Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
2013 Off Season Dynasty Trade Thread (for completed trades) (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter squistion
- Start date
JPeso
Footballguy
King of the Jungle
Footballguy
Good point on the 16 team portion. Still think the 1st should have been left off the Calvin side to make this a little more easier to swallow. Maybe I am just lower on the rookies than most. I do see the point of filling holes in a larger league.....but agree with EBF that if I am trading Calvin (or any elite player) I would like more substance in return.
Concept Coop
Footballguy
Even in this format? Green isn't the top 3 player that he is in a start 3 PPR league. Chris Johnson - any starting RB, really - is worth a lot more in this format. Torrey Smith is worth more, compared to PPR leagues.
I honestly don't think it's that bad, in this format. Especially if the 1st round pick end ups in the top half.
Concept Coop
Footballguy
I agree, 95% of Spiller owners (or more) probably would not make a trade like this, and I can understand why some may find the trade to be “horrid”. Most owners have a grip so tight on their elite player (if they are fortunate enough to have one) that it doesn’t occur to them that they may need to give one up to get more down the road.
Here is my general thought process in making this and other similar trades – my quick and dirty approach to consistently building (or at least attempting to build) dominant teams:
Step 1 – Accumulate: The name of the game is rostering the most elite players. Duh.
Step 2 - Consolidate: Trade multiple good to very good, but hopefully not potentially elite, dynasty assets for elite players. EVERYONE gets this concept and “knows” that the team getting the best player wins the deal. You hear it all the time. Barring unusual circumstances, the team getting the elite player on this thread will garner most (if not all) of the support. Players can live off Step 2 alone (I have with some of my teams) and end up with good (but usually not great) teams. However, no one is going to consistently win a lot of money in Dynasty with “good” teams. Things tend to even out too much over time in Dynasty for that to occur. To consistently win in Dynasty (good money, that is) you will need AT LEAST 4 or 5 of the top 12 overall players, 7 or 8 of the top 12-15 ideally. I have learned and continue to learn (the hard way) that it is almost pointless to chance it with less over the long haul. To get to where you need to be, you probably will have to go to Step 3.
Step 3 – Let Go to Grow: When necessary (and it is almost ALWAYS necessary), trade elite players for multiple potentially elite players so that at the end of the day, you end up with more elite players (or overwhelming trade value to acquire more elite players). Take one step back to take two steps forward. Because of the fear of trading the best player in the deal (especially the truly elite players like Spiller) and the difficulty in identifying the potentially elite players (and having confidence in that evaluation), very few are able to do this with success. Unfortunately, this is what often separates the good owners from the great. And again, “good” does not win the money long term.
Regarding Step 3, most players know what they are doing and will not simply hand you combinations of Percy Harvin and Randall Cobb for CJ Spiller. This game is rarely that easy and holding out for those dream deals often leaves you with no deal at all (and a team that stagnates at the “good” level). Often times, in order to strike gold in the face of good competition, you’ve got to find what is ugly to most. My best trades so far this year will probably end up being the deals that made the most people cringe in this thread (e.g., D.Wilson/Spiller trades, Ray Rice for Blackmon/L.Miller type deals, etc.).
As for ADP, in making this trade, does it matter whether a late 3rd plus a mid 4th justifies a trade for Spiller (a mid 1st)? Not in the least. ADP has its uses, but using ADP to justify one’s own trades is dangerously close to the dreaded sheep mentality (fear of drifting from the herd) that keeps good teams from becoming great. Instead, I prefer coming up with the list of desirable players (players with potential to become elite or otherwise experience a dramatic value gain) and use ADP to find an “ugly” deal (sometimes the ugliest are the best) that involves as many of those identified players as possible. Spiller for Miller and Gio is such a deal, and the ugliness of the deal is by design.
