This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
My thouhts exactly.
Unless you have no realistic chance to win the league with Gore, I'd rather have him than Little.
Gee, helpful. You realize the difference between 1 and 3 years is a chasm the size of Madonna's nether-regions, no?
That seems like an absolutely brutal trade on your part.
You're being short sighted IMO.Even if little completely busts this trade won't come back to haunt him much, and if he hits it's a blowout win getting Little.
Little will be cheaper than Gore in dynasty at this time NEXT year. And this is coming from a Little owner.
I highly doubt it. People can barely get anything for Gore in trade now. Next off season Gore will be lucky to bring in a late 1st in most leagues.Maybe you play in different kinds of dynasty leagues then i do, but in mine he couldn't even bring in a mid-1st this offseason and no matter what he does his value will decline this season due to age. People don't give up much of anything for 30 year old RB's.
This. Handcuffing is a redraft concept with no real place in dynasty.
IMO handcuffing works in some cases in dynasty. As one example, I drafted both McFadden and Bush in a startup last season. When McFadden missed 3 games, Bush was an excellent starter in his place. And if and when Bush leaves, his value could increase. That is a good dynasty handcuff.
I drafted S-Jackson to handcuff M-Faulk way back when and that worked out pretty nicely for me.Little is not greater then Gore right now in dyansty I can say that because I have seen 3 FFPC dynasty start ups and been in 1 this year.Gore was went at pick 30 and Little went pick 70 in mine.In the other one Gore 31, Little 65In the 3rd one Gore 38, Little 70Clearly Gore carries much more weight then Little in dynasty right now.
If you like Michael Bush, I don't consider him a handcuff, any more than I consider Jonathan Stewart a handcuff. In my mind, a handcuff is a guy whose only road to value is an injury to the guy in front of him- not a talented guy who just happens to be stuck behind an even more talented guy, but who has a good shot at getting his own gig somewhere down the line. I'm all in favor of using precious roster spots on guys who have talent, but might have for an injury or relocation to show it. I'm not in favor of burning precious, limited roster spots on guys who are scrubs, career backups, but who might (or might not) have value over an 8-game sample if the guy in front of them goes down.
If a guy gets injured in week 7 and his handcuff takes over, then that handcuff was productive for 50% of the expected shelf life of an RB in a redraft league. Meanwhile, if the average RB in dynasty is giving you a 3-year lifespan, then that handcuff was only productive for 17% of the expected shelf life of an RB in a dynasty league. Handcuffs are inherently less valuable in dynasty, because their productive window is a smaller percentage of the league's lifetime.Over a short timeline, you'll run into situations where a talent vacuum means a mediocre player is producing well above his pay grade simply because there's no competition around... but those talent vacuums almost always get filled over the offseason, meaning over a long timeline, guys tend to produce at a level commensurate with their true talent level. In redraft, drafting handcuffs makes some sense (although I think it's a highly overrated concept even in redraft- lots of "handcuffs" really stink up the joint because, newsflash, they simply aren't that good). In dynasty, though, handcuffs take up a roster spot that could be used developing a more talented player who can have a positive impact on your team over a longer timeline.
It's ridiculous to call Steven Jackson a former "handcuff". The guy was a first round pick drafted to be the RB of the future. That'd be like drafting Matt Hasselbeck and then "handcuffing" him with Jake Locker.The reason Steven Jackson succeeded is because he's an all-world talent, and those are the guys you should be rostering in dynasty, whether they're backups or not. Roster them because they're talented, though- not because their name is second on the depth chart. Other examples of "handcuffs" who were really just stud-RBs-in-waiting stuck behind sublime talents include guys like Larry Johnson, Maurice Jones-Drew, and Michael Turner.Edit to add: Quick test for whether or not someone is a handcuff. Ask yourself: if next offseason this RB leaves via free agency and lands on an average team, would he be a 2nd or 3rd round draft pick in next year's redraft leagues? If the answer is yes, then the guy is a talent. If the answer is no, then the guy is a handcuff. And, in my opinion, handcuffing is a poor strategy in dynasty leagues. It has its place, especially in deep leagues or on teams that are strong competitors but unnaturally thin at RB... but it should be avoided whenever possible.Using that test, I view Michael Bush as a "talent" and someone like Javon Ringer as a "handcuff".
