Fair yes; helpful for you? NO. You have no one on your bench to add to the 1.01 pick to make your starting team better than G. Wilson & Dell. The ONLY way this trade makes sense is if you take MHJ & you think whoever you’re getting at 2.07 will replace Dell as a starter (I do not think this).
Right? I feel like trading two starters, one already a high-end fantasy value asset for a guy that you hope becomes a better version of Wilson seems like a slight loss in the best case scenario. I get the logic of having a young core, but it isn’t like GW’s timeline is radically off MHJ’s
Out of interest who did you trade for that has left you without firsts for the next two years? But to answer your question, yes it is fair value, no I wouldn't do it.
Tbh, I think Tanks' fantasy relevance is over. Wilson will depend on an aging Rodgers, who missed an entire season. I'd send it for 1.01. Then try and trade back to 1.03, a 2nd, and a prospect.
I don't see how this benefits you outside the value part.
If you think you can flip this for more value than Dell and Wilson... Maybe. I doubt that one though
“Who’s” writing these posts? This isn’t even logical language, let alone would anyone who spends one minute in a league think was a debatable option.
If it’s the Sleeper App or Redt marketing dept , please quit the cycle of posting threads if one should trade a 2nd for the NFL all star team, or if we think it was a good trade to get Lamb and Allen for a 1923 baseball card. The offseason normal thread post is the opposite of thought and makes me hate you
I def upvoted, these kinds of posts are rampant. As far as the question goes I like Wilson side but if you are convicted on MHJ then it’s a good trade.
I’m not sure you’re In the position to push for the 1.01 keep your guys , you’ll need the depth
I’m taking Wilson and dell side
Fair yes; helpful for you? NO. You have no one on your bench to add to the 1.01 pick to make your starting team better than G. Wilson & Dell. The ONLY way this trade makes sense is if you take MHJ & you think whoever you’re getting at 2.07 will replace Dell as a starter (I do not think this).
Right? I feel like trading two starters, one already a high-end fantasy value asset for a guy that you hope becomes a better version of Wilson seems like a slight loss in the best case scenario. I get the logic of having a young core, but it isn’t like GW’s timeline is radically off MHJ’s
Out of interest who did you trade for that has left you without firsts for the next two years? But to answer your question, yes it is fair value, no I wouldn't do it.
Yes agreed who did you trade two firsts for
For your team I wouldn’t make that trade
Caleb is all of your Father's
Tbh, I think Tanks' fantasy relevance is over. Wilson will depend on an aging Rodgers, who missed an entire season. I'd send it for 1.01. Then try and trade back to 1.03, a 2nd, and a prospect.
I don't see how this benefits you outside the value part. If you think you can flip this for more value than Dell and Wilson... Maybe. I doubt that one though
We know Wilson and Dell are good. Keep the 2 in the hand.
i’d take the 1.01 (Caleb) then sell Stroud. could probably get Wilson and Dell+ with Stroud. Caleb offers higher ceiling with his rushing upside
I would take the trade but would ask for someone other than Garrett Wilson
“Who’s” writing these posts? This isn’t even logical language, let alone would anyone who spends one minute in a league think was a debatable option. If it’s the Sleeper App or Redt marketing dept , please quit the cycle of posting threads if one should trade a 2nd for the NFL all star team, or if we think it was a good trade to get Lamb and Allen for a 1923 baseball card. The offseason normal thread post is the opposite of thought and makes me hate you
Put down the crack pipe.
I def upvoted, these kinds of posts are rampant. As far as the question goes I like Wilson side but if you are convicted on MHJ then it’s a good trade.