Waiver Wire Depth

[moishetreats]

Your organization here provides for more nuance. In that scheme, Pickett and Jones are my tier 1. I believe in their floor, even if I don't see a crazy high ceiling.

In the "they can be the starter the next two years if they play well" group, I'd put Purdy, Love and Ridder. Purdy may have already played well enough to be in tier 1, and I think either Rodgers or Love will be on a new team next season. Ridder may not have played enough to prove himself worthy of a starting role in 2023, nevermind 24. So, he looks more dependent on practice field stuff and interactions with the coaching staff, which are hard to unearth, nevermind quantify.

No quibbles on tiers 3 and 4, with the obvious caveat of Purdy. Tier 5 is where I'm intrigued. Do you think Wilson and Mills are finished as NFL players and can't see their value resuscitated? I have problems with Wilson from a mental makeup perspective, but how do you separate Mills' struggles through 2 years from the poor OC/scheme/weapons support he's had to date? I've seen suggestions that, if Houston takes QB at 1.2, they might trade Mills. If he's acquired as a depth play to potentially be groomed (a la Mayfield to LAR), he could see a value bump. Imagine him going to Seattle or Detroit for a 6th.

Yeah, I can't really disagree or quibble with your rankings. Most of these guys really belong in one of two categories:
-I believe in their talent and they just need an opportunity.
-I don't believe in their talent and the opportunity doesn't matter.
Buy the first group and sell the second.

I see Mills as done. He's shown enough, I think, to stick around the NFL. One of the best 75 QBs, and they're always rostered. But I'm not seeing enough to ever project him as more than a capable back-up. Which means he'll probably start games again, but I don't want to be holding him forever in the hopes that, when he does have a few games that he's starting, I'm going everything I can *not* to start him.

And that's what I'm seeing with him, Wilson, etc. They might have okay stretches as NFL QBs, but I never want to start them. With players like that -- at all positions -- I want them off my roster. Guys whom I think will never have anything more than a minimal value increase or whom I want to constantly avoid starting clog my rosters. For instance, I dumped Jeff Wilson, Jr. right before final waivers this year in my Dynasty league. Yes, he is productive at times. But I don't think he'll ever have a real value increase and I never want him starting for me. I think there are more value-upside players and players who are more likely to have big spike weeks -- those are they guys I want in my lineup in a pinch.

So Mills is gone for me. Same with Z Wilson. He had plenty of questions coming in, has had terrible coaching early in his career, and just doesn't seem to have it. A future Baker Mayfield. Enough talent to get a couple more random opportunities in a desperate NFL, but how likely is it that (a) any fantasy team will offer something of substance for him unless he produces for a meaningful stretch, or (2) you'll ever want to start him? That's why I put in the roster-clogger tier. I just don't want to hold onto a guy like him for years for that unlikely but possible small value spike. I'd rather have someone from the list above -- or at another position -- who might have less of a chance of any value uptick but whose spike could be higher. E.g. Zappe. I'm not a huge believer, and I think he has less potential than Wilson. But if he somehow gets the starting job in N.E. next year, I think his value jump could be real.

One final note: We'll also likely know about Zappe by September or mid-year at the latest. Wilson, for instance, you're stuck holding for 2+ years to see if anything happens.

None of us wants to give up on the next Tannehill too early: a guy with early-season struggles who finds success later in his career. In most SF/2QB leagues, he was probably a free agent at some point, though. And there are soooooo many Bakers compared to the single Tanny that they become roster-cloggers for me.

I have no problem stashing QBs. At one point, I had 10 (!) on my 27-player roster (before we moved to best ball) because of the slim possibility of the value spike. From that mindset, go ahead and hold onto guys like Mills and Wilson. I came to see that I was missing out players at other positions whose value spike was far more likely.

Thanks for getting this thread started. I'm enjoying our conversation!

[moishetreats]

For what it's worth, yes, I realize the apparent hypocrisy given my teams below. The second is different: it's a contract league, and 2022 was a rebuild for me. I have an obscene amount of cap space and can restock my QB room pretty easily in just one off-season.

