Trading into the top 2 is not difficult this year... three deals done (1 Viewer)

[gatorbait]

This is what makes fantasy football great. If you value the top 3 that bad, go get them. Personally, I would move a top 3 pick for two later first round picks.

My main point was all the people that came out saying some of Bloom's deals were with idiots and "people in my leauge would never do that." I guess I'm an idiot then. I feel there is decent depth to this draft. And if you earned the 1.01-1.03 pick in a 12-16 team league, you have a lot of holes that one guy is not going to make you a contender right now anyways. At least not one guy from this draft. IMO

Most of the talk has been listing wrs like Hunter, Wheaton, Woods, etc... at 1.10 and 1.13 (just using the lesser of the two first round picks) but there are a lot more names you could add to that list. Lattimore and Michael are possibly there. If you play IDP, you could even look at Arthur Brown there. I'm sure we could come up with more names in that range as well. If I had the worst team in the league, I would move 1.01 for two first rounders since you have to assume those teams have more than one glaring hole.

This is based on right now for early drafts. If you draft right before the regular season, this may change drastically.

 

[Sabertooth]

I kind of agree. In fact in the league I did these trades

1.1 for 1.5 and 2014 1st

1.5 for 2.1 and 2014 1st

I am now trying to trade the 1.10 and 2.1 for the 1.1 pick again as it has moved around to 2 teams since my trading it away.

If I am successful, and he's mulling it, I will be right back in the catbird seat.

I will have effectively turned

1.01 and 1.10

into

1.01, and a pair of 2014 1st rounders (both anticipated to be top 5)..... . Unless I trade it back again and load more picks into next year.

 

[cstu]

I kind of agree. In fact in the league I did these trades

1.1 for 1.5 and 2014 1st

1.5 for 2.1 and 2014 1st

I am now trying to trade the 1.10 and 2.1 for the 1.1 pick again as it has moved around to 2 teams since my trading it away.

If I am successful, and he's mulling it, I will be right back in the catbird seat.

I will have effectively turned

1.01 and 1.10

into

1.01, and a pair of 2014 1st rounders (both anticipated to be top 5)..... . Unless I trade it back again and load more picks into next year.

Example #924234 why bad teams stay bad.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

This is what makes fantasy football great. If you value the top 3 that bad, go get them. Personally, I would move a top 3 pick for two later first round picks.

My main point was all the people that came out saying some of Bloom's deals were with idiots and "people in my leauge would never do that." I guess I'm an idiot then. I feel there is decent depth to this draft. And if you earned the 1.01-1.03 pick in a 12-16 team league, you have a lot of holes that one guy is not going to make you a contender right now anyways. At least not one guy from this draft. IMO

Most of the talk has been listing wrs like Hunter, Wheaton, Woods, etc... at 1.10 and 1.13 (just using the lesser of the two first round picks) but there are a lot more names you could add to that list. Lattimore and Michael are possibly there. If you play IDP, you could even look at Arthur Brown there. I'm sure we could come up with more names in that range as well. If I had the worst team in the league, I would move 1.01 for two first rounders since you have to assume those teams have more than one glaring hole.

This is based on right now for early drafts. If you draft right before the regular season, this may change drastically.

The likelihood that you land two solid starters with the 1.07 and 2.07 (or even the 1.10 and 1.13) is extremely low. What's worse is that one of the many reasons guys slide down that far is often because they're looking at more time to get the job (your examples of Lattimore/Michael). So not only are you unlikely to land more than one good player out of it, you're less likely to get any kind of immediate help. If your team earned the 1.01 through its finish (as seems to be rare with most of the people here, but it's relevant to the point you brought up) then you're going to stay bad for that much longer.

The rate of players that become great or even good is far too low, especially that far down in the rookie draft, to be banking on the idea that you're going to earn more good players because you have more picks. The only reason to trade down is if you feel you'd have a better shot of landing one guy by having more darts to throw at smaller targets. Hitting with both your darts is a possibility, but should be considered a bonus as it is unlikely.

 

[Sabertooth]

To take your example further though, the likelihood of hitting with the #1 pick isn't great this year either. The top 3 or 4 guys all have some serious bust potential. In a situation like that where all the prospects have bigtime bust potential, taking two or three shots at it might be the best approach.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

To expand on my point, I went and looked back at the 10th and 13th picks each year in my main league's 7 rookie drafts.

2012: Alshon Jefferey, Stephen Hill
2011: Greg Little, DeMarco Murray
2010: Golden Tate, Jonathan Dwyer
2009: Darrius Heyward-Bey, Kenny Britt
2008: Limas Sweed, Matt Ryan
2007: Lorenzo Booker, Sydney Rice
2006: Maurice Jones-Drew, Chad Jackson

Some good players in there for sure, but not a single example where a team got two great or even good players out of it. Totally anecdotal and way too small a sample size to mean anything, but for those thinking "I've got lots of holes so if I trade down for multiple picks I can fill more of those holes!", I urge you to go and look back through your league's history of rookie drafts with the picks you're considering acquiring and see how many times it would have actually worked out that way.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

To take your example further though, the likelihood of hitting with the #1 pick isn't great this year either. The top 3 or 4 guys all have some serious bust potential. In a situation like that where all the prospects have bigtime bust potential, taking two or three shots at it might be the best approach.

