What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Redraft Strategy: Trade from Depth, or Hoard/Play Keep-Away? (1 Viewer)

Hot Sauce Guy

Footballguy
Just curious as to how everyone feels about strategy.

Let’s say you’re a top 3 seed, headed to the playoffs.

You have a deep roster, with quality players/depth at every position.

Injuries strike other contenders - Kupp to one of the other to 4 teams, Goeddart on another.

They come at you hunting for your backup WR/TE respectively.

Do you:
1. Trade from depth, taking advantage of their desperation to improve at a position?

-or-

2. Reject such offers, because it might be your guy getting hurt next. And even if your roster remains healthy, better to have those points on the bench than to face them in the playoffs. And better to have weaker opponents.

I thought it was an interesting redraft strategy question.
 

Hot Sauce Guy

Footballguy
Personally I’m hoarding. I have 4 quality WR & 2 quality TE, which gives me a huge advantage in the playoffs.

This morning I was approached with casual “hey, are you interested in moving” conversations for Sutton (my WR5 in a start-3 +Flex league) and either Hockenson or Kmet (in a mandatory start-1 TE) and just said “not interested”.

I’d rather have the depth, and also want the other high seeded teams to be weaker when I face them in a few weeks.
 

habsfan

Footballguy
I'm not against bolstering starters at the expense of depth but I would need to be an absolute frontrunner or just trying to squeeze through the door into the play-offs to do it. I'm somewhere in between and there's a lot of football left so I'm holding my depth.
 

BobbyLayne

Footballguy
Do you:
1. Trade from depth, taking advantage of their desperation to improve at a position?

This is my default response every year. Always try to upgrade - and by that I mean acquiring undervalued guys with both upside potential and at least 2 good matchups in the WK 15-17 playoffs.

Manage your team. Blocks are a legitimate strategy but don’t let it dictate decision making.

***************

Unfortunately I can’t do it this year. I have two starting WRs (Hollywood + Mike Williams) filling up the IR slots, and dead spots occupied by Jameson, injured Kyler and a pervy leper. 25% of my roster scoring zero points before we talk about bye week fillers.

Incredibly, I’m 8-2 & in first place.
 

efactor

Footballguy
Do you:
1. Trade from depth, taking advantage of their desperation to improve at a position?

This is my default response every year. Always try to upgrade - and by that I mean acquiring undervalued guys with both upside potential and at least 2 good matchups in the WK 15-17 playoffs.

Manage your team. Blocks are a legitimate strategy but don’t let it dictate decision making.

***************

Unfortunately I can’t do it this year. I have two starting WRs (Hollywood + Mike Williams) filling up the IR slots, and dead spots occupied by Jameson, injured Kyler and a pervy leper. 25% of my roster scoring zero points before we talk about bye week fillers.

Incredibly, I’m 8-2 & in first place.
Same. Do a lot of 2 for 1 deals with me getting the upgrade. But has bit me the last few years. The guys I traded have ended up outperforming my "upgrade" in key playoff games.

I'll still do it though
 

Hot Sauce Guy

Footballguy
I'm not against bolstering starters at the expense of depth but I would need to be an absolute frontrunner or just trying to squeeze through the door into the play-offs to do it. I'm somewhere in between and there's a lot of football left so I'm holding my depth.
Fair. I’m 8-2, healthy (knock on wood), and pretty stacked.

As such, I’m not really sure where I could even upgrade that would be worth losing depth & simultaneously helping the teams I’ll likely be facing in the playoffs.
 

Gally

Footballguy
As you approach playoffs depth loses it's importance. In the playoffs depth is way overrated as an in game injury likely ends your season anyway. In general as the season winds down trade depth to improve your starting lineup. The best starting lineup is likely winning in the playoffs. Depth doesn't help as much because if you lose one of your studs you are likely done anyway.

In this particular scenario it is a bit different. Getting a marginal improvement at a starting position to vastly help your opponents is a net loss at this juncture. I would need enough improvement to a starting spot to justify helping a close opponent get better. It's all about the actual trade on whether I hoard or bolster.
 

Gally

Footballguy
As such, I’m not really sure where I could even upgrade that would be worth losing depth & simultaneously helping the teams I’ll likely be facing in the playoffs.
The bolded is why I likely stand pat and don't make a move. Unless I could get a significant improvement to my starting lineup. That is really the key component to evaluating these type trade offers.
 

BobbyLayne

Footballguy
Do you:
1. Trade from depth, taking advantage of their desperation to improve at a position?

This is my default response every year. Always try to upgrade - and by that I mean acquiring undervalued guys with both upside potential and at least 2 good matchups in the WK 15-17 playoffs.

Manage your team. Blocks are a legitimate strategy but don’t let it dictate decision making.