Yawn.
There are always suckers in a league, especially startups where many treat it as a redraft. Ffpc requires 50% future years fees, which is great, but since it's random people you'll get a few who will pay the premium to go big year one and bail.Show me an established dynasty league where gore brought in big value.
He's right. The idiots that pay a decent price for Tolbert/mcgahee type handcuffs in dynasty will end up losers, I guarantee it.
Decent price? You pick them off the wire.... (Tolbert, Hillis, Blount just in the past year)Saying cuffs have no place in dynasty is moronic.
Picking them off the waiver wire is fine, paying a good price for them is not.Also the guys you listed weren't thought of as handcuffs going into last season, they came out of nowhere.
I added the "real" part as a bit of a qualifier. I'm not suggesting that there is never any situation where handcuffing serves a viable purpose in dynasty. In exceptionally deep leagues, obviously it's a must. If you've got a major contender but are thin at RB, it serves as a valuable hedge. I'm not even suggesting that you avoid picking up backups. I'm simply saying that for the most part, handcuffing is an outmoded strategy based on unrealistic expectations and poorly evaluated timelines. Roster spots are very dear in dynasty leagues- far too dear to be wasting on mediocre backs whose only virtue is that they're not good enough to start in the NFL.You brought up several names- Hillis, Blount, and Tolbert, specifically. The entire "handcuffing" theory suggests that those three backs should have been especially valuable to the Harrison, Cadillac, or Matthews owners. In reality, that wasn't the case- I would have benefited a ton from owning Hillis, Blount, or Tolbert, even if I didn't also own the guy ahead of them on the depth chart. Instead of wasting my time drafting the guys behind my own RBs (even if they're some of the least talented backups in the league), I'd be far better served drafting the BEST backups in the league. If I'm a Jamaal Charles owner, for instance, instead of "handcuffing" him with Thomas Jones, in the long run I'm probably better off taking Michael Bush or Alex Green, instead. In other words, I'd be better off discarding the theory of "handcuffing" and instead moving to the theory of "maximizing talent".'Sudoku_in_the_Bathtub said:
We aren't being short sighted, I just think some of might actually want to win the league, not put together a pretty-looking roster of youth. Anyone that would chose Little over Gore is basically deciding to donate their entry fee, IMHO. Sometimes, there is nothing wrong with letting a stud retire off your team, if you go out swinging for the title.
Or that guy has two top 5 dynasty RBs and a solid #3 to go with. That guy also has a top 3 dynasty WR, a top 12 dynasty WR as a #2 and is looking for a top 20 or better to make his #3 in a 2RB, 3WR ppr format.
In my auction/contract league, Gore came off the board as the 6th highest paid RB. Now, to be fair, McCoy, McFadden, Mendenhall, Rice, Forte were already under contract for less from previous years, but that would still mean he'd bring at least top 11 money even if all those guys had gone back up for auction this year.Little, on the other hand, is the 25th highest paid WR in our league and has little chance of being a top 11 WR in the next two years. Gore has a a chance to finish in the top 10 this year and next.Who do you put in your lineup if your RB1 or RB2 goes down for the season? That sneaky stash RB who is still 3rd on his teams' depth chart behind some other owner's RB1? Sweet.Obviously, if your league has such restrictive roster rules that putting a handcuff on your roster puts your club years behind, then maybe you can't afford to grab one. But I see a lot of guys go myopic on building for the future and effectively kill their chances of winning a championship because they never see the opportunity to seize the day and win this year. Hell, I used to be one.
Not even close. Value is about VORP. Your are comparing the lifespan of a WR to that of a RB. That is a huge mistake that I regulaly benefit from.
