****OFFICIAL DYNASTY TRADES**** (24 Viewers)

[barackdhouse]

Others liked the deal.

I didn't comment on the deal - I commented on something you said in order to further discussion and you responded like a child. I won't muck up the thread further and move on though.

wow ok guy

 

[barackdhouse]

Others liked the deal.

I didn't comment on the deal - I commented on something you said in order to further discussion and you responded like a child. I won't muck up the thread further and move on though.

"if you say so" is responding like a child? that's awfully soft

 

[jtd13]

PPR, 2 rb 3 wr no flex.

Gave Jonathan Mingo and Keaontay Ingram
Received Tank Bigsby and mid 24 2nd

 

[titusbramble]

Team A:

Jahan Dotson
2024 1st (mid-early)
2025 2nd
2025 3rd

Team B:
Tee Higgins

This seems like a fairly large overpay for Tee

 

[eighsse2]

PPR, 2 rb 3 wr no flex.

Gave Jonathan Mingo and Keaontay Ingram
Received Tank Bigsby and mid 24 2nd

Big win imo.

 

[joey]

Team A:

Jahan Dotson
2024 1st (mid-early)
2025 2nd
2025 3rd

Team B:
Tee Higgins

Is there that big of a gap between Dotson and Higgins to warrant a 1st, 2nd AND 3rd?
I think I would just stand pat with Dotson and keep my picks, especially if the 1st might be mid/early

 

[The Future Champs]

Team A:

Jahan Dotson
2024 1st (mid-early)
2025 2nd
2025 3rd

Team B:
Tee Higgins

Is there that big of a gap between Dotson and Higgins to warrant a 1st, 2nd AND 3rd?
I think I would just stand pat with Dotson and keep my picks, especially if the 1st might be mid/early

Yeah , I’m a Higgins fan but I would trade him for that without hesitation.

 

[The Future Champs]

Thinking about it: I wouldn’t move Higgins for Dotson and a late 2023 1st.

 

[Dez]

FFPC SuperFlex

I gave Hockenson
I got Gesicki & 2024 1st late

FFPC SuperFlex

I gave Hockenson
I got Gesicki & 2024 1st late

You win that

Interesting that you think that is a win. That is like saying you will trade pick 43 straight up for a 2024 late 1st round pick in a startup draft.

For me I think I get nearly identical production out of Gesicki this year as Hockenson. Within a small enough range that a 1st makes it a slam dunk for me. I don't agree with either player's ADP in either redraft or dynasty. I do like Hockenson but also think now *might* be a good sell high window. I think Addison starts dominating non-Jefferson targets by the end of the year. Granted, TEs are measured by a different stick in any format, and especially FFPC, and therefore Hockenson should still be productive. But I would guess both TEs finish around TE9-14.

Hockenson and Gesicki score about same pts ? It's a bold strategy, Cotton. Let's see if it pays off for 'em. One of them is going TE3 off the board and the other is TE23.

 

[Buckna]

SF makes it closer as that 1st is worth more but give me Hock. They added Addison sure but he’s a rook, the loss of Dalvin makes me think they will throw more.

I’d be surprised if Gesicki catches more than 40 balls this year as a Patriot. Even in TE premium he’s borderline to stay on a roster, especially in a cutdown league like FFPC.

 

[barackdhouse]

FFPC SuperFlex

I gave Hockenson
I got Gesicki & 2024 1st late

FFPC SuperFlex

I gave Hockenson
I got Gesicki & 2024 1st late

You win that

Interesting that you think that is a win. That is like saying you will trade pick 43 straight up for a 2024 late 1st round pick in a startup draft.

For me I think I get nearly identical production out of Gesicki this year as Hockenson. Within a small enough range that a 1st makes it a slam dunk for me. I don't agree with either player's ADP in either redraft or dynasty. I do like Hockenson but also think now *might* be a good sell high window. I think Addison starts dominating non-Jefferson targets by the end of the year. Granted, TEs are measured by a different stick in any format, and especially FFPC, and therefore Hockenson should still be productive. But I would guess both TEs finish around TE9-14.

Hockenson and Gesicki score about same pts ? It's a bold strategy, Cotton. Let's see if it pays off for 'em. One of them is going TE3 off the board and the other is TE23.

