“Untouchable” players (2 Viewers)

[Don Quixote]

I don’t consider any player untouchable, but I have told other owners that or something similar. Mostly when the other owner really wants a player, but makes some weak offers, I tell them their offer falls pretty short, and tries to put pressure (or place some burden) on me to counter. Like, I don’t know, dude, don’t give me a homework assignment — you are the one who wants him. It’s more of a go away and quit bothering me.

 

[JohnnyU]

I don’t consider any player untouchable, but I have told other owners that or something similar. Mostly when the other owner really wants a player, but makes some weak offers, I tell them their offer falls pretty short, and tries to put pressure (or place some burden) on me to counter. Like, I don’t know, dude, don’t give me a homework assignment — you are the one who wants him. It’s more of a go away and quit bothering me.

Yeah, ole let me make an offer for the sake of getting a counter offer. Oldest, yet most tiring tool option in the fantasy toolbox.

 

[ghostguy123]

Speaking of untouchables, this deal just happened in a startup, single QB, FFPC

Pick 1.02

For

2.06, 5.07, future 1st

I assume Chase goes 1.01

I’ll take Bijan

Just curious, would you trade Bijan for 4 future 1sts?

I think so

Just asking, cause 2.06 and 5.07 would fairly easily be able to get you 3 future 1sts, plus probably a bit more

Interesting point. Maybe I would need to know more about the firsts. But this trade is roughly MH Jr and RJ Harvey and a random 1st for Bijan.

Every startup goes a bit different, but value-wise pretty close to that though generally the top 10 rookies this year are gone before 5.07.
However, I've never seen a startup where 5.07 can't fetch a future 1st straight up, and 2.06 can probably get you back something like an early 4th round startup pick plus another future 1st.
So, basically you could grab something like the 5th rookie off the board plus three future 1sts.

I would agree a trade like that looks less desirable if you were to stand pat and draft, I sure wouldnt intend to do that if moved pick 2 for that package

Future 1sts get more valuable every year. Mid 6th used to be the going rate for a future 1st and it was easy to swap. That's pretty hard to pull off now. Now it's a 5th and you've gotta throw in a little extra on top of the 5th in most drafts.

By FFPC ADP btw this is

Nabers
for
Ladd, McLaurin, 2026 1st

Which honestly in that deal I'd take Nabers pretty easily. Though I do think you can do better than McLaurin at 5.07 and I'm surprised his ADP is there. But the highest rookie available at that spot via ADP is Golden who I'm not stoked about either, and would still prefer the Nabers side if you plugged Golden in for Terry.

Just goes back to my point that trading up in startups usually nets the better players in the end. Even in this case where it seems like a MASSIVE overpay when looking at the picks, it's actually pretty equal if not a little light once you plug the players in.

ETA: Just saw your post about flipping those picks for more 1sts and I agree, doing it that way makes it better.

Funny enough, some other guy just traded 2.07 and a future 1st to move up to 1.05.

Bijan is still available at 5

 

[ffmail4me]

call me crazy, but in a SF, Jayden Daniels is nearly untouchable. I know I wouldn't move him without an ABSURD offer in the leagues I have him. And I've tried acquiring him multiple times in other leagues (giving say Lamar and a #1 or at worst #2 WR or RB with Lamar) and all were quick rejects with no counter. No one is moving him...in my leagues at least.

 

[IHEARTFF]

Speaking of untouchables, this deal just happened in a startup, single QB, FFPC

Pick 1.02

For

2.06, 5.07, future 1st

I assume Chase goes 1.01

I’ll take Bijan

Just curious, would you trade Bijan for 4 future 1sts?

I think so

Just asking, cause 2.06 and 5.07 would fairly easily be able to get you 3 future 1sts, plus probably a bit more

Interesting point. Maybe I would need to know more about the firsts. But this trade is roughly MH Jr and RJ Harvey and a random 1st for Bijan.

Every startup goes a bit different, but value-wise pretty close to that though generally the top 10 rookies this year are gone before 5.07.
However, I've never seen a startup where 5.07 can't fetch a future 1st straight up, and 2.06 can probably get you back something like an early 4th round startup pick plus another future 1st.
So, basically you could grab something like the 5th rookie off the board plus three future 1sts.

I would agree a trade like that looks less desirable if you were to stand pat and draft, I sure wouldnt intend to do that if moved pick 2 for that package

Future 1sts get more valuable every year. Mid 6th used to be the going rate for a future 1st and it was easy to swap. That's pretty hard to pull off now. Now it's a 5th and you've gotta throw in a little extra on top of the 5th in most drafts.