Last edited by a moderator:
Instinctive
Footballguy
The first round pick will not be in the top half. Team is starting Spiller/Morris/MJD at RB, Harvin/Green/Colston at wideout and has Rodgers at QB. It may not win the title, but it'll make the playoffs.
Correct. Especially with 2 R/W/T flex spots - although only 1 can be a RB and only 1 can be a TE. You can do 2 flex WR. Ideally, most teams would start 3 RB, 3 WR, and 1 TE if they could.
thriftyrocker
Footballguy
Really got scared off of drafting Hunter. If you took Quick or Hill last year you pretty much know what his value trajectory is going to be, right?
Allen's upside is dependent on VBrown. Waldman said something about don't be surprised if he Bolden's out, but that's a pretty big gamble. He could look good, and I drafted him enough that I hope he does, but a big gamble he's valued anywhere in the same galaxy as MC next year IMO.
What does Crabtree have to do? Play. Pretty much that's it. No, not even that. Practice. Did you try to buy Britt 3 months ago vs. this month. Completely different conversation just based on one person saying he looks good in practice.
Really I didn't think I was that high post-injury on Crabtree but given recent startups/mocks/trades I guess I am.
Concept Coop
Footballguy
You've mentioned this before - though not as in depth. Hhow long have you been building teams this way?
msudaisy26
Footballguy
I look at it like this would you trade Calvin a 2014 first and 2 2014 seconds for 3 2013 firsts and a 2013 second, I assume Allen is a late first early second guy. The answer is not in a million years.
msudaisy26
Footballguy
I think this is a combo of Wilson love and fear of Gronk's back surgery
Concept Coop
Footballguy
[SIZE=medium]I can agree with the Quick comparison, to a degree, but not Hill. I was never very high on Hill and – easy to say in hindsight, I know - I think Hunter is a much better prospect. I don’t think Hunter is as raw as Quick, though a lot of that is big school bias, and the buzz that Hunter had pre-injury. But those who drafted Quick shouldn’t be ready to write him off or value him less than they did a year ago, in my opinion. Don’t get me wrong – Hunter will likely have to be more than Quick for this trade to work out, especially this time next year. We’ll see – I’m not convinced that you’re wrong. [/SIZE]
Coeur de Lion
Footballguy
The reason most people keep a death grip on proven young elite players is that those guys are really rare. It takes a blend of talent, situation, and luck in order for a guy to put up ridiculous numbers.
That said, if I took over a brutal team with Spiller as my only asset, I'd consider moving him for multiple younger elite prospects. But Gio is a decent prospect in a mediocre situation, and Miller is worse from both talent and team standpoints. The odds against either one being even a longterm RB2 are worse than 50/50. The odds against either one becoming a difference making RB1 are astronomical.
That said, if I took over a brutal team with Spiller as my only asset, I'd consider moving him for multiple younger elite prospects. But Gio is a decent prospect in a mediocre situation, and Miller is worse from both talent and team standpoints. The odds against either one being even a longterm RB2 are worse than 50/50. The odds against either one becoming a difference making RB1 are astronomical.
EBF
Footballguy
I think there is a "good twin" and "evil twin" side to a lot of common dynasty philosophies.
Everyone who's played in a few dynasty leagues will be familiar with the kind of owner who always drinks the Kool-Aid on every incoming rookie class and is so in love with getting the next big thing that he's always recycling his roster before it can mature and actually win him some games.
On the other hand, there is a different type of owner who's so risk-averse and terrified of uncertainty that he'll cling too tightly to his proven assets. He'll pass on the opportunity to trade 28 year old Tomlinson for 21 year old Peterson. He'll pass on the opportunity to trade 28 year old Fitzgerald for 22 year old Julio. He'll end up eating a lot of expiring value because he's too slow to recognize change and act accordingly.
I think the strategy that you're suggesting is a golden mean between those two poles. Someone who doesn't take the bait on every single touted rookie, but also has enough foresight and acumen to recognize a good gamble and take advantage of other owners overvaluing youth/potential or security/proven talent. I think that's what most good owners strive to become.