Sure, and while I disagree with the idea that there is a shallow dropoff this year, I can't fault someone for taking that approach. My point above was primarily in response to the point that was made that a bad team could fill more holes with more picks. Statistically, that is extremely unlikely.

This is the key sentence to take out of the point I'm making..

The rate of players that become great or even good is far too low, especially that far down in the rookie draft, to be banking on the idea that you're going to earn more good players because you have more picks. The only reason to trade down is if you feel you'd have a better shot of landing one guy by having more darts to throw at smaller targets. Hitting with both your darts is a possibility, but should be considered a bonus as it is unlikely.

 

[moderated]

i wouldn't give up anything to move up from 1.5 to 1.01 or 1.02 in leagues that don't score return yards, so it shouldn't cost much of anything to move up in that range.

patterson/austin draft positions were inflated a bit due to their return abilitly which doesn't count in most FF leagues. If they didn't have return ability they would have went a bit later (although not too much later).

Hopkins got drafted above Patterson and he's not going to be used in the return game. As a pure WR, which is what matters in FF, it seems Hopkins should be looked at as valuable if not more valuable then Patterson.

 

[tdmills]

i wouldn't give up anything to move up from 1.5 to 1.01 or 1.02 in leagues that don't score return yards, so it shouldn't cost much of anything to move up in that range.

patterson/austin draft positions were inflated a bit due to their return abilitly which doesn't count in most FF leagues. If they didn't have return ability they would have went a bit later (although not too much later).

Hopkins got drafted above Patterson and he's not going to be used in the return game. As a pure WR, which is what matters in FF, it seems Hopkins should be looked at as valuable if not more valuable then Patterson.

I disagree and see Patterson as more valuable.

Hopkins is smaller/slower/less athletic than Patterson with a fraction of what he can do after the catch. Hopkins has better route running/hands. Hopkins has a lower ceiling.

 

[Spike]

I moved out of the 1.1 for 1.5 and a 2014 first.

This is a great year to accumulate picks going into next year IMO. I don't get the Patterson love. Unpolished, some say dimwitted, receiver going to a rushing team with an inaccurate QB.

+1

 

[moderated]

i wouldn't give up anything to move up from 1.5 to 1.01 or 1.02 in leagues that don't score return yards, so it shouldn't cost much of anything to move up in that range.

patterson/austin draft positions were inflated a bit due to their return abilitly which doesn't count in most FF leagues. If they didn't have return ability they would have went a bit later (although not too much later).

Hopkins got drafted above Patterson and he's not going to be used in the return game. As a pure WR, which is what matters in FF, it seems Hopkins should be looked at as valuable if not more valuable then Patterson.

I disagree and see Patterson as more valuable.

Hopkins is smaller/slower/less athletic than Patterson with a fraction of what he can do after the catch. Hopkins has better route running/hands. Hopkins has a lower ceiling.

I agree Patterson has a higher upside based on his speed and athleticism, but he is not a natural receiver at all. body catches and looks really unnatural catching the ball.

Maybe these things can be learned, but he's more of a freak athlete then a receiver IMO. When you watch bigger guys like Dez, AJ Green, etc they pluck the ball out of the air and have a smoothness to them. Patterson looks like a chicken with his head cut off out there. He reminds me of a faster Greg Little in a lot of ways.

The more i think about it the more i think a faster Greg Little is the best comparison to Patterson out there. Watching their college highlights it's like a carbon copy.

40 yard dash

4.42 - Patterson

4.53 Little

Vertical

Little - 40.5

Patterson - 37

Broad

Little - 129

Patterson - 128

Little college highlights, scary how similar to Pattersons they are.

 

[Sabertooth]

To take your example further though, the likelihood of hitting with the #1 pick isn't great this year either. The top 3 or 4 guys all have some serious bust potential. In a situation like that where all the prospects have bigtime bust potential, taking two or three shots at it might be the best approach.

Sure, and while I disagree with the idea that there is a shallow dropoff this year, I can't fault someone for taking that approach. My point above was primarily in response to the point that was made that a bad team could fill more holes with more picks. Statistically, that is extremely unlikely.

This is the key sentence to take out of the point I'm making..

>The rate of players that become great or even good is far too low, especially that far down in the rookie draft, to be banking on the idea that you're going to earn more good players because you have more picks. The only reason to trade down is if you feel you'd have a better shot of landing one guy by having more darts to throw at smaller targets. Hitting with both your darts is a possibility, but should be considered a bonus as it is unlikely.

I call it the Ted Thompson approach. Look how he built the Packers after arriving to bare cupboards after Mike Sherman repeatedly traded up and missed on guys (BJ Sander??? Really Mike?). Thompson traded back again and again and amassed 43 picks in his first 4 seasons. How did that work out? Quite well actually. Lot's of NFL starters in that group. Was he a superior evaluator of talent? I don't think so. Look at his first rounders, for every Rodgers there is a Sherrod, for every BJ Raji there is a Justin Harrell. He's average to above average as an evaluator. His formula is to throw a lot of #### at the wall and see what sticks. And it works.

 

[Concept Coop]

Little college highlights, scary how similar to Pattersons they are.

The highlights look more like Dez Bryant, after catch, than they do Patterson.

