FFPC dynasty and redraft thread (1 Viewer)

[barackdhouse]

I think there are enough nuances and unique qualities to the FFPC leagues that many of us play in, that we should have our own dedicated thread to talk shop, strategy, anything really that doesn't fit better elsewhere.

I just want to get this thing started, it belongs to all of us so it's not like this is up to me, but I would suggest we still talk as much FFPC as we see fit within the trade and dynasty value threads, but if we want to dive in deeper into some FFPC specific subtopics, I think this can be the place. We can talk about the FPC/Main Event contests in here as well as it has the same 20 person inseason lineup with 10 starters.

My only suggestions would be that we still post trades in the trade thread, that we don't try to buy and sell teams here, even though we're going to talk about our teams and the orphan process, and that's about it. 

Possible subtopics and just my initial ten cents to offer the thread on each:

The format : It has been said a 1000 times, but let's reiterate here. FFPC is PPR, but it is premium TE where they get 1.5 PPR. The standard and Superflex dynasty format has 20 roster spots inseason and must cutdown to 16 by March 31st each year, including a kicker and defense. This is an incredibly challenging restraint and it changes market dynamics and roster management approaches compared to deeper or more conventional dynasty formats. I *often* find myself making deals or making arguments on these boards that are *extremely* FFPC centric.

The orphan process : To the best of my knowledge, orphans have always been managed and administered directly through the FFPC site. Now you have that option still, or another 3rd party site that hosts auctions of orphan teams. I have bought a handful of FFPC orphan teams this year using this site. It is a very interesting twist that might act as an incentive for prospective owners to take on a struggling orphan? If they know they can "flip" it for a profit. I'm actually not sure how I feel about it, TBH.

Assessing market value of a FF franchise : Using an aggregate of Hindery's trade value chart, online calculators, and other sources, including one's own, in order to track one's franchise market value over time, if deemed necessary. It could also be used to assess orphan quality either in terms of wanting to put it up for sale or in terms of wanting to buy one.

Strategy nuances : Anything and everything I guess. My 4 quarters for a dollar thread is directly appplicable, IMO. In FFPC I believe you have to have difference makers and a few speculative plays each year. Anything in between is a roster clogger and franchise killer. The owners advertise the FFPC format as being quick to rebuild a struggling orphan and with our knowledge of how fast the FF landscape can change, this is very true. Cannot state enough how big of a deal cutting down to 16 in March is. In SF, which I have fallen even more in love with than standard FFPC, is even more so because all the QBs are rostered (mostly). I have played FFPC and FFPC style for 6+ years with very high success. A big part of my success, IMO, is my willingness to cash in extra quarters that I either can't roster or shouldn't. If I think the landscape is heading one way, and my trade partner is heading another, I want to be ahead of the curve, which sometimes means a loss on paper (as a snapshot in time). But if I inch closer to getting difference makers, that is the ultimate goal. Not to obtain value, but to win ships. "To crush your enemies, to see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women." I think the conventional wisdom that says "regularly accepting deals for less than market on paper will lead you to ruin eventually" doesn't apply in FFPC. So long as you are acquiring difference makers and hitting on upside plays and draft picks (which I tend to do). Anyway I have seen some really bad FFPC teams turn it around really quick. Including a 3 peater of mine. Just one year before it's first title I was complaining to a league mate about how that was my worst dynasty team by far (it was). But some shrewd moves and picks and next thing you know my team is dominant. You have to be willing to churn your roster and you will likely end up cutting some valuables pieces. People that haven't played FFPC don't appreciate this no matter how many times it has been said.

I like to use poker analogies a lot and I'd also like to add that there is more than one way to skin a cat. Which is to say there are many winning styles and approaches. Mine has worked for me (tight aggressive), but in both hobbies it has been my experience that the most risk averse owners/players are the ones actually taking the biggest risk. Again I think that holds more water with FFPC and maybe less so in other styles.

These are just a few blurbs I decided to add but feel free with whatever. This thread isn't mine. 

 

[menobrown]

The orphan process : To the best of my knowledge, orphans have always been managed and administered directly through the FFPC site. Now you have that option still, or another 3rd party site that hosts auctions of orphan teams. I have bought a handful of FFPC orphan teams this year using this site. It is a very interesting twist that might act as an incentive for prospective owners to take on a struggling orphan? If they know they can "flip" it for a profit. I'm actually not sure how I feel about it, TBH.

I'll start here.

I've never bought an orphan team and was not looking to sale an FFPC team so I'd not been checking on that third party site until you mainly brought it to my attention. It might be necessary. For those that don't know one of the reasons for playing in the FFPC is I'm not aware of any league having ever folded. Other factors like generally good customer service(I'd have said excellent until last year but a few hiccups occurred in a challenging season), and just in general a big time trust factor they will pay and your league will continue to exist. So whatever they feel is necessary to help leagues fill I can't quibble with and if they getting some of that 20% transaction fee that's a win for them, that's good business for someone that's for sure.

But I don't actually like this process. I don't like that a focus for some teams might change from competing to sale prepping. I also worry about an increase chance of collusion in light of the fact the teams with young assets and draft picks are the teams commanding top dollar on the resale market. I had that concern when I first started looking at this, say for example two people buy two teams in same league. Use one team as "win now" team, the other team as a bit of a farm team that collects all the valuable picks and young assets. Under this plan these two people would have a win now team in contention while building up a team to try and move for bundle bigger then what winning the league would entail.

Does that sound far fetched to you all? I would think this would be easier in a startup but after thinking this thought I now find myself wondering if it's being played out in front of my eyes in a league were two new owners bought teams. One just bought the team yesterday and these owners have made 3 fairly big trades with each other and with no one else.

In total one team has acquired CMC, Tee Higgins and 2.8 for 1.3, 1.6, 1.8, 2.3, 2.4, 2.8, 3.3 and a 2022 first.

I don't have any issue with the total comp paid out on both sides nor am I saying these teams are colluding but just that these teams are only trading with each other and it's exactly the scenario I worried about were one team tries to win now while building up the other team for a future sale.

 

[NE_REVIVAL]

Collusion is always a concern but I don't see the DD auction site as increasing the possibility all that much and I like the idea of people who like to draft and are good at building teams can sell them. The collusion scenario above could happen with or without the DD site (2 teams for sale in same lg) and having a win now team and a rebuild trading with each other happens all the time. Building a team to be sold in the future is pretty much the same as building a team to win in the future don't you think?

Even without DD or there even being 2 teams for sale the potential for collusion is ripe, all you need is 1 lg opening and a friend to join the lg and help each other. Not sure DD increases the likely hood of collusion all that much more than already exists but yes the potential for bad actors is there.

Regarding the 2 teams in your lg, do you know if they were bought via DD site or FFPC orphans?

