Sheer volume of early round picks?
This is a great question for @ghostguy123 since he has done a ton of startups already this year and has made many trade downs from a top 4 draft slot this year.I’ve looked at some trade value charts, but would like some other opinions.
For those of you who like to, or would consider, trade out of 1.01 in a dynasty startup, what are you looking to get in return?
Sheer volume of early round picks? Picks in future years?
The under 23 year old RBs mean 22 and under you might not even field a team with that strategy.Sheer volume of early round picks?
this
and if I may, focus on building a dynasty, not a redraft. I'd only draft young rising players. I'd start with WRs and TEs under 25 years old, RBs under 23 yo, QB under 27 yo.
as crazy as it sounds, guys like Travis Kelce wouldn't even be on my draft board in a dynasty start up
and I'd go WR very heavy. WRs win multiple years in dynasty (and I have). RBs have the least value to me
I think those numbers from @Jppaul make a lot more sense if there is an off-by-one error ... If he meant "less than or equal to", then I think those are good numbers. If he really did mean strictly "less than", that's a bit too far in my opinion.The under 23 year old RBs mean 22 and under you might not even field a team with that strategy.Sheer volume of early round picks?
this
and if I may, focus on building a dynasty, not a redraft. I'd only draft young rising players. I'd start with WRs and TEs under 25 years old, RBs under 23 yo, QB under 27 yo.
as crazy as it sounds, guys like Travis Kelce wouldn't even be on my draft board in a dynasty start up
and I'd go WR very heavy. WRs win multiple years in dynasty (and I have). RBs have the least value to me
So Breece Hall who is 23 is off your draft board ?
How many NFL RB's are actually 22 or younger right now ? Bijan, Gibbs and Achane are the only 3 I can even think of that are currently 22 yrs old and were anywhere in the top 30 RBs last year.
Big difference from wanting to drop back 3-4 spots and trading your 1.01 to collect a bunch of picksI drew the 1.01 in my startup last year. 16 team SF IDP.
Couldn’t get an offer. Wanted to drop back 3-4 spots.
No takers.
Yeah, fair point.Big difference from wanting to drop back 3-4 spots and trading your 1.01 to collect a bunch of picksI drew the 1.01 in my startup last year. 16 team SF IDP.
Couldn’t get an offer. Wanted to drop back 3-4 spots.
No takers.
Example trading the 1.01 for the 2.02, 3.11 and a future 1st and future 2nd.
Some people will want to come up and deal for the 1.01 and have 2 top 5 picks. They don't always want to just move up 3 to 4 spots. They want both.
The under 23 year old RBs mean 22 and under you might not even field a team with that strategy.Sheer volume of early round picks?
this
and if I may, focus on building a dynasty, not a redraft. I'd only draft young rising players. I'd start with WRs and TEs under 25 years old, RBs under 23 yo, QB under 27 yo.
as crazy as it sounds, guys like Travis Kelce wouldn't even be on my draft board in a dynasty start up
and I'd go WR very heavy. WRs win multiple years in dynasty (and I have). RBs have the least value to me
So Breece Hall who is 23 is off your draft board ?
How many NFL RB's are actually 22 or younger right now ? Bijan, Gibbs and Achane are the only 3 I can even think of that are currently 22 yrs old and were anywhere in the top 30 RBs last year.
You do you, of course. But I completely disagree that going strictly youth will prohibit you from competing in year three... That's when you'd start to dominate for the next 3-4 yearsI believe the best way to build is a mix of youth and vets. Too many people try and go to heavy fire the future and end up being unable to compete for at least 3-4 years. By that time you are now chasing it and it's hard to recover.
As far as trading the 1.01 I would try and optimize early round start up picks. I would also not be afraid to use future picks to available high end talent that seems to fall to be good value as the draft is happening.
Of course it can happen but it my experience it rarely does. In order for it to work you have to hit on 60-70% of those picks in a way that makes them all be top end performers in 3 years. If you don't then you are starting over again with no real assets.You do you, of course. But I completely disagree that going strictly youth will prohibit you from competing in year three... That's when you'd start to dominate for the next 3-4 years
I’ve looked at some trade value charts, but would like some other opinions.
For those of you who like to, or would consider, trade out of 1.01 in a dynasty startup, what are you looking to get in return?
Sheer volume of early round picks? Picks in future years?
