6 replies to this topic

[The Hitter]

14-team PPR DYNASTY - finished 4th last year in regular season (lost 1st round of playoffs)

Team is a mix of vets and youth with the stars consisting more of older vets (Vick, Roddy, DWill & Turner) but Gronkowski is far and away my most valuable dynasty prospect.

Been offered Stafford, Olsen (or TGonzo) and the 1.8 for Vick and Gronkowski.

(I already own the 1.7 and 1.9 plus three mid 2nds so this draft will infuse quite a bit of youth.)

Any advice is appreciated.

[ABearWithFurniture]

You could do much, much better than what's basically Stafford and the 1.08 pick.  Gronk is a monster in a PPR league and worth at least a top 3 pick in a dynasty rookie draft and/or the equivalent of a number 1-2 tier QB/RB/WR.

[delusions of grandeur]

ABearWithFurniture, on 30 April 2012 - 11:37 AM, said:

You could do much, much better than what's basically Stafford and the 1.08 pick.  Gronk is a monster in a PPR league and worth at least a top 3 pick in a dynasty rookie draft and/or the equivalent of a number 1-2 tier QB/RB/WR.

I'm not sure you're quite looking at that right. Stafford is just behind Gronk in ADP right now, so yes Gronk is worth a bit more, but not that much more... So it's not as much the pick as getting Stafford for Gronk, so then the question is if the 1.08 and the replacement TE are worth more than Vick to balance it out....

That's a tougher one to say... I'd maybe try to see if you could get some WR or RB depth instead and then draft Fleener with one of your picks, and then I think it'd be a pretty good deal for you. I think Stafford is worth way more than Vick in dynasty, than is Gronk worth that much more than Fleener with a good throw in too.


Do you not have any other QBs in the works? Because you need one with Vick, and I'm not that crazy about next year's QB class, and it's probably not likely you can get Luck or Griffin without trading up (another possibility I suppose).

Edited by delusions of granduer, 30 April 2012 - 11:47 AM.

[The Hitter]

I've not really checked around for any other QB deals that could be had, but in this league, which is far FAR skewed towards QB points, getting a dynasty top 5 QB is like the finding the Holy Grail.  Example - 2011 points - Stafford 1000 #4 QB), Vick 730 (#17), Gronk 570 (#1 TE), Olsen 350 (#18 TE).  Compared to other positions - RRice #1 RB 720 points, and Mega #1 WR 550 points.  Weird scoring I know, but no changes imminent so...

My logic is that the difference between Gronk coming back down to earth a little, and Olsen (or Fleener type) in a slightly better year than last is probably about 100 points.  And the difference between Stafford coming back down a little, and Vick in a slightly better year than last may be nearly the same 100 points.

So then the deal comes down to the 1.8 pick and the youth factor.  Both of those factors push the weight to the Stafford/Olsen/1.8 side and pretty heavily IMO.  Just my thoughts on the deal.

[Big Country]

With that kind of scoring disparity towards QBs, I go with the Stafford side of the deal. When the #17 QB is scoring 1.5 times as many points as the #1 WR or TE and the same points as the #1 RB, you need consistency at the QB position and that is something you donlt get with Vick. I see no reason why Stafford does not remain a likely top 5 fantasy QB, and with this kind of scoring, assuming relatively standard lineups, that is game changing fantasy wise.

[The Hitter]

Big Country, on 30 April 2012 - 01:25 PM, said:

With that kind of scoring disparity towards QBs, I go with the Stafford side of the deal. When the #17 QB is scoring 1.5 times as many points as the #1 WR or TE and the same points as the #1 RB, you need consistency at the QB position and that is something you donlt get with Vick. I see no reason why Stafford does not remain a likely top 5 fantasy QB, and with this kind of scoring, assuming relatively standard lineups, that is game changing fantasy wise.

My thoughts exactly.

Thanks for the replies, guys!

[delusions of grandeur]

And this is why we always need to know any scoring anamolies to give good input...

I agree with BC, I see nothing to suggest that Stafford doesn't have top 5 potential for the forseeable future, and is a no-brainer with the sheer scoring of QBs in addition to a larger differential between him and Vick, despite being closer in rankings.