Coop's Dynasty Rules Of Thumb (1 Viewer)

[Raback]

Congrats? This is why I like the FFPC. The six worst teams play off for the 1.1 to 1.6. You would have tanked your way to the 1.6. The FFPC regulates and stops outright tanking. You must field a lineup or they will do it for you.

I would not have chosen to employ the same strategy given those league parameters.  No system is perfect but I will look for an edge to exploit whatever system is in place in my leagues 

 

[Arodin]

I would not have chosen to employ the same strategy given those league parameters.  No system is perfect but I will look for an edge to exploit whatever system is in place in my leagues 

This highlights the number one bit of advice for new league entrants, dynasty or otherwise:

Know thy rules.

Anything outside of boilerplate “espn standard” is an opportunity to gain differential value over owners stuck in the community consensus mindset.

 

[JackReacher]

I would not have chosen to employ the same strategy given those league parameters.  No system is perfect but I will look for an edge to exploit whatever system is in place in my leagues 

I get what you’re saying, but the integrity of the league suffers when teams aren’t even fielding a lineup. Just anecdotal, but last year in an FFPC league, I won the toilet bowl, earned 1.1, and won the league with Barkley this year. 

 

[Gally]

I would not have chosen to employ the same strategy given those league parameters.  No system is perfect but I will look for an edge to exploit whatever system is in place in my leagues 

This drives me nuts as a commish.  Don't get me wrong, I am all for knowing the rules and looking for advantages to use to my benefit.  However, without integrity this leads to owners looking to circumvent the INTENT of the rules in place because "its not specifically against the rules".  It is very difficult to write rules that encompass every possible loophole there is.  Typically there is an intent to every rule and figuring out ways to specifically circumvent the intent of the rules is terrible.  Whenever that happens we try and close that loophole as soon as possible.  It ends up being a game between the Commish's office and a couple owners where they try and circumvent the rules and we try and close the loopholes as they become known. 

To me purposely not fielding a complete team that is playing each week (only having a back up QB on your roster) to "tank" is a prime example of purposely circumventing the intent of the rules.  I think it lacks integrity and isn't something I would want happening in my leagues. 

 

[Gally]

This highlights the number one bit of advice for new league entrants, dynasty or otherwise:

Know thy rules.

Anything outside of boilerplate “espn standard” is an opportunity to gain differential value over owners stuck in the community consensus mindset.

There is a difference though between knowing the rules and playing within the intent the rules are conveying and purposely trying to circumvent the intent of the rules as written.  Owners that try and exploit loopholes to circumvent the intent of a particular rule lacks integrity and shouldn't be done. 

 

[MAC_32]

This drives me nuts as a commish.  Don't get me wrong, I am all for knowing the rules and looking for advantages to use to my benefit.  However, without integrity this leads to owners looking to circumvent the INTENT of the rules in place because "its not specifically against the rules".  It is very difficult to write rules that encompass every possible loophole there is.  Typically there is an intent to every rule and figuring out ways to specifically circumvent the intent of the rules is terrible.  Whenever that happens we try and close that loophole as soon as possible.  It ends up being a game between the Commish's office and a couple owners where they try and circumvent the rules and we try and close the loopholes as they become known. 

To me purposely not fielding a complete team that is playing each week (only having a back up QB on your roster) to "tank" is a prime example of purposely circumventing the intent of the rules.  I think it lacks integrity and isn't something I would want happening in my leagues. 

We've only had to do it once in my several different dynasty leagues, but we booted an owner who kept doing as you described.  It's a complicated league with a salary cap, penalties for cutting players under contract, positional roster limits, rookie wage scale, tag capabilities, free agent auction, etc. so no rule set will cover all bases.  If you have good dudes then it's a non-issue.  So we removed the one and replaced him with a good dude.  No problems since.  This game is supposed to be fun.  If you're the fun ruiner then I am on board with removal.

But that's beside the point of this thread.  It isn't to gloat about the way you gamed your opponents in your league's structure.  It's more general strategy talk.  Otherwise good dialogue can't exist.  So please leave you league's unique traits at the door.

 

[kittenmittens]

Because great players on your bench can't be in opponents' lineups.  Robby Anderson didn't score 29.5 against me in the championship because he was on my bench.

Because when Gurley pulls up lame in week 16 you put Damien Williams in your lineup and win your league.

Because you can trade Dalvin Cook and Kenny Golloday for Antonio Brown to a rebuilder.

Because you can trade Joe Mixon and Corey Davis for Deandre Hopkins.

I would say that the only way you have Damien Williams is if you were good about keeping some churnable roster spots at the end of the roster. 

Williams wasn't exactly obviously going to do what he did, it took Ware going down and by the time Ware went down Williams was already owned. 

 

[Hankmoody]

I would say that the only way you have Damien Williams is if you were good about keeping some churnable roster spots at the end of the roster.  

Williams wasn't exactly obviously going to do what he did, it took Ware going down and by the time Ware went down Williams was already owned.  

Which is a function of "caring what your bench does", which is what I was addressing.

