Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

****OFFICIAL DYNASTY TRADES****


Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, Andy Dufresne said:

Bennett in the Packer offense versus fat Eddie? That's an easy one.

Green Bay TE Fantasy Points ranking for the last 7 years:

  • 2016 - 26
  • 2015 - 17
  • 2014 - 23
  • 2013 - 17
  • 2012 - 14
  • 2011 - 9
  • 2010 - 20

It is an easy one. I'd take Fat Eddie.  Aaron Rodgers is a great QB, but he hasn't put up great TE numbers in 7 years, that's not going to change now that they got Marty B. He only plays well in Sept. So, if I made this trade I'd trade Bennet away after the first 4 games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CabinFever said:

 

Seems dirt cheap when you look at the details of Lacy's contract. He was brought in to be the starter

I agree Lacy was likely brought in to be the starter but it's not like he's without risk (weight, bad o-line) or competition (Rawls, Prosise, Collins). Bennett has been a very productive TE and Green Bay was an excellent landing spot. I see this as pretty close.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, steelers1080 said:

Green Bay TE Fantasy Points ranking for the last 7 years:

  • 2016 - 26
  • 2015 - 17
  • 2014 - 23
  • 2013 - 17
  • 2012 - 14
  • 2011 - 9
  • 2010 - 20

It is an easy one. I'd take Fat Eddie.  Aaron Rodgers is a great QB, but he hasn't put up great TE numbers in 7 years, that's not going to change now that they got Marty B. He only plays well in Sept. So, if I made this trade I'd trade Bennet away after the first 4 games.

You kind of have to look at who the TEs were during those years. Cook looked good in the second half of the season when he was healthy and Marty B >>> Cook.

Top TEs by season:

2016 - Rodgers/Cook

2015 - Rodgers

2014 - Quarless

2013 - Quarless/ Finley (played in 6 games)

2012 - Finley

2011 -Finley

2010 - Quarless/Finley (played in 5 games)

So when Finely was healthy those rankings look ok - would you throw to Andrew Quarless or Richard Rodgers a lot? I don't see how these numbers are relevant. Bennett is a top 5 talent at the position.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, steelers1080 said:

Green Bay TE Fantasy Points ranking for the last 7 years:

  • 2016 - 26
  • 2015 - 17
  • 2014 - 23
  • 2013 - 17
  • 2012 - 14
  • 2011 - 9
  • 2010 - 20

It is an easy one. I'd take Fat Eddie.  Aaron Rodgers is a great QB, but he hasn't put up great TE numbers in 7 years, that's not going to change now that they got Marty B. He only plays well in Sept. So, if I made this trade I'd trade Bennet away after the first 4 games.

I'd say those numbers are more indicative of the talent at the position than the featured use. 

Of course,  I'd take a bologna sandwich over Lacy...and I think Lacy would too. And I hate bologna. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Dr. Octopus said:

You kind of have to look at who the TEs were during those years. Cook looked good in the second half of the season when he was healthy and Marty B >>> Cook.

Top TEs by season:

2016 - Rodgers/Cook

2015 - Rodgers

2014 - Quarless

2013 - Quarless/ Finley (played in 6 games)

2012 - Finley

2011 -Finley

2010 - Quarless/Finley (played in 5 games)

So when Finely was healthy those rankings look ok - would you throw to Andrew Quarless or Richard Rodgers a lot? I don't see how these numbers are relevant. Bennett is a top 5 talent at the position.

 

Como se what???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, jeaton6 said:

Como se what???

He's surely a talent. Not sure why that's a controversial statement. I suppose I could have added the word "arguably".

He's a bit of a head case, but anywhere he's been featured, he's been highly productive and I'd have a hard time coming up with a list of more "talented" tight ends:

Gronk

Reed

and then the list gets debateable after that imo (Kelce, Eifert...). Situation dictates production in addition to talent.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, slackjawedyokel said:

12 Team PPR IDP

Team A received 1.03

Team B received 1.09, 2.06, 2.10

 

 

:X

22 minutes ago, Dr. Octopus said:

He's surely a talent. Not sure why that's a controversial statement. I suppose I could have added the word "arguably".

He's a bit of a head case, but anywhere he's been featured, he's been highly productive and I'd have a hard time coming up with a list of more "talented" tight ends:

Gronk

Reed

and then the list gets debateable after that imo (Kelce, Eifert...). Situation dictates production in addition to talent.

 

If we're talking pure talent...

Gronk

Reed

Kelce

Graham

Henry

Eifert

Olsen

Ebron

Ertz

Howard

Rudolph

Frankly, I don't think Bennett is any more talented than Jared Cook.  Cook hasn't put it together, but Bennett really only did for one year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, -OZ- said:

:X

If we're talking pure talent...