***************

Unfortunately I can’t do it this year. I have two starting WRs (Hollywood + Mike Williams) filling up the IR slots, and dead spots occupied by Jameson, injured Kyler and a pervy leper. 25% of my roster scoring zero points before we talk about bye week fillers.

Incredibly, I’m 8-2 & in first place.
Same. Do a lot of 2 for 1 deals with me getting the upgrade. But has bit me the last few years. The guys I traded have ended up outperforming my "upgrade" in key playoff games.

I'll still do it though

Last week I was offered production starved JT straight up for my red hot ETN. That reject didn’t look as good by SNF, but looking at playoff matchups, probably still the right call.

I find most of my league mates adhere to “he who gets the best player involved wins the trade.” 2:1 and 3:2 have been out of fashion for awhile. So I functionally create the same thing by trading along these lines:

Other team’s stud I want + one of his 3 least desirable players for 2 of my good but not great guys. It’s the same thing but not the optics look less like a 2:1.
 

Hot Sauce Guy

Footballguy
In this particular scenario it is a bit different. Getting a marginal improvement at a starting position to vastly help your opponents is a net loss at this juncture. I would need enough improvement to a starting spot to justify helping a close opponent get better. It's all about the actual trade on whether I hoard or bolster.
Exactly what I’m struggling with, and I’m inclined to agree.

It would be very different if there were bubble teams looking for my backups to try to make the WC.

But in my case, when it’s the 2 other divisional leaders (each with 2 game leads) I’d just as soon leave them desperate than fill their sudden need for a TE or WR, two of the tougher positions to get off the FA list, especially when it doesn’t really upgrade me much.
 

BobbyLayne

Footballguy
In this particular scenario it is a bit different. Getting a marginal improvement at a starting position to vastly help your opponents is a net loss at this juncture. I would need enough improvement to a starting spot to justify helping a close opponent get better. It's all about the actual trade on whether I hoard or bolster.
Exactly what I’m struggling with, and I’m inclined to agree.

It would be very different if there were bubble teams looking for my backups to try to make the WC.

But in my case, when it’s the 2 other divisional leaders (each with 2 game leads) I’d just as soon leave them desperate than fill their sudden need for a TE or WR, two of the tougher positions to get off the FA list, especially when it doesn’t really upgrade me much.

Yeah context matters. Both my trades this year were with bottom half trading partners. There are a clear Big 4 in my redraft (8-2 x 2, 7-3 x 2, top four total points.) I’m not interesting in improving those guys teams lol.

Generally I do not try to win trades. My offers are “my surplus to help your weakness”, which makes it a win win if I’m getting the guy I want coming back.

Mindset in redraft is always right here right now. Much more nuanced in Dynasty where a team that’s out of it is accumulating picks by trading to teams who are in win now.
 

Gally

Footballguy
Generally I do not try to win trades. My offers are “my surplus to help your weakness”, which makes it a win win if I’m getting the guy I want coming back.
I wish more people thought about it this way. I always try and look at other roster to see where I think their needs fall. Unfortunately many times the owner's thoughts and my thoughts differ greatly. It's why I sometimes want to ask them what they think they need. Some get offended and some don't.

For the guys that get offended I let them know my thoughts on their roster but they are also usually the type that think I am trying to tell them what to do. I found the owners with this type attitude really have no confidence in their evaluation process and think something is trying to be pulled on them. Very frustrating.

I still have a guy that needs to "win" trades with me because in JT's rookie season I traded him Lamar, Chubb, & J. Robinson (who was a top 5 RB at the time) for Dak (out for the year), Mixon (never played again that year) and Taylor. I was rebuilding and he was in contention. He thinks I screwed him because Taylor exploded soon after the deal happened and then had last year. I still think the guy got a great deal as a win now team (it was a SF dynasty/salary cap league) but since he ended up not winning the title he blames me for "screwing him over". Ugh.
 

oso diablo

Footballguy
i was just thinking about this last week, and decided that Kupp was my ideal trade target. Luckily, it didn't work out.

generally, though, it depends greatly on the quality of your league's waiver wire.
 

Hot Sauce Guy

Footballguy
Generally I do not try to win trades. My offers are “my surplus to help your weakness”, which makes it a win win if I’m getting the guy I want coming back.
I wish more people thought about it this way. I always try and look at other roster to see where I think their needs fall. Unfortunately many times the owner's thoughts and my thoughts differ greatly. It's why I sometimes want to ask them what they think they need. Some get offended and some don't.

For the guys that get offended I let them know my thoughts on their roster but they are also usually the type that think I am trying to tell them what to do. I found the owners with this type attitude really have no confidence in their evaluation process and think something is trying to be pulled on them. Very frustrating.

