****OFFICIAL DYNASTY TRADES**** (38 Viewers)

[InDitkaWeTrust]

I hate when I’m negotiating a trade and some one tells me what their calculator says. They suck. This just further cements that feeling.

Meh, it's a data point.  It shouldn't be the reasoning for any trade, but there's no harm in consulting a calc or four when putting together a trade package.  But point taken.  It shouldn't be thrown out there as a rationalization for a trade.

 

[King of the Jungle]

14 team PPR TE 1.5 not my trade this time

N Harris Pitt RB

for

T Higgins Cin WR + 2023 2nd

I am a WR over RB guy most of the time. Even though I do not love Najee he is one of the few RBs that is almost guaranteed 300+ touches if healthy. If going after a WR I would want higher return than Higgins.

 

[ghostguy123]

Meh, it's a data point.  It shouldn't be the reasoning for any trade, but there's no harm in consulting a calc or four when putting together a trade package.  But point taken.  It shouldn't be thrown out there as a rationalization for a trade.

Nobody ever seems to tell me which calc they use. If they did, I would exploit the hell out of it with stupid offers that their stupid calculators stupidly rate in their favor

 

[Cjw_55106]

Nobody ever seems to tell me which calc they use. If they did, I would exploit the hell out of it with stupid offers that their stupid calculators stupidly rate in their favor

Have you ever asked? Most people just love to share that sort of nonsense. 

 

[Boston]

Except you won't get more than a 2, I tried. 2 leagues and only 2 guys were willing to pay a 2nd. Sure a guy might be "worth" more, but can you actually get more becomes the question. My answer is no, I couldn't get more. 

Two things...your best bet to get more is during the season when injuries/benchings take place and a team becomes desperate...right know everyone is healthy...he is also be a great add-on to a bigger deal...two, I would rather hold onto him then deal him for a #2...I am not a Wentz fan but QBs are gold in SF and I would rather have the QB depth then a future #2...if he gets benched before I can move him for something better so be it, that is worth the risk. 

 

[ghostguy123]

Have you ever asked? Most people just love to share that sort of nonsense. 

I have asked a few.  They declined to share.

 

[InDitkaWeTrust]

I have asked a few.  They declined to share.

At least they are smart enough not to give you the keys to the castle!

 

[Cjw_55106]

I have asked a few.  They declined to share.

I would tell them no calc shows that and see what they say. People love to prove others wrong. 

 

[menobrown]

Nobody ever seems to tell me which calc they use. If they did, I would exploit the hell out of it with stupid offers that their stupid calculators stupidly rate in their favor

That's my go to reply when someone sends me a wonky offer and tells me I should be taking it because the calcs show me winning. I will reply and say if you tell me what calculator you are using I promise I'll send you over a winning offer so long as you promise to accept it.

 

[Jonesin For Some Football]

14 team PPR TE 1.5 not my trade this time

N Harris Pitt RB

for

T Higgins Cin WR + 2023 2nd

This is Harris by a mile.  RBs who are bell cows are too hard to come by to trade them for a WR that isn't even a 1 on his own team and a 2nd in a larger league.  This isn't close to me.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

If that was the best he could get for a player he took at 1.01 or 1.02 last year that lived up to that billing and more then he should hold and wait. I like Higgins but he gives you little to no advantage with so many WRs out there now. Harris is one of the few workhorse backs out there.

Harris went 1.05 in my SF league, but point taken.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

I am a WR over RB guy most of the time. Even though I do not love Najee he is one of the few RBs that is almost guaranteed 300+ touches if healthy. If going after a WR I would want higher return than Higgins.

As The Rolling Stones so eloquently said, “where’s my heroin?!” - wait, sorry, it’s “you can’t always get what you want.”

 

[Jonesin For Some Football]

As The Rolling Stones so eloquently said, “where’s my heroin?!” - wait, sorry, it’s “you can’t always get what you want.”

Very true but then you just hold on to your guy.  You aren't going to lose because you have Najee Harris on your roster.  You might lose if you don't have a stud RB though as there aren't many out there.  Just seems terrible to me. 

Plus, they didn't say it was SF so they traded the 1.01 from last year for a guy that went like 10th the year before and his real team loved his #1 ability so much that the very next year they went and drafted a different WR1 when they had dire need on the line.

