22, 23, and 24 firsts for Pitts??

[Mtt33]

In 2021-draft terms, these picks equate to two seconds and a third, in my estimation. I wouldn't give up Pitts for that. Maybe he's not the generational talent he's touted as, but I really want to find out for myself!

I’m fine with passing on this offer if you genuinely think Pitts is gonna be the second coming of Kelce/Gronk, but the bolded part makes literally zero sense to me. Either you’re WAY too high on the 2021 class or you’re WAY too impatient to cash in future picks, because there’s no way two 2nd and a 3rd in 2021 are worth three 1sts in 2022-2024. Even if we’re talking about the 2021 2.01, 2.02 and 3.01, based on Mizelle ADP for May, those picks would net you Elijah Moore, Michael Carter and D’Wayne Eskridge. You’re saying you’d prefer those three players to three 1sts over the next three years??

I agree that’s definitely an exaggeration but saying “you have to take 3 1sts” as if they equal 3 1sts this year is an exaggeration the other way.

[wickerkat1212]

Pitts is going to be the next Gronk. If you think you can get three good players in that range, do it. But I worry that it DOES help an elite team get even BETTER. Projections already have him as a top 5-10 TE.

No, Pitts might aspire to hopefully have a Gronk like career. I never care about how another team fairs after a trade I make. If it helps my team who cares. Projections don't mean squat until production matchs those projections. I think it is very fair to say that statistically you are better off improving your team with 3 1st round draft picks over a singular TE. This is coming from somebody that LOVES Pitts, but this vaue is far too great to pass on.

Right, but you are trading a player that could be one of the top 2-4 taken, for players in the 10-12 range. Not even close IMO. As we saw in other posts of who was taken at say 1.10 the last three years, I'd rather have Pitts in MOST of those scenarios.

[chalorpas]

In 2021-draft terms, these picks equate to two seconds and a third, in my estimation. I wouldn't give up Pitts for that. Maybe he's not the generational talent he's touted as, but I really want to find out for myself!

I’m fine with passing on this offer if you genuinely think Pitts is gonna be the second coming of Kelce/Gronk, but the bolded part makes literally zero sense to me. Either you’re WAY too high on the 2021 class or you’re WAY too impatient to cash in future picks, because there’s no way two 2nd and a 3rd in 2021 are worth three 1sts in 2022-2024. Even if we’re talking about the 2021 2.01, 2.02 and 3.01, based on Mizelle ADP for May, those picks would net you Elijah Moore, Michael Carter and D’Wayne Eskridge. You’re saying you’d prefer those three players to three 1sts over the next three years??

This. The owners who discount future 1sts this heavily are too short sighted. Making deals like this for future 1sts is how you build dynasties.

[wickerkat1212]

Offered Lamar, MDavis, Mostert, Beasley, Lazard, 2022 1st and 2022 3rd for the 1.02 and got a fast no. WOW.

[Buckhill Bombers]

I'd pass

[wickerkat1212]

I'd pass

Lamar is projected to be the #2 QB this year.
Davis is going to be a stud in ATL
2022 1st
Beasley is actually a PPR monster

But yeah, I guess some people would rather have only Harris OR Chase. IDK. LOL For teams that are hurting at multiple positions I thought it was a good offer.

[Tripwired]

I think your team is on the precipice of being in the ship for the next several years. Having studs in a 10 teamer is what i'm always looking to do. I think this boils down to your personal philosophy. Are you skilled at finding the gems in the late 1st round? It's not as easy as having early 1sts, obviously. I got lucky and landed JJ at 1.10 last year, but literally no one thought he'd break Anquan's rookie record or he'd have been the consensus 1.01. There was also Ruggs, Pittman, and Reagor in that range. Meh.... If you choose JJ out of those 4 good be thanking your lucky stars.
You'll need some luck or good fortune to make those 3, presumably, late 1sts hit.... unless you're better than most at finding the gems that aren't obvious.

