Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Dynasty Value Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Zyphros said:

Is Swift a sell?

They're going with Goff who isn't the worst, but that offense has almost 0 long term WR's signed (only Cephus), Goff is no stud, and new coaching staff. They're going to run the team into the ground before they compete in 2-3 years right? 

I'm in the opposite camp. I think this signals a move to the running game for Detroit. Goff doesn't have to be great. The wrs don't have to be great. Swift with a reasonable offseason, training camp and preseason is going to be special. He flashed that talent this season with an abbreviated intro to the NFL.  I see 1400 total yards as an achieveable target. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 12.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Tentative rookie RB/WR tiers after diving into clips and stats this weekend:   RB Josh Jacobs, Raiders - No major weaknesses and walks into a starting role. Power, hands, elusiveness, and e

That is interesting. As a Gordon owner here and there, I think I'd have jumped on that offer in any league I have him, without even looking at my own roster or that of the owner sending me the pick.

At first glance I agree, but then when I think about it I almost think the opposite.  If anything it's ridiculous that RBs are so ridiculously overvalued in 1qb leagues.  I love RBs having lots of val

On 1/30/2021 at 3:06 AM, northern exposure said:

What is Ronald Jones value in terms of 2021 rookie pick(s)? 12 tm non-ppr dynasty league. League is moving from being able to start 1RB (multiple flex spots) to mandatory start 2 RB in 2021.

Like last year, I'm holding through the draft. Once the draft came and went last year then the market shifted towards Vaughn I kept holding. I would have sold him in-season, but then I ended up needing him (he was either my 3 or 4 going into the season)...which is why the same thing will probably happen this season. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Zyphros said:

Is Swift a sell?

They're going with Goff who isn't the worst, but that offense has almost 0 long term WR's signed (only Cephus), Goff is no stud, and new coaching staff. They're going to run the team into the ground before they compete in 2-3 years right? 

His ceiling is capped in his age 22 season, but I would not suppress his value much v a month ago. We'll see what the market says, but if it over corrects I'll consider sending an offer for him.

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, InDitkaWeTrust said:

I'm in the opposite camp. I think this signals a move to the running game for Detroit. Goff doesn't have to be great. The wrs don't have to be great. Swift with a reasonable offseason, training camp and preseason is going to be special. He flashed that talent this season with an abbreviated intro to the NFL.  I see 1400 total yards as an achieveable target. 

Agree with this take. Even if Golladay walks, I imagine they’ll be using some FA money or draft capital for some key WR help. And as mentioned, Goff doesn’t have to be great. Akers was doing just fine with him, albeit with quality receivers to take pressure off.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, zamboni said:

Agree with this take. Even if Golladay walks, I imagine they’ll be using some FA money or draft capital for some key WR help. And as mentioned, Goff doesn’t have to be great. Akers was doing just fine with him, albeit with quality receivers to take pressure off.

I don't think Golladay ever intended to return, but this move makes it clear the front office won't pursue him. I agree about expecting a draft pick though- probably top 50 WR. Not so sure about FA.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, MAC_32 said:

I don't think Golladay ever intended to return, but this move makes it clear the front office won't pursue him. I agree about expecting a draft pick though- probably top 50 WR. Not so sure about FA.

I guess they could always franchise tag Golladay, although I can’t imagine he’d be too happy staying on after Stafford was sent packing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, zamboni said:

I guess they could always franchise tag Golladay, although I can’t imagine he’d be too happy staying on after Stafford was sent packing.

I don't think they will have the cap space to do that, but this Lions group doesn't intend to compete in '21 anyway and Golladay is starting to head down the age bell curve. He makes more sense somewhere else.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Swift was being valued as one of the top RB’s by his owners, I don’t see them coming off their price until we see what the Lions do and how their new offense looks given their moves. An ADP was posted of startups a few weeks ago and Swift was a 1st rounder, I just don’t see that as reasonable anymore. The coaching and GM hires and recent coach speak obviously point to a very nice volume and  floor for Swift which is what many will focus on but also points to a multi-year rebuild pushed back a year since they didn’t get any 2021 picks for Stafford.

