Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
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!
*** OFFICIAL *** In-Season Dynasty Trade Thread (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter doowain
- Start date
ConnSKINS26
Footballguy
Thanks guys, I know some are higher on Martin and Floyd going forward than others.
Way earlier in this thread I posted the following trade. I'd appreciate some feedback on the deal now that the season has pretty much ran it's course.
Trich, bilal Powell, cj spiller, hakeem nicks kenbrell thompkins and Jordan Cameron
For
J charles demaryious Thomas Ellington efiert 1st and 2nd Rd pick both top four.
Some are really bashing the guy who got trich.sayin it's the worst trade ever. I know the charles side wins but is it really all that bad
10 team .5 PPR rb/wr 1 PPR Te idp dynasty
Tia
Trich, bilal Powell, cj spiller, hakeem nicks kenbrell thompkins and Jordan Cameron
For
J charles demaryious Thomas Ellington efiert 1st and 2nd Rd pick both top four.
Some are really bashing the guy who got trich.sayin it's the worst trade ever. I know the charles side wins but is it really all that bad
10 team .5 PPR rb/wr 1 PPR Te idp dynasty
Tia
Last edited by a moderator:
Currently you would have trouble even getting a Charles or DT owner to even talk to you for everything on the other side so I would say it is pretty bad...start of the season maybe closer but it gets worse every game TRich and Spiller play
cstu
Footballguy
No one can fault you for making this move for the playoffs. I think it's pretty close by next year but if it helps you win the title it's a great trade.
ConnSKINS26
Footballguy
Only thing about that...is I'm a building team. Not a contender till next year. Hoping it's a worst-to-first type turnaround though.
Concept Coop
Footballguy
Standard, 12 tm ppr
Gave: MJD
Got: Bryce Brown, 2013 2nd (8-12 range)
Gave: MJD
Got: Bryce Brown, 2013 2nd (8-12 range)
ConnSKINS26
Footballguy
Thx for the reply. Would like some other points of view on this one. I agree with the trich n cj points. But also think this trade won't look nearly as bad next year. The Draft picks really swing it tho.
ConnSKINS26
Footballguy
Yeah, that trade is pretty awful. I'd take the Charles/DT side even if the picks were on the other side. As it stands, that's a really bad trade.
Yeah, I could see it being fair/even before the season. But knowing what we know right now, it's DT side by a mile.
Edit: I'm assuming that this trade was done before the season.
Last edited by a moderator:
Bamac
Footballguy
I'd take Ellington without the pick. If he can ever get free from Arians, look out.
thriftyrocker
Footballguy
12 team PPR
Mike Williams
Josh Boyce
Stepfan Taylor
for
MJD
Mike Williams
Josh Boyce
Stepfan Taylor
for
MJD
That's not an overpay. Questions have arisen surrounding Doug Martin. He's not the bulletproof top-3 dynasty pick he was six months ago.
With the full benefit of hindsight, yeah, that's a really terrible trade for the guy getting Richardson.
Look at it this way:
Charles >>>>>>>>>>>> Richardson
Demaryius >> Spiller
Ellington ~ Nicks
Eifert < Cameron
Pick 2.01-2.04 > Kenbrell + Powell
Plus you got the 1.01-1.04 pick for free, just because.
Not a fan, simply because I've moved away from Bryce Brown as a guy to target in dynasty leagues. I think it'll be years before he does anything meaningful, and there are a lot of other names I'd be much more interested in shopping for.
BearsFan4Life
Footballguy
I think that's a trade that might look uglier and uglier every single year. Charles and Spiller are about the same age, Demaryius will hang around in the league longer than Richardson, and once names get attached to those draft picks things are just going to snowball. I think the Charles/Demaryius/Picks guy will still be starting players from that deal long after everyone on the Richardson/Spiller side has washed out of the league.