I'm aware of what the market thinks of them

 

[Da Franchise]

My response to most of the trades being posted the last little while is….woof.

 

[Birdie048]

For me I think I get nearly identical production out of Gesicki this year as Hockenson

It seems tough to make a statement like that.

While I agree with this sentiment, I think it will occur later in season games …Gesicki & Hock will be closer to performance scoring as Addison get more acclimated to the NFL and Gesicki develops more chemistry with Mac Jones in NE.
My main concern is NEP Passing game has so many questionable weapons ... Bourne, Parker, Juju, HHenry, Thorton and Rookie Bouette.

 

[barackdhouse]

They've been talking all offseason about how they want to feature Gesicki in that offense. And I thought it was pretty obvious that Miami was a terrible situation for him.

 

[BigA]

I'm in 4 player 12T keeper league. .5 ppr.

I turned JJefferson into Kupp, G Wilson and D Smith. Hurts is my QB.

 

[menobrown]

They've been talking all offseason about how they want to feature Gesicki in that offense. And I thought it was pretty obvious that Miami was a terrible situation for him.

Miami turned terrible for him last season, no idea why they tagged him since he was a round peg in a square hole for McDaniels offense.But his previous 3 seasons he had finishes of 3rd, 7th and 12th in TE targets so that does not seem bad to me.

I've never been a fan. My comp for him coming into the league was Fleener and nothing has made me change my mind, he's had his chances and to me has been pretty underwhelming. The NFL does not seem to be a big fan as he struggled to land a good contract, even guys like Hayden Hurst did better.

I'm not going to say it's not possible for you to be correct as we've seen massive improvements just last year with two TE's who had change of scenery's in Hock and Engram, though to be sure the teams financial/compensation commitment to those two is very different then what NE has invested. So possible, but I personally am not seeing them as close and am more in line with their market values.

 

[menobrown]

Not quite the blockbuster like some trades getting posted but did this little one today in FFPC:

Gave: Eric the Gray
Got: 2024 third

Offered to the Barkley owner, he snap accepted. Fine with trade, had no expected use for Gray or the path to keeping him seemed slim, but made me realize maybe I should have asked for something like my third/Gray for his second instead and maybe I sold to cheap/to soon?

 

[barackdhouse]

They've been talking all offseason about how they want to feature Gesicki in that offense. And I thought it was pretty obvious that Miami was a terrible situation for him.

Miami turned terrible for him last season, no idea why they tagged him since he was a round peg in a square hole for McDaniels offense.But his previous 3 seasons he had finishes of 3rd, 7th and 12th in TE targets so that does not seem bad to me.

I've never been a fan. My comp for him coming into the league was Fleener and nothing has made me change my mind, he's had his chances and to me has been pretty underwhelming. The NFL does not seem to be a big fan as he struggled to land a good contract, even guys like Hayden Hurst did better.

I'm not going to say it's not possible for you to be correct as we've seen massive improvements just last year with two TE's who had change of scenery's in Hock and Engram, though to be sure the teams financial/compensation commitment to those two is very different then what NE has invested. So possible, but I personally am not seeing them as close and am more in line with their market values.

The thing is I'm getting paid if I'm wrong. But my expectations are not that he will ascend to a level that Hockenson has already performed at, but rather that Hockenson will regress a bit. Even if not, again I'm getting paid for it. But the Dolphins were 100% holding him back based on system/scheme and yeah it was a round hole/square peg deal. Now the Patriots are looking to really feature him as a receiver (IMO) so some positive regression would seem plausible if not probable. Again my prediction from earlier was both TEs finish somewhere around TE9-13 and even though I know my take is against the grain... that's where I'm at. Thanks for a thoughtful response.

I don't think Coby Fleener is such a bad comp and one I could live with. I don't think Gesicki is the second coming of Gronk (at all) but he is more than capable and my guess is he has a big, big chip on his shoulder. We'll see. He is in his prime and had improved his stats each season getting up to 73/780/2 (we all know TDs are fluky) until the complete outlier with McDaniels in 2022.

