Let's chill with the "This is DYNASTY" as a be-all-end-all

[lukkynumber13]

I'm not advocating that everyone should load up on Forte, Blount, Gore, and Gates regardless of their team context.

I'm talking more about the conversations we have seen such as the following: Tajae Sharpe being valued over Eric Decker, Wendall Smallwood over Theo Riddick, Devante Parker/DGB/Crief/Treadwell over Jordy, DT, Alshon, Jordan Matthews, Hilton etc. Why value Crief over Hilton? You're literally hoping he becomes Hilton in terms of production, at best.

The ones that really got me were CJ Prosise & Keith Marshall. People drafted these dudes in the top 15 of rookie picks! Insanity. Marshall especially. He was getting drafted as if he was some sort of heir apparent, and then struggles to make the team.

So many dyno owners completely ignore production simply because it's not sexy. Young WRs are sexy. Parker & Moncrief are sexy. Treadwell and Doctson were sexy in May. Lockett was sexy. DGB was sexy last year. Edelman isn't sexy, neither are Fitz, decker, Baldwin, Sanders, etc.

Yes, dynasty means building a sustainable winning team. But that won't happen if all we do is load up on flash.

[clarion contrarion]

yep how many titles could you have won with decker jordy and edelman take the discount , come on down and win the new game show the price is white !

[moishetreats]

The other end of the coin (and siding with the OP): I have yet to make a first-round pick in my league (year 4). I continually trade it (and usually my second-round pick) in-season (often packaging them both up) for older productive vets. I have made money every year and sit as the #2 seed this year.

If I always move the rookies with upside for immediate production, then I am constantly upgrading my this-year production relative to everyone else. At some point, I might to rebuild. But, this method should serve for another couple of years.

This is called a win now strategy, just one of many dynasty strategies. Bottom line is 'This is Dynasty' and it affects everything, you do not treat your team like a redraft league no matter how much you may think you do. You're not going to trade Sammy Watkins for Steve Smith in your dynasty league, but you would probably consider just that in your redraft for this year. Even when you're playing win now and making trades to plug immediate needs there is still a limit to how far you go because 'This is Dynasty'. Silly thread.

Why so black-and-white?? Why is must this be a "win-now" strategy? This strategy got me guys like Rodgers (2QB), McCoy, Ingram, DT, Gates, Peyton (three years ago), Calvin (four years ago), Fleener, Henry. Most of my team should continue to be productive. So, let's say I trade, for instance, two 1sts, my 2nd, and Kessell (I'm making this up) for Stafford. Or the same picks and TY. Williams for Julio. Those are the kinds of trades that I've been making. How is that win-now? They help me now AND for the next 2-4 years. I'm getting the older productive vets whose value is entirely on the decline and paying a premium for them. But, while other teams are waiting 1-3 years for their stud rookies to become stud players, I'm getting stud players albeit for a shorter period of time. Indeed, I am awaiting that type of trade this year for a WR...

[lukkynumber13]

Exactly. I've traded off a ton of picks for talent. Some older (Marshall, Edelman, Ingram, Stewart), some younger (Evans, Watkins). I don't have any 2017 firsts or seconds any more. But looking at my roster, there's zero reason why I shouldn't be able to continue to compete in 2017 and beyond. Marshall may no longer be relevant, Edelman & Ingram may fall off, Reed may be retired. But the 2017 early picks have huge potential to be busts. There are coin tosses either way but at least I am competitive. I could build around Parker, Treadwell, Boyd, and DGB and be all "potential"

[Cameron Giles]

There's always been a balance that needs to be achieved. It also depends on your team structure. If you're a team that's 5th or 6th in your league, then you're not going to trade Devante Parker for Eric Decker or Derrick Henry for L. Blount. Those are the type of "win-now" trades that can hurt you. They're band-aid trades, in the sense that you're trading really talented young players (who may not be producing for other reasons) for a quick scoring fix. Then Parker and Henry get increased opportunities and you're regretting it.

Moves have to be calculated.

[thebeast]

The other end of the coin (and siding with the OP): I have yet to make a first-round pick in my league (year 4). I continually trade it (and usually my second-round pick) in-season (often packaging them both up) for older productive vets. I have made money every year and sit as the #2 seed this year.