 

[ghostguy123]

I kind of agree. In fact in the league I did these trades

1.1 for 1.5 and 2014 1st

1.5 for 2.1 and 2014 1st

I am now trying to trade the 1.10 and 2.1 for the 1.1 pick again as it has moved around to 2 teams since my trading it away.

If I am successful, and he's mulling it, I will be right back in the catbird seat.

I will have effectively turned

1.01 and 1.10

into

1.01, and a pair of 2014 1st rounders (both anticipated to be top 5)..... . Unless I trade it back again and load more picks into next year.

Example #924234 why bad teams stay bad.

haha, yep. Bad teams will watch 1-2 owners do trade after trade after trade, knowing that those owners will only do deals where they get a slight (and sometimes not so slight) "value" advantage, and after 10 deals it looks like they gave up pick 9 and Antonio Gates for pick 1 and hernandez

 

[cstu]

The top 3 or 4 guys all have some serious bust potential.

In PPR, I believe there's one guy who has very low bust potential - Bernard. The reason I say this is that with his receiving ability he'll at least be in a RBBC and get you low RB2 numbers. That's not what you want out of a top 3 rookie pick but IMO that's his floor with the potential of being another McCoy.

 

[tdmills]

To take your example further though, the likelihood of hitting with the #1 pick isn't great this year either. The top 3 or 4 guys all have some serious bust potential. In a situation like that where all the prospects have bigtime bust potential, taking two or three shots at it might be the best approach.

Sure, and while I disagree with the idea that there is a shallow dropoff this year, I can't fault someone for taking that approach. My point above was primarily in response to the point that was made that a bad team could fill more holes with more picks. Statistically, that is extremely unlikely.

This is the key sentence to take out of the point I'm making..

>The rate of players that become great or even good is far too low, especially that far down in the rookie draft, to be banking on the idea that you're going to earn more good players because you have more picks. The only reason to trade down is if you feel you'd have a better shot of landing one guy by having more darts to throw at smaller targets. Hitting with both your darts is a possibility, but should be considered a bonus as it is unl

ikely.

I call it the Ted Thompson approach. Look how he built the Packers after arriving to bare cupboards after Mike Sherman repeatedly traded up and missed on guys (BJ Sander??? Really Mike?). Thompson traded back again and again and amassed 43 picks in his first 4 seasons. How did that work out? Quite well actually. Lot's of NFL starters in that group. Was he a superior evaluator of talent? I don't think so. Look at his first rounders, for every Rodgers there is a Sherrod, for every BJ Raji there is a Justin Harrell. He's average to above average as an evaluator. His formula is to throw a lot of #### at the wall and see what sticks. And it works.

I honestly question how good TT is as a GM. GB fans are gaga over every move he makes like it's gold. However, GB wins due to Aaron Rodgers. Take him out of the equation and insert Josh Freeman or an average QB and is GB winning all of these games? Do they go on the playoff run as the #6 seed and win 3 games on the road + the super bowl? Just like in New England with BB, they win because of Brady. But when you look at the quality of the team besides Rodgers/Brady, with all of those draft picks and it's a ton of misses. Why does that make them a great GM?

 

[ghostguy123]

i wouldn't give up anything to move up from 1.5 to 1.01 or 1.02 in leagues that don't score return yards, so it shouldn't cost much of anything to move up in that range.

patterson/austin draft positions were inflated a bit due to their return abilitly which doesn't count in most FF leagues. If they didn't have return ability they would have went a bit later (although not too much later).

Hopkins got drafted above Patterson and he's not going to be used in the return game. As a pure WR, which is what matters in FF, it seems Hopkins should be looked at as valuable if not more valuable then Patterson.

WHat YOU would give up isn't the point.

If you had pick 1, what would it take from someone to get you to move down to pick 5?

 

[cstu]

The more i think about it the more i think a faster Greg Little is the best comparison to Patterson out there. Watching their college highlights it's like a carbon copy.

That just serves to remind me to hold onto Little until he a FA and can go to a team that will use him properly.

 

[moderated]

i wouldn't give up anything to move up from 1.5 to 1.01 or 1.02 in leagues that don't score return yards, so it shouldn't cost much of anything to move up in that range.

patterson/austin draft positions were inflated a bit due to their return abilitly which doesn't count in most FF leagues. If they didn't have return ability they would have went a bit later (although not too much later).

Hopkins got drafted above Patterson and he's not going to be used in the return game. As a pure WR, which is what matters in FF, it seems Hopkins should be looked at as valuable if not more valuable then Patterson.

WHat YOU would give up isn't the point.

If you had pick 1, what would it take from someone to get you to move down to pick 5?

if i had 1.01 i'd move down to 1.05 pretty cheaply. for example any mid 2nd plus 1.05 would be enough for 1.01.

***assuming the league doesn't count return yardage, in those leagues austin and patterson get a big bump.

 

[ghostguy123]

i wouldn't give up anything to move up from 1.5 to 1.01 or 1.02 in leagues that don't score return yards, so it shouldn't cost much of anything to move up in that range.

patterson/austin draft positions were inflated a bit due to their return abilitly which doesn't count in most FF leagues. If they didn't have return ability they would have went a bit later (although not too much later).