 

[zed2283]

This drives me nuts as a commish.  Don't get me wrong, I am all for knowing the rules and looking for advantages to use to my benefit.  However, without integrity this leads to owners looking to circumvent the INTENT of the rules in place because "its not specifically against the rules".  It is very difficult to write rules that encompass every possible loophole there is.  Typically there is an intent to every rule and figuring out ways to specifically circumvent the intent of the rules is terrible.  Whenever that happens we try and close that loophole as soon as possible.  It ends up being a game between the Commish's office and a couple owners where they try and circumvent the rules and we try and close the loopholes as they become known. 

To me purposely not fielding a complete team that is playing each week (only having a back up QB on your roster) to "tank" is a prime example of purposely circumventing the intent of the rules.  I think it lacks integrity and isn't something I would want happening in my leagues. 

This is how we end up with a bunch of stupid rules in the NFL as well.

 

[Rhythmdoctor]

Solid post/advice! I’m in 2 dynasty leagues and won the Championship in both this year. My strategy was pretty simple and followed your first rule... I invested heavily in my starters. In fact in both leagues we start 9 players and I only carried 11 players. Meaning I had only 2 players on my bench. In one of my leagues those 2 players were Sam Bradford and Isiah Crowell, so basically I had no bench and I also had Evan Engram as my only TE who missed 6 weeks of the season. I barely made the playoffs then steamrolled the playoffs thanks in part to Derrick Henry’s late season explosion. In short though, I was aggressive in trades and many times was perceived to have “lost” the trade on paper but my starting lineups were pretty much stacked in both leagues. 

Here is one of those "losing" trades.  Simply put, I didn't/don't trust OBJ and his diva ways nor their QB situation.  To me, this trade made a lot of sense and without it, I wouldn't have won the Championship this season.  Also, this being a 16 team league, that 2nd round pick isn't what it seems and since I won the league, that is now the 32nd overall rookie pick, which is basically a dart throw.  I'd say I won this trade even though just a few months back the whole world (even the SP) thought I lost.

Rhythmdoctor will give:
Beckham, Odell NYG WR
Year 2019 Round 2 Draft Pick from Rhythmdoctor

$15 Dynasty Dollars

Team B will give:
Hopkins, DeAndre HOU WR

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

1. Make most of your trades near "generic market value".

2. Treat future draft picks as currency, 
3. Move around a lot during the rookie draft
4. Try to get stopgap starters for cheap
5. Try to free up roster space.
6. Buy cheap on injured players.

This is a great list IMO.  

 

[kittenmittens]

Which is a function of "caring what your bench does", which is what I was addressing.

Sure, I wasn't really in disagreement. 

Just pointing out that if you had too much bench depth you probably wouldn't be able to roster somebody like Williams before another owner with worse depth snapped him up as a flier. 

 

[MAC_32]

Sure, I wasn't really in disagreement. 

Just pointing out that if you had too much bench depth you probably wouldn't be able to roster somebody like Williams before another owner with worse depth snapped him up as a flier. 

After September there's always dead weight to be found on a roster. Just have to be willing to stop waiting for someone who hasnt done anything yet. 

 

[Travieso]

Great Thread; thanks for starting and sharing Coop.  I consider myself an average dynasty player (5 leagues; make playoffs in 2 or MAYBE 3/year; won a league this year but none in prev. two years).      I am also in league 1 with Coop.    My comments/observations/questions to coop on his strategies:

Investing all available value into starting lineup and consolidate.     I have always preferred depth and I think I am now convinced to move toward this approach; probably not this extreme but I see value in some open roster spots and I know I get too attached to players for too long.

Trade rookie picks.  Again, I am coming around and will do more of this in leagues where I have playoff caliber teams.  In the league with Coop, I am in year 1 of a massive rebuild (let my team get old) and will use some picks (but I will also trade picks for younger players where I can).  I looked at the last 3 drafts and Coop has had only 3 picks (earliest was 3.7) and none in last two years, so he follows this...…...

QB/TE - I agree and follow these; I never understand teams that have 4 qb's in a start 1, 24 roster league...

Other observations of Coop in this league:  

The man trades and trades fairly and I think that he is Understating the value/impact in that.  He probably averages 40 trades a year.  There have been several threads about lowball offers and how to respond.  many people are like me and get offended (not saying it is smart or right) and write some owners off.  Coop is the opposite and I think it benefits him.  If I don't think one his offers is fair, I actually question myself.  This helps him in a couple of ways,  people come to him with offers b/c they know he is fair and will make deals (think about that - 90% of the people in your leagues aren't like that).   Coop also sends out many (not multiple, many) offers at the same time, I have missed on some deals because I needed to think about it (you have to act fast with him or you may not get a deal done and sometimes that means taking the offer vs. negotiating).  I think this is a big part of his success and I will be efforting to be much more active in sending offers.   I think with more available trade calculators this is easier for all of us to do.

Questions for Coop/theories on why he is successful:

How much time do you spend in season on your 4 leagues?  It takes me quite awhile to come up with fair trades; how many hours a week are you putting in?

Talent evaluation?   You don't draft rookies and don't follow college ball, so I assume you have some process for determining studs before they become studs; i.e. you have Kamara on all 4 teams and I believe in this league you acquired him early in his rookie year.

