Biabreakable
Footballguy
Dead Horse mode: Barkley is being very over valued right now.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Dynasty Value Discussion Thread (13 Viewers)
- Thread starter spider321
- Start date
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
Generally year N+2 is even worse, by a WHOLE lot actually. Like, almost every one of these guys was terrible two years later.
Here is their dropoff from year N1 (2000+ yard season) to N2 (two years later). Calculated via (1 - (N2 / N1)) * 100. For instance LT2 scored 474pts in year N1, and 277 in year N2, so (1-(277/474))*100 = 41% decline.
Marshall Faulk: -5% (5% increase)
Larry Johnson: 65%
Ladainian Tomlinson: 41%
Shaun Alexander: 67%
Deangelo Williams: 81%
Jamaal Charles: 72%
OJ Simpson: 63%
Ray Rice: 52%
Adrian Peterson: 97%
Earl Campbell: 66%
Ricky Williams: 63%
Edgerrin James: 47%
Shady McCoy: 46%
Brian Westbrook: 78%
So yeah, 25% dropoff from that big season in year N+2 looks pretty darn rosy. Of these 14 guys only one (Faulk) reached that number. Not only that, Faulk was the only one to even finish with less than a 40% decline in year N+2, much less 25%. I'll say again, 13 out of 14 (93%) declined by more than 25% (actually by more than FORTY percent).
Now obviously the study isn't perfect. A lot of these guys just happened to get injured in year N+2 which is why you see some of the really big declines like Peterson's 97% (got hurt in the first game of year N+2). I will note however that in every one of these cases, the player was already way off the pace in year N+2 and also never again in their career approached their year N numbers. Peterson was the closest as he had a single season with "only" a 25% decline later, but no one else had any others that even came close. For example DeAngelo Williams got hurt in the season two years after his 2000/20 season so the 81% decline is exaggerated, but he never came even close to 2000/20 again for the entire rest of his career anyway.
Additionally there were several guys (Faulk, LT2, Edge) that had multiple 2000+ yard seasons in their career. In that case I simply chose the best season for year N which may or may not have been the best way to approach it, since it is possible (though very unlikely) DJ will have another season better than 2016. Regardless, even in those cases (other than Faulk) those guys saw reasonable dropoffs in the N+2 from their other 2000 yard season as well.
So even if we fudge the numbers a bit to try and make things look as nice as possible we're looking at Faulk, LT2, and Edge out of that list of 14 that would still retain elite fantasy value from this point in their careers on. 11 out of 14 were completely done as elite fantasy players and 10 out of 14 were complete disasters that would never again put up a RB1 season, in many cases never even coming close to it.
So yeah, if I end up not trading DJ this offseason and he ends up declining by only 25% I will be a pretty happy camper and I stand by my notion that a "massive" 25% dropoff from his 2016 numbers would be a borderline best case scenario, not a worst case one.
Thanks for actually providing substance, certainly much better than "I'm guessing...".
It's not that I'm overlooking that necessarily, it's more that I don't find it particularly compelling when you peel away the onion. I believe the only one of them to have such a huge season this early in their career was Edge, and he followed it up with an even better season. I'm pretty sure Larry Johnson's repeat season actually came after the coaching change (and they lost their starting QB for 1/2 the season to injury in week 1). Shawn Alexander had 1866/20 prior to his 1958/28, I'd count that as a repeat, and that was at the tail end of 5 consecutive seasons of 1600+/16+. He's on the plus side of the "can superb fantasy performance be repeated" ledger IMO.
Another consideration is that not many of those monster seasons came on fewer than 300 carries. We know of the correlation between an excessive number of carries and drop off, perhaps that's the bigger driving force than 2000/20 (or whatever fantasy scoring threshold you want to use)? Very often carries and FF performance go hand in hand, but not so much in this case.
Also, how many of those guys had essentially the entire next year to recoup after their big season? How many were playing for their one and only big contract the next year? How many did so with remarkable consistency- he holds the record for consecutive 100+ yfs games in a season while only 3 players in NFL history have scored more TDs in their first 31 games (2 HOF's and the 3rd is Edge, meanwhile DJ wasn't even the starter for his first 11 games)?
In any event, while a drop off that large happened more times than not in the past, obviously there were times where it didn't, and I think this combination of early career performance, consistency, motivation, and very low overall and recent workload is basically unprecedented. Still very likely to be a drop off, but IMO those factors will help cushion the blow. This really only pertains to next season as well, a smaller percentage of those examples you listed were "by far an outlier year" in their respective careers.
Good talk.
RamblinIrish
Footballguy
Here's something for everyone to weigh in on in regards to dynasty value.
Our dynasty league is expanding this year.
I am only able to protect 2 of my 3 QBs.
