What's new
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.

Dynasty Question: When to Blow Up Your Dynasty Team? (1 Viewer)

Finish this sentence: draft picks are

  • Overrated by most

    Votes: 23 50.0%

  • Underrated by most

    Votes: 23 50.0%
  • Total voters
    46
Hot Sauce Guy

Hot Sauce Guy

Footballguy
Is there a time to just blow it all up & start anew? 

or do you want to perennially compete, doing the occasional trade to stay competitive?

or do you have a regular cycle of destruction? (I know a manager who does this) 

or is it completely dependent on a 2-3 year trend in drafting & whether your aging team could net you a boatload of picks?

When’s the right time to blow up your dynasty team?  Feel free to post up examples of teams you’re ready to dynamite.
🧨

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I voted never, but that's a bit extreme; I do think there could be a scenario where I'd need to sell everything for picks. I will only do it reluctantly. If I'm paying money to be in the league I'm going to try to win.

Middle of the season as the odds become slim I will trade some older players for picks, this is mainly to improve my selection so I don't win many more games. Don't know if that counts as blowing up your team. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Don't know if that counts as blowing up your team. 
Click to expand...
That’s another interesting question. “What % of roster churn” = “blowing up your team”?

maybe 51% or greater, leaving you with all upside youth & draft picks?   :shrug:

 
I think picks in general are over-valued by the majority of dynasty owners.  The percentage of truly impactful rookies is relatively low and I would rather obtain upside guys that have at least shown something in the NFL and have a change in situation.  I also think that older players are necessary to win because you can get them cheap as everyone usually wants the shiny new toy that hasn't done anything.

I have been in the same dynasty league for 15 years and have never "blown it up".  I have won three times and am usually in the top 3rd.  I have the second most wins all time and the 3rd highest winning percentage (#2 has only been in the league 3 years) and inherited a solid team and won in his second year. 

I also tend to look at my team in 2 year increments because so much changes quickly.  Teams that tend to look over 4 or 5 years seem to always be rebuilding for the "next" year and don't play to win this year.  I play to win every year.  After all that is the whole point of playing. 

 
great question, I was a contender for awhile with one squad, featuring AB and AJ Green, past season finished with #1 pick now, still have a solid core, Watson, Mixon, Golladay, Deebo and DK with Kittle, just need to hit on a RB with #1 this year and add another WR and I should be ok. 

I don't think I will get squat for AB, as he is done, AJ Green maybe ok

 
Nothing I love more than rebuilding.  All my leagues are cap-based leagues, where we have 100 years to assign (no actual salaries) and every year each player's contract is reduced so there is a ton of decay built in which helps keep the league competitive.  That makes is a lot more viable to trade mid-top tier guys if they are on expiring/short contracts.  Give me a 1-3 start and I'm out.  I also play in <$100 leagues so it's a lot easier to stomach.  I get way more bang for my buck on these leagues than I get anywhere else other than maybe when I was playing WOW/SWTOR hardcore.

 
Gally said:
I think picks in general are over-valued by the majority of dynasty owners.  The percentage of truly impactful rookies is relatively low and I would rather obtain upside guys that have at least shown something in the NFL and have a change in situation.  I also think that older players are necessary to win because you can get them cheap as everyone usually wants the shiny new toy that hasn't done anything.

I have been in the same dynasty league for 15 years and have never "blown it up".  I have won three times and am usually in the top 3rd.  I have the second most wins all time and the 3rd highest winning percentage (#2 has only been in the league 3 years) and inherited a solid team and won in his second year. 

I also tend to look at my team in 2 year increments because so much changes quickly.  Teams that tend to look over 4 or 5 years seem to always be rebuilding for the "next" year and don't play to win this year.  I play to win every year.  After all that is the whole point of playing. 
Click to expand...
You & I share this philosophy exactly. I’m open to trades & especially if I believe I’m getting good young value in return, but i couldn’t see blowing it all up either.

in fact, going into the 2nd year of my new league, I basically dealt away all of my 2020 & most 2021 picks for proven young players that will help me down the road. 

as soon as the season ended I dealt Sutton, a 2020 5.10 & a 2020 4.xx for Daniel Jones (I’ve got Mahomes & it’s a superflex). While I love Sutton, I’m deep at WR and now I’ve got a solid pair of QBs hopefully for a while.

but as for the draft picks I dealt? I picked up young players who have great upside & proven track records.  The odds of hitting on the next Sutton or Boyd with a 10th overall seem slim. I knew my team would compete this year so I dealt away as many picks as possible to teams who love to tinker or are obsessed with youth. 

gimme the established player instead. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I like to think that I'm continually rebuilding while staying very competitive.  I always try to move an elite player a little before they hit their decline just to maximize value but I'm not "blowing up" my roster for the sake of doing so.  There have been times when injuries, etc. turned a good team bad seemingly overnight but my response is not to nuke the team.