Injuries.  What do you do when they happen to a stud in season (with no depth).  do you trade them (assume they get hurt week 1 and are out for the year but will make a full recovery).

Again, greatly appreciate the insight.....

 

[tangfoot]

This drives me nuts as a commish.  Don't get me wrong, I am all for knowing the rules and looking for advantages to use to my benefit.  However, without integrity this leads to owners looking to circumvent the INTENT of the rules in place because "its not specifically against the rules".  It is very difficult to write rules that encompass every possible loophole there is.  Typically there is an intent to every rule and figuring out ways to specifically circumvent the intent of the rules is terrible.  Whenever that happens we try and close that loophole as soon as possible.  It ends up being a game between the Commish's office and a couple owners where they try and circumvent the rules and we try and close the loopholes as they become known. 

To me purposely not fielding a complete team that is playing each week (only having a back up QB on your roster) to "tank" is a prime example of purposely circumventing the intent of the rules.  I think it lacks integrity and isn't something I would want happening in my leagues. 

IMO, the best dynasty leagues reward draft picks based on reverse Potential Points.  The best way to "game" that system is by not having players who will score points clogging up your roster. 

Mahomes was active on game day every week in 2017, and perfectly acceptable as a QB starter in every format.  If your league has a specific rule that says you must start "startable" players, then how do you define or enforce it? 

Playing for the future is one of the most enjoyable things about dynasty fantasy football, and you should not be in a position to police someone's intent.  Not every team can compete every year, and they shouldn't be required to.

 

[DropKick]

There is an exception to every rule.. that is except the rule that says there is an exception to every rule.  That has no exception. 

Wait a minute.  I guess it does have an exception.  So there is an exception to every rule, or is there?

Yes, our track record and approach is very similar.  One difference, however, is I put more value on rookie picks.  Put more of an emphasis on quality than quantify when looking for prospects and you can also hold the younger player, who could prove more costly to acquire by trade tomorrow.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Mahomes was active on game day every week in 2017, and perfectly acceptable as a QB starter in every format.  If your league has a specific rule that says you must start "startable" players, then how do you define or enforce it?

Come on.

 

[jwb]

Mahomes was active on game day every week in 2017, and perfectly acceptable as a QB starter in every format.  If your league has a specific rule that says you must start "startable" players, then how do you define or enforce it?

Come on.

agreed. That's generally not acceptable to me. I'll make an exception for someone who has his other options on a bye - you want to "start" an active B/U qb who clearly isn't going to play that one week so you don't have to drop a prospect/bench guy you like, that's fine. But if someone was starting Mahomes every week in 2017, that someone is tanking in my mind, regardless of league rules. 

In a few of my leagues that I was in at startup, I suggested a "best interest of the league" rule that gave the commish power to adjust to things like this that aren't specifically spelled out in other rules. 

 

[tangfoot]

agreed. That's generally not acceptable to me. I'll make an exception for someone who has his other options on a bye - you want to "start" an active B/U qb who clearly isn't going to play that one week so you don't have to drop a prospect/bench guy you like, that's fine. But if someone was starting Mahomes every week in 2017, that someone is tanking in my mind, regardless of league rules. 

In a few of my leagues that I was in at startup, I suggested a "best interest of the league" rule that gave the commish power to adjust to things like this that aren't specifically spelled out in other rules. 

This is the type of rule that would preclude me from joining a dynasty league.  It's ridiculous to assume that all teams can be competitive at all times.

 

[tangfoot]

Come on.

What?  Tanking is a perfectly acceptable strategy.

 

[jwb]

What?  Tanking is a perfectly acceptable strategy.

Then I'm thankful that every dynasty league I am in has an anti-tanking rule. We'll just have to agree to disagree. 

 

[tangfoot]

Then I'm thankful that every dynasty league I am in has an anti-tanking rule. We'll just have to agree to disagree. 

I've always wondered how this can be policed.  What's the criteria for determining that someone is tanking? 

If I trade away all my viable starters for future draft picks, what's the penalty?  League banishment?

 

[Bfrahm3]

I've always wondered how this can be policed.  What's the criteria for determining that someone is tanking? 

If I trade away all my viable starters for future draft picks, what's the penalty?  League banishment?

That’s not tanking, that’s rebuilding...tanking is starting Tavon Austin instead of Deandre Hopkins and mike Gieski instead of George Kittle so that it helps you lose.

edit to add: tanking is cheating (throwing a game), rebuilding is a strategy.

 

[tangfoot]

That’s not tanking, that’s rebuilding...tanking is starting Tavon Austin instead of Deandre Hopkins and mike Gieski instead of George Kittle so that it helps you lose.

If you'll notice, I mentioned previously that I'm a strong proponent of using Potential Points to determine draft order.  Intentionally benching viable starters is a no-no in every league I've ever been a part of.  But trading Hopkins for an injured rookie and a couple future picks is perfectly acceptable and should be encouraged in every dynasty league.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

I've always wondered how this can be policed.  What's the criteria for determining that someone is tanking? 

