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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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 ****.
 
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.
 
Let me hear some opinions on this back n forth this a.m.

Sent over:
  • my Jaylen Waddle & Isaiah Pacheco for
  • his ARSB & Zeke
Now it’s patently obvious I’m trying to disguise a 2:1 trade for Amon-Ra. I lost Burrow last night & the other half of that stack, Chase, needs reinforcements. I was offering the two worst playoff schedules on my roster so I expected a reject & counter.

I got one.
  • His ARSB & EE for
  • My Waddle & Jahmyr Gibbs
My fingers could not find the reject button any faster. This is from the 12th place team. I’m 5-5 in 6th place but 1st in power rankings & 2nd in PF. Probably won’t lose again unless weird stuff happens, easy remaining schedule.



Our trade deadline is tomorrow. I am fine with rolling out Jared Goff for the next 4 weeks if Burrow goes on IR. But just for giggles I sent out a couple feelers:
  • 4th place team - my Njoku got his TLaw. Chucklehead has 4 QBs. Rodgers on IR, Purdy his nominal starter, Dobbs current starter. Dude still has 7 bye weeks to cover, can’t keep hoarding them.
  • 2nd place team ALSO has 4 QBs. The hell? We also have two teams with 4 TEs. No idea why. This guy has Stafford on IR, Geno as the backup to LJax, and the hot rookie. I sent over Njoku for Stroud. Brother man has 8 bye weeks to still cover, cannot hoard forever.
important EDIT - 2nd guy had Mark Andrews with no backup

Probably both get rejected but hopefully will receive a counter.
 
Last edited:
I always use my pieces on my team to score the most points for my team. For example. In my only real league I own Kincaid and Kittle. I'm in 3rd and the Andrews owner is in 2nd. He had an offer with Kittle in it this morning. I have no problem helping another competitive team if it gives me a bump.
 
I think you hoard assets for depth and injury/bye coverage early in a season and then trade that away as the season goes to craft a playoff roster of studs and little bench. My reasoning is that if you lose a key player due to injury in a playoff game you are likely to be screwed that week anyway so no reason to sit on depth that doesn't help you win your playoff games. I would rather maximize my starters for the playoffs for that reason.
 
I have both Hock and Kelce. Just waiting to see what comes my way... MUwahahah.
I do hope to score an elite WR. I have K. Allen, but I'd love to have a younger guy to hold.

FYI, I'm also fine holding both. I've been starting both of them. So the fact I'm scoring high in the position twice - eliminates another team at the position.
 
Last edited:
Sort of both.

Hoard to start so when someone needs something you got you are dealing from a position of strength and have every right to make a trade offer you would openly admit to the other guy is a request for overpayment.
 
Our trade deadline is tomorrow. I am fine with rolling out Jared Goff for the next 4 weeks if Burrow goes on IR. But just for giggles I sent out a couple feelers:
  • 4th place team - my Njoku got his TLaw. Chucklehead has 4 QBs. Rodgers on IR, Purdy his nominal starter, Dobbs current starter. Dude still has 7 bye weeks to cover, can’t keep hoarding them.
  • 2nd place team ALSO has 4 QBs. The hell? We also have two teams with 4 TEs. No idea why. This guy has Stafford on IR, Geno as the backup to LJax, and the hot rookie. I sent over Njoku for Stroud. Brother man has 8 bye weeks to still cover, cannot hoard forever.
important EDIT - 2nd guy had Mark Andrews with no backup

2nd Place rejected with out a counter. I'm not gonna chase Stroud, he can eat all 4 of his QBs and keep hoarding while he scrambles to cover byes + replace Andrews.

4th place team did not reject my first offer. Instead sent his own proposal of his TLaw for my Pacheco. Seems fair to me but gonna mull it overnight. Will send him a text letting him know I'll respond in the a.m.
 
I literally just had this happen and went for trading from depth. That's partially because I advertised it and want to keep camaraderie cool in an FFA league, but the thought crossed my mind to reject the trade because the person I would be trading with was ahead of me in the standings.

Turns out, I dealt him Stroud for Amari Cooper and he had Deshaun Watson as his main QB.

It did not work out, obviously. I mean, it was the worst possible outcome for me. Oh wellz. It's a fun league.
 
4th place team did not reject my first offer. Instead sent his own proposal of his TLaw for my Pacheco. Seems fair to me but gonna mull it overnight. Will send him a text letting him know I'll respond in the a.m.

OK, my mind is coming back into focus. A few hours ago I was under anesthesia but the fog is starting to life.

This is an insanely lopsided offer. I have to reject. He gets massive benefit and I get viretually none.