My QBs are Brady, Stafford, and Garoppolo.
I'm leaning to Garoppolo being one of them as he is the youngest.
I feel the choice comes down to Stafford or Brady being the 2nd one to protect.
I have leaned heavily toward Stafford until recently. Talk me either back from the cliff or take the dive and run to the end with Brady.
Our dynasty league is expanding this year.
I am only able to protect 2 of my 3 QBs.
My QBs are Brady, Stafford, and Garoppolo.
I'm leaning to Garoppolo being one of them as he is the youngest.
I feel the choice comes down to Stafford or Brady being the 2nd one to protect.
I have leaned heavily toward Stafford until recently. Talk me either back from the cliff or take the dive and run to the end with Brady.
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
Stafford and Garoppolo for me. Brady really faded down the stretch. I like Garoppolo's upside and Stafford's safety long-term should Garoppolo not pan out.
Craig_MiamiFL
Footballguy
Would definitely keep Garoppolo. Understand it's the minority opinion but firmly believe he's in the Top 5 QBs.
Tough choice between Stafford and Brady. I'd go with father time/history and keep Stafford.
Last edited by a moderator:
EBF
Footballguy
Barkley is coming in with massive hype and a great skill set. If he has even a Trent Richardson type of rookie year, he's a top 5 startup pick a year from today.
So to me, he's not overvalued. He is one of the best players you could get if you were building a roster from scratch.
You basically get a free pass to evaluate him during his rookie season and if for some reason you're not sold, you cash out and trade for almost anyone.
So to me, he's not overvalued. He is one of the best players you could get if you were building a roster from scratch.
You basically get a free pass to evaluate him during his rookie season and if for some reason you're not sold, you cash out and trade for almost anyone.
Last edited by a moderator:
-OZ-
Footballguy
Jimmy for sure. I'm not ready to draft him top 5 but wouldn't argue too much against it.
If you're prioritizing a run in 18, keep Brady. Otherwise Stafford.
This is sound advice imo.
Also, regardless of whether or not you go with this growing consensus, consider trying to shop the player you decide to cut. Never know when someone might by Brady from you and make youneven happier with your choice.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
I think what he's saying is that everyone already expects a fairly significant drop off in his production or he would still easily be ranked as the top dynasty back as to now he's sitting in the 6-10 range. His risks and expected "normalization" are already built into his price, thus hes not over-ranked as was the original claim. As some one that has him ranked as RB6 (and havent added any of the rookies yet), I would agree with that. If I thought he'd even have one more season close to last year I'd rank him higher. I just do not expect him to be so bad that the best he can do in 2019 is be Duke Johnson - that's the more extreme position than having him top 5 imo.
Interesting stuff FB. Guess we get to Gurley put this to the test next year (2000/19).
Do we need to think about this for his current sky high value?
Last edited by a moderator:
fruity pebbles
Footballguy
-OZ-
Footballguy
Snorkelson
Footballguy
I suppose yes value would dictate you take the deal, but I see Dj as DeMarco Murray- he had his elite season, and he may turn in a couple more decent ones, but I don’t think he will be in the elite tier of rb in another year or two. There is some good talent in this draft class rb wise with the tier break at about the 1.04 at the moment (with a lot of unknowns) that could give you the same production over the next couple years. At this point in the offseason with no qb, no coach, no wr depth, an oline that needs something else, coming off an injury, he is a high risk/high reward short term player imo. Unless I’m ready to make a run immediately I’m not sure I want DJ.ghostguy123 said:
Definately good points on many sides, many sides, here. Thanks to those who post actual data to offset my random thoughts.
Trust your gut instinct on this one. Easily Stafford and Garoppolo to me. Stafford is 11 years younger and finished QB6 while Brady finished QB2. You're gaining a lot of youth at a very small price - if Brady even keeps that pace up at age 41. Speaking of pace, Stafford actually outscored Brady in the 2nd half of the season. His HC is up in the air right now, so we don't know if he'll have the same OC, but he's had a few over the years and his past 7 finishes have been 5, 9, 4, 15, 8, 7, 6. Also, all of his offensive pieces will be returning, including the OL. Most notable offensive FA is his backup TE: http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/free-agents/detroit-lions/
wah wah wah... but lo and behold, I was spot on and your 25% drop off was proven ridiculously optimistic.
I should've said, "glancing at the numbers but without doing the math it certainly appears..." and then maybe you'd have cried less.
Last edited by a moderator:
fruity pebbles
Footballguy
Sorry I was unclear.
I would take Gurley for 1.01.
If I held the 1.01 I would reject Mixon, 1.05, and 1.10 for the pick.