 
I always try to move an elite player a little before they hit their decline just to maximize value
Click to expand...
ah yes...the “Bill Walsh” better a year too early than a year too late, AKA Montana in the wrong color red jersey & Haley with a ring on the Cowboys. 
 

 
Dr. Dan said:
See, if I were finishing top 3, or a favorite to finish top 3, I'd be trading those picks too. Those picks are likely more valued than the players you're getting back, yet its 50/50 if they hit (but you have a good idea about the player you are getting back).
Click to expand...
exactly why I made the moves. I essentially lost in the playoffs because I had no depth at TE when Engram went down, and with an aging & ineffective Brady as my superflex I had to get younger at the position 

Bur if I weren’t as competitive I may have tried to deal Hopkins or Evans for early top picks. 

the challenge I always have with that is the “bird in the hand” vs 2 in the bush. The fear of dealing a Hopkins for what amounts to a handful of magic beans if the draft picks don’t pan out. 

 
If I don't have a realistic shot at competing this year, then I'll focus on building a team that can compete starting in a year or two. That means looking to trade away vets and anyone else whose trade value is bigger than his future value, not caring about patching holes in my lineup, and looking to acquire draft picks, prospects, injured/bounceback guys, etc. That's the closest I get to blowing up a team.

 
ZWK said:
If I don't have a realistic shot at competing this year, then I'll focus on building a team that can compete starting in a year or two. That means looking to trade away vets and anyone else whose trade value is bigger than his future value, not caring about patching holes in my lineup, and looking to acquire draft picks, prospects, injured/bounceback guys, etc. That's the closest I get to blowing up a team.
Click to expand...
To me this is a classic conservative blow-up, as you stated you’re planning to compete in a year or two. That implies you’re willing to sacrifice next year to be better in 2 years. So you’re blowing it up to where you’re possibly noncompetitive for a year, or maybe 2. 

I suspect a lot of managers wouldn’t be comfortable dealing enough assets to be no competitive for a season. The long game can pay off though for sure. 

 
Roster depth is important when deciding just how scorched earth your rebuild can be. In shallow leagues you’re almost forced to go for it every year

 
cloppbeast said:
I voted never, but that's a bit extreme; I do think there could be a scenario where I'd need to sell everything for picks. I will only do it reluctantly. If I'm paying money to be in the league I'm going to try to win.
Click to expand...
Sacrificing one or two seasons to be in position to win multiple years could still be a net positive rather than applying band aids that get you into "one and done" playoff runs every season. Of course I don't necessarily play to win money (of course it's nice but not life changing) so I enjoy the challenge and strategy of a rebuild now and then.

To answer the OP - I didn't vote in the poll yet because I'm not sure there's a right answer or that it's an exact science - it's more of a feel thing for me. I've been fairly successful in turning a team back around rather quickly but obviously you also don't want to spin your wheels and rebuild every two to three years - once it's built you want to conduct some offseason maintenance each year to keep it running.

 
Dr. Octopus said:
Sacrificing one or two seasons to be in position to win multiple years could still be a net positive rather than applying band aids that get you into "one and done" playoff runs every season. Of course I don't necessarily play to win money (of course it's nice but not life changing) so I enjoy the challenge and strategy of a rebuild now and then.
Click to expand...
The amount of luck which goes into winning a fantasy football league is pretty dumb. The guy with Evans or Godwin this year may have earned the #1 seed, but Perriman was the one who won people leagues. You just never know. Having the 6th seed in the play-offs does not mean one-and-done. 

 
cloppbeast said:
The amount of luck which goes into winning a fantasy football league is pretty dumb. The guy with Evans or Godwin this year may have earned the #1 seed, but Perriman was the one who won people leagues. You just never know. Having the 6th seed in the play-offs does not mean one-and-done. 
Click to expand...
ok - so I guess we may as well all not even try?

 
cloppbeast said:
Definitely try, just try a little different. Instead of building the absolute best future roster at the expense of the current one, try to have a decent team every year. Just my opinion. 
Click to expand...
Just having a decent team may mean you get lucky once in a Blue Moon and win the whole thing based on some waiver wire darlings (yes, I have seen that happen) but I've seen plenty of team that fall into the "borderline playoff" team rut that keep that up year in and year out and never win. They either just miss or go one and done each season - rinse and repeat.

