafting the best player available out of 10's of players remaining at numerous positions, trading the pick for a veteran player that holds more value and/or chance for success than Warren, trade the pick for a better future pick, etc). 

And to answer your question, additional information is available on that "flier" named Warren that has reduced my valuation of him.  I valued Warren in the preseason last year, when I felt he had an opportunity to carve out a role, far more than I do today.    That's because I don't believe he's going to receive that opportunity when he's up against a rookie RB that his new GM likely selects in the first 2-3 rounds of this draft, as well as the veteran that this new GM just signed.  So I would gladly give up on this (particular) flier for a chance a new flier, and trust that I'll pull someone from the rookie draft that has a much better chance for success than Warren presently has.  If you can't grasp the benefit there, then we simply approach dynasty differently.  You seem to take a hold and wait approach until the player either fully establishes themselves or fully craps out of the league.  I'm always looking for players that I believe provide me the better opportunity to improve my team.  If I deem Warren as no longer likely to do that, I'll move on from him for a dart throw in the 3rd or 4th round without hesitation if that's the best the market will bring. 

But to actually get offended by offers of 3rds or 4ths for someone like Warren, when that's at best where his value lies, is crazy town.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/18/2019 at 2:14 PM, Andy Dufresne said:

What don't people get about replacement value?

In an IDP Zealots league, a guy sends on offer of the 4.09 for Danielle Hunter.

Of course I reject saying he's arguably a top 5 d-lineman.

He replies with "Very true....but he's still a DL. Not a lot of value there."

Me: But the odds of replacing his value with a fourth round pick are nearly zero.

Him: 1st DL in last year's rookie draft went 3.10, and Hunter wasn't even drafted in the 2015 rookie draft, so the odds are WAY better than zero.

 

I stopped there but, isn't it obvious that has nothing to do with it? D-linemen go late because of both position and difficulty predicting protection. That just means that when a guy's an actual producer that his value has appreciated. He basically wanted me to trade him a known asset for the chance at getting lucky. 

This is the reason I'm just about done with dynasty leagues. Trading is necessary but almost always ends up stupid.

Same format, I traded Hunter for an early 2020 1st and 2019 4.03.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SayWhat? said:

Yeah, I'm still baffled by the logic.  Guess it's just a difference of opinion on the value of players already on your roster vs future picks.  Warren was one of those "late round useless cloggers" just a year ago (even  undrafted in some rookie drafts), so just the fact that he's now on your roster now doesn't mean he's magically in some different value tier than the rookies in that range in this year's draft.   But your stance is that he's worth at least a 3rd to you, because you're rostering him and believe in him as an UDFA and late round rookie pick that did zero on the field in Year 1?  That's your prerogative, but you're in the tiny minority that wouldn't trade Warren for a 3rd in this year's draft.  Because when you make that trade, you're trading a very specific asset with minimal value (an undrafted free agent RB that's proven nothing one year into his career, on a team that has and will continue to undoubtedly upgrade at the position) for a rookie pick that gives you numerous options (drafting the best player available out of 10's of players remaining at numerous positions, trading the pick for a veteran player that holds more value and/or chance for success than Warren, trade the pick for a better future pick, etc). 

And to answer your question, additional information is available on that "flier" named Warren that has reduced my valuation of him.  I valued Warren in the preseason last year, when I felt he had an opportunity to carve out a role, far more than I do today.    That's because I don't believe he's going to receive that opportunity when he's up against a rookie RB that his new GM likely selects in the first 2-3 rounds of this draft, as well as the veteran that this new GM just signed.  So I would gladly give up on this (particular) flier for a chance a new flier, and trust that I'll pull someone from the rookie draft that has a much better chance for success than Warren presently has.  If you can't grasp the benefit there, then we simply approach dynasty differently.  You seem to take a hold and wait approach until the player either fully establishes themselves or fully craps out of the league.  I'm always looking for players that I believe provide me the better opportunity to improve my team.  If I deem Warren as no longer likely to do that, I'll move on from him for a dart throw in the 3rd or 4th round without hesitation if that's the best the market will bring. 

But to actually get offended by offers of 3rds or 4ths for someone like Warren, when that's at best where his value lies, is crazy town.

I agree

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a 12 team non-ppr dynasty league, what do you see as Guice's value in terms of rookie draft picks?

I liked him in the draft, but was too far back in the 1st to get him. Now with the complications involved with his surgery and the re-signing of ADP, I'm hoping I can pick him up from an owner with rookie fever. What rookie draft picks would you give/want for him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think 9 out of 10 Guice owners would need the 1.1 minimum to move him. I own him in half a dozen leagues and I don't think I'd move him for 1.1 this year unless I really needed a WR bad and one fell in the perfect spot. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎4‎/‎18‎/‎2019 at 3:14 PM, Andy Dufresne said:

What don't people get about replacement value?