 With that much money tied up in Goff and the dead cap hit from Stafford, I can’t see the Lions being players in FA this year. Assuming they spend a top 50 pick on a WR is a big assumption as well at this point as they are clearly thinking multi-year rebuild. This is likely good for volume for Swift and Hock with no one else to throw to. However the overall offense effectiveness is likely to be bottom rung for the next 2-3 years. That doesn’t mean Swift/Hock can’t be successful on a bad team but IMO it does mean their upside is greatly capped for the next 2-3 years at which point Swift will be 25 and looking for his next contract.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Buckna said:

Swift was being valued as one of the top RB’s by his owners, I don’t see them coming off their price until we see what the Lions do and how their new offense looks given their moves. An ADP was posted of startups a few weeks ago and Swift was a 1st rounder, I just don’t see that as reasonable anymore. The coaching and GM hires and recent coach speak obviously point to a very nice volume and  floor for Swift which is what many will focus on but also points to a multi-year rebuild pushed back a year since they didn’t get any 2021 picks for Stafford.

 With that much money tied up in Goff and the dead cap hit from Stafford, I can’t see the Lions being players in FA this year. Assuming they spend a top 50 pick on a WR is a big assumption as well at this point as they are clearly thinking multi-year rebuild. This is likely good for volume for Swift and Hock with no one else to throw to. However the overall offense effectiveness is likely to be bottom rung for the next 2-3 years. That doesn’t mean Swift/Hock can’t be successful on a bad team but IMO it does mean their upside is greatly capped for the next 2-3 years at which point Swift will be 25 and looking for his next contract.

I think they pick a top 50 WR cause this class is loaded.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, zamboni said:

I guess they could always franchise tag Golladay, although I can’t imagine he’d be too happy staying on after Stafford was sent packing.

If they’re rebuilding there’s no reason to use the tag on him - but who knows?

As to Swift, I don’t think he should lose any volume since he’ll be by far the best player on their offense, and there’s already been talk of using him in the slot. Goff is not a great QB but he’s likely better than most of the alternatives for the Lions once they were trading Stafford.

I can’t agree his ceiling is capped because the volume will be there. It will be a conservative offense, but not a terrible one that will be centered around Swift now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MAC_32 said:

I think they pick a top 50 WR cause this class is loaded.

It’s a definite possibility but I wouldn’t act as if it’s a certainty. Given it appears they are looking to tank for multiple seasons so I would guess they would mostly focus on BPA. At 7 that could be a Devonta Smith of Jaylen Waddle. I think they would also be extremely likely to trade down to get more picks for their rebuild.

One thing to keep in mind is the Lions had literally the worst defense in the league last year. Dead last in both Points Against and Yards Against, they were awful in both stopping the run and at defending the pass. They need a ton of help on the defensive side of the ball so their early picks could easily be spent on defense too.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Dr. Octopus said:

If they’re rebuilding there’s no reason to use the tag on him - but who knows?

As to Swift, I don’t think he should lose any volume since he’ll be by far the best player on their offense, and there’s already been talk of using him in the slot. Goff is not a great QB but he’s likely better than most of the alternatives for the Lions once they were trading Stafford.

I can’t agree his ceiling is capped because the volume will be there. It will be a conservative offense, but not a terrible one that will be centered around Swift now.

Fair points - they’re rebuilding and that may reduce the need to franchise Golladay. But then again, coaches and GMs also don’t have the luxury to wait and have to improve now. If they wait to add key players, it will end up to be the benefit of the next coaching/management regime.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Buckna said:

It’s a definite possibility but I wouldn’t act as if it’s a certainty. Given it appears they are looking to tank for multiple seasons so I would guess they would mostly focus on BPA. At 7 that could be a Devonta Smith of Jaylen Waddle. I think they would also be extremely likely to trade down to get more picks for their rebuild.

