Drunken Cowboy
Footballguy
Run, don't walk, to the accept buttonSo I was just offered Bijan (1.01) and 3.07
for 1.03, 1.05 and 2.05. The 2.05 doesn’t really feel much more valuable than 3.07
my league is 1 QB
Run, don't walk, to the accept buttonSo I was just offered Bijan (1.01) and 3.07
for 1.03, 1.05 and 2.05. The 2.05 doesn’t really feel much more valuable than 3.07
my league is 1 QB
Huh? Two went in the top 12?What a weird intersection of a deep RB class and the NFL completely punting the position.
Are you seriously going to argue that the NFL, as a whole, values RBs? SheeshHuh? Two went in the top 12?What a weird intersection of a deep RB class and the NFL completely punting the position.
Are you pretending two didn’t go top 12? How is that punting the position?Are you seriously going to argue that the NFL, as a whole, values RBs? SheeshHuh? Two went in the top 12?What a weird intersection of a deep RB class and the NFL completely punting the position.
1st - 2Are you pretending two didn’t go top 12? How is that punting the position?Are you seriously going to argue that the NFL, as a whole, values RBs? SheeshHuh? Two went in the top 12?What a weird intersection of a deep RB class and the NFL completely punting the position.
I won’t beat this to death but your stats and your conclusion seem to be at odds with one another - 7 RBs in the top 3 rounds is hardly “punting”.1st - 2Are you pretending two didn’t go top 12? How is that punting the position?Are you seriously going to argue that the NFL, as a whole, values RBs? SheeshHuh? Two went in the top 12?What a weird intersection of a deep RB class and the NFL completely punting the position.
2nd - 1
3rd - 4
4th - 1
5th and beyond - who cares.
Either the backs in this class were over rated or the NFL has devalued the position.
Maybe punting was not the right term. I still think marginal WRs will be pushed up allowing good RBs to be selected later.I won’t beat this to death but your stats and your conclusion seem to be at odds with one another - 7 RBs in the top 3 rounds is hardly “punting”.1st - 2Are you pretending two didn’t go top 12? How is that punting the position?Are you seriously going to argue that the NFL, as a whole, values RBs? SheeshHuh? Two went in the top 12?What a weird intersection of a deep RB class and the NFL completely punting the position.
2nd - 1
3rd - 4
4th - 1
5th and beyond - who cares.
Either the backs in this class were over rated or the NFL has devalued the position.
Fair points. One big difference between now and even six years ago is that RBBC has become increasingly commonplace. Which means that outside of Bijan and *maybe* Gibbs, we likely have to temper our expectations for the group at large.2017 historically great RB class
Rounds 1-3: 8 RB's
Rounds 4+: 19 RB's
2023
Rounds 1-3: 7 RB's
Rounds 4+: 11 RB's
So, almost as many in the early rounds as there were in 2017. Not that I expect this group to be comparable. But we have 2 that are practically expected to be elite, and 5 or 6 more with a decent shot (situations might hold some of them back ... "bet on talent, not situation" sometimes works). Then several more with outside shots.As someone with 8 top-20 dynasty picks (and I expect at least 4 of those to be RB's) I'm not thrilled with the draft. But I'm not too bummed out about it.
Draft capital and hindsight knee injury make this true but as players, I think they are equal.Also even with the “bad” spots for the RBs this year, you still have an advantage over last year by quite. A bit IMO
Bijon>Hall
By a mileGibbs>Walker
I can't get behind the idea that Cook landing on the Bills was a bad spot. Cook was mid prospect and all his value is derived from the offensive juggernaut he landed on. The other RBs are all blah and I would Pacheco over them all without a 2nd thought.the other 2022 RBs were drafted as late as the 2023 picks and in equally “bad” spots. James cook drafted into a committee by a team that doesn’t feature a RB. Rascaad White drafted to a team with Fournette. Tyrion Davis Price drafted into a huge committee with the 49ers. Brian Robinson drafted to a team that had a good Antonio Gibson. Dameon Pierce drafted into an ideal spot but fell to the 4th round. Isaiah Spiller drafted into Ekeler. Zamir White, Hassan Haskins, Pierre strong? All bad spots behind studs. Allgier was the late round suprise and his value was just crushed!
