Cost to trade for a QB

[remedy29]

I am curious to see what teams are paying for a 2nd QB in a SF assuming you only have 1 QB on your roster and you are not trading a QB in return. Assume average to poor QBs.

I'm seeing asking prices far greater than the values you see on KTC to the point that I'd rather wait to draft a young QB and just stick with RB/WR in the SF spot in the meantime.

[MacDaddy123]

I am curious to see what teams are paying for a 2nd QB in a SF assuming you only have 1 QB on your roster and you are not trading a QB in return. Assume average to poor QBs.

I'm seeing asking prices far greater than the values you see on KTC to the point that I'd rather wait to draft a young QB and just stick with RB/WR in the SF spot in the meantime.

Did you switch the KTC settings to SF? If not, then you are probably seeing 1 QB values, which would be VERY different from SF.
QB's values are very high in SF, even for poor QB's, because generally, a poor QB will still score more points in any given week than most RB's and WR's. If you have to play with a WR/RB/TE in your SF, you are at an extreme disadvantage.

[remedy29]

I am curious to see what teams are paying for a 2nd QB in a SF assuming you only have 1 QB on your roster and you are not trading a QB in return. Assume average to poor QBs.

I'm seeing asking prices far greater than the values you see on KTC to the point that I'd rather wait to draft a young QB and just stick with RB/WR in the SF spot in the meantime.

Did you switch the KTC settings to SF? If not, then you are probably seeing 1 QB values, which would be VERY different from SF.
QB's values are very high in SF, even for poor QB's, because generally, a poor QB will still score more points in any given week than most RB's and WR's. If you have to play with a WR/RB/TE in your SF, you are at an extreme disadvantage.

Of course, using SF setting in KTC.

For instance, Daniel Jones on KTC gives near equal value to Christian Kirk, Rondale Moore or Tyler Locket. I feel the asking price for a QB like Jones is far exceeding this value.

[frerichs5]

I think most times people don’t want to trade a QB without getting one back. Which makes it tough if you only have one to begin with. Tougher yet if the team you’re trying to get a QB from only has 2 or 3.

I wouldn’t trade Jones for those WRs either. Those types of WR are easily replaceable. Looking at the trade analyzer on here, you’d have to add a late 2nd to Kirk to get Jones.

But they’re all just resources in the end. It’s going to vary league to league what it takes to get one.

[murphysxm]

Your trade partners see that you only roster one QB in a SF and you are surprised your offers aren't fair value? You don't have the leverage here. Either you overpay or you stay where you are

[zaner75]

I'm not a huge fan of KTC as I think their values are player specific and leave out league format and size. QBs should have the most value because their production cannot be replaced. So even gross QBs (like D Jones, Ryan, Wentz, etc) help a roster more than a replaceable bench WR. You are looking for starting lineup help. The commensurate return should reflect that, imo. Equivalent player values around a QB do not address that point. If you're looking to trade a player straight-up for a QB, you have to move up a couple of tiers for an offer to be even considered.
If I'm the one moving a QB, my line is your 1st round draft pick needs to be in play. If you don't want to trade the pick to me, that's fine because another rookie RB/WR will be pushed down the board to me if you feel pressured into taking a QB. If you don't take a rookie QB, then your team is at a disadvantage in season, making it easier for me to get into the playoffs. The team with a QB to trade has all the leverage. Unfortunately, you're in the unenviable position of having to chase QB and I wouldn't expect any of your league-mates to let you off the hook.