It's a good target to aim at, but a difficult one to hit. The risk with people who don't make any moves is obvious. They pass up favorable propositions. The risk with teams who try to anticipate every single ebb and flow in player value is that they get too cute and make mistakes. Like trading Fitzgerald for Braylon, Gonzo for Finley, or SJax for Beanie. I don't know too many people who get it right all the time, but it doesn't necessarily matter. If you can get someone to give you Cordarrelle Patterson, Michael Floyd, and a 2nd round pick for Brandon Marshall, you've got a lot of margin for error. If the deal is just Patterson and a 2nd for Marshall, that's when you start to get into the "zero margin for error" territory where you're letting it all ride on your evaluation. I think some of these deals for guys like Wilson and Miller are scraping up against that boundary.
The death grip is understandable, but what I am pointing out is that there is another way (and in order to reach the next level, possibly the only way). This kind of trade for me can be as good for some of my best teams as it is for any rebuilding one.
You can't end up regularly acquiring the necessary 4 or 5 of the top 12 dynasty players (or ideally 7 or 8 of the top 12-15) without loosening that grip.
I wish I could say forever in which case I’d be so much further along today than I am. I’ve been playing a while, with my 1st league being in 2004 (where I did HORRIBLY).
I started to become quite good by (off the top of my head) 2008, with varying approaches (including what I have described), but for many of my teams played conservatively (relative to now), drafting the Calvins and Fitzs and NEVER trading them. Still, I built a very nice portfolio of teams and regularly won more money than most (probably the top 5% - maybe the top, I don’t know for sure). But, per my post, Dynasty has a way of evening things out (through luck or otherwise) when playing multiple leagues. I generally found it ridiculous that you could build a portfolio of good to very good teams like I had, spend the time that I spend and still make so little money (relatively). Something had to change.
Still, over time, I have only gradually moved towards building teams in this way. Over the last 2-3 years though, there has been a significant shift in how I approach my teams. As a result, over the last 2 years, I’ve grossed over $20,000 in Dynasty and it is safe to say that I am the career Dynasty money leader at this point. It is still not enough given the time and effort, but I feel like I am taking the appropriate steps right now (which includes these types of trades) and exhibiting the kind of patience necessary to grow my yearly take home to a new level in the coming years (which is my goal).
ItsOnlytheRiver
Footballguy
You should see where Crabtree is going in the DLF June startup mocks, though I contend it's because he has been removed from the MFL ADP list.
thriftyrocker
Footballguy
ItsOnlytheRiver
Footballguy
Where? I took him in the 9th/10th swing which I thought was a steal, and I saw a Tweet that in another one he went in the 17th.You should see where I took him in the DLF June startup mock.
Concept Coop
Footballguy
[SIZE=10.5pt]I guess my question to you – if I understand your philosophy – if we’re aiming for the ideal, why can’t I have the best team today, and every year over the next decade? I understand the concept of accruing value by delaying the return. Theoretically, you’ll eventually have as much value on your roster as you can fit. But, theoretically, too, I could start with the best team in the league and match your acquisition of value, unit per unit. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=10.5pt]There are plenty of ways to win fantasy championships and build dominant rosters – I do understand that. As EBF pointed out, every philosophy or strategy has pros and cons. I don’t buy into the “collector” model, except when rebuilding, however. I just don’t feel it’s needed. I think an owner can draft a solid roster day 1 and maintain that advantage by making good roster decisions. I don’t think prolonging a championship window is the way to maximize championships. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=10.5pt]Just my thoughts and what has worked for me, but it has worked for me. [/SIZE]
Last edited by a moderator:
Dez
Footballguy
You probably need to be in a league with him or someone who does it like he does it to truly understand the concept of what he is doing. I am in 2 leagues with CKC so I understand what he was doing and trying to do now looking back but at the time I really didn't know fully what was going on but I sure do now...of course it helps when you pick your rookie spots and land future studs instead of having them crap out on you. Also helps when things fall just right like landing Newton and Dem Thomas in the 15th round because one was a rookie and the other one was hurt. Also helps when you get people to trade you what you want I mean if your holding 10 1st round picks and every single person in the league decides not to play ball your not going to build the team you want and have to wait and hope most of your rookies pan out and that may take a few years. It takes two to tango and it sure helps when people fall into your trap.
