Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

****OFFICIAL 2021 IN- SEASON DYNASTY TRADES****


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, BigAl21 said:

I’ve been hunting for big fish the past few days before cut downs

Just landed another big time WR in FFPC

got AJ Brown

gave Evan Engram, Mike Williams, Juju, Gabe Davis

now I have to find some roster fillers for cheap before cut down but I’m happy with the deal

That's dumb

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BigAl21 said:

I’ve been hunting for big fish the past few days before cut downs

Just landed another big time WR in FFPC

got AJ Brown

gave Evan Engram, Mike Williams, Juju, Gabe Davis

now I have to find some roster fillers for cheap before cut down but I’m happy with the deal

The stud always wins. 4 quarters for a dollar, nice work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

Lordy - unless I’m desperate for Lawrence, gimme the Gibson/Campbell side. 

That makes me wonder if Team 2 couldn’t have just dealt that package for a good established QB. 

This is why I am gonna stay away from superflex.  I assumed this was hugely lopsided in favor of the #1 pick.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ghostguy123 said:

This is why I am gonna stay away from superflex.  I assumed this was hugely lopsided in favor of the #1 pick.

I mean, yes - that 1.01 is valuable, especially in superflex. Not saying Lawrence isn’t valuable. Draft calc favors the Gibson side slightly in SF, but I feel like that’s besides the point. 

The package offered is easily enough to get an established young QB. So unless one truly believes that Lawrence in JAX is the next Peyton Manning/Patrick Mahomes, why not just cut out the middle man & trade for the known quantity? 

Sometimes I think dynasty owners would rather have 2 in the bush over 1 in-hand, as the old expression goes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

I mean, yes - that 1.01 is valuable, especially in superflex. Not saying Lawrence isn’t valuable. Draft calc favors the Gibson side slightly in SF, but I feel like that’s besides the point. 

The package offered is easily enough to get an established young QB. So unless one truly believes that Lawrence in JAX is the next Peyton Manning/Patrick Mahomes, why not just cut out the middle man & trade for the known quantity? 

Sometimes I think dynasty owners would rather have 2 in the bush over 1 in-hand, as the old expression goes. 

Apparently I must also value Gibson lower than most.  

Does campbell have any real value?  I must be out of the loop

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, ghostguy123 said:

Apparently I must also value Gibson lower than most.  

Does campbell have any real value?  I must be out of the loop

Some, yes, but Gibson is the main guy in this deal. 

I’m also not as high on Gibson as many are. But he has an established value, so whatever my own value of him is becomes irrelevant. 

The only thing that is relevant is someone is dealing a top x running back for a QB.  And if we remove the allure of the sexy “can’t miss prospect” from the equation, it boils down to that. 

Personally I’d float that package to the league & see if I could get a more established young QB.

But that’s more a personal preference. I don’t like investing in the Jags, I’m not sure what Urban will be able to achieve there & I think you could likely get a more established player on a more proven team/offense for Gibson. :shrug: 

Edited by Hot Sauce Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, JoeJoe88 said:

Yeah I’ll take Lawrence here in SF, pretty easily. 

And if I’m trading the 1.01 in SF, I’ll need more than Gibson. I liked Campbell at one point but he’s nearly irrelevant to me now. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

I mean, yes - that 1.01 is valuable, especially in superflex. Not saying Lawrence isn’t valuable. Draft calc favors the Gibson side slightly in SF, but I feel like that’s besides the point. 

The package offered is easily enough to get an established young QB. So unless one truly believes that Lawrence in JAX is the next Peyton Manning/Patrick Mahomes, why not just cut out the middle man & trade for the known quantity? 

Sometimes I think dynasty owners would rather have 2 in the bush over 1 in-hand, as the old expression goes. 

Takes 2 to tango. Who do you think you can get for gibby/Campbell? Honestly that seems cheap for 1.01, no way that happens after the nfl draft imo. There’s a lot you can do with 1.01 other than take Lawrence. 
 

Who do you target with that package in SF though? NFL is a mix of old good qbs and a handful of good young qbs

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Snorkelson said:

Takes 2 to tango. Who do you think you can get for gibby/Campbell? Honestly that seems cheap for 1.01, no way that happens after the nfl draft imo. There’s a lot you can do with 1.01 other than take Lawrence. 
 