 

[barackdhouse]

I hate when I’m negotiating a trade and some one tells me what their calculator says. They suck. This just further cements that feeling.

I don't think they suck, in fact most are fed by real market data and can be very useful. But I never bring them up in negotiations. I would assume it would come off the wrong way and kind of sleazy (or pushy or something). Whenever someone does so to me, I typically throw it back at them and show a few other sources that disagree. But if it gets to that point there usually isn't any deal pending anyway.

I have Higgins (30 points) and a 2nd (5-10 points) worth about equal to Najee (37 points in my value system) but as I always say nothing happens in a vacuum and RB scarcity swings this one for me. 

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Harris went 1.05 in my SF league, but point taken.

The trade in question wasn't a Superflex league. 

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

I don't think they suck, in fact most are fed by real market data and can be very useful. But I never bring them up in negotiations. I would assume it would come off the wrong way and kind of sleazy (or pushy or something). Whenever someone does so to me, I typically throw it back at them and show a few other sources that disagree. But if it gets to that point there usually isn't any deal pending anyway.

I have Higgins (30 points) and a 2nd (5-10 points) worth about equal to Najee (37 points in my value system) but as I always say nothing happens in a vacuum and RB scarcity swings this one for me. 

Fair take, both on the trade & on trade calcs. I don't bring them up during trade negotiations either, but occasionally trade partners will send me screen shots to assert that my offer isn't enough. Armed with the knowledge of what calc they're using, it makes it super easy to adjust the deal to the point that it's close on their calc. 

Obviously one can be ridiculous and, as implied by some, offer 10x scrubs that add up to 1 star in a trade calc, but good luck not offending your trade partner that way. Being able to understand where the deal is off, and by how much, so I can counter-offer, has value. I usually counter by building on the offer I'd initially made. Sometimes the calc tells me I wont be able to get something done, because I don't value the players involved the same way that the trade calc my partner is using does.

But there's absolutely value in trade calcs. I tend to think of them as a communications tool. Back when I was a project manager professionally, one of the most frustrating things was having a peer in a different group who wasn't a trained PM. Because they weren't trained in the discipline, they didn't speak the same language, which made every aspect of working through the PM cycle more difficult. The same can be true in negotiations with a trade partner if each team manager values players wildly differently. I view calcs as a means to an end, not the definitive end-all be all bible of player value. 

But like with your points system, it's a starting point to communicate how you value the player. If you came at me with a statement of "by my system, I have Najee as a 37, and Higgins as a 30" - I might not agree with you. But it gives me a perfect opportunity to either decide that you'll want too much for Najee compared to how I value Higgins, or to know that I need to come up with another piece to include to get it done. 

Back to this deal, for my rebuilding team in a 12-team SF, I'm honestly not sure what I would do if someone offered me Najee for Higgins straight up. As I mentioned in my 1st response, I know Najee is worth more. But I also don't see Higgins as a WR2 on his team, but rather a 1B to Chase's 1A. It's a very pass-friendly offense with a very good QB, in an organization I see as on the rise. Pittsburgh feels like a rebuilding team that doesn't quite know that it's a rebuilding team. I hate their QB situation, and I don't love having good RBs on bad offenses. And I'm not completely convinced Harris is a really good RB, so much as he is a volume guy. Meaning, if the offense stinks with Trubusky and the volume isn't there, is Harris going to live up to that perceived 37 point valuation short-term? I assume the valuation takes age into consideration, but we see time and again teams with poor QB play hold back the offense, and RBs often have a shorter window than other positions. 

So for me, personally, I might well decline such an offer. I'm sure everyone here will tell me I suck at FF for that opinion. Have at it. I'd rather have good players on good teams, if I have the choice. While it leans Najee, it's not so lopsided that it's a "godfather offer" for a player I personally really like.  Sometimes liking the players on your roster has value too. 

If I were in a 16 team league & hurting at RB while having good WR depth, my opinion would obviously be different. 

 

[Jonesin For Some Football]

Fair take, both on the trade & on trade calcs. I don't bring them up during trade negotiations either, but occasionally trade partners will send me screen shots to assert that my offer isn't enough. Armed with the knowledge of what calc they're using, it makes it super easy to adjust the deal to the point that it's close on their calc. 