Gronk

Reed

Kelce

Graham

Henry

Eifert

Olsen

Ebron

Ertz

Howard

Rudolph

Frankly, I don't think Bennett is any more talented than Jared Cook.  Cook hasn't put it together, but Bennett really only did for one year. 

Let's just say I strongly disagree with a lot of players on that list. I should have put Graham clearly ahead of him before though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is anyone worried about Lance Kendricks hurting Bennett's value? Kendricks put up 50-499 in a horrible Rams passing offense last year (Bennett had 55-701 with the Pats) and is more of a flex/receiving TE. With the Packers talking about using more two TE sets, it could mean Bennett blocks more while Kendricks gets more routes.

Maybe I'm way off base, but I could see this Packers TE fantasy production being something like a 60/40 split in favor of Bennett and not the 90% type numbers that many seem to expect. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Dr. Octopus said:

I agree Lacy was likely brought in to be the starter

I don't but most of all don't agree that he's the starter based on his contract. I think they genuinely like Rawls and the things Prosise can do but both have struggled to stay on the field.  I think Lacy was brought in to compete and be in the mix,  not walking in as the starter.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Dr. Octopus said:

Let's just say I strongly disagree with a lot of players on that list. I should have put Graham clearly ahead of him before though.

This might not be the best thread for the discussion but I'd like to hear more about the strong disagreement with most of those guys. I don't think very highly of Benett so that might be part of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Fish said:

FFPC......not involved.

 

Team A gets               Eifert + Ingram

Team B gets               Kelce + 3.12

I own Eifert a few places in FFPC and he's awfully frustrating with his injuries so I can see basically using Ingram as the chip to get a similar productive TE but one is usually always available. I honestly have him on one  FFPC team and sometimes I mentally think about my roster without staring at it and I think of my TE situation as it relates to team need and a few times I've actually forgot he was on the team.

In general trade seems even to me but depends on team makeup. I'd only give away Ingram to turn Eifert into Kelce if I could spare a RB but if i could I'd do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Dan Hindery said:

Is anyone worried about Lance Kendricks hurting Bennett's value? Kendricks put up 50-499 in a horrible Rams passing offense last year (Bennett had 55-701 with the Pats) and is more of a flex/receiving TE. With the Packers talking about using more two TE sets, it could mean Bennett blocks more while Kendricks gets more routes.

Maybe I'm way off base, but I could see this Packers TE fantasy production being something like a 60/40 split in favor of Bennett and not the 90% type numbers that many seem to expect. 

I'm not that worried because I honestly don't think Bennett has much value either way. I doubt all 3 TEs get much more than 120 targets. Bennett will probably lead the way with 70. Personally I see his upside as 50/550/5.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Dan Hindery said:

Is anyone worried about Lance Kendricks hurting Bennett's value? Kendricks put up 50-499 in a horrible Rams passing offense last year (Bennett had 55-701 with the Pats) and is more of a flex/receiving TE. With the Packers talking about using more two TE sets, it could mean Bennett blocks more while Kendricks gets more routes.

Maybe I'm way off base, but I could see this Packers TE fantasy production being something like a 60/40 split in favor of Bennett and not the 90% type numbers that many seem to expect. 

Personally, I'm not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dr. Octopus said:

He's surely a talent. Not sure why that's a controversial statement. I suppose I could have added the word "arguably".

He's a bit of a head case, but anywhere he's been featured, he's been highly productive and I'd have a hard time coming up with a list of more "talented" tight ends:

Gronk

Reed

and then the list gets debateable after that imo (Kelce, Eifert...). Situation dictates production in addition to talent.

 

You said "he's a top 5 talent". Big difference between that and "he's surely a talent". He's not in the same class as guys you're saying are debatable. Eifert, Kelce, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see Bennet as fairly overrated and Lacy as underrated. Also, Lacy is 26 and Bennet is 30.  

I'm not sure Lacy is the lead back in Seattle, but it's also a 1-year deal.  He's overweight, but he was still able to produce. Lacy has had 2 ankle injuries, 4 years apart, 2 concussions, and a groin pull. In 4 years in the NFL at a tough position.  I don't see where the injury prone tag is coming from.  Being fat doesn't cause a high ankle sprain requiring surgery.  It's not like he's pulling hamstrings or something that's conditioning related *cough* Beckham *cough*.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, -OZ- said:

This might not be the best thread for the discussion but I'd like to hear more about the strong disagreement with most of those guys. I don't think very highly of Benett so that might be part of it.

Without mucking up the thread too much, I'll just say that perhaps I'm conflating "athleticism" with "talent" and you're conflating "good situations/production" with "talent". The answer is probably somewhere in the middle. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jeaton6 said:

You said "he's a top 5 talent". Big difference between that and "he's surely a talent". He's not in the same class as guys you're saying are debatable. Eifert, Kelce, etc.