Concept Coop
Footballguy
I think this is part of my point - is it the process that let to the outcome? Adding value to your roster can be done many different ways. Trading Spiller for Miller and Gio - even assuming it works out - is only one of those ways. I'm in a league with a guy (many here know him) who seems to add the equivalent of the 1.01 to his roster every year, based on trades. If your plan to beat him was to outlast him - it's not going to work, assuming he can keep it up for any good period of time. Everything you gain by being young and having high draft picks, he also gains via trade. In one of my leagues I have drafted Hernandez, Graham, Charles, Newton, etc, despite drafting in the last half (at least) every year over the last 5 or 6. If you spotted me a 2-3 year window hoping to "outlast me", it didn't work.
I am sure Ernol is a great dynasty owner; I don't mean to question that. But I think it has more to do with hitting on his investments, than the collection model.
Last edited by a moderator:
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Ckc does have a few ripoffs in our league, but he has also hit on his picks, which is the key to his team in that league.
And I think ckc is not talking about building a team that can compete every year. He is talking about building a team that will be the favorite every year.
If you have three or four good young rbs. Let's say Wilson, miller, and mccoy. And you also have foster or rice or something. Rice or foster would be the target guy on my roster to try and deal for more rising stars, or try and add more for a guy like AJ green or Julio. In one of my leagues now I have rice, morris, Murray, and miller. I am looking to deal rice. I tried for something like Wilson and cobb. I have to add more, but that is the kind of deal I am looking to do, or deal him for green or Julio.
I sucked it up last year and collected youth and a bunch of 1st rounders. Well, I have no issue sucking on purpose for one year when only 3 of 12 teams make money in year one, and clearly there is no guarantee you will he one of them. Collecting youth and picks, and now already a bunch more 2014 1sts, my margin of error is huge. I can screw up a few thing and will still have a good lineup every week.
If you do this, and hit on some picks along the way, you will end up with a projected decade long dynasty like ckc has in our league rolling out Ryan, Richardson, Calvin, green, Julio, Thomas, and gronk every week, plus more very good players.
Year 1, specifically the start up draft, is really the only time you can get this kind of good value on trades, simce every other team thinks they will win year 1. How else can you deal something marginal for a future 1st and have that 1st end up pick #1??
You also need a fairly active league, but thats a whole different conversation.
And I think ckc is not talking about building a team that can compete every year. He is talking about building a team that will be the favorite every year.
If you have three or four good young rbs. Let's say Wilson, miller, and mccoy. And you also have foster or rice or something. Rice or foster would be the target guy on my roster to try and deal for more rising stars, or try and add more for a guy like AJ green or Julio. In one of my leagues now I have rice, morris, Murray, and miller. I am looking to deal rice. I tried for something like Wilson and cobb. I have to add more, but that is the kind of deal I am looking to do, or deal him for green or Julio.
I sucked it up last year and collected youth and a bunch of 1st rounders. Well, I have no issue sucking on purpose for one year when only 3 of 12 teams make money in year one, and clearly there is no guarantee you will he one of them. Collecting youth and picks, and now already a bunch more 2014 1sts, my margin of error is huge. I can screw up a few thing and will still have a good lineup every week.
If you do this, and hit on some picks along the way, you will end up with a projected decade long dynasty like ckc has in our league rolling out Ryan, Richardson, Calvin, green, Julio, Thomas, and gronk every week, plus more very good players.
