Big Country

PPR scoring? What are the lineup requirements for RB and WR?

What are your rules for what keepers cost? In any league I've been in that did the lose X round for player Y based on where they were drafted, that round drafted carries with the player, so it would cost whatever it would have been for the original owner. That "cost" is factor in the trade value of those players. For waiver/FA acquisitions, again, what do you rules say? If there is no rule in place, then you'll have to get the league to agree on something - some leagues just don't allow FA/waiver acquisitions to be kept, some assign an arbitrary first year keeper cost, some assign the last round, some do something arbitrary like say 12th round (assuming a 16+ round draft)

The restructuring of the deal by HOU essentially now making Diggs playing on a 1 year deal to prove he deserves another big payday may certainly motivate him to be on his best behavior and give his best effort, but looking at the last couple seasons where he had production drop offs later in the season, perhaps he is at a point where being the 1B in an offense is a better fit, if he can accept that role. For HOU, Collins is the ascending talent as your 1A, Diggs is the just past prime but still stud potential 1B and Dell fits in perfectly as the slot weapon. If you can keep Diggs ego in check with the potential deal he’s playing for, even if it turns into a 1 year rental for HOU the cost of a 2nd could be worth it if they can make a deep playoff run.

https://x.com/patrickmorantb/status/1775542006288375881?s=46&t=Znse-aVpnoV2_txARwAcOQ This was more than a salary dump - Bills ate a ton of dead cap space and took another hit this year to the cap by not waiting until after June 1st to make the move for a future pick, at which point they could have spread the cap hit over two years. Either the relationship got to the point of being that toxic, or the Bills had a major reason to get that pick now before this years draft, perhaps as a piece they will use to move up. Pure speculation on my part.

Either approach would be fine. Man, first you describe the league as veto happy, and now you say you have position limits - I know these are your buddies, but man it's a lot of red flags for a league.

If it's 1 QB, then not a lot of value in comparison to RB/WR assuming fairly standard lineups and scoring system. If you switch to Superflex, it changes the calculus drastically.

Big time score to get the 1.7 for that. I know you have your heart set on Williams but this appears to be a very strong QB class, so even if you don't move up to get Williams and if he doesn't fall to you, you can still get a Daniels/May/McCarthy type who may go on to have similar fantasy value as Williams.

Twitter thread from Drew Davenport with some of the legal perspectives thus far. TL;DR - don't jump to conclusions so fast

I was clear on what you were saying. Your offer is pretty light for what you are asking to get, even with Pickens added to it. But everyone values players differently, so maybe he’d go for it.

Regarding the veto - get it out of the league - let owner's manage their teams as they see fit. When it can be weaponized on perfectly fine trades it just ruins leagues. The fact that this has happened multiple times in the past tells me that this is definitely not a league I would want to play in. Regarding the offer, send it over. I think it's a bit light without Pickens in there and would maybe open with Pickens instead of Sutton or give him the choice of either one, but that's what negotiation is for. Everyone has different valuations on players and picks, it's how both parties can come out of a trade feeling happy and like they improved.

Why not try trade for both?

I'm still of the mind that in 1 QB leagues, you need to be careful not to overrate them. Having a point per completion does change things a bit, but then you want to find the high volume pocket passers - it actually devalues the hybrid QBs that run a lot a fair bit as the rushing doesn't make up ground on the QB that passes 40+ times a game if they are only throwing 25 times and picking up 40-50 yards rushing on average. While it's still likely not the way I would approach it, using the 3 on a QB is not terrible, but if it means passing on a MHJ/Nabors it probably is still a pretty bad idea. Instead of trying to send Hooker to the Goff owner, see if you can get him to send you Goff - he was #2 in the league last year in completions and attempts with no reason to think that will go down this year, and with Harbaugh in town likely looking to implement a run first offense, no reason to think Herbert will suddenly spike in passing attempts.

Yes, and they got the #9 as part of the deal for the #1 overall

Or it all ends up being a smoke screen and they go get themselves another massive haul for the #1 pick and roll with Fields. I think that's less likely than just taking Williams, but it's an intriguing option. So far they have turned the 2023 #1 overall pick into: WR DJ Moore WR Keenan Allen CB Tyrique Stevenson OT Darnell Wright #1 Overall 2024 Pick 2025 2nd Round pick

What would be your goal with dealing the 3 in that scenario? You do likely get better at WR going from Pickens to AJB, though his production trailed off badly at the end of the season, but you likely get worse at TE and drop from an elite prospect pick to 2 pretty good prospects. It's a "fair" trade, but I don't know that you necessarily come out better from it. I'm not very bullish on Harris, so using him to move up is something I wouldn't be opposed to doing. Heck, if the guy at 1 needs an RB, maybe you build something on Harris and the #3 for the #1. You draft MHJ, and he still gets a top 3 WR at 3 to go with adding Harris to his RB room. If his team is bad enough where it needs multiple pieces to be competitive, he may be receptive to such a deal, especially since it seems your league really values RBs highly.