My game is youth. Veterans can be good for those bottom roster spots (bottom, when ranked by dynasty value). For example, I acquired Geno Smith a few weeks ago as a safety valve if Hurts is injured. Perfectly good way to fill a roster spot if a solid younger asset cannot be acquired to fill the spot. Other than that, I have Godwin, and the next oldest guy on my roster is AJ Brown, and I wouldn't have it any other way. I don't think I would ever be trading for a Tyreek Hill (Tyreek Hill today) type, at consensus value.You do you, of course. But I completely disagree that going strictly youth will prohibit you from competing in year three... That's when you'd start to dominate for the next 3-4 yearsI believe the best way to build is a mix of youth and vets. Too many people try and go to heavy fire the future and end up being unable to compete for at least 3-4 years. By that time you are now chasing it and it's hard to recover.
As far as trading the 1.01 I would try and optimize early round start up picks. I would also not be afraid to use future picks to available high end talent that seems to fall to be good value as the draft is happening.
I have seen start ups where owners weren't patient and wound up sucking after a year or two, never recover, and leave the league
It's harder to hit on 1st/2nd year guys that haven't shown much in the NFL.
My game is youth. Veterans can be good for those bottom roster spots (bottom, when ranked by dynasty value). For example, I acquired Geno Smith a few weeks ago as a safety valve if Hurts is injured. Perfectly good way to fill a roster spot if a solid younger asset cannot be acquired to fill the spot. Other than that, I have Godwin, and the next oldest guy on my roster is AJ Brown, and I wouldn't have it any other way. I don't think I would ever be trading for a Tyreek Hill (Tyreek Hill today) type, at consensus value.You do you, of course. But I completely disagree that going strictly youth will prohibit you from competing in year three... That's when you'd start to dominate for the next 3-4 yearsI believe the best way to build is a mix of youth and vets. Too many people try and go to heavy fire the future and end up being unable to compete for at least 3-4 years. By that time you are now chasing it and it's hard to recover.
As far as trading the 1.01 I would try and optimize early round start up picks. I would also not be afraid to use future picks to available high end talent that seems to fall to be good value as the draft is happening.
I have seen start ups where owners weren't patient and wound up sucking after a year or two, never recover, and leave the league
Edit: I should definitely add. This is the only league I've ever played in, and it is a 12-team league with 20-man rosters and we only start 6 offensive players total. That is very shallow lineups, and my theory may not work with deeper lineups. (And it may not work in our league either, jury still out.)
I could not agree more. So many people in dynasties focus way too much on youth, as opposed to building a competitive roster for the present. You can get a lot of vets at great value that will help you a ton more for 2-3 years, compared to a rookie who might bust completely.I believe the best way to build is a mix of youth and vets. Too many people try and go to heavy fire the future and end up being unable to compete for at least 3-4 years. By that time you are now chasing it and it's hard to recover.
Possibly. There could be certain circumstances like that where I would do it. Though I would hope it wouldn't be an overpay when the other guy is rebuilding and scrapping Hill for parts ... (Then again the other guy knows I need Hill just as much as he doesn't need him.) But yeah, I could see that.My game is youth. Veterans can be good for those bottom roster spots (bottom, when ranked by dynasty value). For example, I acquired Geno Smith a few weeks ago as a safety valve if Hurts is injured. Perfectly good way to fill a roster spot if a solid younger asset cannot be acquired to fill the spot. Other than that, I have Godwin, and the next oldest guy on my roster is AJ Brown, and I wouldn't have it any other way. I don't think I would ever be trading for a Tyreek Hill (Tyreek Hill today) type, at consensus value.You do you, of course. But I completely disagree that going strictly youth will prohibit you from competing in year three... That's when you'd start to dominate for the next 3-4 yearsI believe the best way to build is a mix of youth and vets. Too many people try and go to heavy fire the future and end up being unable to compete for at least 3-4 years. By that time you are now chasing it and it's hard to recover.
As far as trading the 1.01 I would try and optimize early round start up picks. I would also not be afraid to use future picks to available high end talent that seems to fall to be good value as the draft is happening.
I have seen start ups where owners weren't patient and wound up sucking after a year or two, never recover, and leave the league
Edit: I should definitely add. This is the only league I've ever played in, and it is a 12-team league with 20-man rosters and we only start 6 offensive players total. That is very shallow lineups, and my theory may not work with deeper lineups. (And it may not work in our league either, jury still out.)
