Better use for my 1st, right?

[Prison_Mike]

Team 2 in signature - 12tm PPR SF - Strong contender, 6-0

A rebuilding team just put Goff on the trade block and marked his price as a 1st, (I think he really wants the points off his roster)

I don't have picks left in 2024, but I've got a '25 1st. I don't really need Goff as I have Mahomes and Allen manning the QB/SF spots, but Russ is my QB3 and that's....not great

Not too many holes across the rest of the roster. Would you be willing to secure a strong QB3 for (what should be) a late future 1st, or is there a better use for it? (i.e. RB depth in the midst of a title run, upgraded TE, general liquidity)

[Trevormortis]

I don't mind it. However, you may want to shop Russ and something else to try and upgrade TE or RB.

[Prison_Mike]

I don't mind it. However, you may want to shop Russ and something else to try and upgrade TE or RB.

Yeah I think that would be the goal if I landed Goff, as he would effectively make Russ expendable (or more so than he currently is)

[Dynasty DeLorean]

There’s probably a better use for it, but it’s a fair deal.

[BigBawseRoss]

id take goff before someone else does

[Gator Sens]

Pretty nice value overall in a 12 team SF format.

[TheTroll]

Pretty nice value overall in a 12 team SF format.

yeppers

[mzkp54]

There’s probably a better use for it, but it’s a fair deal.

Agree with this

[Prison_Mike]

There’s probably a better use for it, but it’s a fair deal.

Agree with this

Yep, I think it's more than fair.

Only question whether it's the best use of the asset. I built this team by having immense draft capital, so it feels weird to have virtually none at this point. If I'm going to send a 1st, I want to use it efficiently. I'm always hesitant to pour high value assets into depth. I'm curious if anyone has written about this (the importance of a QB3 in SF, what you should spend on one, etc)

[Anteaters]

There’s probably a better use for it, but it’s a fair deal.

Agree with this

Yep, I think it's more than fair.

Only question whether it's the best use of the asset. I built this team by having immense draft capital, so it feels weird to have virtually none at this point. If I'm going to send a 1st, I want to use it efficiently. I'm always hesitant to pour high value assets into depth. I'm curious if anyone has written about this (the importance of a QB3 in SF, what you should spend on one, etc)

I don't know if anyone has written about it, but I think it is very important. Not because of any statistics that might point to how often a 3rd QB is called into use and helps a team win. But for what it means to a strong contender who loses a starting QB in SF and does not have a good backup.

It's insurance for me, plain and simple. I'm not a big believer in insurance in all the ways it's pushed in real life, but I think insurance is hugely important to fantasy football.

Fantasy championships are a rare thing, and when the opportunity is there, it behooves a manager to stock cheap insurance. With the frequency of QB (and all player) injuries, it seems an unnecessary gamble to ignore the opportunity to stack high-quality depth. This is a cheap price to pay for a superb-quality QB depth in SF.

On to the second piece of the equation, I would not be quick to dump Russ for low quality dart throws (or simply low-quality players) elsewhere. If your roster allows it, I'd rather keep all 4 QBs, take your best shot at a title, then trade one of your top 3 QBs for a great player at a different position, high quality '24 draft picks, or both.

[Prison_Mike]

Agree with this

Yep, I think it's more than fair.

Only question whether it's the best use of the asset. I built this team by having immense draft capital, so it feels weird to have virtually none at this point. If I'm going to send a 1st, I want to use it efficiently. I'm always hesitant to pour high value assets into depth. I'm curious if anyone has written about this (the importance of a QB3 in SF, what you should spend on one, etc)

I don't know if anyone has written about it, but I think it is very important. Not because of any statistics that might point to how often a 3rd QB is called into use and helps a team win. But for what it means to a strong contender who loses a starting QB in SF and does not have a good backup.

It's insurance for me, plain and simple. I'm not a big believer in insurance in all the ways it's pushed in real life, but I think insurance is hugely important to fantasy football.

Fantasy championships are a rare thing, and when the opportunity is there, it behooves a manager to stock cheap insurance. With the frequency of QB (and all player) injuries, it seems an unnecessary gamble to ignore the opportunity to stack high-quality depth. This is a cheap price to pay for a superb-quality QB depth in SF.

On to the second piece of the equation, I would not be quick to dump Russ for low quality dart throws (or simply low-quality players) elsewhere. If your roster allows it, I'd rather keep all 4 QBs, take your best shot at a title, then trade one of your top 3 QBs for a great player at a different position, high quality '24 draft picks, or both.

Thanks for the insight, well said, and I think that's where I'm at too. Just trying to wrap my brain around the importance of depth there vs. other positions. I'm guessing the logic would be that QB has the biggest potential to derail your title run if you go from say Josh Allen's 23+ppg to Russ's 17ppg, with a lot of variance. The discrepancy at other positions probably isn't as large, or at the very least, is cheaper to replace

And yeah, I like your last point too about holding all 4 and making one of the top-3 available in the future. I guess I shouldn't decide against trading away a 1st for Goff due to pick liquidity and should recognize that Goff carries similar liquidity as I'm certain some of these teams (maybe even the one I'm looking to buy from) will need a QB in the near future.

