M Gordon vs. 1.02

[Ben1989]

Posted this morning about accepting M Gordon for my 1.07/2.01.

Shortly after received an offer of 1.02 for Gordon. Should I make the swap?

For Team 1 in Sig (haven't added Gordon to it yet, but otherwise the same.)

[MockGM]

You got great value out of your first deal, but I think MG is worth slightly more than 1.02 as he has more value as a pass catcher than Guice/Chubb, but it's kinda close. See if you can get another pick/prospect out of the other owner. Your team does look like it needs a few more players to compete and Gordon's microfracture worries me long term.

[Bisquiteen Trisket]

It’s surprising that this post has 18 votes currently, and only 1 comment.

Anyway, I’d keep Melvin. This is Melvin for Guice, or Melvin for Chubb. I’d take Melvin in both cases. I tend to lean towards a known commodity versus an unknown rookie/situation.

[HOFC12]

It is beyond me how anyone could value 1.2 over M. Gordon. We have no idea where that player will end up or if they will be successful in the NFL at all. You are hoping and praying to get a RB as good as Gordon has been. Gordon will be 25 years old. He is an RB1 PERIOD!!! Funny how Mixon gets the benefit of the doubt with "bad o-line play" in Cincy, but SD o-line was horrible. Pouncy signing, the Chargers drafting the best guard in the draft, a healthy Mike Williams, Keenan Allen, Hunter Heny, and the wiley vet at QB? Give me Gordon, and I'll look to see all of yall back here next year saying the same thing about another RB next year while Gordon will still be an RB1.

[Igwebuike 4 Prez]

Give me Gordon. I'll let someone else chase what Gordon already is.

[FKC]

1.02 easily.

[EAGLES]

Gordon. It’d take the 1.02 plus some to get me to move Gordon

[Madcity_matt]

Gordon for me

[pokerplayer1000]

Gordon for me, and especially with your team 2 makeup. THat team looks primed to compete, why would you risk that with a rookie RB when you already know you are going to get RB1 numbers from Gordon. You would be taking a rb at 1.02 chasing points

[M-Dub]

He is an RB1 PERIOD!!!

Am I the only one who finds this sentence hilarious?

Anyhow, I would lean slightly towards the 1.02. Melvin Gordon seems like a much better fantasy producer than real-life football player. If a UDFA like Ekeler can steal a moderate chunk of his workload, what happens if the Chargers draft a competent satellite back in the 4th or 5th round? Whoever you take at 1.02 will almost certainly be a superior athlete, but is unlikely to see the type of volume that has catapulted Gordon to RB1 status. If you’re a serious contender, I’d probably hold Gordon, but if not, I’d prefer the long-term upside of the 1.02.

[Reno McCoy]

I just received this same offer, Gordon for 1.02, in my 16-team league. My team is a contender, having just lost the championship last season.

Gordon is on the final year of his contract for my fantasy team, so swapping out would help me in that regard. But I need WRs more than I need swapping RBs, but still, I like the idea of moving up in the draft.

[Bad News Barrett]

I worry about Gordon and the micro fracture surgery. Not sure how long he will be able to play. Give me Guice over Gordon

We can talk about risk over a pick, but Melvin Gordon is a ticking time bomb himself

[xlur8ed]

Melvin Gordon seems like a much better fantasy producer than real-life football player

This. I'd lean towards Gordon if you're competing, and 1.02 if not. Fine valuation imo.

[Johnny Canuck]

Gordon for me, no guarantee that the 1.02 becomes anything close to what Gordon already is...youth is great, but I can't win just because I put up the youngest lineup, I need the fantasy points.

Microfracture surgery is being overblown and is great to bring up if you want to depress value. Kelce had the same surgery and never see anything about his longevity regarding his knees.

"You play to win the game" - go with Gordon.

[Pet_Smith]

Never been a big Gordon fan, so 1.02 for me. Essentially, you'll have gone 1.07 & 2.01 for 1.02.

Gordon is volume dependent, hasn't managed to hit the baseline 4.0 Y/C, and was losing work to an UDFA. Microfractures don't concern me, but it is another minor flag.And managed a whole season with no TD's...

Overall though, I'd say the value isn't bad, hence the results aren't that far off. Just need to decide who you like more