Dynasty League Football Forum

Just offered to me, and I’ve been going back and forth on this one. Team 3 in SIG. 1 QB league.
My H. Ruggs, V. Jefferson, and 21’ 2.04 for his C. Edmonds.
Personally, idc about Jefferson whatsoever, he can have him. Which side has the better outcome or, higher upside?

I'd probably rather keep Reagor for now. I get RB are valuable but you have 3 solid ones and a 4th in RoJo. I'm not sold Edmonds is the starter next year

I would only take this if I could flip Edmonds for more. I'm always weary of moving second year players too early. I think there is still hope for Reagor and Edmonds is nothing special.

Agree Van Jefferson is nothing. 2.4 is an ok mid round pick. Personally I'd rather had Reagor who still has a chance and being a great player, still unknown with a injured rookie year, than Edmonds who I feel will never be more than a bye week back. Great talent, but don't think he's ever a bell cow and they add to that backfield, splitting carries.

This isn’t remotely close.
2.04 >= Edmonds
Reagor >>>>>>>>>>

I'd move edmonds for Reagor straight up or 2.04 straight up. So both plus Van Jefferson. Easily the package.

NEW UPDATE:
Reagor is out and we decided to replace him with Ruggs. Which I would much rather do. 2.04 is valuable, but is a dart throw. Still the package or take a shot at Edmonds being the guy in 21’?

I value Ruggs substantially less than Reagor, but I'd still have him slated as an early second. I don't personally buy Chase Edmunds as much of anything besides off-season hype, so I'd only do this trade if I believed I could flip him for more.

I hear you. Jefferson is worth nothing to me personally. Ruggs I have 0 hope for. So it comes down to the 2.04. Which is probably another dart throw at a receiver. So which would I rather have, all these WR hopefuls, or a shot at a more sought after asset in a starting RB.
That’s my thinking anyways.

TampaBay216 wrote: ↑Tue Apr 13, 2021 6:19 am NEW UPDATE:
Reagor is out and we decided to replace him with Ruggs. Which I would much rather do. 2.04 is valuable, but is a dart throw. Still the package or take a shot at Edmonds being the guy in 21’?

It's not as exciting, but still the package for me. Arizona brought in Conner yesterday for a visit, Edmonds will not be there guy in my opinion.

I like Reagor better than Ruggs, but yes, deal Edmonds, value is just going to go down.

do you have any flex spots in that league, or is it just 2RB 2WR?

i'm pretty sure that even if the cardinals sign conner, they will also add/draft someone, so i'm not particularly high on edmonds.
van jefferson is blocked by kupp and woods for the foreseeable and i don't think he has a lot of upside. 2.04 is a dart throw. ruggs... who knows. i think he can still pull it off, so if we're looking at upside alone, i'd go with him and the 2.04. edmonds should have a steadier weekly output with some good weeks in case of injuries. given the team and good RB depth, i'd look for upside and keep the package.

Because Ruggs basically has no value to your team at present, I wouldn't look at this deal has "having" to deliver significant value back to you. At this point, you're trading one penny-stock for another penny-stock. If you like Edmonds more or if you think Edmonds has more long term or short term upside, or if you simply like the Cardinals better than the Raiders, there is no compelling reason why you should not trade Ruggs to get him.

Ruggs has not done anything to prove his potential is anything more than hope. If you want to trade Ruggs' hope for Edmonds' hope, I say go for it. This isn't the same as trading a valuable player (like Lockett) for Edmonds. This is like for like.

Go for it.

I am not a big Ruggs fan, but the kid just turned 22 and was a 1st rd pick last year. He also runs in the 4.2's. I would deal my Edmonds for him and would also deal Edmonds for the 2.4. Edmonds is a nice handcuff to have in deep leagues, but I am not dealing several young assets for him.

Az just signed Conner..... Bet they still pick up an RB in the draft.... time to move Edmonds.