 

[menobrown]

The thing is I'm getting paid if I'm wrong. But my expectations are not that he will ascend to a level that Hockenson has already performed at, but rather that Hockenson will regress a bit. Even if not, again I'm getting paid for it

Oh yes for sure and the trade itself is another matter entirely but you told me if I'm not in super-flex I can't comment on those trades so...lol. J/k and I actually usually do refrain from commenting on SF trades in event I'm missing some nuance but I got an idea of what the first round looks like and I'm down for the trade.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

12 team PPR SF start 10, no K, no D/ST

I’d been wrestling with Mattison. I acquired him for next to no cost (Mariotta + Zay Jones) and have a team I think is ready to compete.

I gave: Mattison + KJO + 2025 2nd
I rec’d: Mike Williams + 2025 1st

I couldn’t give Osborn away, but I wasn’t thrilled with just getting a 2025 1st for an asset (Mattison) without improving my current roster.

This leaves me with
Fields, ARich (Minshew)
Bijan, ETN, Montgomery, AJD (and some scraps - Eric Gray, Prince, Deon Jackson)
AJ Brown, ARSB, Higgins, Williams, Bateman (Gabe Davis, Charlie Jones, Iosivas, AT Perry, Parker Washington)
Pitts (Conklin, Fortson, Grat, Latu, Likely, E. Higgins)

And that 2025 1st, which I lacked.

 

[titusbramble]

Mattison side unless we know the first will be early, which we can't really at this stage. Give me a starting RB and someone who might be occasionally useful for a WR for someone who I don't really rate in comparison to his value and a 1/2 pick swap. That you already have three WRs objectively better than Williams both now and going forward makes this even more baffling, especially given you say you are ready to compete now and have nothing better than Mattison after Bijan and Etienne at RB

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Mattison side unless we know the first will be early, which we can't really at this stage. Give me a starting RB and someone who might be occasionally useful for a WR for someone who I don't really rate in comparison to his value and a 1/2 pick swap. That you already have three WRs objectively better than Williams both now and going forward makes this even more baffling, especially given you say you are ready to compete now and have nothing better than Mattison after Bijan and Etienne at RB

We can start up to 6 WR & only have to start 2 RB

Given longevity windows of positions I’d simply rather have Mike Williams than Mattison.

Mattison’s numbers haven’t been otherworldly, and I’ve heard tale the Vikes will be passing more.

I don’t find it baffling at all. Seems pretty logical - in a PPR league I’d rather have the WR. I feel like 4 starting RB is enough, and I have a few dart throws that might generate value. If not I can spend the 2025 pick on a RB either in that draft or in trade.

 

[InDitkaWeTrust]

Mattison side unless we know the first will be early, which we can't really at this stage. Give me a starting RB and someone who might be occasionally useful for a WR for someone who I don't really rate in comparison to his value and a 1/2 pick swap. That you already have three WRs objectively better than Williams both now and going forward makes this even more baffling, especially given you say you are ready to compete now and have nothing better than Mattison after Bijan and Etienne at RB

I dunno. This really depends on roster requirements. I'm inclined to agree with you in a start 2RB format, but for a start 1 and multiple flex, I think it's a good move for him.

 

[InDitkaWeTrust]

Mattison side unless we know the first will be early, which we can't really at this stage. Give me a starting RB and someone who might be occasionally useful for a WR for someone who I don't really rate in comparison to his value and a 1/2 pick swap. That you already have three WRs objectively better than Williams both now and going forward makes this even more baffling, especially given you say you are ready to compete now and have nothing better than Mattison after Bijan and Etienne at RB

We can start up to 6 WR & only have to start 2 RB

Given longevity windows of positions I’d simply rather have Mike Williams than Mattison.

Mattison’s numbers haven’t been otherworldly, and I’ve heard tale the Vikes will be passing more.

I don’t find it baffling at all. Seems pretty logical - in a PPR league I’d rather have the WR. I feel like 4 starting RB is enough, and I have a few dart throws that might generate value. If not I can spend the 2025 pick on a RB either in that draft or in trade.

No, you don't have 4 starting RBs. YOu have two solid ones and two guys who are destined for committee and we don't know which side of the 60/40 they will fall. Your RB room is going to be super thin all season and one injury could ruin your chance to compete.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Mattison side unless we know the first will be early, which we can't really at this stage. Give me a starting RB and someone who might be occasionally useful for a WR for someone who I don't really rate in comparison to his value and a 1/2 pick swap. That you already have three WRs objectively better than Williams both now and going forward makes this even more baffling, especially given you say you are ready to compete now and have nothing better than Mattison after Bijan and Etienne at RB

We can start up to 6 WR & only have to start 2 RB

Given longevity windows of positions I’d simply rather have Mike Williams than Mattison.