Obviously one can be ridiculous and, as implied by some, offer 10x scrubs that add up to 1 star in a trade calc, but good luck not offending your trade partner that way. Being able to understand where the deal is off, and by how much, so I can counter-offer, has value. I usually counter by building on the offer I'd initially made. Sometimes the calc tells me I wont be able to get something done, because I don't value the players involved the same way that the trade calc my partner is using.

But there's absolutely value in trade calcs. I tend to think of them as a communications tool. Back when I was a project manager professionally, one of the most frustrating things was having a peer in a different group who wasn't a trained PM. Because they weren't trained in the discipline, they didn't speak the same language, which made every aspect of working through the PM cycle more difficult. The same can be true in negotiations with a trade partner if each team manager values players wildly differently. I view calcs as a means to an end, not the definitive end-all be all bible of player value. 

But like with your points system, it's a starting point to communicate how you value the player. If you came at me with a statement of "by my system, I have Najee as a 37, and Higgins as a 30" - I might not agree with you. But it gives me a perfect opportunity to either decide that you'll want too much for Najee compared to how I value Higgins, or to know that I need to come up with another piece to include to get it done. 

Back to this deal, for my rebuilding team in a 12-team SF, I'm honestly not sure what I would do if someone offered me Najee for Higgins straight up. As I mentioned in my 1st response, I know Najee is worth more. But I also don't see Higgins as a WR2 on his team, but rather a 1B to Chase's 1A. It's a very pass-friendly offense with a very good QB, in an organization I see as on the rise. Pittsburgh feels like a rebuilding team that doesn't quite know that it's a rebuilding team. I hate their QB situation, and I don't love having good RBs on bad offenses. And I'm not completely convinced Harris is a really good RB, so much as he is a volume guy. Meaning, if the offense stinks with Trubusky and the volume isn't there, is Harris going to live up to that perceived 37 point valuation short-term? I assume the valuation takes age into consideration, but we see time and again teams with poor QB play hold back the offense, and RBs often have a shorter window than other positions. 

So for me, personally, I might well decline such an offer. I'm sure everyone here will tell me I suck at FF for that opinion. Have at it. I'd rather have good players on good teams, if I have the choice. While it leans Najee, it's not so lopsided that it's a "godfather offer" for a player I personally really like.  Sometimes liking the players on your roster has value too. 

If I were in a 16 team league & hurting at RB while having good WR depth, my opinion would obviously be different. 

I agree with everything you said about the trade calculators.  They can have their place and can help you come to an agreement or to a realization that a deal isn't going to come to fruition.  It is a great way to get in the heads of your trade partner for an idea of what valuation they are using.

I definitely wouldn't say you suck at fantasy football but I think your valuation of Harris is way off.  They had a terrible line last year and Big Ben really was a terrible QB last year and he still put up big numbers.  I think Pitts proved they are going to lean on him and will continue to do so.  Everyone might value different guys higher or lower and you seem way in on Higgins but straight up I would say is a terrible trade.

Even with the 2023 2nd, I wouldn't even consider it for Harris.  Bell-cow RBs are just too hard to come by.  Even if Higgins is a WR1B to Chase, I still don't see him as a WR1 in fantasy football.  WR2s are easy to come by in fantasy, bell-cow RBs absolutely aren't.  I think that matters a bunch.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

I definitely wouldn't say you suck at fantasy football but I think your valuation of Harris is way off.  They had a terrible line last year and Big Ben really was a terrible QB last year and he still put up big numbers.  I think Pitts proved they are going to lean on him and will continue to do so.  Everyone might value different guys higher or lower and you seem way in on Higgins but straight up I would say is a terrible trade.

Even with the 2023 2nd, I wouldn't even consider it for Harris.  Bell-cow RBs are just too hard to come by.  Even if Higgins is a WR1B to Chase, I still don't see him as a WR1 in fantasy football.  WR2s are easy to come by in fantasy, bell-cow RBs absolutely aren't.  I think that matters a bunch.

we all have our takes. And we all have our preference of players. I’m not a Najee guy. I am a Higgins guy. Like I said, sometimes I want to have players I like on teams I like. Sometimes it’s as simple as that. And I even said Najee is worth more - his value is widely accepted as being more than Higgins. It’s just a personal preference. 