In an IDP Zealots league, a guy sends on offer of the 4.09 for Danielle Hunter.

Of course I reject saying he's arguably a top 5 d-lineman.

He replies with "Very true....but he's still a DL. Not a lot of value there."

Me: But the odds of replacing his value with a fourth round pick are nearly zero.

Him: 1st DL in last year's rookie draft went 3.10, and Hunter wasn't even drafted in the 2015 rookie draft, so the odds are WAY better than zero.

 

I stopped there but, isn't it obvious that has nothing to do with it? D-linemen go late because of both position and difficulty predicting protection. That just means that when a guy's an actual producer that his value has appreciated. He basically wanted me to trade him a known asset for the chance at getting lucky. 

This is the reason I'm just about done with dynasty leagues. Trading is necessary but almost always ends up stupid.

Just need better dynasty leagues. I traded the 1.11 for him a few weeks ago and think I got a steal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The consensus for Guice is 1.1 or 1.1+, which personally I don't understand at all.

I don't even agree that he would be the consensus top back in this class which most seem to consider obvious.

He seems like a guy that the fantasy community has always been higher on than the NFL community.  Here we have a guy who was a late 2nd round NFL pick that teams were climbing over each other to avoid (trading up to make sure they could draft a different RB and didn't get stuck with Guice).  Meanwhile this year's draft has a guy that looks very likely to be a late 1st round pick or early 2nd at worst, who is much more of a passing threat than Guice (important for fantasy) and to top all that off Guice now is coming off of a torn ACL.

I can certainly understand some people preferring Guice, to each their own and all that, but I don't get how 99 out of 100 seem to prefer a late 2nd NFL round pick that NFL teams seem to hate with questionable receiving skills who is coming off a major injury easily over a likely late 1st round NFL pick that NFL teams reportedly really like who's skillset is more well rounded for fantasy.

Edited by FreeBaGeL
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, FreeBaGeL said:

The consensus for Guice is 1.1 or 1.1+, which personally I don't understand at all.

I don't even agree that he would be the consensus top back in this class which most seem to consider obvious.

He seems like a guy that the fantasy community has always been higher on than the NFL community.  Here we have a guy who was a late 2nd round NFL pick that teams were climbing over each other to avoid (trading up to make sure they could draft a different RB and didn't get stuck with Guice).  Meanwhile this year's draft has a guy that looks very likely to be a late 1st round pick or early 2nd at worst, who is much more of a passing threat than Guice (important for fantasy) and to top all that off Guice now is coming off of a torn ACL.

I can certainly understand some people preferring Guice, to each their own and all that, but I don't get how 99 out of 100 seem to prefer a late 2nd NFL round pick that NFL teams seem to hate with questionable receiving skills who is coming off a major injury easily over a likely late 1st round NFL pick that NFL teams reportedly really like who's skillset is more well rounded for fantasy.

All of this.  Couldn’t have said it better. The infatuation with Guice has made little sense for quite a while.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, FreeBaGeL said:

The consensus for Guice is 1.1 or 1.1+, which personally I don't understand at all.

I don't even agree that he would be the consensus top back in this class which most seem to consider obvious.

He seems like a guy that the fantasy community has always been higher on than the NFL community.  Here we have a guy who was a late 2nd round NFL pick that teams were climbing over each other to avoid (trading up to make sure they could draft a different RB and didn't get stuck with Guice).  Meanwhile this year's draft has a guy that looks very likely to be a late 1st round pick or early 2nd at worst, who is much more of a passing threat than Guice (important for fantasy) and to top all that off Guice now is coming off of a torn ACL.

I can certainly understand some people preferring Guice, to each their own and all that, but I don't get how 99 out of 100 seem to prefer a late 2nd NFL round pick that NFL teams seem to hate with questionable receiving skills who is coming off a major injury easily over a likely late 1st round NFL pick that NFL teams reportedly really like who's skillset is more well rounded for fantasy.

that had complications in his recovery, and is part of an offense led by

*checks notes*

Case Keenum. Or is it Colt McCoy? Ourlads.com lists someone named Darvin Kiddy as the RWR across from Doctson. Fair to say they are in the market. Watch one of the top WRs go here next week and fall to the late 1st in rookie drafts. 

