WEBVTT - July Trade Value Chart Changes | Dynasty Trade Block (Ep. 383)

0:00:03.960 --> 0:00:04.920
<v Speaker 1>Hello, everybody.

0:00:04.960 --> 0:00:09.040
<v Speaker 2>Welcome into the Fantasy Pros Dynasty Football Podcast, brought to

0:00:09.119 --> 0:00:14.120
<v Speaker 2>you by League Tycoon, the Dynasty first fantasy football platform fits.

0:00:14.320 --> 0:00:16.080
<v Speaker 1>I have not talked to you on air.

0:00:16.079 --> 0:00:17.600
<v Speaker 2>We've talked behind the scenes, but I'm going to talk

0:00:17.640 --> 0:00:19.959
<v Speaker 2>to you on air in like three plus weeks.

0:00:19.960 --> 0:00:20.560
<v Speaker 1>How are you doing.

0:00:21.720 --> 0:00:22.520
<v Speaker 3>I'm doing well.

0:00:22.720 --> 0:00:24.840
<v Speaker 4>I hope you had a good vacation, and I know

0:00:25.480 --> 0:00:29.400
<v Speaker 4>your return from vacation has not gone as optimally as

0:00:29.840 --> 0:00:32.080
<v Speaker 4>it could. You want to tell the people.

0:00:32.400 --> 0:00:35.159
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I mentioned it on a couple of shows, including

0:00:35.200 --> 0:00:38.080
<v Speaker 2>I just finished a live stream on the Dynasty YouTube channel,

0:00:38.080 --> 0:00:40.640
<v Speaker 2>which I hope everybody here goes to subscribe to, with

0:00:40.880 --> 0:00:43.080
<v Speaker 2>myself and Bogman, I was just talking a little bit

0:00:43.080 --> 0:00:45.559
<v Speaker 2>about it. I have come back to a house with

0:00:45.640 --> 0:00:48.720
<v Speaker 2>no air conditioning during a one hundred degree heat wave

0:00:48.800 --> 0:00:51.680
<v Speaker 2>here in Denver. Not only is there no air conditioning,

0:00:51.840 --> 0:00:55.920
<v Speaker 2>but the unit leaked through my kitchen ceiling, creating a

0:00:56.000 --> 0:00:58.800
<v Speaker 2>huge puddle on the kitchen floor in the span of

0:00:58.840 --> 0:01:00.560
<v Speaker 2>like an hour. It was like it was like a

0:01:00.600 --> 0:01:04.959
<v Speaker 2>downpour through my ceiling. All told to replace the entire

0:01:05.200 --> 0:01:08.560
<v Speaker 2>HVAC system, water damage, all of it. We're looking at

0:01:08.560 --> 0:01:13.360
<v Speaker 2>about nineteen grand, which my jaw hit the floor when

0:01:13.360 --> 0:01:16.120
<v Speaker 2>I heard that, And I'm like, I talk about, you know,

0:01:16.680 --> 0:01:20.080
<v Speaker 2>dynasty market values here and not overpaying and everything, but

0:01:20.200 --> 0:01:21.920
<v Speaker 2>sometimes you don't have a choice. Fits.

0:01:22.680 --> 0:01:26.560
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, it's funny, Wor I've gotten addicted to this. There's

0:01:26.600 --> 0:01:29.600
<v Speaker 4>this social media dude who makes videos of like people

0:01:29.880 --> 0:01:32.280
<v Speaker 4>in New York and ask them what they pay for

0:01:32.319 --> 0:01:35.399
<v Speaker 4>their apartment. Then he tours the place and it's everything

0:01:35.400 --> 0:01:37.679
<v Speaker 4>from like guys who live in a cellar for like

0:01:38.000 --> 0:01:40.440
<v Speaker 4>seven hundred a month or whatever, to like these people

0:01:40.440 --> 0:01:44.480
<v Speaker 4>with these fabulous penthouse places. And it's New York, so

0:01:44.520 --> 0:01:49.000
<v Speaker 4>these are absorbitent rents and like ridiculous amounts. My jaw

0:01:49.040 --> 0:01:51.120
<v Speaker 4>is always hitting the floor when people say what they pay.

0:01:51.320 --> 0:01:53.400
<v Speaker 4>But then again, when you rent, you don't have to

0:01:53.440 --> 0:01:55.760
<v Speaker 4>deal with stuff like this. Someone comes and fixes it

0:01:55.800 --> 0:01:58.800
<v Speaker 4>for you. The joys of home ownership, worm, I'm there

0:01:58.800 --> 0:02:03.640
<v Speaker 4>with you. They're always some really unforeseen and unpleasant surprises.

0:02:05.280 --> 0:02:07.680
<v Speaker 2>I generally have liked being a homeowner. This is the

0:02:07.720 --> 0:02:10.200
<v Speaker 2>first time I have really not liked. This is the

0:02:10.240 --> 0:02:14.880
<v Speaker 2>first real, like serious hit. And yeah, thank thankfully they

0:02:14.919 --> 0:02:17.519
<v Speaker 2>have payment plans at this company, because otherwise I don't

0:02:17.560 --> 0:02:20.960
<v Speaker 2>know what I'd do. So that's my SOB story for everybody.

0:02:21.000 --> 0:02:23.120
<v Speaker 2>I'm currently recording this in a house that's like eighty

0:02:23.120 --> 0:02:26.040
<v Speaker 2>seven degrees, doing the best I can to power through.

0:02:26.520 --> 0:02:28.200
<v Speaker 2>We can go ahead and jump into the show here.

0:02:28.680 --> 0:02:30.880
<v Speaker 2>This is the trade block, our monthly show. We obviously

0:02:31.080 --> 0:02:33.040
<v Speaker 2>do it the first Tuesday of the month, which was

0:02:33.120 --> 0:02:35.360
<v Speaker 2>last week because I was still on vacation, so we

0:02:35.480 --> 0:02:38.399
<v Speaker 2>pushed it back week and are doing it today. We'll

0:02:38.400 --> 0:02:40.600
<v Speaker 2>go through the first half of the episode just kind

0:02:40.600 --> 0:02:44.160
<v Speaker 2>of generally reacting to the updated Dynasty trade value chart

0:02:44.200 --> 0:02:46.200
<v Speaker 2>that was updated on July first, so a little longer

0:02:46.240 --> 0:02:48.880
<v Speaker 2>ago than usual, but obviously still pretty relevant. Not much

0:02:48.880 --> 0:02:51.400
<v Speaker 2>has happened between then and now, and then the second

0:02:51.400 --> 0:02:53.200
<v Speaker 2>half of the show, we will take all of your questions,

0:02:53.200 --> 0:02:56.200
<v Speaker 2>whether calling you up on stage or in the chat.

0:02:56.760 --> 0:02:59.480
<v Speaker 2>Let's go ahead and kick things off with the quarterbacks

0:02:59.520 --> 0:03:02.320
<v Speaker 2>as all always fits. You know, again this time of year,

0:03:02.400 --> 0:03:04.840
<v Speaker 2>not as much on the movement side, so you know,

0:03:04.919 --> 0:03:07.840
<v Speaker 2>rather than asking questions about where guys are moving, I

0:03:07.919 --> 0:03:09.520
<v Speaker 2>more just want to kind of take a look at

0:03:09.600 --> 0:03:11.360
<v Speaker 2>where they are right now. I actually just talked to

0:03:11.440 --> 0:03:15.240
<v Speaker 2>Bogman in the last stream about Lamar a little bit.

0:03:15.360 --> 0:03:19.160
<v Speaker 2>Somebody was asking about trading Lamar away for neighbors in

0:03:19.200 --> 0:03:22.120
<v Speaker 2>a super Flex league, and you know, we were pretty

0:03:22.240 --> 0:03:25.000
<v Speaker 2>against that in super Flex, you know, not just with

0:03:25.120 --> 0:03:27.920
<v Speaker 2>neighbors as injury, but just Lamar, you know, is an

0:03:27.960 --> 0:03:30.200
<v Speaker 2>elite asset. And I was like, yeah, it's like one

0:03:30.240 --> 0:03:31.840
<v Speaker 2>of the top three guys in our trade value chart.

0:03:31.840 --> 0:03:32.840
<v Speaker 2>And I went to go look and it's like, oh,

0:03:32.880 --> 0:03:34.280
<v Speaker 2>it turns out his fourth. I didn't realize he was

0:03:34.280 --> 0:03:36.200
<v Speaker 2>a little bit lower. But do you still feel like

0:03:36.240 --> 0:03:38.720
<v Speaker 2>Lamar is the type of guy that should be warranting

0:03:38.760 --> 0:03:41.320
<v Speaker 2>a huge haul in return. I mean, I was surprised

0:03:41.320 --> 0:03:44.840
<v Speaker 2>to hear that a trade like Lamar for neighbors, even

0:03:44.880 --> 0:03:47.280
<v Speaker 2>though I love neighbors, but like an injured wide receiver

0:03:47.800 --> 0:03:49.480
<v Speaker 2>to me in a super Flex I was surprised that

0:03:49.480 --> 0:03:50.400
<v Speaker 2>that was even on the table.

0:03:51.760 --> 0:03:55.320
<v Speaker 4>I was too, especially so right now I'm in the

0:03:55.320 --> 0:03:58.080
<v Speaker 4>middle of a dynasty startup, so it's kind of giving

0:03:58.120 --> 0:04:02.320
<v Speaker 4>me perspective on values, and I was shocked. I mean,

0:04:02.360 --> 0:04:06.440
<v Speaker 4>I have Lamar ranked third overall in super Flex Dynasty

0:04:06.520 --> 0:04:07.119
<v Speaker 4>QB three.

0:04:07.520 --> 0:04:09.800
<v Speaker 3>Obviously he went twelve.

0:04:10.360 --> 0:04:12.680
<v Speaker 4>He went at the end of the first round, all

0:04:12.720 --> 0:04:14.920
<v Speaker 4>the way to the turn and in the startup now,

0:04:14.960 --> 0:04:17.760
<v Speaker 4>neighbors didn't go till two to eleven. So yes, clearly

0:04:18.040 --> 0:04:21.680
<v Speaker 4>Lamar's is valued more than neighbors, and I got neighbors

0:04:21.760 --> 0:04:25.560
<v Speaker 4>by the way. Yeah, I was just I was shocked

0:04:25.560 --> 0:04:28.560
<v Speaker 4>that Lamar fell that far baffling to me. It is

0:04:28.920 --> 0:04:31.680
<v Speaker 4>it is I just like our people, that's spooked by

0:04:32.080 --> 0:04:35.080
<v Speaker 4>last year, which was so obviously injury related.

0:04:35.480 --> 0:04:36.240
<v Speaker 3>I know he's not.

0:04:38.080 --> 0:04:41.560
<v Speaker 4>Like young prime anymore, but I feel like he's mid

0:04:41.640 --> 0:04:44.719
<v Speaker 4>to late not even late prime. I feel like he's

0:04:44.800 --> 0:04:48.919
<v Speaker 4>mid prime right now. So I'm surprised, right, he's not

0:04:48.920 --> 0:04:53.320
<v Speaker 4>even thirty right right, So I don't know. I feel

0:04:53.320 --> 0:04:55.440
<v Speaker 4>like he's got at least two or three more seasons

0:04:55.440 --> 0:04:56.200
<v Speaker 4>of prime.

0:04:56.640 --> 0:04:58.679
<v Speaker 2>Twelfth, Like in a league with me, he's not getting

0:04:58.680 --> 0:05:02.920
<v Speaker 2>past pick four. I like, I just I find that crazy.

0:05:03.000 --> 0:05:06.440
<v Speaker 2>Like he is still in his twenties. He was, it

0:05:06.440 --> 0:05:08.480
<v Speaker 2>was a really small sample size, but he was still

0:05:08.520 --> 0:05:10.799
<v Speaker 2>elite before the injury last year. The injury just happened

0:05:10.800 --> 0:05:12.800
<v Speaker 2>in Week three, so most of the year wasn't very good,

0:05:12.800 --> 0:05:15.360
<v Speaker 2>but we wanted two. He was his usual excellent self.

0:05:15.800 --> 0:05:18.080
<v Speaker 2>He has never not won an MVP in his first

0:05:18.160 --> 0:05:19.760
<v Speaker 2>year with a new play caller. He has a new

0:05:19.760 --> 0:05:22.320
<v Speaker 2>play caller this year. I'm just like, I don't know

0:05:22.360 --> 0:05:25.720
<v Speaker 2>what there is. Like I totally get Josh Allen being ahead,

0:05:25.760 --> 0:05:28.279
<v Speaker 2>and I totally get Drake may the age difference, but

0:05:28.440 --> 0:05:32.719
<v Speaker 2>like it's hard for me to really see him being

0:05:32.760 --> 0:05:34.440
<v Speaker 2>too low. So again I was surprised by that. I

0:05:34.440 --> 0:05:36.440
<v Speaker 2>still think he's one of those Tier one super flex

0:05:36.480 --> 0:05:39.400
<v Speaker 2>startup types values, So I just wanted to kind of

0:05:39.400 --> 0:05:40.160
<v Speaker 2>mention that one here.

0:05:40.800 --> 0:05:43.000
<v Speaker 4>I think there are two ways of looking at dynasty value.

0:05:43.040 --> 0:05:46.240
<v Speaker 4>There's like the dynasty value what you produced during the season,

0:05:46.400 --> 0:05:49.960
<v Speaker 4>and then you know right now worth the stage where

0:05:50.040 --> 0:05:52.440
<v Speaker 4>your dynasty value is what the market says it is.

0:05:53.080 --> 0:05:55.159
<v Speaker 4>And I feel like there is a gap between what

0:05:55.279 --> 0:05:57.760
<v Speaker 4>Lamar Jackson is going to produce this fall and what

0:05:57.800 --> 0:05:59.520
<v Speaker 4>the market is saying his value is.

0:06:00.760 --> 0:06:02.440
<v Speaker 1>We can go quickly through some of these names.

0:06:02.520 --> 0:06:04.599
<v Speaker 2>What I want to do with the quarterbacks is there's

0:06:04.640 --> 0:06:06.760
<v Speaker 2>a bunch of guys who are tied in our trade

0:06:06.800 --> 0:06:08.880
<v Speaker 2>value chart. I want you to break the tie on them,

0:06:08.880 --> 0:06:10.159
<v Speaker 2>so we don't need like deep diving all of them

0:06:10.160 --> 0:06:12.400
<v Speaker 2>because there's a few different pairs here, but because we'll

0:06:12.440 --> 0:06:14.480
<v Speaker 2>quickly throw them at you breaking some of these ties.

0:06:14.560 --> 0:06:16.440
<v Speaker 2>Right at the very top, Drake May and Josh Allen.

0:06:17.480 --> 0:06:20.719
<v Speaker 3>I've got Drake May higher. I just like that.

0:06:20.839 --> 0:06:24.320
<v Speaker 4>He immediately looked like one of the best pure passers

0:06:24.320 --> 0:06:26.920
<v Speaker 4>in the league last year, and he's much younger.

0:06:27.839 --> 0:06:29.680
<v Speaker 1>Joe Burrow and Caleb Williams are tied.

0:06:30.920 --> 0:06:33.240
<v Speaker 4>I've got Caleb ranked higher. Give me the guy with

0:06:33.279 --> 0:06:35.800
<v Speaker 4>a little bit of mobility. Obviously, Burrow's a much better

0:06:35.839 --> 0:06:40.760
<v Speaker 4>pure passer, but Caleb Ron's than also younger, and Burrow's

0:06:40.760 --> 0:06:42.640
<v Speaker 4>injury history is a little concerning.

0:06:43.400 --> 0:06:46.560
<v Speaker 2>So far, you've taken the much younger guy both times. Unsurprising.

0:06:47.320 --> 0:06:50.120
<v Speaker 2>Herbert and Mahomes are tied in the trade value chart.

0:06:50.880 --> 0:06:55.320
<v Speaker 4>I like Herbert more. I just I think Mahomes will

0:06:55.360 --> 0:07:01.080
<v Speaker 4>probably age well. But you know, the Kansas City offense

0:07:01.120 --> 0:07:04.559
<v Speaker 4>has not been what it was earlier in his career

0:07:04.600 --> 0:07:07.000
<v Speaker 4>when he was averaging like three hundred passing yards a game.