I think we all expect too much instant production out of mid to late first round picks. Many of these WR and RB situations will look a lot better one year from now as the RB landscape will quickly change. These talented RBs shouldn’t change their draft status just because they were drafted into situations that will take a year or two to materialize. There will also be round 3-5 guys that will quickly rise to value when a key player ahead of them gets injured.
That is funny because I wouldn't trade 1.01-1.03 for 1.09 and 1.10. I wouldn't even give it a moment of thought.According to the keep trade cut everyone loves to reference here it says Robinson value in 1 QB leauges is 8978 and that rookie picks 9 and 10 combine to value at 9311
So people should be trading pick 1 for picks 9+10 right ?
I just threw up.Is this the thread where we rank 1.04 - 1.07 (PPR, RB = 0.5, TE-Prem; Start 1 QB) ?
Sure.
I'll start
1.04 Quentin Johnston
1.05 Rashee Rice
1.06 Jonathan Mingo
1.07 Dalton Kincaid
I am not putting mighty midgets playing for Baltimore or MN anywhere near this list.
Agreed and agreed.Not Bigsby unless the ETN owner does it and I wouldn't.
It’s the classic trade calc “4 quarters for a dollar” fallacy. In the real world, 4 quarters are worth a dollar. In FF, 4 quarters (players/picks) are not worth a dollar (players/picks).That is funny because I wouldn't trade 1.01-1.03 for 1.09 and 1.10. I wouldn't even give it a moment of thought.According to the keep trade cut everyone loves to reference here it says Robinson value in 1 QB leauges is 8978 and that rookie picks 9 and 10 combine to value at 9311
So people should be trading pick 1 for picks 9+10 right ?
The gap between Bijan and the next player at the RB position, which I view as Hall, is a larger gap than any other position.Bijon>Hall
What I don't get is ... You'd think they could at least calibrate the actual numerical values so that 2-for-1's are accurate. Then you'd only have to make adjustments on 3-for-1's, etc. What I mean is. If two 50 cent pieces are not fair value for a dollar piece ... Then they aren't 50 cent pieces. Where does that 50 cent valuation come from if two of them are not worth a dollar.It’s the classic trade calc “4 quarters for a dollar” fallacy. In the real world, 4 quarters are worth a dollar. In FF, 4 quarters (players/picks) are not worth a dollar (players/picks).That is funny because I wouldn't trade 1.01-1.03 for 1.09 and 1.10. I wouldn't even give it a moment of thought.According to the keep trade cut everyone loves to reference here it says Robinson value in 1 QB leauges is 8978 and that rookie picks 9 and 10 combine to value at 9311
So people should be trading pick 1 for picks 9+10 right ?
Every time trade calc discussions come up someone brings up the “stacking” issue. How you can just keep adding dribs and drabs to a trade until it’s balanced.
It simply doesn’t work, and most folks understand this inherently.
Within reason, one might add a drib or a drab to balance a deal, sure. But that’s like “Pick 1.02 for pick 1.03 & 1.09” or something.
Not sure why folks get so hung up about this one - I rarely see offers that match the concern. Most dynasty managers understand that 1x $1 player/pick is worth significantly more than 4x $0.25 players/picks or 2x $.50 players/picks
I’m not sure who was overrating the backs after Gibbs. They never looked all that great to many.1st - 2Are you pretending two didn’t go top 12? How is that punting the position?Are you seriously going to argue that the NFL, as a whole, values RBs? SheeshHuh? Two went in the top 12?What a weird intersection of a deep RB class and the NFL completely punting the position.
2nd - 1
3rd - 4
4th - 1
5th and beyond - who cares.
Either the backs in this class were over rated or the NFL has devalued the position.
But that only really works when you factor the other player / roster space you drop with the additional player. Plus the lost value in your starting lineup. It still isn’t perfect but it’s better.What I don't get is ... You'd think they could at least calibrate the actual numerical values so that 2-for-1's are accurate. Then you'd only have to make adjustments on 3-for-1's, etc. What I mean is. If two 50 cent pieces are not fair value for a dollar piece ... Then they aren't 50 cent pieces. Where does that 50 cent valuation come from if two of them are not worth a dollar.It’s the classic trade calc “4 quarters for a dollar” fallacy. In the real world, 4 quarters are worth a dollar. In FF, 4 quarters (players/picks) are not worth a dollar (players/picks).That is funny because I wouldn't trade 1.01-1.03 for 1.09 and 1.10. I wouldn't even give it a moment of thought.According to the keep trade cut everyone loves to reference here it says Robinson value in 1 QB leauges is 8978 and that rookie picks 9 and 10 combine to value at 9311
So people should be trading pick 1 for picks 9+10 right ?
