34 Responses to “The DLF Mailbag”

  1. Derek says:

    Brilliant trade for Green, been nice if you could’ve found a way to get it done and keep Cobb too, as I think he’s gonna be top 10 for many years. In my 3 dynasty leagues, one I have Dez, Cobb, and trying hard to get AJ without losing Cobb. In another, I have AJ, Decker, A.Brown and I’m trying hard to get Dez! Lol. I will package Decker and Brown if needed, but most in that league don’t trade w me anymore, due to knowing, if I’m offering something that even looks like a waybetter deal for them, there still timid and don’t do it….anybody else deal w that crap?

    • Ryan Krcil says:

      Ha YES! I deal with this all the time. Due to knowing more and they won’t trade with me because “it will make your team better”.

      • Derek says:

        YES! They don’t look at the trade its self, they just see what its doing to our team. Besides trading away Crabtree for A.Brown last year about this time, I don’t think I’ve ever lost a trade in that league. Sure that doesn’t help matters, but having other owners post messages after I make a trade like, please stop trading w him, it looks like your getting the better deal, but he is only getting stronger!!! Which I found to be chicken shit, since we had 3 new owners in our 16team league, that’s has to get them timid to trade w me… My trade was I gave A.Johnson, C.McCarthy for D.Washington. …already had D.Thomas, Cobb, Graham, L.David, P.Posluszny….this made my #3 LB much better, but I lost freaking A.Johnson. ..doesn’t matter to them!

    • Brian says:

      That can happen in a league if you have consistently “won” trades. They start to assume you know something they don’t. A lot of times that is the case though. Surprises me sometimes how little guys will know about the players on their team.

    • phildees says:

      man youare preaching to the choir…..in my league there are 2 other owners and myself who encounter this problem all the time….its like if we are offering a little bit more for someone then that guy must be awesome and theres no way we will get them…it sucks really

  2. Jonathan says:

    “As it’s likely you won’t be benching Russell Wilson anytime soon, why not go with the guy who offers the most immediate value? I’d hang onto Foles.” Are you serious? That sentence doesn’t even make sense. If Wilson is going to be the starter for a long time, who cares what a stash QBs immediate value is? The whole point of a stash QB is the LONG term value. Foles may squeak into the starting job this year, but is anyone confident that he will still be a starter in 3 years? Mallet could be Brady’s heir, but will Belichick stick around for a post Brady era? Osweiler appears to have the confidence of Denver’s front office and is learning from one of the smartest QBs to ever play. And let’s not forget Osweiler was a 2nd round pick. I’d go with Osweiler.

    • jbpar72 says:

      That was what I was thinking about when I asked the question. With the majority of teams already having 2 qbs, I didn’t see much trade value in Foles while he starts for a run heavy team. I think Mallett has big trade value when he gets a starting job, or value to my team if Bradford doesn’t take the next step this year. I honestly don’t know much about Osweiler, besides that they seem to really like him. And the boss liking you is never a bad thing for your career.

    • Eric Hardter says:

      You’re making three big assumptions here:

      1. Mallett is indeed Brady’s heir apparent.
      2. Osweiler is indeed Manning’s heir apparent.
      3. Foles will fall flat on his face if/when he wins the starting job.

      So what if none of these happen? What if Mallett and Osweiler languish on the bench, and Foles actually becomes a competent starter? Once you move past the QB1 tier, there are a whole lot of question marks. Foles could have legit QB2 value as soon as this year, depending on the scope of Kelly’s offense. If he plays well, he could provide an important trade chip to teams lacking a quality backup – could Mallett/Osweiler say the same? Maybe, but then again, there’s probably a reason they’re still sitting there on the waiver wire…

      • jbpar72 says:

        I think opportunity is the only reason the other two are available. And I don’t think Foles will be terrible, but I wonder his overall value on what I assume will be a run heavy team. He wont be able to make up for the lack of pass plays with rushing like Russell Wilson did last year. I guess it comes down to is who do you think is flat out more talented, Foles – Mallett?

        • Brian says:

          I lean Mallet myself. I don’t believe he is Brady’s heir either. He will be an unrestricted FA after 2014 and will walk with little compensation to the Patriots (assuming a compensation pick in the 2015 draft). My guess is if he shows well in preseason and any limited play he gets this season that he is a big trade target for teams looking for a QB. So to me Mallet is likely a starter next season on his own team. Brady will be playing for enough years that the Patriots likely do not see him as his heir either.

        • Eric Hardter says:

          I’d say Mallett by a hair, but I’d rather cash in on Foles’ value this year than wait on Mallett.