In the context of the deal (which I don’t actually know other than league-size) Najee is the better piece and I would accept it due to the scarcity of the position. 

But personally I’d rather have Higgins, because I’m a Higgins fan. 

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Back to this deal, for my rebuilding team in a 12-team SF, I'm honestly not sure what I would do if someone offered me Najee for Higgins straight up. As I mentioned in my 1st response, I know Najee is worth more. But I also don't see Higgins as a WR2 on his team, but rather a 1B to Chase's 1A. It's a very pass-friendly offense with a very good QB, in an organization I see as on the rise. Pittsburgh feels like a rebuilding team that doesn't quite know that it's a rebuilding team. I hate their QB situation, and I don't love having good RBs on bad offenses. And I'm not completely convinced Harris is a really good RB, so much as he is a volume guy. Meaning, if the offense stinks with Trubusky and the volume isn't there, is Harris going to live up to that perceived 37 point valuation short-term? I assume the valuation takes age into consideration, but we see time and again teams with poor QB play hold back the offense, and RBs often have a shorter window than other positions.  

I know Big Ben is a future Hall of Famer but he was not very good last season and Harris performed fine. I think Trubisky or Pickett are both upgrades to that version of Ben - especially when we are considering impact to the running game. Ben couldn't throw the ball 15 yards in the air so defenses were all packed in close to the line of scrimmage. Also Harris is a good RB - he was a first round pick by a great organization. 

 

[Jonesin For Some Football]

we all have our takes. And we all have our preference of players. I’m not a Najee guy. I am a Higgins guy. Like I said, sometimes I want to have players I like on teams I like. Sometimes it’s as simple as that. And I even said Najee is worth more - his value is widely accepted as being more than Higgins. It’s just a personal preference. 

In the context of the deal (which I don’t actually know other than league-size) Najee is the better piece and I would accept it due to the scarcity of the position. 

But personally I’d rather have Higgins, because I’m a Higgins fan. 

Oh for sure.  I am good at taking "like" out of it since I have quite a few teams so I always have guys I like and some I don't but you are right, it is easier to enjoy if you like your guys.  Valuations vary and everyone of them could be wrong.

I think he said 14 team league but that could have been a different one.  I do like HIggins too and will be looking to get many parts of that offense this year.  That being said, I think Harris is team proof as he will get touches.  I agree Pitts isn't going to be good though and could affect him.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

I know Big Ben is a future Hall of Famer but he was not very good last season and Harris performed fine. I think Trubisky or Pickett are both upgrades to that version of Ben - especially when we are considering impact to the running game. Ben couldn't throw the ball 15 yards in the air so defenses were all packed in close to the line of scrimmage. Also Harris is a good RB - he was a first round pick by a great organization. 

Time will tell. 

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Time will tell. 

Do you think Ben was good last season?

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Do you think Ben was good last season?

I do not. But Mitch is one of the least accurate QBs I've ever seen, and I would take a busted down Roethlisburger over a "what the ever-loving hell was that throw, mitch?!" any day.  Trubisky is immobile, inaccurate and makes terrible no-good awful decisions with the football. 

Ask Allen Robinson how he liked having literally every ball thrown 1 yard behind him for years. Especially vexing when ARob was running a great route and had the angle on the defense so that if the ball was thrown with anything resembling accuracy to lead the receiver they would have been sure-fire walk-in touchdowns. As an ARob shareholder for years, it was maddening. 

So no - Ben was not good last year. He was sluggish, slow to process his reads, and had a noodle arm. And he was still better than anything I've ever seen out of Mitch Trubisky.  

I haven't seen Pickett play at the NFL level, so again, time will tell. 

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Trubisky is immobile

You may want to double check that.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

You may want to double check that.

OK, a better phrasing: He is inaccurate when throwing on the run. That's more where I was going with that. 

I know he can run. He can run WAY better than he can throw, which is a very sad statement. 

 

[Gally]

OK, a better phrasing: He is inaccurate when throwing on the run. That's more where I was going with that. 

