Consolidating Trade, Thoughts? (1 Viewer)

[eighsse2]

Feel free to post a link to your own question, and I'll do my best.

Trying to think of trade ideas that would at least have some chance of being accepted. I feel personally like this trade would be well worth it for me, but doubt it would be accepted. Would just like a sanity check before I throw a major trade out there.

12-team, 20-man, Q R R W W F K D (no TE slot)
PPR, 6pt all TD, 1pt/50pyd, 0.1/rush or rec yd
5pt bonus at 300/150/150yds

I give:
Etienne
Smith-Njigba
Higgins
Pick #11
Pick #16
Pick #20

I get:
Breece Hall
Puka

I feel like this is one of those "nice value, but you could throw in 10 more medium assets and the needle just doesn't move for two guys like Hall and Puka". Etienne is the only guy of a relevent magnitude I guess.

For reference, I am sitting quite well currently at the business end of my roster with a lineup of Hurts, Bijan, Gibbs, Lamb, AJ Brown, Etienne, and a bench with players like Swift, Njigba, Higgins, Godwin. But always looking to improve.

 

[Gally]

I would stick with what you got. I don't think this trade is all that good for you. Unless you need roster space and are just going to be cutting these guys I would rather see what happens (especially with Higgins). I like the Hall over ETN piece but maybe you can get that done with ETN & JSN or ETN & Pick 11.

 

[eighsse2]

I would stick with what you got. I don't think this trade is all that good for you. Unless you need roster space and are just going to be cutting these guys I would rather see what happens (especially with Higgins). I like the Hall over ETN piece but maybe you can get that done with ETN & JSN or ETN & Pick 11.

Thanks for the input, Gally. And no, it wouldn't be just to make space. Though I do need some space eventually to use all of my draft picks, but we're talking about dropping guys like Sean Tucker -- not major losses, were I not to clear any space.

But, are you saying Etienne and Njigba, alone, for Breece and Puka?? Seems like most people currently are considering Breece >> Etienne and Puka >>> Smith-Njigba.

 

[Gally]

But, are you saying Etienne and Njigba, alone, for Breece and Puka?? Seems like most people currently are considering Breece >> Etienne and Puka >>> Smith-Njigba.

No, I am saying ETN/JSN for Hall alone. I wouldn't go after Puka with your team. It just complicates things. But I am also intrigued to see where Higgins goes and think he could be a difference maker with the right landing spot.

 

[eighsse2]

But, are you saying Etienne and Njigba, alone, for Breece and Puka?? Seems like most people currently are considering Breece >> Etienne and Puka >>> Smith-Njigba.

No, I am saying ETN/JSN for Hall alone. I wouldn't go after Puka with your team. It just complicates things. But I am also intrigued to see where Higgins goes and think he could be a difference maker with the right landing spot.

Ohh okay, got ya got ya. Thanks!

 

[BearsFan4Life]

I own ETN and JSN and would trade them for Hall in a heartbeat. May even try that offer myself but don't think the Hall owner would take it.

 

[Big Nate]

I think trading away JSN and Higgins right now would be at their lowest value. Higgins struggled with a few injuries and CIN lost Burrows the last half of the season. Definitely not reflective of what type of receiver he is. JSN was a rookie and was the third receiver behind two very good WRs in Locket and Metcalf. JSN's time will come but I think you have to be a bit patient.

You could try to float ETN and JSN for Hall and see what the owner says. Doesn't hurt to try but - I think ETN should have another good season next year (He doesn't have much competition) and JSN should keep getting more and more work as he develops. An old school coach like Carroll often brings on rookies slowly and being the 3rd WR in the group has his value low right now. I'd hold until the season and see how he progresses but that is just me.

 

[eighsse2]

I think trading away JSN and Higgins right now would be at their lowest value. Higgins struggled with a few injuries and CIN lost Burrows the last half of the season. Definitely not reflective of what type of receiver he is. JSN was a rookie and was the third receiver behind two very good WRs in Locket and Metcalf. JSN's time will come but I think you have to be a bit patient.

You could try to float ETN and JSN for Hall and see what the owner says. Doesn't hurt to try but - I think ETN should have another good season next year (He doesn't have much competition) and JSN should keep getting more and more work as he develops. An old school coach like Carroll often brings on rookies slowly and being the 3rd WR in the group has his value low right now. I'd hold until the season and see how he progresses but that is just me.

Appreciate the input, all.

And yeah those are good points about Njigba and Higgins. There's always the fear that a dull season is the beginning of the end, and holding the guy is just value leaking out of your team before your eyes. But you give realistic reasons to have optimism.

 

[rockaction]

JSN is getting panned in Player Profiler and Adam Harstad's rookie models. They don't like what they see. You might want to look into that. You subscribe now. Check Harstad's latest article in the dynasty section. Dated Jan. 12, I think.

I'd try ETN and JSN for Hall, but Higgins is a bridge too far.