One thing to keep in mind is the Lions had literally the worst defense in the league last year. Dead last in both Points Against and Yards Against, they were awful in both stopping the run and at defending the pass. They need a ton of help on the defensive side of the ball so their early picks could easily be spent on defense too.

Few things:

*I don't expect a multi year tank

*If they are to draft a WR then I think age becomes more important. I.e. there may be a big difference from their perspective on a 20 year old Rondale Moore v a 22 year old Devonta Smith and that's before considering retail cost. 

*You're right about the defense, but I don't think it is high priority early in a rebuild. High end defenses have shorter shelf lives, so the pendulum should not swing towards it until the offense appears fixed. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, MAC_32 said:

Few things:

*I don't expect a multi year tank

*If they are to draft a WR then I think age becomes more important. I.e. there may be a big difference from their perspective on a 20 year old Rondale Moore v a 22 year old Devonta Smith and that's before considering retail cost. 

*You're right about the defense, but I don't think it is high priority early in a rebuild. High end defenses have shorter shelf lives, so the pendulum should not swing towards it until the offense appears fixed. 

Yeah, good point on the age item. At this point we don’t know what the Lions are thinking really. Which is one of the reasons I don’t think any current owners will come off their high price for Swift yet. There’s the possibility they replace Golladay with a top 50 pick, they may even draft a top QB this year at 7 to sit for a year behind Goff. A high volume offense for Swift looks likely but will it be James Robinson-esque where all the touches also leads to good results or will it be like what we saw with Zeke this past year with lots of touches and terrible efficiency? (Just a statistical example, not saying they are the exact same situation or players.) I know I wouldn’t spend a 1st in a startup on him at this time, way too much uncertainty IMO.

Edited by Buckna
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MAC_32 said:

His ceiling is capped in his age 22 season, but I would not suppress his value much v a month ago. We'll see what the market says, but if it over corrects I'll consider sending an offer for him.

Can you expound on this ceiling cap at age 22?  Relative newb to the boards here, although I've been a round ffl for a long time. I'd assume that given the circumstances of 2020 that MOST rookie's performance will increase more than  normal between season 1 and 2, age be damned. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, InDitkaWeTrust said:

I'm in the opposite camp. I think this signals a move to the running game for Detroit. Goff doesn't have to be great. The wrs don't have to be great. Swift with a reasonable offseason, training camp and preseason is going to be special. He flashed that talent this season with an abbreviated intro to the NFL.  I see 1400 total yards as an achieveable target. 

I don't disagree that Swift showed the talent to be special or that he can achieve a high output. I still view him very highly as a pure talent. My issue is if he will get the role we want him to have to be fantasy beastly? If that team is rebuilding the whole thing, which that's what it looks like, that's 2-3 years of it probably. He's a backend RB1 or a decent RB2 on a poor offense if that's the case, probably just due to volume. He's the only weapon worth a damn on that team (as of now). More focus from defense's and they're likely to not be up in games to give him the volume to run as much. Could be a boom to his receiving but I doubt it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, InDitkaWeTrust said:

Can you expound on this ceiling cap at age 22?  Relative newb to the boards here, although I've been a round ffl for a long time. I'd assume that given the circumstances of 2020 that MOST rookie's performance will increase more than  normal between season 1 and 2, age be damned. 

RB success has some correlation to the quality of team, especially the quality of the offense. Volume and independent skill still matters more, but it's something to consider. I'll try to remember next time I'm on my laptop to search for the supporting data I read about this last year. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/29/2021 at 1:27 PM, menobrown said:

I scanned that orphan list of teams in FFPC a few days ago (I've never bought one as of yet) and saw a ton of Zeke teams for sales so no surprise.

I can't recall the previous thread on Zeke he was discussed but obviously based on were I listed him here I got concerns. I'd add on more thought I think I'd put him on a tier by himself with Aaron Jones under him, but I still lower then most.

My concerns center on the obvious. I'm a believer that wear and tear is real and it's very real with combined with increasing age. And with Zeke it's not just an idea, it's combining that with what I saw and some stats that back it. Stuff like just 3 carries over 20 yards. Fact his only two games he went over 100 came when he did not play the week before(which could be argued allowed his injuries to improve).