If I always move the rookies with upside for immediate production, then I am constantly upgrading my this-year production relative to everyone else. At some point, I might to rebuild. But, this method should serve for another couple of years.

This is called a win now strategy, just one of many dynasty strategies. Bottom line is 'This is Dynasty' and it affects everything, you do not treat your team like a redraft league no matter how much you may think you do. You're not going to trade Sammy Watkins for Steve Smith in your dynasty league, but you would probably consider just that in your redraft for this year. Even when you're playing win now and making trades to plug immediate needs there is still a limit to how far you go because 'This is Dynasty'. Silly thread.

Why so black-and-white?? Why is must this be a "win-now" strategy? This strategy got me guys like Rodgers (2QB), McCoy, Ingram, DT, Gates, Peyton (three years ago), Calvin (four years ago), Fleener, Henry. Most of my team should continue to be productive. So, let's say I trade, for instance, two 1sts, my 2nd, and Kessell (I'm making this up) for Stafford. Or the same picks and TY. Williams for Julio. Those are the kinds of trades that I've been making. How is that win-now? They help me now AND for the next 2-4 years. I'm getting the older productive vets whose value is entirely on the decline and paying a premium for them. But, while other teams are waiting 1-3 years for their stud rookies to become stud players, I'm getting stud players albeit for a shorter period of time. Indeed, I am awaiting that type of trade this year for a WR...

Uhm, are you trying to win now with the players you're acquiring?

[yooperbacker]

Imagine an owner this past off-season who had accrued Devante Parker, DGB, Lockett, Treadwell, Doctson, Moncrief, and Leonte Carroo as his WRs. He would have been bragging from May til Sep what a WR corps he had. Now...? He'd be bored out of skull for at LEAST 12 more months.[/quote]

Said owner would have good looking wr core for the next decade and some high draft capital to pair with them...

[maxhyde]

Imagine an owner this past off-season who had accrued Devante Parker, DGB, Lockett, Treadwell, Doctson, Moncrief, and Leonte Carroo as his WRs. He would have been bragging from May til Sep what a WR corps he had. Now...? He'd be bored out of skull for at LEAST 12 more months.

Said owner would have good looking wr core for the next decade and some high draft capital to pair with them...

When will the decade begin because it hasn't started yet

[Seventy5]

It’s all about roster value and building a roster full of desirable assets for me. If you have a roster full of desirable assets, it is very easy to construct a starting lineup capable of winning both now and later. If you have a lineup full of assets most of your owners will perceive as rentals, stopgaps, or “win-now” only types and you don’t win now, or have any picks to re-load….well then you’re going to have a very difficult time building a lineup capable of winning later.

Let’s take a look at two made up lineups:

Typical Win-NOW lineup:
QB: Tom Brady, Eli Manning, Tyrod Taylor
RB: Lamar Miller, Matt Forte, LeGarrette Blount, Spencer Ware, Paul Perkins, Kenneth Dixon, Bishop Sankey, David Cobb, Wendell Smallwood
WR: Alshon Jeffery, Jordan Matthews, Larry Fitzgerald, Eric Decker, Nelson Agholor, Golden Tate, Malcom Mitchell, Chris Hogan, Vjax, Tyrell Williams
TE: Coby Fleener, Antonio Gates, Delanie Walker, Maxx Williams
Picks: 2017 3, 4, 4

Could very easily win this year, but, you’re not going to get much of anything on the market for most of that roster and in two years you could very easily be stuck with a lineup that no longer has Brady, Forte, Blount, Fitzgerald, Decker, Gates, Walker, and even Miller/Fleener/Ware. All of a sudden this owner doesn’t have enough fire power to realistically win-now, and doesn’t have enough desirable assets to pull off a quick re-build or re-tooling of the roster. The re-build either takes 2-3+ years to pull off, or the owner says he’s leaving the league because he has too many obligations outside of fantasy football and he needs to downsize the amount of leagues he is in.