And, as I've written before, not staying on QB course is why I'm honestly considering blowing up my team 1 in sig (what would you do?). Over the past few years (except for the Herbert trade), I've let my QBs age productively, using my resources to stay competitive. We just finished our 10th year, and 4 of the 10 teams make the playoffs. I've made them all 10 years, with four Superbowl appearances, three 'ships, and two seasons with the most points scored. I've passed up on keeping my QB position strong to extend the window after the sixth year.

Put in another context: not following my own advice is why I'm not sure my stacked team below can realistically compete in 2023. I'll almost assuredly make the playoffs, but I don't know that I'll be good enough to have three spike weeks to win a 'ship unless ALL my other positions have huge games.

[Pullo Vision]

Yeah, I can't really disagree or quibble with your rankings. Most of these guys really belong in one of two categories:
-I believe in their talent and they just need an opportunity.
-I don't believe in their talent and the opportunity doesn't matter.
Buy the first group and sell the second.

I see Mills as done. He's shown enough, I think, to stick around the NFL. One of the best 75 QBs, and they're always rostered. But I'm not seeing enough to ever project him as more than a capable back-up. Which means he'll probably start games again, but I don't want to be holding him forever in the hopes that, when he does have a few games that he's starting, I'm going everything I can *not* to start him.

And that's what I'm seeing with him, Wilson, etc. They might have okay stretches as NFL QBs, but I never want to start them. With players like that -- at all positions -- I want them off my roster. Guys whom I think will never have anything more than a minimal value increase or whom I want to constantly avoid starting clog my rosters. For instance, I dumped Jeff Wilson, Jr. right before final waivers this year in my Dynasty league. Yes, he is productive at times. But I don't think he'll ever have a real value increase and I never want him starting for me. I think there are more value-upside players and players who are more likely to have big spike weeks -- those are they guys I want in my lineup in a pinch.

So Mills is gone for me. Same with Z Wilson. He had plenty of questions coming in, has had terrible coaching early in his career, and just doesn't seem to have it. A future Baker Mayfield. Enough talent to get a couple more random opportunities in a desperate NFL, but how likely is it that (a) any fantasy team will offer something of substance for him unless he produces for a meaningful stretch, or (2) you'll ever want to start him? That's why I put in the roster-clogger tier. I just don't want to hold onto a guy like him for years for that unlikely but possible small value spike. I'd rather have someone from the list above -- or at another position -- who might have less of a chance of any value uptick but whose spike could be higher. E.g. Zappe. I'm not a huge believer, and I think he has less potential than Wilson. But if he somehow gets the starting job in N.E. next year, I think his value jump could be real.

One final note: We'll also likely know about Zappe by September or mid-year at the latest. Wilson, for instance, you're stuck holding for 2+ years to see if anything happens.

None of us wants to give up on the next Tannehill too early: a guy with early-season struggles who finds success later in his career. In most SF/2QB leagues, he was probably a free agent at some point, though. And there are soooooo many Bakers compared to the single Tanny that they become roster-cloggers for me.

I have no problem stashing QBs. At one point, I had 10 (!) on my 27-player roster (before we moved to best ball) because of the slim possibility of the value spike. From that mindset, go ahead and hold onto guys like Mills and Wilson. I came to see that I was missing out players at other positions whose value spike was far more likely.

Thanks for getting this thread started. I'm enjoying our conversation!

Within this arrangement, I I can't put Ridder in the "I believe" or the "I don't believe" category. I got him where I did for the value but I don't know about his long term staying power. I started a thread in the discussion subforum hoping to get an argument tilting me one way or the other.

I'm hard out on Z Wilson. I'd only consider buying if the price was a 3rd.

I know the majority of dynasty players have moved on from Mills, if they thought anything of him in the first place, but it's tough for me to reconcile the pre draft optimism on Mills with his performances in a bad situation. He was scouted favorably with NFL ready skills. The pre draft process was capped with him "crushing" his rain soaked pro day, per Daniel Jeremiah. David Shaw, a respected college coach brought in for not draft day coverage, spoke highly of him.