I still have a guy that needs to "win" trades with me because in JT's rookie season I traded him Lamar, Chubb, & J. Robinson (who was a top 5 RB at the time) for Dak (out for the year), Mixon (never played again that year) and Taylor. I was rebuilding and he was in contention. He thinks I screwed him because Taylor exploded soon after the deal happened and then had last year. I still think the guy got a great deal as a win now team (it was a SF dynasty/salary cap league) but since he ended up not winning the title he blames me for "screwing him over". Ugh.
This is how I get so many deals done.

I joined a league where two different people told me that nobody ever trades, and I was able to get six trades done this year.

It’s just a matter of finding the right fit. Value matters, but it’s more valuable if both teams are better as the result of the trade, than if the trade matches perfectly evenly. It’s incredibly difficult to balance a trade perfectly. Needs are much easier to identify.
 

BobbyLayne

Footballguy
Generally I do not try to win trades. My offers are “my surplus to help your weakness”, which makes it a win win if I’m getting the guy I want coming back.
I wish more people thought about it this way. I always try and look at other roster to see where I think their needs fall. Unfortunately many times the owner's thoughts and my thoughts differ greatly. It's why I sometimes want to ask them what they think they need. Some get offended and some don't.

For the guys that get offended I let them know my thoughts on their roster but they are also usually the type that think I am trying to tell them what to do. I found the owners with this type attitude really have no confidence in their evaluation process and think something is trying to be pulled on them. Very frustrating.

I still have a guy that needs to "win" trades with me because in JT's rookie season I traded him Lamar, Chubb, & J. Robinson (who was a top 5 RB at the time) for Dak (out for the year), Mixon (never played again that year) and Taylor. I was rebuilding and he was in contention. He thinks I screwed him because Taylor exploded soon after the deal happened and then had last year. I still think the guy got a great deal as a win now team (it was a SF dynasty/salary cap league) but since he ended up not winning the title he blames me for "screwing him over". Ugh.
This is how I get so many deals done.

I joined a league where two different people told me that nobody ever trades, and I was able to get six trades done this year.

It’s just a matter of finding the right fit. Value matters, but it’s more valuable if both teams are better as the result of the trade, than if the trade matches perfectly evenly. It’s incredibly difficult to balance a trade perfectly. Needs are much easier to identify.

I don’t get why people think lateral moves are a winning strategy. RB 4 RB, WR 4 WR - shoot man, I drafted my guy in front of your guy based on a lot of research. More fun to mix it up, help both teams, both teams strengthen areas of weakness.

I made an exception this year. Immediately regretted Conner at 3.11 and ETN went 4.01. Waited for the Week 1 overreaction (Conner 15+ ETN was JRob’s backup) & undid that ****.
 

efactor

Footballguy
Generally I do not try to win trades. My offers are “my surplus to help your weakness”, which makes it a win win if I’m getting the guy I want coming back.
I wish more people thought about it this way. I always try and look at other roster to see where I think their needs fall. Unfortunately many times the owner's thoughts and my thoughts differ greatly. It's why I sometimes want to ask them what they think they need. Some get offended and some don't.

For the guys that get offended I let them know my thoughts on their roster but they are also usually the type that think I am trying to tell them what to do. I found the owners with this type attitude really have no confidence in their evaluation process and think something is trying to be pulled on them. Very frustrating.

I still have a guy that needs to "win" trades with me because in JT's rookie season I traded him Lamar, Chubb, & J. Robinson (who was a top 5 RB at the time) for Dak (out for the year), Mixon (never played again that year) and Taylor. I was rebuilding and he was in contention. He thinks I screwed him because Taylor exploded soon after the deal happened and then had last year. I still think the guy got a great deal as a win now team (it was a SF dynasty/salary cap league) but since he ended up not winning the title he blames me for "screwing him over". Ugh.
This is how I get so many deals done.

I joined a league where two different people told me that nobody ever trades, and I was able to get six trades done this year.

It’s just a matter of finding the right fit. Value matters, but it’s more valuable if both teams are better as the result of the trade, than if the trade matches perfectly evenly. It’s incredibly difficult to balance a trade perfectly. Needs are much easier to identify.

I don’t get why people think lateral moves are a winning strategy. RB 4 RB, WR 4 WR - shoot man, I drafted my guy in front of your guy based on a lot of research. More fun to mix it up, help both teams, both teams strengthen areas of weakness.

I made an exception this year. Immediately regretted Conner at 3.11 and ETN went 4.01. Waited for the Week 1 overreaction (Conner 15+ ETN was JRob’s backup) & undid that ****.
I just offered AJ Brown for Waddle, which is pretty much the definition of lateral based on the season so far. But I just like Waddle to be a little more consistent ROS and since I have Tua, will be fun to have the stack.

But yeah, most of my trades (I trade a lot) are to fix an area of weakness on both teams.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top