Is this an offense you want the presumed starting RB for? Guess it could be worse. I would certainly roster Guice with a gun to my head. I wouldn't give the 1.01 for him. At all. Before landing spots are known I'm thinking 1.06. 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, barackdhouse said:

that had complications in his recovery, and is part of an offense led by

*checks notes*

Case Keenum. Or is it Colt McCoy? Ourlads.com lists someone named Darvin Kiddy as the RWR across from Doctson. Fair to say they are in the market. Watch one of the top WRs go here next week and fall to the late 1st in rookie drafts. 

Is this an offense you want the presumed starting RB for? Guess it could be worse. I would certainly roster Guice with a gun to my head. I wouldn't give the 1.01 for him. At all. Before landing spots are known I'm thinking 1.06. 

 

That’s one of my biggest problems with Guice. The qbs and wrs are brutal and it could be like that for a while. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, barackdhouse said:

that had complications in his recovery, and is part of an offense led by

*checks notes*

Case Keenum. Or is it Colt McCoy? Ourlads.com lists someone named Darvin Kiddy as the RWR across from Doctson. Fair to say they are in the market. Watch one of the top WRs go here next week and fall to the late 1st in rookie drafts.  

Is this an offense you want the presumed starting RB for? Guess it could be worse. I would certainly roster Guice with a gun to my head. I wouldn't give the 1.01 for him. At all. Before landing spots are known I'm thinking 1.06. 

 

I'm buying all day at these prices.  Situations change fast in the NFL but talent prevails.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, FreeBaGeL said:

The consensus for Guice is 1.1 or 1.1+, which personally I don't understand at all.

I don't even agree that he would be the consensus top back in this class which most seem to consider obvious.

He seems like a guy that the fantasy community has always been higher on than the NFL community.  Here we have a guy who was a late 2nd round NFL pick that teams were climbing over each other to avoid (trading up to make sure they could draft a different RB and didn't get stuck with Guice).  Meanwhile this year's draft has a guy that looks very likely to be a late 1st round pick or early 2nd at worst, who is much more of a passing threat than Guice (important for fantasy) and to top all that off Guice now is coming off of a torn ACL.

I can certainly understand some people preferring Guice, to each their own and all that, but I don't get how 99 out of 100 seem to prefer a late 2nd NFL round pick that NFL teams seem to hate with questionable receiving skills who is coming off a major injury easily over a likely late 1st round NFL pick that NFL teams reportedly really like who's skillset is more well rounded for fantasy.

I think the argument is that Guice was a better talent than his draft stock would indicate, that he slipped due to character concerns, which are more important  to NFL teams than fantasy owners. And last year was a crazy deep RB class. Jacobs might not even go round 1 this year, with no competition.

I like Jacobs more than Guice as well, but it’s reasonable to prefer Guice. He’s the better athlete and I think his receiving ability is underrated.

Edited by Concept Coop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Concept Coop said:

I think the argument is that Guice was a better talent than his draft stock would indicate, that he slipped due to character concerns, which are more important  to NFL teams than fantasy owners. And last year was a crazy deep RB class. Jacobs might not even go round 1 this year, with no competition.

I like Jacobs more than Guice as well, but it’s reasonable to prefer Guice. He’s the better athlete and I think his receiving ability is underrated.

I pretty much agree with all of this.

And I'll add that last year I was sitting on some early picks and after the draft, after Guice dropped, I went back to watch several of his games trying to find stuff I did NOT like or to try and see if I could see an on the field reason for why he fell. Saw no reason. Decided to watch two game cut-ups of his in slo-mo to see if I was missing something, that exercise got me even higher on him. One of those games was against Florida which I counted at the time and I think they had 8 starters on that D who are in the NFL right now-which is why I picked that game,  and that's just the starters, the guy the Jaguars took at 29 last year-Taven Bryan, was a backup. This game was the year before he came out, his stats were modest, he had a costly fumble late in the game which likely cost them a win but against an incredibly loaded defense that overwhelmed his OL he looked great, actually reminded me a lot of younger Lynch.

All that did was 100% convince me that his personality, not really character concerns so much as personality, just turned a lot of teams off.

Then after that you get nothing but strong OTA/camp reports, Gruden talking about how good he in the passing game, etc, etc.

I'm 100% sold on the talent.

Except for arguably  one of the best OL coach's in the game, who they might struggle to retain after this season, I don't like a single thing around him. QB, pass catchers, presence of two capable veteran RB's.  Then you got the knee.  So other then talent not a lot to like but a young soon to be 22 year old talented RB just beats anything I'm seeing right now though I think post-draft it's possible I like a player or two more then him.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And he did look REALLY good in camp last year and even the long run he got hurt on. Yes it was just a glimpse, but he looked very impressive and the staff basically said they were building the offense around him. That says a lot IMO. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Hankmoody said:

I'm buying all day at these prices.  Situations change fast in the NFL but talent prevails.