Hopkins got drafted above Patterson and he's not going to be used in the return game. As a pure WR, which is what matters in FF, it seems Hopkins should be looked at as valuable if not more valuable then Patterson.

WHat YOU would give up isn't the point.

If you had pick 1, what would it take from someone to get you to move down to pick 5?

if i had 1.01 i'd move down to 1.05 pretty cheaply. for example any mid 2nd plus 1.05 would be enough for 1.01.

***assuming the league doesn't count return yardage, in those leagues austin and patterson get a big bump.

Every league I am in I would get laughed at badly if I offered that.

Not even so much because it is a bad deal, but in a 12 team league it would be pretty rare to not find someone to give more than a mid 2nd to move up like that. It's selling low.

 

[moderated]

Little college highlights, scary how similar to Pattersons they are.

i don't see the dez comparison. Dez was a very smooth college WR who plucked balls out of the air like nobody's business.

Patterson and Little were more raw athletes who didn't look near as natural as Dez in college and mainly relied on their freakish athletic ability.

 

[thriftyrocker]

The more i think about it the more i think a faster Greg Little is the best comparison to Patterson out there. Watching their college highlights it's like a carbon copy.

That just serves to remind me to hold onto Little until he a FA and can go to a team that will use him properly.

Greg Little's YAC ability is very overrated. Let's just accept he's a possession WR with bad hands. He is closer to Sanu than Patterson IMO. Sanu might be better.

 

[Concept Coop]

i don't see the dez comparison. Dez was a very smooth college WR who plucked balls out of the air like nobody's business.

Patterson and Little were more raw athletes who didn't look near as natural as Dez in college and mainly relied on their freakish athletic ability.

Right. I'm just talking after catch. In college highlights, Little was a beast. Hasn't really translated.

 

[moderated]

The more i think about it the more i think a faster Greg Little is the best comparison to Patterson out there. Watching their college highlights it's like a carbon copy.

That just serves to remind me to hold onto Little until he a FA and can go to a team that will use him properly.

Greg Little's YAC ability is very overrated. Let's just accept he's a possession WR with bad hands. He is closer to Sanu than Patterson IMO. Sanu might be better.

In college Little was a YAC beast. It's a lot harder to do in the pros when defenses have zero respect for the Cle offense to stretch the field and the safeties can cheat closer to the LOS.

Little and Sanu have zero in common as far as playing styles.

 

[moderated]

i don't see the dez comparison. Dez was a very smooth college WR who plucked balls out of the air like nobody's business.

Patterson and Little were more raw athletes who didn't look near as natural as Dez in college and mainly relied on their freakish athletic ability.

Right. I'm just talking after catch. In college highlights, Little was a beast. Hasn't really translated.

I agree, that's why i'm worried about Pattersons game translating as he's going to run into the same issues as Little has.

 

[cstu]

i don't see the dez comparison. Dez was a very smooth college WR who plucked balls out of the air like nobody's business.

Patterson and Little were more raw athletes who didn't look near as natural as Dez in college and mainly relied on their freakish athletic ability.

Right. I'm just talking after catch. In college highlights, Little was a beast. Hasn't really translated.

I agree, that's why i'm worried about Pattersons game translating as he's going to run into the same issues as Little has.

In Patterson's favor he's faster, not as big (I believe Little's size is actually a hindrance) and is much more of a play maker.

 

[moderated]

i don't see the dez comparison. Dez was a very smooth college WR who plucked balls out of the air like nobody's business.

Patterson and Little were more raw athletes who didn't look near as natural as Dez in college and mainly relied on their freakish athletic ability.

Right. I'm just talking after catch. In college highlights, Little was a beast. Hasn't really translated.

I agree, that's why i'm worried about Pattersons game translating as he's going to run into the same issues as Little has.

In Patterson's favor he's faster, not as big (I believe Little's size is actually a hindrance) and is much more of a play maker.

definitely, i grade Patterson higher as a prospect, i just think they are a far better comparison then the one to Harvin. The Harvin comparison is lazy IMO.

 

[el centro]

I'm not in any IDP leagues, but I find the feedback on this year's draft-class the most diverse EVER! I for one couldn't disagree more with the top-2 WRs. I don't like Patterson's history. ONE YEAR of quality numbers?!?! That seems like a boom-or-bust player if every I saw one. These one-year wonders tend to be over-hyped, and RARELY pan-out in the NFL (see J.Russell). As for Austin - when's the last time a 5'8" WR put super #s in the NFL? I think he'll be a dynamic special teams player, and probably get 3-6 touches/game on offense, but that's not enough to take him in the top-6 of a Rookie draft IMO. ESPECIALLY a non-PPR league.

As for this only being deep to 1.3 or 1.5... I think you've got 4 quality RBs in good situations, and another 4-8 with decent upside. The WRs after the previously mentioned also have some decent upside.

I see a decent tier-drop off at 1.5 this year (arguably at 1.3 or even 1.6, but certainly in the first half of the first round)... made three deals already this week:

16 team, 1/2/3/1 2 Flex, full IDP, salary cap contract. pt per 20 ret yds, .2 pt per comp/carry, 1157 cap, salary slots 60/50/50/40/40/40/35/35/35/30 rest of first. 20 in 2nd.