Last edited by a moderator:
Concept Coop
Footballguy
I'm not super high on Brown either (in relation to my stance a few months ago), but I like his potential - based on both situation and physical talent. 22 YO, high level physical talent, great situation, high handcuff value. I can see both sides, but obviously prefer mine; for my team, at least.
Last edited by a moderator:
ILUVBEER99
Footballguy
Richardson has looked awful this year, but are we so sure a 22-23 yr old RB is going to wash out of the league soon?
Turn arounds happen and doubt Indi gives up on him after trading a 1st. Would it be shocking to see him be a solid RB into his late 20's?
Obviously the trade looks really bad now, but before the season it didn't and things change quickly in FF. Next year if Spiller rebounds he could easily be as valuable as Charles just like he was this offseason.
EBF
Footballguy
As bad as he has been this year, I think Trent Richardson remains a huge wild card in dynasty. I have him in a couple leagues and I just don't see myself parting with him for anything less than a big overpay based on current market value. Feels too similar to what happened with Reggie Bush and Marshawn Lynch. His struggles have been worse than anything those two endured, but he was too good in college and too highly-touted by the whole world to be THIS bad. I'd even go as far as saying that nobody who's good enough to make an NFL roster should be bad enough to rush for 2.9 YPC on a high workload.
He has fallen a few rungs in my estimation, but on the other hand it wouldn't surprise me in the least to see him have a big career when all is said and done. When I go back and watch his Alabama clips, he still looks like a tremendous talent. So unless there's something going on with injuries or work ethic that we're not privy to, I think this is just a more nightmarish version of what happened to guys like Benson and Thomas Jones earlier in their careers. If you're still able to fetch top 5 dynasty RB value for him then I guess I can't argue with trading him, but if you're selling him just to sell him then I think it's likely to be a mistake. You know the drill. Buy low. Sell high. Not buy high. Sell low.
He has fallen a few rungs in my estimation, but on the other hand it wouldn't surprise me in the least to see him have a big career when all is said and done. When I go back and watch his Alabama clips, he still looks like a tremendous talent. So unless there's something going on with injuries or work ethic that we're not privy to, I think this is just a more nightmarish version of what happened to guys like Benson and Thomas Jones earlier in their careers. If you're still able to fetch top 5 dynasty RB value for him then I guess I can't argue with trading him, but if you're selling him just to sell him then I think it's likely to be a mistake. You know the drill. Buy low. Sell high. Not buy high. Sell low.
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
I think he's a good hold/buy-low, assuming you're actually buying low.
That said, a trade that involves giving up guys like Charles, Demaryius, and a top 4 rookie pick isn't exactly buying low.
He's a good wildcard that I'd like to have on my team, but not something I'd give up an already top dynasty player for.
EBF
Footballguy
I'm mostly on board with that. I just don't know that you can pin an accurate value to him at this point and say he's this or he's that. The detractors have a strong case for arguing that he's trash, but I think he has the potential to rebound in a huge way. So for me it's hard to look at most trades involving him and say they're definitely good/bad. I'm not sure we know who he is yet. To get a player like DT or Charles is a slightly different story, but in general I would be a little terrified of trading him at this point, fearing that he'll realize his potential and make me regret selling low. I'd say I've been rewarded more than I've been punished by keeping faith in mega talent top 10 overall type of prospects through hard times (Crabtree and Reggie come to mind immediately).
Even trading him for Charles, which seems like a no-brainer move at this point, still has some hidden potential of backfiring given the age gap. I have Charles rated higher on my most recent list, but I'm not gonna lie. If someone offered me Charles for Trent it would still feel like a bit of a trap to me.
Trent Richardson could have been fantastic so far and it'd be a toss-up whether he'd outlast the 26-year-old superstar receiver, simply because receivers just last longer. With Richardson sucking, and with the Demaryius side also getting a top-4 draft pick as a hedge, I would feel pretty confident betting that that side will still have players going by the time the Richardson side is all out of the league.ILUVBEER99 said:
ILUVBEER99
Footballguy
at this point i completely agree with you, hindsight is 20/20 and the mentioned trade was done in week 4.