I know he can run. He can run WAY better than he can throw, which is a very sad statement. 

I think Trubisky was screwed by the coaching staff trying to put a round peg in a square hole and didn't set Trubisky up for success.  

I don't think he is a great QB but he does have tools that can be used to succeed.  If the Steelers play to what he can do then I think we will be much better than last year's Big Ben and an upgrade to that offense.  

 

[Dr. Octopus]

OK, a better phrasing: He is inaccurate when throwing on the run. That's more where I was going with that. 

I know he can run. He can run WAY better than he can throw, which is a very sad statement. 

I'm not saying Trubisky is good but you're exagerating his inaccuracy - his career passing percentage is 64.1% which puts him 22nd all-time ahead of Joe Montana and Matthew Stafford and barely behind Tom Brady (64.2%) and Ben Roethlisberger (64.4%).

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

I think Trubisky was screwed by the coaching staff trying to put a round peg in a square hole and didn't set Trubisky up for success.  

I don't think he is a great QB but he does have tools that can be used to succeed.  If the Steelers play to what he can do then I think we will be much better than last year's Big Ben and an upgrade to that offense.  

And I think he's a terrible QB who lacks the tools to succeed because he's inaccurate & doesn't read a defense well. 

For the 3rd time: time will tell which of us is correct. 

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

I'm not saying Trubisky is good but you're exagerating his inaccuracy - his career passing % is 64.1% which puts him 22nd all-time ahead of Joe Montana and Matthew Stafford and Barley behind Tom Brady (64.2%) and Ben Roethlisberge (64.4%).

I know what stats say. I also know what my eyes saw. Sometimes raw statistics don't tell the whole tale, but by all means, you're welcome to go trade for all the PIT WRs and buy several Trubisky jerseys.  

Your comparing him favorably to Montana & Brady is one of the best examples of how one can manipulate statistics I've ever seen. It's also laughable. 2 HOF QBs, and a dude who maybe dumped off enough balls to get his % up. Please. 

We are allowed to have different opinions on the QB. I think he sucks. 

 

[Jonesin For Some Football]

I know what stats say. I also know what my eyes saw. Sometimes raw statistics don't tell the whole tale, but by all means, you're welcome to go trade for all the PIT WRs and buy several Trubisky jerseys.  

Your comparing him favorably to Montana & Brady is one of the best examples of how one can manipulate statistics I've ever seen. It's also laughable. 2 HOF QBs, and a dude who maybe dumped off enough balls to get his % up. Please. 

We are allowed to have different opinions on the QB. I think he sucks. 

I'm somewhere in the middle here.  I agree he looked terrible in Chicago but I think Coaching and O-line affected that some too.  I think Picket ends up taking over at some point personally.  I do agree that using that stat to compare him to the 2 best QBs ever is proving why that stat is garbage.

 

[barackdhouse]

This probably sounds crazy but a RB worth 37 in this system may be worth more than a WR worth 40 (I have Mefcalf there presently). The presumption is that 37 represents the advantage over replacement spread out over the player's presumed (fantasy relevant) career arc. 

IOW 37 may only be spread out over 3 to 6 years for a RB where 40 may be spread out over 6 to 9 for a WR. So the actual production advantage of the RB at a scarce position represents quite a bit more than the actual production of a comparably priced WR.

Therefore the gap between Najee and Higgins is even greater. The long term value of a WR may seem great but the short term advantage of an elite workhorse is much greater. 

These numbers of mine (and Hindery) are an expectation spread out over time but in my case I try to adjust for market. Anyway, even though my numbers show it close, I don't think it is enough for Najee by a bit. And I will often do deals that don't add up (by my own numbers) if I think it makes my team strong. Roster construction still matters. What am I gonna do roster all the QBs because they are worth the most? How do I turn that into victories?

 

[Dr. Octopus]

  I do agree that using that stat to compare him to the 2 best QBs ever is proving why that stat is garbage.

If that's what you think I did, that's on you. Maybe go back and re-read it.

I wasn't in any way saying he was as good as those guys - I was merely using facts that relate to accuracy to show he wasn't "the most inaccurate QB of all-time".