0:07:07.040 --> 0:07:09.880
<v Speaker 4>They've been like twenty second in the last two years

0:07:09.880 --> 0:07:12.760
<v Speaker 4>in yards per play, So I'm a little worried about that,

0:07:12.800 --> 0:07:14.560
<v Speaker 4>And just seems like things are pointing.

0:07:14.360 --> 0:07:18.320
<v Speaker 2>Up for Herbert Lawrence and Dart Lawrence.

0:07:18.360 --> 0:07:20.320
<v Speaker 3>For me, Dart still has a lot to prove.

0:07:21.560 --> 0:07:23.160
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, Purdy and bo Nicks.

0:07:25.000 --> 0:07:26.760
<v Speaker 3>I have Purdy ranked higher.

0:07:27.360 --> 0:07:30.600
<v Speaker 4>Bownicks averaged six point four yards per pass attempt last year. Like,

0:07:30.640 --> 0:07:33.360
<v Speaker 4>I still don't know if he's actually good. He threw

0:07:33.360 --> 0:07:35.240
<v Speaker 4>the most passes in the league last year and still

0:07:35.240 --> 0:07:37.040
<v Speaker 4>didn't have four thousand passing yards.

0:07:38.560 --> 0:07:40.320
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, Strout and Schuck.

0:07:42.800 --> 0:07:43.400
<v Speaker 3>That's close.

0:07:43.440 --> 0:07:47.160
<v Speaker 4>I've got Strout a little higher, but that's very debatable.

0:07:48.600 --> 0:07:50.800
<v Speaker 1>Just two more four year at Baker and Sam Darnald.

0:07:52.920 --> 0:07:56.160
<v Speaker 4>I have Darnald a little bit higher.

0:07:57.440 --> 0:08:00.000
<v Speaker 2>And then a three way tie between Malik Willis, Kyler Murray,

0:08:00.160 --> 0:08:00.760
<v Speaker 2>and Bryce Young.

0:08:05.200 --> 0:08:09.760
<v Speaker 4>Willis, Murray and Young. I just no interest in Bryce Young.

0:08:09.800 --> 0:08:11.960
<v Speaker 4>I think this is his last year as a starter

0:08:12.240 --> 0:08:13.560
<v Speaker 4>in all likelihood.

0:08:13.960 --> 0:08:16.600
<v Speaker 3>Kyler, who knows if it's his last year as a starter.

0:08:16.640 --> 0:08:20.680
<v Speaker 4>He's got to have a compelling audition with the Vikings

0:08:20.680 --> 0:08:24.480
<v Speaker 4>this year, and then, like Willis, hopefully they give him

0:08:24.560 --> 0:08:28.760
<v Speaker 4>enough leash where they don't hold the terrible pass catching

0:08:28.800 --> 0:08:30.320
<v Speaker 4>core against him.

0:08:30.960 --> 0:08:32.120
<v Speaker 1>All right, Thanks for bearing with me.

0:08:32.200 --> 0:08:34.320
<v Speaker 2>There were more ties than I realized when I was

0:08:34.760 --> 0:08:37.679
<v Speaker 2>started doing that. There's a lot of them there. I said,

0:08:37.679 --> 0:08:38.880
<v Speaker 2>that was kind of interesting to kind of put a

0:08:38.920 --> 0:08:40.559
<v Speaker 2>bunch of head to heads. Given how many there were,

0:08:40.960 --> 0:08:43.600
<v Speaker 2>let's go down to the running backs here fits. But

0:08:43.640 --> 0:08:46.880
<v Speaker 2>before we do, if you play in a serious dynasty league,

0:08:46.960 --> 0:08:49.559
<v Speaker 2>you should check out League Tycoon. It's a modern fantasy

0:08:49.559 --> 0:08:54.160
<v Speaker 2>football platform built specifically for dynasty leagues not redraft. Standard

0:08:54.200 --> 0:08:57.320
<v Speaker 2>Dynasty leagues on League Tycoon are completely free. League Tycoon

0:08:57.320 --> 0:09:00.680
<v Speaker 2>has tools for serious dynasty leagues, slow auction with twenty

0:09:00.679 --> 0:09:04.720
<v Speaker 2>plus players at once, trade auctions, draft lotteries, compensatory picks,

0:09:04.720 --> 0:09:08.080
<v Speaker 2>and league history import with no ads or sportsbook clutter.

0:09:08.280 --> 0:09:10.240
<v Speaker 2>And if your league wants to go even deeper, League

0:09:10.280 --> 0:09:14.520
<v Speaker 2>Tycoon also offers contract dynasty with multi year contracts, extensions,

0:09:14.600 --> 0:09:18.840
<v Speaker 2>rookie deals, tags, and are restricted free agency tenders. Standard

0:09:18.880 --> 0:09:21.480
<v Speaker 2>Dynasty is free for everyone and for contract dynasty leagues

0:09:21.679 --> 0:09:23.800
<v Speaker 2>use Promo Code Pros to get your first season free.

0:09:23.840 --> 0:09:26.800
<v Speaker 2>Start your free dynasty league today at League tycoon dot

0:09:26.840 --> 0:09:30.000
<v Speaker 2>com and for contract dynasty leagues that's Promo Code Pros

0:09:30.080 --> 0:09:33.600
<v Speaker 2>to get your first season free. Get into those running

0:09:33.600 --> 0:09:38.439
<v Speaker 2>backs now again, you know, not the most changes here.

0:09:38.480 --> 0:09:41.160
<v Speaker 2>I'll kind of you know, kick it to you. Is

0:09:41.200 --> 0:09:43.160
<v Speaker 2>there a name that you want to start with that

0:09:43.240 --> 0:09:46.000
<v Speaker 2>you think is kind of interesting? Where they are ranked

0:09:46.000 --> 0:09:47.160
<v Speaker 2>in the chart right now.

0:09:49.240 --> 0:09:53.000
<v Speaker 4>We're continuing to see steam for Jonathan Brooks, who's up

0:09:53.040 --> 0:09:56.400
<v Speaker 4>to running back thirty, just on the optimism like if

0:09:56.400 --> 0:10:01.080
<v Speaker 4>this second ACL repair that they sound very confident in

0:10:01.160 --> 0:10:05.360
<v Speaker 4>if this takes, he could be lead running back this year,

0:10:05.920 --> 0:10:09.120
<v Speaker 4>which is interesting because he's young. He's only twenty two

0:10:09.520 --> 0:10:15.680
<v Speaker 4>and yeah, like double ACL tears, that's terrifying. But a

0:10:15.720 --> 0:10:18.000
<v Speaker 4>guy who could potentially be a lead running back going

0:10:18.040 --> 0:10:20.360
<v Speaker 4>this cheap, and so he's starting to get a little

0:10:20.400 --> 0:10:22.800
<v Speaker 4>less cheap. I think people are realizing the potential. And

0:10:22.880 --> 0:10:26.040
<v Speaker 4>he's also saw some upward movement for Rashad White, who

0:10:26.040 --> 0:10:29.160
<v Speaker 4>I think people realize it's kind of a pretty meaty

0:10:29.280 --> 0:10:32.800
<v Speaker 4>role with the Commanders this year, like passing down stuff

0:10:32.800 --> 0:10:35.360
<v Speaker 4>for sure, maybe some early down stuff too.

0:10:35.600 --> 0:10:37.240
<v Speaker 3>Those are the guys that kind of jump out to.

0:10:37.200 --> 0:10:40.760
<v Speaker 2>Me Brooks like, you know, sneaky, twenty two years old.

0:10:41.160 --> 0:10:45.200
<v Speaker 2>I like him and I want to be trying to

0:10:45.240 --> 0:10:47.400
<v Speaker 2>acquire him. I think it's I think his price point

0:10:47.440 --> 0:10:49.800
<v Speaker 2>is really interesting right now. To your point about it's

0:10:49.880 --> 0:10:52.480
<v Speaker 2>kind of going up, I wonder where it will settle

0:10:52.640 --> 0:10:56.040
<v Speaker 2>before the season starts. In terms of Dynasty, I'm pretty

0:10:56.040 --> 0:10:58.400
<v Speaker 2>convinced he is going to go up rapidly in redraft.

0:10:58.480 --> 0:11:00.800
<v Speaker 2>He's like RB forty in real draft, and I think

0:11:00.800 --> 0:11:03.240
<v Speaker 2>that's going to rise as we get closer to the season,

0:11:03.240 --> 0:11:06.199
<v Speaker 2>barring something unforeseen. But in dynasty, I'm really curious whether

0:11:06.240 --> 0:11:07.880
<v Speaker 2>it's going to settle in whether in terms of picks

0:11:07.960 --> 0:11:11.560
<v Speaker 2>or another player. RB thirty is like maybe already like

0:11:12.120 --> 0:11:15.920
<v Speaker 2>higher than I'm comfortable like spending up for right, Like

0:11:15.960 --> 0:11:18.040
<v Speaker 2>maybe I would pay market value for him. I don't

0:11:18.080 --> 0:11:20.839
<v Speaker 2>know if I would want to aggressively target him at

0:11:20.840 --> 0:11:23.240
<v Speaker 2>that price point, but he is a guy that I

0:11:23.320 --> 0:11:26.280
<v Speaker 2>believe in as having real upside and is I think

0:11:26.320 --> 0:11:28.000
<v Speaker 2>going to get an opportunity. And it's been a long

0:11:28.040 --> 0:11:30.560
<v Speaker 2>time since that second injury, so maybe it's been enough

0:11:30.600 --> 0:11:33.000
<v Speaker 2>to recover. So I think he's one of the more

0:11:33.040 --> 0:11:34.080
<v Speaker 2>fascinating names here.

0:11:34.679 --> 0:11:37.080
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, And I feel like if you want to get him,

0:11:37.120 --> 0:11:39.520
<v Speaker 4>now is the time to do it, because it is

0:11:39.559 --> 0:11:42.400
<v Speaker 4>only going to take a few videos of him looking

0:11:42.440 --> 0:11:47.600
<v Speaker 4>good running around tires in training camp for his stock

0:11:47.679 --> 0:11:50.520
<v Speaker 4>to get steamed up. Like a couple videos is all

0:11:50.559 --> 0:11:52.120
<v Speaker 4>it's going to take, and all of a sudden, he's

0:11:52.160 --> 0:11:58.000
<v Speaker 4>going like his ADP and redraft has gone up half around. Yeah.

0:11:58.080 --> 0:12:00.640
<v Speaker 2>We had a question in the other stream about a

0:12:00.760 --> 0:12:05.080
<v Speaker 2>contender week at running back trading for Josh Jacobs. What

0:12:05.120 --> 0:12:07.560
<v Speaker 2>do you think a fair deal is for Jacobs right now?

0:12:07.600 --> 0:12:10.560
<v Speaker 2>Given the off field stuff that has been happening. He's

0:12:10.600 --> 0:12:13.760
<v Speaker 2>in his late twenties, you know, but it's still you know,

0:12:13.840 --> 0:12:17.280
<v Speaker 2>when when healthy and on the field and given the opportunity,

0:12:17.280 --> 0:12:19.000
<v Speaker 2>he's been very productive. What do you think about Jacobs

0:12:19.000 --> 0:12:21.120
<v Speaker 2>for a contending team at these days? He's alreably twenty

0:12:21.120 --> 0:12:22.160
<v Speaker 2>four by the way on this list.

0:12:23.080 --> 0:12:25.320
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, I don't want to do it in terms of

0:12:25.360 --> 0:12:28.320
<v Speaker 4>twenty twenty six rookie value because a lot of people

0:12:28.400 --> 0:12:31.040
<v Speaker 4>have already had their drafts. I think it's like a

0:12:31.480 --> 0:12:37.680
<v Speaker 4>second in twenty twenty seven, you know, early to mid second,

0:12:37.800 --> 0:12:41.240
<v Speaker 4>and we maybe have him valued closer to early second.

0:12:42.080 --> 0:12:46.680
<v Speaker 4>It's worth noting that the little town in northeast Wisconsin,

0:12:47.440 --> 0:12:50.680
<v Speaker 4>you know, where he was arrested for this domestic incident.

0:12:50.880 --> 0:12:54.800
<v Speaker 4>Like they're still investigating the case. It has not been closed,

0:12:55.400 --> 0:12:59.120
<v Speaker 4>but there's been no word on charges, and like I

0:12:59.280 --> 0:13:02.280
<v Speaker 4>kind of get the feeling it's just going to disappear.

0:13:02.760 --> 0:13:06.120
<v Speaker 4>And I don't think he's going to incur any sort

0:13:06.120 --> 0:13:11.280
<v Speaker 4>of suspension if there are no charges forthcoming, So I

0:13:11.320 --> 0:13:12.640
<v Speaker 4>think he's still.

0:13:12.440 --> 0:13:13.080
<v Speaker 3>Going to be the guy.

0:13:13.200 --> 0:13:16.760
<v Speaker 4>And like he has averaged pretty close to a touchdown

0:13:16.840 --> 0:13:20.760
<v Speaker 4>a game since he joined the Packers two years ago,

0:13:20.920 --> 0:13:24.960
<v Speaker 4>and I think the last year the Packers didn't have

0:13:25.400 --> 0:13:29.000
<v Speaker 4>Josh Jacobs, Jordan Love finished QB five in fantasy scoring

0:13:29.480 --> 0:13:32.480
<v Speaker 4>and he has not sniffed QB one territory since then.

0:13:32.600 --> 0:13:36.080
<v Speaker 4>They like to give Jacobs the ball. Matt Lafleur is

0:13:36.080 --> 0:13:38.640
<v Speaker 4>one of the better run game designers in the league.

0:13:38.760 --> 0:13:40.800
<v Speaker 4>I was just thinking the other day about how good

0:13:40.840 --> 0:13:44.360
<v Speaker 4>their running game looked after two years ago, after Jordan

0:13:44.440 --> 0:13:47.160
<v Speaker 4>Love got injured in that Brazil game to open the

0:13:47.160 --> 0:13:50.560
<v Speaker 4>season and they had to send out Malik Willis for

0:13:50.640 --> 0:13:54.040
<v Speaker 4>a couple of games. Matt Lafleur was so in his

0:13:54.160 --> 0:13:57.720
<v Speaker 4>bag with the run game play calling in that like

0:13:57.800 --> 0:14:00.440
<v Speaker 4>some of the design stuff was just amazed, and like

0:14:00.559 --> 0:14:04.280
<v Speaker 4>Josh Jacobs was ripping off these big chunk runs. I'm

0:14:04.320 --> 0:14:07.360
<v Speaker 4>excited about that. Jacobs was banged up for a lot

0:14:07.360 --> 0:14:10.439
<v Speaker 4>of last season. A healthy Josh Jacobs still a very

0:14:10.480 --> 0:14:13.520
<v Speaker 4>impactful fantasy running back, so I do think he's worth

0:14:13.520 --> 0:14:17.120
<v Speaker 4>a two, you know, if not like a real early two.

0:14:18.160 --> 0:14:18.640
<v Speaker 2>Yeah.

0:14:18.920 --> 0:14:19.880
<v Speaker 1>One more running back here.

0:14:19.880 --> 0:14:21.800
<v Speaker 2>I want to ask you about Jerium Price, another guy

0:14:21.800 --> 0:14:24.800
<v Speaker 2>that we got questions on in the last stream, and

0:14:25.240 --> 0:14:27.720
<v Speaker 2>there was a question about trading him for a mid

0:14:27.960 --> 0:14:30.280
<v Speaker 2>twenty twenty seven first. It was described as mid to

0:14:30.440 --> 0:14:36.000
<v Speaker 2>late twenty twenty seven first. Okay, no on giving up

0:14:36.040 --> 0:14:37.880
<v Speaker 2>the first or no on giving up Price.

0:14:38.560 --> 0:14:40.480
<v Speaker 3>I wouldn't give up a late first.

0:14:40.400 --> 0:14:41.760
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, to get you that's what I thought, you mad.

0:14:41.760 --> 0:14:42.680
<v Speaker 1>I just wanted to clarify.

0:14:42.800 --> 0:14:49.080
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, yeah, So the track record people like you can't

0:14:49.440 --> 0:14:53.560
<v Speaker 4>keep first round running backs together when you like parse out.

0:14:53.600 --> 0:14:56.280
<v Speaker 4>The track record of these guys. First round running backs

0:14:56.360 --> 0:14:59.160
<v Speaker 4>drafted one through twelve over the last eight years have

0:14:59.240 --> 0:15:02.720
<v Speaker 4>been like the hit or not eight years, twelve years,

0:15:02.800 --> 0:15:06.280
<v Speaker 4>eleven years. Since twenty fifteen, there have been eight guys

0:15:06.360 --> 0:15:08.840
<v Speaker 4>drafted top twelve and twelve.