But I'm guessing you'd over-pay for a rental stud, like if the Tyreek Hill owner is heading to a rebuild, you're already mathematically in the playoffs at the trade deadline and you think Hill puts you over the top to win the league?
well, you might "over-pay" a rebuilding owner because other playoff bound owners might be in on it.Possibly. There could be certain circumstances like that where I would do it. Though I would hope it wouldn't be an overpay when the other guy is rebuilding and scrapping Hill for parts ... (Then again the other guy knows I need Hill just as much as he doesn't need him.) But yeah, I could see that.My game is youth. Veterans can be good for those bottom roster spots (bottom, when ranked by dynasty value). For example, I acquired Geno Smith a few weeks ago as a safety valve if Hurts is injured. Perfectly good way to fill a roster spot if a solid younger asset cannot be acquired to fill the spot. Other than that, I have Godwin, and the next oldest guy on my roster is AJ Brown, and I wouldn't have it any other way. I don't think I would ever be trading for a Tyreek Hill (Tyreek Hill today) type, at consensus value.You do you, of course. But I completely disagree that going strictly youth will prohibit you from competing in year three... That's when you'd start to dominate for the next 3-4 yearsI believe the best way to build is a mix of youth and vets. Too many people try and go to heavy fire the future and end up being unable to compete for at least 3-4 years. By that time you are now chasing it and it's hard to recover.
As far as trading the 1.01 I would try and optimize early round start up picks. I would also not be afraid to use future picks to available high end talent that seems to fall to be good value as the draft is happening.
I have seen start ups where owners weren't patient and wound up sucking after a year or two, never recover, and leave the league
Edit: I should definitely add. This is the only league I've ever played in, and it is a 12-team league with 20-man rosters and we only start 6 offensive players total. That is very shallow lineups, and my theory may not work with deeper lineups. (And it may not work in our league either, jury still out.)
But I'm guessing you'd over-pay for a rental stud, like if the Tyreek Hill owner is heading to a rebuild, you're already mathematically in the playoffs at the trade deadline and you think Hill puts you over the top to win the league?
I’m struggling with this right now. Last year I was a bottom team. Between trades and my own picks I now have Bijan, MHJ, Garret Wilson and a few other good young players. But I’m really not likely to contend. I’m not trading these young guys but don’t feel right putting the top 1st and 2nd year players on the taxi squad although that would be the prudent move. So I’m probably going to be mid pack. Which kinda sucks. But at least there are no old players on the team.never ever be mediocre cause that keeps you mediocre. If you can't be great, acknowledge it, sell off your non-young players and rebuild. Go all-in on the rebuild.
I could not agree more. So many people in dynasties focus way too much on youth, as opposed to building a competitive roster for the present. You can get a lot of vets at great value that will help you a ton more for 2-3 years, compared to a rookie who might bust completely.I believe the best way to build is a mix of youth and vets. Too many people try and go to heavy fire the future and end up being unable to compete for at least 3-4 years. By that time you are now chasing it and it's hard to recover.
but don’t feel right putting the top 1st and 2nd year players on the taxi squad
but don’t feel right putting the top 1st and 2nd year players on the taxi squad
why?
I stopped being morally/ethically restrained when the San Diego Chargers picked up a RB released by Tampa (i forget the details) just so my denver broncos couldn't get him the year they went through 7-8 RBs. Do any of y'all remember that year? Selvin Young, etc. Tatum Bell was selling cell phones in the mall near my house when he got a call to join the team because all the rest were on IR.
And the chargers never even played that RB they acquired... just to screw over the broncos.
so, in a rebuild, put all your young, best players on taxi UNTIL you're ready to dominate.
I've done some startups where I've gone the other way with highly valuing RB's or TE's(TEP) and blowing off WR's and have had a lot of success. Just illustrates there are multiple strategies that can be successful. Boils down less about position and picking the right players IMO.I have had a great deal of dynasty success under-valuing RBs and going heavy with WRs.
