Yeah, I mentioned that QB scoring is significantly depressed... for example, Mahomes ranked as #14 in ppg in 2020 and tied for #25 in 2019. He would certainly provide stability for the long term, but that is not the level of performance I want from the 1.1 pick.
I am not sure I agree here. By that I mean the best player to have isn't necessarily the #1 overall guy if next year he drops to #50 and then the year after back to #30 then to #1. I am assuming you are looking at a non-QB based on your statement but is that really the best way to go? I want consistency for a long time if I am starting my team and getting the #1 high floor and high ceiling QB for the next 8 years seems like a good way to go. I just don't see a RB or WR that would be a better selection for that pick.
If I was trading the 1.01 in a startup I would want something more than two rounds of improvement from 10 to 8 (even if it was dropping back one pick). I would rather just get my guy. Who are you taking at 1.02?
He said QB scoring is depressed. Would you take Mahomes at 1.01 in a "start 1 QB" league, because the argument would be the same?
Possibly. Based on his PPG finishes I think it would be safe to assume he is going to be a top 20 overall guy every year. Is there anybody else that fits in that for the next 8 years? I haven't done an actual start up draft as all my startups are auctions so I haven't had to think about it in a draft mindset. I guess is CMC (with his injury risk) for the next 3 years better than Mahomes for the next 8 years? Kamara? Barkley? Adams (pre Rodgers issues)? Tyreek? Everyone has questions.
And even with QB scoring being depressed it is still a SF. Playing a QB in that spot should give you a higher floor week to week which also has it's advantages so it isn't a straight equivalent to a start 1 QB situation.
I guess my point is that just because I may think I am not taking the consensus guy at 1.01 (assuming it's Mahomes based on the comment) I would still want more than a two round improvement in round 10 unless I plan to still make more moves with the 1.02.
I guess my question to the OP would be what "level of performance" do you want from the 1.01? And who would provide that?
Glad to see this stimulated some discussion. A bit of background. This is a 12 team PPR league with these starting lineup requirements: 1Q, 1R, 2W, 1T, 4F (R/W/T), 1SF (Q/R/W/T), 1K, 1DST. Since we have to start at least 8 R/W/T players x 12 teams each week, it seems very likely that the SF position will typically be a QB.
However, QB scoring is much lower than I have ever seen in any league: 0.0333 per passing yard (1/30); 2.667 per passing TD; 0.0667 per rushing yard (1/15); 4 per rushing TD.
As a point of reference, Mahomes averaged 19.315 ppg in this system last season. QB24 by ppg was Bridgewater, who averaged 13.572 ppg. So Mahomes was worth less than 6 ppg more than Bridgewater. That is less than the spread between RB12 and RB36, but it is more than the spread between WR12 and WR36 (about 3.4 ppg). Granted that is just one season, but it gives a feel.
My thought was that in this system, Mahomes offers less of an expected positional advantage than in most leagues, so I am more reluctant than I would usually be (in Superflex) to take a QB at 1.1 and have to wait for 22 more players to be drafted before drafting my second player and first potential non-QB. I expect a significant dropoff in talent to occur over that span.
As for the value of what I got, we will be starting 10 skill position players every week, so we are drafting starters in the 8th-10th rounds. Moving up 23 spots from 10.1 to 8.2 should be valuable as long as I don't botch the pick (a distinct possibility...).
I certainly could have made a tactical error. I haven't participated in a dynasty startup draft since 2010, just played in a couple long running leagues, so I am definitely out of practice That is one reason I posted the trade, to get some opinions. Thanks for the responses.