0:15:08.720 --> 0:15:12.040
<v Speaker 2>Years, right if you include this year as the twelve Yeah.

0:15:12.200 --> 0:15:16.400
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, yeah, twelve if you include the season that's about

0:15:16.440 --> 0:15:19.160
<v Speaker 4>to play out. But the hit rate has been fantastic

0:15:19.320 --> 0:15:22.200
<v Speaker 4>on those guys, just generally. Probably the only guy who

0:15:22.200 --> 0:15:25.400
<v Speaker 4>didn't really work out over the long run was Leonard Fournett,

0:15:25.760 --> 0:15:29.480
<v Speaker 4>and even Fournette had some nice seasons. You had McCaffrey,

0:15:29.520 --> 0:15:33.520
<v Speaker 4>You've got Gibbs, Bijon, Robinson, Jenty yet to go Ezekiel

0:15:33.600 --> 0:15:37.280
<v Speaker 4>Elliott who smashed a lot of hits in there, but

0:15:37.720 --> 0:15:41.360
<v Speaker 4>later in the round first runt picks maybe not as good.

0:15:41.440 --> 0:15:43.880
<v Speaker 4>You get Rashad Penny in there, and like, that's the

0:15:44.280 --> 0:15:47.960
<v Speaker 4>obvious comparison to make. What if Zach Charbonet is the

0:15:48.040 --> 0:15:55.280
<v Speaker 4>Chris Carson to Genarian prices? You know, Charbonet is Penny

0:15:55.640 --> 0:15:58.360
<v Speaker 4>or wait, oh man, am I mixing up this metaphor

0:15:58.720 --> 0:16:03.360
<v Speaker 4>Charbonet is Chris Carson. Genarian price is for Seoan Penny. Like,

0:16:03.600 --> 0:16:06.680
<v Speaker 4>I don't know that Genarian price is better than Zach Sharboney.

0:16:06.800 --> 0:16:11.840
<v Speaker 3>I think Charbona is pretty good. So I'm a little.

0:16:13.480 --> 0:16:16.640
<v Speaker 4>Less into Genarian price than a lot of other people are. Plus,

0:16:16.680 --> 0:16:19.080
<v Speaker 4>we just don't know how good he is based on

0:16:19.160 --> 0:16:22.480
<v Speaker 4>his college track record, because he was always Jeremiah loves

0:16:22.520 --> 0:16:26.000
<v Speaker 4>backup and he does like this passes.

0:16:27.040 --> 0:16:30.120
<v Speaker 2>I'm really in on price for this year. I think

0:16:30.240 --> 0:16:32.400
<v Speaker 2>I'm not worried about Sharboney with as late as I

0:16:32.440 --> 0:16:35.320
<v Speaker 2>expect him to come back and need time to kind

0:16:35.320 --> 0:16:37.560
<v Speaker 2>of get back into things. Like, I'm very in on

0:16:37.640 --> 0:16:40.760
<v Speaker 2>Price this year, and yet I still would rather have

0:16:40.840 --> 0:16:43.880
<v Speaker 2>any twenty twenty seven first than Price, even though I

0:16:43.920 --> 0:16:45.880
<v Speaker 2>expect Price to have a good year where his value

0:16:45.880 --> 0:16:48.000
<v Speaker 2>in a vacuum will rise. I just think the class

0:16:48.080 --> 0:16:50.440
<v Speaker 2>is good enough that i'd rather take the swing, especially

0:16:50.440 --> 0:16:52.120
<v Speaker 2>if there's a chance it's more like a mid first

0:16:52.160 --> 0:16:54.400
<v Speaker 2>next Those mid first next year are going to be awesome,

0:16:54.880 --> 0:16:59.120
<v Speaker 2>so I would want to take that swing, even though

0:16:59.280 --> 0:17:00.440
<v Speaker 2>I like Price more than you.

0:17:01.800 --> 0:17:04.280
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, digga, All right.

0:17:05.160 --> 0:17:09.000
<v Speaker 2>Let's look at the receivers here fits. I mean, I

0:17:09.080 --> 0:17:11.480
<v Speaker 2>keep repeating myself, but not a ton of changes here.

0:17:11.840 --> 0:17:14.359
<v Speaker 2>One guy who actually has moved up a little is

0:17:14.480 --> 0:17:17.000
<v Speaker 2>Luther Burden. He's been kind of one of the more

0:17:17.000 --> 0:17:20.000
<v Speaker 2>interesting guys that folks have talked about this offseason. He's

0:17:20.000 --> 0:17:24.080
<v Speaker 2>now tied for sixteenth on this list with Jordan Tyson

0:17:24.320 --> 0:17:28.359
<v Speaker 2>and Ladd McConkie, just ahead of mackay Lemon, Devonte Smith,

0:17:28.480 --> 0:17:32.680
<v Speaker 2>Roma Doonza, and a few points behind Chris Olave, Nico

0:17:32.760 --> 0:17:34.639
<v Speaker 2>Collins and Garrett Wilson. There's a little bit of a

0:17:34.640 --> 0:17:37.600
<v Speaker 2>gap between the top fifteen and then sixteen in below.

0:17:38.040 --> 0:17:39.920
<v Speaker 2>You have been the high man on Luther Burden. So

0:17:40.040 --> 0:17:42.200
<v Speaker 2>are you feeling a little bit vindicated seeing him just

0:17:42.280 --> 0:17:45.840
<v Speaker 2>slowly ever, so, you know, creeping up the rankings, or

0:17:46.320 --> 0:17:47.840
<v Speaker 2>do you feel like, you know, you kind of planted

0:17:47.840 --> 0:17:48.800
<v Speaker 2>your flag first here.

0:17:49.200 --> 0:17:50.880
<v Speaker 1>What's your reaction to Burden moving up a bit.

0:17:51.640 --> 0:17:52.680
<v Speaker 3>I'm not surprised.

0:17:52.960 --> 0:17:56.919
<v Speaker 4>Just a young player playing in a really good offensive system,

0:17:57.000 --> 0:17:59.600
<v Speaker 4>playing with a good quarterback, has an immediate path to

0:17:59.800 --> 0:18:03.320
<v Speaker 4>like target growth. And we have seen, like it's not

0:18:03.400 --> 0:18:06.000
<v Speaker 4>just our Dynasty Trade value chart, which is kind of

0:18:06.000 --> 0:18:09.119
<v Speaker 4>powered by the rankings of me and Andrew ricksident Derek Brown.

0:18:09.359 --> 0:18:11.800
<v Speaker 4>I've seen his probably come up on Keep Trade Cut,

0:18:12.040 --> 0:18:15.760
<v Speaker 4>Dynasty Trade Calculator, some of the other you know, gauges

0:18:15.760 --> 0:18:19.200
<v Speaker 4>of the market out there. So I do think there's

0:18:19.280 --> 0:18:21.240
<v Speaker 4>growing enthusiasm for him.

0:18:21.960 --> 0:18:24.600
<v Speaker 2>A guy ahead of him who didn't move in this update,

0:18:24.600 --> 0:18:26.480
<v Speaker 2>but I still want to bring up his Carnel Tate.

0:18:26.640 --> 0:18:28.040
<v Speaker 1>I like Tate a lot.

0:18:28.160 --> 0:18:30.240
<v Speaker 2>There are some names behind him that I'm like a

0:18:30.280 --> 0:18:33.040
<v Speaker 2>little nervous to have behind him, particularly like Nico Collins.

0:18:33.359 --> 0:18:35.000
<v Speaker 1>I know there's like an age gap at this.

0:18:34.960 --> 0:18:36.919
<v Speaker 2>Point between those two because Nico has been in the

0:18:37.040 --> 0:18:39.200
<v Speaker 2>league a few years and came in older than Tate did.

0:18:39.680 --> 0:18:42.000
<v Speaker 2>But I feel like the appeal of Tate is that

0:18:42.040 --> 0:18:44.040
<v Speaker 2>I think he's going to be good right away, and

0:18:44.080 --> 0:18:46.480
<v Speaker 2>I'm reasonably certain he's going to be a good player.

0:18:46.760 --> 0:18:48.240
<v Speaker 1>I'm not saying he has no ceiling.

0:18:48.320 --> 0:18:52.639
<v Speaker 2>I like him a ton, but I almost would just

0:18:52.680 --> 0:18:55.320
<v Speaker 2>prefer maybe the ceiling of a guy like Nico compared

0:18:55.359 --> 0:18:58.639
<v Speaker 2>to Tate. I I'm surprised to see Tate given that

0:18:58.800 --> 0:19:02.000
<v Speaker 2>he was considered a bit of a lesser receiving prospect

0:19:02.160 --> 0:19:04.480
<v Speaker 2>than some of the elite guys that have come through lately,

0:19:04.520 --> 0:19:07.280
<v Speaker 2>like you know, Marveat Harrison Junior as a prospect Milik Neighbors.

0:19:07.320 --> 0:19:09.480
<v Speaker 2>It's not that it's we didn't like Tate, but you know,

0:19:09.560 --> 0:19:11.679
<v Speaker 2>Teero McMillan another one that I thought came in with

0:19:11.760 --> 0:19:14.520
<v Speaker 2>a little bit more hype than Tate, and so I

0:19:14.560 --> 0:19:16.360
<v Speaker 2>was a little surprised to see Tate at eleven. Where

0:19:16.400 --> 0:19:18.320
<v Speaker 2>do you have him ranked in Dynasty right now?

0:19:19.400 --> 0:19:22.680
<v Speaker 4>I've got tits and I totally get what you're saying,

0:19:22.680 --> 0:19:25.600
<v Speaker 4>and I feel like maybe I'm a little bit high

0:19:25.680 --> 0:19:30.400
<v Speaker 4>on him. I've got Tate thirteenth and the one that

0:19:30.560 --> 0:19:34.639
<v Speaker 4>I'm I'm going to change in time for the August trade.

0:19:34.720 --> 0:19:37.640
<v Speaker 4>Value Charp, I've got him on spot ahead of George Pickens.

0:19:38.520 --> 0:19:42.120
<v Speaker 4>And the funny thing is Pickens. The book on Pickens

0:19:42.160 --> 0:19:44.520
<v Speaker 4>going into last year was sort of the same as

0:19:44.560 --> 0:19:50.639
<v Speaker 4>the book on Tait. Downfield playmaker might not earn targets

0:19:50.680 --> 0:19:54.159
<v Speaker 4>at uh, you know, alpha receiver rates, but he's going

0:19:54.240 --> 0:19:56.639
<v Speaker 4>to make a lot of big plays and could maybe

0:19:56.680 --> 0:20:00.720
<v Speaker 4>sort of grow into a bigger target chair That's exactly

0:20:00.720 --> 0:20:03.480
<v Speaker 4>what happened with Pickens. Like still making a lot of

0:20:03.520 --> 0:20:05.720
<v Speaker 4>plays downfield last year, but he started to get way

0:20:05.760 --> 0:20:11.159
<v Speaker 4>more targets in a more aggressive passing offense after the

0:20:11.200 --> 0:20:13.560
<v Speaker 4>move from Pittsburgh to Dallas. Plus he got a little

0:20:13.560 --> 0:20:15.880
<v Speaker 4>boost from Ceedee Lamb missing some time and not being

0:20:15.880 --> 0:20:19.439
<v Speaker 4>totally healthy for the entire season. But Pickens kind of

0:20:19.440 --> 0:20:22.000
<v Speaker 4>expanded his role and showed he could do it. Why

0:20:22.040 --> 0:20:25.400
<v Speaker 4>do we have Tate ahead of Pickens, the guy who

0:20:25.560 --> 0:20:28.040
<v Speaker 4>showed out and showed he could take on a bigger

0:20:28.119 --> 0:20:29.680
<v Speaker 4>role and still be pretty awesome.

0:20:30.280 --> 0:20:31.320
<v Speaker 3>Whereas Tate.

0:20:32.600 --> 0:20:35.520
<v Speaker 4>Was the number two in his own college program and

0:20:35.600 --> 0:20:37.679
<v Speaker 4>now is we don't know if he can be an

0:20:37.680 --> 0:20:41.360
<v Speaker 4>alpha receiver. Wouldn't surprise me if Wandale Robinson had more

0:20:41.359 --> 0:20:45.199
<v Speaker 4>targets than Carnel Tate this year, and boy, I like

0:20:45.240 --> 0:20:48.639
<v Speaker 4>pickens situation a lot more than Tate's situation, So I

0:20:48.640 --> 0:20:50.639
<v Speaker 4>think I got to move Pickens ahead of Tate and

0:20:51.160 --> 0:20:52.959
<v Speaker 4>might be more than just one spot ahead.

0:20:53.520 --> 0:20:55.200
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, they're tied in the chart.

0:20:55.240 --> 0:20:58.720
<v Speaker 2>We don't know. So if you look at the top twelve,

0:20:58.800 --> 0:21:01.199
<v Speaker 2>like I would say, we know the east about Tate's

0:21:01.240 --> 0:21:05.440
<v Speaker 2>quarterback of anybody else in the top twelve besides Justin Jefferson,

0:21:05.480 --> 0:21:07.640
<v Speaker 2>who obviously, like we think, you know, it's probably gonna

0:21:07.680 --> 0:21:10.640
<v Speaker 2>be Khyler and that maybe will be more certain this year,

0:21:10.680 --> 0:21:12.960
<v Speaker 2>but there was some certain last year. The other guys

0:21:13.000 --> 0:21:16.080
<v Speaker 2>like Chase has Burrow, jsn Iss, Sam Darnold, Puka has Stafford,

0:21:16.080 --> 0:21:18.920
<v Speaker 2>Amena has Goff, you know, Ceedee Lamb as Dak Prescott,

0:21:18.920 --> 0:21:21.760
<v Speaker 2>George Pickens as Dak Prescott, like like you could say,

0:21:21.760 --> 0:21:23.639
<v Speaker 2>like Drake London, Like I don't know, I feel a

0:21:23.680 --> 0:21:26.480
<v Speaker 2>little more sure about what we're gonna get when Pennix's

0:21:26.560 --> 0:21:29.240
<v Speaker 2>and to our respectively are on the field as opposed

0:21:29.280 --> 0:21:32.119
<v Speaker 2>to you know Ward. I like him Ward quite a bit,

0:21:32.160 --> 0:21:34.040
<v Speaker 2>But it just feels like there's some uncertainty there quarterback

0:21:34.040 --> 0:21:35.320
<v Speaker 2>that maybe some of these other guys in the top

0:21:35.320 --> 0:21:36.159
<v Speaker 2>twelve don't have.

0:21:36.840 --> 0:21:40.080
<v Speaker 4>Would you rather have Tate than either Lad mcconachie or

0:21:40.119 --> 0:21:40.960
<v Speaker 4>Garrett Wilson.

0:21:43.400 --> 0:21:46.520
<v Speaker 2>I have always been the guy who's a couple spots

0:21:46.560 --> 0:21:50.800
<v Speaker 2>too high on Wilson, So I if Mike has I

0:21:50.880 --> 0:21:53.880
<v Speaker 2>hesitate to not be overly aggressive in answering that because

0:21:53.920 --> 0:21:55.800
<v Speaker 2>my initial reaction is that I would rather have Wilson,

0:21:56.440 --> 0:21:58.879
<v Speaker 2>especially because there's only like a four year age, you know,

0:21:59.000 --> 0:22:03.720
<v Speaker 2>age difference between them. I think Lad is properly ranked

0:22:03.920 --> 0:22:06.359
<v Speaker 2>where he's at, which is eighteenth. I think you could

0:22:06.400 --> 0:22:08.399
<v Speaker 2>justify putting up at like fifteen. I don't think he

0:22:08.400 --> 0:22:11.639
<v Speaker 2>should be inside the top twelve, but it would not

0:22:11.720 --> 0:22:14.119
<v Speaker 2>surprise me if he jumps in there this year with

0:22:14.200 --> 0:22:17.720
<v Speaker 2>Mike McDaniel and hopefully healthy offensive line and everything like that.

0:22:18.040 --> 0:22:20.840
<v Speaker 2>So as I'm kind of talking through it, I do

0:22:20.880 --> 0:22:24.240
<v Speaker 2>think I would rather have Lad.

0:22:25.440 --> 0:22:25.800
<v Speaker 1>I don't know.