Every time trade calc discussions come up someone brings up the “stacking” issue. How you can just keep adding dribs and drabs to a trade until it’s balanced.
It simply doesn’t work, and most folks understand this inherently.
Within reason, one might add a drib or a drab to balance a deal, sure. But that’s like “Pick 1.02 for pick 1.03 & 1.09” or something.
Not sure why folks get so hung up about this one - I rarely see offers that match the concern. Most dynasty managers understand that 1x $1 player/pick is worth significantly more than 4x $0.25 players/picks or 2x $.50 players/picks
While it's impossible to just give each player numerical values that can be summed together (some complicated formula, maybe, but not just a sum) to get their combined value, it would be possible to make it work pretty well for 2-for-1's, if they just set the numbers right. But the numbers are always far too close together, they values need to go down more dramatically as you go down the rankings.
The challenge is it’s never so clean or even.While it's impossible to just give each player numerical values that can be summed together (some complicated formula, maybe, but not just a sum) to get their combined value, it would be possible to make it work pretty well for 2-for-1's, if they just set the numbers right. But the numbers are always far too close together, they values need to go down more dramatically as you go down the rankings.
If that's what it generally takes to get the deal done, then they're not $.73 and $.51 players. They're $.59 and $.41 players. By my thinking anyway. I mean, where does $.73 and $.51 valuation come from? Seems arbitrary if not based on trade value.In a 2 for 1 deal, it usually only gets done if the 2 are like, $.73 and $.51 players..
I was told there would be no math.If that's what it generally takes to get the deal done, then they're not $.73 and $.51 players. They're $.59 and $.41 players. By my thinking anyway. I mean, where does $.73 and $.51 valuation come from? Seems arbitrary if not based on trade value.In a 2 for 1 deal, it usually only gets done if the 2 are like, $.73 and $.51 players..
I mean even what I'm saying I don't feel so good about, because it doesn't translate properly to trades with other quantities of players on one side. Even if I say they are 59 and 41 cent players, if I have two 59 cent guys and two 41 cent guys, even though I can get a $1 guy with a pair of them, there's likely no way I can get a $2 guy for all four of them. I don't know any good answer.I was told there would be no math.If that's what it generally takes to get the deal done, then they're not $.73 and $.51 players. They're $.59 and $.41 players. By my thinking anyway. I mean, where does $.73 and $.51 valuation come from? Seems arbitrary if not based on trade value.In a 2 for 1 deal, it usually only gets done if the 2 are like, $.73 and $.51 players..
I get what you’re saying. My point was that in most successful 2 for 1 deals I’ve made, I’m paying the equivalent of $1.24 for $1, with one piece valuable enough that it’s not *that much* of a drop-off from what the other team is getting, with the other piece being valuable enough to not simply be filler (one of those $.25 pieces mentioned earlier)I mean even what I'm saying I don't feel so good about, because it doesn't translate properly to trades with other quantities of players on one side. Even if I say they are 59 and 41 cent players, if I have two 59 cent guys and two 41 cent guys, even though I can get a $1 guy with a pair of them, there's likely no way I can get a $2 guy for all four of them. I don't know any good answer.
Definitely this, in the end. It's like asking a robot for romantic relationship advice.The point is it’s an inexact science. Where math is very clean, trades are super messy. That’s why trade calcs aren’t the end all/be all. Even calcs that factor in roster space fail in that regard.
Perfect analogy.Definitely this, in the end. It's like asking a robot for romantic relationship advice.
BIJAN |
GIBBS |
QUENTIN |
JSN |
CHARBONNET |
KENDRE |
KINCAID |
FLOWERS |
MAYER |
ROSCHON |
TANK |
ACHANE |
TILLMAN |
ISRAEL |
RICHARDSON |
CHASE |
YOUNG |
LAPORTA |
MIMS |
RICE |
MUSGRAVE |
REED |
HYATT |
ADDISON |
DOWNS |
SCOTT |
HULL |
According to the keep trade cut everyone loves to reference here it says Robinson value in 1 QB leauges is 8978 and that rookie picks 9 and 10 combine to value at 9311
So people should be trading pick 1 for picks 9+10 right ?