Mattison’s numbers haven’t been otherworldly, and I’ve heard tale the Vikes will be passing more.

I don’t find it baffling at all. Seems pretty logical - in a PPR league I’d rather have the WR. I feel like 4 starting RB is enough, and I have a few dart throws that might generate value. If not I can spend the 2025 pick on a RB either in that draft or in trade.

No, you don't have 4 starting RBs. YOu have two solid ones and two guys who are destined for committee and we don't know which side of the 60/40 they will fall. Your RB room is going to be super thin all season and one injury could ruin your chance to compete.

Eh, I’m not sure Mattison makes it that much better.

That’s why I pulled the trigger.

If a RB gets hurt I have plenty of assets to move for a RB. They’re cheaper and easier to replace than elite WRs.

ETA: Mattison was my 4th-5th RB, a bench player. Williams (when healthy) is a starting WR, sending Bateman/Davis to the bench as BYE week fillers.

I don’t see any of this as particularly controversial. I much prefer my side of the deal.

 

[InDitkaWeTrust]

Mattison side unless we know the first will be early, which we can't really at this stage. Give me a starting RB and someone who might be occasionally useful for a WR for someone who I don't really rate in comparison to his value and a 1/2 pick swap. That you already have three WRs objectively better than Williams both now and going forward makes this even more baffling, especially given you say you are ready to compete now and have nothing better than Mattison after Bijan and Etienne at RB

We can start up to 6 WR & only have to start 2 RB

Given longevity windows of positions I’d simply rather have Mike Williams than Mattison.

Mattison’s numbers haven’t been otherworldly, and I’ve heard tale the Vikes will be passing more.

I don’t find it baffling at all. Seems pretty logical - in a PPR league I’d rather have the WR. I feel like 4 starting RB is enough, and I have a few dart throws that might generate value. If not I can spend the 2025 pick on a RB either in that draft or in trade.

No, you don't have 4 starting RBs. YOu have two solid ones and two guys who are destined for committee and we don't know which side of the 60/40 they will fall. Your RB room is going to be super thin all season and one injury could ruin your chance to compete.

Eh, I’m not sure Mattison makes it that much better.

That’s why I pulled the trigger.

If a RB gets hurt I have plenty of assets to move for a RB. They’re cheaper and easier to replace than elite WRs.

Fair. That's not been my experience, but I know all leagues are different. In my leagues, folks tend to hold onto producing RBs like gold during the season, regardless of real or perceived fantasy value. I'm curious to see how your roster plays out over the season. Might be a good one to track in a pre and post season thread?

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Fair. That's not been my experience, but I know all leagues are different. In my leagues, folks tend to hold onto producing RBs like gold during the season, regardless of real or perceived fantasy value. I'm curious to see how your roster plays out over the season. Might be a good one to track in a pre and post season thread?

Well, this is my total rebuild where I got down to like 7 core assets and had 6x 1sts.

I feel like I’ve built a nice roster. I was specifically trying to do a “hero RB” build around Bijan/ETN. I actually ended up with a deeper RB room than I anticipated with AJD & Monty. My goal was to de-emphasize the position in favor of QB/WR/TE.

I’m certainly hoping to compete - looking at the rest of the leagues there are now 6 rebuilding teams, so I just have to beat 6 teams to win a ship. Easy, right?


And I agree I’m an injury away from having to make a move. But I kinda feel like that’s always the case. There are like 4 teams that have a ton of RB, so they’re always in need of WR/TE, of which I have a bunch.