0:22:25.840 --> 0:22:27.880
<v Speaker 2>That's a tough one because I like the market would

0:22:27.880 --> 0:22:29.920
<v Speaker 2>dictate that. It's not like when you're making trades, right,

0:22:29.920 --> 0:22:32.880
<v Speaker 2>you have to pay attention to what guy's values are,

0:22:32.920 --> 0:22:35.280
<v Speaker 2>and it would feel, based on the market that it

0:22:35.320 --> 0:22:38.080
<v Speaker 2>wouldn't be very smart to trade away Tate for Lad

0:22:38.480 --> 0:22:41.040
<v Speaker 2>but if I was on the clock in a startup

0:22:41.400 --> 0:22:43.880
<v Speaker 2>in whatever round these guys are kind of going in

0:22:43.920 --> 0:22:47.040
<v Speaker 2>this stretch of receivers, I think I might be inclined

0:22:47.080 --> 0:22:51.200
<v Speaker 2>to take Lad over over Tate because I'm more confident

0:22:51.200 --> 0:22:54.560
<v Speaker 2>in the quarterbacks certainly long term, I'm very confident in

0:22:54.600 --> 0:22:57.240
<v Speaker 2>the offensive play caller for at least this year. Like

0:22:57.280 --> 0:22:59.440
<v Speaker 2>the offensive environment is just so much better, and Ladd

0:22:59.440 --> 0:23:01.240
<v Speaker 2>is a really good play who has had a great

0:23:01.240 --> 0:23:03.719
<v Speaker 2>fantasy season before, especially if you count what he did

0:23:03.760 --> 0:23:05.919
<v Speaker 2>in the playoffs and at the end of his rookie season,

0:23:06.040 --> 0:23:08.639
<v Speaker 2>like like throwing in those stats, like what an exceptional

0:23:08.680 --> 0:23:11.359
<v Speaker 2>first year. So I think I would prefer Lad, even

0:23:11.400 --> 0:23:13.639
<v Speaker 2>though it feels like trading Tait for Lad would be

0:23:14.119 --> 0:23:17.040
<v Speaker 2>a bad quote unquote value in a vacuum.

0:23:17.600 --> 0:23:21.200
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, I mean, there are some numbers that could sort

0:23:21.200 --> 0:23:25.400
<v Speaker 4>of paint Lad as having a really disappointing twenty twenty five.

0:23:25.480 --> 0:23:27.399
<v Speaker 4>But man, the whole offense I felt like was just

0:23:27.440 --> 0:23:31.680
<v Speaker 4>broken last year when the offensive line fell apart due

0:23:31.680 --> 0:23:33.680
<v Speaker 4>to injury, well due to injury in the middle of

0:23:33.720 --> 0:23:36.960
<v Speaker 4>the offensive line just being terrible. Yeah, So I do

0:23:37.000 --> 0:23:40.800
<v Speaker 4>think it's close with all three guys, you know, a

0:23:40.880 --> 0:23:44.359
<v Speaker 4>year ago would have been a no way would I

0:23:44.359 --> 0:23:47.119
<v Speaker 4>have put Carnell Tate, a guy with that sort of

0:23:47.160 --> 0:23:50.840
<v Speaker 4>rookie profile, ahead of Garrett Wilson. But it's like Garrett Wilson,

0:23:50.880 --> 0:23:53.320
<v Speaker 4>we always said, oh, this guy's going to be great eventually,

0:23:53.400 --> 0:23:55.520
<v Speaker 4>he's going to get a quarterback, and now he's kind

0:23:55.520 --> 0:23:57.760
<v Speaker 4>of moving into the prime of his career and like

0:23:57.880 --> 0:24:01.040
<v Speaker 4>still doesn't have that quarterback yet. I mean, I think

0:24:01.080 --> 0:24:05.440
<v Speaker 4>Garret Wilson turns twenty six, like later this summer, before

0:24:05.480 --> 0:24:09.040
<v Speaker 4>the season starts. It's like, man, what how old is

0:24:09.080 --> 0:24:11.760
<v Speaker 4>he going to be before he's actually got his quarterback

0:24:11.800 --> 0:24:15.480
<v Speaker 4>hopefully next year Arch Manning, Dante More or someone like that.

0:24:15.720 --> 0:24:17.680
<v Speaker 3>But poor Garrett Wilson.

0:24:17.720 --> 0:24:19.560
<v Speaker 4>I just don't want him to see him don't want

0:24:19.600 --> 0:24:22.120
<v Speaker 4>to see him age out before he has a competent

0:24:22.320 --> 0:24:24.000
<v Speaker 4>quarterback he can work with.

0:24:24.200 --> 0:24:26.360
<v Speaker 2>I don't think you can value him as if he's

0:24:26.400 --> 0:24:29.119
<v Speaker 2>definitely getting the quarterback next year, because we just don't know,

0:24:29.160 --> 0:24:31.919
<v Speaker 2>and that's a tricky game. If he does get Arch Manning,

0:24:32.400 --> 0:24:35.600
<v Speaker 2>I'll be very excited about him, even as a you know,

0:24:35.760 --> 0:24:37.280
<v Speaker 2>about to be twenty seven year old.

0:24:37.720 --> 0:24:38.640
<v Speaker 1>I think he'll give us.

0:24:38.520 --> 0:24:41.359
<v Speaker 2>A few pretty good years still paired with a with

0:24:41.400 --> 0:24:43.080
<v Speaker 2>an actually good rookie quarterback, if it have.

0:24:44.080 --> 0:24:47.760
<v Speaker 4>I got him at forty seven overall in the Dynasty startup.

0:24:47.920 --> 0:24:51.160
<v Speaker 4>I think that's good value. He was four pick four eleven.

0:24:51.600 --> 0:24:53.840
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, so that you gonna say that's what late fourth?

0:24:54.119 --> 0:24:54.439
<v Speaker 3>Yeah?

0:24:54.840 --> 0:24:57.000
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I mean it depends on who else on the board,

0:24:57.040 --> 0:24:57.760
<v Speaker 1>But I think so.

0:24:58.760 --> 0:25:02.000
<v Speaker 3>I'd like I think so too. I expected him to go, wait, he's.

0:25:01.840 --> 0:25:03.800
<v Speaker 2>A good player, like he just needs the quarterback. He's

0:25:03.840 --> 0:25:06.359
<v Speaker 2>a good player. So yep, i'd be in on that.

0:25:06.680 --> 0:25:08.600
<v Speaker 2>All right, Let's look at the tight ends briefly here,

0:25:09.440 --> 0:25:12.880
<v Speaker 2>and then we will get to some of the questions

0:25:12.920 --> 0:25:15.840
<v Speaker 2>from the fine folks in the discord chat. I did

0:25:15.880 --> 0:25:18.199
<v Speaker 2>notice that George Kittle got bumped up a bit. Is

0:25:18.200 --> 0:25:20.879
<v Speaker 2>that like a degree of injury optimism? Is that just

0:25:21.040 --> 0:25:23.640
<v Speaker 2>like feeling at least we know he's really good when

0:25:23.640 --> 0:25:27.240
<v Speaker 2>he's healthy. Was that somebody else and not you? This

0:25:27.280 --> 0:25:30.800
<v Speaker 2>is a collective collaborative effort here between you Ericson and Debro.

0:25:31.040 --> 0:25:34.040
<v Speaker 2>Can you speak to Kittle moving up a bit? He's

0:25:34.040 --> 0:25:36.480
<v Speaker 2>still tight end thirteen, but just rose in value.

0:25:37.200 --> 0:25:39.159
<v Speaker 4>I think I bumped him spot or two, and I

0:25:39.200 --> 0:25:41.360
<v Speaker 4>think some of the other guys. Most have too, because

0:25:41.480 --> 0:25:46.200
<v Speaker 4>you know, for a three point value gain suggests that, yeah,

0:25:46.600 --> 0:25:49.600
<v Speaker 4>the reports have been pretty positive that there's a realistic

0:25:49.720 --> 0:25:52.280
<v Speaker 4>chance he'll be able to play, if not in that

0:25:52.320 --> 0:25:55.800
<v Speaker 4>week one game in what Australia is that where they're

0:25:55.800 --> 0:25:56.520
<v Speaker 4>playing the Rams.

0:25:56.600 --> 0:25:57.639
<v Speaker 3>I think it's Australia.

0:25:57.760 --> 0:25:59.120
<v Speaker 2>Yes, I believe it's Melbourne.

0:25:59.200 --> 0:26:01.320
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, so if.

0:26:01.000 --> 0:26:03.879
<v Speaker 4>Not week one, then like week two, he's going to

0:26:03.920 --> 0:26:07.399
<v Speaker 4>be ready to go because apparently there was some and

0:26:07.440 --> 0:26:09.040
<v Speaker 4>I got to read up more in the injury, but

0:26:09.080 --> 0:26:14.159
<v Speaker 4>apparently it wasn't as bad as the typical achilles tear.

0:26:14.119 --> 0:26:17.720
<v Speaker 3>Because I forget what they said. It happened higher or

0:26:17.760 --> 0:26:18.200
<v Speaker 3>something like.

0:26:18.520 --> 0:26:22.879
<v Speaker 4>I don't want to speak on that unintelligently, unlike so

0:26:22.920 --> 0:26:25.679
<v Speaker 4>many other things I speak unintelligently on. But I'm not

0:26:25.720 --> 0:26:29.520
<v Speaker 4>sure there is some mitigating circumstance where they think it's

0:26:29.640 --> 0:26:32.440
<v Speaker 4>a lesser Achilles tear, if that's possible.

0:26:33.720 --> 0:26:37.080
<v Speaker 2>The gap increased slightly between Bowers and McBride at the top.

0:26:37.200 --> 0:26:40.840
<v Speaker 2>I think I agree with that. Loveland stays where he is, third,

0:26:41.119 --> 0:26:43.200
<v Speaker 2>Warren slight bump still in the same spot to a

0:26:43.280 --> 0:26:45.320
<v Speaker 2>fourth he's Warren kind of stands alone a fourth. He's

0:26:45.359 --> 0:26:47.800
<v Speaker 2>not that close to Loveland at three, but he's pretty

0:26:47.800 --> 0:26:49.840
<v Speaker 2>far ahead of Tucker Craft at five. He's just kind

0:26:49.840 --> 0:26:53.320
<v Speaker 2>of settled in as tight end four. Harold fannin excuse me,

0:26:53.440 --> 0:26:57.000
<v Speaker 2>is tight end six? Kyle Pitts or Sam Laporta, they

0:26:57.000 --> 0:26:59.479
<v Speaker 2>are very close. Pitts is just a hair ahead on

0:26:59.520 --> 0:27:02.399
<v Speaker 2>the chart, but they're essentially tied in value tight end

0:27:02.440 --> 0:27:04.919
<v Speaker 2>seven and tight end eight in a startup and maybe you,

0:27:05.000 --> 0:27:07.040
<v Speaker 2>I don't know, if you came across a decision like

0:27:07.040 --> 0:27:08.879
<v Speaker 2>this in the startup that you're a part of right now,

0:27:09.000 --> 0:27:11.280
<v Speaker 2>would you prefer Pits or Laporta as your tight end.

0:27:11.960 --> 0:27:14.359
<v Speaker 4>Pitts got picked about eight spots before I picked, and

0:27:14.400 --> 0:27:15.760
<v Speaker 4>I picked Laporta in the same room.

0:27:15.880 --> 0:27:17.960
<v Speaker 2>Okay, nice.

0:27:20.480 --> 0:27:24.920
<v Speaker 4>I would draft Pits over Laporta. But Laporta was the

0:27:25.040 --> 0:27:27.879
<v Speaker 4>last of the top eight tight ends to go, and

0:27:27.920 --> 0:27:29.640
<v Speaker 4>I was glad to get him because I think there's

0:27:29.640 --> 0:27:31.440
<v Speaker 4>a drop off after Laporta.

0:27:32.000 --> 0:27:35.560
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I would agree with that. It feels pretty you know,

0:27:35.800 --> 0:27:38.160
<v Speaker 2>Laporta is at eight. Then Kenyon sid get nine. Now

0:27:38.280 --> 0:27:42.000
<v Speaker 2>he's a top twenty pick, very athletic, reason to be interested,

0:27:42.119 --> 0:27:44.000
<v Speaker 2>but he's a twenty one year old who went to

0:27:44.000 --> 0:27:46.560
<v Speaker 2>the Jets, who hasn't done it before. Laporte has had

0:27:46.600 --> 0:27:48.879
<v Speaker 2>an elite season, He's in a good offense, he's with

0:27:48.920 --> 0:27:51.400
<v Speaker 2>a good quarterback there, and he's still young, he's twenty five.

0:27:51.560 --> 0:27:52.920
<v Speaker 2>There are a lot of reasons I think that there.

0:27:52.920 --> 0:27:54.520
<v Speaker 2>It feels like a gap between the top eight and

0:27:54.840 --> 0:27:59.879
<v Speaker 2>the rest. So I like that any favorites late, you know,

0:28:00.000 --> 0:28:02.879
<v Speaker 2>so it could be We've talked about about Chigaconquo that

0:28:02.920 --> 0:28:05.960
<v Speaker 2>I like a lot Terrence Ferguson is up at tight

0:28:06.040 --> 0:28:08.679
<v Speaker 2>end eighteen, you know, as a veteran. Mark Andrews, I

0:28:08.800 --> 0:28:12.080
<v Speaker 2>like this year, you know, even looking later, like you know,

0:28:12.160 --> 0:28:14.560
<v Speaker 2>just an upside swinging on a twenty three year old

0:28:14.560 --> 0:28:17.640
<v Speaker 2>at gunner Helm or you know, Elijah Royo, Max Clair

0:28:17.640 --> 0:28:20.160
<v Speaker 2>we talked about during Rooie drafts. Sy'son any names saying

0:28:20.160 --> 0:28:22.200
<v Speaker 2>out to Greg Dulci if Erickson were on the show,

0:28:22.240 --> 0:28:24.800
<v Speaker 2>would certainly talk about him. Any deep sleepers that you

0:28:24.880 --> 0:28:27.199
<v Speaker 2>like in Dynasty, particularly at the tight end position.

0:28:28.040 --> 0:28:29.600
<v Speaker 3>Those are all interesting names.

0:28:29.800 --> 0:28:31.560
<v Speaker 4>The only guy I think is going to lose value

0:28:31.560 --> 0:28:33.720
<v Speaker 4>from now to next year is Max Claire, because I

0:28:33.760 --> 0:28:35.840
<v Speaker 4>think Max Clair is probably gonna have something close to

0:28:35.880 --> 0:28:38.320
<v Speaker 4>a red shirt season where he just doesn't play that much.

0:28:38.400 --> 0:28:42.440
<v Speaker 4>But the Rams glut of tight ends wouldn't be surprising

0:28:42.600 --> 0:28:45.120
<v Speaker 4>if he were just inactive on game days and the.

0:28:45.080 --> 0:28:46.719
<v Speaker 3>Other four guys play if they're healthy.

0:28:47.320 --> 0:28:49.680
<v Speaker 4>Of all the guys you mentioned, I think the other Ram,

0:28:49.920 --> 0:28:54.560
<v Speaker 4>Terrence Ferguson, is the most interesting, like just the way

0:28:54.720 --> 0:28:59.760
<v Speaker 4>the Rams brass talks about him, the way he was

0:29:00.840 --> 0:29:03.560
<v Speaker 4>I mean, like a big play tight end last year.

0:29:03.600 --> 0:29:05.600
<v Speaker 4>I know he didn't have a lot of targets, not

0:29:05.680 --> 0:29:08.400
<v Speaker 4>a lot of catches, but like he averaged what twenty

0:29:08.440 --> 0:29:11.120
<v Speaker 4>one yards of catch or something. It was insane. I

0:29:11.120 --> 0:29:14.240
<v Speaker 4>wouldn't be shocked if he made a big second year

0:29:14.320 --> 0:29:17.320
<v Speaker 4>leap and wound up being basically the third most valuable

0:29:17.360 --> 0:29:21.160
<v Speaker 4>pass catcher in this offense behind Puka and Davante, Like

0:29:21.200 --> 0:29:24.719
<v Speaker 4>I think, especially with not much else at receiver, at

0:29:24.800 --> 0:29:27.680
<v Speaker 4>least not much proven. I know, like you know, I

0:29:28.680 --> 0:29:31.719
<v Speaker 4>think Kannada Mumfield is a good guy to spend your

0:29:31.800 --> 0:29:35.000
<v Speaker 4>last roster spot on. And uh, you know, maybe it's

0:29:35.120 --> 0:29:38.320
<v Speaker 4>Jordan Whittington or one of these other guys, But like

0:29:38.960 --> 0:29:42.440
<v Speaker 4>I think Ferguson is really intriguing. Could be a guy

0:29:42.520 --> 0:29:45.440
<v Speaker 4>who's climbs way up on this chart a year from

0:29:45.480 --> 0:29:47.320
<v Speaker 4>now or less than a year from now.