Why so low on Addison?If I do it by tiers:
Bijan
**
Gibbs
**
**
**
a heaping pile of crap
well if this is a joke that Addison is the pile being referenced, then at least I put him 3rd? lolWhy so low on Addison?If I do it by tiers:
Bijan
**
Gibbs
**
**
**
a heaping pile of crap
Clearly an art and not science, but I figure the open roster spot / dropped player is probably worth about 24¢ in this example.If that's what it generally takes to get the deal done, then they're not $.73 and $.51 players. They're $.59 and $.41 players. By my thinking anyway. I mean, where does $.73 and $.51 valuation come from? Seems arbitrary if not based on trade value.In a 2 for 1 deal, it usually only gets done if the 2 are like, $.73 and $.51 players..
no you're right that's way too low - I kept sorting and sorting and he kept falling I guessWhy so low on Addison?If I do it by tiers:
Bijan
**
Gibbs
**
**
**
a heaping pile of crap
One could maybe even argue the opposite and that NFL teams put emphasis on the position, which is why some teams opted to draft multiple RBs while already rostering a bona-fide bellcow RB?Maybe punting was not the right term. I still think marginal WRs will be pushed up allowing good RBs to be selected later.I won’t beat this to death but your stats and your conclusion seem to be at odds with one another - 7 RBs in the top 3 rounds is hardly “punting”.1st - 2Are you pretending two didn’t go top 12? How is that punting the position?Are you seriously going to argue that the NFL, as a whole, values RBs? SheeshHuh? Two went in the top 12?What a weird intersection of a deep RB class and the NFL completely punting the position.
2nd - 1
3rd - 4
4th - 1
5th and beyond - who cares.
Either the backs in this class were over rated or the NFL has devalued the position.
I do have Achane higher due to McDaniels & his relatively fragile competition, but otherwise it’s a fair 1st shot.^I'm just kidding of course, but here goes by tiers:
Bijan
*
Gibbs
*
Quentin/JSN
*
Charbs/Kinkaid/Kendre
*
Flowers/Mayer
*
Roschon/Tillman/Abanikanda
That doesn't even match my list above but whatever
Yeah I imagine Achane gets into the 1st for me as wellI do have Achane higher due to McDaniels & his relatively fragile competition, but otherwise it’s a fair 1st shot.^I'm just kidding of course, but here goes by tiers:
Bijan
*
Gibbs
*
Quentin/JSN
*
Charbs/Kinkaid/Kendre
*
Flowers/Mayer
*
Roschon/Tillman/Abanikanda
That doesn't even match my list above but whatever
Ok, yeah I was referring to your first list. That seemed way low.no you're right that's way too low - I kept sorting and sorting and he kept falling I guessWhy so low on Addison?If I do it by tiers:
Bijan
**
Gibbs
**
**
**
a heaping pile of crap
Generally, KTC does a great job of player valuation and offers a bonus to the team not acquiring a stud.What I don't get is ... You'd think they could at least calibrate the actual numerical values so that 2-for-1's are accurate. Then you'd only have to make adjustments on 3-for-1's, etc. What I mean is. If two 50 cent pieces are not fair value for a dollar piece ... Then they aren't 50 cent pieces. Where does that 50 cent valuation come from if two of them are not worth a dollar.It’s the classic trade calc “4 quarters for a dollar” fallacy. In the real world, 4 quarters are worth a dollar. In FF, 4 quarters (players/picks) are not worth a dollar (players/picks).That is funny because I wouldn't trade 1.01-1.03 for 1.09 and 1.10. I wouldn't even give it a moment of thought.According to the keep trade cut everyone loves to reference here it says Robinson value in 1 QB leauges is 8978 and that rookie picks 9 and 10 combine to value at 9311
So people should be trading pick 1 for picks 9+10 right ?
Every time trade calc discussions come up someone brings up the “stacking” issue. How you can just keep adding dribs and drabs to a trade until it’s balanced.
It simply doesn’t work, and most folks understand this inherently.
Within reason, one might add a drib or a drab to balance a deal, sure. But that’s like “Pick 1.02 for pick 1.03 & 1.09” or something.
Not sure why folks get so hung up about this one - I rarely see offers that match the concern. Most dynasty managers understand that 1x $1 player/pick is worth significantly more than 4x $0.25 players/picks or 2x $.50 players/picks
While it's impossible to just give each player numerical values that can be summed together (some complicated formula, maybe, but not just a sum) to get their combined value, it would be possible to make it work pretty well for 2-for-1's, if they just set the numbers right. But the numbers are always far too close together, they values need to go down more dramatically as you go down the rankings.