It looks like the CMC & Higgins trades were fairly close in value.

On the plus side, I find some of these FFPC lgs get a little stale over time, very little communication, not a lot of trading and invariably some owners who never even acknowledge trade offers (i hate that). I like having a bit more flexibility to move on now and I also like that I can do more startups

 

[IHEARTFF]

I don’t have anything insightful to add right at this second, but I do want to subscribe to this thread.

 

[barackdhouse]

I have had some of the same concerns about the possibility of collusion or of perverting the incentive structure. But I don't think that possibility is any higher with this setup, since the same thing could have been done before. 

I did a trade with a guy recently that I thought was a little loose by him but it gained him a couple draft picks and then I saw his team go up for sale. So yeah I think it is weird and could have unintended consequences. 

But I can't point to a tangible downside that isn't just a fear. Today.

As for a bunch of activity between two new owners, I think that makes sense since this is an owner active enough to buy a team. 

I've been seeing good deals on teams that did a startup last year, made the playoffs and came up short, and then I think left because of a sour end of season taste in their mouth. Bought a few like that.

 

[jabarony]

I'm sure it happens, but I doubt too many people are looking to buy a team, make a few moves, then sell it.  The reason I say that is because when you buy a team, you pay the 2022 league deposit.  So if you buy a "$250" team for $200, you'd have to get it to sell for $300 (not to mention transaction fees) to at least break even.  And a few weeks earlier, it didnt sell for near that.  

FFPC would love these transactions - multiple deposits collected on 1 team before the season even starts!

 

[barackdhouse]

Pet peeves: FFPC owners who you tell them that you like an offer but you don't have any way of making room for that player they offered. Then they look at your roster and bounce back with hey you can drop *this* player and that one. Like yeah just because I haven't physically dropped them yet doesn't mean I'm counting them as a roster spot. In my experience, there *are* players that 95% of owners would autodrop here in February but who you can get something greater than zero if you put them on the block. So I tend to not actually drop anyone until I actually have to. Kind of like getting dealt 2-7 in the big blind and nobody raises it to you. Oh my God I hate that hand there is no reason to play it, except as a raise. But it is free to see a flop. I don't fold until the moment I am required to, usually. But people look at your roster and say "hey there are two guys right here that are droppable, what do you mean you don't have room?" Well #### at least they are responding. They apparently can't count to 16 very good but they're responding.

This jostling of who has room to buy players and who doesn't, and who is trying to pawn off their garbage for anything greater than zero (a solid strategy BTW) is present in every deal. It drastically changes the landscape of trading, IMO.

 

[menobrown]

The reason I think this format leads to more collusion is teams getting bought for multiple years league entry fee for their teams because they have young assets is a game changer. Did this exist before? I have not been paying attention but if teams were being purchased for multiple years entry fees before or being purchased at amounts were you'd need to win the league a few years to break even based mainly on draft picks and a few young assets I did not know about but if it has been going on please ignore everything I'm saying.

Before I would have thought if two people are colluding it's tough to make a big profit, tough to make it worthwhile. You'd essentially be having two teams pay an entry fee in hopes one of them cashed and cashed enough to cover the picked apart team. Then if you pick apart a team to much you lose money on the deposit.

The difference is now both teams could work together and be working together for favorable monetary results for both teams they bought in the league together, not just the one they hope would cash. As I was saying earlier one team built to win now, the other more of a collector of picks and future assets to take to market. A win/win. I just think the ability to build up a team to win now while at the same time building up a team to market later works better hand in hand now then is used to, again that is again only if this has not been going on already were teams were routinely being purchased based on draft and young asset capital for a big profit to the seller.

As for  the example I used I don't have enough information to feel super strongly about it but if I had to bet on it I would say they are in fact working together doing just what I outlayed. NE Revival asked if both teams were bought on the DD site and I don't know, one was for sure but the other one was bought before I even knew about the DD site earlier. There are things about their trade history immediately upon purchase, lack of trading with other teams, lack of quality offers to other teams and other items that make me inclined to think they are working together but I for sure can't say that with 100% degree of confidence. But one team was a discount team, not sure on other one since I don't know when it sold and in a series of a few moves with each other has positioned one team to compete while making the other team an attractive one to take to market next year.

I did not mean to get to bogged down on this topic for this thread. It was just fresh on my mind, was just thinking yesterday of how I thought this could be exploited a bit and then bam the next day I feel like I was actually seeing it, potentially that is.

 

[menobrown]

. So I tend to not actually drop anyone until I actually have to.

I've never understood why anyone cuts before they need to.

I'll date myself but I have a term for this, if anyone remembers the old Paul Masson wine commercials with Orson Welles were he used to say they sale no wine before it's time. So yea, I call this my Paul Masson theory, I will cut no player until it's time.

As  an example of were not using the Paul Masson theory goes wrong. I saw people last year cutting Hayden Hurst in early February. Whether he was any good or turns out to be any good is not the point so much as that he had value. Same thing for Gronk who I saw cut in leagues and then had value.

 

[barackdhouse]

Assessing market value of a FF franchise : Using an aggregate of Hindery's trade value chart, online calculators, and other sources, including one's own, in order to track one's franchise market value over time, if deemed necessary. It could also be used to assess orphan quality either in terms of wanting to put it up for sale or in terms of wanting to buy one.

Just for fun I am posting a breakdown of my worst Superflex orphan in FFPC and my best SF team overall, IMO, which is not an orphan, though I have a few orphans that are comparable. It is an example of how I use these values to assign a franchise value. Which is just me being a dork and doesn't give you any points in your boxscore. But I think visualizing what 16 looks like with a starting lineup of 10, is helpful when trying to determine strengths, weaknesses, and particularly in identifying where the fat is on your roster that needs burned off. I'm looking at you, Kenny Golladays of the world. I track my teams like this in a sheet and it informs me when I'm strategizing. 

Worst $250 orphan, bought from DD site for $29 :

BEN 9
ZEKE 25
GORDON 8
WOODS 15
JULIO 18
THIELEN 14
CAM 5
TRAUTMAN 3
PACKERS
SLY
HARRIS 5
MCKISSIC 4
SLAYTON 9
AGHOLOR 2
PERRIMAN 2
A BROWN 2

1.07 19
2.07 5
3.05 3
3.07 2

Future capital, 1st, 2nd, 3rd-7th (I'm calling a full future draft set as 30)

Total : 180 franchise value points (per Hindery's system but with my values synthesized from several sources)

Best team, not an orphan, but SF:

KYLER 58
HENRY 35
ROBINSON 25
NUK 40
JEFFERSON 47
CLAYPOOL 27
WILSON 43
HIGBEE 9
CHIEFS
MCMANUS
AJONES 32
WINSTON 5
BRADY 9
JUJU 24
PITTMAN 15
COREY 16

3.12, 4.01, 4.11, 4.12 and future 2nd-7th only (In total calling this 14)

Total : 402 franchise points (I also have a small handful of players I haven't cut yet that may bring some value)

What is your best SF and/or regular FFPC squad?