A wise man once told me to never build a roster scared. That man’s name was Mitch Cumstein.
/caddyshack

 

[titusbramble]

Mattison side unless we know the first will be early, which we can't really at this stage. Give me a starting RB and someone who might be occasionally useful for a WR for someone who I don't really rate in comparison to his value and a 1/2 pick swap. That you already have three WRs objectively better than Williams both now and going forward makes this even more baffling, especially given you say you are ready to compete now and have nothing better than Mattison after Bijan and Etienne at RB

We can start up to 6 WR & only have to start 2 RB

So what are your actual starting lineups? Don't just say "start 10" then list the very minimum number of the position you can trade away and the very maximum number of the position you have just traded for, from where I'm looking that's just projection trying to justify your position

 

[The Future Champs]

Mattison side unless we know the first will be early, which we can't really at this stage. Give me a starting RB and someone who might be occasionally useful for a WR for someone who I don't really rate in comparison to his value and a 1/2 pick swap. That you already have three WRs objectively better than Williams both now and going forward makes this even more baffling, especially given you say you are ready to compete now and have nothing better than Mattison after Bijan and Etienne at RB

We can start up to 6 WR & only have to start 2 RB

Given longevity windows of positions I’d simply rather have Mike Williams than Mattison.

Mattison’s numbers haven’t been otherworldly, and I’ve heard tale the Vikes will be passing more.

I don’t find it baffling at all. Seems pretty logical - in a PPR league I’d rather have the WR. I feel like 4 starting RB is enough, and I have a few dart throws that might generate value. If not I can spend the 2025 pick on a RB either in that draft or in trade.

No, you don't have 4 starting RBs. YOu have two solid ones and two guys who are destined for committee and we don't know which side of the 60/40 they will fall. Your RB room is going to be super thin all season and one injury could ruin your chance to compete.

Eh, I’m not sure Mattison makes it that much better.

That’s why I pulled the trigger.

If a RB gets hurt I have plenty of assets to move for a RB. They’re cheaper and easier to replace than elite WRs.

ETA: Mattison was my 4th-5th RB, a bench player. Williams (when healthy) is a starting WR, sending Davis to the bench as a BYE week filler.

I don’t see any of this as particularly controversial. I much prefer my side of the deal.

I can see your side of the deal, as you’ve got a competitive team for several years, and missing 1st round picks can derail that.
That said, I’d want another QB more than RBs or WRs. Richardson has a higher bust probability than most early QBs.
Also, why all that flotsam in TE?

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Mattison side unless we know the first will be early, which we can't really at this stage. Give me a starting RB and someone who might be occasionally useful for a WR for someone who I don't really rate in comparison to his value and a 1/2 pick swap. That you already have three WRs objectively better than Williams both now and going forward makes this even more baffling, especially given you say you are ready to compete now and have nothing better than Mattison after Bijan and Etienne at RB

We can start up to 6 WR & only have to start 2 RB

Given longevity windows of positions I’d simply rather have Mike Williams than Mattison.

Mattison’s numbers haven’t been otherworldly, and I’ve heard tale the Vikes will be passing more.

I don’t find it baffling at all. Seems pretty logical - in a PPR league I’d rather have the WR. I feel like 4 starting RB is enough, and I have a few dart throws that might generate value. If not I can spend the 2025 pick on a RB either in that draft or in trade.

No, you don't have 4 starting RBs. YOu have two solid ones and two guys who are destined for committee and we don't know which side of the 60/40 they will fall. Your RB room is going to be super thin all season and one injury could ruin your chance to compete.

Eh, I’m not sure Mattison makes it that much better.

That’s why I pulled the trigger.

If a RB gets hurt I have plenty of assets to move for a RB. They’re cheaper and easier to replace than elite WRs.

ETA: Mattison was my 4th-5th RB, a bench player. Williams (when healthy) is a starting WR, sending Davis to the bench as a BYE week filler.

I don’t see any of this as particularly controversial. I much prefer my side of the deal.

I can see your side of the deal, as you’ve got a competitive team for several years, and missing 1st round picks can derail that.
That said, I’d want another QB more than RBs or WRs. Richardson has a higher bust probability than most early QBs.
Also, why all that flotsam in TE?

QBs are impossible to get in this format. SF is extremely challenging in that regard, and if one were available I would have pulled the trigger on that trade already.

I already acquired Fields for 2x 1sts (4 & 11) and drafted ARich, while trading for Minshew.

I tried hard to get Howell, but the owner wouldn’t bite. That said, he needs WRs, so I might now try to move Gabe Davis or Bateman for Howell. Or some combo of them & a TE not named Pitts.