          • Jonathan says:

            But the question wasn’t about best immediate value. The question was about stash potential. If Jerrod is looking for insurance than, Foles would be the better choice. But if he’s looking to stash a developmental QB (which seems to be what he’s talking about) then Osweiler could have the better long term situation (yes, assuming he takes over for Manning; Manning is in a more precarious situation physically, and is 4 years older, than Brady; and Denver has better receivers). Maybe the better question for Jerrod is, why use a roster spot on a stash QB when you have two under 26?

          • Eric Hardter says:

            That’s fair…I guess I more answered the question of “who I’d rather have on my roster.” I get the concept of wanting a “stash,” but I think it makes more sense to roster the guy whose trade value is going to spike sooner. I truly believe Foles WILL have a fantasy trade market this year, and if Jerrod can move him, he can worry about a true stash then, or in the 2014 draft.

          • Brian says:

            Manning 4 years older than Brady!?!?!? Manning turned 37 in March and Brady will be 36 in August.

    • cbryantc says:

      I have a hard time comprehending why you wouldnt keep Foles. Every report out of camp is saying how he is beating Vick. Look at this page “Foles by the numbers”: http://www.comcastsportsnet.com/landing?By-the-numbers-Foles-historic-rookie-ran=1&blockID=817023&feedID=704

      Regardless of what you think you know about Foles, he put up the pretty amazing stats (LOOK AT THE LINK) for having a decimated WR corp and EVEN WORSE O LINE. Only one projected starting O linemen was still starting at the end of the season. He was making Riley Cooper (who may be cut) look good. If you hated him that much, you could still wait until mid season and then trade him. Im sure Brock and Mallet will be waiting on the wire for you.

      • cbryantc says:

        Also, can you stash another qb, if you can carry a 4th? Bradford averaged 18 ppg in my league, while 16. They werent that different, except it was Foles’ rookie yr behind a terrible line, and it was Bradfords 3rd. Or maybe Wilson scrambles and gets injured. You would have Bradford and a bench sitter. Or Wilson is on bye and bradford is stuck playing a division rival (SF, Seattle or Arz all solid), while Foles is playing Tampa (he put up 41 in my league that week). To me there are too many reasons to keep Foles.

  3. Jesse says:

    “If you adhere to the belief that future rookie picks are worth a round “less” than current picks, that 2015 first round selection equates to merely a third rounder in 2013.”

    Not many adhere to this at all in fantasy rookie drafts, at least not for 1st rounders. MAYBE when a person is smitten with a particular player, they might give a future 1st for a 2nd this year, but even this is the exception. In any event, it is certainly not a rule of thumb at all.

    • Eric Hardter says:

      NFL teams do it all the time. Trade away a 2013 5th rounder for a 2014 fourth etc. Most every trade I’ve seen involving draft picks utilizes this philosophy. If someone wants to trade for your 2013 third, you ask for a 2014 second. The following year, if someone wants that 2014 2nd, you ask for a 2015 1st. It might take two years to complete the cycle, but that’s the cost of having to wait to make a selection. I don’t want to say 2015 picks are “useless” because that’s disingenuous, but you won’t be able to cash in on them for two more years. That alone is enough for devaluation.

      • Chris in Chuck says:

        I love to get “throw in” future picks. If I want the current deal but think I can get a pick two years from now, why not?

        With a couple extra thirds in out years, I can usually grab a second this year in a trade. Or, if I take a player at 1.4 that I know the team at 1.6 wants (while the player I want will be there two picks later) I ask for a future pick or an upside player.

        Basically, collect assets any time you can get them!

      • Jesse says:

        NFL draft is completely different than fantasy rookie drafts.

        Only a bad owner would trade a future 1st for a current 2nd or 3rd(!), outside of the limited conditions listed above. Maybe there are enough bad owners in some leagues to give the impression that the NFL rule of thumb is also a fantasy rule of thumb, but I sure haven’t seen it and the idea has been lambasted (rightfully, IMO) on message boards.

        Would anybody here trade a 2015 1st rounder for a current 3rd rounder?

        • Eric Hardter says:

          I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree on this one. Trading a future pick for a current pick provides you with two things:

          1. The ability to start your draft pick selection this year.
          2. The luxury of not having to worry about what’s going to change in the next year (see: Barkley, Matt).

          Conversely to what you’re saying, I rarely if ever come across owners who will accept having to wait a year without a future round bump. I don’t think it makes you a bad owner at all.

    • donbrazi says:

      I certainly subscribe to the idea. It’s the only thing that makes sense to me. A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush..

      The only other pick valuation that I’ve come across is a simple 1 for 1, regardless of the year. I’ve had people tell me they value a 2015 1st the same as a 2013 1st. To me, that’s ridiculous. But it’s there..