Gave up 1.7 and 2.7 for 1.2

With return yardage added, Austin and Patterson are elite prospects, and the .2 PPC helps bernard and bell's stock. Possible Bell or Hopkins would fall to 1.7, but being guaranteed one of austin or patterson or bernard is outstanding - RBs are a big premium in this league.

16 team 1/2/3/1 2 Flex salary cap, pt per 25 punt rtn yds 40 ko rtn yds, .2 per carry, 124 cap, salary slots 8/8/7/7/6/6/5/5/4 rest of first.

Gave up 1.10 and 1.13 for 1.1

Same logic... Austin/Patterson/Bernard a premium. scoring expands span bw top 3 and rest

12 team 1/1/1/1 w 3 RB/WR/TE flex PPR

Gave up 1.6 and 1.8 for 1.1/2.9

This league only starts 5 RB/WR per team in a 12 teamer, so again elite upside is emphasized. Felt a strong pull to get in top 2 for bernard/patterson...

Happy Hunting!

 

[gatorbait]

To expand on my point, I went and looked back at the 10th and 13th picks each year in my main league's 7 rookie drafts.

2012: Alshon Jefferey, Stephen Hill
2011: Greg Little, DeMarco Murray
2010: Golden Tate, Jonathan Dwyer
2009: Darrius Heyward-Bey, Kenny Britt
2008: Limas Sweed, Matt Ryan
2007: Lorenzo Booker, Sydney Rice
2006: Maurice Jones-Drew, Chad Jackson

Some good players in there for sure, but not a single example where a team got two great or even good players out of it. Totally anecdotal and way too small a sample size to mean anything, but for those thinking "I've got lots of holes so if I trade down for multiple picks I can fill more of those holes!", I urge you to go and look back through your league's history of rookie drafts with the picks you're considering acquiring and see how many times it would have actually worked out that way.

I'm not saying I disagree with you going back over the years. There are definitely years where I wouldn't move from a top three pick. But I don't consider the top end of this draft equally with all the years before it.

This year, I would be willing to move back from 1.01 for more first round picks just because I don't see the difference between the top and bottom as much as you do. I like Austin and Patterson as prospects. I'm not badmouthing them. I'm just saying I would be willing to take two of guys like Hunter, Wheaton, Woods, A. Brown, etc... at say 1.10 and 1.13 over Austin or Patterson.

Time will only tell how all these guys work out and hindsight is 20/20. Maybe Austin will be Percy or Patterson will be a stud. It wouldn't shock me (but I don't think he will be Percy). But it also wouldn't shock me if they both turn out to be average wrs as well. To me, this isn't one of those years where I have the 1.01 pick and feel like I'm getting a beast to build around.

So while I don't disagree with your thoughts on the people selected at 1.10 and 1.13 the last few years, I don't really compare it to the discussion at hand. To me, this discussion is about this year's draft, not a drafting philosophy.

Last year, I'm staying high and take TRich, D. Martin, D. Wilson, Luck or RG3. I wouldn't be moving from one of those picks to get Jeffery and Stephen Hill. Although I'll admit, I do like Jeffery but not over the guys mentioned above.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

I'm not saying I disagree with you going back over the years. There are definitely years where I wouldn't move from a top three pick. But I don't consider the top end of this draft equally with all the years before it.

This year, I would be willing to move back from 1.01 for more first round picks just because I don't see the difference between the top and bottom as much as you do. I like Austin and Patterson as prospects. I'm not badmouthing them. I'm just saying I would be willing to take two of guys like Hunter, Wheaton, Woods, A. Brown, etc... at say 1.10 and 1.13 over Austin or Patterson.

Time will only tell how all these guys work out and hindsight is 20/20. Maybe Austin will be Percy or Patterson will be a stud. It wouldn't shock me (but I don't think he will be Percy). But it also wouldn't shock me if they both turn out to be average wrs as well. To me, this isn't one of those years where I have the 1.01 pick and feel like I'm getting a beast to build around.

So while I don't disagree with your thoughts on the people selected at 1.10 and 1.13 the last few years, I don't really compare it to the discussion at hand. To me, this discussion is about this year's draft, not a drafting philosophy.

Last year, I'm staying high and take TRich, D. Martin, D. Wilson, Luck or RG3. I wouldn't be moving from one of those picks to get Jeffery and Stephen Hill. Although I'll admit, I do like Jeffery but not over the guys mentioned above.

Again, I'm being quoted out of context here. My point was specifically in reply to the notion that trading down would make sense for a bad team because they could fill more holes that way. Realistically, that's very unlikely. Sure, they'll be able to fill holes on a sheet of paper during the offseason, but in practice it's very unlikely they'll get good production out of both players.

Trading down to acquire more darts to throw at the wall isn't what I was referring to. As I mentioned, while I disagree with that approach this year, it's merely a difference in approach and there's nothing saying one way is better than the other. People just go way too far with the "filling out their lineup" concept, thinking that a name on a piece of paper magically does something. "Why would I draft just a running back when I have holes at RB and WR and could get both?" Well, even if you trade down and draft both, it's very unlikely that you're going to actually get both, at least in terms of production.