But I would do ETN, JSN, Higgins, and 20 for Hall and Puka.

I would not give up #11 and #16.

I don't see why sticking with what you've got is that bad a move. I'm not sure how much of an upgrade it is if you're giving up another first round pick and a mid-second.

That's too much. That's where this deal falls apart for me.

 

[eighsse2]

JSN is getting panned in Player Profiler and Adam Harstad's rookie models. They don't like what they see. You might want to look into that. You subscribe now. Check Harstad's latest article in the dynasty section. Dated Jan. 12, I think.

I'd try ETN and JSN for Hall, but Higgins is a bridge too far.

But I would do ETN, JSN, Higgins, and 20 for Hall and Puka.

I would not give up #11 and #16.

I don't see why sticking with what you've got is that bad a move. I'm not sure how much of an upgrade it is if you're giving up another first round pick and a mid-second.

That's too much. That's where this deal falls apart for me.

Thanks for the input, rock. I feel like any picks in the mid-second-and-later range in our league is just held really loosely. Have made several trades in the past where I feel I'm swapping two even players and getting a second back for nothing. So that might devalue my feelings toward that #16 pick. You're probably right, it's a more significant asset than I'm feeling. There are a lot of good receivers in this class, and I can definitely use any WR with a decent chance to step up as my third guy for security. I guess I'm trying to lock that #3 guy in with a stud like Nacua, but not good to make a bad trade for it.

(I actually got a refund on that subscription. There are some really nice resources and all, but some things were a little, just, weird.)

 

[rockaction]

feel like any picks in the mid-second-and-later range in our league is just held really loosely. Have made several trades in the past where I feel I'm swapping two even players and getting a second back for nothing. So that might devalue my feelings toward that #16 pick.

Hmm . . . I wouldn't get held up by the #16th if that's the case. It's that pick in addition to the 11th and 20th that I'd wonder about. I think that's just too many picks. Puka was probably hit with a dart like that, though he's few and far between. Just saying that those darts can come in handy.

If they're held loosely in your league, only you know that. I'd be more worried about the eleventh.

Gut check time. If you told me you'd trade me Puka and Hall for Higgins, ETN, JSN, and 16 and 20, I'd take that deal if seconds are loosely held and devalued. All day. I'd have a hard time parting with eleven. I might, though. I'd just hate giving up a first-round pick. Depends on what you're looking at for the eleventh pick. If it was a crapshoot, I'd throw it in. But that's me.

As for the scrip, I'm glad they gave you a refund and feel badly I steered you into something you were expecting that you didn't get. But it's refunded so all is cool, I'd assume.

 

[eighsse2]

feel like any picks in the mid-second-and-later range in our league is just held really loosely. Have made several trades in the past where I feel I'm swapping two even players and getting a second back for nothing. So that might devalue my feelings toward that #16 pick.

Hmm . . . I wouldn't get held up by the #16th if that's the case. It's that pick in addition to the 11th and 20th that I'd wonder about. I think that's just too many picks. Puka was probably hit with a dart like that, though he's few and far between. Just saying that those darts can come in handy.

If they're held loosely in your league, only you know that. I'd be more worried about the eleventh.

Gut check time. If you told me you'd trade me Puka and Hall for Higgins, ETN, JSN, and 16 and 20, I'd take that deal if seconds are loosely held and devalued. All day. I'd have a hard time parting with eleven. I might, though. I'd just hate giving up a first-round pick. Depends on what you're looking at for the eleventh pick. If it was a crapshoot, I'd throw it in. But that's me.

As for the scrip, I'm glad they gave you a refund and feel badly I steered you into something you were expecting that you didn't get. But it's refunded so all is cool, I'd assume.

Puka went undrafted in our rookie draft. We usually have 25-35 total rookies drafted. I remember even saying after Puka's big week that if I had the #1 waiver choice, I wouldn't even attempt to pick him up. Haha It just seemed like such a fluke for the first couple of weeks. A whiff on my part.

And, nah man, I enjoyed checking out the cool charts, especially the customizable dynasty value chart. I just couldn't bring myself to believe some of the numbers I was seeing and decided it wasn't worth spending real cash money on something whose accuracy is so hard to verify. (And then what? Do I go ahead and trust the guidance of the numbers to make long-term decisions that seem off to me in my dynasty league? ) The stuff is top-notch, I'm sure, though.

 

[Big Nate]

JSN is getting panned in Player Profiler and Adam Harstad's rookie models. They don't like what they see. You might want to look into that. You subscribe now. Check Harstad's latest article in the dynasty section. Dated Jan. 12, I think.

I'd try ETN and JSN for Hall, but Higgins is a bridge too far.

But I would do ETN, JSN, Higgins, and 20 for Hall and Puka.

I would not give up #11 and #16.

I don't see why sticking with what you've got is that bad a move. I'm not sure how much of an upgrade it is if you're giving up another first round pick and a mid-second.