I would accept, holding the 1.01, an offer of Fournette and Davis.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
The team retained Jim Bob Cooter even after firing Caldwell - but it is possible that the new coach brings in his own OC (as you imply). However from what I read Matt Patricia will be announced as the new HC right after the Pats' season ends. Since he's a defensive guy he just may feel like the continuity on offense would be a big help to him. The way JBC has Stafford playing, I would certainly keep him on board.
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah, thanks for clarifying. I was aware of that, but didn't want to get too lengthy. I've got a fair amount of Detroit shares in dynasty leagues, so I am kind of high on them (possible bias), however, I think Stafford's history and age should be enough to justify keeping him over Brady at this point in their careers.
Given a package of say the 1.03, 1.08, and 1.09 draft picks, what players are you NOT moving for that package? I’m guessing that isn’t enough to move the needle for Gurley, Zeke, OBJ, and Hopkins but beyond that I think everyone else would be in play. Am I on the mark in that valuation?
NeverEnough
Footballguy
Andy Dufresne
Footballguy
I just had an offer of 1.06/2.02/Diggs for 1.1 rejected in a non-ppr dynasty.
Kind of relieved it was, actually. And with no counter offer I know I don't have to bother wondering about it.
Kind of relieved it was, actually. And with no counter offer I know I don't have to bother wondering about it.
fruity pebbles
Footballguy
Andy Dufresne
Footballguy
I expected that. Leading with your best never makes sense, IMO.
The significant thing is no counter. If this wasn't really close to ballpark then either a) the cost is prohibitively high or b) he's simply not interested.
Cjw_55106
Footballguy
I probably would not have countered myself. Diggs had one game over 100 yards this year. He also went a stretch of 8 games with just 1 TD. In a none ppr league, he is easily a non-starter many weeks.
Andy Dufresne
Footballguy
Again, I don't think the specific player is entirely relevant. If two picks and a decent player won't even make you return the phone call with an ask of two picks and a better player then IMO you're saying you're not really interested in any trade. And that's cool too.
johnadams
Footballguy
I would take all three. 2nd one is the only that gives me pause as Mixon hasn't proven his value yet but getting two firsts makes up for that, especially given the depth at RB this year.
Sometimes you realize your valuations are so far off that a counter isn’t worth the time
If two picks and a decent player won't even make you return the phone call with an ask of two picks and a better player then IMO you're saying you're not really interested in any trade. And that's cool too.
1. No question
2. Close but no
3. Easy pass as I’m not big on either of those players
Andy Dufresne
Footballguy
If Barkley is worth a lot more than two picks and a player then yeah, I guess so.
And I think the guy is awesome, BTW.
Last edited by a moderator:
johnadams
Footballguy
One of my leagues, the managers all want counters for any goobly#### they throw on the wall. Your original offer wouldn't have gotten a counter for me either. The value isn't aligned and there is nothing intriguing in the offer. If I'm good with the general valuation but not the components, I'll usually counter. If the initial valuation is off, but there is component to the trade that is intriguing, I may counter. If the valuation is off and nothing intriguing, I don't bother countering.
Andy Dufresne
Footballguy
And, like I said, that's just fine. No counter means to me that from my perspective you're overvaluing your asset way beyond what I consider reasonable and I no longer need to try.
As another poster mentioned, Diggs is a WR3/flex player. You’d have to pair two higher picks with him to even be in the ballpark (say 1.03 and 1.05)
Andy Dufresne
Footballguy
Pwingles
Footballguy
haha
poster- your offer wasnt great imo
andy- correct, he obv wasnt interested
another poster- no, its because your offer had a bad player
andy- yeah, i assume they wouldve countered if that was the issue
poster- you know that diggs is valued at "x" right
andy- *facepalm
joey
Footballguy
You didn't throw it in my court, but I intercepted the pass so I'll play
assuming NON-ppr, 12 team, keep around 20 (which is probably considered "shallow keeper" to some here), this is the side I prefer in each of those offers:
1) Gurley
2) 1.1, but I'm not high on Mixon as the "best RB of last year's bunch", as some are)
3) 1.1, but it's pretty darn close, and depends on what my current starters look like. If my starting 3 WRs were something like ABrown, Adams and Cooks, I'd probably make prefer the 1.1. If I "need" DavIs to be a starter this year, I might stick with Davis/Fournette
You were likely typing this I as I was typing my earlier response, but again, I don't think these situations are great comparisons since the only player to have their huge season that early in their career (among other differences) was Edge, and he did repeat. None of them had the best FF season of their career in their first year as a starter, but you think DJ's year will be by far an outlier in his (even if his situation didn't change for the worse, which it has)- obviously that's possible, but if we're putting much stock in your comparisons, the data doesn't seem to support that opinion.
Point of clarification- I never said that a 25% drop off is a worst case scenario, I disagreed with you that it was his absolute best case scenario. Those are very different things.