Some will chalk it up to Dak being out and injuries impacting OL. I'll just add I can recall after week 3 of talking with a friend of mine about performance of top picks, how CMC, Barkley and Michael Thomas teams were hurting and I distinctly recall both of us saying that Zeke is performing well for fantasy and if you picked him you in top 3 you got no qualms about it right now but neither of us thought he looked very good. Looked sluggish and not in optimal shape to me. As Dak would later go down, OL issues cropped up and Zeke dealt with some injuries I just recall him being more of a compiler early in the year when those were not issues.

So I got those concerns. I looked up a few RB's career past similar age/usage as Elliot and some went on to have 2-3 big time seasons. LT being one. That seemed to generally be the max.

To me I look at it as you got a lot of excuses being made for Zeke. No Dak, OL, his injuries. Some or all of those excuses might have some level of validity. I absolutely think Zeke could rededicate himself to being in great shape and put forth a big time 2-3 seasons. But again that's pretty much the best case scenario.

So in summary for me I'd  go with a younger or at worse RB with less wear and tear over him instead of hoping the trifecta of excuses made for his poor showing prove to be valid. I would for sure be trying to move him right now instead of holding on hoping he rebounds especially when he seems to remain in high regard as evidenced by how high he continues to be ranked. 

I am uncertain as to whether things have shifted to the point where mid-20's are the new near-30 or if we just happen to be in a place where the guys that just recently passed their mid-20's simply weren't very good.

Remember most of the guys that just faded in their mid-20's came from that series of NFL RB classes where there was nary a good prospect to be found, where we were reaching for Bishop Sankey as the top RB off the board, and where dynasty startups had 19 of the first 21 picks off the board as WRs because there was such a dearth of young RB talent.

I think it's perfectly reasonable to conject that perhaps guys like Eddie Lacy, Devonta Freeman, and David Johnson were just never really that good to begin with.  The only real elite players that fell off in that age range recently both had outliers (Gurley with the degenerative knee and Le'Veon quitting football for a little while).  I guess Melvin Gordon is another but I've been vocal about my belief that he is not a particularly good football player even when he was putting up those monster fantasy stats on garbage efficiency at his peak in San Diego.

Prior to that terrible run of RB talent entering the NFL we had a ton of guys like Peterson, Lynch, Forte, Faulk, Gore, Edge, Alexander, McCoy, Foster, Tomlinson, SJax, and I'm sure others that I'm not thinking of off the top of my head for whom age 25 with a hefty workload was still a ways from the end.

To me guys like Elliott, CMC, etc that are currently entering that range don't seem like the Lacy/Freeman/DJ types who were pretty meh prospects that had really just 1 or 2 good years but didn't really seem like anything special as a player (DJ was a great receiver, but even at his peak he was a very average runner).  It's certainly possible that something has changed in the modern NFL that makes these guys fade ~3 years earlier than they used to but I'm not ready to jump on that with any certainty until I see what happens to this current crop that actually came into the NFL with these kind of expectations.

Edited by FreeBaGeL
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

We all know consolidating before FFPC cut downs is the goal. I have a handful of fringe guys and need to keep 1. The two I like the most are the two getting nibbles, albeit for crumbs, but my question is when we’re talking about guys that don’t hold much value from one to the next- do you move the slightly better tradable asset for dirt cheap and keep the next best thing so feel like you squeezed the most out of your roster before cut downs? 

Edited by BigAl21
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BigAl21 said:

We all know consolidating before FFPC cut downs is the goal. I have a handful of fringe guys and need to keep 1. The two I like the most are the two getting nibbles, albeit for crumbs, but my question is when we’re talking about guys that don’t hold much value from one to the next- do you move the slightly better tradable asset for dirt cheap and keep the next best thing so feel like you squeezed the most out of your roster before cut downs? 

It depends.....there is value to not making your opponents better.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Gally said:

It depends.....there is value to not making your opponents better.