Apparently "debatable" is a concept you are not familiar with.

If Bennett was on the Chiefs, he'd put up Kelce numbers - and that's not a slam on Kelce, I'd buy the argument that he's the better receiver.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Dr. Octopus said:

Apparently "debatable" is a concept you are not familiar with.

If Bennett was on the Chiefs, he'd put up Kelce numbers - and that's not a slam on Kelce, I'd buy the argument that he's the better receiver.

If Kelce was on the Pats he would have blown away the numbers Bennett put up.  Bennett won't end the year as a top 8 TE imo.  After the year I'll come back for some humble pie if necessary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, steelers1080 said:

If Kelce was on the Pats he would have blown away the numbers Bennett put up.  Bennett won't end the year as a top 8 TE imo.  After the year I'll come back for some humble pie if necessary.

Bennett had 55 catches for 701 yards and 7 TDs played through lower leg injuries all last season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dr. Octopus said:

Without mucking up the thread too much, I'll just say that perhaps I'm conflating "athleticism" with "talent" and you're conflating "good situations/production" with "talent". The answer is probably somewhere in the middle. 

No, I have Ebron on my list.  I'm talking raw talent.  Benett is probably more talented than I give him credit, but I even for pure, raw talent he's not that great. 

More important, he sure hasn't produced in his (almost) decade in the league. Nor has he been able to stick with a team.  Can't blame him for leaving Dallas but the Giants and bears weren't in a position to lose very talented players and the pats chose to trade a rival for dwayne allen instead of signing Bennett to stay.  Granted, Allen is a better blocker so that might be part of it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, slackjawedyokel said:

12 Team PPR IDP

Team A received 1.03

Team B received 1.09, 2.06, 2.10

 

 

 

17 hours ago, CabinFever said:

Robbery to get 1.3 at that price 

Last year everyone thought that the top 4 picks were the cream of the crop. Last year this trade might have netted the guy with 1.3 Treadwell meanwhile the guy with 1.9, 2.06 and 2.10 might have landed Michael Thomas at 9 and Howard with one of those 2nds and then what ?

You really just never know.  Thomas went pick 9 or 10 in multiple of my rookie drafts last year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dez said:

 

Last year everyone thought that the top 4 picks were the cream of the crop. Last year this trade might have netted the guy with 1.3 Treadwell meanwhile the guy with 1.9, 2.06 and 2.10 might have landed Michael Thomas at 9 and Howard with one of those 2nds and then what ?

You really just never know.  Thomas went pick 9 or 10 in multiple of my rookie drafts last year.

While that is anecdotally true I suspect systematically trading, say the last dozen 1.3s for the last dozen 1.9s and 2.6s would be a losing proposition...

Just like the NFL.  Even though there are high profile first round busts and surprise late round stars, the odds of hitting on a first round prospect are much much better than hitting on a late rounder.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dr. Octopus said:

Apparently "debatable" is a concept you are not familiar with.

If Bennett was on the Chiefs, he'd put up Kelce numbers - and that's not a slam on Kelce, I'd buy the argument that he's the better receiver.

Oooh nice comeback. Look, just because your now backtracking on what you said there's no need to get saucy. . 

If, if, if...Bennett had his chance with Gronk out. What did he put up in a very TE friendly offense when Gronk was out? 22/303/4 in 8 games on a whopping 32 targets. 1 game was 5/114/1. He was much better when he had Gronk opening the field up for him. When he had to be the guy, he didn't deliver. But, but, but..,.he had to stay in and block more..right? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dez said:

 

Last year everyone thought that the top 4 picks were the cream of the crop. Last year this trade might have netted the guy with 1.3 Treadwell meanwhile the guy with 1.9, 2.06 and 2.10 might have landed Michael Thomas at 9 and Howard with one of those 2nds and then what ?

You really just never know.  Thomas went pick 9 or 10 in multiple of my rookie drafts last year.

So you're saying you would trade 1.03 for 1.09 and a couple seconds?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Andy Dufresne said:
1 hour ago, mcintyre1 said:

2.06

For

Tyler Higbee

Higbee bigly.

Lol

I like higbee enough to make the trade if I need a TE but it's really close.  Idp I'd keep the pick but understand either way. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Borden said:

Carlos Hyde and pick 4.04

for

2018 1st and 2018 2nd

Edit: I am not either of these teams.

I think I'd take Hyde, unless the pick was pretty early, I want to give Hyde one more chance in a decent offense with a good coach to see what he can do.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Joe Bryant changed the title to ****OFFICIAL DYNASTY TRADES****
  • Joe Bryant locked and unlocked this topic

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...