Stop applying NFL concepts that don't fit in FF to FF. The Ted Thompson analogy up above is kind of an example. Trading down in the NFL is a lot different than trading down in fantasy because role players and solid NFL backups have value in the NFL, whereas in fantasy they do not. If you take a WR a little later in the draft and he ends up being a good 4th option in passing situations and contributes on special teams then he helps your team. In fantasy, he's waiver trash. Likewise, it's a lot easier for NFL guys to acquire multitudes of picks when moving down. A trade into the early first might net three or four early picks. That doesn't happen in fantasy, and the dropoff from round to round occurs much quicker.

As an aside though, I do want to touch on something. This draft is not deep. Not deeper than normal, at least. People will tell you it is, but those people say the same thing every year. Every. Single. Year. People will always talk themselves into these late round WRs that go to teams that don't have several great WRs. There are tons of them every year, and the vast majority of them just disappear into obscurity. The next year rolls around and everyone has forgotten and is telling us how deep the new year's draft class is. Find me the last time someone said "man this year's draft class is really shallow". It doesn't happen.

I agree that this year is weaker at the top than a typical year but the extent is being grossly exaggerated. Those four RBs at the top are likely going to provide several good fantasy producers for years to come and a lot of people are passing up on a 50% shot to get one of them in favor of two 15% swings that probably won't have as much upside even if they do hit. Worse case scenario, you can always take the EBF approach. It's going to be very difficult for a guy like La'Veon Bell to have less value at this time next year than he does right now. If you don't like what you see, you'll likely be able to move him for a lot more than a mid second round magnetic dart that barely even sticks to the gameboard.

 

[moderated]

I'm not saying I disagree with you going back over the years. There are definitely years where I wouldn't move from a top three pick. But I don't consider the top end of this draft equally with all the years before it.

This year, I would be willing to move back from 1.01 for more first round picks just because I don't see the difference between the top and bottom as much as you do. I like Austin and Patterson as prospects. I'm not badmouthing them. I'm just saying I would be willing to take two of guys like Hunter, Wheaton, Woods, A. Brown, etc... at say 1.10 and 1.13 over Austin or Patterson.

Time will only tell how all these guys work out and hindsight is 20/20. Maybe Austin will be Percy or Patterson will be a stud. It wouldn't shock me (but I don't think he will be Percy). But it also wouldn't shock me if they both turn out to be average wrs as well. To me, this isn't one of those years where I have the 1.01 pick and feel like I'm getting a beast to build around.

So while I don't disagree with your thoughts on the people selected at 1.10 and 1.13 the last few years, I don't really compare it to the discussion at hand. To me, this discussion is about this year's draft, not a drafting philosophy.

Last year, I'm staying high and take TRich, D. Martin, D. Wilson, Luck or RG3. I wouldn't be moving from one of those picks to get Jeffery and Stephen Hill. Although I'll admit, I do like Jeffery but not over the guys mentioned above.

I agree that this year is weaker at the top than a typical year but the extent is being grossly exaggerated. Those four RBs at the top are likely going to provide several good fantasy producers for years to come and a lot of people are passing up on a 50% shot to get one of them in favor of two 15% swings that probably won't have as much upside even if they do hit. Worse case scenario, you can always take the EBF approach. It's going to be very difficult for a guy like La'Veon Bell to have less value at this time next year than he does right now. If you don't like what you see, you'll likely be able to move him for a lot more than a mid second round magnetic dart that barely even sticks to the gameboard.

But many believe that trading down from 1 to 6 or 7 that they are getting similar talent and are able to pick up another lottery ticket in the late 1st/early 2nd.

there is very little value difference between the 3 1st round WR's and the 2nd round RB's in a lot of peoples minds, i personally agree with those people.

Some are claiming austin/patterson/geo are in their own tier, many disagree with that and see no difference between them and the guys being picked in the 4-7 spots. If you're one of those people it would be foolish not to trade down and collect an extra late 1st or early 2nd.

 

[kurtrudder]

I would think that a FF expert like Sigmund Bloom would play in more challenging leagues. I couldn't get a trade like the first two done in my work league, much less a league with people who know what they are doing.

Even if you dont believe in any of the top few guys, trading them for the 1.07 and 2.07 is insane.

This is the same league that Sig tweeted about back in March saying it's his favourite salary cap/contract league. Mike Clay also used to play in this league until this season. Here is a link

FYI, Bloom hasn't made it to a Championship game as yet, playoffs first two seasons, 8-8 last year and missed the playoffs. I think it's plenty challenging.

 

[kurtrudder]

You all keep trading up, with my 1.05 and 1.06 (2 different leagues) I'll be perfectly happy to take a Bell/Ball/Lacy guy there and a quality receiver in the middle 2nd. I just hope Markus Wheaton is available in the middle 2nd.

Guys like Bloom have clarity, their top 3 are set in stone, they trust their eyes but many others don't see it that way. I just saw Bell and Ball go 1.01 & 1.02 in a super competitive league. This emphasises the point that this draft is seriously polarising people. You trust your draft board and stick to it. Like I said earlier, I would be happy with whoever made it to me at 1.07 or 1.08 so trading down into a sweet spot like that works for me. I don't necessarily think there is one right answer to all this, but I do feel like when all is said and done, we are going to end up with more FF busts coming out of the top 5 than ever before.