PFF recently dropped a piece discussing how Zach Wilson has had 2 bad NFL years, and wondering if that should force analysts to reconsider their QB evaluation process. One of the points brought up was how few games Wilson played and how it limits teams' opportunities to effectively scout him. Mills has a similar problem with 11 college starts. The reasons I can see for real pessimism about Mills are-
1- those limited college starts, throwing into question the accuracy of those scout reports
2- the poor NFL support has damaged his development, on the scale of David "shellshock" Carr and Sam "Ghost" Darnold

To your point, I think he can have a long career. The question is if he spends most of that on the sideline. That gives him a zombie like floor- he's rostered but not doing anything for a fantasy team. In that case, you're hoping he's signed as a bridge. If he wasn't destroyed or can be rehabilitated, what is his ceiling if everything lines up? I'm thinking Goff. With weapons and/or scheme support (McVay, Kupp, ARSB, BJohnson), he can help an NFL team. He won't be a guy who *carries* an NFL team, and they may be on the lookout for an upgrade, like Goff. But, in the right environment, he can become a useful starter.

All of that said, definitely see Wilson as the higher ceiling. He also has a lower floor, and I think he's much more like to bottom out than hit that ceiling.. Mills is more of an NFL floor play with an at best moderate ceiling. In an either/or choice, I'd definitely weigh league settings and roster. I'd go Wilson in shorter rosters, Mills in deeper/wider leagues.

Yep, in SC, with unique rules like tags and the FA bidding process, you can really turn over a roster quick. In bestball, I'd approach roster building different from lineup leagues. To me, there's a ton of value in having multiple starting options. Rodgers/Wilson/Geno take definitely care of QB2, and step up to QB1 when Herbert has a QB2 day himself.

As to whether to rebuild it, the QB situation is fine short term but the RBs worry me way more. How to address the QB age, RB age/depth and WR age would be informed by the league's trade history. If the you can get paid for Rodgers and Wilson (like 1sts and youth) I'd look at it real hard. In the Advice sub-forum here, someone posted about a Wilson v 1.11 trade in SF. I'm curious what he'd go for in this 2QB league. I wouldn't sell them in a "my team is old and short on depth I'm selling for whatever I can get" panic, but the QB trade opportunities would dictate how I'd approach Kupp/Mixon/DMont/CMC/Kelce.

If I were to continue to try to compete, I'd be focused on that RB2 spot, and the depth behind it, over the QB age concerns. Could also see retooling, like trading Kelce for RB help and future draft cap, maybe pairing in Mixon/DMont/Pacheco.

I've totally enjoyed our convo here. It's all really helped with the SF strategizing.

[Pullo Vision]

Found this article, which considers many of the points discussed here- https://www.dynastynerds.com/balancing- ... eam-apart/. It suggests Fields, Lance and Watson as value buys for potential elite QB production.

[moishetreats]

Cool article. Thank you! Seems very much aligned with what we're discussing.

All of that said, definitely see Wilson as the higher ceiling. He also has a lower floor, and I think he's much more like to bottom out than hit that ceiling.. Mills is more of an NFL floor play with an at best moderate ceiling. In an either/or choice, I'd definitely weigh league settings and roster. I'd go Wilson in shorter rosters, Mills in deeper/wider leagues.

I agree with you about Z Wilson and Mills. Because we're on the same page, there's no world in which I want Mills instead of Z Wilson. I get that in larger leagues, having some with a more reliable floor might be appealing. But, here's the rub: do you ever realistically want to start him? For one or two games, maybe. But for anything more, almost assuredly not. Let's say you have J. Herbert, R Wilson, Rodgers, and Mills. And let's say that, improbably, Mills becomes a starter again. There's one week were Wilson is on bye and Herbert tweaked an ankle; he'll miss 1-2 games. Fine, I'll play Mills. But, if you're in a position where you need to start Mills for 4+, you're doing *anything* you can to find someone else (heck, maybe even for the 1-2 games!!). That's how I define roster-clogger: someone whose value will likely never spike and whom I want to avoid starting no matter what. And you'd kind of be stuck holding him if wins a starting job.

With Z Wilson, there are two huge benefits over Mills. If he starts, his ceiling is undeniably higher. Better either as a player to spot-start or sub in for injury in the hypothetical scenarios above. In both of those cases -- spot-starting, trade -- his value is far above Mills. Their floors are both actually similar to me: they suck and are perennial backups at best. But I agree that the ceiling is a differentiation, so I'd always take Z Wilson of the two.