By FFPC ADP btw this is

Nabers
for
Ladd, McLaurin, 2026 1st

Which honestly in that deal I'd take Nabers pretty easily. Though I do think you can do better than McLaurin at 5.07 and I'm surprised his ADP is there. But the highest rookie available at that spot via ADP is Golden who I'm not stoked about either, and would still prefer the Nabers side if you plugged Golden in for Terry.

Just goes back to my point that trading up in startups usually nets the better players in the end. Even in this case where it seems like a MASSIVE overpay when looking at the picks, it's actually pretty equal if not a little light once you plug the players in.

ETA: Just saw your post about flipping those picks for more 1sts and I agree, doing it that way makes it better.

Funny enough, some other guy just traded 2.07 and a future 1st to move up to 1.05.

Bijan is still available at 5

just curious who is going 2-4? Nabers, Bowers, JJ?

 

[ghostguy123]

Speaking of untouchables, this deal just happened in a startup, single QB, FFPC

Pick 1.02

For

2.06, 5.07, future 1st

I assume Chase goes 1.01

I’ll take Bijan

Just curious, would you trade Bijan for 4 future 1sts?

I think so

Just asking, cause 2.06 and 5.07 would fairly easily be able to get you 3 future 1sts, plus probably a bit more

Interesting point. Maybe I would need to know more about the firsts. But this trade is roughly MH Jr and RJ Harvey and a random 1st for Bijan.

Every startup goes a bit different, but value-wise pretty close to that though generally the top 10 rookies this year are gone before 5.07.
However, I've never seen a startup where 5.07 can't fetch a future 1st straight up, and 2.06 can probably get you back something like an early 4th round startup pick plus another future 1st.
So, basically you could grab something like the 5th rookie off the board plus three future 1sts.

I would agree a trade like that looks less desirable if you were to stand pat and draft, I sure wouldnt intend to do that if moved pick 2 for that package

Future 1sts get more valuable every year. Mid 6th used to be the going rate for a future 1st and it was easy to swap. That's pretty hard to pull off now. Now it's a 5th and you've gotta throw in a little extra on top of the 5th in most drafts.

By FFPC ADP btw this is

Nabers
for
Ladd, McLaurin, 2026 1st

Which honestly in that deal I'd take Nabers pretty easily. Though I do think you can do better than McLaurin at 5.07 and I'm surprised his ADP is there. But the highest rookie available at that spot via ADP is Golden who I'm not stoked about either, and would still prefer the Nabers side if you plugged Golden in for Terry.

Just goes back to my point that trading up in startups usually nets the better players in the end. Even in this case where it seems like a MASSIVE overpay when looking at the picks, it's actually pretty equal if not a little light once you plug the players in.

ETA: Just saw your post about flipping those picks for more 1sts and I agree, doing it that way makes it better.

Funny enough, some other guy just traded 2.07 and a future 1st to move up to 1.05.

Bijan is still available at 5

just curious who is going 2-4? Nabers, Bowers, JJ?

Chase, Bowers, Jeanty, Jefferson.

Nabers at 5(this guy has both 5 and 6)


Update.,Lamb at 6, Bijan at 7

 

[mjb03003]

I don’t consider any player untouchable, but I have told other owners that or something similar. Mostly when the other owner really wants a player, but makes some weak offers, I tell them their offer falls pretty short, and tries to put pressure (or place some burden) on me to counter. Like, I don’t know, dude, don’t give me a homework assignment — you are the one who wants him. It’s more of a go away and quit bothering me.

Yeah, ole let me make an offer for the sake of getting a counter offer. Oldest, yet most tiring tool option in the fantasy toolbox.

100% agree with you both. If the offer isn't at least in the ballpark, I don't feel any pressure to counter. Sometimes I leave a note saying something like "anyone is available at the right price but you're nowhere close."

I also get pretty tired of the "what do you want for Gibbs?" or "price check on Lamb?" inquiries. To me that's just extremely lazy. Do you actually need me to tell you that they are elite, tier 1, 1st round startup picks and will therefore cost a boatload? Why is it up to me to review your roster and come up with a path to getting one of my best players onto your roster? That will never make sense to me and it's a tactic I refuse to use personally.

that said I have no issue with a "price check" inquiry on some flex option or bench depth... that feels completely different to me.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Speaking of untouchables, this deal just happened in a startup, single QB, FFPC

Pick 1.02

For

2.06, 5.07, future 1st

I assume Chase goes 1.01

I’ll take Bijan

Just curious, would you trade Bijan for 4 future 1sts?

I think so

Just asking, cause 2.06 and 5.07 would fairly easily be able to get you 3 future 1sts, plus probably a bit more

Interesting point. Maybe I would need to know more about the firsts. But this trade is roughly MH Jr and RJ Harvey and a random 1st for Bijan.