If I trade away all my viable starters for future draft picks, what's the penalty?  League banishment?

Don’t be silly.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

But trading Hopkins for an injured rookie and a couple future picks is perfectly acceptable and should be encouraged in every dynasty league.

Yes, of course that’s perfectly acceptable (as long as the injured rookie isn’t then in your lineup) and no one would argue that. What’s not perfectly acceptable is starting a backup QB that never plays every week just so you can take a zero in the lineup. That was all that was being discussed here.

 

[Bfrahm3]

Yes, of course that’s perfectly acceptable (as long as the injured rookie isn’t then in your lineup) and no one would argue that. What’s not perfectly acceptable is starting a backup QB that never plays every week just so you can take a zero in the lineup. That was all that was being discussed here.

If all other QBs were taken it would be but yes if there was an actual starter on waivers then I would understand someone getting upset

 

[jwb]

I've always wondered how this can be policed.  What's the criteria for determining that someone is tanking? 

If I trade away all my viable starters for future draft picks, what's the penalty?  League banishment?

Tanking = knowingly taking zeros.

Rebuilding = trading your decent starters for draft picks. Perfectly fine. But you still field a team in an attempt to compete.

It's fine to knowingly field a bad team if you are rebuilding and collecting picks.  It's not fine to take a zero week after week at a position because you have no interest at all in competing in that week's game. 

 

[renesauz]

My leagues would have pressured you to make a trade or made waiver claims when starters went down. Blatant tanking like that is frowned upon in every league I'm in.

In most of my leagues it’s required to submit a valid and complete lineup. Intentionally tanking is very strictly forbidden.

 

[DropKick]

We've turned a potentially great thread into a pissing ground for tanking?

 

[Tanner9919]

I won the championship in 3 of my 4 dynasty leagues and largely credit these rules of thumb. I'm an impulsive person, so I've learned to rely on rules to curb my would-be moments of impulsivity, when it comes to things like budgeting and time management. I saw immediate and drastic results as soon as I applied this to fantasy football. I know this is a little ointsatownshirt:, but I hope it sparks dialog or helps other owners.

(Keep in my mind that I came up with these through trial and error and with only myself in mind; I'm not claiming they're universal; of course there are exceptions to every rule; I'm not claiming that luck didn't play a role.)

At core my philosophy is: Invest all available value into starting lineup, creating "churn-able" roster spots in order to maximize potential weekly output and waiver wire value, and backfill depth. I don't think that is particularly novel, but I do think I push it more than the majority. My stance on rookie picks is probably pretty out there.  

Consolidate, consolidate, consolidate (This should be a given, but really go for fit. Consolidate more than it is comfortable to. Have the most churn-able roster spots in the league.)
-Trade depth for upgrades in the starting lineup
-Keep favorite WW prospects and trade the rest ASAP (for picks, BB$, or to upgrade another part)
-Limit the number of QBs, TEs, and DSTs on roster
-Aim to acquire the best player in every deal
-Be willing to overpay for your guys

Trade rookie picks
Rookie picks are most valuable as trade assets and prospects can waste roster space. 
-Trade rookie picks for proven assets or future picks (Trading late 1sts for future 1sts is a favorite of mine – all reward, no risk, opens a roster spot)
-The premium for targeting a player after a promising start to his career, rather than during the rookie draft, is well worth it
-Absolutely no drafting QBs, WRs, or TEs
-Elite RBs an exception (Zeke, Barkley, Fournette, Gurley, Richardson)

Bargain shop at QB
QBs are hard to trade for good value and easy to land at a discount, once considered old.
-No premium assets invested in the QB position, until rest of starting lineup is maximized 
-Target QBs as soon as the market considers them old 
-QBBC: Have 2 solid options and play match-ups  

Go big or go home at TE
TEs take a long time to develop, are scheme dependent, and only the elite options make a material difference.
-Pay full price for proven elite options (Ertz/Kelce/Kittle) or bargain shop
-Don’t draft them or get attached to WW finds

Other
-Avoid sunk cost fallacy: move on quickly from mistakes and don't let past investment dictate future moves
-Don't get attached to players
-(Latest entry) Don't make trades with future trades in mind (don't assume you can flip for profit)

Examples:
I landed Philip Lindsay in 3 of my 4 leagues. Not because I spent time scouting him, but because I had the rosters spots to take chances on a lot of guys. Once he was on my roster, I watched him closely and decided that he was a keeper (though I did add to him for Guice in one league).  

Traded Hunt, Wilson, Tate, 2nd for Zeke, 1st, Carr (last off-season). Not to pretend I saw the Hunt thing coming, but even ignoring the outcome, this is a great example of deals that I like to seek out. I upgraded one of my starting spots, got market value for a high-end QB, and opened up rosters spots. 

Traded Cooper, Ingram, Rosen for Hill. Upgrade a starting spot, open up rosters spots, get a QB off of my roster. 

En example of me acting against my rules of thumb and really regretting it: Traded Hill, Jackson for Fournette, Boyd. I really like Boyd, but the trade was always going to come down to Fournette vs Hill. I had no business trading the safer and more valuable asset. I got cute and paid for it. 