 

[wileytigers]

Been offered 1.5, 2.7 and either Maclin or Antonio Brown for 1.1

trade for the pick last year so my team isnt bad, targeting a RB though and can still get a good one at 1.5

 

[ghostguy123]

Been offered 1.5, 2.7 and either Maclin or Antonio Brown for 1.1

trade for the pick last year so my team isnt bad, targeting a RB though and can still get a good one at 1.5

I think its lopsided enough in your favor that you shouldnt even consider your needs

 

[cstu]

Been offered 1.5, 2.7 and either Maclin or Antonio Brown for 1.1

trade for the pick last year so my team isnt bad, targeting a RB though and can still get a good one at 1.5

I think its lopsided enough in your favor that you shouldnt even consider your needs

Correct.

 

[Adam Harstad]

You all keep trading up, with my 1.05 and 1.06 (2 different leagues) I'll be perfectly happy to take a Bell/Ball/Lacy guy there and a quality receiver in the middle 2nd. I just hope Markus Wheaton is available in the middle 2nd.

Guys like Bloom have clarity, their top 3 are set in stone, they trust their eyes but many others don't see it that way. I just saw Bell and Ball go 1.01 & 1.02 in a super competitive league. This emphasises the point that this draft is seriously polarising people. You trust your draft board and stick to it. Like I said earlier, I would be happy with whoever made it to me at 1.07 or 1.08 so trading down into a sweet spot like that works for me. I don't necessarily think there is one right answer to all this, but I do feel like when all is said and done, we are going to end up with more FF busts coming out of the top 5 than ever before.

This leads to a slight tangent, but one of the first lessons I learned in dynasty was trading to just outside of my target tier and figuring someone would fall. For instance, if I have a clear top 5 and I'm struggling to trade into a top 5 pick, I'll try targeting pick 1.06, instead. It's easy to spend so much time here in the offseason while everyone is painstakingly building a consensus and forget that this place can be a bit of an echo chamber, and in other echo chambers they're painstakingly building a completely different consensus. It's easy to say "man, I need a top 3 pick this year to get Austin/Patterson/Bernard", and then when the draft finally rolls around you see Bell, Ball, Lacy, and Hopkins go 1-4, meaning if you'd just stayed at the 1.05 you could have had your pick of the guys you wanted. Some years the consensus is more universal (for instance, Green/Julio/Ingram were almost always going in the top 3), but in years like this one, the fluidity at the top can be a pretty compelling argument for staying put.

 

[Christo]

Been offered 1.5, 2.7 and either Maclin or Antonio Brown for 1.1

trade for the pick last year so my team isnt bad, targeting a RB though and can still get a good one at 1.5

Why are you waiting?

 

[suttree]

You all keep trading up, with my 1.05 and 1.06 (2 different leagues) I'll be perfectly happy to take a Bell/Ball/Lacy guy there and a quality receiver in the middle 2nd. I just hope Markus Wheaton is available in the middle 2nd.

Guys like Bloom have clarity, their top 3 are set in stone, they trust their eyes but many others don't see it that way. I just saw Bell and Ball go 1.01 & 1.02 in a super competitive league. This emphasises the point that this draft is seriously polarising people. You trust your draft board and stick to it. Like I said earlier, I would be happy with whoever made it to me at 1.07 or 1.08 so trading down into a sweet spot like that works for me. I don't necessarily think there is one right answer to all this, but I do feel like when all is said and done, we are going to end up with more FF busts coming out of the top 5 than ever before.

This leads to a slight tangent, but one of the first lessons I learned in dynasty was trading to just outside of my target tier and figuring someone would fall. For instance, if I have a clear top 5 and I'm struggling to trade into a top 5 pick, I'll try targeting pick 1.06, instead. It's easy to spend so much time here in the offseason while everyone is painstakingly building a consensus and forget that this place can be a bit of an echo chamber, and in other echo chambers they're painstakingly building a completely different consensus. It's easy to say "man, I need a top 3 pick this year to get Austin/Patterson/Bernard", and then when the draft finally rolls around you see Bell, Ball, Lacy, and Hopkins go 1-4, meaning if you'd just stayed at the 1.05 you could have had your pick of the guys you wanted.Some years the consensus is more universal (for instance, Green/Julio/Ingram were almost always going in the top 3), but in years like this one, the fluidity at the top can be a pretty compelling argument for staying put.

You said that so well. Especially now, when the Shark Pool has already started to agree on rough tiers relatively early in the post-draft shake-out. I traded out of the 1.01 in a draft that began today; the guy I swapped with (who I play in several leagues with and have learned to respect quite a bit) took Lacy. Now, is that because he's using the mid-April consensus, or does a group of folks in some bizarro Shark Pool believe Lacy still looks like the top player, or has this guy just developed an idiosyncratic board? I dunno. But I know that at 1.04 I'm going to get one of my three tier 1 guys. But I pondered and pondered over dealing the 1.01, because I took for granted I was giving up those three if I did so.

 

[suttree]

i don't see the dez comparison. Dez was a very smooth college WR who plucked balls out of the air like nobody's business.

Patterson and Little were more raw athletes who didn't look near as natural as Dez in college and mainly relied on their freakish athletic ability.

Right. I'm just talking after catch. In college highlights, Little was a beast. Hasn't really translated.