Every startup goes a bit different, but value-wise pretty close to that though generally the top 10 rookies this year are gone before 5.07.
However, I've never seen a startup where 5.07 can't fetch a future 1st straight up, and 2.06 can probably get you back something like an early 4th round startup pick plus another future 1st.
So, basically you could grab something like the 5th rookie off the board plus three future 1sts.

I would agree a trade like that looks less desirable if you were to stand pat and draft, I sure wouldnt intend to do that if moved pick 2 for that package

Future 1sts get more valuable every year. Mid 6th used to be the going rate for a future 1st and it was easy to swap. That's pretty hard to pull off now. Now it's a 5th and you've gotta throw in a little extra on top of the 5th in most drafts.

By FFPC ADP btw this is

Nabers
for
Ladd, McLaurin, 2026 1st

Which honestly in that deal I'd take Nabers pretty easily. Though I do think you can do better than McLaurin at 5.07 and I'm surprised his ADP is there. But the highest rookie available at that spot via ADP is Golden who I'm not stoked about either, and would still prefer the Nabers side if you plugged Golden in for Terry.

Just goes back to my point that trading up in startups usually nets the better players in the end. Even in this case where it seems like a MASSIVE overpay when looking at the picks, it's actually pretty equal if not a little light once you plug the players in.

ETA: Just saw your post about flipping those picks for more 1sts and I agree, doing it that way makes it better.

Funny enough, some other guy just traded 2.07 and a future 1st to move up to 1.05.

Bijan is still available at 5

That’s wild. But I get it - some folks don’t want to invest that heavily in RB.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Nabers at 5(this guy has both 5 and 6)


Update.,Lamb at 6, Bijan at 7

Nabers/Lamb is a nice start to a draft.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Nabers at 5(this guy has both 5 and 6)


Update.,Lamb at 6, Bijan at 7

Nabers/Lamb is a nice start to a draft.

I would've prefered Nabers/Bijan, but either one is amazing for only having to give up your 2026 1st.

 

[-OZ-]

Mid 6th used to be the going rate for a future 1st and it was easy to swap. That's pretty hard to pull off now.

figure that’s roughly Judkins, k Johnson or golden range if rookies are included. So future first for essentially a late first round pick. Could see either side, depending on your plan and confidence.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Nabers at 5(this guy has both 5 and 6)


Update.,Lamb at 6, Bijan at 7

Nabers/Lamb is a nice start to a draft.

I would've prefered Nabers/Bijan, but either one is amazing for only having to give up your 2026 1st.

Yeah, that comes down to personal preference - kinda coin flippy.

I like Bijan, but I don’t love having that much value tied up at RB in dynasty. But sure, that would also be a great start.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Mid 6th used to be the going rate for a future 1st and it was easy to swap. That's pretty hard to pull off now.

figure that’s roughly Judkins, k Johnson or golden range if rookies are included. So future first for essentially a late first round pick. Could see either side, depending on your plan and confidence.

In 1qb all of those guys are gone via FFPC ADP. Next rookies available mid 6th are Skattebo and Tuten.

SF is a little better because you get into the Kaleb/Egbuka range in the mid 6th, but of course the 2026 1st is more valuable in that format too.

Regardless, the point was more how rookie picks increase in value by consensus every year. A few years ago you could offer your 6th rounder for a future 1st to anyone in the league and they would take it. Now you've usually gotta giver your 5th + a little sweetener and only 1 or 2 guys willing to do it (better hope someone didn't beat them to it). I bet by next year there are some people offering their 4th for a future 1st and a few years after that, a 4th is the consensus.

It's been a pretty linear progression towards future picks having more value every year for a long time now. 15 years ago the consensus thought was that taking a rookie Adrian Peterson (best RB prospect of most of our FF lives) in the 3rd round of a startup drafts was insane because why use a 3rd round pick on a guy that had never stepped onto an NFL field when you could have a reliable proven veteran like 27 year old Rudi Johnson at that pick instead. How far we've come.

ETA: And remember, a decade or so ago there was a post on this very forum arguing that no player is worth four 1st round picks, and that was a controversial opinion at the time. That is to say that at the time buying a top player for 4 1sts was considered incredibly cheap, and people asserting against that were a minority.

 

[-OZ-]

Mid 6th used to be the going rate for a future 1st and it was easy to swap. That's pretty hard to pull off now.

figure that’s roughly Judkins, k Johnson or golden range if rookies are included. So future first for essentially a late first round pick. Could see either side, depending on your plan and confidence.

In 1qb all of those guys are gone via FFPC ADP. Next rookies available mid 6th are Skattebo and Tuten.

SF is a little better because you get into the Kaleb/Egbuka range in the mid 6th, but of course the 2026 1st is more valuable in that format too.