Rosters: to give you an idea of how I like to build my teams. Starters bolded. All 12 Tm PPR, 1x QB. 

Team 1  (Ommegang) 12-1, won championship*
Q - Ryan, Rivers
R - Zeke, Kamara, Fournette, Thompson
W - Hopkins, Thomas, Thielen, Watkins, Foster
T - Ertz
Churn-able roster spots: 12/25
*Got away from my rules far too often this year. 

Team 2 (Bullet Club) 12-1, won championship
Q - Rodgers, Allen
R - Barkley, Zeke, Kamara, Mixon, Ito
W - Juju, Evans, Tate
T - Engram, Everett
Churn-able roster spots: 13/25

Team 3 (Bullet Club) 11-2, won championship (startup season)
Q - Ben, Dak
R - Kamara, Mixon, Lindsay, White, Thompson
W - OBJ, Julio, Ridley, Tate, Anderson, Smith, Samuel 
T - Graham, Everett
Churn-able roster spots: 12/28

Team 4 (Bullet Club) 9-4, lost in first round, injury bug
Q - Wentz, Mayfield, Dak, Allen (I know)
R - Kamara, Cook, Guice, Lindsay, Thompson
W - OBJ, Kupp, Boyd, Ridley, Smith, MVS
T - Reed, Everett
Churn-able roster spots: 12/28

A few notes: I use the rankings of ZWK and Ryan McDowell at DLF as a 2nd/3rd opinion. I use the DTC trade calculator to help build quality offers. (I'm typically very active and careful not to offend with lowballs.)
 

have to throw the flag down on this one..for Team 1, how many teams are in your league  , 4? you got Zeke, Kamara, Hopkins,Thomas AND Ertz? c'mon now. seriously, I mean you have to be in a 4 team league, right? or you're drafting against 8 yr olds.

Team 2 has Rodgers, Barkley, Zeke, Kamara, Mixon, J.s.shuster,Evans .please.

Team 3 has OBJ AND Julio?! lol , Kamara, Big Ben, Lindsay?  

Team 4 is the only one I could see that you needed to work to make it win.

anyways most of the advice is good. Go big for TE is correct, most fantasy leagues haven't changed TE rec pts from 15 yards to 25 to make them equal to WRs - but they should.

always have 2 QBs and play match-ups.thats the best nugget of your whole post. 

but saying you won 4 of 5 leagues , with THOSE rosters, is a bit misleading. you SHOULD win 4 of 5 with those stacked gems!

 

[Dr. Octopus]

have to throw the flag down on this one..for Team 1, how many teams are in your league  , 4? you got Zeke, Kamara, Hopkins,Thomas AND Ertz? c'mon now. seriously, I mean you have to be in a 4 team league, right? or you're drafting against 8 yr olds.

Are you in any dynasty leagues? - because putting together a team like that does not require playing with inferior competition. It's easy to see that team and think that but where do you think Kamara, Thomas and Ertz went in rookie drafts?   

 

[Gally]

IMO, the best dynasty leagues reward draft picks based on reverse Potential Points.  The best way to "game" that system is by not having players who will score points clogging up your roster. 

Mahomes was active on game day every week in 2017, and perfectly acceptable as a QB starter in every format.  If your league has a specific rule that says you must start "startable" players, then how do you define or enforce it? 

Playing for the future is one of the most enjoyable things about dynasty fantasy football, and you should not be in a position to police someone's intent.  Not every team can compete every year, and they shouldn't be required to.

It is not perfectly acceptable to start a backup QB in any format.  QB is different than any other position.  Only one plays barring an in-game injury.  It is not acceptable to start a guy that is not expected to see the field at all. 

Policing intent is part of the job of the commish however the intent you are policing is the intent of the rules.  Owners that purposely try to circumvent the intent of a rule are flat out trying to be a problem. 

 

[Dr. Octopus]

but saying you won 4 of 5 leagues , with THOSE rosters, is a bit misleading. you SHOULD win 4 of 5 with those stacked gems!

Who put those rosters together?

I won 3 championships of 5 dynasty leagues this year (it was my best season ever by far) and those rosters were stacked as well. That's the type of roster that wins dynasty leagues - and it takes a lot of work (and a lot of luck) to put those rosters together. I know I, and I'm sure Coop, play in very competive leagues with guys that have been doing it for a while. I'm sure there were at least 3-5 teams in those leagues that looked equally stacked.

 

[DepthCharts]

A few from the other leagues:
raded Green and Dez for OBJ (2016/17)

As I look back on this trade...... I won the title in 17, which means giving up OBJ was well worth it.  This trade happened 1-2 weeks before his ankle injury last year,  Haunts me at times long term.... oddly, i was the first round opponent this year of Coop, without green, and advanced.  On paper it looks horrible for me... in the pocketbook, it was the right move.
I dropped Dez for the Titans D this year... meh  

 

[scott46984]

.good stuff

 

[Pwingles]

What?  Tanking is a perfectly acceptable strategy.

This

If you'll notice, I mentioned previously that I'm a strong proponent of using Potential Points to determine draft order.  Intentionally benching viable starters is a no-no in every league I've ever been a part of.  But trading Hopkins for an injured rookie and a couple future picks is perfectly acceptable and should be encouraged in every dynasty league.