 

[menobrown]

Pet peeves: FFPC owners who you tell them that you like an offer but you don't have any way of making room for that player they offered.

I have two pet peeves.

The guy who you know has seen your offers but won't actually ever bother to decision them one way or the other.

The second and the comment that always rubs me the wrong way is "I have no use" or "I have no interest" in such and such a player. And I mean this with respect to were I'm making someone an offer to obtain a player who might be their best QB, first or second best RB, WR or TE. How can you say you haven no use of interest in that? It bothers me. Tell me you don't want to pay that for the player but don't say you have no use or interest in them.

 

[rockaction]

I have two pet peeves.

The guy who you know has seen your offers but won't actually ever bother to decision them one way or the other.

The second and the comment that always rubs me the wrong way is "I have no use" or "I have no interest" in such and such a player. And I mean this with respect to were I'm making someone an offer to obtain a player who might be their best QB, first or second best RB, WR or TE. How can you say you haven no use of interest in that? It bothers me. Tell me you don't want to pay that for the player but don't say you have no use or interest in them.

I just did that. I had no interest in some of the players the person was offering. In fact, I had cut one of the guys he was offering. Seems like a rather benign phrase. I get it that pet peeves are irrational, but that's how I put it so that the person knows.

 

[barackdhouse]

I have two pet peeves.

The guy who you know has seen your offers but won't actually ever bother to decision them one way or the other.

The second and the comment that always rubs me the wrong way is "I have no use" or "I have no interest" in such and such a player. And I mean this with respect to were I'm making someone an offer to obtain a player who might be their best QB, first or second best RB, WR or TE. How can you say you haven no use of interest in that? It bothers me. Tell me you don't want to pay that for the player but don't say you have no use or interest in them.

I literally told someone today I had no use for the player they offered (Lockett). He would have been my WR6 or something, though.

 

[menobrown]

What is your best SF and regular FFPC squad?

I'm boring old standard FFPC so no SF or BB or anything for me and this team rated the highest on Hindery's chart.

Mahomes, Herbert, Hurst

Alvin, Dalvin, CEH, Dobbins, Robinson, Jeff Wilson

Amari, Diontae, JuJu, Juedy, Deebo, Antonio Brown

Kittles, Engram

1.11, 2.11, 3.2,3.117

The bolded are projected cuts.

I did my team valuation using Hindery's numbers a few weeks and ago used just top 14 position players, not 16 since we can't keep that many and I added 25% to the TE's. But not adding 25% to TE's and using top 16 players and similar value for rounds 3-7 I'm at 427 and what is crazy is I've led the league in scoring 7 straight years already.

 

[menobrown]

I just did that. I had no interest in some of the players the person was offering. In fact, I had cut one of the guys he was offering. Seems like a rather benign phrase. I get it that pet peeves are irrational, but that's how I put it so that the person knows.

I literally told someone today I had no use for the player they offered (Lockett). He would have been my WR6 or something, though.

Not sure about your example rock but based on the one barack used that is NOT what I was talking about. I was talking about when a player would be your obvious best or second best at a position, an obvious starter.

 

[barackdhouse]

I'm boring old standard FFPC so no SF or BB or anything for me and this team rated the highest on Hindery's chart.

Alvin, Dalvin

I did my team valuation using Hindery's numbers a few weeks and ago used just top 14 position players, not 16 since we can't keep that many and I added 25% to the TE's. But not adding 25% to TE's and using top 16 players and similar value for rounds 3-7 I'm at 427 and what is crazy is I've led the league in scoring 7 straight years already.

Lol nice team but how have I never seen these two RBs paired like that ?!

Yeah just 14. I included the name of my defense and kicker but only 14 skill players listed.

 

[NE_REVIVAL]

I have two pet peeves.

The guy who you know has seen your offers but won't actually ever bother to decision them one way or the other.

The second and the comment that always rubs me the wrong way is "I have no use" or "I have no interest" in such and such a player. And I mean this with respect to were I'm making someone an offer to obtain a player who might be their best QB, first or second best RB, WR or TE. How can you say you haven no use of interest in that? It bothers me. Tell me you don't want to pay that for the player but don't say you have no use or interest in them.

Sorry, I too am guilty as charged on that and I do it all the time. For context it is rarely a player who would be my #1 or 2 at any position; 9 out of 10 times it is a player that would be a marginal (at best) improvement over WW fodder. Updated to reflect your response to BDH

There are occasionally times where it might be a decent player that I just don't like, we all have our guys and I have guys who the market likes but for whatever reason I don't and i'm shorting them. But the latter is more of a rarity and typically my response would be more along the lines of "I'm just not a player x guy". But I do use the i have no interest in player x line all the time to let the other owner know I am not interested in their (any) marginal type players.

 

[rockaction]

Not sure about your example rock but based on the one barack used that is NOT what I was talking about. I was talking about when a player would be your obvious best or second best at a position, an obvious starter.

Oh, okay. I'm always a little confused by that, too, then. I was surprised when I shopped James Robinson earlier this year and got that exact reply. So I can see what you're saying. To me it's just become shorthand for "I don't really want that guy for what you're offering or what you think he's worth." That's how I chalk it up. But I can see where you'd be confused. "I'm not looking at Player A at the generally accepted price" seems like a better way to phrase it, I'll give you that.

So yeah, I used it today for guys that wouldn't crack my starting lineup and are in the midst of serious decline right now.

 

[barackdhouse]

In my example I told the guy I liked Lockett and it was a good offer but I didn't need him on my team. And I said thanks.

 

[menobrown]

Lol nice team but how have I never seen these two RBs paired like that ?!

I don't know but going back to that discussion in the dynasty thread about performance of older RB's, that's not me just talking I really feel that way and I'm trying hard to break up Alvin and Dalvin, move at least one of them for a younger piece and not having any luck so far. Problem is I don't want 2 for 1's back and the few players I want are all on the same team and he's well, well he told me he had no interest in Alvin in Dalvin. LOL.

 

[barackdhouse]

So far we haven't even touched maybe the most obvious nuance of FFPC:

TE Premium 1.5 PPR - and there are 2 flex spots so you can start 3 TEs if needed/wanted - I'm stepping away but anyone feel free to run with this one (or anything else). My take is that this is a big factor but I think people over estimate how big of a deal it is (on draft day that is). Having a solid second TE (if such a thing even exists in the current landscape) can be a difference maker during injuries/byes/etc. And a marginal performance can get you through the week. As has been said in every format, Kelce is like a cheat code right now and that is even more true in this format. And it colors any kind of objective debate we might have about these nuances. Because he just destroys the position. Almost any strategy or approach has to acknowledge or navigate the question of how to deal with the top heavy TE field where the rest is either streamable or easily acquired. 