That's too much. That's where this deal falls apart for me.

In regards to JSN - I listened to a podcast Harstad was on and he talked about his model. He did mention if a rookie WR was the third receive (JSN was behind Metcalf and Lockett) it often moves their "grade" down. It is a good discussion and what I came away with is JSN suffered being the third option in that offense and those that watch the film are still high on him. Having said that he graded out lower than expected but that doesn't mean he still can't turn out to be a good one.

Overall I think JSN's value is much lower than it should be and I would buy if I can get a decent price. But there is more risk with him, as he didn't dominate like some thought he would.

Look up Adam's stuff as well as Matt Waldman who go into depth on this topic. It is worth it!

 

[rockaction]

Look up Adam's stuff as well as Matt Waldman who go into depth on this topic. It is worth it!

Sure thing. If you read my post (and I'm assuming you did), I mention Adam's model that he writes about. He writes that the model actually doesn't take context into consideration. This is what he says about that. It's a nuanced point.

I'll let him speak in his own words.

"The most common question I get when I talk about my model is, "Did you consider (important context that is relevant to my favorite rookie WR?)" And the answer is always no, but I also didn't consider (context that is relevant to literally every other rookie I'm comparing him against), either.

This gets to the point of having a model. I don't take my model's values as gospel. Dontayvion Wicks scores substantially higher than Jaxon Smith-Njigba in my model. Smith-Njigba is significantly hurt by playing with Tyler Lockett and DK Metcalf. Receivers average fewer yards per route run out of 3WR sets simply because there are more viable places for the quarterback to go with the ball. Being relegated to 3WR sets is often a bad sign for rookies, but that's because the top two WRs are rarely as good as Lockett and Metcalf.

Maybe someday I'll get around to running formation-adjusted YPRR for all receivers and testing whether this improves predictive power (because it better measures how efficient a receiver really is given their context) or not (because it ignores how responsible most receivers are for their context, at least insofar as playing time is concerned). What I won't do is create a special "Jaxon Smith-Njigba carveout" where I fudge the numbers for him and him alone. The numbers are what the numbers are.

The purpose of building a model is to give an objective data point to consider, and the second you start making ad hoc adjustments is the second it loses its objectivity and ceases to be of benefit. If you feel Smith-Njigba deserves to be above Wicks, you don't need to change the model to tell you that; you can instead just look at the model, consider what it's telling you, incorporate it into all the other data you have gotten over the course of the year, and make a decision about who you prefer afterward.

I would personally be happy to trade Wicks for Smith-Njigba today"

So I get your point about context, but he's pretty specifically saying that context doesn't enter into the model, it enters into his final decision about the player. Two different things, for sure.

 

[Big Nate]

Look up Adam's stuff as well as Matt Waldman who go into depth on this topic. It is worth it!

Sure thing. If you read my post (and I'm assuming you did), I mention Adam's model that he writes about. He writes that the model actually doesn't take context into consideration. This is what he says about that. It's a nuanced point.

I'll let him speak in his own words.

"The most common question I get when I talk about my model is, "Did you consider (important context that is relevant to my favorite rookie WR?)" And the answer is always no, but I also didn't consider (context that is relevant to literally every other rookie I'm comparing him against), either.

This gets to the point of having a model. I don't take my model's values as gospel. Dontayvion Wicks scores substantially higher than Jaxon Smith-Njigba in my model. Smith-Njigba is significantly hurt by playing with Tyler Lockett and DK Metcalf. Receivers average fewer yards per route run out of 3WR sets simply because there are more viable places for the quarterback to go with the ball. Being relegated to 3WR sets is often a bad sign for rookies, but that's because the top two WRs are rarely as good as Lockett and Metcalf.

Maybe someday I'll get around to running formation-adjusted YPRR for all receivers and testing whether this improves predictive power (because it better measures how efficient a receiver really is given their context) or not (because it ignores how responsible most receivers are for their context, at least insofar as playing time is concerned). What I won't do is create a special "Jaxon Smith-Njigba carveout" where I fudge the numbers for him and him alone. The numbers are what the numbers are.

The purpose of building a model is to give an objective data point to consider, and the second you start making ad hoc adjustments is the second it loses its objectivity and ceases to be of benefit. If you feel Smith-Njigba deserves to be above Wicks, you don't need to change the model to tell you that; you can instead just look at the model, consider what it's telling you, incorporate it into all the other data you have gotten over the course of the year, and make a decision about who you prefer afterward.

I would personally be happy to trade Wicks for Smith-Njigba today"

So I get your point about context, but he's pretty specifically saying that context doesn't enter into the model, it enters into his final decision about the player. Two different things, for sure.

For sure, and I was just adding on to what you were saying. Thanks for finding his exact words. It's not perfect but I think it is well worth looking into. I think JSN is at a good buy opportunity especially if he starts off slow again.

I also quite like Wicks and have him on 2 dynasty teams so excited about that.