In a start up, it's possible I don't even draft a RB
WRs win multiple years in dynasty (and I have). RBs have the least value to me
At that point you don’t want to contend.I’m struggling with this right now. Last year I was a bottom team. Between trades and my own picks I now have Bijan, MHJ, Garret Wilson and a few other good young players. But I’m really not likely to contend. I’m not trading these young guys but don’t feel right putting the top 1st and 2nd year players on the taxi squad although that would be the prudent move. So I’m probably going to be mid pack. Which kinda sucks. But at least there are no old players on the team.never ever be mediocre cause that keeps you mediocre. If you can't be great, acknowledge it, sell off your non-young players and rebuild. Go all-in on the rebuild.
Unless you play in the FFPC and you have to play for your draft pick which is way different than any other league. You can't full tank the FFPC unless you own a ton of other 1st round picks otherwise you are likely picking 1.04 or 1.03.At that point you don’t want to contend.I’m struggling with this right now. Last year I was a bottom team. Between trades and my own picks I now have Bijan, MHJ, Garret Wilson and a few other good young players. But I’m really not likely to contend. I’m not trading these young guys but don’t feel right putting the top 1st and 2nd year players on the taxi squad although that would be the prudent move. So I’m probably going to be mid pack. Which kinda sucks. But at least there are no old players on the team.never ever be mediocre cause that keeps you mediocre. If you can't be great, acknowledge it, sell off your non-young players and rebuild. Go all-in on the rebuild.
Sell off the olds, keep the core, and draft baby, draft!
Embrace the suck. Enjoy that 1.01
Oh yeah - this isn’t ‘nam, Smokey. There are rules.Unless you play in the FFPC and you have to play for your draft pick which is way different than any other league. You can't full tank the FFPC unless you own a ton of other 1st round picks otherwise you are likely picking 1.04 or 1.03.At that point you don’t want to contend.I’m struggling with this right now. Last year I was a bottom team. Between trades and my own picks I now have Bijan, MHJ, Garret Wilson and a few other good young players. But I’m really not likely to contend. I’m not trading these young guys but don’t feel right putting the top 1st and 2nd year players on the taxi squad although that would be the prudent move. So I’m probably going to be mid pack. Which kinda sucks. But at least there are no old players on the team.never ever be mediocre cause that keeps you mediocre. If you can't be great, acknowledge it, sell off your non-young players and rebuild. Go all-in on the rebuild.
Sell off the olds, keep the core, and draft baby, draft!
Embrace the suck. Enjoy that 1.01
The best approach is a mix. Going too young and you could wait forever. Going too old and you fall out fast.I could not agree more. So many people in dynasties focus way too much on youth, as opposed to building a competitive roster for the present. You can get a lot of vets at great value that will help you a ton more for 2-3 years, compared to a rookie who might bust completely.I believe the best way to build is a mix of youth and vets. Too many people try and go to heavy fire the future and end up being unable to compete for at least 3-4 years. By that time you are now chasing it and it's hard to recover.
that's funny, my experience has been the opposite. I have seen way too many owners focus on older, proven players and fail... that's how I started out in FF and when I was sure Donald Drive had one or two more good years left, then didn't, my approach changed.
so you'd draft kelce?I don't prioritize age. I prioritize talent. Doesn't really matter how old the player is within reason
so you'd draft kelce?I don't prioritize age. I prioritize talent. Doesn't really matter how old the player is within reason
See - “within reason.”so you'd draft kelce?I don't prioritize age. I prioritize talent. Doesn't really matter how old the player is within reason
I went youth heavy in a startup last year. Still took Mike Evans in the 9th even though he didn't quite fit to that approach. Ended up trading him mid-year for a future 1st. A good asset is a good asset, regardless of age limits.I could not agree more. So many people in dynasties focus way too much on youth, as opposed to building a competitive roster for the present. You can get a lot of vets at great value that will help you a ton more for 2-3 years, compared to a rookie who might bust completely.I believe the best way to build is a mix of youth and vets. Too many people try and go to heavy fire the future and end up being unable to compete for at least 3-4 years. By that time you are now chasing it and it's hard to recover.
That's disingenuous because he won't fall, not far enough.so you'd draft kelce?I don't prioritize age. I prioritize talent. Doesn't really matter how old the player is within reason
Sure. Depending where he fell to
It goes to exactly what I have been saying I do. Draft a mix to ensure I am always competitive from the start. How is it disingenuous stating I would take a player if the value is right? It's how I draft every player.That's disingenuous because he won't fall, not far enough.