0:29:48.080 --> 0:29:51.040
<v Speaker 2>I talked on a redraft show earlier with deebro and

0:29:51.120 --> 0:29:55.640
<v Speaker 2>Jake Seely about Terrence Ferguson, and we talked about how

0:29:55.800 --> 0:29:59.120
<v Speaker 2>like basically he's very deep sleep where you can get

0:29:59.120 --> 0:30:01.480
<v Speaker 2>a basically for free and redraft, but a tight end

0:30:01.480 --> 0:30:05.080
<v Speaker 2>I think was thirty is like pretty I think, you know,

0:30:05.120 --> 0:30:08.959
<v Speaker 2>there's real upside there in our chart. He's tight end

0:30:09.040 --> 0:30:11.840
<v Speaker 2>eighteen in this Dynasty's different than redrafts of course, but

0:30:11.880 --> 0:30:14.160
<v Speaker 2>like he's up at eighteen, so like they're clearly, at

0:30:14.200 --> 0:30:18.520
<v Speaker 2>least within our staff is some interest in Ferguson in Dynasty,

0:30:18.520 --> 0:30:22.440
<v Speaker 2>which I wholeheartedly endorse. I love him as a later

0:30:22.760 --> 0:30:24.640
<v Speaker 2>you know, a cheaper guy you can try to target

0:30:24.760 --> 0:30:25.360
<v Speaker 2>at tight end.

0:30:26.200 --> 0:30:29.120
<v Speaker 4>Rams tight ends combined for over one hundred catches and

0:30:29.240 --> 0:30:34.160
<v Speaker 4>seventeen touchdowns last year. We just need that consolidated amongst

0:30:34.640 --> 0:30:37.240
<v Speaker 4>one or two, or maybe like a third guy chips

0:30:37.240 --> 0:30:38.440
<v Speaker 4>in a little bit, just not.

0:30:38.800 --> 0:30:39.960
<v Speaker 3>Four or five.

0:30:40.800 --> 0:30:43.000
<v Speaker 2>He's the guy in the offense who has the best

0:30:43.040 --> 0:30:47.800
<v Speaker 2>combination of affordable in trades or startup drafts and could

0:30:47.800 --> 0:30:51.120
<v Speaker 2>be a top three target earner in the offense. Nobody

0:30:51.160 --> 0:30:53.520
<v Speaker 2>else in the rams will give you that combination. So

0:30:53.920 --> 0:30:56.400
<v Speaker 2>if we're talking about buying into that with a guy

0:30:56.400 --> 0:30:58.360
<v Speaker 2>who loves tight ends and Sean McVay and the best

0:30:58.360 --> 0:31:00.520
<v Speaker 2>offensive mind, like, that's pretty Only.

0:31:01.040 --> 0:31:02.920
<v Speaker 4>He went two spots in front of me in this

0:31:03.040 --> 0:31:05.800
<v Speaker 4>startup when I was intending to take him, and it

0:31:05.880 --> 0:31:06.600
<v Speaker 4>hurt my soul.

0:31:07.440 --> 0:31:11.200
<v Speaker 2>That's a tagger. You can evaluate trades with confidence using

0:31:11.240 --> 0:31:14.400
<v Speaker 2>the Trade Analyzer. Instantly see the impact of trades on

0:31:14.480 --> 0:31:17.720
<v Speaker 2>your team and get expert recommendations, whether you're receiving a

0:31:17.720 --> 0:31:19.960
<v Speaker 2>two for one package or swapping draft picks for that

0:31:20.000 --> 0:31:22.680
<v Speaker 2>stud who will help you win now. Our Analyzer helps

0:31:22.720 --> 0:31:26.040
<v Speaker 2>you make smarter, data driven decisions. Access to the Trade

0:31:26.040 --> 0:31:29.600
<v Speaker 2>Analyzer is included for all premium subscribers. Start your three

0:31:29.720 --> 0:31:33.280
<v Speaker 2>day free trial today at Fantasypros dot com slash Dynasty

0:31:33.320 --> 0:31:36.000
<v Speaker 2>twenty six and win the trade market with the Trade

0:31:36.040 --> 0:31:41.160
<v Speaker 2>Analyzer at Fantasypros dot Com slash My Playbook. All right, Fitz,

0:31:41.240 --> 0:31:45.440
<v Speaker 2>let's get to some questions from our wonderful listeners. Let's

0:31:45.440 --> 0:31:47.520
<v Speaker 2>start off with a couple that were written in the chat.

0:31:47.520 --> 0:31:50.320
<v Speaker 2>We can always call folks up onto the stage. As

0:31:50.400 --> 0:31:53.840
<v Speaker 2>well as more of those hands come up. Bunting couldn't

0:31:53.840 --> 0:31:56.240
<v Speaker 2>make the chat today, so he dropped in chat just

0:31:56.240 --> 0:31:58.360
<v Speaker 2>a couple of minutes early to drop in a question,

0:31:59.120 --> 0:32:01.480
<v Speaker 2>what would you give up for a donsay in a rebuild?

0:32:01.600 --> 0:32:04.600
<v Speaker 2>If anything, I think his talent has to come through eventually.

0:32:04.960 --> 0:32:07.240
<v Speaker 2>I have a bunch of twenty seven firsts and lamb

0:32:07.320 --> 0:32:09.120
<v Speaker 2>as my biggest pieces in the rebuild.

0:32:09.440 --> 0:32:11.320
<v Speaker 1>Thank you guys.

0:32:12.480 --> 0:32:16.240
<v Speaker 4>Our trade value chart says mid first. I feel like

0:32:16.320 --> 0:32:18.320
<v Speaker 4>that's too high. Would you give up a late first

0:32:18.360 --> 0:32:20.560
<v Speaker 4>for a doonsday? I feel like late first is the

0:32:20.640 --> 0:32:21.200
<v Speaker 4>right price.

0:32:22.280 --> 0:32:24.640
<v Speaker 2>My first attempt to trade for a doon Day would

0:32:24.680 --> 0:32:27.040
<v Speaker 2>be a twenty eight first and say I don't even

0:32:27.040 --> 0:32:28.479
<v Speaker 2>know where it's going to fall in the class, but

0:32:29.200 --> 0:32:31.160
<v Speaker 2>if I can keep my twenty seven and get a donsday,

0:32:31.160 --> 0:32:34.640
<v Speaker 2>I would do that. If they wouldn't take that, I

0:32:34.680 --> 0:32:36.240
<v Speaker 2>do think I would trade a late first. I would

0:32:36.280 --> 0:32:38.479
<v Speaker 2>have to be pretty confident it's late though, not one

0:32:38.520 --> 0:32:40.280
<v Speaker 2>of these like, oh I think I'm going to contend

0:32:40.360 --> 0:32:42.240
<v Speaker 2>and have a shot. I would want to be like,

0:32:42.640 --> 0:32:44.560
<v Speaker 2>it's going to be tough for this pick to fall out,

0:32:44.560 --> 0:32:47.920
<v Speaker 2>you know, inside the top nine, right, like I wouldn't.

0:32:48.000 --> 0:32:49.520
<v Speaker 2>I wouldn't trade it with a pick that there is

0:32:49.560 --> 0:32:52.400
<v Speaker 2>a reasonable chance of, oh, this actually ended up like

0:32:52.480 --> 0:32:54.440
<v Speaker 2>the fourth or fifth pick, because that would that would

0:32:54.480 --> 0:32:56.960
<v Speaker 2>scare me. So if I was really sure that this

0:32:57.040 --> 0:32:58.640
<v Speaker 2>is going to be a late pick, because you never

0:32:58.680 --> 0:33:01.000
<v Speaker 2>really know, then I think I would. I like a

0:33:01.080 --> 0:33:02.720
<v Speaker 2>Duneesay a lot.

0:33:03.080 --> 0:33:07.960
<v Speaker 4>In our chat k least shout out, k lest suggests

0:33:08.200 --> 0:33:15.680
<v Speaker 4>that maybe if Bunting dealt Lamb, he could get oduonsay plus.

0:33:16.600 --> 0:33:21.000
<v Speaker 4>I think from plus Lamb to Rome and what is

0:33:21.240 --> 0:33:23.600
<v Speaker 4>the gap that bridges that? Like what a twenty twenty

0:33:23.640 --> 0:33:25.600
<v Speaker 4>seven second bridge the gap?

0:33:26.480 --> 0:33:28.400
<v Speaker 2>I don't know that it would for me a because

0:33:28.440 --> 0:33:31.160
<v Speaker 2>I really like CD and I'm expecting a big year

0:33:31.200 --> 0:33:34.680
<v Speaker 2>from him and B. I like there is still the

0:33:34.720 --> 0:33:38.120
<v Speaker 2>element of Rome's foot that is a part of the

0:33:38.120 --> 0:33:41.120
<v Speaker 2>equation where there's some injury question mark and some of

0:33:41.160 --> 0:33:43.440
<v Speaker 2>the comments from him about you know, kind of a

0:33:43.480 --> 0:33:45.640
<v Speaker 2>new normal and things like that. So I don't think

0:33:45.680 --> 0:33:48.480
<v Speaker 2>I would for a second, maybe if I was certain

0:33:48.520 --> 0:33:50.200
<v Speaker 2>it was a high second if we got to get

0:33:50.240 --> 0:33:52.840
<v Speaker 2>into that game again. But but yeah, I really like

0:33:52.880 --> 0:33:54.640
<v Speaker 2>a Dunsay, But I don't know that I want to

0:33:55.320 --> 0:33:57.160
<v Speaker 2>you know, give up too much for him.

0:33:57.880 --> 0:34:00.719
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, I don't see how. I don't know if I'm

0:34:00.960 --> 0:34:03.960
<v Speaker 4>as confident as you are that Lamb's gonna have a

0:34:03.960 --> 0:34:06.400
<v Speaker 4>big year, Like I do think Pickens is a real

0:34:06.480 --> 0:34:09.160
<v Speaker 4>problem for him. What if Christian Parker, the new DC

0:34:09.320 --> 0:34:11.520
<v Speaker 4>in Dallas, makes this defense a lot better and the

0:34:11.520 --> 0:34:14.960
<v Speaker 4>Cowboys aren't in as many shootouts. I've been having a

0:34:15.000 --> 0:34:17.279
<v Speaker 4>rethink on Pickens, and I think I've been not giving

0:34:17.360 --> 0:34:20.000
<v Speaker 4>him enough credit, and I worry that he could actually

0:34:20.040 --> 0:34:21.560
<v Speaker 4>take a chunk out of Lamb's production.

0:34:24.320 --> 0:34:27.000
<v Speaker 2>I just think Lamb's really good. It's not like he's

0:34:27.040 --> 0:34:30.160
<v Speaker 2>old yet. I think Dak's really good. I think he's

0:34:30.160 --> 0:34:33.279
<v Speaker 2>a good fit for CD. Like there's just so much

0:34:33.280 --> 0:34:35.920
<v Speaker 2>to like about Cede Lamb that, you know, maybe I'm

0:34:35.960 --> 0:34:38.080
<v Speaker 2>wrong about him having this awesome year, but I think

0:34:38.120 --> 0:34:40.520
<v Speaker 2>he's still gonna be certainly really good. Whereas Rome, there

0:34:40.600 --> 0:34:44.800
<v Speaker 2>is a much more plausible floor. I think, Yeah, fair,

0:34:45.719 --> 0:34:49.240
<v Speaker 2>let's go to Big Ray coming off a two peet

0:34:49.360 --> 0:34:52.000
<v Speaker 2>barely made it in last year, being the fourth of

0:34:52.040 --> 0:34:54.719
<v Speaker 2>a fourteen bracket. Should I go do it for the

0:34:54.760 --> 0:34:57.879
<v Speaker 2>dynasty or jump start to rebuild? If so, what moves

0:34:57.880 --> 0:34:59.799
<v Speaker 2>should I make no taxi squad and only a twenty

0:34:59.800 --> 0:35:02.400
<v Speaker 2>four man roster with two IR spots. He has this

0:35:02.520 --> 0:35:05.480
<v Speaker 2>posted in the chat for those who are listening on audio. Later,

0:35:05.520 --> 0:35:07.960
<v Speaker 2>I'll just read out some of these Lamar Jackson, brock Purty.

0:35:08.719 --> 0:35:11.880
<v Speaker 2>By this way, this is a one QV league. Derrick Henry,

0:35:11.920 --> 0:35:18.279
<v Speaker 2>Alvin Kamara, Christian McCaffrey, Lad McConkie, Davante Adams, Brock Bowers,

0:35:18.400 --> 0:35:22.640
<v Speaker 2>Terry McLaurin. He does have looks like kind of his

0:35:22.800 --> 0:35:25.520
<v Speaker 2>normal pick a lotment, you know, twelfth pick this year,

0:35:26.040 --> 0:35:28.279
<v Speaker 2>his first next year, all that sort of stuff. So

0:35:28.520 --> 0:35:31.239
<v Speaker 2>would you go for the three peat here fits or

0:35:31.280 --> 0:35:34.440
<v Speaker 2>would you say, hey, I got the two championships, this

0:35:34.480 --> 0:35:37.759
<v Speaker 2>team's older, with Henry and CMC and Kamara, it's time

0:35:37.800 --> 0:35:39.000
<v Speaker 2>to kickstart a rebuild.

0:35:39.760 --> 0:35:42.840
<v Speaker 3>Nope, I'm going for the three peat with this roster.

0:35:43.000 --> 0:35:45.359
<v Speaker 4>Like he's got Derrick, Henry and CMC, and we know

0:35:45.400 --> 0:35:47.239
<v Speaker 4>if you try to trade those guys you're just not

0:35:47.320 --> 0:35:50.520
<v Speaker 4>going to get a great return on them because of

0:35:50.560 --> 0:35:54.480
<v Speaker 4>the age and in CMC's case, the injury risk. DeVante

0:35:54.480 --> 0:35:57.520
<v Speaker 4>Adams is another guy like that, but who can all

0:35:57.560 --> 0:36:00.960
<v Speaker 4>be very helpful to you this year. Terry Chlorin on

0:36:01.000 --> 0:36:04.160
<v Speaker 4>the wrong side of thirty. I think this is the

0:36:04.200 --> 0:36:07.759
<v Speaker 4>perfect type of team to run it back with Ray,

0:36:07.800 --> 0:36:10.840
<v Speaker 4>and like, if you want to just sort of stick

0:36:10.960 --> 0:36:13.640
<v Speaker 4>one foot, I'd at least play out the start of

0:36:13.640 --> 0:36:17.759
<v Speaker 4>the season, not trading off young assets, not trading off

0:36:17.800 --> 0:36:21.440
<v Speaker 4>future draft picks. Just go in with this group and

0:36:22.520 --> 0:36:25.200
<v Speaker 4>see what things are looking like after the first month

0:36:25.320 --> 0:36:28.200
<v Speaker 4>or so, four weeks, five weeks. If you're four and

0:36:28.320 --> 0:36:31.600
<v Speaker 4>one man, might be time to stop the accelerator. If

0:36:31.640 --> 0:36:34.000
<v Speaker 4>you get some injuries and you're you know, two to

0:36:34.239 --> 0:36:37.760
<v Speaker 4>three and you're you've got McConkie out for the season

0:36:37.840 --> 0:36:41.200
<v Speaker 4>something like that or not maconkie, I meant CMC, Yeah,

0:36:41.239 --> 0:36:43.799
<v Speaker 4>then maybe you go in the other direction. I'd try

0:36:43.800 --> 0:36:45.920
<v Speaker 4>to run it back one more year with this group

0:36:46.040 --> 0:36:48.800
<v Speaker 4>and wait to make any moves until you get in season.

0:36:49.560 --> 0:36:51.520
<v Speaker 2>It's almost like if you just had one or two

0:36:51.600 --> 0:36:53.919
<v Speaker 2>of these guys, then I'd say I'd be more willing

0:36:53.960 --> 0:36:56.279
<v Speaker 2>to just trade him and try and lead into some youth.