Because if Charles goes down this year, you can plug in Alex Green? Or Michael Bush? I guess you'll be snickering at that Thomas Jones owner with his 20+ touches a game while you savor your 12 touches a game from Bush.And your using a 27 year old Michael Bush as an example of a preferable dynasty stash? He hasn't been able to capitalize in 4 years even when McFadden absolutely sucked. Now he's behind a more talented 24 year old RB that has finally shown something. And he'll be testing free agency next year as a 28 year old RB having never rushed for more than 655 yards in a season. Even if he goes somewhere and nails down a bell cow role, you've had to carry him for 5 years so you can get a 2 year return just before he hits 30 and gives way to someone younger.
Well, that really wasn't the discussion. If the choice was Gore vs. a top-20 WR in a PPR, then that makes the choice closer, and certainly getting a starter as your wr3 would improve the team. But we were discussing Gore vs. Little.
No matter how you want to slice it, handcuffs are important in dynasty leagues. Value, of course, is relative. But Toby Gerhardt is worth more to the AP owner than the 2-3 backs ranked next to him. Simple.
Agreed. The only time you do not handcuff is if you are absolutely stacked at RB.
Sure, if Charles goes down this year, Thomas Jones will be more useful than Alex Green. Of course, Thomas Jones' upside is 5 or 6 low-end RB2 games before his career is over. Alex Green's upside is potential top-10 dynasty back for the next 6 years. I know which I'd rather burn a roster spot on.Laugh at Michael Bush all you want, but his situation is not all that dissimilar from Chester Taylor's... and Chester Taylor had a pair of top 20 seasons after hitting free agency as a 27 year old career backup. LaMont Jordan had a top 10 season after hitting free agency as a 27 year old former backup. Thomas Jones did nothing for two different teams before joining Chicago at age 26. Michael Turner did nothing before joining Atlanta at age 26.If you have enough irons in the fire, then you'll have more than 2 quality RBs so if you lose a starter to injury, you can replace him with... another starter. If not, low-end RB2 production is typically crazy cheap- BenJarvus Green Ellis or Danny Woodhead could have been had for a future rookie 2nd in most leagues last year. Besides, handcuffs are often overrated even in redraft. Sure, sometimes a handcuff comes in without missing a beat (typically when the handcuff was a highly-drafted heir like the guys I'm advising spending roster spots on). More frequently, though, a handcuff performs a bit more like Brandon Jackson from last season, reminding the world why they weren't the starter in the first place.
The word "real" is a qualifier, meant to slightly temper an otherwise absolute statement. I acknowledge a very, very tiny niche that handcuffs can fill (if your league is extremely deep, or if your team is extremely shallow). Both of those niches demonstrate my belief that handcuffs are an option of absolute last resort.Hmmmm SSOG says handcuffs have no real place in dynasty and then outlined their place in dynasty.Which one is it??
The question is not whether Toby Gerhart is worth more to the ADP owner than he is to anyone else. The answer to that question is "of course he is". The question is whether Toby Gerhart is worth more to the ADP owner than a different backup RB would be. That's a much murkier picture. Actually, Gerhart isn't the best example, because I like Gerhart (good pedigree, good production) and think he could actually be a quality starter in the league. When I'm saying "handcuffing doesn't belong in dynasty", I'm talking about guys like Thomas Jones, or Brian Leonard, or Derrick Ward, or John Kuhn, Cadillac Williams, Isaac Redman, Earnest Graham, etc.If I'm a Steven Jackson owner and it's late in the draft, I'm not going to draft Cadillac Williams to "handcuff" my starter. Caddy is old, broken down, would provide a bare shadow of SJax's production, and holds no long-term value. If I'm going to use that pick on a backup RB, I'm going to use it on one with actual talent and potential. I'll draft Javon Ringer, or Alex Green, Pierre Thomas, Rashad Jennings, Tashard Choice, etc. The fact that I don't own the guys in front of those guys on the depth chart is irrelevant- I'm rostering talent because I'm confident that it will pay dividends in the long term. Those last two words are the key here- the long term. That's how you build a true dynasty- you look at the big picture instead of getting too myopic and bogging down in untalented players with mediocre short-term value.Besides, it's not as if this comparison has to be "handcuff or other backup RB". If you don't like any of the backup RBs available, pass on RB and use that pick on a high-upside receiver or an up-and-coming QB like Matt Flynn or Dennis Dixon. If those picks hit, you can turn around and trade them for an RB down the road.