It would ultimately be a value play. I'm going to send it. We'll see. I have a feeling the 'sticker price' will be too good to be true lol

[RunFar100]

I do not think he would take a 25 1st for Goff but hopefully he does for you. Maybe your biggest weakness would be TE. Maybe, try and upgrade that.

[Prison_Mike]

I do not think he would take a 25 1st for Goff but hopefully he does for you. Maybe your biggest weakness would be TE. Maybe, try and upgrade that.

Yeah, we'll see. It's a situation where he's actively tanking and trying to shed points. The problem for him is there are 3 other teams doing that. Between those teams, they've collected 10 of 2024's 1st round picks. The only remaining two are on fringe contenders, one of which I know is refusing to trade his 1st next year because it burned him last year, the other is a guy who generally doesn't trade his 1sts, and even if he did, requires a landslide in his favor to make most deals.

So, 12 of the 1sts he's looking for either aren't moving or he already owns them. If he wants the points off his roster, (he does), he'll have to take a '25. It's just a matter of whether he thinks he can find a team that A) has a '25 pick projected earlier than mine, B) is willing to sell him their 1st, and C) needs a QB. - Quite a tall order IMO

And yes, in the short term, TE is my biggest weakness. Some of the same factors as above exist within my league's TE market, and the market itself is much smaller because most players at the position simply don't matter. Those who do are on contending rosters and are unlikely to move. The only option that's currently on the table for me is to move Trey Palmer for Jonnu Smith, which feels gross, but would seemingly be an upgrade, despite how baffling that is to me

[Dynasty DeLorean]

There’s probably a better use for it, but it’s a fair deal.

Agree with this

Yep, I think it's more than fair.

Only question whether it's the best use of the asset. I built this team by having immense draft capital, so it feels weird to have virtually none at this point. If I'm going to send a 1st, I want to use it efficiently. I'm always hesitant to pour high value assets into depth. I'm curious if anyone has written about this (the importance of a QB3 in SF, what you should spend on one, etc)

I think QBs in superflex are incredibly overrated. I won a league with literally only Kenny Pickett as my qb last year. I’m 5-1 this year in that league and I’m getting negative points from my starters (Pickett, Zach Wilson, Mac Jones and baker mayfield). I picked up Mac Jones and baker in the offseason for the 2.05 and rashaad penny. You can always get a starter for cheap if you’re looking hard enough.

I didn’t win a league but had most points scored for the season with Derek Carr as my only qb a few years ago.

I used to think like everyone else, that qb is super important, but I adjusted and started having success. Basically, nearly everything you’ve been taught to do in dynasty is wrong.

Of course you can build a great team with good QBs too. I’m just saying, it’s not nearly as important as people would like you to believe, especially in SF.

Now maybe that equation changes, the smaller the starting lineup the more important qb might be, idk. But in general, no, you shouldnt give a hoot about your qb3. The important thing is to play to whatever your league format is. If it’s somehow rewarding qb depth then go get qb depth. If it’s not then… what are you doing.

You have Mahomes and Allen. A 3rd qb can go kick rocks. And if you ever do need one, you can almost always get a reliable one for a late 1st or early 2nd (as you are seeing right now with Goff).

[Prison_Mike]

Agree with this

Yep, I think it's more than fair.

Only question whether it's the best use of the asset. I built this team by having immense draft capital, so it feels weird to have virtually none at this point. If I'm going to send a 1st, I want to use it efficiently. I'm always hesitant to pour high value assets into depth. I'm curious if anyone has written about this (the importance of a QB3 in SF, what you should spend on one, etc)

I think QBs in superflex are incredibly overrated. I won a league with literally only Kenny Pickett as my qb last year. I’m 5-1 this year in that league and I’m getting negative points from my starters (Pickett, Zach Wilson, Mac Jones and baker mayfield).

I didn’t win a league but had most points scored with Derek Carr as my only qb a few years ago.

I used to think like everyone else, that qb is super important, but I adjusted and started having success. Basically, nearly everything you’ve been taught to do in dynasty is wrong.

Of course you can build a great team with good QBs too. I’m just saying, it’s not nearly as important as people would like you to believe, especially in SF.

Now maybe that equation changes, the smaller the starting lineup the more important qb might be, idk. But in general, no, you shouldnt give a hoot about your qb3. The important thing is to play to whatever your league format is. If it’s somehow rewarding qb depth then go get qb depth. If it’s not then… what are you doing.

Wow, interesting

You must have been absolutely loaded everywhere else? I tend to look at QBs as my baseline in SuperFlex. For example, for this specific team, my team virtually starts off with 50 points locked in @ QB+SF (5 of the first 6 weeks = 60+). I happen to have a great team built around that as well, but I’d feel like that alone would be a significant advantage even if I had a pretty average team in the remaining starting slots

We’re obviously talking about the extremes on either side of it here with Mahomes+Allen vs. Kenny ‘incapable of putting up a 20point game’ Pickett+nonQB, but it’s an interesting difference in strategy, that to your point, I hadn’t even considered because of the ‘conventional’ superflex wisdom