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

I'm somewhere in the middle here.  I agree he looked terrible in Chicago but I think Coaching and O-line affected that some too.  I think Picket ends up taking over at some point personally.  I do agree that using that stat to compare him to the 2 best QBs ever is proving why that stat is garbage.

We don't yet know how "mittens" is going to do in the pros. I agree Pickett may take over. Whether that is an upgrade remains to be seen. 

It'll be an interesting season in PIT. They're a good organization, historically speaking. I was shocked when they brought in Mitch, and I'm still not sure if Pickett would have been taken in the 1st had PIT not taken him. That's not to say Pickett can't be a good NFL QB. I just haven't see it yet, because no one's seen it yet.  Scouting reports were similar to Mac Jones, saying he had a high floor, but possibly a low ceiling. NFL-Ready was used a lot to describe him though, so I concede he may be better than Ben or Trubisky, whatever Mitch's HOF statistical resume may say.  

 

[Jonesin For Some Football]

If that's what you think I did, that's on you. Maybe go back and re-read it.

I wasn't in any way saying he was as good as those guys - I was merely using facts that relate to accuracy to show he wasn't "the most inaccurate QB of all-time".

Not all throws are created equal either.  When you take a ton of sacks because you won't throw downfield or won't throw unless a guy is open, you are manipulating that stat.  I don't think he is as bad as Hot Sauce Guy but he was bad in Chicago.  We are about to see if that was because of Chicago or if it was him.  This is his chance to show why he doesn't suck.

I just wouldn't consider him to even close to as accurate as TB12 or Joe Cool so that stat is meaningless is all I'm saying.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

If that's what you think I did, that's on you. Maybe go back and re-read it.

I wasn't in any way saying he was as good as those guys - I was merely using facts that relate to accuracy to show he wasn't "the most inaccurate QB of all-time".

Oh I read it. You were just playing fast & loose with a questionable stat, & made a bad point as a result.  You absolutely used the completion % and compared him to Montana & Brady. I quoted it. 

Speaking of re-reading, I didn't say Mitch was "the most inaccurate of all time" (weird you put that in quotes) - I said he was inaccurate, and that Ben in his worst season was better.  

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Not all throws are created equal either.  When you take a ton of sacks because you won't throw downfield or won't throw unless a guy is open, you are manipulating that stat.  I don't think he is as bad as Hot Sauce Guy but he was bad in Chicago.  We are about to see if that was because of Chicago or if it was him.  This is his chance to show why he doesn't suck.

I just wouldn't consider him to even close to as accurate as TB12 or Joe Cool so that stat is meaningless is all I'm saying.

100% 

Clearly I wasn't the only one who read that post that way.  

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Oh I read it. You were just playing fast & loose with a questionable stat, & made a bad point as a result.  You absolutely used the completion % and compared him to Montana & Brady. I quoted it. 

Speaking of re-reading, I didn't say Mitch was "the most inaccurate of all time" (weird you put that in quotes) - I said he was inaccurate, and that Ben in his worst season was better.  

Fast and loose with questionable stats? WTF.

https://www.footballdb.com/leaders/career-passing-completionpct

You're now on ignore.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

These numbers of mine (and Hindery) are an expectation spread out over time but in my case I try to adjust for market. Anyway, even though my numbers show it close, I don't think it is enough for Najee by a bit. And I will often do deals that don't add up (by my own numbers) if I think it makes my team strong. Roster construction still matters. What am I gonna do roster all the QBs because they are worth the most? How do I turn that into victories?

The bolded is what I've been saying. If I knew more of the context of the 2 teams involved I could make a better evaluation. What if team Najee has 4 other RB and is thin at WR? What if they can only start 3 RB at most? Like you said, hard to win a game with points on the bench and not in the lineup. 

I can see a scenario where the deal makes sense, even if the numbers aren't completely equitable.  

 

[Dr. Octopus]

I just wouldn't consider him to even close to as accurate as TB12 or Joe Cool so that stat is meaningless is all I'm saying.

It wouldn't say he was either and guess what I didn't say that. I was just trying to show that saying he was "one of the most inaccurate QBs I've ever seen" may be a bit hyperbolic considering his completion percentage is far from terrible and it's comparable to many great QBs. 