Again, I appreciate the discussion. No doubt there's a wide range of possible outcomes.
Last edited by a moderator:
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
In addition to the notion that I would agree that Barkley is worth a lot more than the pieces offered in non-PPR, I don't understand why some expect that if you show interest in a player you should expect a counter.
When I have a player that I am really high on (which I would be the 1.01 if I had it), I will rarely ever send out a counter offer involving them. I'm typically not looking to trade them, and if someone else wants them that doesn't mean I'm going to find something to trade them away for when I don't want to move them in the first place.
For instance in the league where I own OBJ I will likely never send out an offer involving him, counter or otherwise. I don't particularly want to trade him, so if someone wants him they're just going to have to come up with something that blows me away. I'm not interested in finding away to make it work because I'm not particularly interested in it working. Heck a lot of times I'll look at another owner's team and decide there's not even anyone on their team I'd be willing to move that guy for anyway.
I'd imagine that's how it works with this guy and Barkley, particularly with the slew of offers likely coming in for Barkley.
So much is situation dependent. If I'm an immediate contender with a limited window of upper status, then there is little chance I deal star players for picks. If I'm in a rebuild an I have one star player with limited ancillary resources, then I'm much more open to this type of framework.
In most drafts, 1.08 and 1.09 look good on paper, but when you actually pair the players likely to be available at those slots, the end result is usually less desirable. Mid firsts, especially when talking about elite players, do not move the needle much for me. If I'm moving a star player, I want multiple, high firsts and will outrank a high first over multiple mid-firsts. That's just my lens. Others may see it differently.
Completely agree with this take.
If another owner wants an OBJ type player from me, I do not counter with OBJ in the package unless I feel like I'm getting at least 110% value in return.
If I'm going to move my best player, I'll only do it when I feel strongly that I've won the deal. Stars are simply too difficult to come by in leagues with strong ownership and should be valued as such.
tkrull
Footballguy
EBF
Footballguy
Wouldn't necessarily rush to take any of them, but I think they're all within the realm of being reasonable.
I like Barkley as a prospect more than I liked any of those other backs. With Gurley being so young/productive, it would be tough to justify a straight up deal. I for sure take Barkley straight up over Mixon or Fournette, so in those cases it's just a question of how much value the other parts add.
squistion
Footballguy
It does if it is a player you are really interested in and want to close the deal quickly.
I understand your viewpoint is the conventional wisdom and for people who do a lot of trading it makes sense from a managing your roster portfolio perspective. However I have lost out on several players I really wanted because I didn't tender my best offer to begin with, and in the interim, another party came forward and sealed the deal with a lesser offer than what would have been my best.
It is a question of trade strategy and as with everything else in Dynasty, one size does not always fit all.
Last edited by a moderator:
Concept Coop
Footballguy
I do agree that his market value is safe and could survive a mediocre season. He's got more hype than Mixon, and Mixon's market value is largely unchanged. But cashing in on the mulligan works better in theory than in practice, from what I've seen. I think most Trent Richardson owners went down with the ship or sold too late. It's hard to know when to bail. Those who cashed in on Gurley's stability, after a down 2016, are kicking themselves now. I'd also argue that the other top assets would also be afforded a mulligan. Using Gurley again--he was a first round startup pick after a down year. I think it applies to most players who will be going in the first round of startups.
Concept Coop
Footballguy
Is it right to treat this coming season as the "following" season for DJ? I'm sure the correlation is just as strong when looking at touches, rather than production. He'll have essentially taken a year off--he'll be as fresh as it gets. Something to consider, at least.
I certainly expect his numbers to come back down to earth, but feel confident that he's a solid RB1 if healthy. I think we can take his huge season as a sign of his talent level, and value it for that reason, without expecting him to repeat it. I do share some of the concern, however. I don't own him and am not in a rush to target him. I think I'll target him early next season, if and when he gets off to a human start.
Last edited by a moderator:
JackReacher
Footballguy
As a Pac 10 guy, care to weigh in on the JuJu debate? Some of us in here (myself included) see him as a big talent, whose skill set will help him produce even with a QB change, and that he will be fetching multiple firsts as early as next year. Others are in the camp that he’s another product of a rich Pittsburgh system, who will be held back by AB, and whose future value is closely tied to Big Ben.
Hankmoody
Footballguy
It also depends on your trade partner. Many guys in my leagues won't counter to save their life.
Then there's the issue of advanced tactics. If I always lead with a low offer, owners will expect I'll always be willing to add to it. Sometimes I'll offer my best offer up front and if they don't take it they don't take it. But at least the precedent is set that there are times you can't bleed me for more. Other times I might make a best offer on a guy with the intention of coming back later offering less. A guy like Cooper would be a great example.