Sort of but qb and wr isn’t an easy fix. I’d buy at 1.06 prices too but that’s about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Hankmoody said:

I'm buying all day at these prices.  Situations change fast in the NFL but talent prevails.

What prices are you buying at, the 1.06?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/20/2019 at 7:48 PM, northern exposure said:

What prices are you buying at, the 1.06?

I know you didn’t ask me, but to add my .02:

I put his value right around the 1.03.

I don’t love the top of this class, to put it mildly. There isn’t a prospect I like more than I liked Guice at this point last season. I’d take Jacobs over Guice, because he feels a lot safer. I also think it’s a relatively safe bet that the draft will push another prospect or 2 ahead of Guice. 

But I’m not taking Brown, a 2nd round receiver, or one of the other RBs over Guice - and that’s what you’re likely looking at around 1.04 - 1.06.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Concept Coop said:

I know you didn’t ask me, but to add my .02:

I put his value right around the 1.03.

I don’t love the top of this class, to put it mildly. There isn’t a prospect I like more than I liked Guice at this point last season. I’d take Jacobs over Guice, because he feels a lot safer. I also think it’s a relatively safe bet that the draft will push another prospect or 2 ahead of Guice. 

But I’m not taking Brown, a 2nd round receiver, or one of the other RBs over Guice - and that’s what you’re likely looking at around 1.04 - 1.06.

This valuation seems right to me as well. 

I would, without question, take Jacobs over Guice right now. Other than that, Guice would slot an 1.02 for me if he were in this class. 

1.03, given that Guice is coming off a major injury seems like a reasonable trade inflection point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Ack88 said:

 

I would, without question, take Jacobs over Guice right now. Other than that, Guice would slot an 1.02 for me if he were in this class. 

 

This is exactly where I'm at right now. Put another way if I was in a league that held it's draft before the NFL draft and Guice was in the pool I'd take Jacobs at 1 and Guice at 2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/20/2019 at 3:54 AM, barackdhouse said:

*checks notes*

Case Keenum. Or is it Colt McCoy? Ourlads.com lists someone named Darvin Kiddy as the RWR across from Doctson. Fair to say they are in the market. Watch one of the top WRs go here next week and fall to the late 1st in rookie drafts. 

Is this an offense you want the presumed starting RB for? Guess it could be worse. I would certainly roster Guice with a gun to my head. I wouldn't give the 1.01 for him. At all. Before landing spots are known I'm thinking 1.06.

Saquon Barkley is considered the consensus 1.01 in all of dynasty right now and he has a QB that's only marginally better than these two pieces of ####.  They Giants receivers are only marginally better than the trash that Washington has, and I'd say that Washington has far better TE and OL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do we feel about Cook vs Mixon right now?

I feel like they are in the same tier-ish, but if you owned one, would you trade straight up for the other? Would either side have to add a piece?

Have an offer on the table where the other owner wants to send me mixon and dion lewis for Cook and Pettis. I am not interested in that particular deal, because my team is super bad at wr, and also I have no desire to own lewis.

I do however have Cook in a few too many spots and if the situation arose where i could divest but stay in the same tier of player, I think that would be smart, so I am willing to deal cook if the offer were closer to what I need in that spot.

Just wanted to take you guys' temperature on the whole thing since ive mostly been on the buying end of Cook to this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Pwingles said:

How do we feel about Cook vs Mixon right now?

 

I own both in multiple leagues and Cook on a little more then half of my teams, like both and think both are about to take a step up but  I'd take Mixon. Younger, to me a little better, has been more durable and Bengals seem to be a little more aggressive on addressing OL issues then Vikings have been.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, tangfoot said:

Saquon Barkley is considered the consensus 1.01 in all of dynasty right now and he has a QB that's only marginally better than these two pieces of ####.  They Giants receivers are only marginally better than the trash that Washington has, and I'd say that Washington has far better TE and OL.

Barkley is in a different talent stratosphere than Guice, so I think comparing anyone to what Barkley was able to do in a mediocre setting is nonrelevant.  

Edited by SayWhat?
ETA: And Washington’s TE’s are a hot mess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SayWhat? said:

Barkley is in a different talent stratosphere than Guice, so I think comparing anyone to what Barkley was able to do in a mediocre setting is nonrelevant.  

i was gonna say disimportant, but yeah, I agree

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.