That said if Richardson would have progressed and put up a top 10 RB season (which was expected going into this season), he'd be close to untouchable. If he was what many thought he was he would be going #1 in startups, in fact he did go #1 in a lot of them this past offseason.
He was viewed as the most valuable player in that deal just a few months ago, my how things have changed.
Psychologically, we're motivated a lot more by a desire to avoid regret than we are by a desire to gain satisfaction. It's called loss aversion. It's a big reason why it's so hard to get someone else to trade without offering something that's clearly biased in their favor.EBF said:
EBF
Footballguy
I'm not sure if that's the right explanation, but common psychological phenomena have become widespread precisely because they've proven effective at negotiating problems throughout the course of human history. So in other words an owner's fear of trading away Trent Richardson might be rooted in sense.
I wouldn't argue with anyone who sends Trent packing in return for another top 10 overall dynasty player, but I'd certainly caution against selling for the sake of selling. Sometimes when a player hits rock bottom it's hard to remember that it's probably the WORST possible time to sell him. So unless you can get someone to pay 2013 offseason prices or something reasonably close, I'd stay put and go down with the Titanic.
The problem is that the situations these biases coped with don't at all resemble the situations we deal with in day-to-day life. Humans are terrible at conceptualizing numbers greater than 10 because our hunter/gatherer ancestors never had to deal with more than 10 things at a time, and yet now we routinely make decisions regarding hundreds, thousands, tens of thousands, or in some cases, (such as mortgages), even hundreds of thousands of dollars. Extreme risk aversion made a lot more sense when the tail risk was "you die" and not "you lose half of your investment portfolio". Because most of the decisions dealt directly with survival, most of our biases skew towards more caution than is truly optimal now that decisions are no longer life-or-death.
Or take a look at the availability heuristic for another example. We make judgments of how likely an event is based on how easily we can recall other instances of that event. In a tribal society where we have limited access to the world at large, estimating probability based on frequency is a handy shortcut that gets a reasonable estimation while saving a lot of time and mental processing power. And then we went and invented the network news, whose sole reason for existence is to find and report about all of these ridiculously rare (and therefore "newsworthy") events that are happening. Now our availability heuristic has completely destroyed our ability to estimate probability, because we think rare events are common and common events are rare. Your child is thousands of times more likely to die from an improperly installed car seat than he is from a stranger kidnapping, and yet most parents spend far more time and energy guarding against the latter than the former. Some estimates suggest that over 75% of car seats in America are improperly installed. Many police stations, car dealerships, fire stations, and hospitals will inspect your car seat and help you get it properly installed for free. It takes maybe 30 minutes worth of time and effort, and people just can't be bothered with it... but they'll spend dozens of hours and hundreds of dollars trying to protect their kids from the threat of nameless, faceless abductors. A cognitive shortcut that worked great for 99% of human history has suddenly gone haywire because it's not built to cope with our modern reality. All of these biases might have served a purpose at some point, but now they're merely maladaptive.
You're saying you wouldn't sell Trent Richardson unless you got something "reasonably close" to what he cost six months ago, and yet surely you can believe that your hope for his prospects going forward isn't "reasonably close" to what it was six months ago. Even if you don't want to bury him, Bayesian reasoning says we have to update our initial beliefs to account for newly introduced data. That newly introduced data should cause us to downgrade our expectations for Richardson's future by a pretty decent amount, and yet you aren't willing to sell Richardson for a cost that reflects this new discount because you're worried about the possibility that it'll turn out your initial belief was more accurate than your new, updated belief. That's loss aversion, and maybe a little bit of sunk cost fallacy thrown in for good measure. You're motivated more by a fear of being wrong than a desire to be right. It's a bias, and in the long run, it will result in lost value.