Year 1, specifically the start up draft, is really the only time you can get this kind of good value on trades, simce every other team thinks they will win year 1. How else can you deal something marginal for a future 1st and have that 1st end up pick #1??
You also need a fairly active league, but thats a whole different conversation.
Enderdog
Footballguy
Indeed. I like both of the trades you made. A lot. You've quickly become a problem again.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
It is both the model, plus hitting on the picks. The model allows for the possibility of a super team, and also increases your chances of being competitive every year forever with maybe one year of sucking to start it out.In the ffpc, people are starting to come around on it a LITTLE. But to a degree it will still work. What we are talking about though covers like a million different scenarios. It might be easier to discuss the thought process on a specific deal knowing the roster, instead of just discussing value in a vacuum which is what this thread is all about. I am very much in favor of gaining youth. Not doing it in EVERY league right now, but if I ever do any more startups I will try to.
Concept Coop
Footballguy
.
4pt passing/ non-PPR/QRRWWFF (WR=TE)
Newton (Traded Marshall for Newton + 1st)
McCoy (Traded Gore + Stevie)
Peterson (Traded Foster for AP+Decker; got Foster for Bradshaw + Wells)
Forte
Spiller (Traded Murray+Holmes for Spiller + Cruz)
Cruz
Marshall (Don't remember what I got him for the 2nd time)
I guess my point is that I've been able to do both (win right away and build), and have seen others do the same. Again, I understand there is no right and wrong - the concept of losing for 2-3 years to be better after that span doesn't appeal to me, personally.
I had to drop the league, but I went into my MOX season last year with this squad. 3rd year dynasty, led the league in points over that span, never missed the playoffs. This despite my a few busts in my startup (S. Rice, Kolb).
4pt passing/ non-PPR/QRRWWFF (WR=TE)
Newton (Traded Marshall for Newton + 1st)
McCoy (Traded Gore + Stevie)
Peterson (Traded Foster for AP+Decker; got Foster for Bradshaw + Wells)
Forte
Spiller (Traded Murray+Holmes for Spiller + Cruz)
Cruz
Marshall (Don't remember what I got him for the 2nd time)
I guess my point is that I've been able to do both (win right away and build), and have seen others do the same. Again, I understand there is no right and wrong - the concept of losing for 2-3 years to be better after that span doesn't appeal to me, personally.
Last edited by a moderator:
ghostguy123
Footballguy
I have seen EVERY way work in some way. However, one method seems to work a higher percentage of the time. I also don't recall anyone talking about losing for 2-3 years to do it. Just one year.
Concept Coop
Footballguy
Yeah - we all have different sample sizes, and - as you said - we've likely all seen plenty of methods work. For the most part, I'd say I've seen the best owners at the top, on average. No method is going to make someone a good owner.
thriftyrocker
Footballguy
I took him the earliest. PIck 68. Not ashamed to say.Where? I took him in the 9th/10th swing which I thought was a steal, and I saw a Tweet that in another one he went in the 17th.You should see where I took him in the DLF June startup mock.
P-Dizzle
Footballguy
The 2014 1st wasn't supposed to be on the table at that point, but I couldn't be bothered arguing it after a while of back and forth.
I gave up depth at WR to obtain Calvin and it won me the league last year, but I was very lucky with injuries as my squad was very thin. I also own Stafford and felt I was too invested in the Lions this coming season, so I was prepared to take the risk of mixing it up rather than stagnate with the same thin group of WRs. I'm not expecting this to pay off immediately and I don't regret giving up Megatron.
King of the Jungle
Footballguy
I wish you luck as it seems like a bold move. My viewpoint is not a very experienced one because I am not involved in a 16 team league.
Dez
Footballguy
Concept Coop
Footballguy
Not at all. I've got rosters I'm not so quick to bring up too. Only using it as a counter example to Ghost's - just pointing out that other methods work.
Again, I am not suggesting I am right and anyone wrong. Ernol's got $20,000 in his pocket that I don't, so obviously what he's doing works.
