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!
In a similar format (with fewer teams "12" vs 16) I have Burrow and traded Dak for Pitts before this year started so I may be a little biased. In TEP, Kelce and Andrews have been a "cheat code" and I'm still hoping for the same out of Pitts with a better situation next year, but Freiermuth and Mayer may be good enough to fall back on. It's tough enough to get good QB's in a "12" teamer, must be really hard in a 16 and I can see why being set there would be a big relief and worth taking the chance.
Seems like a lot for a dude who's QB has had multiple significant concussions.
It really comes down to your favorite rookies / how you feel about guys like Addison, QJ, Zach Evans, Boutte, etc.
I don't hate it, but I don't love it. Value-wise I think it leans the Burrow side by about 15-25%
Agreed - if it was the 1.04 & 2.07 alone I'd have it about dead even. Still not sure I'd make the deal, as the QB situation in MIA is a bit murky. I am not Pollyanna about Tua's dome situation.
I think you'd be surprised.
The exact equation I found would have been as done, minus me getting a pick but giving a 2022 late 2nd. I tried that one hard and tried to throw in a devy to see if that'd work, but he was naturally nervous and everyone's gushing Burrow right now with how he's performing. Didn't want to upset the whole apple cart even if I overpaid more than I wish by 1 round and got him to toss me a 6th so I could speculate as I love the draft and trading a lot, too, so maybe I luck into the next Brock Purdy or whatever too.
Yeah, I actually do not believe you overpaid. In fact, I think you won, as Burrow is the most valuable piece in this deal.
I currently would not offer more than the 1.06. Bijan, Gibbs, Addison, Johnston, JSN, then the tier drop where I'd put Ekeler.No way would I trade Ekeler for the 1.08 If I had him, and I don’t.But I have win-now people unwilling to offer 1.08 or 1.10, for example. Not that I would take either.Probably 1.04 or 1.05 at worst. This is non-SFInteresting. He’s on my short list of RB to acquire if cheap enough. As an Ekeler owner what is the cheapest you’d take for him (pick wise)?Can't give Ekeler away...
I don't know that I would accept that, so probably in the ballpark.
That's basically 2+ 1sts (each of Higgins & Barkley are worth a 1st+), and 13th overall, which is basically a late 1st. All added up that's probably more than 3x 1sts worth of value.
Can you elaborate?
The groupthink is that every pick is guaranteed to be a stud. People just ignore the fact that a huge percentage of picks either completely bust or are nothing more than filler types.
Surely you try to trade away all your picks every year if they're universally overvalued?
In a lot of cases, yes. Obviously it depends on the condition of my team. But I traded a late first and a mid second for Lamar in a SF league and was ecstatic.
I actually did this in my original league and had great success. I was back to back champion. I stockpiled picks this year though. I will wait until after the NFL draft to really make my decision on selections or trade targets.
I don't value picks nearly as much as most people do but that doesn't mean I will just give them away either. Having an understanding of how other's value picks allows you to get some bargains in terms of players in return if done right and you have leaguemates willing to trust their valuations.
Funny you ask. Same guy and I made my crazy annual deal two years ago and it kinda bit me in the back end so I'm curious if I'm going to feel the same again here in a few years. The cornerstones a few years ago was me needing a RB for a playoff push (finished 2nd), getting James Conner and a devy named Pat Freiermuth while giving him some devy pieces but also Jalen Hurts. Hurts was a rookie and was still Wentz's speculative backup at that point, but I figured he may or may not amount to really becoming a thing and my personal preference in fantasy is to play from a very strong TE position. That was also the year I fought to get Pitts so hard, so I ended up in a position with Pitts + Freiermuth with hopes they'd become who I hope they'd become and could brow beat my league with TEs for years. So much so that I also drafted Brock Bowers last year
and then turned him into Michael Mayer this year.Slam dunk for Barkley + Higgins + 2.01 IMO. SF makes that 2.01 even more valuable.
You seem to somehow own half the first round of rookie picks every off-season, so it is clear you like rookies. I do not understand the theory behind trading young, proven production for random young talent however. Are we not drafting rookies hoping they will produce like Waddle has? Or is the theory with multiple picks your hit ratio is good enough to have two Waddles?
And the good owners will take advantage of that groupthink.
Nope - sorry, but you’re mistaken. It’s just this year. In fact, in that rebuilding league I’ve never had a 1st round pick, as I was always competing so I’d deal a 1st every year trying to get over the hump.
I mostly agree but in a 14 team league the 2.07 is 21. I wouldn't give Waddle for 4 and 21 and I own him. I do think the 5 is too much. Like 4 and any pick below like 14 or 15 would do it.
Yeah, I mean or throw a player in with that 1.04 and 2.07. I was also partly basing the “not worth 1.04 and 1.05“ based on the 14 team league, making those picks more valuable.
I don't believe in vetos very often, especially in dynasty as it is impossible to value picks completely but this trade looks very much like it should not go through.