I'm not saying give Trent Richardson away for peanuts. I'm just saying, all Trent Richardson owners should be ready to accept substantially less for him today than they were six months ago. As hard as that pill is to swallow.
EBF
Footballguy
I wasn't looking for a psych 101 lecture. Simply stating that I think he's better than he's showing and thus not worth panic selling at dirt cheap prices.
I'm sure you would've written the same wall of text about Marshawn Lynch circa 2009-2010 or Michael Crabtree circa 2011. To paint the fear of selling a player too low as an irrational psychological process would only be accurate in cases where the fear is actually unjustified in hindsight. I'd guess that all the Crabtree owners who practiced "loss aversion" after his pathetic showing in the 2011 NFL playoffs are feeling pretty good about their irrational mental processes right now.
FUBAR
Footballguy
"I'm not saying give Trent Richardson away for peanuts. I'm just saying, all Trent Richardson owners should be ready to accept substantially less for him today than they were six months ago. As hard as that pill is to swallow."
Or, as many of us have decided to do, you don't accept substantially less and you hold. Nevertheless, if offered Thomas or Charles straight up, it's a done deal.
Or, as many of us have decided to do, you don't accept substantially less and you hold. Nevertheless, if offered Thomas or Charles straight up, it's a done deal.
That's outcome-oriented thinking, not process oriented thinking.
Look at it this way. You keep bringing up Marshawn Lynch and Michael Crabtree and Thomas Jones and all these other highly drafted players who just needed a second chance. Let's say that 50% of highly drafted players who look like they suck wind up becoming studs in the end (a ridiculously high estimate, by the way, since 50% of draft picks bust, so we'd assume the percentages would be much higher for draft picks who play historically poorly in their first two seasons). Let's say that before the season, we thought Richardson had just a 10% chance of busting. The fact that Richardson fell into the Lynch/Crabtree/Jones territory means that we should be dropping Richardson's estimated value by a whopping 45%! I'm not saying we drop it to zero, but we have to drop it by a lot. Yes, some players who sucked became great. And some players who sucked continued to be terrible. If you're only pricing Richardson based on the former possibility while ignoring the latter possibility, then you're mispricing Trent Richardson.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
I think what most of the Richardson owners are saying is that they realize his value is down and thus he's a "hold" at this point. While some that are implying that Charles for Richardson isn't enough to sell at this point, may be going a little to far on their "hold" poisition - their position of not wanting to sell at a reduced price is a sound one.
I don't own Richardson anywhere, but I have tried to buy at a discount and all of my offers have been (understandably) rejected thus far.
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't mean to suggest that his owners should feel compelled to sell him. I'm saying if I asked you before the season "what is the least it would take to get Richardson away from you", and I asked you again today "what is the least it would take to get Richardson away from you", that second answer better be a lot lower than the first or you're allowing loss aversion to stand in the way of properly valuing your own assets. Maybe the offers you're getting have fallen so much that they still fail to clear that "least you would take" bar, but that bar has to have gone down substantially over the last six months. He's already had a franchise give up on him. He's been historically unproductive and has gotten outproduced by Dammit Donald Brown (by a MASSIVE margin). He's looked terrible on the field. There's still a decent chance he gets everything turned around, but the estimated chances of Richardson just being a terrible player have to be a lot higher today than they were 6 months ago with all the extra information we've gained. And even if Richardson turns it around, the indefinite timetable has to hurt his value in the same way it hurts Bryce Brown's or Bernard Pierce's.
Again, I don't think you should bury Richardson. I drafted him in the 3rd round of the most recent set of DLF in-season mocks, because I felt he presented too much upside at that point. I just think phrases such as "unless you can get someone to pay 2013 offseason prices or something reasonably close, I'd stay put" and "I would be a little terrified of trading him at this point, fearing that he'll realize his potential and make me regret selling low." raise major red flags to me that his owners might be basing his value off of emotion, sunk cost fallacy, and loss aversion instead of a strictly rational and objective evaluation of his prospects going forward.