More info here: https://forums.footballguys.com/threads/post-nfl-draft-dynasty-or-devy-drafts.808315/#post-24494087Sure will.My draft starts tomorrow morning.It would be very temptingI'm sitting on 1.05 in start-1 qb and I love AR. Pretty sure I won't be drafting him, but I'll think about it..
But buck up little campers! Things can and likely will change between now and draft day (unless your league drafts insanely starts on Monday, like one of my leagues does) - Mixon could be released. Players get hurt. Things change.
It may well be that there’s a more clearly defined top 12 by the time rookie draft SZN is upon us.
That’s my glass half full rah rah speech. How’d I do?
![]()
1 qb? Could you share how it goes for you?
I hope they have patienceMore info here: https://forums.footballguys.com/threads/post-nfl-draft-dynasty-or-devy-drafts.808315/#post-24494087Sure will.My draft starts tomorrow morning.It would be very temptingI'm sitting on 1.05 in start-1 qb and I love AR. Pretty sure I won't be drafting him, but I'll think about it..
But buck up little campers! Things can and likely will change between now and draft day (unless your league drafts insanely starts on Monday, like one of my leagues does) - Mixon could be released. Players get hurt. Things change.
It may well be that there’s a more clearly defined top 12 by the time rookie draft SZN is upon us.
That’s my glass half full rah rah speech. How’d I do?
![]()
1 qb? Could you share how it goes for you?
AR has gone 1.04 and 1.06 in start-1 qb dynasty (first league in OP has not been updated to reflect staus)
Not at all surprising.More info here: https://forums.footballguys.com/threads/post-nfl-draft-dynasty-or-devy-drafts.808315/#post-24494087Sure will.My draft starts tomorrow morning.It would be very temptingI'm sitting on 1.05 in start-1 qb and I love AR. Pretty sure I won't be drafting him, but I'll think about it..
But buck up little campers! Things can and likely will change between now and draft day (unless your league drafts insanely starts on Monday, like one of my leagues does) - Mixon could be released. Players get hurt. Things change.
It may well be that there’s a more clearly defined top 12 by the time rookie draft SZN is upon us.
That’s my glass half full rah rah speech. How’d I do?
![]()
1 qb? Could you share how it goes for you?
AR has gone 1.04 and 1.06 in start-1 qb dynasty (first league in OP has not been updated to reflect staus)
I have that guy in my league, who dealt for 5 1st round picks.
bummer
I agree about the WRs. The problem with RBs is, if they take a year or 2 to materialize, that's a pretty good chunk of their FF usefulness.Also even with the “bad” spots for the RBs this year, you still have an advantage over last year by quite. A bit IMO
Bijon>Hall
Gibbs>Walker - I loaded up on Walker and love him and predict he’ll still be better than Gibbs but you can’t ignore the fact that the Lions took him almost a full round sooner than Walker and the Seahawks just drafted another talented 2nd round pick to compete.
the other 2022 RBs were drafted as late as the 2023 picks and in equally “bad” spots. James cook drafted into a committee by a team that doesn’t feature a RB. Rascaad White drafted to a team with Fournette. Tyrion Davis Price drafted into a huge committee with the 49ers. Brian Robinson drafted to a team that had a good Antonio Gibson. Dameon Pierce drafted into an ideal spot but fell to the 4th round. Isaiah Spiller drafted into Ekeler. Zamir White, Hassan Haskins, Pierre strong? All bad spots behind studs. Allgier was the late round suprise and his value was just crushed!
I think we all expect too much instant production out of mid to late first round picks. Many of these WR and RB situations will look a lot better one year from now as the RB landscape will quickly change. These talented RBs shouldn’t change their draft status just because they were drafted into situations that will take a year or two to materialize. There will also be round 3-5 guys that will quickly rise to value when a key player ahead of them gets injured.
Did you even try this? Because it’s not true. I just tried it and it’s still off by 3000pts. FYI.According to the keep trade cut everyone loves to reference here it says Robinson value in 1 QB leauges is 8978 and that rookie picks 9 and 10 combine to value at 9311
So people should be trading pick 1 for picks 9+10 right ?