0:36:56.320 --> 0:36:57.880
<v Speaker 2>But you have so many of them that it's like

0:36:57.920 --> 0:37:00.200
<v Speaker 2>it's almost not worth it. Like just just play out

0:37:00.200 --> 0:37:01.520
<v Speaker 2>and see what happens, and if you get that three

0:37:01.600 --> 0:37:03.800
<v Speaker 2>pet you're not going to care three of these guys

0:37:03.960 --> 0:37:06.719
<v Speaker 2>go off the cliff next year, and you didn't. You

0:37:06.719 --> 0:37:09.560
<v Speaker 2>didn't get yourself these at like you'll flags fly forever,

0:37:09.640 --> 0:37:13.480
<v Speaker 2>especially a threepet. So yeah, I would lean towards that

0:37:13.520 --> 0:37:18.279
<v Speaker 2>as well. Doing an auction dynasty startup in like a

0:37:18.440 --> 0:37:21.239
<v Speaker 2>month twelve team super Flex with tight end premium twenty

0:37:21.320 --> 0:37:24.240
<v Speaker 2>twenty six rookies will be included. Have we ever done

0:37:24.400 --> 0:37:28.600
<v Speaker 2>an auction dynasty startup? Initial thoughts and strategies fits. I

0:37:28.640 --> 0:37:31.799
<v Speaker 2>have done a salary cap dynasty startup. It was the

0:37:31.840 --> 0:37:34.920
<v Speaker 2>first dynasty league I ever did, so I didn't quite

0:37:35.040 --> 0:37:40.000
<v Speaker 2>have all my conceptual you know, approaches down pat yet

0:37:40.040 --> 0:37:42.239
<v Speaker 2>the way I would now and be a little more

0:37:42.239 --> 0:37:44.520
<v Speaker 2>confident in some of the moves I made. I spent

0:37:44.640 --> 0:37:47.360
<v Speaker 2>a lot of money to get Dj Moore because I

0:37:47.400 --> 0:37:49.480
<v Speaker 2>wanted the young Maryland Terrapin receiver.

0:37:50.160 --> 0:37:51.200
<v Speaker 1>In that initial startup.

0:37:51.400 --> 0:37:53.239
<v Speaker 2>Some would say I spent too much money. I did

0:37:53.320 --> 0:37:55.560
<v Speaker 2>not spend enough on quarterback. It was the first. Not

0:37:55.640 --> 0:37:58.040
<v Speaker 2>only was my first dynasty, it was my first Superflex league.

0:37:58.600 --> 0:38:00.640
<v Speaker 2>This is many years ago. At this point, I was like,

0:38:00.920 --> 0:38:03.720
<v Speaker 2>not prioritizing it enough, so I have done it before.

0:38:04.640 --> 0:38:07.160
<v Speaker 2>To me, the difficult part to answer about this is

0:38:08.160 --> 0:38:11.919
<v Speaker 2>it are these salary caps assigned to these guys going

0:38:11.920 --> 0:38:14.480
<v Speaker 2>to be going forward like it's like a deep keeper

0:38:14.480 --> 0:38:17.640
<v Speaker 2>and you keep them at these costs, or is it

0:38:17.640 --> 0:38:19.920
<v Speaker 2>it's just for the startup and whoever you get, it's

0:38:19.960 --> 0:38:23.319
<v Speaker 2>then a normal rookie draft in future years. Because if

0:38:23.360 --> 0:38:25.440
<v Speaker 2>it's the latter, If it's a normal draft in future

0:38:25.520 --> 0:38:28.400
<v Speaker 2>years and the salary is only useful for getting the

0:38:28.440 --> 0:38:32.600
<v Speaker 2>startup team, then I would absolutely spend all of my

0:38:32.719 --> 0:38:37.440
<v Speaker 2>money on like four young, awesome studs at every position

0:38:37.520 --> 0:38:40.319
<v Speaker 2>other than running back and lean into the project, you know,

0:38:40.360 --> 0:38:43.319
<v Speaker 2>the productive struggle, and say I got my quarterbacks, I

0:38:43.360 --> 0:38:45.160
<v Speaker 2>got a couple of elite receivers, maybe one of them

0:38:45.200 --> 0:38:47.320
<v Speaker 2>is a tight end, and then I want to have

0:38:47.360 --> 0:38:48.640
<v Speaker 2>a lot of depth this year, but I'm going to

0:38:48.680 --> 0:38:53.040
<v Speaker 2>have true foundational pieces and be able to have an

0:38:53.040 --> 0:38:55.200
<v Speaker 2>early pick for you know, a Maad Hardi or whoever

0:38:55.200 --> 0:38:57.160
<v Speaker 2>it is next year in the draft.

0:38:57.360 --> 0:38:58.760
<v Speaker 1>That would be my initial thought.

0:38:59.320 --> 0:39:01.520
<v Speaker 2>If you do, if these salaries do matter, and they

0:39:01.600 --> 0:39:03.920
<v Speaker 2>say you keep them at this cost in future years,

0:39:04.080 --> 0:39:06.759
<v Speaker 2>then it becomes a different calculation. Have you fits ever

0:39:06.840 --> 0:39:09.000
<v Speaker 2>done a salary cap dynasty? Startup.

0:39:09.480 --> 0:39:14.400
<v Speaker 4>I've not that's an interesting strategy. Getting Drake may Brockbauers

0:39:14.480 --> 0:39:16.960
<v Speaker 4>a couple other young pieces and then just kind of

0:39:17.000 --> 0:39:22.240
<v Speaker 4>like filling it out with young, unproven, relatively cheap pieces.

0:39:22.719 --> 0:39:25.560
<v Speaker 4>That would be an interesting That's kind of a strategy

0:39:25.560 --> 0:39:27.560
<v Speaker 4>I might favor in a league like that. I'm glad

0:39:27.600 --> 0:39:31.680
<v Speaker 4>you asked Worm about whether Chungus is playing a dynasty

0:39:31.800 --> 0:39:37.680
<v Speaker 4>startup where there's any meaning to the player salaries, because

0:39:37.719 --> 0:39:40.520
<v Speaker 4>I play in a sort of a dynasty baseball league

0:39:40.560 --> 0:39:43.680
<v Speaker 4>where those player salaries are relevant because we can, like

0:39:43.760 --> 0:39:45.480
<v Speaker 4>the third year of having a guy, you have to

0:39:45.560 --> 0:39:48.480
<v Speaker 4>make a decision whether to give him more money to

0:39:48.600 --> 0:39:51.640
<v Speaker 4>continue to hold him or throw him back, or have

0:39:51.719 --> 0:39:55.400
<v Speaker 4>him play one third season for you at the same cost,

0:39:55.480 --> 0:39:57.880
<v Speaker 4>and then he automatically goes back in ear fourth. So

0:39:57.960 --> 0:40:00.719
<v Speaker 4>some leagues do things like that. But maybe this is

0:40:00.719 --> 0:40:02.760
<v Speaker 4>a league where you just pay to acquire the guys

0:40:02.760 --> 0:40:03.480
<v Speaker 4>and then that's it.

0:40:03.560 --> 0:40:04.240
<v Speaker 3>That's your roster.

0:40:04.360 --> 0:40:07.200
<v Speaker 4>The salaries mean nothing after that. That's kind of what

0:40:07.239 --> 0:40:11.320
<v Speaker 4>I assume too, But who knows. I guess my advice

0:40:11.320 --> 0:40:14.799
<v Speaker 4>to Chungus would be just as I'm doing right now

0:40:14.800 --> 0:40:18.600
<v Speaker 4>in my Snake dynasty startup, I always cut corner cut

0:40:18.640 --> 0:40:22.279
<v Speaker 4>corners at running back in startups always, I don't do

0:40:22.320 --> 0:40:25.360
<v Speaker 4>it wide receiver, never going to cut corners there, like

0:40:25.400 --> 0:40:27.600
<v Speaker 4>to get a foothold at tight end and I'm not

0:40:27.640 --> 0:40:32.759
<v Speaker 4>getting caught short at quarterback and superflex. Same thing this year,

0:40:32.960 --> 0:40:36.959
<v Speaker 4>Like I've got Derrick Henry, I got him late because

0:40:36.960 --> 0:40:39.600
<v Speaker 4>he was so cheap, Rashad White, And then I think

0:40:39.640 --> 0:40:41.759
<v Speaker 4>I've got like two of the Penn State rookies, Nick

0:40:41.800 --> 0:40:44.879
<v Speaker 4>Singleton and k Tron Allen. Like my running back room

0:40:44.920 --> 0:40:46.399
<v Speaker 4>is going to be a train wreck in year one.

0:40:47.280 --> 0:40:52.000
<v Speaker 4>You have to cut costs somewhere, and I would think

0:40:52.040 --> 0:40:55.040
<v Speaker 4>about that Chungus like where because you cannot have everything

0:40:55.080 --> 0:40:56.400
<v Speaker 4>in a dynasty auction.

0:40:57.120 --> 0:40:58.280
<v Speaker 3>You just can't get everything.

0:40:58.280 --> 0:41:00.719
<v Speaker 4>You've got to figure out what you're willing to to

0:41:00.760 --> 0:41:01.560
<v Speaker 4>cut corners on.

0:41:02.400 --> 0:41:05.880
<v Speaker 2>I would also be really aggressive about nominating guys like

0:41:05.960 --> 0:41:10.239
<v Speaker 2>Gibbs and Bijon and just really any elite running back

0:41:10.280 --> 0:41:11.680
<v Speaker 2>because they're going to get a lot of money off

0:41:11.719 --> 0:41:13.040
<v Speaker 2>the board. If you're willing to kind of go with

0:41:13.040 --> 0:41:15.239
<v Speaker 2>the strategy we're suggesting where you don't spend on those

0:41:15.280 --> 0:41:17.360
<v Speaker 2>guys get that money off the board. I know some

0:41:17.400 --> 0:41:19.600
<v Speaker 2>people say, like in an auction, you want to be

0:41:19.680 --> 0:41:22.160
<v Speaker 2>unpredictable and not just always nominate people you don't want

0:41:22.160 --> 0:41:24.320
<v Speaker 2>it there, always dominate people you do. I think early

0:41:24.480 --> 0:41:26.319
<v Speaker 2>in a startup, if I want to get other people

0:41:26.400 --> 0:41:29.680
<v Speaker 2>to spend big on Ashon Gent, I'm going to nominate

0:41:29.719 --> 0:41:31.240
<v Speaker 2>him right away. I want that money off the board

0:41:31.280 --> 0:41:33.600
<v Speaker 2>so I can then spend it on Drake London or

0:41:33.719 --> 0:41:37.440
<v Speaker 2>Jamar Chase or Lamar Jackson or whatever direction you go.

0:41:38.840 --> 0:41:41.840
<v Speaker 3>And one other bit of advice, like it might help

0:41:42.000 --> 0:41:42.440
<v Speaker 3>if he.

0:41:44.360 --> 0:41:48.280
<v Speaker 4>Like just kind of sketches out, takes out a piece

0:41:48.320 --> 0:41:50.880
<v Speaker 4>of paper, does it on the computer whatever, and figures

0:41:50.880 --> 0:41:55.839
<v Speaker 4>out like approximate salaries for roster spots, and you are

0:41:55.880 --> 0:42:00.760
<v Speaker 4>by no means beholden to like spending up to that limit.

0:42:00.880 --> 0:42:03.520
<v Speaker 4>It doesn't have to be a limit, but it's going

0:42:03.600 --> 0:42:05.359
<v Speaker 4>to give you a better idea of like what your

0:42:05.400 --> 0:42:07.360
<v Speaker 4>distribution is going to be and what you're going to

0:42:07.400 --> 0:42:09.480
<v Speaker 4>need to fill out different spots. And you'll know that

0:42:09.520 --> 0:42:11.920
<v Speaker 4>if you spend way more than you were expecting to

0:42:12.040 --> 0:42:14.480
<v Speaker 4>for your wide receiver one, then you're gonna have to

0:42:14.520 --> 0:42:17.640
<v Speaker 4>spend less than you had sort of mapped out somewhere else.

0:42:18.400 --> 0:42:20.040
<v Speaker 2>The last thing, I'll say just what we're thinking about

0:42:20.040 --> 0:42:23.600
<v Speaker 2>salary cap strategy. I like getting the second guy in

0:42:23.680 --> 0:42:26.640
<v Speaker 2>a tier, Like, for example, at quarterback, I'm going to

0:42:26.719 --> 0:42:29.200
<v Speaker 2>let somebody else spend up on Josh Allen, but I

0:42:29.239 --> 0:42:32.600
<v Speaker 2>would love to get Lamar right at at tight end.

0:42:32.719 --> 0:42:34.840
<v Speaker 2>Maybe somebody else wants to break the bank for Bauers,

0:42:34.920 --> 0:42:37.000
<v Speaker 2>I'll happily take Loveland right. Like I want to get

0:42:37.000 --> 0:42:39.440
<v Speaker 2>guys who are in those best tiers that I can,

0:42:39.760 --> 0:42:41.319
<v Speaker 2>but not the number one guy at the tier that

0:42:41.360 --> 0:42:43.920
<v Speaker 2>you know, Like I almost always walk out of salary

0:42:43.960 --> 0:42:46.520
<v Speaker 2>cap drafts not having the best guy at any position,

0:42:46.840 --> 0:42:48.920
<v Speaker 2>but I have a lot of second best guy at

0:42:48.920 --> 0:42:50.840
<v Speaker 2>this position, third best guy at the position. Like I

0:42:50.840 --> 0:42:53.520
<v Speaker 2>don't want to just go for true depth and no stars,

0:42:53.960 --> 0:42:56.960
<v Speaker 2>but I think a little aim just like one tick

0:42:57.040 --> 0:42:59.360
<v Speaker 2>lower within the same tier, you'll get discounts.

0:43:00.000 --> 0:43:02.680
<v Speaker 4>You also don't want to get the last guy to

0:43:02.800 --> 0:43:05.359
<v Speaker 4>come up for bidding on a tier, because that guy

0:43:05.400 --> 0:43:08.799
<v Speaker 4>will be unfortunately much more expensive than probably the other

0:43:08.880 --> 0:43:09.640
<v Speaker 4>guys on the tier.

0:43:09.920 --> 0:43:12.480
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, Herbs and Cheese has a question here, When is

0:43:12.520 --> 0:43:14.000
<v Speaker 2>the best time to make a move to push my

0:43:14.040 --> 0:43:16.480
<v Speaker 2>team over the top. I'm the defending champ and look

0:43:16.520 --> 0:43:18.319
<v Speaker 2>to be on a collision course for a rematch with

0:43:18.360 --> 0:43:21.279
<v Speaker 2>the other juggernaut in my league. Wondering if preseason is

0:43:21.320 --> 0:43:24.120
<v Speaker 2>the best time to buy or just be patient. Looking

0:43:24.120 --> 0:43:26.520
<v Speaker 2>at his team, Drake May, Jonathan Taylor, Chase Brown, Jamar

0:43:26.600 --> 0:43:30.040
<v Speaker 2>Chase aj Brown, Brock Bauers, Nico Tedera McMillan, Obviously this

0:43:30.120 --> 0:43:32.560
<v Speaker 2>is a very, very very good team. Do you feel

0:43:32.560 --> 0:43:34.399
<v Speaker 2>like fits the best time when you're already a good

0:43:34.400 --> 0:43:37.520
<v Speaker 2>team and trying to prepare for a championship run, is

0:43:37.560 --> 0:43:40.360
<v Speaker 2>to try and buy between now in September? Or is

0:43:40.400 --> 0:43:42.719
<v Speaker 2>it to make an in season buy from maybe a

0:43:42.719 --> 0:43:44.560
<v Speaker 2>team that thought they were contending and fell off and

0:43:44.600 --> 0:43:46.279
<v Speaker 2>now has guys are willing to trade. What would be

0:43:46.320 --> 0:43:46.880
<v Speaker 2>your approach?

0:43:47.719 --> 0:43:52.480
<v Speaker 4>I tend to favor in season, especially with a roster

0:43:52.760 --> 0:43:55.520
<v Speaker 4>like this where it's pretty balanced as far as where

0:43:55.560 --> 0:43:58.480
<v Speaker 4>the strengths are. If you go out and get another

0:43:59.080 --> 0:44:01.520
<v Speaker 4>wide receiver now, and all of a sudden one of

0:44:01.520 --> 0:44:04.359
<v Speaker 4>your running backs get gets hurt, I guess then you've

0:44:04.360 --> 0:44:06.760
<v Speaker 4>got to serve plus the wide receivers you can deal from.