I think like everything in life you need to put yourself into the best position "on paper" to win, and let the chips fall where they may. You may run into some bad beats along the way but the odds are much more in your favor to take home multiple championships if you're consistently a top tier team than the just decent teams.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dr. Octopus said:
Sacrificing one or two seasons to be in position to win multiple years could still be a net positive rather than applying band aids that get you into "one and done" playoff runs every season. Of course I don't necessarily play to win money (of course it's nice but not life changing) so I enjoy the challenge and strategy of a rebuild now and then.
Click to expand...


cloppbeast said:
The amount of luck which goes into winning a fantasy football league is pretty dumb. The guy with Evans or Godwin this year may have earned the #1 seed, but Perriman was the one who won people leagues. You just never know. Having the 6th seed in the play-offs does not mean one-and-done. 
Click to expand...
This is why teams that play for the future really do themselves a disservice.  There are so many ways to win each year that if you are always trying to play for next year you end up never getting there.  It doesn't take much to be competitive every year and any team can go on a hot streak to win the title.   In my experience those owners that "build for next year" never win and give up on seasons too soon every year.  They never give things a chance.   By and large I think the best approach is in two year increments.  Don't make moves "for the future" that may never come.  Make moves to win this year and not hurt you next year.  Three years from now you can always recover and be back in the mix.  There are always teams looking to move starting quality "old guys" because they are "building for the future".  Those are the guys that win you leagues. 

 
Dr. Octopus said:
Just having a decent team may mean you get lucky once in a Blue Moon and win the whole thing based on some waiver wire darlings (yes, I have seen that happen) but I've seen plenty of team that fall into the "borderline playoff" team rut that keep that up year in and year out and never win. They either just miss or go one and done each season - rinse and repeat.

I think like everything in life you need to put yourself into the best position "on paper" to win, and let the chips fall where they may. You may run into some bad beats along the way but the odds are much more in your favor to take home multiple championships if you're consistently a top tier team than the just decent teams.
Click to expand...
Well of course you have a better chance of winning if you are consistently a top tier team.  However, teams that are always building for the future never get a top tier team because their year is always 2 years down the road. 

 
Gally said:
Well of course you have a better chance of winning if you are consistently a top tier team.  However, teams that are always building for the future never get a top tier team because their year is always 2 years down the road. 
Click to expand...
No one is advocating for "always building for the future" - that's a straw man argument and is silly. I said as much that rebuilding every 2-3 years is spinning your wheels and that once you do it right it just requires maintenance.

 
Gally said:
Well of course you have a better chance of winning if you are consistently a top tier team.  However, teams that are always building for the future never get a top tier team because their year is always 2 years down the road. 
Click to expand...
This is what I was going to say. 

I'll add, that I said in my above post about how there are times when you should "build for the future". If I'm like 2-5 I'll be trading some of my older players for picks, which hold value a lot better. I'd use them picks to make trades trying to complete next year if I need to. So really "build for the future" becomes get 'em next year.

 
Dr. Octopus said:
No one is advocating for "always building for the future" - that's a straw man argument and is silly. I said as much that rebuilding every 2-3 years is spinning your wheels and that once you do it right it just requires maintenance.
Click to expand...
Maybe a straw-man. But blowing up your team trying to get a top tier roster would count as a false choice. You don't have to forgo fielding a competitive roster to do that. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dr. Octopus said:
No one is advocating for "always building for the future" - that's a straw man argument and is silly. I said as much that rebuilding every 2-3 years is spinning your wheels and that once you do it right it just requires maintenance.
Click to expand...
I agree that it is silly to run a team this way however I see it more often that not.  There are many owners that go into a year and lose a couple games and think they have no shot to win that year so they start trading for picks.  Then they build their team from those picks the next year and then lose a few games out of the gate and do it all over again.  I see far more of these type teams than teams that start out mediocre and trade picks for perceived aging veterans that are still useful to go after it the current year.   The reason why this happens more often is because they are chasing the shiny new toy.  They use dynasty as a crutch to not play for the current year.  It is a terrible way to run your team. 

 
cloppbeast said:
Maybe a straw-man. But blowing up your team trying to get a top tier roster would count as a false choice. You don't have to forgo fielding a competitive roster to do that. 
Click to expand...
It wasn’t a false choice (false dilemma fallacy, to be accurate) at all.