To your 2nd question, when you have 7 players and a bunch of picks, you mine the WW. I dealt Hopkins for pick 1.08 a couple years back to get Pitts. As TEs have flashed, I've added them. They come in handy in trades, and I had plenty of roster space for them.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

So what are your actual starting lineups? Don't just say "start 10" then list the very minimum number of the position you can trade away and the very maximum number of the position you have just traded for, from where I'm looking that's just projection trying to justify your position

They're very flexible. I'm not "projecting" anything to justify anything - I like the deal, which is all that matters to me.

Start 1-2 QB
Start 2-5 RB
Start 3-6 WR
Start 1-4 TE

So in theory my starting lineup is now
Fields/ARich (or Minshew - whomever starts)
Bijan/ETN/Dilon
Brown/ARSB/Higgins/Williams
Pitts

I should still have more than enough depth to cover BYEs.

All TD 6 points, Ints -3, FL -2, .1/30 PaYd, .1/1 Ru/ReYD

Ps - Can't believe I forgot to include Bateman in my original post above. My bad.

 

[The Future Champs]

Mattison side unless we know the first will be early, which we can't really at this stage. Give me a starting RB and someone who might be occasionally useful for a WR for someone who I don't really rate in comparison to his value and a 1/2 pick swap. That you already have three WRs objectively better than Williams both now and going forward makes this even more baffling, especially given you say you are ready to compete now and have nothing better than Mattison after Bijan and Etienne at RB

We can start up to 6 WR & only have to start 2 RB

Given longevity windows of positions I’d simply rather have Mike Williams than Mattison.

Mattison’s numbers haven’t been otherworldly, and I’ve heard tale the Vikes will be passing more.

I don’t find it baffling at all. Seems pretty logical - in a PPR league I’d rather have the WR. I feel like 4 starting RB is enough, and I have a few dart throws that might generate value. If not I can spend the 2025 pick on a RB either in that draft or in trade.

No, you don't have 4 starting RBs. YOu have two solid ones and two guys who are destined for committee and we don't know which side of the 60/40 they will fall. Your RB room is going to be super thin all season and one injury could ruin your chance to compete.

Eh, I’m not sure Mattison makes it that much better.

That’s why I pulled the trigger.

If a RB gets hurt I have plenty of assets to move for a RB. They’re cheaper and easier to replace than elite WRs.

ETA: Mattison was my 4th-5th RB, a bench player. Williams (when healthy) is a starting WR, sending Davis to the bench as a BYE week filler.

I don’t see any of this as particularly controversial. I much prefer my side of the deal.

I can see your side of the deal, as you’ve got a competitive team for several years, and missing 1st round picks can derail that.
That said, I’d want another QB more than RBs or WRs. Richardson has a higher bust probability than most early QBs.
Also, why all that flotsam in TE?

QBs are impossible to get in this format. SF is extremely challenging in that regard, and if one were available I would have pulled the trigger on that trade already.

I already acquired Fields for 2x 1sts (4 & 11) and drafted ARich, while trading for Minshew.

I tried hard to get Howell, but the owner wouldn’t bite. That said, he needs WEs, so I might now try to move Gabe Davis or Bateman for Howell. Or some combo of them & a TE not named Pitts.

To your 2nd question, when you have 7 players and a bunch of picks, you mine the WW. I dealt Hopkins for pick 1.08 a couple years back to get Pitts. As TEs have flashed, I've added them. They come in handy in trades, and I had plenty of roster space for them.

I gave Mike Evans and the 1.09 for the 1.02 so I could get Pitts. I'm still very optimistic that this works out, although I'm not sold on this year.

Here's the list of TEs who had a 1,000 yard season at age 22: ________________
And here's the list of TEs who have had a 1,000 yard season at age 21: Kyle Pitts.

Yeah, there's a couple of owners in my league who keep including Pitts in trade offers despite my making it very clear he's not available.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Yeah, there's a couple of owners in my league who keep including Pitts in trade offers despite my making it very clear he's not available.

I had more than a few opportunities to deal Pitts. He’s a guy to build around, not a guy to trade away IMO

 

[titusbramble]

So what are your actual starting lineups? Don't just say "start 10" then list the very minimum number of the position you can trade away and the very maximum number of the position you have just traded for, from where I'm looking that's just projection trying to justify your position

They're very flexible. I'm not "projecting" anything to justify anything - I like the deal, which is all that matters to me.