0:44:06.800 --> 0:44:08.799
<v Speaker 3>But I don't know. I think.

0:44:10.239 --> 0:44:12.959
<v Speaker 4>I think it's always a little bit better to make

0:44:13.000 --> 0:44:16.040
<v Speaker 4>these types of deals in season because gives you a

0:44:16.080 --> 0:44:18.640
<v Speaker 4>little more flexibility and you have a better idea of

0:44:18.680 --> 0:44:20.600
<v Speaker 4>what your hand looks like.

0:44:20.960 --> 0:44:25.440
<v Speaker 3>You know what I mean. It's like betting pre flop

0:44:25.560 --> 0:44:27.400
<v Speaker 3>versus betting post flop and poker.

0:44:28.680 --> 0:44:31.240
<v Speaker 2>I don't play enough poker to really follow that metaphor,

0:44:31.360 --> 0:44:35.000
<v Speaker 2>but that's fine. I'm sure our listeners did. We have

0:44:35.040 --> 0:44:37.719
<v Speaker 2>another question here? How many twenty twenty seven picks is

0:44:37.840 --> 0:44:40.640
<v Speaker 2>too many? I've traded my way to three firsts and

0:44:40.719 --> 0:44:43.480
<v Speaker 2>three seconds based on your advice about this class, and

0:44:43.560 --> 0:44:46.319
<v Speaker 2>have more trades I could make. He gives some suggestions

0:44:46.320 --> 0:44:49.200
<v Speaker 2>here in the chat. Will likely wait for injuries or

0:44:49.239 --> 0:44:51.040
<v Speaker 2>camp news to make offers, But I'm wondering at what

0:44:51.040 --> 0:44:52.719
<v Speaker 2>point I should hold tight and wait for guys to

0:44:52.760 --> 0:44:55.520
<v Speaker 2>develop instead of trading for more future picks. My team

0:44:55.560 --> 0:44:57.320
<v Speaker 2>is predicted to finish middle of the pack in twenty

0:44:57.360 --> 0:45:00.600
<v Speaker 2>twenty six, but it's ranked second overall in Dynasty. I

0:45:00.640 --> 0:45:02.640
<v Speaker 2>don't think there's any such thing as too many of

0:45:02.680 --> 0:45:05.120
<v Speaker 2>these picks, because you can always trade them next offseason.

0:45:05.160 --> 0:45:06.960
<v Speaker 2>If you go into next season and say, oh, some

0:45:07.000 --> 0:45:08.480
<v Speaker 2>of my guys developed and maybe I don't have that

0:45:08.520 --> 0:45:11.040
<v Speaker 2>many roster spots where I can add eight new rookie picks,

0:45:11.440 --> 0:45:13.040
<v Speaker 2>you can package them in trades because I don't think

0:45:13.040 --> 0:45:15.000
<v Speaker 2>they're gonna lose much value, and I think to like,

0:45:15.000 --> 0:45:17.239
<v Speaker 2>twenty twenty four fits a lot, like that's the last

0:45:17.280 --> 0:45:20.319
<v Speaker 2>class that was looked at years out as being a

0:45:20.360 --> 0:45:23.200
<v Speaker 2>great class. And imagine if you had three picks in

0:45:23.200 --> 0:45:26.319
<v Speaker 2>that class and you took Caleb Williams, Drake May and

0:45:27.000 --> 0:45:29.680
<v Speaker 2>Malik Neighbors, but you turned down getting a fourth because

0:45:29.680 --> 0:45:31.560
<v Speaker 2>you didn't want another rookie, and that fourth could have

0:45:31.640 --> 0:45:33.160
<v Speaker 2>been Brock Bauers. Right.

0:45:33.239 --> 0:45:36.160
<v Speaker 1>Like, when these really good classes actually hit, which twenty

0:45:36.200 --> 0:45:39.000
<v Speaker 1>twenty seven could end up not hitting, that is on

0:45:39.040 --> 0:45:39.520
<v Speaker 1>the table.

0:45:39.880 --> 0:45:42.879
<v Speaker 2>But when these classes hit, there's no such thing as

0:45:43.239 --> 0:45:45.760
<v Speaker 2>having too many of these picks, because if they truly

0:45:45.800 --> 0:45:47.600
<v Speaker 2>are elite, within a year or two, they're going to

0:45:47.600 --> 0:45:49.400
<v Speaker 2>be elite dynasty assets, and you are going to be

0:45:49.440 --> 0:45:52.080
<v Speaker 2>the envy of everybody in your league for having picked

0:45:52.160 --> 0:45:54.480
<v Speaker 2>the right year to go all in on picks. The

0:45:54.840 --> 0:45:57.840
<v Speaker 2>championship I won in our Shared work league was because

0:45:57.960 --> 0:46:00.359
<v Speaker 2>I went all into twenty twenty four and had three

0:46:00.400 --> 0:46:02.359
<v Speaker 2>picks in that Actually I had four first round picks

0:46:02.360 --> 0:46:06.400
<v Speaker 2>in that class, and it totally set me up for

0:46:06.560 --> 0:46:09.879
<v Speaker 2>the rest of this championship run. So to me, there's

0:46:09.880 --> 0:46:11.920
<v Speaker 2>no such thing as too many at least we're talking

0:46:11.960 --> 0:46:14.240
<v Speaker 2>about first. If you have a bunch of first and seconds,

0:46:14.400 --> 0:46:16.080
<v Speaker 2>maybe you don't need to throw in that many thirds

0:46:16.080 --> 0:46:18.799
<v Speaker 2>and fourths or whatever. But I'll take as many first

0:46:18.800 --> 0:46:20.440
<v Speaker 2>as I can get and not feel like I'm putting

0:46:20.480 --> 0:46:21.640
<v Speaker 2>too many eggs in that basket.

0:46:22.400 --> 0:46:23.120
<v Speaker 3>Totally with you.

0:46:23.360 --> 0:46:27.520
<v Speaker 4>Someone in our discord somehow has acquired like eight next

0:46:27.600 --> 0:46:29.719
<v Speaker 4>year eight first have the.

0:46:29.640 --> 0:46:32.440
<v Speaker 2>Best day of his life on rookie draft.

0:46:32.120 --> 0:46:35.239
<v Speaker 4>I know, and especially when next year's draft looks like

0:46:35.320 --> 0:46:39.040
<v Speaker 4>such an absolute candy store. I mean, you can if

0:46:39.040 --> 0:46:42.600
<v Speaker 4>you're trying to maybe accelerate your arrival time, if you're

0:46:42.680 --> 0:46:45.440
<v Speaker 4>midpack you don't want to wait for the rookies to produce,

0:46:45.560 --> 0:46:47.560
<v Speaker 4>or maybe you're worried that some of these guys aren't

0:46:47.560 --> 0:46:49.480
<v Speaker 4>going to blossom right away. I suppose you could do

0:46:49.800 --> 0:46:54.800
<v Speaker 4>trade picks for established talent, but man like I don't

0:46:54.840 --> 0:46:57.400
<v Speaker 4>want to sell any of those picks at anything less

0:46:57.440 --> 0:47:02.719
<v Speaker 4>than full value, and we for us full value for

0:47:02.760 --> 0:47:07.160
<v Speaker 4>twenty twenty seven first round picks is a lot expensive.

0:47:07.200 --> 0:47:09.480
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. The other thing, too, is like, the more picks

0:47:09.480 --> 0:47:11.600
<v Speaker 2>you have, the more chances you have at a team

0:47:11.719 --> 0:47:13.840
<v Speaker 2>getting hit with bad injury luck and ending up with

0:47:13.880 --> 0:47:16.920
<v Speaker 2>a top pick. Right, Like, if you have five, it's

0:47:16.960 --> 0:47:19.480
<v Speaker 2>not even just about you're getting five picks, it's that

0:47:19.480 --> 0:47:21.960
<v Speaker 2>that's now a better chance that one of those five

0:47:22.120 --> 0:47:25.399
<v Speaker 2>is Jeremiah Smith or Arch Manning. Whereas it's only three,

0:47:25.600 --> 0:47:27.600
<v Speaker 2>you have a twenty five percent chance of that happening.

0:47:27.840 --> 0:47:29.480
<v Speaker 2>You know, it's just in a vacuum if there's twelve

0:47:29.520 --> 0:47:32.200
<v Speaker 2>teams in the league. So like, the more the merrier

0:47:32.360 --> 0:47:33.919
<v Speaker 2>for me when it comes to these picks, I would

0:47:33.960 --> 0:47:36.920
<v Speaker 2>not fret about having too many at all.

0:47:37.080 --> 0:47:39.640
<v Speaker 4>Some of those handcuff backs you can sell, Yeah, I

0:47:39.840 --> 0:47:43.960
<v Speaker 4>like the handcuffs you would sell Marshaun Lloyd, Zach Sharbin.

0:47:44.760 --> 0:47:46.560
<v Speaker 3>I don't know if I necessarily want to sell.

0:47:46.560 --> 0:47:50.440
<v Speaker 4>Charbon A, but like Brian Robinson, Jordan Mason, yeah, I

0:47:50.440 --> 0:47:52.759
<v Speaker 4>mean those guys would get you like late picks in

0:47:52.840 --> 0:47:56.480
<v Speaker 4>next year's draft. But you know, late picks in next

0:47:56.520 --> 0:47:58.400
<v Speaker 4>year's draft are certainly going to be worth more than

0:47:58.520 --> 0:48:01.160
<v Speaker 4>late round picks and this year's rookie draft.

0:48:01.200 --> 0:48:02.879
<v Speaker 2>The other thing too, if the nature of your roster

0:48:02.960 --> 0:48:05.000
<v Speaker 2>is that you can't take on that many rookies next year.

0:48:05.640 --> 0:48:08.520
<v Speaker 2>Don't be afraid to say, hey, I've got Chris Rodriguez

0:48:08.560 --> 0:48:11.680
<v Speaker 2>to the Tuton owner, give me a twenty eight second

0:48:11.760 --> 0:48:13.600
<v Speaker 2>instead of a twenty seven to third, or you know,

0:48:13.920 --> 0:48:15.640
<v Speaker 2>move up around from what you would have asked for

0:48:15.680 --> 0:48:17.960
<v Speaker 2>this year, but push it back a year. You'll be

0:48:18.000 --> 0:48:19.640
<v Speaker 2>pretty happy, I think a year from now, even if

0:48:19.680 --> 0:48:21.440
<v Speaker 2>it's not quite the same level of class to be like, well,

0:48:21.480 --> 0:48:23.440
<v Speaker 2>I got all these rookies, and I also have more

0:48:23.520 --> 0:48:26.240
<v Speaker 2>draft capital to play around with for the upcoming draft,

0:48:26.239 --> 0:48:28.959
<v Speaker 2>which always gets more expensive as soon as the current

0:48:29.000 --> 0:48:33.080
<v Speaker 2>years draft ends, so you can think about that as well. Actually,

0:48:33.120 --> 0:48:34.680
<v Speaker 2>before we get to the next question, quickly, you can

0:48:34.800 --> 0:48:38.520
<v Speaker 2>join our Fantasy Pros discord community chat with other fans

0:48:38.520 --> 0:48:40.759
<v Speaker 2>to get access to exclusive amas that wind up on

0:48:40.800 --> 0:48:44.000
<v Speaker 2>our podcast feed just like this one. Here's our current schedule,

0:48:44.120 --> 0:48:46.280
<v Speaker 2>myself in fits at five eastern on the first Tuesday

0:48:46.320 --> 0:48:48.719
<v Speaker 2>of every month, Bogman and Fits at five eastern on

0:48:48.760 --> 0:48:51.160
<v Speaker 2>the third Tuesday of every month. Come get your questions

0:48:51.200 --> 0:48:53.960
<v Speaker 2>answered and be on the show at fantasypros dot com

0:48:53.960 --> 0:48:57.759
<v Speaker 2>slash chat. All right, fit some more questions we want

0:48:57.800 --> 0:49:00.959
<v Speaker 2>to run through here. Hey guys, thanks for today. Two

0:49:01.040 --> 0:49:04.279
<v Speaker 2>questions for us. First, do you see Javante as a

0:49:04.360 --> 0:49:06.120
<v Speaker 2>sell candidate if he has a good start to the

0:49:06.160 --> 0:49:08.120
<v Speaker 2>season or do you think he has a good chance

0:49:08.160 --> 0:49:11.120
<v Speaker 2>to maintain value over the next couple of seasons. Second,

0:49:11.200 --> 0:49:13.960
<v Speaker 2>without any special scoring settings, do you generally hope to

0:49:14.000 --> 0:49:15.640
<v Speaker 2>flex receivers or running backs?

0:49:15.640 --> 0:49:16.240
<v Speaker 1>And why?

0:49:16.440 --> 0:49:19.040
<v Speaker 2>I've seen differing opinions on this lately, so I was

0:49:19.120 --> 0:49:22.480
<v Speaker 2>curious your thoughts. Thanks guys to the answer to the

0:49:22.480 --> 0:49:25.440
<v Speaker 2>second part. First, I really don't think about position unless

0:49:25.480 --> 0:49:28.640
<v Speaker 2>this scoring setting suggests that I should. If there's not

0:49:28.680 --> 0:49:31.400
<v Speaker 2>really one favorite or the other, like a heavy PPR

0:49:31.480 --> 0:49:33.839
<v Speaker 2>or anything like that, I just like whichever player I

0:49:33.880 --> 0:49:36.399
<v Speaker 2>like better. I really don't think about position at all. Again,

0:49:36.440 --> 0:49:38.240
<v Speaker 2>unless it's like, oh, this is PPR and the running

0:49:38.280 --> 0:49:40.560
<v Speaker 2>back does the catch passes, things like that. On the

0:49:40.560 --> 0:49:42.800
<v Speaker 2>first part of this question fits, I do think Javante

0:49:42.880 --> 0:49:44.400
<v Speaker 2>is a cell candidate. He wouldn't be a sell at

0:49:44.400 --> 0:49:47.160
<v Speaker 2>any cost candidate if he starts out strong, but I

0:49:47.160 --> 0:49:48.480
<v Speaker 2>would be very open to offers.

0:49:48.520 --> 0:49:50.640
<v Speaker 3>I think I would too.

0:49:51.400 --> 0:49:53.840
<v Speaker 4>I don't know if he's gonna have quite the touchdown

0:49:53.920 --> 0:49:56.920
<v Speaker 4>runout that he had last year, and his pass catching

0:49:56.960 --> 0:49:59.680
<v Speaker 4>metrics are just flat out bad, Like he's just not

0:49:59.760 --> 0:50:03.160
<v Speaker 4>good as a pass catcher, and PPR league or dynasty

0:50:03.239 --> 0:50:05.800
<v Speaker 4>leagues tend to be PPR leagues, so that is a

0:50:05.800 --> 0:50:10.400
<v Speaker 4>little bit of a concern that just that there isn't

0:50:10.560 --> 0:50:13.279
<v Speaker 4>enough for him as a pass catcher to sort of

0:50:14.160 --> 0:50:19.279
<v Speaker 4>maintain RB one type value for him. So I'm a

0:50:19.320 --> 0:50:22.080
<v Speaker 4>little bit skeptical. At the same time, he was pretty

0:50:22.080 --> 0:50:26.239
<v Speaker 4>convincing as a runner last year, so I'm not a

0:50:26.320 --> 0:50:27.560
<v Speaker 4>post as selling right now.

0:50:29.000 --> 0:50:30.439
<v Speaker 3>You know, this is probably a good time.