I’m pretty sure everyone in this thread plays dynasty and we all have different strategies in one way or another. If everyone is grabbing youth, it means some older guys are going to fall and be good values. Why wouldn’t you grab a few of them if the price is right?Would anyone here like to start a dynasty league and we all can put our theories to work?
Because in years 3-7 of the dynasty, I'd consistently demonstrate successI’m pretty sure everyone in this thread plays dynasty and we all have different strategies in one way or another. If everyone is grabbing youth, it means some older guys are going to fall and be good values. Why wouldn’t you grab a few of them if the price is right?Would anyone here like to start a dynasty league and we all can put our theories to work?
Dude in my 16 teamer drafted an old team. Almost all olds. While everyone was youth chasing, he scooped up the McLaurin, Kupp, Cooper, Conner, etc types.Throwing this into the "youth vs veterans" conversation
And if you sprinkled a few stud vets in there maybe you’d consistently demonstrate success in years 1-7.Because in years 3-7 of the dynasty, I'd consistently demonstrate successI’m pretty sure everyone in this thread plays dynasty and we all have different strategies in one way or another. If everyone is grabbing youth, it means some older guys are going to fall and be good values. Why wouldn’t you grab a few of them if the price is right?Would anyone here like to start a dynasty league and we all can put our theories to work?
in all sincerity... who?And if you sprinkled a few stud vets in there maybe you’d consistently demonstrate success in years 1-7.Because in years 3-7 of the dynasty, I'd consistently demonstrate successI’m pretty sure everyone in this thread plays dynasty and we all have different strategies in one way or another. If everyone is grabbing youth, it means some older guys are going to fall and be good values. Why wouldn’t you grab a few of them if the price is right?Would anyone here like to start a dynasty league and we all can put our theories to work?
You’re missing the point.in all sincerity... who?And if you sprinkled a few stud vets in there maybe you’d consistently demonstrate success in years 1-7.Because in years 3-7 of the dynasty, I'd consistently demonstrate successI’m pretty sure everyone in this thread plays dynasty and we all have different strategies in one way or another. If everyone is grabbing youth, it means some older guys are going to fall and be good values. Why wouldn’t you grab a few of them if the price is right?Would anyone here like to start a dynasty league and we all can put our theories to work?
would you draft Davante Adams in a redraft? Of course, yeah? I think we all agree he's a stud. MFL has him at ADP 66 and he's "projected" to get 290 points (i think way too high, but let's use "unbiased" numbers). Metcalf has an ADP of 81 with a projection of 250 points, a full round later
Would you really take:
I think we all agree that going into the year with McCaffrey, Tyreek and Adams would be awesome.
- Adams (66) over Metcalf (81)?
- Christian McCaffrey (ADP 5) over Breece Hall (17) or Bijan (10)?
- Tyreek (18) over Waddle (60) or Nico (67)
EDIT: let's go extra controversial...
Kelce (54) vs Dalton Kincaid (72)?
You’re missing the point.in all sincerity... who?And if you sprinkled a few stud vets in there maybe you’d consistently demonstrate success in years 1-7.Because in years 3-7 of the dynasty, I'd consistently demonstrate successI’m pretty sure everyone in this thread plays dynasty and we all have different strategies in one way or another. If everyone is grabbing youth, it means some older guys are going to fall and be good values. Why wouldn’t you grab a few of them if the price is right?Would anyone here like to start a dynasty league and we all can put our theories to work?
would you draft Davante Adams in a redraft? Of course, yeah? I think we all agree he's a stud. MFL has him at ADP 66 and he's "projected" to get 290 points (i think way too high, but let's use "unbiased" numbers). Metcalf has an ADP of 81 with a projection of 250 points, a full round later
Would you really take:
I think we all agree that going into the year with McCaffrey, Tyreek and Adams would be awesome.
- Adams (66) over Metcalf (81)?
- Christian McCaffrey (ADP 5) over Breece Hall (17) or Bijan (10)?
- Tyreek (18) over Waddle (60) or Nico (67)
EDIT: let's go extra controversial...
Kelce (54) vs Dalton Kincaid (72)?
Sure, going strictly by ADP, I’d take the younger guys. But if there’s a bunch of “you” in the draft and Breece and Bijan go, and some other young guys, and I’m sitting at the end of the first and CMC is there, you can bet I’m going to take him.