FFPC

Right now I’m projecting to keep one of Penny, LeVeon, Gus, Cohen or Trautman

they all seem fairly interchangeable with Trautman being the most intriguing with upside type guy 

cohen and Trautman got nibbles

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, BigAl21 said:

FFPC

Right now I’m projecting to keep one of Penny, LeVeon, Gus, Cohen or Trautman

they all seem fairly interchangeable with Trautman being the most intriguing with upside type guy 

cohen and Trautman got nibbles

I have Trautman as well and plan on keeping him due to FFPC being TE Premiun as well as word that Cook might be on the way out of New Orleans. Can’t ignore that upside imo. 
and with uncertainty around Carson's return to Seattle, I think he might make the cut for me as well since at least there’s a path to being a starter. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, BigAl21 said:

FFPC

Right now I’m projecting to keep one of Penny, LeVeon, Gus, Cohen or Trautman

they all seem fairly interchangeable with Trautman being the most intriguing with upside type guy 

cohen and Trautman got nibbles

This is how I would rank them:

Trautman
Gus
Penny
Cohen
Le'Veon (el stinko)

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, BigAl21 said:

FFPC

Right now I’m projecting to keep one of Penny, LeVeon, Gus, Cohen or Trautman

they all seem fairly interchangeable with Trautman being the most intriguing with upside type guy 

cohen and Trautman got nibbles

I got a Penny, Bell, Cohen team and might cut them all so welcome to my world.

If your question was along the lines of you'd keep Cohen but someone will give you something for him and nothing for say Gus who you'd not otherwise keep does it make sense to just deal Cohen? If that's the question it depends what you are getting back. If it's like a 5th, then I'd just keep what I think is the best player, if it's like a solid third I'd start to consider trading.

For me personally as of right now  I put Trautman and Penny clearly ahead of the rest just because they at least have upside potential. I don't think the other's do, at least in theory. Cohen for example did have close to a 15 PPG season and Bell used to be great but at this stage I'm not seeing it for either.

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, BigAl21 said:

FFPC

Right now I’m projecting to keep one of Penny, LeVeon, Gus, Cohen or Trautman

they all seem fairly interchangeable with Trautman being the most intriguing with upside type guy 

cohen and Trautman got nibbles

I have some tough choices in FFPC leagues as well. But for yours specifically, I'd consider Cohen or Trautman. Cohen in FFPC is rather valuable for a competitor I'd say, just doesn't hold trade value. If you're looking towards the future and not quite competitive I'd keep Trautman here. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

We could have a whole thread related to tough FFPC cuts.  I'm a fantasy grinder. If you are posting and reading these boards right now you probably are as well. This means we are more likely to fill out the back end of our rosters better then most.

This along with examining superflex QB availability(which I've never played in before) got me thinking the other day if the FFPC format I mainly play is tailored to my strengths or worse for me? It's kind of complicated, wondered what others thought.

Take for example QB's. We had a thread recently were we ranked the top 7 QB's. I have 8 dynasty teams have at least one of them on every team, own 6 of the 7 in total, the one I don't own is Lamar who I drafted in the third and fourth round of drafts and cut him in one league and traded him in another.  Between the other 6 QB's I own Mahomes(3x), Kyler (3x), Watson (2x), Herbert(2x), and Dak and Allen once each. The highest draft capital I paid was 2.3 and most money I spent in FA for any of them was $71. This leads me to my though which was  went this was " I can find stud QB's on the cheap, if I took this skillset to SF it would be a boon". But would reality be that SF would be worse for me since these kind of QB's might never be so cheap and instead what I would lose is competitive advantage of one QB leagues were I've been able to acquire stud QB's so cheaply?  I think this is the more likely scenario.

And on roster space. I was thinking if I consistently am doing a better job filling out the back end of my roster would I not benefit by playing in leagues with larger roster spaces? Seems easy to think that way but the more I think about it maybe not because the larger roster spots would lead to less available FA's and make it more difficult for me to use FA to my advantage.