Who do you target with that package in SF though? NFL is a mix of old good qbs and a handful of good young qbs

Yeah it's probably easier to deal pick 1 for a good established QB than gibson and campbell

10 team league may be a factor I suppose

  • Thinking 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Snorkelson said:

Takes 2 to tango. Who do you think you can get for gibby/Campbell? Honestly that seems cheap for 1.01, no way that happens after the nfl draft imo. There’s a lot you can do with 1.01 other than take Lawrence. 
 

Who do you target with that package in SF though? NFL is a mix of old good qbs and a handful of good young qbs

Hard to say. I’m more a bird in the hand guy though & there are a lot of questions around JAX, a team I’m loathe to invest in. 

If there’s a Gibson fan in your league maybe you add a better player than Campbell & try for an even better QB. 

I’d rather have a QB in a better situation if I’m paying a starting RB + X for it. 

each to their own. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ghostguy123 said:

Yeah it's probably easier to deal pick 1 for a good established QB than gibson and campbell

10 team league may be a factor I suppose

You may could deal that package for a good established OLDER QB. But you’re not coming close to a Kyler or Josh Allen. And if you think Lawrence could be in their caliber, making that move for the 1.01 is a no brainer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ghostguy123 said:

Yeah it's probably easier to deal pick 1 for a good established QB than gibson and campbell

10 team league may be a factor I suppose

Ah, I missed that it was 10 team. I assumed 12. You are probably correct that it’s a factor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JoeJoe88 said:

You may could deal that package for a good established OLDER QB. But you’re not coming close to a Kyler or Josh Allen. And if you think Lawrence could be in their caliber, making that move for the 1.01 is a no brainer. 

But you could also add something other than Paris Campbell to go for a better younger quarterback. And you definitely touched on my point, which is that you have to believe. Thinking back on the history of the Jacksonville jaguars doesn’t doesn’t exactly bring “quarterback development“ to mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BigAl21 said:

I’ve been hunting for big fish the past few days before cut downs

Just landed another big time WR in FFPC

got AJ Brown

gave Evan Engram, Mike Williams, Juju, Gabe Davis

now I have to find some roster fillers for cheap before cut down but I’m happy with the deal

Good thing these trades are done via a computer, because I don't know how you would have been able to hide that look on your face.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

But you could also add something other than Paris Campbell to go for a better younger quarterback. And you definitely touched on my point, which is that you have to believe. Thinking back on the history of the Jacksonville jaguars doesn’t doesn’t exactly bring “quarterback development“ to mind.

True, but I’ll bet on Lawrence being on a different stratosphere talent-wise than the likes of Chad Henne, Blake Bortles and Gardner Minshew. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, JoeJoe88 said:

True, but I’ll bet on Lawrence being on a different stratosphere talent-wise than the likes of Chad Henne, Blake Bortles and Gardner Minshew. 

Team has a lot of holes, shaky OL and a coach who I’m not sure is well-suited to the NFL.

It could absolutely work out great and someone could end up with the next spectacular generational quarterback, but it’s not a lock.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

Team has a lot of holes, shaky OL and a coach who I’m not sure is well-suited to the NFL.

It could absolutely work out great and someone could end up with the next spectacular generational quarterback, but it’s not a lock.

Gibson could be worthless in a year or two for various reasons.   He is no lock.

Lawrence could tear his ACL three offseasons in a row and still have quite a bit of value.  

Obviously nobody is a lock, but Lawrence is pretty darn close to a lock for me in terms of being a capable QB.  He will also get running points.  

At 22 that is enormous value in superflex......at least I think it is.  I dont play superflex

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

I’d rather have the future 1st 100 times out of 100. 

Couldn't disagree more.

The point of draft picks, IMO, if to get talent on your squad you think will help you win. If you see an opportunity to do that a year really you should do it. It's not always about "maximizing value" of the pick and besides, there is no guarantee the kind of guy you hope you'll get will actually be there next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Andy Dufresne said:

Couldn't disagree more.

The point of draft picks, IMO, if to get talent on your squad you think will help you win. If you see an opportunity to do that a year really you should do it. It's not always about "maximizing value" of the pick and besides, there is no guarantee the kind of guy you hope you'll get will actually be there next year.