Regardless, the point was more how rookie picks increase in value by consensus every year. A few years ago you could offer your 6th rounder for a future 1st to anyone in the league and they would take it. Now you've usually gotta giver your 5th + a little sweetener and only 1 or 2 guys willing to do it (better hope someone didn't beat them to it). I bet by next year there are some people offering their 4th for a future 1st and a few years after that, a 4th is the consensus.

It's been a pretty linear progression towards future picks having more value every year for a long time now. 15 years ago the consensus thought was that taking a rookie Adrian Peterson (best RB prospect of most of our FF lives) in the 3rd round of a startup drafts was insane because why use a 3rd round pick on a guy that had never stepped onto an NFL field when you could have a reliable proven veteran like 27 year old Rudi Johnson at that pick instead. How far we've come.

ETA: And remember, a decade or so ago there was a post on this very forum arguing that no player is worth four 1st round picks, and that was a controversial opinion at the time. That is to say that at the time buying a top player for 4 1sts was considered incredibly cheap, and people asserting against that were a minority.

Different leagues of course, I just looked at rookies ranked in the 60s overall.

I’ve always been in favor of certain players being worth multiple firsts. Having traded 4 firsts for Tomlinson about 23 years ago which worked out very well. I’d still do it for a handful today.

 

[ghostguy123]

Nabers at 5(this guy has both 5 and 6)


Update.,Lamb at 6, Bijan at 7

Nabers/Lamb is a nice start to a draft.

I would've prefered Nabers/Bijan, but either one is amazing for only having to give up your 2026 1st.

Yeah, that comes down to personal preference - kinda coin flippy.

I like Bijan, but I don’t love having that much value tied up at RB in dynasty. But sure, that would also be a great start.

I can't see trading my future 1st in a startup to grab the 11th or 12th rookie. It would be to grab a good scoring player for NOW

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

I can't see trading my future 1st in a startup to grab the 11th or 12th rookie. It would be to grab a good scoring player for NOW

completely agree.

In the only dynasty startup I've done in 2023, not only did I get a start-up 2.02 for my 2024 1st & 2nd round rookies, I then got a 2.04 start-up for my 2025 1st & 2nd round rookies.

With those picks I was able to select Ceedee Lamb & AJB. My picks those two years were 13th/16 and 15th/16. I would make those deals again 100/100 times.

 

[ghostguy123]

I can't see trading my future 1st in a startup to grab the 11th or 12th rookie. It would be to grab a good scoring player for NOW

completely agree.

In the only dynasty startup I've done in 2023, not only did I get a start-up 2.02 for my 2024 1st & 2nd round rookies, I then got a 2.04 start-up for my 2025 1st & 2nd round rookies.

With those picks I was able to select Ceedee Lamb & AJB. My picks those two years were 13th/16 and 15th/16. I would make those deals again 100/100 times.

Free league?

 

[-OZ-]

I can't see trading my future 1st in a startup to grab the 11th or 12th rookie. It would be to grab a good scoring player for NOW

Nor would I, probably - and definitely not this year. But overall ADP gives an idea regarding value.

Although in a draft like last year where we like the players going as the 11th or 12th rookie, I wouldn’t be opposed. For example, in SF Brian Thomas was the 2.01 in my league. I liked him then enough to trade a decent starting QB straight up for him, and would have taken him in the 6th rather easily. (Of course that’s easy to say now, but I did take him in redrafts too)

 

[Ilov80s]

I kinda get it with a guy like Chase. Kinda. I had someone tell me McConkey was untouchable today. That I have a hard time understanding.

McConkey is a 2nd year player.

Sure, there’s a price for him, but I totally understand managers who hit on a draft pick not wanting to move them.

I get being high on him and hesitant to move him because you see him about to become the CeeDee Lamb or something but it's pretty wild to call a 2nd year WR who really overperformed and has a lengthy injury history untouchable. If someone is willing to overpay, I think you got ot move Ladd. Fantasy is a wild unpredictable game and values can change fast even with young players. Look at Juju, Breece Hall, ETN, Michael Thomas, Kyle Pitts after his 1000 yad rookie year, etc.

 

[darksideofoz]

no one is untouchable.

this thread reminds me about a guy that is in several of my leagues. I got him into fantasy about a decade ago. at least once a year in one of the leagues, and it usually happens multiple times a year, he will reach out to me about a great player on my team. usually someone that I hit a home run on from a lower round. I'll tell him I'm not looking to move that player. He'll ask me to give him an idea about what would it take to get him. I tell him what it would take, either from his roster or so he can try pulling pieces from other teams. he'll say, that's an unreasonable offer. and then I remind him I'm not making any offers and I don't want to trade the player, I am just humoring him because he wouldn't believe me that I wasn't interested in moving the player.