      • Jesse says:

        I agree that present value is greater than future value (some would not agree). So I could see trading a future 1st + something else for a current 1st… but a 1st for a 2nd or 3rd? Almost always silliness.

        • cbryantc says:

          I Think It All Depends. I Traded This Years First For A Next Year First (From A Team I Think Will Be Bad) Because I Was Not Impressed By This Years Draft. Next Year Has A Much Greater Potential (Marquis Lee, Sammy Watkins, 4 Qb’s, Etc). I’ll Gladly Wait For top End Talent.

  4. nathan says:

    Thanks for the advice! I went ahead and pulled the Bowe trade on the 13th for the same reason you mentioned: his valie should skyrocket about 5 games in.

  5. Doug D says:

    I would agree with the next year’s 1 equals this year’s 2….but our league has a rule preventing the trading of future picks beyond the next upcoming draft, with the lone exception being we are allowed to trade future picks during the draft itself. Sounds odd, but it makes sense for us.

    Say Joe Schmo decides to go all in on this years draft, trading away future picks for this year’s picks. He doesn’t do his research, or has some breaks go the wrong way, and they all fail. Now he has crap for a roster, and no picks with which to recover with, increasing the likihood of a dead team, with no owner.

    Sad, but true…its a protection from ourselves.

  6. KCGuzz says:

    I’m not one to comment negatively out of habit, but re: #3; interested to know how Michael “owned” his league last year, but is now thin at RB & WR. Head scratcher.

  7. Lara Croft says:

    Bryce Brown worth the 1.11?

    • Chris in Chuck says:

      Bryce Brown went as the RB48 in Matthew Berry’s redraft league just published over at ESPN. That was ahead of Zac Stacy by one spot.

      DLF’s rankings have him #37 in dynasty. Again, he is ahead of Zac Stacy — this time by 8 spots. That is one position lower than Christine Michael, who is at #36 in the DLF rankings.

      Stacy and Michael are ranked 19 and 20, respectively, amongst the rookies. Therefore, #11 for Bryce Brown would appear a bit early, but not much. Go with your gut, recognizing that B.Brown has played against NFL competition already, is young and has almost no tread off his proverbial tires.

  8. ChiefsHonk says:

    Chiefs Supa Bowl!!!!

    I too overpaid for AJ Green because I wanted him. Every startup draft Ive had since his rookie year I drafted AJ. This offseason I took over a team and I traded Demaryus/Percy/Vick Ballard (on the Practice Squad) for AJ Green and BJGE. I also had to swap this years 1st round picks which I was 1.03 and he was 1.05. Demaryus and Percy are hot right now but I can never trust those guys and BJGE was just RB3 or 4 so not like I was counting on him but nice guy to have…older version of Ballard. I mean to get a Rodgers/Megatron/AJ Green/Arian Foster chances are you are going to have to give up the best player on your team to get him and all your draft picks or another great player as well. And it rarely happens in a dynasty league. It really is like the step out of the airplane when you go sky diving…..same feeling i swear.

    Supa Bowl!!!!

    • phildees says:

      i agree with you totally…i just madea trade in our lg and i gave up alot but i think it was totally worth it…i gave up andre johnson welker demarco and mendenhall for stevan ridley, markus wheaton and MEGATRON!… i understand that to get one of those guys you mentioned you gotta give alot and allthough i gave up alot of production at wr i feel very good about having prob the best wr on my tm…ridley and murray are a push i think, and i just love wheatons chances in the pitt offense with wallace gone…but im hinging it all on boldin having a good yr since hes now my wr3 and i got cobb as my wr2..with tate hopkins wheaton on the bench…im hoping to get to the title game again and i hope MEGATRON is the piece needed to do so…also in our lg the green owner wouldnt even hear of pulling the trigger on that one…he knows and loves what he has with green…i think its a more than fair trade though…

  9. laracroft says:

    I have been offered RGIII for Amendola and Bryce Brown. I already have Brees and Romo. I would have to trade away Romo but what can I get for him? Take it now before he changes his mind? Leaves me light at wr/rb…

    • Eric Hardter says:

      I’d do it based on value alone. Also, I’d try to flip Brees instead of Romo. Romo is a more than serviceable backup for RGIII, and Brees is going as an early 4th rounder in startups – he’ll fetch a good price on the market.

  10. web page says:

    There are specific breeds lower susceeptible to chocolate however never give your dog chocolate by choice.

    , Charleston, SC: 15. Somehow having their own space eass the separation anxiety that most dogs experience.

Leave a Comment


eight − 3 =