Give me the future 1st.

If you implore this strategy every chance you get, you will be better for it in the long run by far.  

I am cool with a slightly lesser chance to win in 2021 and 2022 if it means I have a better chance to win from 2023 till, well, forever

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, ghostguy123 said:

Give me the future 1st.

If you implore this strategy every chance you get, you will be better for it in the long run by far.  

I am cool with a slightly lesser chance to win in 2021 and 2022 if it means I have a better chance to win from 2023 till, well, forever

I'm not saying to always do it. I just disagree you never should.

It's better to do in-draft, I'll admit. Last year, Higgins and Aiyuk, for example, both made it to the 2nd round in a couple drafts I had. They'd definitely be worth a 2021 first - but I'm sure not everyone feels that way either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

Hard to say. I’m more a bird in the hand guy though & there are a lot of questions around JAX, a team I’m loathe to invest in. 

If there’s a Gibson fan in your league maybe you add a better player than Campbell & try for an even better QB. 

I’d rather have a QB in a better situation if I’m paying a starting RB + X for it. 

each to their own. 

X = almost nothing in that equation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

Some, yes, but Gibson is the main guy in this deal. 

 

No. Lawrence is the main piece in this deal and is worth more than Gibson. 1.01 Should get you Gibson plus more than Campbell. It's not bad by any means, but most SF players wouldn't take this unless they were loaded at QB. In which case they would be asking for more than Campbell to go with Gibson.

For reference, and with the caveat that I'm crazy, I paid Gibson plus my future 1st for R Wilson a few weeks ago. Who is going just after Lawrence in startups. Gibson about two rounds later.

 

2 hours ago, ghostguy123 said:

This is why I am gonna stay away from superflex.  I assumed this was hugely lopsided in favor of the #1 pick.

It is. Ok not huge but it is in favor of 1.01.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Andy Dufresne said:

Couldn't disagree more.

The point of draft picks, IMO, if to get talent on your squad you think will help you win. If you see an opportunity to do that a year really you should do it. It's not always about "maximizing value" of the pick and besides, there is no guarantee the kind of guy you hope you'll get will actually be there next year.

I think you mean in two years, not next year. Which IMO only strengthens your point and I agree I don't think it is crazy for the 2.01 this year. I'd need to feel really good about the board though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, barackdhouse said:

I think you mean in two years, not next year. Which IMO only strengthens your point and I agree I don't think it is crazy for the 2.01 this year. I'd need to feel really good about the board though.

I mean I have no idea what I'll get with my 2022 pick. So if I feel like I am getting a starter this year for a hypothetical next near then I'm open to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Andy Dufresne said:

I mean I have no idea what I'll get with my 2022 pick. So if I feel like I am getting a starter this year for a hypothetical next near then I'm open to it.

ok but what I'm saying is that the deal was for a 2023 pick not 2022

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Andy Dufresne said:

Couldn't disagree more.

The point of draft picks, IMO, if to get talent on your squad you think will help you win. If you see an opportunity to do that a year really you should do it. It's not always about "maximizing value" of the pick and besides, there is no guarantee the kind of guy you hope you'll get will actually be there next year.

That’s what makes the world go around. We can have different opinions about that.

I’ll happily deal my 2021 2nd for a 2022 1st, believing I’ll get superior talent by acquiring that future pick.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, barackdhouse said:

ok but what I'm saying is that the deal was for a 2023 pick not 2022

I’d still want the 2023 1st over a 2021 2nd, but it also depends a lot on what my team looks like now. 

for example, my team is a competing win-now team with 3 straight playoff appearances, but getting older in places.

If I feel like I’ll compete this year, then maybe next year I deal off aging assets for draft picks, do poorly & get good draft position and put a bunch of eggs into the 2023 draft hoping to restock with young talent. 

If I need a piece or two to win this year, I can see getting the 2nd now to get someone to help my team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ghostguy123 said:

Gibson could be worthless in a year or two for various reasons.   He is no lock.

Lawrence could tear his ACL three offseasons in a row and still have quite a bit of value.  

Obviously nobody is a lock, but Lawrence is pretty darn close to a lock for me in terms of being a capable QB.  He will also get running points.  