Frank Gore is 28 years old. You must be a Kendall Hunter dynasty owner.'Unwrittenlaw said:
Gore is the same age as Cedric Benson (whom many believe is aging/on the decline/almost done, etc.)Gore also has over 1600 career touches (compared to Benson's 1350). Granted, he is much more talented than Benson, but the point here is that Gore has a lot more mileage on those wheels than many people think. I think questioning Gore's dynasty viability based on age/usage is spot on. I'd be selling, not buying at this point. His value will only continue to drop - hard and fast - over the next year or so.Frank Gore is 28 years old. You must be a Kendall Hunter dynasty owner.'Unwrittenlaw said:
You think the 49ers can be competitive in 2 years?Frank Gore is 28 years old. You must be a Kendall Hunter dynasty owner.'Unwrittenlaw said:
I don't know what conversation there is to have, beyond your own statement "Of course [Gerhart] is [worth more to ADP owner's than anyone else]. Nobody is suggesting the drafting or acquisition of Thomas Jones over a more valuable player. But Thomas Jones is still worth more to the Jamaal Charles owner than he is to anyone else. Handcuffing is important/valid in dynasty formats.'SSOG said:
I think most people are plenty aware of Gore's mileage and age/injury concern. That is why "selling" Gore doesn't make much sense. The average RB produces peak numbers for 4 years or so. That is just my guess, but I think it is close, at the very least. Therefore, if Gore has 2 years in him, he is not far off from the league average. He is less of an age concern than Peyton Manning and Tom Brady, in comparison to their own positions.People undervalue the RB on a per year basis. They see flashy WR with 8 years left in their careers, based on projections, and think they are 4 times more valuable than a RB with 2. That is a paradigm and guppy logic that good owners cash in on. If your team is not competing, then get rid of Gore for what you can. But if you are, the 2 years of RB1 play he could provide will greatly outscore (in VORP/VBD) the mid first round draft pick you get for him.
I think their division is wide open this year.You think the 49ers can be competitive in 2 years?Frank Gore is 28 years old. You must be a Kendall Hunter dynasty owner.'Unwrittenlaw said:
The argument is over the phrase "over a more valuable player". We're discussing just what qualifies as a more valuable player. Personally, I believe "more valuable than Thomas Jones" is such an extremely low hurdle to clear that I will never wind up with Thomas Jones on any of my rosters, even if I'm a Charles owner, unless the league goes 400+ players deep. On the other hand, I see many, many, many owners who believe that the magical "handcuff" pairing carries so much intrinsic value that if they own Charles, it propels Thomas Jones way up the value charts to the point where they're rostering him in leagues that only roster 240 players.The main thrust of my argument is that, while the "handcuff" designation does carry some intrinsic value (i.e. if you manage to hold all other variables constant, preference should be given to the back with handcuff status), in dynasty leagues that intrinsic value is so minor as to be almost (but not quite) completely dwarfed into irrelevancy by all other value considerations. I contend that the majority of the time people engage in handcuffing in dynasty leagues, they do it at a cost level that represents a negative value proposition for them; therefore, on the whole, handcuffing as it is currently practiced represents a losing strategy in dynasty. It's an inefficiency in the market.'Concept Coop said:
Current Vegas odds have the 49ers as the favorites in the NFC West.They may be bad, but in the NFC West they will be competitive.'Velveeta22 said:I think their division is wide open this year.You think the 49ers can be competitive in 2 years?Frank Gore is 28 years old. You must be a Kendall Hunter dynasty owner.'Unwrittenlaw said:
