That is exactly my point. I never said Olave is garbage. I'd like to have him on my teams, just as I'd like to have Waddle and Wilson and other guys.Tvols wrote: ↑Sun Oct 29, 2023 5:42 amare we going put waddle in this category too? or does he fall further? He is struggling this year injury possible? IDk is why I ask? Wilson we going move down he is struggling too? just curious what the break point is? I love any of them on my team, there are only a few "studs" in the league it why they are so valuable and rightfully so. IMO, The top ones are elite talent with elite type situations.Anteaters wrote: ↑Sat Oct 28, 2023 7:47 amI wouldn't. Then again, I see Olave as a very good low end WR2 who is being overvalued as a midWR1.
At the right price, I'd be very happy to trade for Olave. At current valuations, not so much.
Fantasy managers have to be careful about getting over excited about athleticism and better than average seasons as a rookie. Every NFL WR is athletic and most are rare athletic specimens. There can only be 12 (or 14) WR1s in fantasy. Let's say we push that to 16-18 guys because of fluctuation and close calls. Olave ain't there.
Sure, we can toss out a few old guys in dynasty rankings and try to guess which young guys are going to improve their stats and be next years (or two years from now) T16WRs. But looking forward means not only downgrading old guys like Evans and Adams, it means adding in rookies who will be studs. For all intents and purposes, a second or third year WR who is scoring WR26 in 2023, is going to be a WR who is scoring around WR26 in 2024.
If you see something you truly like about a player that points to growth, go for it. But don't try to force anticipated growth on every player with athleticism, or you'll be chasing ever chick at the bar after catching a glimpse at her from across a crowded room.
Pay for Olave the same as you'd pay for Flowers or Pittman or Kirk. And even that is a bit of a reach for me right now. If Olave's situation presented a higher target share, he'd be on these guys value level. Right now, I put him a smidge below, but close enough for this comparison.
I think some people translate "I wouldn't pay two mid 1sts for him" into "I think he's terrible."
As you said, there are only a few studs, and to be a stud you need elite (I'd say almost-elite would do) talent AND an elite situation. Players who lack the situation should not be priced the same as those who have the elite situation. I get the dynasty mantra of trade for the future, but I also trade for the present because I don't believe in multi-year rebuilds. I don't have time to give up stud prices for WRs I have to wait years to end up in a situation that maximizes their talent.
Other managers disagree with me on that. Other managers don't mind trading on talent alone and gambling the elite situation will come along one day. That's cool with me and I don't disparage that path. It's just not one I choose to pursue.
So, if I drafted Olave, yeah, I'm holding on and hoping for the best, just like I am with Waddle, GWilson, London and whoever else. But if I don't own one of those guy and I want to trade for him, I'm not paying stud-level prices for a guy who can't deliver stud numbers for the foreseeable future. For the record, Waddle has an elite situation and I have more faith that he'll rebound this season than Olave.
I don't have Olave. I hate Olave's trade value.
It's all about opportunity cost. If Olave is producing like Kirk and I can get Kirk for a 1st, why should I pay two 1sts for Olave? For his name? For his rookie hype in fantasyland? I choose to pay for production. I'm fine with others paying extra for hype.