Last edited by a moderator:
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Very true. No method will make you a good owner. But a good owner plus a good method can create a super team at a higher rate than other methods.
As with any method, you have to pick the right players.
I have also noticed the better owner make mistakes at a lesser rate than others. Like CKC, I bet he has made a lot of mistakes, but he has also made a ton of moves. I would say his "mistake percentage" is very low.
Combine going for youth with a couple good trades to get you there, and I think you can have a lot of success. Lets say you have Foster, and you personally prefer Lamar Miller over him. Well trading Foster for Miller probably isnt a good idea. Trading Foster to someone else who gives you something like a top 2-3 pick and Cobb or Harvin or something, then trading that pick plus maybe a bit more for Miller. so you not only have Miller but a very highly regarded WR....................stuff like that. Some people view every trade as the last trade they will ever make and how it affects their team. Then again, that is more of a "good owner" kind of move than a method move. Kinda combines the two.
But I am perfectly fine doing a move than I know hurts me for 1-2 years but will help me for the next 5 after that (even more if you do another similar deal down the road with one of those players).
On the Browns forum I talk to people on, we call it the "patriot way". The damn Patriots have been doing this with draft picks for a long long time. They have kinda sucked at picking, but since they have so many damn quality picks every year they still end up getting some goood players even though their hit rate is lower than most other teams.
Last edited by a moderator:
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Hey Dez, in a year or two, you should do another league like the one you created in 2010 and get a lot of these guys on here to join. Invite only, lol. A few guys here and a few guys from the FFPC.
12 teams IDP (though lower scoring IDP), 35 man rosters, 30 man taxi squads, salary cap, and can trade picks 2 years in advance.
Would be very interesting.
12 teams IDP (though lower scoring IDP), 35 man rosters, 30 man taxi squads, salary cap, and can trade picks 2 years in advance.
Would be very interesting.
EBF
Footballguy
That's the oldest trick in the book, isn't it? Trade Moss for Fitz and a 1st. Trade Fitz for Dez and a 1st. Trade Dez for Marqise Lee and a 1st. And so on until you have so much value in your back pocket that you can buy the world. I think that's what we're talking about here and I've seen teams employ that approach to great success.
That approach is enabled by owners who overrate security/proven talent and don't put a high enough premium on youth/longevity. I think a good example of that right now is something like Peterson vs. Martin or Richardson. To me that's not even a remotely difficult decision. The higher longevity potential and similar short term outlook for the younger guys gives them a huge mathematical edge. Many others see it that way, but there are still some who will argue that the proven veteran is a better bet. This kind of miscalculation is what creates the space to not only move a top veteran player for a top young player, but to sometimes even get some extra value thrown into the pot.
I think there are a few key skills when it comes to managing a dynasty team. One of them is knowing what you're looking at when it comes to a given player. Some of my worst trades have involved pissing away guys like Mike Wallace and Aaron Hernandez for cheap because I didn't know what I had. The right strategy won't matter if you consistently hold onto the ugly ducklings and trade away the swans. Bad evaluations are how the "trade Fitz for Dez and a 1st" strategy becomes "trade Fitz for Braylon and a 1st." The former is a huge win. The latter is a team killer. So while I like the philosophy behind cashing in your players for younger versions of the same thing + whatever extra value you can get, the viability of that approach hinges on your ability to make the proper assessments.
In general, I think it's important to anticipate instead of reacting. When I look at most dynasty rankings I see a lot of the latter and not much of the former. Whoever struggled last year will be ranked low. Whoever did well last year will be ranked high. There's a lot of reacting to what happened yesterday and not enough time spent on estimating what will happen tomorrow. I think there's a huge value to timing in dynasty leagues. You want to be the first one in line. You want to be the guy making offers for CJ Spiller after his modest rookie season, not the guy talking about how great he is after he just rushed for 1200 yards at 6 YPC. By that point the secret is out. Everyone knows what happened yesterday, so it's rare that you'll get a big discount on players if all you do is flow with the current. If you can be the first one in line, you can sneak in under the wire and make profitable moves while others are lagging behind.