Because also this, and that

I will attempt to add something to this discussion. Great OP and responses so far, btw

I will add that knowing your league mates and understanding tendencies is important. The easiest example would be something as easy as knowing that "Tom" is an avid Bengals fan, so he might value Tyler Boyd more than "Bob" who needs wr help badly, but will be harder to extract maximum value from. Maybe due to an opinion you happen to know he holds of Boyd, or maybe its just a lack of resources, either way, knowing and using information like this is key when trying to make the best deals for your team. So its to your benefit to be active and sociable within your league, not just actively spamming trade offers and combing the wire daily.

Sort of like poker where you have "optimal" vs "exploitative" strategies. You can use either on their own based on the merit that they have as stand alone strategies, but the best way is usually somewhere in the middle, utilizing either when appropriate.

 

[Mr. Irrelevant]

-Absolutely no drafting QBs, WRs, or TEs

Just as an aside, I feel as though any league for which this is anything close to optimal strategy has a serious imbalance in its roster / lineup requirements, scoring, or both.

An ideal league would balance positional strength such that you should be basically indifferent to position in your drafting, trading, or roster management strategy. Obviously, that’s impossible in the real world, but any league format that rewards drafting nothing but RBs falls miles short of the ideal. At a minimum I would ensure  ...

2) once you go superflex, you never go back

I don't have much that hasn't been said more eloquently upthread. Although I'll throw a couple things out there:

Embrace the barbell strategy. Almost every available roster spot should be filled with one of two classes of players: studs, or players with some chance of becoming studs - even if that chance is relatively small. Someone with a 10% chance of becoming a 90 VBD player (e.g. Dante Pettis) is worth far more than someone with a 90% chance of being a 10 VBD player (e.g. Marvin Jones). This works at TE/QB (in 1-QB leagues) because the gap between low-end starter and WW fodder is so small; at RB because the potential payoff for a stud is so large; and at WR for both reasons.

(Caveat: “Studs” in this context refers to current production, not dynasty value. Every dynasty owner worth his salt should have had multiple shares of Fitz the last 3 years – the gap between his median expected production and average cost was absolutely staggering. A.J. Green and T.Y. Hilton look like similarly juicy targets as they pass the age-30 threshold.)

Don’t be afraid to buy high. It’s easy to forget that consensus value doesn’t mean much when it comes to dynasty. Almost by definition, the people who own a given player in a given league value him higher than that league’s consensus - so in most cases any offer you make for him will have to value him higher still. If you have a high degree of confidence that the player either is or will become elite, even offers that look like overpays in the moment often turn into huge bargains 1-2 years down the road.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Don’t be afraid to buy high. It’s easy to forget that consensus value doesn’t mean much when it comes to dynasty. Almost by definition, the people who own a given player in a given league value him higher than that league’s consensus - so in most cases any offer you make for him will have to value him higher still. If you have a high degree of confidence that the player either is or will become elite, even offers that look like overpays in the moment often turn into huge bargains 1-2 years down the road.

I've recently delved into this philosophy in a big way. I'm no longer worried about overpaying to get the guy I want. I'll make offers with multiple very good to great assets to get the guy I want. For one thing I feel I can replace those roster spots by churning the wire or with other trades.

Also I agree, we get so hung up on "market value" which is fairly useless to each of us as individuals in our reality. There is no general "dynasty market" that sets values. We are all dealing with very limited markets (i.e 9 other teams. 11 other teams, 13 other teams, etc.). Now sure it's useful to see what a guy like Adam Thielen is going for in other leagues to be able to set some baseline on an offer, but the only thing that ultimately matters is what the guy who owns him wants for him - you'll either pay it or you'll pass if you deem its too much.

 

[ShaHBucks]

This should be monetized Coop 

 

[Men-in-Cleats]

Embrace the barbell strategy. Almost every available roster spot should be filled with one of two classes of players: studs, or players with some chance of becoming studs - even if that chance is relatively small. Someone with a 10% chance of becoming a 90 VBD player (e.g. Dante Pettis) is worth far more than someone with a 90% chance of being a 10 VBD player (e.g. Marvin Jones). This works at TE/QB (in 1-QB leagues) because the gap between low-end starter and WW fodder is so small; at RB because the potential payoff for a stud is so large; and at WR for both reasons.

This sort of strategy works very well until you get salaries involved as you really can't afford a roster of all studs in most cases and you have to sometimes try to fill some positions at a bargain and hope they outperform their salary by a good margin.  You have to be a bit more of a bargain shopper rather than stockpiling studs. 

 

[Mr. Irrelevant]

This sort of strategy works very well until you get salaries involved as you really can't afford a roster of all studs in most cases and you have to sometimes try to fill some positions at a bargain and hope they outperform their salary by a good margin.  You have to be a bit more of a bargain shopper rather than stockpiling studs. 

I would think, although I've never played in a salary-cap league so I'm the furthest thing from an authority on the subject.