My thought right now is I'm playing in exactly the format I should be playing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You would probably lose your cheap qb edge and find a new cheap wr edge or similar. Also your qb makeup made me think of something else.

Would you or anyone sell high on Herbert? That would be my suggestion. I don't have him on any dynasty teams, but I worry that he is a tiny bit of fool's good right now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, IHEARTFF said:

You would probably lose your cheap qb edge and find a new cheap wr edge or similar. Also your qb makeup made me think of something else.

Would you or anyone sell high on Herbert? That would be my suggestion. I don't have him on any dynasty teams, but I worry that he is a tiny bit of fool's good right now.

Probably right on the bolded, I did not consider the QB's eating up extra roster space in SF.

On Herbert I would answer yes to wanting to trade him but I can't personally agree to the terminology of selling high as I think he's legit. But he's my QB2 on 14 max position player teams so yes I'd like to move him and if was my QB9 I'd be trying to move him regardless of who my QB1 was.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Concept Coop said:

How do you rank these guys: Pitts, Waller, Hockenson, Fant?

W  FHP

FHP are all pretty close for me, but I'll take the guys that have shown they can play in the league right now.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Concept Coop said:

How do you rank these guys: Pitts, Waller, Hockenson, Fant?

I know we are reading that Pitts might be the greatest TE since (fill in the blank) but man if you go back and look at the number of TEs taken in the first round over the last decade who either haven't broken out yet or never turned out more than average to solid it would make me pause about taking Pitts over Waller, Fant, and Hockenson. Some of those 1st round TEs are Kmet, Hurst, Henry, Maxx Williams, Ebron, Eifert, Fleener, Rudolph, and Gresham just going back 10 years.  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, ffmail4me said:

I know we are reading that Pitts might be the greatest TE since 

Yeah, but generational, man.

It seems like teams just can't stop tripping over themselves to pick a position in the first round where guys are easily replaceable and so hard to be scouted (see: Waller, Darren, who had drug problems but also practice squad ones).

Waller
Fant
Hockenson
Pitts

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, ffmail4me said:

I know we are reading that Pitts might be the greatest TE since (fill in the blank) but man if you go back and look at the number of TEs taken in the first round over the last decade who either haven't broken out yet or never turned out more than average to solid it would make me pause about taking Pitts over Waller, Fant, and Hockenson. Some of those 1st round TEs are Kmet, Hurst, Henry, Maxx Williams, Ebron, Eifert, Fleener, Rudolph, and Gresham just going back 10 years.  

You forgot OJ Howard too. The hype for him was crazy.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

TE is a peculiar position though in that it's almost universally really...average.

I guess I'd rather take the chance that Pitts is a home run hitter even if he's not than settle on a guy that bats .250.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Concept Coop said:

How do you rank these guys: Pitts, Waller, Hockenson, Fant?

My order is this

Tier2 - Waller

Tier3 - Pitts

Tier4 - Hockenson, Fant

The thing holding me back on Hockenson is that I didn't see as my dynamism when he had the ball in his hands. He was solid, getting better for sure, and arguably the top youth candidate to vault himself up into elite territory. It's very obvious when Waller/Kelce/Kittle have the ball in their hands that they can do almost anything they want. I failed to see that from Hockenson. I saw glimpses of it with Fant, but that offense was so bad. Hockenson showed a better floor so I favor him. But I feel the ceiling is higher with Fant. Anyways this is probably a Pitts question and he's so much better of a TE prospect than all of them he's the guy I want. I'd argue he's almost as good a WR as Chase is. He's absolutely elite already and a decent/willing blocker.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Andy Dufresne said:

TE is a peculiar position though in that it's almost universally really...average.

I guess I'd rather take the chance that Pitts is a home run hitter even if he's not than settle on a guy that bats .250.