Pair that kind of mindset with sound analysis/evaluation skills and a good understanding of value and you can really start to separate yourself from the pack. Easier said than done, but nevertheless something to aspire to. I think the process of trading guys like Spiller for Wilson + pieces or Miller + pieces comes from that perspective. I don't know that the individual evaluations are sound in this case, but I think the general principle behind that kind of move makes sense.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
No EBF, I wasnt really talking about the "trade 50 times for value thing". The rest was right on though.
I was just saying that for example if you like Miller over Foster, dont trade Foster straight up for him. The value is too far off. If you want "your guy", there is a better way to get him than just giving up a clearly far more valuable player.
I was just saying that for example if you like Miller over Foster, dont trade Foster straight up for him. The value is too far off. If you want "your guy", there is a better way to get him than just giving up a clearly far more valuable player.
Last edited by a moderator:
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Don't know if that someone giving up on blackmon or in love with pierce. Looks like a little of both.
Donsmith753
Footballguy
Hmmm, I'm a big fan of Pierce and I wouldn't touch this deal.
Bamac
Footballguy
No ppr? Maybe, maybe I could see the Rice owner doing this in a 2RB-2WR-flex league with no ppr.
gandalas
Footballguy
For which side? He basically got 4 first rookie picks for Calvin and a 2014 1, plus 2 2015 2s.
Between Eifert, Bernard, and Austin, that is possibly the 1,2, and 3 rookie picks, plus Allen is a late 1st in a 16 team league.
Doesn't look like any of you guys are considering the weird starting setup and how that affects VBD. If the WR position is considered deep when you start 3 + flex, it is ridiculously deep when you start only 2, so relative position value shifts. In that same league Tavon went at 1.6, Cordarelle at 1.8 and neither seemed as a surprise.Zdravko said:
Bamac
Footballguy
Doesn't look like you read my post.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Would you right now trade Doug Martin straight up for Jonathan Franklin if you were CONVINCED Franklin would be better this year and for every year after??
What i am saying is, find another way to get the player you covet than just giving away a ton of value in the deal. Yes, market value is important. The more market value you have on your team, the better chance you have of being able to go out and get those players you covet.
If you have exhausted other possibilities, then I suppose I cant argue with a 1 for 1 straight up deal of two guys that are not comparable value, but it's really gonna suck to do that when you see the guy turn around and deal for 2-3 players/picks all of which on their own are comparable to the guy you traded him for, knowing you coulda made the same deal then went back and got the guy you covet, plus another player or nice pick on top of it.
That does not ALWAYS work, but I'll be damned if I am not going to try that 1st before giving up that much value in a deal.
Whether its PPR or non-PPR is a much bigger factor than those starting requirements imo. Apologize if you've already mentioned it either way, but which is it? If PPR, I think Blackmon is quite a bit more valuable than Pierce.
Also, its not a terribly uncommon setup and provides only a slight bump to RB imo if this is still PPR. In another league with the same setup (PPR), I traded up to the 1.2 during the draft (1.12 + 2.12 + 2014 1st) to draft Tavon. WRs are still valuable if PPR.
msudaisy26
Footballguy
I did miss the 16 team part so they were all first round picks but still a horrible trade.I don't see the scoring system but unless tight ends get 1.5 ppr Eifert was 1.06 at best and probably like 1.10 because they have to start 2 rbs and 3 wrs.This team is obviously rebuilding so there 2014 first will probably be a high pick and you can call Austin or Gio a wash with that pick because of the class coming out in 2014 and the 2015 class is supposed to be strong as well as so those 2 seconds are probably equal to Allen. So basically he traded Calvin for 1.01 this year and 1.06.