Yep, in SC, with unique rules like tags and the FA bidding process, you can really turn over a roster quick. In bestball, I'd approach roster building different from lineup leagues. To me, there's a ton of value in having multiple starting options. Rodgers/Wilson/Geno take definitely care of QB2, and step up to QB1 when Herbert has a QB2 day himself.

As to whether to rebuild it, the QB situation is fine short term but the RBs worry me way more. How to address the QB age, RB age/depth and WR age would be informed by the league's trade history. If the you can get paid for Rodgers and Wilson (like 1sts and youth) I'd look at it real hard. In the Advice sub-forum here, someone posted about a Wilson v 1.11 trade in SF. I'm curious what he'd go for in this 2QB league. I wouldn't sell them in a "my team is old and short on depth I'm selling for whatever I can get" panic, but the QB trade opportunities would dictate how I'd approach Kupp/Mixon/DMont/CMC/Kelce.

If I were to continue to try to compete, I'd be focused on that RB2 spot, and the depth behind it, over the QB age concerns. Could also see retooling, like trading Kelce for RB help and future draft cap, maybe pairing in Mixon/DMont/Pacheco.

Thank you SO much for your thoughts!! I think you're right about the QB room in 2023. I'm not sure how much beyond that it can last, though, unless I am [naively] right about Love being a good/great QB. Hence the thought of the rebuild: get that solved now so I'm good for the foreseeable future with Herbert, R Wilson, Love, +whom I'm get in trades by rebuilding.

I also don't love my RBs for 2023, and I agree they're the weak spot. That doesn't worry me too much in February, though, especially given the incredible variance of so many of my players. It might be the spot I need the most help, and I feel best about finding stopgap measures if needed throughout the season (easier than most other positions, IMO). I appreciate your insight, though, that it's the single biggest need I should focus on if making a run over the QB room.

In that R Wilson / 1.11 thread, I was a STRONG advocate of Wilson even before Payton arrived. I feel much more confident that he will be at least a QB2 for 2-4 more years. In a 2QB league, that's certainly a great QB3. And I wouldn't even entertain 1.11 for him.

I'll certainly have those RBs on the block (along with other aging players -- Kelce, Kupp, Hill, Rodgers, Wilson, etc.). Whether I go for a retool or a rebuild might just be dependent on what good (if any) offers I get. Put another way (and thank you for helping me see this): I don't have to make any decisions now. I can essentially let the league decide. If people are up for paying decent value for those guys, then I can move them and let that determine my direction. Otherwise, ride with the wave for 2023 and see if I can pull another championship run out of this group. Thank you again!

[Pullo Vision]

Cool article. Thank you! Seems very much aligned with what we're discussing.

All of that said, definitely see Wilson as the higher ceiling. He also has a lower floor, and I think he's much more like to bottom out than hit that ceiling.. Mills is more of an NFL floor play with an at best moderate ceiling. In an either/or choice, I'd definitely weigh league settings and roster. I'd go Wilson in shorter rosters, Mills in deeper/wider leagues.

I agree with you about Z Wilson and Mills. Because we're on the same page, there's no world in which I want Mills instead of Z Wilson. I get that in larger leagues, having some with a more reliable floor might be appealing. But, here's the rub: do you ever realistically want to start him? For one or two games, maybe. But for anything more, almost assuredly not. Let's say you have J. Herbert, R Wilson, Rodgers, and Mills. And let's say that, improbably, Mills becomes a starter again. There's one week were Wilson is on bye and Herbert tweaked an ankle; he'll miss 1-2 games. Fine, I'll play Mills. But, if you're in a position where you need to start Mills for 4+, you're doing *anything* you can to find someone else (heck, maybe even for the 1-2 games!!). That's how I define roster-clogger: someone whose value will likely never spike and whom I want to avoid starting no matter what. And you'd kind of be stuck holding him if wins a starting job.

With Z Wilson, there are two huge benefits over Mills. If he starts, his ceiling is undeniably higher. Better either as a player to spot-start or sub in for injury in the hypothetical scenarios above. In both of those cases -- spot-starting, trade -- his value is far above Mills. Their floors are both actually similar to me: they suck and are perennial backups at best. But I agree that the ceiling is a differentiation, so I'd always take Z Wilson of the two.