I agree. I’d take Pitts over Fant and Hockenson. If the current versions of Hockenson and Fant are what I miss out on if I swing and miss on Pitts, I can live with that. I like the other two, so I understand the counter argument. But I do see a higher fantasy upside with Pitts. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Zyphros said:

My order is this

Tier2 - Waller

Tier3 - Pitts

Tier4 - Hockenson, Fant

The thing holding me back on Hockenson is that I didn't see as my dynamism when he had the ball in his hands. He was solid, getting better for sure, and arguably the top youth candidate to vault himself up into elite territory. It's very obvious when Waller/Kelce/Kittle have the ball in their hands that they can do almost anything they want. I failed to see that from Hockenson. I saw glimpses of it with Fant, but that offense was so bad. Hockenson showed a better floor so I favor him. But I feel the ceiling is higher with Fant. Anyways this is probably a Pitts question and he's so much better of a TE prospect than all of them he's the guy I want. I'd argue he's almost as good a WR as Chase is. He's absolutely elite already and a decent/willing blocker.

Pretty much my rankings and thoughts exactly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Concept Coop said:

I agree. I’d take Pitts over Fant and Hockenson. If the current versions of Hockenson and Fant are what I miss out on if I swing and miss on Pitts, I can live with that. I like the other two, so I understand the counter argument. But I do see a higher fantasy upside with Pitts. 

Same here and in many ways I could compare this discussion to a previous discussion of Josh Jacobs value compared to 1.1. They are similar because in both cases you know with the veteran players you have good players, but so far not great players or what I'd term as difference makers. If you think these players will become those things that's another subject but if you are inclined to think they won't be great or difference makers and you have a shot to take someone you think can be I'm taking that shot. I'll risk swinging and missing on a player I think is good for a chance at something great. I'll know I won't always hit 100% on these kind of deals, I also would know I don't need to remotely come close to that for it to work out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, menobrown said:

Same here and in many ways I could compare this discussion to a previous discussion of Josh Jacobs value compared to 1.1. They are similar because in both cases you know with the veteran players you have good players, but so far not great players or what I'd term as difference makers. If you think these players will become those things that's another subject but if you are inclined to think they won't be great or difference makers and you have a shot to take someone you think can be I'm taking that shot. I'll risk swinging and missing on a player I think is good for a chance at something great. I'll know I won't always hit 100% on these kind of deals, I also would know I don't need to remotely come close to that for it to work out.

I agree with you in principle, and do prefer the 1.01, but am pretty low on this RB class, relative to consensus. Outside of Harris, who probably would have been my RB3 or 4 in last year's class, I don't see a prospect I like more than I liked Jacobs. I don't see another back with an obviously higher ceiling.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Helaire-ious said:

Speaking of Waller, what would it take to get him in PPR? I have been trying & keep getting turned down with no counter. 1.09 + Golladay + Engram doesn't get it done... I'd rather not deal Goedert...

Waller owner's ears must have been burning. He just sent me an offer...His Waller, 2021 1.08 & 2021 3.03 for my Keenan Allen, Goedert & Golladay.

For me it breaks down to Waller for Allen, the 1.08 for Golladay & 3.03 for Goedert. I think that would be me paying too much. Especially when the Nuk owner tried to get Allen from me for him (Not straight up, though). I'd rather have Nuk if I'm moving Allen.

Edited by Helaire-ious
Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Helaire-ious said:

For me it breaks down to Waller for Allen, the 1.08 for Golladay & 3.03 for Goedert.

That's about right. I ran it through three calcs and haven't seen one of them even remotely close in your favor. It's pretty lopsided in favor of him, but you have to discount Golladay and Goedert a bit because nobody seems to be buying. But your breakdown of who for who or what for what seems accurate. Depends if you can negotiate something better for Goedert.

Edited by rockaction
This is the dyansty value thread. Never mind.
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, rockaction said:

That's about right. I ran it through three calcs and haven't seen one of them even remotely close in your favor. It's pretty lopsided in favor of him, but you have to discount Golladay and Goedert a bit because nobody seems to be buying. But your breakdown of who for who or what for what seems accurate. Depends if you can negotiate something better for Goedert.

I guess we shall see what he says.I'm ok with Golladay for 1.08, but maybe I'd do it now if he took Engram from me instead of Goedrt in his offer...

Link to post
Share on other sites

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...