1.10, 1.11 for my DK+

[Zacsby]

I don’t know about the majority of these replies. It feels a little premature to value DK as easily worth more than two 1sts (albeit later ones) in a loaded draft class. Depth is more important in a 14-team league. I think the value is on the picks side.

Honestly WR depth isn't affected too much in a 14 teamer. Unless it's start 3 WRs. RB is where depth gets hit hard, and you're probably not getting a quality RB at 10. If Swift or Akers were to fall that far I would consider it. But I highly doubt it. And I see no reason to trade DK for two late 1st WRs who may or may not pan out.

[TheBelgian]

I don’t know about the majority of these replies. It feels a little premature to value DK as easily worth more than two 1sts (albeit later ones) in a loaded draft class. Depth is more important in a 14-team league. I think the value is on the picks side.

Honestly WR depth isn't affected too much in a 14 teamer. Unless it's start 3 WRs. RB is where depth gets hit hard, and you're probably not getting a quality RB at 10. If Swift or Akers were to fall that far I would consider it. But I highly doubt it. And I see no reason to trade DK for two late 1st WRs who may or may not pan out.

I saw this thread and am curious what you think of the idea of sending Akers for Metcalf and Boston Scott. Where is the value on something like this? I'm assuming it is on the Metcalf side because he has proven he can play, but is this offer close in a vacuum?

[FantasyFoosball]

I don’t know about the majority of these replies. It feels a little premature to value DK as easily worth more than two 1sts (albeit later ones) in a loaded draft class. Depth is more important in a 14-team league. I think the value is on the picks side.

Honestly WR depth isn't affected too much in a 14 teamer. Unless it's start 3 WRs. RB is where depth gets hit hard, and you're probably not getting a quality RB at 10. If Swift or Akers were to fall that far I would consider it. But I highly doubt it. And I see no reason to trade DK for two late 1st WRs who may or may not pan out.

I saw this thread and am curious what you think of the idea of sending Akers for Metcalf and Boston Scott. Where is the value on something like this? I'm assuming it is on the Metcalf side because he has proven he can play, but is this offer close in a vacuum?

Lol, no, that offer is not close at all. DK alone is >> Akers. Not that Scott offers much of anything here, but the Akers side is the one that needs to be adding. A lot.

[M-Dub]

Honestly WR depth isn't affected too much in a 14 teamer. Unless it's start 3 WRs. RB is where depth gets hit hard, and you're probably not getting a quality RB at 10. If Swift or Akers were to fall that far I would consider it. But I highly doubt it. And I see no reason to trade DK for two late 1st WRs who may or may not pan out.

I saw this thread and am curious what you think of the idea of sending Akers for Metcalf and Boston Scott. Where is the value on something like this? I'm assuming it is on the Metcalf side because he has proven he can play, but is this offer close in a vacuum?

Lol, no, that offer is not close at all. DK alone is >> Akers. Not that Scott offers much of anything here, but the Akers side is the one that needs to be adding. A lot.

Lol.

[M-Dub]

I don’t know about the majority of these replies. It feels a little premature to value DK as easily worth more than two 1sts (albeit later ones) in a loaded draft class. Depth is more important in a 14-team league. I think the value is on the picks side.

Honestly WR depth isn't affected too much in a 14 teamer. Unless it's start 3 WRs. RB is where depth gets hit hard, and you're probably not getting a quality RB at 10. If Swift or Akers were to fall that far I would consider it. But I highly doubt it. And I see no reason to trade DK for two late 1st WRs who may or may not pan out.

I saw this thread and am curious what you think of the idea of sending Akers for Metcalf and Boston Scott. Where is the value on something like this? I'm assuming it is on the Metcalf side because he has proven he can play, but is this offer close in a vacuum?

The value is unequivocally on the Akers side, unless you have to start five WRs and only one RB or some weird scenario like that. You don’t trade away a 20yo rookie RB with a 3-down skill set and upper percentile metrics across the board who is being air-dropped into a workhorse role for a 22yo WR with a limited route tree who is (at best) the second receiving option on a run-first team. Boston Scott doesn’t come close to bridging the gap between them.

[BradysBunch]

Before the draft. No. OTC and lamb or juedy is there. Yes.

[TheBelgian]

Honestly WR depth isn't affected too much in a 14 teamer. Unless it's start 3 WRs. RB is where depth gets hit hard, and you're probably not getting a quality RB at 10. If Swift or Akers were to fall that far I would consider it. But I highly doubt it. And I see no reason to trade DK for two late 1st WRs who may or may not pan out.

I saw this thread and am curious what you think of the idea of sending Akers for Metcalf and Boston Scott. Where is the value on something like this? I'm assuming it is on the Metcalf side because he has proven he can play, but is this offer close in a vacuum?

Lol, no, that offer is not close at all. DK alone is >> Akers. Not that Scott offers much of anything here, but the Akers side is the one that needs to be adding. A lot.

Fair enough. I didn't think it was a laughable offer. I saw Zacsby's post and in this case Akers fell. He said he would consider it IF Akers or Swift fell. So I had to ask.