Start 1-2 QB
Start 2-5 RB
Start 3-6 WR
Start 1-3 TE

Ok, so that looks roughly like 1QB, 2RB, 3WR, 1SF and then 2F, although if that was the case then it'd surely be 1-4 TE as you've listed it, which I guess is a typo. If you like the deal, fair enough, I disagree, I just don't get the point of saying "but we can start 6 wide receivers!" when, outside of bye week hell or an injury crisis, the number of times you would be starting your WR6 over your QB2 is effectively zero. I could start 4 RBs in my league if I wanted, but as the amount of times I would start Pacheco or Brian Robinson over Derek Carr is never, I won't claim I can

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

if that was the case then it'd surely be 1-4 TE as you've listed it, which I guess is a typo

Indeed, 1-4

Typo

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

outside of bye week hell or an injury crisis, the number of times you would be starting your WR6 over your QB2 is effectively zero

I never said I’d be starting a WR6 over a RB2. We have to start 2 RB.

At the end of the day I traded a RB who may or may not be good this year (I’m still not convinced MIN doesn’t bring in Zeke or Hunt) for a WR who has proven he can be a monster when healthy.

Given my team build and depth I believe this improves my roster immediately.

And I turned a likely late 2nd round pick into a likely late 1st round pick. Possibly better since the team I acquired it from is pretty old, and might not be great in 2024.

I fail to see the downside of turning my WR4 into Mike Williams and sending Bateman/Davis to the bench where they’re better BYE week guys, or potential trade bait.

All I sacrificed was a bit of RB depth, losing a player acquired for nearly free.

And not for nuthin, I also cleared a roster spot - since we’re cutting down from 60 to 50 soon, that’s another benefit of this deal to me.

You seem very intensely against this deal, and it’s confusing to me. I think it’s rock solid. Ah well - to each their own.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

12 team PPR SF start 10, no K, no D/ST

I’d been wrestling with Mattison. I acquired him for next to no cost (Mariotta + Zay Jones) and have a team I think is ready to compete.

I gave: Mattison + KJO + 2025 2nd
I rec’d: Mike Williams + 2025 1st

I couldn’t give Osborn away, but I wasn’t thrilled with just getting a 2025 1st for an asset without improving my current roster.

This leaves me with
Fields, ARich (Minshew)
Bijan, ETN, Montgomery, AJD (and some scraps - Eric Gray, Prince, Deon Jackson)
AJ Brown, ARSB, Higgins, Williams, Bateman (Gabe Davis, Charlie Jones, Iosivas, AT Perry, Parker Washington)
Pitts (Conklin, Fortson, Grat, Latu, Likely, E. Higgins)

And that 2025 1st, which I lacked.

Now I’m curious what @barackdhouse thinks of this deal.

 

[barackdhouse]

12 team PPR SF start 10, no K, no D/ST

I’d been wrestling with Mattison. I acquired him for next to no cost (Mariotta + Zay Jones) and have a team I think is ready to compete.

I gave: Mattison + KJO + 2025 2nd
I rec’d: Mike Williams + 2025 1st

I couldn’t give Osborn away, but I wasn’t thrilled with just getting a 2025 1st for an asset without improving my current roster.

This leaves me with
Fields, ARich (Minshew)
Bijan, ETN, Montgomery, AJD (and some scraps - Eric Gray, Prince, Deon Jackson)
AJ Brown, ARSB, Higgins, Williams, Bateman (Gabe Davis, Charlie Jones, Iosivas, AT Perry, Parker Washington)
Pitts (Conklin, Fortson, Grat, Latu, Likely, E. Higgins)

And that 2025 1st, which I lacked.

Now I’m curious what @barackdhouse thinks of this deal.

I'm way off of Mike Williams other than to say he probably has a couple big games. I don't think he improves your roster but I'd still probably slam this deal regardless because 1sts don't just come out of nowhere, and the fact that you could parlay the nothing that it cost to originally get Mattison with KJO who was likely a waiver pickup and basically just a 2nd - to get a 1st? All day. All day.