 

[barackdhouse]

Oh come on for FFS. It was 100% reasonable for Doc to show that example. Who cares. We all know Trubisky has major question marks. And if somebody thinks they've already been answered and he is a bum then fine. Let it go. Please no more.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Oh come on for FFS. It was 100% reasonable for Doc to show that example. Who cares. We all know Trubisky has major question marks. And if somebody thinks they've already been answered and he is a bum then fine. Let it go. Please no more.

“Facts are stubborn things, but statistics are pliable.” is a quote that applies here well. That, or "statistics are the grammar of science". 

It was reasonable to bring it up, yet was also inaccurate. If throwing out a loose stat to make a false equivalence, someone should have the courage to defend it. 

I'm 1000% ok with the entire discussion. I wasn't the one who took my ball & went home. 

Ps - I don't think Trubisky's questions have already been answered - I said pretty clearly, multiple times, "time will tell".  

 

[barackdhouse]

“Facts are stubborn things, but statistics are pliable.” is a quote that applies here well. That, or "statistics are the grammar of science". 

It was reasonable to bring it up, yet was also inaccurate. If throwing out a loose stat to make a false equivalence, someone should have the courage to defend it. 

I'm 1000% ok with the entire discussion. I wasn't the one who took my ball & went home. 

Ps - I don't think Trubisky's questions have already been answered - I said pretty clearly, multiple times, "time will tell".  

JFC

 

[Joe Bryant]

Drop the personal back and forth thread derailment and get this back on topic.

If what you're posting is not 100% about a player, don't post it. 

 

[Jonesin For Some Football]

The bolded is what I've been saying. If I knew more of the context of the 2 teams involved I could make a better evaluation. What if team Najee has 4 other RB and is thin at WR? What if they can only start 3 RB at most? Like you said, hard to win a game with points on the bench and not in the lineup. 

I can see a scenario where the deal makes sense, even if the numbers aren't completely equitable.  

Agreed completely.  Rosters matter.  This is where I would either demand a better player than Higgins (goes to our individual valuations) or trade one of my other RBs (presumably not as good or not as young) for a different WR.  I do like Higgins just feels a little rich for him to me.  I get that others are higher on him for sure.  I'd just like a better pick with him to make it fair.  Like a 1st instead of a 2nd next year.

I will be drafting plenty of Bengals in redraft leagues this eyar for sure though as you are right they are coming up.

 

[foxco]

12 team ppr 1QB

Mike Williams, Cole Kmet, Mac Jones

for

AJ Brown & 2 guys the other team immediately dropped

Team getting Mac Jones only had Goff at QB and is very thin at TE.

 

 

[menobrown]

12 team ppr 1QB

Mike Williams, Cole Kmet, Mac Jones

for

AJ Brown & 2 guys the other team immediately dropped

Team getting Mac Jones only had Goff at QB and is very thin at TE.

 

 AJB

 

[Dez]

Hey its better than the Higgins deal someone did to someone in my 16 team league last year.

Midseason some guy got someone else to send him Higgins AND a 2nd for Robert Woods then he tore his ACL 2 weeks later................ouch.  

 

[King of the Jungle]

As The Rolling Stones so eloquently said, “where’s my heroin?!” - wait, sorry, it’s “you can’t always get what you want.”

That makes it easier then, you just don’t make the trade.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Hey its better than the Higgins deal someone did to someone in my 16 team league last year.

Midseason some guy got someone else to send him Higgins AND a 2nd for Robert Woods then he tore his ACL 2 weeks later................ouch.  

Oof. That’s brutal.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Agreed completely.  Rosters matter.  This is where I would either demand a better player than Higgins (goes to our individual valuations) or trade one of my other RBs (presumably not as good or not as young) for a different WR.  I do like Higgins just feels a little rich for him to me.  I get that others are higher on him for sure.  I'd just like a better pick with him to make it fair.  Like a 1st instead of a 2nd next year.

I will be drafting plenty of Bengals in redraft leagues this eyar for sure though as you are right they are coming up.

From my experience, the bigger the league, the more difficult it is to get exact fair value in trades. The talent pool is scattered across more rosters, and not every owner is going to have the perfect Cinderella deal to make.