[TheBelgian]

Honestly WR depth isn't affected too much in a 14 teamer. Unless it's start 3 WRs. RB is where depth gets hit hard, and you're probably not getting a quality RB at 10. If Swift or Akers were to fall that far I would consider it. But I highly doubt it. And I see no reason to trade DK for two late 1st WRs who may or may not pan out.

I saw this thread and am curious what you think of the idea of sending Akers for Metcalf and Boston Scott. Where is the value on something like this? I'm assuming it is on the Metcalf side because he has proven he can play, but is this offer close in a vacuum?

The value is unequivocally on the Akers side, unless you have to start five WRs and only one RB or some weird scenario like that. You don’t trade away a 20yo rookie RB with a 3-down skill set and upper percentile metrics across the board who is being air-dropped into a workhorse role for a 22yo WR with a limited route tree who is (at best) the second receiving option on a run-first team. Boston Scott doesn’t come close to bridging the gap between them.

This is why I asked the question. The problem I see with this is Akers hasn't done anything...yet. DK just had a solid rookie year on a running team.

[FantasyFoosball]

I saw this thread and am curious what you think of the idea of sending Akers for Metcalf and Boston Scott. Where is the value on something like this? I'm assuming it is on the Metcalf side because he has proven he can play, but is this offer close in a vacuum?

Lol, no, that offer is not close at all. DK alone is >> Akers. Not that Scott offers much of anything here, but the Akers side is the one that needs to be adding. A lot.

Fair enough. I didn't think it was a laughable offer. I saw Zacsby's post and in this case Akers fell. He said he would consider it IF Akers or Swift fell. So I had to ask.

Akers is worth a late first, that's typically where he goes in most rookie drafts. There's a 0% chance that a DK owner is going to sell him for a late first.

I have no idea what M-Dub is talking about here. There's no way that Akers is worth more than DK. CEH/Taylor are probably the only two rookies that I would take over DK. Akers isn't anywhere near the conversation of CEH/Taylor.

[kellysheroes]

I'm sticking with DK

[jjleurquin]

I think a lot of people here are overvaluing Metcalf. This offer is not bad.

[M-Dub]

Lol, no, that offer is not close at all. DK alone is >> Akers. Not that Scott offers much of anything here, but the Akers side is the one that needs to be adding. A lot.

Fair enough. I didn't think it was a laughable offer. I saw Zacsby's post and in this case Akers fell. He said he would consider it IF Akers or Swift fell. So I had to ask.

Akers is worth a late first, that's typically where he goes in most rookie drafts. There's a 0% chance that a DK owner is going to sell him for a late first.

I have no idea what M-Dub is talking about here. There's no way that Akers is worth more than DK. CEH/Taylor are probably the only two rookies that I would take over DK. Akers isn't anywhere near the conversation of CEH/Taylor.

lol. This guy actually concocts entire alternate realities where his bad takes are correct. That’s rich.

Over here in the real world, Akers is a top 5 rookie and rarely makes it past the 1.07 in 1QB rookie drafts. He’s ranked three spots higher than DK in Mizelle’s startup ADP data. Akers might not be in the same conversation as JT/CEH, but neither is DK. WR2s are significantly more replaceable than workhorse RBs. If you take DK over Akers, you’re just flat-out bad at dynasty.

[IR1]

Like both DK and Akers(hoping he makes it to me at 1.09 in 10 team idp heavy league). I have DK slightly above Akers due to length of wr career and we probably haven't seen DK's ceiling as it usually takes a couple years for wr to develop. Probably an element of team need.

[FantasyFoosball]

Fair enough. I didn't think it was a laughable offer. I saw Zacsby's post and in this case Akers fell. He said he would consider it IF Akers or Swift fell. So I had to ask.

Akers is worth a late first, that's typically where he goes in most rookie drafts. There's a 0% chance that a DK owner is going to sell him for a late first.

I have no idea what M-Dub is talking about here. There's no way that Akers is worth more than DK. CEH/Taylor are probably the only two rookies that I would take over DK. Akers isn't anywhere near the conversation of CEH/Taylor.

lol. This guy actually concocts entire alternate realities where his bad takes are correct. That’s rich.

Over here in the real world, Akers is a top 5 rookie and rarely makes it past the 1.07 in 1QB rookie drafts. He’s ranked three spots higher than DK in Mizelle’s startup ADP data. Akers might not be in the same conversation as JT/CEH, but neither is DK. WR2s are significantly more replaceable than workhorse RBs. If you take DK over Akers, you’re just flat-out bad at dynasty.

Lololololol.

Mizelle's startup ADP also has Sanders at 1.09. So if you want to base your decisions off of that, then go right ahead....

CEH/JT/Swift/Jeudy/Lamb/Swift

All a tier or two ahead of Akers.

[M-Dub]

Lolololololololololol

I’m assuming one of those Swifts is supposed to be Dobbins? Regardless, Jeudy and Lamb should not be going ahead of Akers. You’re leaving value on the table if you do that. That’s dumb.