Are people really going to take Pitts in the 1st round this year? And then hold him? I know I know landing spot.

 

[barackdhouse]

I don't know but going back to that discussion in the dynasty thread about performance of older RB's, that's not me just talking I really feel that way and I'm trying hard to break up Alvin and Dalvin, move at least one of them for a younger piece and not having any luck so far. Problem is I don't want 2 for 1's back and the few players I want are all on the same team and he's well, well he told me he had no interest in Alvin in Dalvin. LOL.

the eye of the needle is tiny in FFPC

 

[FreeBaGeL]

What is your best SF and/or regular FFPC squad?

I haven't used the Hindery thing but I have only 3 regular FFPC squads (the other two are best ball) and I'd be hard pressed to figure out which of them I like the best.

I'll just list the highlights and not roster depth

Team 1 (1qb)
QB: Murray
RB: Barkley, Mixon, A Jones
WR: Hopkins, Tyreek, JJefferson, Evans
TE: Goedert

This one doesn't feel that loaded but it's the best performing.  Despite not having Barkley this year this team was #1 seed and finished 15 VPs ahead of the #2 seed.  Consistency helped with that as this team got the 2 VPs for finishing top 4 in scoring every single week of the regular season, which was the first time I've ever done that.

Team 2 (1qb)
QB: Murray
RB: Barkley, Swift, Carson, Hunt
WR: Tyreek, Diggs, AJ Brown, Reagor, Parker
TE: Kelce

Team 3 (SF)
QB: Murray, Wilson
RB: Barkley, Zeke, JRob, Hunt, Dillon
WR: Adams, McLaurin, Lamb, Jeudy
TE: Engram

 

[FreeBaGeL]

So far we haven't even touched maybe the most obvious nuance of FFPC:

TE Premium 1.5 PPR - and there are 2 flex spots so you can start 3 TEs if needed/wanted - I'm stepping away but anyone feel free to run with this one (or anything else). My take is that this is a big factor but I think people over estimate how big of a deal it is (on draft day that is). Having a solid second TE (if such a thing even exists in the current landscape) can be a difference maker during injuries/byes/etc. And a marginal performance can get you through the week. As has been said in every format, Kelce is like a cheat code right now and that is even more true in this format. And it colors any kind of objective debate we might have about these nuances. Because he just destroys the position. Almost any strategy or approach has to acknowledge or navigate the question of how to deal with the top heavy TE field where the rest is either streamable or easily acquired. 

Are people really going to take Pitts in the 1st round this year? And then hold him? I know I know landing spot.

Hock, Fant, Howard, Engram, and Njoku all had 1st round rookie ADP and I think Pitts will go higher than any of them.  The highest pick I have in 1qb is 1.07 and I'm not expecting him to be available.

As to the teams with multiple TEs, in most cases it seems like they just play them both.  I haven't really come across people shopping a really good TE because  they already have another one.  They just play both.

One guy in my main league has had Kittle/Kelce the last few years and I've been trying to pry one of them away from him for 2 years now with no success.

 

[joey]

Thanks for starting this thread!

I'm only in 1 FFPC league but love it. 12 team but not SF or BB. 
I basically treat it like a keeper/redraft league with room for only 4 or 5 rookies. Hoarding lots of picks never made much sense to me in that league since you need to cut down to 20 right before the NFL season starts, so there are 2 tough cut down periods in FFPC leagues. Of course, hoarding picks works when you can trade them for higher picks. The league I’m in doesn’t have tons of trades, but it’s not dead either. 
 

TE Premium: I have Kelce and Andrews and won’t even consider trading them yet. They helped carry me to a championship 2 years ago and 3rd place this year, even though I’m thin at RB. The ability to start 2 or even 3 TEs in this format really makes it interesting to me. I’m sitting at 1.10 and need an RB badly, but if one of the top 4 or 5 RBs don’t make it to me, I’ll definitely look at drafting Pitts there if he’s still available. 

 

[joey]

And, yes, I make my cuts at the last possible second. I sometimes trade a quality back up RB (to the team that owns the starter) right before cut down day, for example, for much less than his value if he’s just not going to make my final 16. He might have 3rd round value In a vacuum, but right before cut down, I’ll take a 5th for him if it makes sense, and use that pick for a kicker or something to hold through the summer and see what happens. 

 

[Penguin]

One guy in my main league has had Kittle/Kelce the last few years and I've been trying to pry one of them away from him for 2 years now with no success.

That would be me.

J/K but I do have both as well as Hooper in League 46

 

[Penguin]

My top BB team has

J.Allen

McCaffrey, Kamara, Hunt

Adams, Hill, McLaurin, Juju, Chark

Little, Andrews

Miami, Pitt

Won the the title years 1,2 & 3 and finished 2nd this year by 8 points due to CMC and Kittle missing so much time

 

[menobrown]

TE Premium 1.5 PPR - and there are 2 flex spots so you can start 3 TEs if needed/wanted - I'm stepping away but anyone feel free to run with this one (or anything else). My take is that this is a big factor but I think people over estimate how big of a deal it is (on draft day that is). Having a solid second TE (if such a thing even exists in the current landscape) can be a difference maker during injuries/byes/etc. And a marginal performance can get you through the week. As has been said in every format, Kelce is like a cheat code right now and that is even more true in this format. And it colors any kind of objective debate we might have about these nuances. Because he just destroys the position. Almost any strategy or approach has to acknowledge or navigate the question of how to deal with the top heavy TE field where the rest is either streamable or easily acquired. 

Are people really going to take Pitts in the 1st round this year? And then hold him? I know I know landing spot.

My oldest FFPC league dates back to 2011. I had read a bunch of fluff pieces on Gronk being unguardable and went on big effort to buy him up. Hernandez was more valued at the time. I was in my first FFPC startup that year and in round 7 I took Gronk, then it took me about half an hour to trade for the next pick and I took Hernandez. Someone said good thing I made that trade because when I took Gronk I was not taking the best one. Anyway Gronk was not that valuable yet, 7th round startup, I recall taking him in round 9 of some redrafts. Graham, Hernandez and Gronk were all huge in 2011 but if my memory serves me correctly if you lined up TE's vs WR's that year in PPG scoring you had 7 TE's that would have been included with 13 WR's making up the top twenty TE/WR's. Gronk was number one overall, beating any WR that season.

So I bring up 2011 because I was a TE horder that season and as it would turn out for most of my FFPC career since. That season highly impacted me. I looked at having these incredible TE's as like erasers, they fixed mistakes in my lineup. It was at this time I began to heavily devalue WR's. My approach was just give me a bunch of difference making RB's and TE's, I'll fill out the WR's. This approach has not always failed me but we've not seen a TE year like 2011 since either.

