SSOG said:
There's nothing wrong with trading Shonn Greene. Like you said, he's replaceable. There's something wrong with getting tunnel vision for a 32 year old RB and overpaying for him when there are other "win-now" RBs out there that will serve you just as well for a fraction of the cost (starting with Tomlinson and Thomas Jones). As I've been saying, if a last place owner has Ricky Williams, he's going to be a lot more motivated to sell than you should be to buy. You're bargaining from a position of power.
Fantasy football isn't a binary game- the question isn't "Ricky or no one". There are limitless possibilities. If one possibility doesn't represent value, then it's in your best interest to forget it and find another that does.
Boom. SSOG always gets it. I like to look at my dynasty rosters in terms of overall talent. What matters initially isn't so much the distribution of that overall talent, but the sum total. It's conceivable that drafting 18 QBs with your 18 picks in an 18 round dynasty startup could be the correct move. Why? Because rosters aren't locked. They're fluid. You don't need to draft a starting lineup. You can trade for one. You can convert those QB assets into WR/RB/TE assets, so there's really no need to take a value loss just to "fill a need."
To use a more reasonable example, let's say you're on the clock in the 8th round of a dynasty startup draft. So far you've taken 2 QBs, 1 RB, 3 WRs, and 1 TE. You badly need to plug your RB2 hole, but the only RBs left on the board are Stacey Mack and Troy Hambrick. Meanwhile you see a young QB named Tom Brady sitting there in the player pool. You're already stocked at QB, but you think Brady has superstar potential and you decide he's easily the best player left. Do you draft Hambrick over Brady simply to fill a need? Of course not. You take Brady knowing that you'll eventually be able to trade him for a RB much better than Hambrick or Mack.
This is a self-serving example because the RBs involved in this example both failed miserably and the QB turned out to be a Hall of Famer. When you're sitting on the clock in a draft you never know exactly how things will play out. You might have a strong hunch that Mack will bust, but maybe you also felt that way about Ahman Green. You might have a strong hunch that Brady will be a star, but maybe you felt that way about Tim Couch. You never really know how things will play out (even if you have strong suspicions).
The point of this tangent is that overall value considerations (rather than short term need) should drive most of your personnel decisions in dynasty leagues. Let's say you're sitting there with Shonn Greene at the bottom of a deep RB roster that includes 6 superior long term options. Meanwhile your starting WRs are Brian Finneran and Dwayne Jarrett. Someone offers you Michael Jenkins for Shonn Greene. Should you take this deal?
I would say no. Jenkins upgrades your starting lineup and increases your chances of winning the league, but Greene for Jenkins is a massive value dump. You could get a better value for Greene at some point now or in the future. Roster composition should certainly be a consideration in your decision making process because it partially determines a player's practical value, but overall value should still be the driving factor. He who compiles the most overall value on his dynasty roster wins because he can readily convert that overall value into practical value.
The main reason I don't like the Greene/Ricky trade is because I think it's a long term value dump. Yes, Ricky might have more practical value for the next month, but I don't think that excuses taking one in the pants. If I found myself in a similar situation I would try to balance the deal either by finding a younger RB to trade for or by insisting that the Ricky owner sandwich a 2nd round rookie pick into the deal in order to help offset the loss in long term value.
The point of this argument isn't that Shonn Greene is destined for stardom. The point is that (based on historical trends) he has something like a 30-35% chance of becoming a quality NFL starter. If you give that up for a player with a 80-90% chance of improving your team for the next 4-5 weeks, you're dumping long term value. Find a better deal or stand pat.