I don't disagree with you. I don't think I would pay 1.4 and 1.5 for Waddle and I like him. QB and Hill being there limits his upside a bit.
My apologies, I must be losing it then (in regards to you always having picks). Everyone has their own strategy. In the past I would always load picks and now I lean towards aiming for proven talent. A balance of the two keeps things going the right direction but if I keep picks I try to aim for elite receiver prospects. Traded up to take Lamb over Taylor/CEH, traded up to number one to take Chase. This year I used picks to get ARSB. In this draft I would prefer Waddle to 1.04 and 1.05 as I just do not value the players in this draft as highly as others. From a “value” perspective that may be the wrong approach but IMO Waddle has shown enough at a young age to keep over two random players in what I consider a weaker crop (in particular at receiver).Nope - sorry, but you’re mistaken. It’s just this year. In fact, in that rebuilding league I’ve never had a 1st round pick, as I was always competing so I’d deal a 1st every year trying to get over the hump.
I spent 1.5 years dealing away my aging assets when it became clear I wasn’t gonna get there, and my roster was aging. Good thing, too, because 80% of the assets I dealt either got hurt or fell off a cliff.
So the rest of your post is based on an incorrect assumption/premise. No offense, just clarifying. I’ve literally never had a 1st round pick in that league and in the past have dealt them away for the exact reasons folks are saying to deal away the picks.
I just personally don’t think Waddle is worth 1.04 & 1.05. And that’s more to do with his QB than Waddle.
I might pay 1.04 & 1.05 for another WR. And THIS year I happen to have 7 of the 1st 13 picks to do it with.
The real question is this: with a rebuild, am I better off dealing 6 of those 7 picks to acquire 3 proven players, or picking 7 players who could all be young, valuable players when they develop? I know that not every draft pick hits, but what is the rate? If it’s 50%, then maybe I should deal six picks for three players. But if it’s closer to 75%, then I’m potentially leaving value on the table by limiting the number of players that I acquire with those picks.
Or is it some combination?
That’s what I’m struggling with, and will struggle with for the next few months. I am guessing it will be some combo, but I can’t know that until I know who my leaguemates are willing to part with, and for what.
The YouTube’s are crawling with them.
No apology needed - I’ve mentioned having these 2023 picks a few times around here over the last 18 months-ish, so I can see how it might have given that impression.My apologies, I must be losing it then (in regards to you always having picks)Nope - sorry, but you’re mistaken. It’s just this year. In fact, in that rebuilding league I’ve never had a 1st round pick, as I was always competing so I’d deal a 1st every year trying to get over the hump.
I spent 1.5 years dealing away my aging assets when it became clear I wasn’t gonna get there, and my roster was aging. Good thing, too, because 80% of the assets I dealt either got hurt or fell off a cliff.
So the rest of your post is based on an incorrect assumption/premise. No offense, just clarifying. I’ve literally never had a 1st round pick in that league and in the past have dealt them away for the exact reasons folks are saying to deal away the picks.
I just personally don’t think Waddle is worth 1.04 & 1.05. And that’s more to do with his QB than Waddle.
I might pay 1.04 & 1.05 for another WR. And THIS year I happen to have 7 of the 1st 13 picks to do it with.
The real question is this: with a rebuild, am I better off dealing 6 of those 7 picks to acquire 3 proven players, or picking 7 players who could all be young, valuable players when they develop? I know that not every draft pick hits, but what is the rate? If it’s 50%, then maybe I should deal six picks for three players. But if it’s closer to 75%, then I’m potentially leaving value on the table by limiting the number of players that I acquire with those picks.
Or is it some combination?
That’s what I’m struggling with, and will struggle with for the next few months. I am guessing it will be some combo, but I can’t know that until I know who my leaguemates are willing to part with, and for what.
Is that from picking players that didn’t pan out, or getting more out of proven assets, or some combo?
Sure, I can see that. It’s a strong RB crop though, so I’m inclined to lean into that.
I think I use to just get swallowed up in rookie fever. A few instances letting one year guys go too early for shiny toys and never really letting my investments payout. So if I find a player who is productive I am trying to be more patient versus always chasing the new crop. If there is an elite receiver I will try to get him. Next year I think Marvin Harrison Jr fits that billing so I will probably see if I can acquire a 2024 pick or two during this off-season/season and try to move up to grab him. For the 2023 I am have zero picks. I will mention we run fairly shallow rosters (12 teams, 18 spots) so roster spots are tight which further favors a young productive player over three random players if you already have a full roster of players you like.
That’s very important context.
Huge difference and my bad for my narrow initial judgement based on that. With your league setup I would easily side with the picks over Waddle.
Probably close, but give me Smith.
I like the smith side.
Pretty even. I like the picks side as I am trader and feel I could work something with two picks instead of just Smith to better my team. I do think Smith is undervalued overall. Being in the shadow of AJ Brown hurts his perceived trade value more than his actual production going forward IMO.