If it's me, i'm holding Pitts. Having that kelce type at TE can give you a huge advantage in any league. Pitts is only 20yo and now with Julio gone he's as close to a sure thing as you'll get from any WR/TE prospect. Plus, their def stinks and they'll likely have to toss it a ton again for the next year ir two until ATL can rebuild the D.

[M-Dub]

I'd pass

Lamar is projected to be the #2 QB this year.
Davis is going to be a stud in ATL
2022 1st
Beasley is actually a PPR monster

But yeah, I guess some people would rather have only Harris OR Chase. IDK. LOL For teams that are hurting at multiple positions I thought it was a good offer.

Teams that are hurting at multiple positions typically aren’t looking for 1-year band-aids. Davis and Beasley have zero value to a rebuilding team. You’re better off shopping them individually during the season to contenders who get bit by the injury bug.

So that leaves Lamar and a ‘22 1st. These are both desirable pieces to ANY team, but probably not enough to get the 1.02 in a 1QB league, unless the 1st projects very early.

[murphysxm]

I'd pass

Lamar is projected to be the #2 QB this year.
Davis is going to be a stud in ATL
2022 1st
Beasley is actually a PPR monster

But yeah, I guess some people would rather have only Harris OR Chase. IDK. LOL For teams that are hurting at multiple positions I thought it was a good offer.

I am not sure many owners would take this offer. Davis and Beasley hold very little long term value. Lamar in a 1 QB is in a tier with about 8 other QB's not names Mahomes. Not sayng it is a "bad" trade offer, but also don't think you should be shocked it wasn't accepted.

[atlmoneyman]

I'd pass

Lamar is projected to be the #2 QB this year.
Davis is going to be a stud in ATL
2022 1st
Beasley is actually a PPR monster

But yeah, I guess some people would rather have only Harris OR Chase. IDK. LOL For teams that are hurting at multiple positions I thought it was a good offer.

I am not sure many owners would take this offer. Davis and Beasley hold very little long term value. Lamar in a 1 QB is in a tier with about 8 other QB's not names Mahomes. Not sayng it is a "bad" trade offer, but also don't think you should be shocked it wasn't accepted.

Man…true statement. QBs in 1QB don’t hold much value. I have Herbert and Lamar in a 1QB and can’t trade either of them for a respectable return. It has made me hate the 1QB format.

[smbkrypt24]

I'd pass

Lamar is projected to be the #2 QB this year.
Davis is going to be a stud in ATL
2022 1st
Beasley is actually a PPR monster

But yeah, I guess some people would rather have only Harris OR Chase. IDK. LOL For teams that are hurting at multiple positions I thought it was a good offer.

Besides Lamar Jackson and 2022 1st you threw a bunch of crap at the wall and hoped it stuck. A bunch of pieces don't add up to a coveted item.

[wickerkat1212]

LOL yeah, true.

I did end up getting the 1.04 pick.

Gave MThomas + Mostert + 2022 1st (probably 8-12 range) and 2022 3rd.
Took Pitts there. I was weak at the position and deep at WR.

I had Thomas, Diggs, Lamb, Beasley, and the 1.06 pick still (Devona/Waddle most likely), as well as Lazard and Coutee.

[murphysxm]

Gave MThomas + Mostert + 2022 1st (probably 8-12 range) and 2022 3rd.
Took Pitts there. I was weak at the position and deep at WR.

I had Thomas, Diggs, Lamb, Beasley, and the 1.06 pick still (Devona/Waddle most likely), as well as Lazard and Coutee.

Wow, that is a steep price. Not a price I would pay

[IR1]

Not opposed to taking that offer, but if he’s loaded, prefer a young future stud and a pick

[imi814]

If this guys team is so loaded he has to have some depth peices that would be attractive to you. Three ones and a decent player makes sense for you. Getting a player lowers the risk of getting the 3 late ones and missing. His #4 wr would probably start for you and gives you one more peice to add to your build.