So seems like were in 2011 you could line up 7 WR's inside top 20 overall WR/TE's it's more like 2-3 the past few years. This makes the impact of having them huge no doubt, but for the most part TE hording has not been going as well for me unless I just happened to horde Waller, Kelce or Kittle.

So for me way I see it is I might have overvalued TE's most of my FFPC playing career based on impact of that 2011 season, a year when TE's were incredible for me. Again it's not always been bad last few year's it's been worse so I'm trying to steer away from it. I have several teams, dynasty and redraft, were I did stuff like draft my 4th or 5th TE before my second WR and again some of these teams were success stories but it's been an especially bad approach the last few season.

But with regards to Kyle Pitts. I can't help myself, I continue to be in search of difference makers and I"m not certain that he should be viewed more as a WR whose position is just listed as TE.

I think for me I'd say I still believe in the value of a big time TE as I did when that value got imprinted on me in 2011 but were I'm changing my tune on TE's is I don't want to draft as many of them as I used,  I'm not so interested in hording anymore but I'm still always trying to find that next big thing.

 

[barackdhouse]

Worst $250 orphan, bought from DD site for $29 : Also my oldest

BEN 9
ZEKE 25
GORDON 8
WOODS 15
JULIO 18
THIELEN 14
CAM 5
TRAUTMAN 3*
PACKERS
SLY
HARRIS 5*
MCKISSIC 4
SLAYTON 9*
G DAVIS 6*
HAMLER 4*
AGHOLOR 2
PERRIMAN 2
A BROWN 2

1.07 19
2.07 5
3.05 3
3.07 2

Future capital, 1st, 2nd, 3rd-7th (I'm calling a full future draft set as 30) - minus 3 for future 3rd given

Total : 181  180 franchise value points (per Hindery's system but with my values synthesized from several sources) small moves, Ellie, small moves

*these players I acquired since taking over this orphan

I'm really screwed at QB and TE. Today. But I have faith. One point of this update is that you have to consider how much value you're potentially losing from the players you have to commit to either cutting or attempting to trade (Agholor and Perriman here). That isn't too big of a deal for this squad, right? But look at these best of the best teams and you tell me who you're dropping or committing to finding a trading partner for if an incoming offer comes in that looks great on paper but adds a player or more to your roster. 

It is a major inhibiting factor to trades this time of year. But IMO that means we all have to adjust our expectations a bit. Also a second to the commenter above who mentioned that the cutdown to 20 before the season is also a major constraint, and that is absolutely correct. You can't just draft a million guys. That being said, I'm not afraid to draft a lot of guys, knowing I'll have work to do if they end up being valued still come August.

I gave two 3rds for Davis and Hamler so I did a quick update here, I'm not going to do that from here out in this thread, just demonstrating the idea of adjusting franchise values. 

 

[barackdhouse]

I have several teams, dynasty and redraft, were I did stuff like draft my 4th or 5th TE before my second WR and again some of these teams were success stories but it's been an especially bad approach the last few season.

But with regards to Kyle Pitts. I can't help myself, I continue to be in search of difference makers and I"m not certain that he should be viewed more as a WR whose position is just listed as TE.

I think for me I'd say I still believe in the value of a big time TE as I did when that value got imprinted on me in 2011 but were I'm changing my tune on TE's is I don't want to draft as many of them as I used,  I'm not so interested in hording anymore but I'm still always trying to find that next big thing.

Yeah when I say I think it is overvalued in this format, I'm not saying it shouldn't be valued highly, but that things like the 1st bolded represent an overvalue. Hoarding is never a good play in FFPC IMO. I tried doing that with TEs for awhile and they're just impossible to find trade partners for. Not true but it is difficult. Nobody wants them unless they are a difference maker. And if that is the case they're not OTB or are prohibitively expensive. My thing is have a plan at TE. I've been lucky these last couple years because I drafted Waller and Kittle late everywhere and rostered them. But I seem to always hit on the value TEs every year. Sometimes I do it in a way where I end up with a few of them, but then I suffer elsewhere, and it really does have a direct effect - how can I roster another player that I need if I have to drop a TE I really like? So I might decide to not make a deal because I don't have a plan for what to do with my roster. In some instances. 

For Pitts I know what you're saying but it doesn't matter one iota if *we* view him as a WR that is listed as TE, it only matters if his coaches in the organization that drafts him use him that way. We should have a much better idea of that once we get to our draft, but yes we should always be looking for that next big thing there. The advantage is just huge with those top guys. I don't think there are any of my teams, save my worst orphan, that really needs a TE right now, though. As much as I'd love to make that pick and see it blossom quickly, my teams generally have a couple good options at TE, if not one elite one and a 2nd good one, which largely means I have no desire to roster a 3rd. Much like preferring not to roster a 2nd QB in regular FFPC, but I will if I have to, I don't want to roster a 3rd TE. The only way I can make speculative upside plays like buying Hamler or G Davis, is if I have room. So I don't really see a scenario where I take Pitts unless the NFL team that takes him drools over him and the scheme matches really well. And even then I probably don't take him. If anyone thought I was loose, you're seeing my conservative side there.

 

[barackdhouse]

I think I got at least a little burned by OJ Howard and Njoku

 

[NE_REVIVAL]

What is your best SF and/or regular FFPC squad?

I recently sold most of my better FFPC teams (6 in total), relatively new to SF and brand new to SF BB Dynasty which is the only SF I own right now. 2nd year startup and would certainly do things differently next time around (another solid qb for instance). Was competitive early on but once Burrow went down the slim chance I had was gone. Middle of the pack, right where you don't want to be.

I thought the BB Dynasty would be easier but it is different animal so not so sure about that. SF BB Dynasty and yet you still need to cut down to 14 position players (oof)

Joe Burrow (CIN)
Matthew Stafford (DET)
Jarrett Stidham (NE)

Alvin Kamara (NO)
Joe Mixon (CIN)
D'Andre Swift (DET)
Antonio Gibson (WAS)
Raheem Mostert (SF)

Cooper Kupp (LAR)
Tee Higgins (CIN)
Jalen Reagor (PHI)
Robby Anderson (CAR)
Gabriel Davis (BUF)
Breshad Perriman (NYJ)

Dallas Goedert (PHI)
Mike Gesicki (MIA)
Cole Kmet (CHI)
Donald Parham (LAC)

Michael Badgley (LAC)
CLE Team Defense (CLE)

1.6,2.6,4.6,6.6,7.6,8.6,9.6,10.6

Fwiw, I would prefer the same rookie pick consolation playoff system they use for the non BB dynasty lgs rather than total points. 