Trying to win, but not sacrificing the future to do so:
QB: Matt Ryan, Carson Wentz, Dak Prescott
WR: Odell Beckham Jr, Allen Robinson, Jarvis Landry , Keenan Allen, Sterling Sheppard, Stefon Diggs, Breshad Perriman, Tajae Sharpe
RB: Ezekiel Elliot, Mark Ingram, Isaiah Crowell, Tevin Coleman, Terrance West, Dwayne Washington, Christine Michael, DJ Foster
TE: Travis Kelce, Hunter Henry, Eric Ebron
Picks: 2017 1, 1, 2, 3, 3, 3

This is the type of lineup that could pretty realistically be pieced together if the owner holds strong to taking the BPA approach, wins a trade or three, and makes a few good WW moves. It has a good chance to win now, and in the future.

There are always owners who are constantly looking at this year and for the most part this year only. The type of owner who makes rookie draft picks based on their year one outlook. Those who take Sankey over OBJ/Kelvin/Arob because he looks to be the teams lead RB and they need help at RB2. Draft Aaron Dobson over Keenan Allen/Eifert because his year one projection looks good with Brady. Draft Kenneth Dixon over Will Fuller/Hunter Henry because he may pay off more in the short-term. Obviously these are cherry examples, and there are some positives to loading up on players who have a shorter path to fantasy relevance (i,e,. hit on a Langford, Montee Ball, J Allen, etc type and then flip them for a quick ROI/increase in roster value, but most owners end up feeling like they found a needle in the haystack and hold onto them only to see a Jordan Howard, CJ Anderson, and Kenneth Dixon come along and destroy their value).

Then you have some owners who are constantly looking towards the future and can’t seem to have a crack at winning. I have been in leagues with owners who just never seem to commit to winning when they’re close, and continuously trade players who are producing for assets they think will do well in the future but then end up whiffing on over half of them.

There is a fine line, and balance is needed whether you’re trying to win now or rebuild. IMO, the owners who are constantly building around desirable assets tend to have much more flexibility to pull off whichever strategy they chose. If you need a Forte/Blount/Fitzgerald type as a back-end starter or injury replacement mid-season, then they’re great buys—especially if you’re buying from a rebuilder who is looking to get something/anything for them because they don’t fit their competitive window. If half your team consists of these types, however, you will soon be left with a lineup that won’t be producing and you won’t have the necessary assets to pull off a quick re-build (or preferably, a re-tooling of your lineup).

Most are firm believers in talent over situation, but situation does play a massive role and needs to be taken into account. One common theme I am seeing is replacement level players being hyped up due to their immediate situation/production - i,e,. Jeremy Langford/Jordan Howard, Allen Hurns, Spencer Ware, Tim Hightower, Latavius Murray, etc. Yes they may be ok this year, and some of these types even string together 1-2 years of relevance, but it won’t require a great talent coming to town to relegate them to Tre Mason/Roy Helu-status. The key here is identifying whether or not these assets are sell-highs or not, which is entirely dependent on the player+situation.

At the end of the day, just be smart with when you buy and when you sell. Don’t buy rookie picks just before the rookie draft, buy them during the season because they’re almost always cheaper and easier to acquire. Don’t buy a hyped player going into year two who has shown a bit of potential and is already being valued near his ceiling, because that presents almost no room for a return on your investment; you either hit and break even, or you whiff and the transaction ends up being a massive over-pay. Capitalize on the what-have-you-done-for-me-lately hype by selling off the assets you don’t believe will have any staying power (Langford/Howard/Latavius), and don’t be afraid to buy-low on a talented player you believe will eventually get things going (Perriman/Treadwell/Ebron). The good thing is there are many ways to winning any given season, but if you’re constantly burning roster value to win-now and you over-commit to that strategy, eventually you will be left with a MASSIVE hole to dig yourself out of. It’s smart to stay within range of being able to pull off a quick re-tooling of your lineup, instead of having to fully rebuild.

[_yeti]

No one says it as a be-all-end-all.

That statement is said in response to someone making a bad short term decision. I have said it for sure. If you treat 2016 player situations as the be-all-end-all I might tell you "this is dynasty." When ppl valued Rawls as RB9 but decided Yeldon had no value bc of the signing of Ivory I might have said "this is dynasty." When ppl lost faith in Evans, I might have said "this is dynasty." When ppl said Gurley didn't produce well while having no QB and stacked boxes as a rookie, I might have said "this is dynasty."