Coeur de Lion
Footballguy
No one (even me) is saying trade the guy for a late 2nd or cut him or anything like that -- that would obviously be stupid and short-sighted. But it's equally foolish to move forward valuing the guy as a high end dynasty RB1. Richardson's college film means far less at this point than his NFL film -- he's never going to see the running lanes that he saw at Bama in the NFL. He's still young, and still has the potential to develop into the power part of a RBBC in a good offense -- he still has 1000 YFS 10 TD upside if he improves and the Colts invest in their line. The high end 2000 YFS upside that some saw before this year is clearly a massive longshot at this point, though. And there's a very real chance that he's just a flat out scrub destined to be a backup moving forward or even wash out of the league entirely. Ignore that chance at your own peril.
ConnSKINS26
Footballguy
There were too many pieces valued higher than Spiller in that trade for Spiller to be the focal point. Spiller could be top-5 next year and it would still be a bad trade.
ConnSKINS26
Footballguy
Traded him last week in a PPR league:Gave the underachieving trio of:
Trent Richardson
David Wilson
Steven Ridley
Got:
Jordy Nelson
Last edited by a moderator:
ConnSKINS26
Footballguy
EBF
Footballguy
You're making it more complicated than it needs to be by trying to connect it to broader psychological phenomena when it's just really simple:
I don't think he's nearly as bad as his statistical output would indicate. That isn't "loss aversion" or "sunk cost." It's just a genuine assessment.
The problem with this line of thinking is that he's not a random coin flip. Either he has the talent to succeed or he doesn't. It's possible right now to evaluate him and come up with the right answer. So if I think the answer is yes, then of course his odds of success are going to look a lot better than 50% to me.
Also, you have to go all the way back to Curtis Enis in 1998 to find a top 15 overall draft pick at RB who never rushed for 1000 yards in a season. So either Trent Richardson is the biggest RB bust of the past 15 years or he's likely to rebound at least a little bit. It will take more than one mediocre season to justify a high startup price, but I think he's far more likely than 50% to significantly revive his career.
I actually have dropped him a bit in my rankings, but I'd caution against selling him at this rock bottom moment unless you're getting great value. Too likely that he's actually a very good player just struggling through a down period. Which is all I was saying in the first place. I'll leave it at that and move on.
JohnnyU
Footballguy
On Nov 11, In a devy league (can have college players), I traded Richardson for the following:
- Minnesota Skillet Lickers gave up Brown, Donald IND RB;Richardson, Trent IND RB
- Mudmen gave up Lattimore, Marcus SFO RB;Goodwin, Marquise BUF WR; Year 2015 Round 1 Draft Pick from Mudmen
EBF
Footballguy
He's the same player now that he was back then, so I don't think it's useless to go back and review what he looked like. I'll throw out the Lynch name again. Lynch is a player that I always liked at Cal. I thought he had all the talent to be a successful starting NFL RB. Should I have thrown that opinion away when he lost his starting job to Fred Jackson and had a 3.8 YPC in a time share? No, because having a concrete understanding of his talent level independent of his immediate results would've helped me ride out the highs and lows of his career without losing perspective on who he really was. And contrary to what you're saying, I think college clips can help you get a pretty good idea of who someone is. When I go back and watch Richardson's Alabama games I don't just see a dominant OL mauling everyone. I see a really good RB with great power, balance, and elusiveness. If that's an accurate picture of who he is then it's helpful to keep that in mind.
Bernard Pierce is a similar case right now. Is he the back who broke records at Temple and had a promising rookie year or is he the 2.7 YPC bum who has been struggling for the Ravens this year? I think he's more the former than the latter. You seem to think that what happens in the NFL overrides everything that came before. What I'm saying is that players have a certain talent level and that if you rely totally on short-term results to gauge that talent level then you're also at risk of being deceived. Because contrary to what you're implying above, the most recent data isn't necessarily the most accurate. I think a horrendous situation can make a great RB look pedestrian just as easily as a great situation can make a pedestrian RB look good.