The original offer was my Njoku for his TLaw.
  • Ran this through a couple trade analyzers before i sent it over. It's very close.
  • Pragmatically, he doesn't need Njoku. But if something happens to 34 y.o. Kelce his streaming options are a teaming pile of :poop:
  • Similarly, I don't need, he'll be glued to my bench. As a FF option he is well below Burrow and Goff, this is a break glass in case of emergency pickup for me. But my WW options would be atrocious if Goff went down. I am fine starting Goff as long as Burrow is out but it's risky not having a Plan B.
  • My offer was fair and beneficial to both teams.
  • His offer was a weak attempt to get greedy and try to win the trade. Bad process if you ask me.
 
4th place team did not reject my first offer. Instead sent his own proposal of his TLaw for my Pacheco. Seems fair to me but gonna mull it overnight. Will send him a text letting him know I'll respond in the a.m.

OK, my mind is coming back into focus. A few hours ago I was under anesthesia but the fog is starting to life.

This is an insanely lopsided offer. I have to reject. He gets massive benefit and I get viretually none.

The original offer was my Njoku for his TLaw.
  • Ran this through a couple trade analyzers before i sent it over. It's very close.
  • Pragmatically, he doesn't need Njoku. But if something happens to 34 y.o. Kelce his streaming options are a teaming pile of :poop:
  • Similarly, I don't need, he'll be glued to my bench. As a FF option he is well below Burrow and Goff, this is a break glass in case of emergency pickup for me. But my WW options would be atrocious if Goff went down. I am fine starting Goff as long as Burrow is out but it's risky not having a Plan B.
  • My offer was fair and beneficial to both teams.
  • His offer was a weak attempt to get greedy and try to win the trade. Bad process if you ask me.
In my opinion, unless it's a super flex league zero chance I move Pacheco for Lawrence. Pacheco's schedule through week 17 is wonderful .
 
4th place team did not reject my first offer. Instead sent his own proposal of his TLaw for my Pacheco. Seems fair to me but gonna mull it overnight. Will send him a text letting him know I'll respond in the a.m.

OK, my mind is coming back into focus. A few hours ago I was under anesthesia but the fog is starting to life.

This is an insanely lopsided offer. I have to reject. He gets massive benefit and I get viretually none.

The original offer was my Njoku for his TLaw.
  • Ran this through a couple trade analyzers before i sent it over. It's very close.
  • Pragmatically, he doesn't need Njoku. But if something happens to 34 y.o. Kelce his streaming options are a teaming pile of :poop:
  • Similarly, I don't need, he'll be glued to my bench. As a FF option he is well below Burrow and Goff, this is a break glass in case of emergency pickup for me. But my WW options would be atrocious if Goff went down. I am fine starting Goff as long as Burrow is out but it's risky not having a Plan B.
  • My offer was fair and beneficial to both teams.
  • His offer was a weak attempt to get greedy and try to win the trade. Bad process if you ask me.
In my opinion, unless it's a super flex league zero chance I move Pacheco for Lawrence. Pachecos schedule through week 17 is wonderful .

Respectfully disagree.

Pacheco's remaining schedule is neutral. It just so happen it's the worst of my 7 RBs so he was the one I would most be willing to move. But not for a mid QB that won't help my team.
 
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.
I hoard unless it is a blow you away overpay, especially at the TE position
 
I had R. White sitting on my bench as my #6 RB so thought I would upgrade WR with a RB needy team. Pulled the trigger and was pretty happy until last night. Yup, just traded for Tee Higgins.
 
and the tradeline comes and goes with no deals getting done

four teams with either 4 QBs or 4 TEs; 2 teams have 9 RBs, 2 have 8 RBs

(league is 18 x 12 with 2 IR with no roster limits on positions)

hoarding was def a thing this year, and they weren't gathering to make deals, it was solely to play keep away
 
Man that was a frustrating deadline. Last day of trading was the day after losing Burrow (I also own Chase) - in hindsight, of course no one wanted to be the team that made my squad better even when it did benefit them immensely.

I've been curb stomping the league the last 3 weeks and went into this week a heavy favorite (that disappeared.) I probably would not have done a deal with me if I was in their shoes.

:kicksrock:
 
at this time of year i love to trade deph for upgrades. in most leagues most teams are technically still in playoff chase. if you are worried about a team close to the top of the standings that wants to give you an upgrade for your backup te/qb cause they lost andrews and/or burrow i could see maybe holding to let them sink but if the 4-6 team two spots out is in same boat try to grab an upgrade off them. maybe they make playoffs but more likely they don't. help them try, help your starting lineup
 
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.

I hoard simply because that person usually doesn't want to make a deal that benefits me....it almost always benefits them. If I have Travis Kelce and Sam Laporta...and the Dallas Goedert guy wants LaPorta; there's not much he can give me that helps my team more than having LaPorta in the bench position.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top