 

[barackdhouse]

Other obvious subtopic:

In FFPC dynasties, rookie picks 1-6 are awarded to the winners of the toilet bowl, so it is a competition, not simply based on worst record/VPs. Based on NE_Revival comments above about BB, that isn't the case there. Which kind of makes sense, but the whole dynamic of not really being able to tank to get a high draft pick, is a major twist to FFPC as well. 

 

[menobrown]

 I don't want to roster a 3rd TE.

And I'd tie this back to what I believe was in your original post about one of the cool things about FFPC in particular is that it provides many different strategies, many different ways to skin the cat. I have 6 FFPC teams, and only one of them will not carry at least 3 TE's, some will carry 4. 

I would say 3 TE's is my preference.

My ideal offseason cut FFPC roster would be one QB, 3 TE's, and either 5/5 on RB/WR or 6/4. Only one of my 6 teams actually will have that roster construct, mainly because I am carrying 4 TE's and/or 2 QB's.

None of this is to say one way is right or not but to highlight the multiple strategies you can take in FFPC. Whatever you are comfortable with or wherever the value takes you, a lot of ways to put good teams together.

 

[menobrown]

I'm a big fan of the playoffs to determine draft position. Only tweak I'd like to see is reverse it so that it's exactly like the real playoffs, not direct H2H.

But as is it provides a measure of anti-tanking and really put another way encourages competitiveness and also it's just fun to have additional rooting interest.

 

[menobrown]

Took a stab at moving a team on the DD site. League has been around 6 years and this team has been in the money every year, second highest rated team of mine on the Hindery chart. League is super dead, deadest of all my leagues, do have some key players who might be in a 2-3 year window so figured if I could get paid well I'd give up this team and do another startup and hopefully in a more active league. I did not expect my team to sell at my asking price, intentionally put it high just to see how this worked.  As was pointed out to me the people bidding on teams sure favor youth and picks and that was more glaring then I thought. After a day I had 2 bids and barely over the team cost so I went ahead and just pulled the bidding, was not remotely close to give up a consistent winning money maker.

Also going back to TE's and multiple ways to build a team this was the team that during the startup I took Mike Evans at 1.8 and then took 5 TE's before I ever took my second WR which was in round 14(and was Roddy White who did not make my opening day roster). Unconventional approach to team construction and as of now  I'm leaning cutting Mims and Mike Williams if I can't move anyone and carrying 3 WR's, 2 QB's(this is not SF) and 4 TE's. A truly odd team configuration but pretty close to what I've been doing past few years(added a RB and took away a WR is only difference). Is it the team configuration I really want? Nope. But two years in a row I can't get anyone to give me a second for Dak so it's the best I can make out of what I got. Also I did not go into the startup with designs to go so TE heavy, I was just focused on taking the player I felt offered most potential to be a difference maker. I did another startup that ran the same time as this one, both my last FFPC startups, that draft I took Ertz in round 4 and then not another TE until double digit rounds. Flexibility IMO is key in FFPC, one league was RB and TE hungry, the other one was WR hungry with a little RB appetite so I adjusted.

Anyway here is a team that hardly anyone wanted and for sure not at a premium. I'd not have sold the team for 5 times the entry fee, I did not get offered anything close to 2X. Projected cuts in bold and I left off players who are totally worthless.

Mahomes, Dak, Hurts

CMC, Dalvin, Robinson, Hunt, Pollard

Michael Thomas, Ridley, Lamb, Mike Williams, Mims

Engram, Henry, Irv Smith, Hurst

Steelers

Butker

Pick 12 in rounds 1-7.

One feature that DD site could really use IMO is the ability to see the other teams in the league. Perhaps they don't want you to see this info but to me it's key. Most leagues of mine have multiple what I term superpower teams, just top to bottom damn near all star lineups, hard to find the shame in their game when you look at some teams lineups- at least when all available. Out of my 6 FFPC leagues last year the highest scoring team in the regular season, which to me is what I consider the best team in the regular season, only two of them won the league with this team being one of the two.That's because the comp is just so stiff across most leagues, you usually need to really bring it big time to win a league, not so much this league. This league  has no superpower teams, some really good teams but while I said this was the deadest of all my leagues it's also the easiest competition. Have a few owners who have been in the league all 6 years who don't really seem to have a plan, FA in particular is always like a gift were I get players considerably less then they are going for in other leagues. I'd never pay top dollar for a team but if I did I'd sure need to know league makeup before I did.

 

[barackdhouse]

None of this is to say one way is right or not but to highlight the multiple strategies you can take in FFPC. Whatever you are comfortable with or wherever the value takes you, a lot of ways to put good teams together.

Yeah for sure. I think I got my own wires crossed when I said I don't want to roster 3 TEs. I meant thru the cutdown to 16. I'll gladly carry 3 or 4 inseason. And that is a wirecrossing because my point was that I wouldn't want Pitts for that reason, but at that point we would be at expanded rosters so I don't know why I said that. I still wouldn't draft him more than likely but roster size wouldn't be a reason. However, I often find myself with extra TEs by the end of each season, not the scrubs but the Higbees, Ebrons of the world that I can't get myself to stomach the notion of dropping. But I'll try hard at adding them to other deals and it is just so hard to do. So taking on another TE, and a rookie at that, just seems higher risk than I'm into. Which is saying something for me. But if he hits.....it will be a 1st world problem to have and that is a good thing.

 

[barackdhouse]

Mahomes, Dak, Hurts

CMC, Dalvin, Robinson, Hunt, Pollard

Michael Thomas, Ridley, Lamb, Mike Williams, Mims

Engram, Henry, Irv Smith, Hurst

Steelers

Butker

Pick 12 in rounds 1-7.

Definitely a reflection of different approaches here, which frankly is hard to find between you and I because we really do think about this stuff very similarly. I would only be keeping two of these TEs if I could possibly help it. I like all 4 of them, don't get me wrong. But I'd really want to see Mims make my active roster unless I really thought I could move him. Mims here is a perfect representation of another FFPC subtopic that we have dealt with elsewhere but hadn't done it here yet:

How do we go about letting relatively highly drafted rookies develop? Is this not waiting long enough or is there a better way to give him a chance without cutting value elsewhere? That is the kind of #### we have to deal with in FFPC. Now that question sort of becomes moot if you are simply not into Mims on any level. Or his situation. If that is the case it doesn't need explained. Carrying 4 TEs here and 2 QBs arguably inhibits the ability to roster a guy like Mims (this doesn't have to be about Mims or about your roster here - I just think it is a good example). Mims is also a guy that many league mates might want to buy low on, and if you feel confident in that then it makes sense to not count him as part of your 14 skill players. I would certainly offer a 3rd in leagues I needed young WRs and had the space. I would probably never cut Mims in this offseason because he carries trade value if nothing else, but you may already be planning on that. 