I'd expect such leagues would resemble shallow keeper leagues more so than traditional dynasty formats. For instance, in one such league this year my roster includes L. Jackson, A. Jones, Chubb, Mixon, Golladay, Lockett, Njoku, and Engram. That's great! Except I can only keep 4 of them and no more than 2 at one position. That's not great! I'd have been far better served consolidating into fewer players with larger gaps between keeper-round cost and future value before the trading deadline than shooting for a title with a roster that was really young, and really good, but not quite star-studded enough.

 

[Men-in-Cleats]

I would think, although I've never played in a salary-cap league so I'm the furthest thing from an authority on the subject.

I'd expect such leagues would resemble shallow keeper leagues more so than traditional dynasty formats. For instance, in one such league this year my roster includes L. Jackson, A. Jones, Chubb, Mixon, Golladay, Lockett, Njoku, and Engram. That's great! Except I can only keep 4 of them and no more than 2 at one position. That's not great! I'd have been far better served consolidating into fewer players with larger gaps between keeper-round cost and future value before the trading deadline than shooting for a title with a roster that was really young, and really good, but not quite star-studded enough.

In ours you set up contracts that can vary in length from 1 years to 6 years and you have up to 54 players on active roster and 6 man taxi squad that doesn't count against your CAP.  There are free agency periods where you can do slow bidding on free agents and the draft is solely rookies.  The kicker is that there is a formula to base ones "earned value" based on their fantasy scoring and if your earned value is 4 times your salary you force a renegotiation where you have to either pay them their earned salary or cut them.  Rookie salaries are fixed depending on what round you are picked in.  You have a hard time accumulating studs because a top RB can have a salary of $8 million or more but if you get them as a rookie you have them for $2.5 million.  It is nearly impossible to pry away a stud RB when they are in their first contract unless they were a later round pick that the owner got at a bargain rate until they forced a renegotiation and the owner can't afford to keep them.  The one thing you can trade for more often is IDP guys because owners are much more likely to let them go, especially older established guys if the owner wants to get younger and trade someone off before their value bottoms out.  I've seen a couple of guys be very successful in trading picks for defensive starters but I'm admittedly not as good on the IDP side as I should be given how long I've been in this league.  In leagues like this CAP management is the art you have to learn and getting players that exceed their value across the board with enough studs mixed in to give you that consistent scoring you need to win. 

 

[Gally]

I would think, although I've never played in a salary-cap league so I'm the furthest thing from an authority on the subject.

I'd expect such leagues would resemble shallow keeper leagues more so than traditional dynasty formats. For instance, in one such league this year my roster includes L. Jackson, A. Jones, Chubb, Mixon, Golladay, Lockett, Njoku, and Engram. That's great! Except I can only keep 4 of them and no more than 2 at one position. That's not great! I'd have been far better served consolidating into fewer players with larger gaps between keeper-round cost and future value before the trading deadline than shooting for a title with a roster that was really young, and really good, but not quite star-studded enough.

In leagues where you keep a minimal number of players you should treat it mostly like a redraft.  The couple of players that you get to keep from year to year lose some importance when there are less of them.  This is much different than a salary cap situation - unless you only keep a few players from year to year. 

 

[Tau837]

What option did they have? This isn’t a redraft league with Ryan Tannehill and Andy Dalton on the waiver wire to pick up.  Every starting QB and multiple backup QBs were rostered.  

They had the option to kick you out of the league, which would have happened in my dynasty leagues.  

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

I've always wondered how this can be policed. 

A strong Commissioner with good judgment backed by rules that give him/her discretion.

 

[DropKick]

While reviewing my main dynasty team's roster recently and noted almost half the team was still playing going into the conference championships and the vast majority of the team had made the play-offs.  Something to be said for targeting the better NFL teams?

 

[Mr. Irrelevant]

While reviewing my main dynasty team's roster recently and noted almost half the team was still playing going into the conference championships and the vast majority of the team had made the play-offs.  Something to be said for targeting the better NFL teams?

It's easy to get the arrow of causality wrong here though. The really good teams are always going to be over-represented on fantasy champions, because really good teams produce really good fantasy seasons ... but if it were easy to predict which teams were gonna be really good in future years, Vegas wouldn't have built all those fancy casinos.

In my experience, it's more effective (and easier) to just avoid shares of guys on really bad offenses. Breakout offenses change from year to year, but bottom-tier offenses - the Raiders, Titans, Bills, Dolphins, Jets - tend to stay bad, even through skill-position and coaching changes, until they either hit on a QB (Browns) and/or completely overhaul their offensive philosophy (Bucs). Almost invariably, the #3 or even #4 fantasy option on a great offense will produce more VBD than the #1 option on a terrible one.

 

[Concept Coop]

So what happens when your guys get hurt then? I won last year & was on the way this year even w/my RBs being meh b/c my WRS were hold (PPR) then I lost AJG, Kupp & Sanders & Allen was hurt for a little as well.

What happens when no one wants guys like Gronk? He didn't help me

Great post, so I hate to sound negative, but if this is your philosophy then you have to include the other critical part of your philosophy which is obviously "luckily avoid injuries."   I've been bitten too many times by the injury bug to jump without a backup parachute like this. But your point is well made that if you have too much depth, it'll hold you back on free agent pick ups. I've been guilty of this.