I agree, that's why i'm worried about Pattersons game translating as he's going to run into the same issues as Little has.

In Patterson's favor he's faster, not as big (I believe Little's size is actually a hindrance) and is much more of a play maker.

cstu, could you elaborate on that? Little interests me. With the new regime in Cleveland, he may already be on a team that will use him correctly.

 

[cstu]

i don't see the dez comparison. Dez was a very smooth college WR who plucked balls out of the air like nobody's business.

Patterson and Little were more raw athletes who didn't look near as natural as Dez in college and mainly relied on their freakish athletic ability.

Right. I'm just talking after catch. In college highlights, Little was a beast. Hasn't really translated.

I agree, that's why i'm worried about Pattersons game translating as he's going to run into the same issues as Little has.

In Patterson's favor he's faster, not as big (I believe Little's size is actually a hindrance) and is much more of a play maker.

cstu, could you elaborate on that? Little interests me. With the new regime in Cleveland, he may already be on a team that will use him correctly.

That's from watching him play, especially his rookie year. He came in very big (231) for a 6-2.5" WR and I think it made his too sluggish off the line. Last year he supposedly lost 11 lbs., which would put him at 220. I think that's a much better weight and gives him a BMI of just under 28, just like Demaryius Thomas. This would be less of an issue if he was faster but he ran a 4.5 at 231 and should be able to run in the 4.4's if he's going to be a top receiver.

As for this year, I'm high on Little (as long as he can catch the ball of course). The offense is much more explosive now and they should be able to use Gordon on more patterns to open things up for him deep.

 

[Adam Harstad]

Really it should be very hard and expensive to get into the top 5. There is far more value in the top 5 than beyond in my opinion. You have better chance of hitting in this draft early than late. Laws of supply and demand. If you can get into the top 5 now, I suggest you do it now.

Who are your top 5?

 

[Adam Harstad]

Really it should be very hard and expensive to get into the top 5. There is far more value in the top 5 than beyond in my opinion. You have better chance of hitting in this draft early than late. Laws of supply and demand. If you can get into the top 5 now, I suggest you do it now.

Who are your top 5?

1. Austin2. Ball3. Bell.4. Patterson5. BernardiThis would be in a PPR. Standard 1 qb, 2 or 3rb, 2 wr/3wr, 1te, flex either rb, wr, or te.The order might change, but really this would be in my mind the 5 best rookies. Hopkins could sneak in and I think Bernardi could fall a bit. The Bengals like a 2 rb system and I could see him with the most bust potential out of the rookie running backs.Ball has the Bronco offense with age/ injury in front of him. Bell has the Pittsburgh commitment to him and not much in front of him. Patterson has AP drawing the defense in and they moved up to get him and would love to use him like Harvin in my opinion and Austin has the speed and offense that has a plan for him.I'm not high on Lacey or Franklin and trying to predict which one will end up with the job could be a head scratcher. Eifert??? How is Cincy going to use him??? Allen in San Diego could be okay, but what are you getting??? EJ Manuel in Buffalo??? When will EJ start and how is his accuracy??? Geno Smith in that disaster of that is the Jets??? I just have been looking at the rookie drafts and after 5, maybe 4 it's a crap shoot. I think,as far as hit percentage goes you have a better chance if your in the top 5. I do like EJ in the long term if your patient. I'm not. I can trade or pick up a qb faster than waiting for one. My own quirk there. It should cost a ton for teams to creep into the top 5 in my opinion.The late first and second is just horrible this year in my opinion.

I think that's a very reasonable top 5, but I don't think it means you have to trade into the top 5 to get one of them. In the majority of leagues, at least one of those 5 guys will still be available at pick #6 (usually because Lacy, Hopkins, or Eifert jumped up into the top 5). That's the point I was trying to get at. It's one thing to say "there are five prospects significantly better than the rest" and another to say "you need a top 5 pick". In my mind, there's a clear top 7 (your five plus Hopkins and Eifert), but in one of my leagues I own the #8 pick and am perfectly content with that, because I'm sure one of those seven will fall (likely because someone ahead of me grabbed Lacy).

 

[mjr]

Really it should be very hard and expensive to get into the top 5. There is far more value in the top 5 than beyond in my opinion. You have better chance of hitting in this draft early than late. Laws of supply and demand. If you can get into the top 5 now, I suggest you do it now.

I would go further and say top 2 or 3. Bell is the only guy in this draft I see being an every week contributer right out of the gates. I think Ball is a great pick, but I don't expect him to be the starter outside of injuries and/or absolutely dominant preseason play/practice. Zero doubt in my mind Patterson is going to need a few years of learning before he's an every week starter in FF. Tavon? Eh. I love watching him play; highlights make him look like he's the only guy on the field in fast forward, but I've been hearing hype on St. Louis WRs for years now and it never seems to come to fruitation. Giovani is another good pick I think, especially in PPR leagues, but he's not likely to be a 3 down back anytime soon either.

I had the 1.07, managed to turn that into the 1.04 and so far have failed to turn that into the 1.02, and even at 4th pick I still don't think I'm going to get any significant help with my lineup this year if Bell goes before that (which I expect him to. Guy picking 2nd needs RBs and already has 2 other PIT RBs on his roster). Guy picking 1.01 isn't letting go of it.