No one talks down on Decker or Fitzgerald. They just don't have the same conversational appeal or long-term excitement. No one knocks anyone keeping vets who have been great and often continue to be and says "this is dynasty." Do people speculate when the wall will hit those vets? Sure, constantly. But I think situations have gotten a little melded in OPs example. Win-now is fine, rebuild is fine. Thinking like redraft while acting like you're right, might get a response of "this is dynasty."

Also, rookie hype for players like Prosise, Marshall, Smallwood was tepid at best and quite overstated IMO. Not everywhere or every league do late round rookies command high prices. The ppl on this forum tend to be the most active and therefore these ppl come up and can be overvalued but I think it's not quite the situation you make it out to be. If you're in a non-IDP league top 15 rookie pick for them isn't too crazy. Also, Moncrief over Hilton? Was that a thing? I talked all offseason how Moncrief was overrated but I don't think he was being valued above Hilton at least from what I saw.

Anyone who over values all rookies is bad at dynasty. Anyone who undervalues all rookies is bad at dynasty. Anyone who thinks too much like redraft, might get told this is dynasty. That is not at all dependent on player age but rather team bulding strategy.

[yooperbacker]

Imagine an owner this past off-season who had accrued Devante Parker, DGB, Lockett, Treadwell, Doctson, Moncrief, and Leonte Carroo as his WRs. He would have been bragging from May til Sep what a WR corps he had. Now...? He'd be bored out of skull for at LEAST 12 more months.

Said owner would have good looking wr core for the next decade and some high draft capital to pair with them...

When will the decade begin because it hasn't started yet[/quote]

You're right. They're all terrible. Parker and Caroo are worse than stills because he scores more points right now. DGB is bad because he got kicked off a bad team. Lockett is terrible because he's not scoring points, has nothing to do with his injury. Same can be said for Moncrief, injured and not producing so he's no good. Treadwell and Doctson haven't broken out yet and were over a quarter through the season so they must be busts..

[maxhyde]

Well i own more than a few of them so i know i didnt call them bad.
They arent winning anything right now though so has the timer started on the decade or not?
The alternative is having a couple players that could be helping you now. Would have been easy trading dgb or lockett for sanders+ six weeks ago bit i would bet it is tougher now . My point is for as good as all might be eventually having all youth is as good a plan as all old guys...except you are more likely to win with the older team

All i think ppl are trying to say is when someone offers you dt for moncrief it shouldnt be a difficult decision.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[yooperbacker]

Lockett is playing with what was reported as a partially torn pcl. If he is shut down at some point, he loses a little value. If Sanders were to go down at this point in his career, he loses all value. I'm not against win now moves depending on price. Timing is everything. Buy vets in the offseason, buy picks/injured players in season when they are scoring. This is dynasty

[Seventy5]

Lockett is playing with what was reported as a partially torn pcl. If he is shut down at some point, he loses a little value. If Sanders were to go down at this point in his career, he loses all value. I'm not against win now moves depending on price. Timing is everything. Buy vets in the offseason, buy picks/injured players in season when they are scoring. This is dynasty

x2.

Youth and potential is overvalued during the off-season and production undervalued. The exact opposite holds true during the season. Buying and selling at the right time is how you steadily increase your roster value.

[lukkynumber13]

Lockett is playing with what was reported as a partially torn pcl. If he is shut down at some point, he loses a little value. If Sanders were to go down at this point in his career, he loses all value. I'm not against win now moves depending on price. Timing is everything. Buy vets in the offseason, buy picks/injured players in season when they are scoring. This is dynasty

x2.

Youth and potential is overvalued during the off-season and production undervalued. The exact opposite holds true during the season. Buying and selling at the right time is how you steadily increase your roster value.

Very agreeable points. I guess part of the thing that peeves me is when people act like being younger than 24 years old (or whatever arbitrary age you want to use) automatically gives you talent. I've heard arguments for Jaelen Strong being more valuable than Edelman because he's young and "this is dynasty". There's no way that's sound reasoning. Yes, he's young. And it's statistically possible that Strong somehow becomes a viable asset during his career. But it's so much more likely that Edelman continues to produce at a WR1/2 or even WR3 level for another 2-4 years. I'd rather take the boring vet who has proven to do it, over a young kid who has age on his side and not really anything else