In order to give oneself a chance at developing some of these kind of guys, you have to have room, though. For me Irv and Engram probably still have the highest ceiling potential as difference makers where I think Henry and Hurst don't. 

 

[menobrown]

Yeah for sure. I think I got my own wires crossed when I said I don't want to roster 3 TEs. I meant thru the cutdown to 16. I'll gladly carry 3 or 4 inseason.

I knew what you meant about it being cutdowns and when I said I'm carrying 3 TE's or more on 5 of my 6 FFPC teams it was also after cutdowns, I'm usually in the 4-5 range in season. 

 

[Zyphros]

I love the VP system (although I missed the playoffs this past year in 1 of my leagues by 1 VP, and I had a better record and a head to head win over the team above me). The ease of someone running the league is the appeal to me so I don't mind the rake they take off league fee's. Plus I feel confident enough I'll make that back by winning (I'm sure a lot of us feel that way). 

The problem I have is there is no real communication option to talk to teams. If there was a chat system similar to facebook messenger but just for the league I think they'd retain so many more teams. Rather than people constantly selling them/auctioning them off. That's my biggest thing is that the communication isn't so great. Communicating through trade offers is almost impossible for me. And no I don't want to use alternative communication options for leagues that set them up like GroupMe. 

As for the competition side of things, an elite TE is almost required, it's the easiest advantage you can have. Otherwise you need the advantage at 2-3 other positions which I find is harder to do. 

I don't buy orphans or anything just usually do a startup every year (which I probably should stop). But I have 4 FFPC teams right, 1 is Superflex. 

I find the Superflex one being the most challenging so far, partly because most of my stashes tend to be TE's on my non-superflex roster's. In Superflex you don't have that luxury and roster constraints are even more restricting because you have to have QB's for those spots. 

Sidenote: how do we want this thread to go? Are we talking mostly strategy style of things, roster cuts and value gains because the format isn't exactly "normal"? or are we going to do trades and stuff in here as well?

 

[barackdhouse]

Anyway here is a team that hardly anyone wanted and for sure not at a premium. I'd not have sold the team for 5 times the entry fee, I did not get offered anything close to 2X. Projected cuts in bold and I left off players who are totally worthless.

Mahomes, Dak, Hurts

CMC, Dalvin, Robinson, Hunt, Pollard

Michael Thomas, Ridley, Lamb, Mike Williams, Mims

Engram, Henry, Irv Smith, Hurst

Steelers

Butker

Pick 12 in rounds 1-7.

One feature that DD site could really use IMO is the ability to see the other teams in the league. 

I would pay a premium for this team. I see lots of assets that can be flipped to get down to 16, too. But, my idea of a premium may not be what you or others are looking for. I've seen teams like this going for way cheaper than what some are getting. If you shop around as a buyer you can find some gems. More so a couple/few weeks ago but still.

As for seeing the rest of the teams in the league, couldn't agree more. I bought one orphan and then went in and checked out the other owners and saw that there are two guys from the old league I commissioned. That league just disbanded and these two owners were by far and away my least favorite humans to interact with on any level in the history of my FF career. So lame. It's a really good team I bought, too. Well I hid my email and changed my username because of it. Weird.

 

[barackdhouse]

I love the VP system (although I missed the playoffs this past year in 1 of my leagues by 1 VP, and I had a better record and a head to head win over the team above me). The ease of someone running the league is the appeal to me so I don't mind the rake they take off league fee's. Plus I feel confident enough I'll make that back by winning (I'm sure a lot of us feel that way). 

Oh my gosh this is one of the most obvious subtopics as well. Yes the VP system is the original selling point that attracted me to FFPC years ago. I take it for granted now but VPs are absolutely the best standings format IMO. For anyone that doesn't know, we have a 13 week H2H regular season. Each week, if you win you get 2 Victory Points, if you lose you get 0. But if you finish in the top 4 of scoring that week, you get an additional 2 VPs. You get 1 additional VPs for finishing in the middle four teams in scoring that week, and 0 for the bottom. So it rewards teams for winning matchups as well as rewarding teams for scoring lots of points. So great. Standings are purely based on VPs.

 

[menobrown]

Definitely a reflection of different approaches here, which frankly is hard to find between you and I because we really do think about this stuff very similarly. I would only be keeping two of these TEs if I could possibly help it. I like all 4 of them, don't get me wrong. But I'd really want to see Mims make my active roster unless I really thought I could move him. Mims here is a perfect representation of another FFPC subtopic that we have dealt with elsewhere but hadn't done it here yet:

How do we go about letting relatively highly drafted rookies develop? Is this not waiting long enough or is there a better way to give him a chance without cutting value elsewhere? That is the kind of #### we have to deal with in FFPC. Now that question sort of becomes moot if you are simply not into Mims on any level. Or his situation. If that is the case it doesn't need explained. Carrying 4 TEs here and 2 QBs arguably inhibits the ability to roster a guy like Mims (this doesn't have to be about Mims or about your roster here - I just think it is a good example). Mims is also a guy that many league mates might want to buy low on, and if you feel confident in that then it makes sense to not count him as part of your 14 skill players. I would certainly offer a 3rd in leagues I needed young WRs and had the space. I would probably never cut Mims in this offseason because he carries trade value if nothing else, but you may already be planning on that. 

In order to give oneself a chance at developing some of these kind of guys, you have to have room, though. For me Irv and Engram probably still have the highest ceiling potential as difference makers where I think Henry and Hurst don't. 

I took Mims at 2.11 so he was not that highly thought of by the league or by me, I've been trying to trade him almost since the minute I drafted him. Not draft capital I feel the need to hold onto to see develop. If they were to acquire Watson before cuts I'd reconsider but I don't see Mims as more then filler, not a NFL #1 WR, more like dime a dozen WR depth is what I see so far. He could prove me wrong but I don't have luxury of waiting to have to do what I think is best now.

We for sure see things differently here as I would not rate Mims remotely close to Henry or Irv over Henry. Henry's needs more targets and he might get it but his 2019 season would have put him 4th in PPG last year, he's been downright elite in his career in a per target basis and I'm excited to see what  FA or if he remains in LA the new staff does with him.  Henry may or may not be a Kelce type difference maker but a 14+ PPG TE is more helpful to teams IMO then a WR3 type and he's been that.

Hurst vs Mims is close for me but I'm going to continue to default to what I normally do and keep the one I think has most potential to be impactful, but that one is close.

 

[barackdhouse]

I love the VP system (although I missed the playoffs this past year in 1 of my leagues by 1 VP, and I had a better record and a head to head win over the team above me). The ease of someone running the league is the appeal to me so I don't mind the rake they take off league fee's. Plus I feel confident enough I'll make that back by winning (I'm sure a lot of us feel that way). 