At 22 that is enormous value in superflex......at least I think it is.  I dont play superflex

All true. If you’re all-in on Lawrence & not a Gibson believer.

I am actually not a Gibson believer, but I’m saying I might go for a more proven asset in a package with Gibson if I needed a QB. 

But since it’s a 10-teamer, that changes values a lot, and also since I know nothing about the roster makeup of the team trying to obtain the 1.01 I’ll just leave it alone at this point. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

In response to someone questioning the value of Paris. Context matters. 

Yeah I read it twice now and I still don't read it the way you meant. I saw that they were questioning Parris but you said "Gibson is the main guy in this deal" not the main piece on one side of it. That is like taking the effort to tell someone that water is wet. Plus you've been arguing he is worth the most anyway. For the record I agree with you about the risk of Lawrence - I'd prefer a vet myself. But in terms of market value.....it is close enough to be fair but if Lawrence *isn't* a bust, his value will go up even higher. 

Mahomes is at 77 on the DTC scale. Top RBs are CMC/Taylor/Barkley at 49,47,46

That's just one calc and one metric. Anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

What about someone like Burrow?

If I have Burrow in SF I probably am relying on him and want to hold. But in terms of market I think it may be about right. Still a little light though for Burrow. The Campbell throw in might do it. I don't like him but I'm sure if I was the one making a deal I could find a secondary piece that I did like. And again if I had extra QBs (in SF the tendency is to actually have more stud RBs though) then yeah that's the kind of thing I'd try to do. But I'm not really a Gibson buyer now that he has broken out. Too expensive.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ghostguy123 said:

What is Lawrence ADP in superflex startups?

I did one last month he went 1.04 (I think that is a little early) right after Mahomes, Murray and Allen. 4 more QBs came off right after him before CMC at 1.09. In FFPC. His ADP though is 1.08 but that includes Watson who will undoubtedly fall pretty far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

All true. If you’re all-in on Lawrence & not a Gibson believer.

I am actually not a Gibson believer, but I’m saying I might go for a more proven asset in a package with Gibson if I needed a QB. 

I like Gibson but I do think that is the right approach. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, barackdhouse said:

I like Gibson but I do think that is the right approach. 

It’s so hard to discuss these in hypotheticals since we don’t know what the motivation of the teams involved are, too. Is it a rebuild, a retool, a team with 6 RB looking for a QB of the future, a ready to win team that needs a QB2 now - any/all of those factors can impact what someone is willing to pay to make the move.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, barackdhouse said:

Yeah I read it twice now and I still don't read it the way you meant.

I’m up at 4 on Sundays & posting from my market booth. Being articulate isn’t always possible before the coffee hits. :lol: 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

It’s so hard to discuss these in hypotheticals since we don’t know what the motivation of the teams involved are, too. Is it a rebuild, a retool, a team with 6 RB looking for a QB of the future, a ready to win team that needs a QB2 now - any/all of those factors can impact what someone is willing to pay to make the move.

yeah these deals don't exist inside an academic model or a vacuum. that truth gets lost too easily.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, barackdhouse said:

FFPC 1QB not involved

Team A gave Mixon, 1.11
Team B gage A Jones, 2.05

I might take the Mixon side there. I'm paranoid about his foot though.

I would take Mixon over Aaron Jones straight up so for sure with the pick bump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, barackdhouse said:

FFPC 1QB not involved

Team A gave Mixon, 1.11
Team B gage A Jones, 2.05

I might take the Mixon side there. I'm paranoid about his foot though.

I like Mixon and I’ve defended him several times before, despite never owning him in dynasty. I do, however, own Aaron Jones, and I would not make this swap in my league. So I have to roll with the AJ side. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Snorkelson said:

Here is a good lesson in fantasy relations. You could have responded with something snarky because 2.09/future 2 is a pretty bad offer, and that may have put the guy off. Sometimes a bad starting offer is simply that and keeping that door open is always a good idea. Even if someone bombards you with stupid offers year after year they’re bound to send something stupid you actually like.

I agree with this. Usually counter-offers don't work because the trade has to be one they have come up with. I have responded to bad trade offers with a counter and they usually just sit there with no response until they time out or I rescind them.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Gottabesweet changed the title to ****OFFICIAL 2021 IN- SEASON DYNASTY TRADES****

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
  • Create New...