I asked a question. I offered 4 choices. 

if your answer is “never”, that’s just as valid as someone responding “every 2 years”. The answers were equally weighted & not intended to unduly effect responses. 

if someone has a 5th response, they’re welcome to post it. I believe the good Doctor did exactly that.

 
Gally said:
I agree that it is silly to run a team this way however I see it more often that not.  There are many owners that go into a year and lose a couple games and think they have no shot to win that year so they start trading for picks.  Then they build their team from those picks the next year and then lose a few games out of the gate and do it all over again.  I see far more of these type teams than teams that start out mediocre and trade picks for perceived aging veterans that are still useful to go after it the current year.   The reason why this happens more often is because they are chasing the shiny new toy.  They use dynasty as a crutch to not play for the current year.  It is a terrible way to run your team. 
Click to expand...
Happened in my start-up dynasty league this year. Two of the teams started poorly & had a couple injuries, and started trading to accumulate picks, effectively tanking this season.

i thought both should have stood pat, waited for better health & used their high draft picks to improve. Instead they both dealt away some top players to acquire multiple 1st & 2nd rounders. 

i was told going in that one manager in particular loved draft picks, so i threw him a couple for a couple of young players I like (Ollison, ATL & KeeSean Johnson, AZ). I think I paid a 2020 3rd & a 2021 4th for them. If Ollison ends up starting in ATL or even in a time-share, I have a hard time seeing that 3.10 being as valuable. Or maybe I threw away a 3.10 - it was a low impact risk to take, and I’d rather have the player.

it'll he interesting to see how those two teams fare over the next year or 2. On paper they don’t look nearly as competitive as they could have been had they held onto their players. And they have to nail their draft picks, which is pretty hard to do from what I’ve seen. Can’t miss prospects miss all the time. 

 
This is a pertinent topic to me since I'm in the midst of a to the studs rebuild (my first) in my superflex league (heading into year 13).  Of my 30 man roster from this time last year, 8 players remain.  The road to get to that decision was a long one.  After titles in 2013 and 2014, I was captain of the near miss

2015: 3rd, 2016: 4th, 2017: 4th, 2018: 3rd.

My team was always competitive, but in all honesty was never good enough to be a probable champion.  Assessing the other "power" teams, I decided that absent extreme good fortune I wasn't likely to compete with the top 2-3 teams in 2019.   I saw that based on where the core of my value was on my roster ) I realized I needed to get out before the bottom fell out.  The worst place to be is in the 4th-7th range.  Never good enough to win a championship but not so bad that you get into the top 3 picks of a rookie draft.  I briefly considered trying to "thread the needle" and only move a couple of core pieces and remain competitive.  Being honest with myself I realized that seemed unlikely.  Looking at the devy landscape I decided that if I was going to stink, 2019 was a good year to be awful with the 2020 rookie class on deck.

Core at the time was: Antonio Brown, Keenan Allen, Travis Kelce, Roethlisberger, Brady, David Johnson.  None of those players were on my roster week 1 2019.  

Core now stands: Watson, Murray, Winston DJ Moore, Godwin, Engram, McLaurin.  I still have a ways to go but with 1.1, 1.5, 2.2, 2.5 and the QB surplus from which to trade I think I'm on the right track.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
As an addendum to my above post.  Deciding to detonate in 2019 was also calculated on the makeup of my league.  Outside of the two strongest teams (who would be presumptive buyers for my aging or in prime vets) there are three other owners who don't see to have much of a long term plan.  They have a track record of trading for aging guys independent of their own team's strength or weakness.  I deemed there to be more potential buyers in 2019 offseason than sellers.  This can be harder to know if you're in a league of internet strangers as opposed to high school buddies like I am.  That said, owners build up a track record and if you're the only seller of prime assets on the block it can benefit you.  I didn't win every trade, but having multiple buyers for Allen, Kelce, David Johnson and company helped get better offers and pieces I consider part of a long term core.

 
I led a dynasty league in points and VP's in all three years of it's existence.  Just before the season starts I lost Antonio Brown, I was concerned how things were looking for AJ Green, and I was really starting to doubt Dante Pettis as a potential WR 4, and my depth at RB was Lamar Miller, Hyde, and Duke Johnson...who all three ended up on the Texans together and it blew up what little RB depth I had.  Week 1 I was starting Hines, Trey Quinn, and Boykin.  I was doomed.

1QB 12 team PPR - I sold Mahomes, Rodgers, Hyde, Ito Smith, Juju, AJG, Pettis, Kelce, and Hollister.