The problem I have is there is no real communication option to talk to teams. If there was a chat system similar to facebook messenger but just for the league I think they'd retain so many more teams. Rather than people constantly selling them/auctioning them off. That's my biggest thing is that the communication isn't so great. Communicating through trade offers is almost impossible for me. And no I don't want to use alternative communication options for leagues that set them up like GroupMe. 

As for the competition side of things, an elite TE is almost required, it's the easiest advantage you can have. Otherwise you need the advantage at 2-3 other positions which I find is harder to do. 

I don't buy orphans or anything just usually do a startup every year (which I probably should stop). But I have 4 FFPC teams right, 1 is Superflex. 

I find the Superflex one being the most challenging so far, partly because most of my stashes tend to be TE's on my non-superflex roster's. In Superflex you don't have that luxury and roster constraints are even more restricting because you have to have QB's for those spots. 

Sidenote: how do we want this thread to go? Are we talking mostly strategy style of things, roster cuts and value gains because the format isn't exactly "normal"? or are we going to do trades and stuff in here as well?

Yes to all of this post. The communication tools do suck. For the bolded it is up to us all to make this what we want but I'm of the opinion that trades should still go in the trade thread. But there are like 10 subtopics in here right now that aren't trades. My ten cents.

 

[menobrown]

Count me as big on the VP format. Nothing is perfect, I had a team in 2019 lead the league in scoring and I was seed #5. I was discussing with a friend of mine who told me he led his league in scoring and did even make the playoffs. Scoring to me is the best indicator of how well a team has done but total points is no fun, pure head to head is a bit to luck based. Only other negative of h2h is  late in the year if you are trying to make a comeback or catch someone it can be frustrating when multiple teams in the league are not making enough effort, you got a ceiling on how much you can make up.

But that's the negatives and I still am a fan of it. I like the way it involves the entire league, while curbing at least a little of the sometimes harsh luck of h2h.

I also like the format for redraft that combines points and record, which you see in most high stakes contest but I like it a lot. What I don't like is total points or just h2h.

 

[barackdhouse]

I took Mims at 2.11 so he was not that highly thought of by the league or by me, I've been trying to trade him almost since the minute I drafted him. Not draft capital I feel the need to hold onto to see develop. If they were to acquire Watson before cuts I'd reconsider but I don't see Mims as more then filler, not a NFL #1 WR, more like dime a dozen WR depth is what I see so far. He could prove me wrong but I don't have luxury of waiting to have to do what I think is best now.

We for sure see things differently here as I would not rate Mims remotely close to Henry or Irv over Henry. Henry's needs more targets and he might get it but his 2019 season would have put him 4th in PPG last year, he's been downright elite in his career in a per target basis and I'm excited to see what  FA or if he remains in LA the new staff does with him.  Henry may or may not be a Kelce type difference maker but a 14+ PPG TE is more helpful to teams IMO then a WR3 type and he's been that.

Hurst vs Mims is close for me but I'm going to continue to default to what I normally do and keep the one I think has most potential to be impactful, but that one is close.

First bolded - makes sense, my only counterpoint is that 2.11 was in a historic draft class, but I'm not into Mims that much either.

Second bolded - yeah this constraint of not being able to wait is what I'm getting at. It is soooo hard to do.

Third bolded - I don't either. Just for the record I'm really not a Mims guy. My point is that you don't get the luxury to even give it a spin without doing something with a TE (or trading another player on your roster). If I knew categorically that I would not be able to trade any of my players before the cutdown, then I probably cut in exactly the manner you highlighted. It isn't that I value Mims over those guys, it's that I value what Mims being on my roster could mean more than I value what those TEs on my roster could mean. It's not a player x vs player y comp for me. What I would be doing is saying, I'm going to ship one of these TEs for draft capital (preferably), or package one of them with some other asset that will also yield draft capital (or whatever makes sense). And then that allows me to theoretically develop Mims and liquidate some assets in the process. Again it doesn't have to be about Mims. Maybe one of my guys like Slayton, Edwards, Davis, Hamler fit into this category on my squads. I want to see what they can do a lot more than I want to have a couple more of the Higbee/Ebron/Henry/Hursts of the world. 

 

[menobrown]

The problem I have is there is no real communication option to talk to teams. If there was a chat system similar to facebook messenger but just for the league I think they'd retain so many more teams. Rather than people constantly selling them/auctioning them off.

Sidenote: how do we want this thread to go? Are we talking mostly strategy style of things, roster cuts and value gains because the format isn't exactly "normal"? or are we going to do trades and stuff in here as well?

I don't really have an issue with the communication but something I've asked for multiple times and is for leagues to have a history section detailing past league champions,  top seed finishes, etc. I just think that adds to the pride of ownership a little, it's small but helps make it less of a money grab and more about league competition and pride over past accomplishments. As is just feels like last years just never happened.

I don't know about the rest of you but I can't say I play dynasty for money. The money justifies the means and time but I'm losing more money right now on business I should be doing then talking about fantasy and I mean literally right now, lol.

As for what to discuss I'm open to any direction but assumed, especially in these dire slow times, anything was up for discussion.

 

[barackdhouse]

Engram, Henry, Irv Smith, Hurst

I think he is a great buy low right now

 

[menobrown]

First bolded - makes sense, my only counterpoint is that 2.11 was in a historic draft class, but I'm not into Mims that much either.

Not to get off point to much here but I got screwed out of Gibson by one pick because of what happened in another league. I won't soon forget it.

In this league the guy with pick 2.10 stalled the draft, was OTC for most of the day. This same owner bought an orphan team in another league of mine and I came up at 2.8 in that draft. This is an old league with good people in it and I did not want to hold the draft up all day but I feared if I took Gibson at 2.8 it would signal to this guy in the other league to take Gibson at 2.10 knowing I wanted him. So I waited 1-2 hours, felt bad about holding up the league and took Gibson at 2.8. I kid you not the guy then immediately drafted Gibson at 2.10 in the other league.

In hindsight Claypool would of course been the better pick but good draft or not I do not see a single player other then Claypool I could have drafted from 2.11 to next few rounds I'd keep.

Also as I was typing this I saw your reply about trying to hold onto players. It's tough in FFPC and I'm pretty sure in every league of mine people gave up on Davante Adams to soon. I'm sure we all have some painful cuts, for me Kelce and Kittle. But one thing I try and do in FFPC or should say I don't like doing is drafting multiple TE's and WR's with my first two picks. I did that in this draft when I took Lamb in round one and Mims in two, never liked it. WR's are advancing a little quicker these days but I still can't draft a rookie WR with idea I am counting on them being year one lineup guys and the idea of committing multiple premium picks to positions that usually need more develop time is something I hate. Got to do it sometimes but it's very rare to see me use a first and second pick and one of them not be a RB.