I'll throw another name out there. Bryce Brown. Ranked as the #1 player in his high school recruiting class by many scouting services. Rushed for just 476 yards in his college career including a whopping 16 yards in his final college season. You could've looked at that and said, "Well, he didn't do anything in college, so I don't care what he was supposed to be back in high school. It's far less significant than his NCAA film." Or you could've realized that maybe there were other variables at work and he was actually a lot more talented than his recent career indicated, which must have been what the Eagles decided when they drafted him ahead of countless RB prospects who had superior NCAA production.
Anything that helps you get an accurate picture of a player's talent level is helpful. And while I generally agree that NFL results are more relevant to a player's pro outlook than what he did in college, I absolutely believe that you can look back at his past as a way to help determine his true talent level. Again, the fact that Lynch was an absolute monster at Cal and that Crabtree was a legendary NCAA player didn't become irrelevant the minute those players began to struggle in the NFL. Those data points were reflections of their true talent level, which was quite high. If the FF community had been able to put the puzzle together using all of the pieces at their disposal instead of just overrating immediate results, those players never would've been downgraded to the criminal extent that they once were.
My point isn't that every NCAA star who struggles in the NFL warrants patience. Only that players have a certain talent level and that their immediate production isn't always going to be a perfect or even an accurate reflection of that. And there might be times when the NCAA film provides a more accurate picture of a player's abilities than the NFL film. It turns out that a healthy Michael Crabtree with a decent QB and a competent coach looks more like the Texas Tech monster than the mediocrity we saw in 2010-2011, whose play was so uninspiring that he fell to the WR35-WR40 range of 2012 preseason dynasty startups. The Detroit Reggie Bush looks more like the USC Reggie Bush than the New Orleans Reggie Bush. The Seattle Marshawn Lynch looks more like the Cal Marshawn Lynch than the Buffalo Marshawn Lynch. It's certainly possible that the Alabama Trent Richardson is closer to being the "real" Trent Richardson than the player we've seen this year. Right away the detractors will say that yes it's possible, but also very unlikely based on historical odds of players who are similar based on X criteria. The thing is, those players weren't Trent Richardson. He's a different player with his own unique talent level. If I look at the college film and decide that his talent level is sky high, it may turn out that I'm completely right (or that I'm completely wrong). Either way, it isn't random or lucky. Players have a certain talent level and the challenge is to draw an accurate picture of their true quality based on all the available information.
Scarpaggio
Footballguy
Traded: Doug Martin, Dion Lewis, Lawrence Timmons, 2014 1st and 5th.
Got: Alfred Morris, David Lavonte, 2014 2nd and 3rd.
My rb before the trade: Martin, Wilson, Hunter, Bryce Brown, Sproles, CJ Anderson, Blount, Snelling, Lewis and Rainey.
My QB: Rodgers, Foles, Keapernick
My WR: Marshall, Gordon, Michael Floyd, Gronk, Austin, Boykin, Gonzo and Roberts.
With any luck the 2nd will be the 2.1 and that first will be the 1.12
Got: Alfred Morris, David Lavonte, 2014 2nd and 3rd.
My rb before the trade: Martin, Wilson, Hunter, Bryce Brown, Sproles, CJ Anderson, Blount, Snelling, Lewis and Rainey.
My QB: Rodgers, Foles, Keapernick
My WR: Marshall, Gordon, Michael Floyd, Gronk, Austin, Boykin, Gonzo and Roberts.
With any luck the 2nd will be the 2.1 and that first will be the 1.12
Last edited by a moderator:
BearsFan4Life
Footballguy
I was also trying to trade DMart for AMorris for my playoff run to a non contender but he wanted Vereen and a 2nd Round Pick with DMart. I like Martin more than Morris however but you do have to pay more for a healthy player.
Similar threads
