Spin: Who to Take at 1.04?

[Black Adam]

10tm/Rst 40/St11 OP & 11 IDP
1.0 PPR/Non-SF*/Non-TEP* (*these may change in a season or two)
QB - RB - RB - WR - WR - WR - TE - W/T - FL - FL - K

You all convinced me to take a WR @ 1.02.

I'm planning to draft Nabers there unless he goes 1.01, then I'll take MHJ @ 1.02. (If CW goes 1.01 I'll also take MHJ.)

My next question is 1.04 too early to take Bowers? I'm assuming Odunze will be gone at 1.03 but if CW goes in the top 3 then I'd have a choice to make between Brock and Rome, so who you got?

Current IOPs:
Q: Mahomes, Jackson
R: Taylor, Swift, Pacheco, Jacobs, Walker, Robinson, Charbonnet, Mitchell, Miller
W: Jefferson, Wilson, Evans, Kupp, Rice, Iosivas
T: Andrews, Mayer, Musgrave


Thanks y'all.

[trc]

I think the *'s has a HUGE impact on your decision.

When will that be resolved?

[Anteaters]

No TEP ... no way I consider Bowers this early.
Easily anyone else for me.
The maybe rules changes are fiction right now and wouldn't affect my thinking until they've been voted and an en-action date set.

[tstafford]

Kind of too early to say. But with these line-up requirements and no TEP, I'd like to avoid Bowers. But if he lands really well it's possible he's the best pick. Odds are I want either the WR4 or RB1, but I don't yet.

[Black Adam]

I think the *'s has a HUGE impact on your decision.

When will that be resolved?

It would have to pass a majority vote, likely to be brought up again sometime this season or offseason.

Exact time table is unknown, but wouldn't be implemented for at least one full off-season or two. (Earliest 2025, or perhaps 2026.)

[tstafford]

I think the *'s has a HUGE impact on your decision.

When will that be resolved?

It would have to pass a majority vote, likely to be brought up again sometime this season or offseason.

Exact time table is unknown, but wouldn't be implemented for at least one full off-season or two. (Earliest 2025, or perhaps 2026.)

In that case, I might seriously consider CW.

[Black Adam]

The maybe rules changes are fiction right now and wouldn't affect my thinking until they've been voted and an en-action date set.

^Fair enough, I'm not too worried about converting to SF or adding a TEP.

Kind of too early to say. But with these line-up requirements and no TEP, I'd like to avoid Bowers. But if he lands really well it's possible he's the best pick. Odds are I want either the WR4 or RB1, but I don't yet.

RB1 @ 1.04?

Out of curiosity who is your 1?

[tstafford]

The maybe rules changes are fiction right now and wouldn't affect my thinking until they've been voted and an en-action date set.

^Fair enough, I'm not too worried about converting to SF or adding a TEP.

Kind of too early to say. But with these line-up requirements and no TEP, I'd like to avoid Bowers. But if he lands really well it's possible he's the best pick. Odds are I want either the WR4 or RB1, but I don't yet.

RB1 @ 1.04?

Out of curiosity who is your 1?

No idea yet. And that's my point. If forced to draft today (like GEDL), I wouldn't take a RB in the top-12.

My comment was predicated on the following:
- League is 1QB so I don't want to burn a pick on a QB in the first round. (Assuming we aren't factoring in the possible move to SF)
- The number of starters and no TEP makes TE a lot less valuable. I'm punting the position overall and not using a premium pick if I can avoid it
- We think we know a lot right now, but we don't have the most valuable piece of data - the results of the NFL Draft. I like all the draft analysis, metrics, etc. but until the Draft the puzzle is incomplete
- I suspect if a RB lands really well (i.e. round 2 to DAL) he will vault up boards. In 1QB, non-TEP with these line-up requirements it will become a valid consideration in this range. In SF, non-TEP it will be in the mix at ~1.07.

Right now the RB situation looks bleak. And maybe it stays that way. If no RBs go in round two and the round three RBs land poorly, we're right we wea are today. That's fine. But I'm open to that changing.

[trc]

I think the *'s has a HUGE impact on your decision.

When will that be resolved?

It would have to pass a majority vote, likely to be brought up again sometime this season or offseason.

Exact time table is unknown, but wouldn't be implemented for at least one full off-season or two. (Earliest 2025, or perhaps 2026.)

You should push for resolvement before the draft. I believe you are in prime position to benefit from such changes.

If no resolvement, Rome is the answer.

[tstafford]

I think the *'s has a HUGE impact on your decision.

When will that be resolved?

It would have to pass a majority vote, likely to be brought up again sometime this season or offseason.

Exact time table is unknown, but wouldn't be implemented for at least one full off-season or two. (Earliest 2025, or perhaps 2026.)

You should push for resolvement before the draft. I believe you are in prime position to benefit from such changes.

If no resolvement, Rome is the answer.

Agreed. If Rome falls to 1.04, that's the pick. Seems unlikely unless the SF thing is resolved. A top-3 pick on CW in 1QB is far too early IMHO.

[Black Adam]

Agreed. If Rome falls to 1.04, that's the pick. Seems unlikely unless the SF thing is resolved. A top-3 pick on CW in 1QB is far too early IMHO.

The SF thing isn't something that needs to be 'resolved' per se, it's just something that some owners have mentioned to me when talking about the league. I mentioned it in the OP but it's honestly not something I'm considering rn.


As for CW going in the top 3, it may happen even if it is early.
Team 1.01 could use QB, RB, WR, and TE.
Team 1.03 needs WR the most.
At least one other owner is interested in trading up, as high as 1.01 to "go get his guy", whoever that is. (CW? MHJ?)

[tstafford]

Agreed. If Rome falls to 1.04, that's the pick. Seems unlikely unless the SF thing is resolved. A top-3 pick on CW in 1QB is far too early IMHO.

The SF thing isn't something that needs to be 'resolved' per se, it's just something that some owners have mentioned to me when talking about the league. I mentioned it in the OP but it's honestly not something I'm considering rn.


As for CW going in the top 3, it may happen even if it is early.
Team 1.01 could use QB, RB, WR, and TE.
Team 1.03 needs WR the most.
At least one other owner is interested in trading up, as high as 1.01 to "go get his guy", whoever that is. (CW? MHJ?)

Hopefully Rome falls to you. That would be terrific.

I took the thread as being - what to do at 1.04 if the top-3 WRs are gone. My guess is we see this question a lot even after the draft.

[Black Adam]

Hopefully Rome falls to you. That would be terrific.

I took the thread as being - what to do at 1.04 if the top-3 WRs are gone. My guess is we see this question a lot even after the draft.

My bad. Thread should've been "Do you like Odunze or Bowers more at 1.04?"

A bunch of bros and random dudes I know have hyped up Bowers but I don't really have a gauge for how good Odunze is. This is a weird year in FF since I don't have any RBs worth going that high. (I like RBs.)

[The.Big.Spank]

Looking at your team I don't see what difference it would make changing to a Sf and TEP. I could be wrong, but Mahomes and Jackson seem like decent enough starters should your league change to a SF format and Andrews is passable with his 20% target volume in a TEP.

As to drafting Bowers over Odunze or Nabors, I would not. The record of 1st round TE busts might be higher than QB's. Both of those better prospects than Wilson, Olave etc coming out of college. This is like the Julio, AJ Green year where you just couldn't go wrong taking either and you have at getting both.

Bowers is an easy pass for me.

[Mtt33]

Draft dependent but as of now Rome easily 3, bowers pretty easily my 4 even in non te premium. If he falls for a while or another wr gets premium draft capital (I’m not in love with Thomas but if he goes early enough I’ll adjust).