In Zealots, I've made 2 off-season trades involving IDPs. My LBs last year were pitiful - with the exception of London Fletcher, I had none that finished in the top 30. Most weeks, I was probably giving away 10-15 pts at that spot alone - it may have been worse, but I really don't want to know
. Both of these trades were made in Feb/March.
1. I traded the 1.01 rookie pick & Jon Kitna (to the Palmer owner) for the 1.09, a 3rd rounder in 2006, Nick Barnett, & Terrance Kiel. I guess that's heresy to most who look at the 1.01 as a sure thing RB. However, there wasn't one RB that stood out to me from the others in this draft & I got two good, young IDPs who should be starters for me for a while (in Zealots, you can start 3 LBs & 3 DBs). If, for grins, we say Kitna = 3rd rd rookie pick.....than I got Barnett & Kiel to move down 8 spots.
2. Traded the 1.12 & 2.01 for Keith Bullock & Santana Moss. I'm not crazy about Moss, but I'm not pressured to start him at this point. If he turns into a starter, all the better. His chance to be decent was the balancer in this trade, because my trading partner wasn't trading Bullock for just one of those picks & I wasn't trading both for KB. IMO, Bullock's better than any IDP rookie I'd have gotten there.
Given the sentiments in many of the previous posts in this thread, most of you will probably think I overpaid. However, I feel much better about my IDPs now than I did in December (also picked up Grant Wistrom & Greg Spires cheap in FA bidding). I've still got the 1.07 & 1.09 rookie picks and, after yesterday, I feel much better about them
ETA: to the original point of the thread, I didn't use any particular rule of thumb in assigning value to my picks (save all of your jokes, please
). I didn't take the first offers that came along, nor did what I
offered always get taken. It depended on each team's wants/needs, which are unique. That's the aspect of dynasty leagues I like the best.