0:50:30.480 --> 0:50:34.440
<v Speaker 4>He very much reinvigorated his dynasty value with the season

0:50:34.480 --> 0:50:40.000
<v Speaker 4>he's coming off of, so probably more likely to lose

0:50:40.080 --> 0:50:44.279
<v Speaker 4>value this season than gain value. And as as the

0:50:44.320 --> 0:50:49.680
<v Speaker 4>other question, I would just say for me, I'm always

0:50:49.680 --> 0:50:51.920
<v Speaker 4>going to build my team more around wide receivers than

0:50:52.040 --> 0:50:54.440
<v Speaker 4>running backs just because they hold their value better and

0:50:54.440 --> 0:50:57.560
<v Speaker 4>the running backs just are a little more fragile with

0:50:57.760 --> 0:51:02.919
<v Speaker 4>attrition guys losing their job. Injury rates, we haven't really

0:51:02.920 --> 0:51:04.759
<v Speaker 4>seen it the last couple of years. It's been weird,

0:51:04.800 --> 0:51:08.239
<v Speaker 4>and that running backs have gotten hurt, you know, maybe

0:51:08.280 --> 0:51:11.560
<v Speaker 4>even less than wide receivers when the injury rates are

0:51:11.640 --> 0:51:15.439
<v Speaker 4>generally higher at running back, but generally they are higher

0:51:15.440 --> 0:51:17.520
<v Speaker 4>at running back, and I think the last two years

0:51:17.560 --> 0:51:19.040
<v Speaker 4>have sort of been exceptions to that.

0:51:20.560 --> 0:51:22.279
<v Speaker 2>I was thinking more like week to week starting, if

0:51:22.280 --> 0:51:24.200
<v Speaker 2>they're talking about like building out your team, like who's

0:51:24.239 --> 0:51:25.719
<v Speaker 2>generally going to be in the flex, than yeah, I'd

0:51:25.719 --> 0:51:28.560
<v Speaker 2>prefer the receiver like that for that reason. Yeah.

0:51:28.680 --> 0:51:31.040
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, And I'm saying right, if you happen to like

0:51:31.320 --> 0:51:33.399
<v Speaker 4>luck your way into some really good you know you're

0:51:33.520 --> 0:51:35.719
<v Speaker 4>you're spending down at running back and still get some

0:51:35.760 --> 0:51:38.759
<v Speaker 4>guys who like spike good seasons for you. I have

0:51:38.800 --> 0:51:42.120
<v Speaker 4>no problem flexing running backs over wide receivers as far as.

0:51:42.040 --> 0:51:43.279
<v Speaker 3>The in game strategy of it.

0:51:43.320 --> 0:51:46.080
<v Speaker 4>I just want to play the guys likely to get

0:51:46.120 --> 0:51:49.680
<v Speaker 4>the most points. Matchups are going to come into that,

0:51:49.760 --> 0:51:54.040
<v Speaker 4>of course, but I just generally have more wide receiver

0:51:54.160 --> 0:51:56.720
<v Speaker 4>strength and running back strength and my dynasty teams.

0:51:57.480 --> 0:52:00.520
<v Speaker 2>We have a question from Germany shouts to No Vortex

0:52:00.640 --> 0:52:04.040
<v Speaker 2>checking in from across the Pond. I'll readly. It's the

0:52:04.120 --> 0:52:05.600
<v Speaker 2>kind of a long so I'll read it quickly. Hey, guys,

0:52:05.600 --> 0:52:08.120
<v Speaker 2>thanks for having me. Got one question regarding pick value.

0:52:08.440 --> 0:52:10.440
<v Speaker 2>Hope it's not too far from today's topic. I'm a

0:52:10.520 --> 0:52:14.000
<v Speaker 2>dynasty league's commissioner and pay attention to everything being fair

0:52:14.040 --> 0:52:16.919
<v Speaker 2>and transparent in the league. A league mate traded away

0:52:17.000 --> 0:52:19.520
<v Speaker 2>his one oh one and twenty twenty six to another manager.

0:52:19.960 --> 0:52:22.200
<v Speaker 2>I this is no vortex talking, had the one ten

0:52:22.480 --> 0:52:24.480
<v Speaker 2>and took my chance to offer him my pick for

0:52:24.520 --> 0:52:28.480
<v Speaker 2>his twenty twenty seven first rounder. He accepted. I took

0:52:28.480 --> 0:52:29.920
<v Speaker 2>a lot of heat for it because the draft next

0:52:30.000 --> 0:52:32.040
<v Speaker 2>year will be way better than this one's. And additionally,

0:52:32.080 --> 0:52:34.239
<v Speaker 2>people expect his pick to be early again, while I'm

0:52:34.280 --> 0:52:36.920
<v Speaker 2>always contending. So my justification is that you don't know

0:52:36.960 --> 0:52:38.960
<v Speaker 2>where he will finish next year. But more importantly, I

0:52:39.080 --> 0:52:41.359
<v Speaker 2>argue my pick is one year away. Heard you guys

0:52:41.440 --> 0:52:43.839
<v Speaker 2>talking about the weight and that that is a disadvantage.

0:52:43.880 --> 0:52:46.880
<v Speaker 2>So my question, finally is and he's wrote finally not

0:52:46.920 --> 0:52:49.759
<v Speaker 2>me saying that does one year's time difference between two

0:52:49.760 --> 0:52:51.399
<v Speaker 2>picks make up for the one in the future being

0:52:51.440 --> 0:52:53.879
<v Speaker 2>a good portion more valuable. I hope I can make

0:52:53.880 --> 0:52:57.120
<v Speaker 2>myself clear, totally clear. It's a great question, Thank you

0:52:57.120 --> 0:52:59.799
<v Speaker 2>for sending it. I think it is one of those

0:52:59.800 --> 0:53:02.360
<v Speaker 2>things is where you're trading a first for a first

0:53:02.400 --> 0:53:04.160
<v Speaker 2>and it's not guaranteed, where that first is going to

0:53:04.200 --> 0:53:07.080
<v Speaker 2>be next year. Like to me, I would certainly much

0:53:07.200 --> 0:53:09.480
<v Speaker 2>rather have this guy's twenty twenty seven pick. But I

0:53:09.480 --> 0:53:11.640
<v Speaker 2>don't think this is like an unfair thing that the

0:53:11.760 --> 0:53:14.839
<v Speaker 2>league should be in an uproar about, because anybody, first

0:53:14.840 --> 0:53:16.520
<v Speaker 2>of all, could have offered a first for a first,

0:53:16.760 --> 0:53:18.840
<v Speaker 2>and second of all, there is a level of uncertainty.

0:53:18.880 --> 0:53:20.840
<v Speaker 2>Next year's class could end up having a lot of

0:53:20.840 --> 0:53:23.399
<v Speaker 2>guys getting hurt and underperforming and not looking as good.

0:53:23.719 --> 0:53:26.080
<v Speaker 2>So it's less for me about the weight of getting

0:53:26.080 --> 0:53:28.320
<v Speaker 2>the player on your team and more about we don't

0:53:28.360 --> 0:53:30.600
<v Speaker 2>know what that value is going to be, and that

0:53:30.640 --> 0:53:34.560
<v Speaker 2>weight makes that more uncertain. So to me, while I

0:53:34.600 --> 0:53:37.120
<v Speaker 2>do think you got away with a great deal, I

0:53:37.120 --> 0:53:39.520
<v Speaker 2>don't think you got away with like highway robbery where

0:53:40.000 --> 0:53:41.640
<v Speaker 2>everybody should be up in arms about it. If that

0:53:41.680 --> 0:53:42.120
<v Speaker 2>makes sense.

0:53:43.960 --> 0:53:44.840
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, I mean.

0:53:46.600 --> 0:53:51.080
<v Speaker 4>I can understand why some of the other managers are

0:53:51.440 --> 0:53:56.040
<v Speaker 4>upset no vortex just because you pulled off a great trade.

0:53:56.280 --> 0:54:01.080
<v Speaker 4>The other manager is probably a little naive and maybe inexperienced,

0:54:01.760 --> 0:54:06.480
<v Speaker 4>just not knowing, maybe not being aware of how much

0:54:06.520 --> 0:54:09.839
<v Speaker 4>better the twenty twenty seven draft class is. And if

0:54:09.840 --> 0:54:12.279
<v Speaker 4>there's someone who's not on top of that, you know,

0:54:12.360 --> 0:54:16.800
<v Speaker 4>that makes them kind of a lesser dynasty manager because

0:54:16.840 --> 0:54:21.400
<v Speaker 4>you need to know what relative the relative strength of

0:54:21.520 --> 0:54:22.719
<v Speaker 4>different draft classes.

0:54:23.400 --> 0:54:26.439
<v Speaker 3>So I don't blame you for making the deal.

0:54:26.600 --> 0:54:29.600
<v Speaker 4>I don't think it's shady or anything, but I understand

0:54:29.640 --> 0:54:34.120
<v Speaker 4>why the other managers feel like, you know, you pulled

0:54:34.120 --> 0:54:37.200
<v Speaker 4>one over on this other manager because you did make

0:54:37.239 --> 0:54:39.959
<v Speaker 4>a great trade and it was shrewd on your part.

0:54:40.920 --> 0:54:44.160
<v Speaker 2>But literally, any of them could have made the same offer, right,

0:54:44.280 --> 0:54:45.920
<v Speaker 2>Like it's a first for a first, they all have

0:54:45.960 --> 0:54:48.040
<v Speaker 2>their first. Presumably they could have made the same deal

0:54:48.080 --> 0:54:51.200
<v Speaker 2>and didn't. If they did and he didn't accept them,

0:54:51.239 --> 0:54:53.240
<v Speaker 2>then that's where it gets into Okay, that's kind of weird.

0:54:53.280 --> 0:54:55.480
<v Speaker 2>Why didn't that happen? But like, you made an offer

0:54:55.520 --> 0:54:59.160
<v Speaker 2>and he accepted, and yeah, I think there's a level

0:54:59.239 --> 0:55:02.400
<v Speaker 2>of let's pretend that this other manager is really naive

0:55:02.440 --> 0:55:05.759
<v Speaker 2>and like nude of fantasy or dynasty. And if you

0:55:05.800 --> 0:55:08.439
<v Speaker 2>were like, hey, I'm going to give you Chris Rodriguez

0:55:08.480 --> 0:55:10.759
<v Speaker 2>for next year's first because at least you get the

0:55:10.800 --> 0:55:13.279
<v Speaker 2>guy this year, and he said yes because he didn't

0:55:13.320 --> 0:55:15.840
<v Speaker 2>know any better, that's like, okay, that is a real problem.

0:55:15.840 --> 0:55:17.720
<v Speaker 2>That's going to mess with the integrity of the league.

0:55:17.840 --> 0:55:21.000
<v Speaker 2>Other managers should be absolutely livid you are taking advantage

0:55:21.040 --> 0:55:23.719
<v Speaker 2>of somebody who's still learning. In this case, I think

0:55:23.880 --> 0:55:27.080
<v Speaker 2>knowing that next year's class is strong, whether because you

0:55:27.120 --> 0:55:28.879
<v Speaker 2>watch college football or because you listen to a show

0:55:28.920 --> 0:55:30.520
<v Speaker 2>like us like We Hope, we give you an advantage

0:55:30.560 --> 0:55:32.600
<v Speaker 2>like that where you can make shrewd deals looking a

0:55:32.680 --> 0:55:34.640
<v Speaker 2>year ahead. That's the whole goal of a show like this.

0:55:34.960 --> 0:55:40.760
<v Speaker 2>To me, that's just being an invested, intelligent, like proactive manager.

0:55:41.600 --> 0:55:43.800
<v Speaker 2>I have done this a lot, traded a late pick

0:55:43.840 --> 0:55:45.799
<v Speaker 2>one year for an early pick to the next year. It's

0:55:45.840 --> 0:55:47.880
<v Speaker 2>not always with an upcoming class as strong as next

0:55:47.960 --> 0:55:50.360
<v Speaker 2>year's look, but I like doing that because I like

0:55:50.400 --> 0:55:52.520
<v Speaker 2>the swing that, Hey, I know this pick's late this year.

0:55:52.840 --> 0:55:54.880
<v Speaker 2>Worst case scenario, it's late again next year. Let me

0:55:54.920 --> 0:55:57.239
<v Speaker 2>take a swing that as early the year after. I've

0:55:57.239 --> 0:55:58.880
<v Speaker 2>done this in a lot of leagues, and to me,

0:55:59.000 --> 0:55:59.880
<v Speaker 2>that's just being shrewd.

0:56:00.440 --> 0:56:04.239
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, And just to look at it from the perspective

0:56:04.280 --> 0:56:06.600
<v Speaker 4>from which he asked the question, does the extra year

0:56:06.640 --> 0:56:09.239
<v Speaker 4>of value game for you? So I want one ten

0:56:09.320 --> 0:56:11.920
<v Speaker 4>Let's say I don't know what's the worthy target there.

0:56:12.000 --> 0:56:13.960
<v Speaker 3>Kenyon Sidik, Let's say.

0:56:13.760 --> 0:56:16.359
<v Speaker 1>Yes, Nyankky Simpson maybe yeah, all.

0:56:16.320 --> 0:56:19.319
<v Speaker 4>Right, so say it's Cidik at one ten. I mean,

0:56:19.440 --> 0:56:23.920
<v Speaker 4>would the extra year of Kenyon Cidik make him a

0:56:23.960 --> 0:56:27.120
<v Speaker 4>player you would want more than Cam Coleman, who's likely

0:56:27.160 --> 0:56:29.520
<v Speaker 4>to be a top six pick next year's second best

0:56:29.520 --> 0:56:34.279
<v Speaker 4>wide receiver prospect in the draft after Jeremiah Smith. Like,

0:56:34.440 --> 0:56:36.879
<v Speaker 4>I'd still rather have cam Coleman pretty easily there.

0:56:37.400 --> 0:56:39.560
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, especially because a guy like Sidik is probably not

0:56:39.600 --> 0:56:41.640
<v Speaker 2>going to do anything this year anyway, so you're already

0:56:41.680 --> 0:56:43.200
<v Speaker 2>going to kind of have to wait for that player

0:56:43.280 --> 0:56:44.400
<v Speaker 2>to contribute.

0:56:45.239 --> 0:56:47.880
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, And I think you could say the same thing

0:56:47.920 --> 0:56:52.000
<v Speaker 4>whether it was Ty Simpson or Denzel Boston or whoever

0:56:52.040 --> 0:56:53.080
<v Speaker 4>else might be at one ten.

0:56:53.800 --> 0:56:56.960
<v Speaker 2>By the way, eight out of ten twenty twenty seven. First,

0:56:57.080 --> 0:57:00.680
<v Speaker 2>it's a real big chungus. That is unbelievable, and I

0:57:00.719 --> 0:57:02.439
<v Speaker 2>would just be laughing all the way to the bank.

0:57:02.880 --> 0:57:05.200
<v Speaker 2>That's gonna be super fun. Looks like we got through

0:57:05.200 --> 0:57:07.000
<v Speaker 2>actually all the questions here, so we'll go ahead and

0:57:07.320 --> 0:57:10.200
<v Speaker 2>wrap things up. Thank you so much for everybody for

0:57:10.640 --> 0:57:12.880
<v Speaker 2>throwing out the questions today. No hands raised for the stages,

0:57:12.920 --> 0:57:14.880
<v Speaker 2>which is totally fine. It's hot summer day. We're not

0:57:14.880 --> 0:57:16.760
<v Speaker 2>really in the heart of it yet. We appreciate the

0:57:16.800 --> 0:57:19.040
<v Speaker 2>really active chatter in the chat as well. If for

0:57:19.040 --> 0:57:21.080
<v Speaker 2>anybody listening who wishes they could have asked their question,

0:57:21.680 --> 0:57:23.919
<v Speaker 2>be sure to check this out again. First and third

0:57:23.960 --> 0:57:26.320
<v Speaker 2>Tuesday of every month. It's either me and Bogman, or

0:57:26.360 --> 0:57:29.000
<v Speaker 2>Bogman or see. It's either me in fits or Fits

0:57:29.040 --> 0:57:32.680
<v Speaker 2>and Bogman. So shouts to everybody for tuning in today.

0:57:32.880 --> 0:57:35.480
<v Speaker 2>For Fits, I'm Ryan Warmley. We'll see again next time.

0:57:35.800 --> 0:57:38.960
<v Speaker 2>Thanks for listening to the Fantasy Pros Dynasty Football podcast.

0:57:39.240 --> 0:57:41.600
<v Speaker 2>If you love the show, the best freeway to support

0:57:41.680 --> 0:57:44.560
<v Speaker 2>us is by leaving a positive review on Apple Podcasts

0:57:44.640 --> 0:57:48.200
<v Speaker 2>or Spotify, follow us on x, Instagram, and TikTok at

0:57:48.240 --> 0:57:51.240
<v Speaker 2>Fantasy Pros, and subscribe to our YouTube channel at YouTube

0:57:51.280 --> 0:58:01.919
<v Speaker 2>dot com slash Fantasy Pros