Mike Williams does give depth and isn't a bad piece to get back. Just not someone I'm targeting, but certainly not someone that would stop me doing the deal. That 1st plus any player X would do it here.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

12 team PPR SF start 10, no K, no D/ST

I’d been wrestling with Mattison. I acquired him for next to no cost (Mariotta + Zay Jones) and have a team I think is ready to compete.

I gave: Mattison + KJO + 2025 2nd
I rec’d: Mike Williams + 2025 1st

I couldn’t give Osborn away, but I wasn’t thrilled with just getting a 2025 1st for an asset without improving my current roster.

This leaves me with
Fields, ARich (Minshew)
Bijan, ETN, Montgomery, AJD (and some scraps - Eric Gray, Prince, Deon Jackson)
AJ Brown, ARSB, Higgins, Williams, Bateman (Gabe Davis, Charlie Jones, Iosivas, AT Perry, Parker Washington)
Pitts (Conklin, Fortson, Grat, Latu, Likely, E. Higgins)

And that 2025 1st, which I lacked.

Now I’m curious what @barackdhouse thinks of this deal.

I'm way off of Mike Williams other than to say he probably has a couple big games. I don't think he improves your roster but I'd still probably slam this deal regardless because 1sts don't just come out of nowhere, and the fact that you could parlay the nothing that it cost to originally get Mattison with KJO who was likely a waiver pickup and basically just a 2nd - to get a 1st? All day. All day.

Mike Williams does give depth and isn't a bad piece to get back. Just not someone I'm targeting, but certainly not someone that would stop me doing the deal. That 1st plus any player X would do it here.

Thanks. Appreciate the response.

Also gaining a roster spot before cut-downs is a bonus.

 

[smbkrypt24]

12 team PPR. 1 QB.

Gave: Waller, 3.03, 3.07
Received: Wentz, 2.08, 2024 2nd, 2024 2nd

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

12 team PPR. 1 QB.

Gave: Waller, 3.03, 3.07
Received: Wentz, 2.08, 2024 2nd, 2024 2nd

In a 1 QB format I don’t really see the point of obtaining Wentz. But I do kinda like getting 3 2nds for Waller and 2x 3rds.

 

[BigAl21]

FFPC, 1QB

Total rebuild, orphan which was not good

Gave: Hopkins , 2nd
Got 1st

 

[BigAl21]

FFPC, 1QB

Gave; Javonte, probable cuts (Fant, Claypool, Osborn)

Got: Laporta, Christian Watson, 2nd

Always trying to move RBs to safer asset in the off season and this was that type of deal.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

FFPC, 1QB

Gave; Javonte, probable cuts (Fant, Claypool, Osborn)

Got: Laporta, Christian Watson, 2nd

Always trying to move RBs to safer asset in the off season and this was that type of deal.

I like it.

 

[JoeJoe88]

10 Team 2QB PPR TE Prem, Start 11

Team A gives: 2024 1st(mid-late), 2025 2nd
Team B gives: Rachaad White, AJ Dillon, 2024 3rd

 

[MTskibum]

Traded away
brandon aiyuk
2024 2nd - should be late

Traded for
Kadarius toney
2024 1st - definitely late

 

[jabarony]

Traded away
brandon aiyuk
2024 2nd - should be late

Traded for
Kadarius toney
2024 1st - definitely late

Seems fair. Toney = 2nd. I guess I'd take my chances with that.

 

[jabarony]

FFPC SF, not involved.
Team A gets:
D. Watson
2024 2nd

Team B gets:
J. Gibbs
D. Waller

 

[kutta]

10 Team 2QB PPR TE Prem, Start 11

Team A gives: 2024 1st(mid-late), 2025 2nd
Team B gives: Rachaad White, AJ Dillon, 2024 3rd

I’ll take the first pretty easily. In a 10 team league I don’t see White and Dillon having a ton of value.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

10 Team 2QB PPR TE Prem, Start 11

Team A gives: 2024 1st(mid-late), 2025 2nd
Team B gives: Rachaad White, AJ Dillon, 2024 3rd

Hard for me to judge in a 10-teamer.

Inclined to lean to the 1st & 2nd.

AJD & White don’t move the needle too much in a 10 team league, as they’re closer to low end RB2/high end RB3s.