I now have - 1.01, 1.02, 1.03, 1.06, 1.11, 2.01, 2.02, 2.06, 2.11, 2.12. 

Juju was the only young talent that was a big loss, but he got me the 1.01 and 2.01.  Mahomes of course is a stud, but this was start 1 QB and I got the Stafford and the 1.03 for him.  This was an extreme case.  I've never been in a spot where I had to flip over and have a whole new roster going into the next year.

 
BINGBING said:
I led a dynasty league in points and VP's in all three years of it's existence.  Just before the season starts I lost Antonio Brown, I was concerned how things were looking for AJ Green, and I was really starting to doubt Dante Pettis as a potential WR 4, and my depth at RB was Lamar Miller, Hyde, and Duke Johnson...who all three ended up on the Texans together and it blew up what little RB depth I had.  Week 1 I was starting Hines, Trey Quinn, and Boykin.  I was doomed.

1QB 12 team PPR - I sold Mahomes, Rodgers, Hyde, Ito Smith, Juju, AJG, Pettis, Kelce, and Hollister.

I now have - 1.01, 1.02, 1.03, 1.06, 1.11, 2.01, 2.02, 2.06, 2.11, 2.12. 

Juju was the only young talent that was a big loss, but he got me the 1.01 and 2.01.  Mahomes of course is a stud, but this was start 1 QB and I got the Stafford and the 1.03 for him.  This was an extreme case.  I've never been in a spot where I had to flip over and have a whole new roster going into the next year.
Click to expand...
But a fine example of “when it’s time” I’d say. 

i don’t see it as that extreme at all. Year to year in redraft, those losses would sting & FF managers would simply devalue or avoid/DND those players. 

in dynasty you don’t have that luxury. Sometimes the hits keep coming - in your case to the extreme, and unfortunately a lot of value went with it. 

so yeah - that’s about when I’d blow up a roster too.  Dealing a young Star like Juju is tough to do, but you got a ton in return for him, and by the time your team is competitive again he’ll be a little longer in the tooth, so he may have aged out by then (or not developed into the true WR1 people expect).

good example. 

 
Some of this depends on your league structure.  The dynasty league I'm in has max four-year contracts, so there's not a huge difference between most established players and most younger players regarding their future viability.  On the flip side, we also have to start a rookie, so picks are more valuable and there tends to be a fair amount of turnover year-to-year (and worst-to-first types of rebounds aren't uncommon).

I've had a very competitive franchise, only missing the playoffs once in 10 seasons.  On the other hand, I haven't had many dominant teams, only winning one title and having one season with 10+ wins in the regular season (I finished 3rd that year but got pretty unlucky).  I value competing year-to-year and am always looking forward to see how I can make minor improvements or leverage my depth to add another asset like a future draft pick.  Other teams make a lot more short-term moves, sometimes working out and sometimes not, and those teams generally aren't very good in a year or two.

To answer the question, if a team has made some short-term moves and finds itself in the offseason without many viable assets, my advice would be to trade away everything of value and amass as many assets as possible.  But have a plan, so that you have an endpoint in mind where you're looking to compete, since always looking to the future at the expense of the present doesn't seem like much fun in fantasy football.

 
To answer the question, if a team has made some short-term moves and finds itself in the offseason without many viable assets, my advice would be to trade away everything of value and amass as many assets as possible.  But have a plan, so that you have an endpoint in mind where you're looking to compete, since always looking to the future at the expense of the present doesn't seem like much fun in fantasy football.
Click to expand...
I agree - I think some people are way too obsessed with youth since they’re playing in a dynasty format. 

In my start-up superflex this year,  on draft day we had a $5 budget. I was able to land AP ($3), Larry Fitz ($3), Brady ($26) - those players all contributed to my positive season (3rd place, paid for next season) while not breaking the bank. I realize none of those guys has a long shelf-life, but those were just bargain basement prices for assets that absolutely contributed. 

A number of team managers commented that they’d rather spend on youth. Ok, good luck with that 7th WR who may get a starting job in 2 years if someone else gets hurt. 

and I think that plays into those plans. If the entire plan is to acquire youth & upside I have no doubt that’s achievable. Whether that translates to wins or championships seems to be highly  questionable. 