My theory is that depth can be put in place via the waiver wire. There will certainly be risk taking a top-heavy approach, but I think it's a good gamble.

While Jared Cook, to pick one name, might not have been on the waiver wire at the time, I expect to have accumulated enough value to trade for someone like Cook, in the event that I lose Gronk. 

I am in active leagues, so in the event that I need to make a trade, I am usually able to. If your leagues are different, maybe this approach won't work.

 

[Concept Coop]

Great Thread; thanks for starting and sharing Coop.  I consider myself an average dynasty player (5 leagues; make playoffs in 2 or MAYBE 3/year; won a league this year but none in prev. two years).      I am also in league 1 with Coop.    My comments/observations/questions to coop on his strategies:

Investing all available value into starting lineup and consolidate.     I have always preferred depth and I think I am now convinced to move toward this approach; probably not this extreme but I see value in some open roster spots and I know I get too attached to players for too long.

Trade rookie picks.  Again, I am coming around and will do more of this in leagues where I have playoff caliber teams.  In the league with Coop, I am in year 1 of a massive rebuild (let my team get old) and will use some picks (but I will also trade picks for younger players where I can).  I looked at the last 3 drafts and Coop has had only 3 picks (earliest was 3.7) and none in last two years, so he follows this...…...

QB/TE - I agree and follow these; I never understand teams that have 4 qb's in a start 1, 24 roster league...

Other observations of Coop in this league:  

The man trades and trades fairly and I think that he is Understating the value/impact in that.  He probably averages 40 trades a year.  There have been several threads about lowball offers and how to respond.  many people are like me and get offended (not saying it is smart or right) and write some owners off.  Coop is the opposite and I think it benefits him.  If I don't think one his offers is fair, I actually question myself.  This helps him in a couple of ways,  people come to him with offers b/c they know he is fair and will make deals (think about that - 90% of the people in your leagues aren't like that).   Coop also sends out many (not multiple, many) offers at the same time, I have missed on some deals because I needed to think about it (you have to act fast with him or you may not get a deal done and sometimes that means taking the offer vs. negotiating).  I think this is a big part of his success and I will be efforting to be much more active in sending offers.   I think with more available trade calculators this is easier for all of us to do.

Questions for Coop/theories on why he is successful:

How much time do you spend in season on your 4 leagues?  It takes me quite awhile to come up with fair trades; how many hours a week are you putting in?

Talent evaluation?   You don't draft rookies and don't follow college ball, so I assume you have some process for determining studs before they become studs; i.e. you have Kamara on all 4 teams and I believe in this league you acquired him early in his rookie year.

Injuries.  What do you do when they happen to a stud in season (with no depth).  do you trade them (assume they get hurt week 1 and are out for the year but will make a full recovery).

Again, greatly appreciate the insight.....

Sorry I missed this earlier. Thanks for the kind words!

It's hard to quantify the time spent, as it varies, depending on work/home obligations. When work is slow and the hobby has my interest, I'll spend a couple hours on this site and sites like it. This helps me stay up on player value, so building offers comes easier. Most of my offers fall under 3 categories - targeting guys I like, targeting areas of need, trying to consolidate. I will say that I spend the most time on our league. Believe it or not, the last few seasons I've been a pretty typical owner in my others, in terms of activity. 

I let the pros do the heavy lifting, when it comes to rookie scouting. I rely heavily on draft position. Rather than trying to out do the pros, I'll try to take what they give me and add fantasy context. For example, I value smaller speed WRs (Ross, Fuller, Brown, etc.) below their draft spot, under the assumption that a sizable portion of the value they offer NFL teams is not rewarded in fantasy points. They're valued in part because they open things up for the rest of their offense, but that doesn't help me win fantasy games. I bump QBs that are likely to add rushing production, I try to account for situation and opportunity, etc. I do watch game clips and highlights and let my evaluation sort players within tiers, but rarely outside them. If a guy looks like a 1st rounder to me but is drafted in the 3rd, I'm going to trust the pros and treat him like a 3rd rounder. I'll likely prefer him to other players drafted around him, however. 

I think it's much more valuable to spend time "scouting" young NFL players. I think that separates you from your peers more than rookie scouting (assuming the rookie draft is after the NFL draft). I landed Kamara in all of my leagues for the same reason I've been bothering you for Kerryon so much. Nothing profound, but both guys looked really good to me - I started sending out offers. 

Injuries are tough - it kind of depends on the situation. If I'm contending, I'm very wary about wasting a season of my studs, so I usually make a move. Ideally, I'll add to my guy for a similar player, rather than downgrade. If I lost Kamara week 1, I'd prefer adding to him for McCaffrey or Zeke, rather than trade him for a lesser player - Melvin Gordon, for example. If I'm rebuilding, I'm targeting players who are hurt but likely to recover fully. I'll also target short-term band-aids, if I need to. It's not sexy, but I'll buy cheap options like Larry Fitzgerald or Jared Cook or Drew Brees, rather than sell low on an injured player I like.