Yep, in SC, with unique rules like tags and the FA bidding process, you can really turn over a roster quick. In bestball, I'd approach roster building different from lineup leagues. To me, there's a ton of value in having multiple starting options. Rodgers/Wilson/Geno take definitely care of QB2, and step up to QB1 when Herbert has a QB2 day himself.

As to whether to rebuild it, the QB situation is fine short term but the RBs worry me way more. How to address the QB age, RB age/depth and WR age would be informed by the league's trade history. If the you can get paid for Rodgers and Wilson (like 1sts and youth) I'd look at it real hard. In the Advice sub-forum here, someone posted about a Wilson v 1.11 trade in SF. I'm curious what he'd go for in this 2QB league. I wouldn't sell them in a "my team is old and short on depth I'm selling for whatever I can get" panic, but the QB trade opportunities would dictate how I'd approach Kupp/Mixon/DMont/CMC/Kelce.

If I were to continue to try to compete, I'd be focused on that RB2 spot, and the depth behind it, over the QB age concerns. Could also see retooling, like trading Kelce for RB help and future draft cap, maybe pairing in Mixon/DMont/Pacheco.

Thank you SO much for your thoughts!! I think you're right about the QB room in 2023. I'm not sure how much beyond that it can last, though, unless I am [naively] right about Love being a good/great QB. Hence the thought of the rebuild: get that solved now so I'm good for the foreseeable future with Herbert, R Wilson, Love, +whom I'm get in trades by rebuilding.

I also don't love my RBs for 2023, and I agree they're the weak spot. That doesn't worry me too much in February, though, especially given the incredible variance of so many of my players. It might be the spot I need the most help, and I feel best about finding stopgap measures if needed throughout the season (easier than most other positions, IMO). I appreciate your insight, though, that it's the single biggest need I should focus on if making a run over the QB room.

In that R Wilson / 1.11 thread, I was a STRONG advocate of Wilson even before Payton arrived. I feel much more confident that he will be at least a QB2 for 2-4 more years. In a 2QB league, that's certainly a great QB3. And I wouldn't even entertain 1.11 for him.

I'll certainly have those RBs on the block (along with other aging players -- Kelce, Kupp, Hill, Rodgers, Wilson, etc.). Whether I go for a retool or a rebuild might just be dependent on what good (if any) offers I get. Put another way (and thank you for helping me see this): I don't have to make any decisions now. I can essentially let the league decide. If people are up for paying decent value for those guys, then I can move them and let that determine my direction. Otherwise, ride with the wave for 2023 and see if I can pull another championship run out of this group. Thank you again!

First off, I've completely dropped the ball on this thread. Feel pretty awful about that. So, I want to say, thank you SO MUCH to everyone who has provided input on this thread, and specifically you, moishetreats. Can't imagine I would feel as grounded as I do in my SF without all this.

Regarding the ZWil/Mills things- totally get it. A part of me feels like I'm trying to come up with a reason to think rostering him can still be worthwhile. The thing with Mills I'm kinda still grappling on is if the pre-draft evaluations were just *off* or if being in a horrendous situation did a number on him, like David Carr years before or Trevor Lawrence his rookie year. If the evaluation was off, then there's nothing further to consider.

If, however, he can be reclaimed, that's much more interesting. I'm curious what the rostering history is for QBs that have seemingly washed out (like Geno Smith) only to come back in and be a starter, even a reason their team won. Is that kind of "figuring it out" rare for a QB? That's the only reason I see to hold him, and his personality (versus Wilson's "I just want to go out there and have fun") seems more likely to work on addressing the flaws his first two years in the league have revealed.

Regardless, depending on how my rookie draft goes, I may be forced to cut him. Mark my words, you know he'll be at the top of my watchlist, lol.

Glad to provide feedback on your team! I'm admittedly a RB hog, so if I don't have 2 top 10-15 ish RBs and good depth, my team looks naked. That said, the DMont to Detroit signing looks great for the team now. Definitely agree with taking a break on addressing the depth to see what happens in the draft- maybe one of these vets will avoid the landmines and emerge unscathed. Maybe with the 4th and 4x5ths in the draft, you'll find a QB that eliminates your roster age cliff concerns.

Again, thanks much for all the input! I'll be more than happy to help in any way in the future.

[moishetreats]

It's your thread. No apologies needed!

Thanks for the kind words, and you're welcome. I've enjoyed our conversation!