You hear this all the time in almost every situation but I am not too sure that it is always correct. I can see many scenarios where riding a guy until he expires is better than trading him away early.
The "year early" or "year late" is an interesting idea but since nobody really knows for sure it can be problematic. The overarching premise to any trade is that it makes your team better in some way. If you are trading a guy a "year early" and it makes your team worse then it shouldn't probably be made. Now the evaluation of making your team worse can be up for debate. Sometimes it makes sense to make your team worse in the short term to get greater benefits down the line (trading something for a 2023 1st rounder for example). That is definitely in play and something to be evaluated for sure.
Team situation also plays a big role in whether or not the original premise applies as well. For the example of what started this comment if I was a contending team I would definitely want to keep Kelce and ride him into the sunset because I am competing now and in the near term. However, if I am not in a position to complete trading him away to benefit the rebuild is worthwhile for the right price. But I wouldn't necessarily categorize that as selling a "year early" as much as it is selling to help the rebuild.
All of this is just rambling out loud to think about the statement and what it really means. In the end you are always trying to make your team better so giving someone away (and that is not necessarily the case here) is never the right thing to do. Always try and make your team better and that doesn't always mean you have to get market value in a deal. Sometimes getting less than market value makes sense and improves your team even if it improves the other guy a little more.
I’m not saying it’s foolproof. Look at Walsh with Montana - he took the chiefs to the playoffs the very next year wearing that sickeningly wrong-colored red uni.
But it wasn’t long until his back issues caught up with him & ended his career.
Now, FF is a much different animal than RL football, so for us nerds is more about maximizing trade value. And as you aptly said, situational determinations are critical to the process.
If I’m looking at a rebuild and looking at Hopkins, Kelce, ARob & Conner on my roster, I’m moving them as quickly as possible because perception is these players are aging out/downside.
if I’m a competing team with a legit shot at a ‘ship, imma ride them ponies into the sunset, or at least give ‘em another year & maybe take less value for them after trying one more time to cash.
The expression has more merit in the NFL than in our magical foozeball game, but it’s still good to keep in mind. And for better or worse, in FF, perception becomes reality. If enough talking heads and nerds on message boards are down on a player, that player’s trade value drops. Sometimes all that takes is a page turn on the calendar so their age starts with a “3”. It might create opportunity for buy-low on still viable, but aging assets for a competing team, but for a rebuilding team, ever day that passes might cost you value.