 
Hot Sauce Guy said:
ZWK said:
If I don't have a realistic shot at competing this year, then I'll focus on building a team that can compete starting in a year or two. That means looking to trade away vets and anyone else whose trade value is bigger than his future value, not caring about patching holes in my lineup, and looking to acquire draft picks, prospects, injured/bounceback guys, etc. That's the closest I get to blowing up a team.
Click to expand...
To me this is a classic conservative blow-up, as you stated you’re planning to compete in a year or two. That implies you’re willing to sacrifice next year to be better in 2 years. So you’re blowing it up to where you’re possibly noncompetitive for a year, or maybe 2. 

I suspect a lot of managers wouldn’t be comfortable dealing enough assets to be no competitive for a season. The long game can pay off though for sure. 
Click to expand...
It's different than any of the poll options, though.

When should you blow up your dynasty team?
When I don't have a realistic shot at competing this year.

How do you define “blowing up your team”?
Trade away vets, build a roster for 1-2 years from now rather than for this season

 
ZWK said:
It's different than any of the poll options, though.

When should you blow up your dynasty team?
When I don't have a realistic shot at competing this year.

How do you define “blowing up your team”?
Trade away vets, build a roster for 1-2 years from now rather than for this season
Click to expand...
I took 4 shots. I can’t be expected to suggest every single possible reason to blow up a team. 

if people are suggesting other reasons, great - that’s what this topic is about. The poll is only as important as the level of enjoyment people take from seeing poll results.   :shrug:

 
BINGBING said:
I led a dynasty league in points and VP's in all three years of it's existence.  Just before the season starts I lost Antonio Brown, I was concerned how things were looking for AJ Green, and I was really starting to doubt Dante Pettis as a potential WR 4, and my depth at RB was Lamar Miller, Hyde, and Duke Johnson...who all three ended up on the Texans together and it blew up what little RB depth I had.  Week 1 I was starting Hines, Trey Quinn, and Boykin.  I was doomed.

1QB 12 team PPR - I sold Mahomes, Rodgers, Hyde, Ito Smith, Juju, AJG, Pettis, Kelce, and Hollister.

I now have - 1.01, 1.02, 1.03, 1.06, 1.11, 2.01, 2.02, 2.06, 2.11, 2.12. 

Juju was the only young talent that was a big loss, but he got me the 1.01 and 2.01.  Mahomes of course is a stud, but this was start 1 QB and I got the Stafford and the 1.03 for him.  This was an extreme case.  I've never been in a spot where I had to flip over and have a whole new roster going into the next year.
Click to expand...
But why did you need a dozen draft picks in the first two rounds?  Don't you keep a Mahomes and get some value for Rodgers; keep a Juju and move an AJG; perhaps move Kelce only  if the return is great?

 
DropKick said:
But why did you need a dozen draft picks in the first two rounds?  Don't you keep a Mahomes and get some value for Rodgers; keep a Juju and move an AJG; perhaps move Kelce only  if the return is great?
Click to expand...
Maybe he had his eye on that 1.01 & a player in mind to take there?

i have Mahomes in a keep-forever, no salary cap league & it would take a king’s ransom to get him from me (especially since it’s Superflex) but I would listen to offers.

i let it be known at the end of the year: Everyone on my team is available for the right price. Immediately received an offer for Sutton. I didn’t want to deal him, but when I was able to get Daniel Jones back, the deal was done - the rest of the time was back & forth to fill out the other pieces. 

 
DropKick said:
But why did you need a dozen draft picks in the first two rounds?  Don't you keep a Mahomes and get some value for Rodgers; keep a Juju and move an AJG; perhaps move Kelce only  if the return is great?
Click to expand...
The 1.01 and 2.01 is worth more than Juju IMO, plus I assured myself a higher draft pick by getting him off my roster if he exploded like he is capable of.  Stafford and 1.03 is worth more than Mahomes in single QB especially when I also have Brees/Bridgewater, and Tannehill to start or trade in the future.  I strategically traded directly with the future owners of the 1.01 and 1.03 picks to sell them assets that were valuable, but wouldn't get them out of the cellar by very much, if at all.  The guy buying Mahomes had no business trading Stafford and 1.03 for him when his roster was trash.  

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Hot Sauce Guy
The Dynasty Manager’s Rookie Draft Hall of Yikes
2
Replies
93
Views
2K
PantherThunder
P
R
[Dynasty] 1QB League to Superflex Transition Thoughts
Replies
16
Views
2K
HW_53
HW_53
Hot Sauce Guy
  • Locked
Will that dog hunt? (Open for redraft now, too!)
4 5 6
Replies
252
Views
6K
Hot Sauce Guy
Hot Sauce Guy

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top