Let's discuss building a dynasty roster. Do you target specific positions? Do you eschew older players? What is your basic strategy in a dynasty league?
Jason Wood: I think one of the easiest arbitrage opportunities is people's tendency to overvalue youth. Every year my jaw drops at the willingness to trade away 28-29 year old proven veterans for a lottery ticket draft pick in the rookie drat or a first or second year guy buried on the depth chart.
One of the things about dynasty is understanding a window. It's very hard to accurately project a players stats in a given year and that difficulty increases exponentially when talking about future years.
Now, you do have to fill your bench with youth if possible, and you definitely want to cycle guys on and off your roster aggressively if they're not proven.
Andy Hicks: I have to agree with Jason, I've seen established veterans like Andre Johnson, Tom Brady and Jason Witten get taken after guys drafted in the 4th round of this years NFL draft. Without wishing to inundate the topic with clichéd phrases, but a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. If a guy is going to put up WR2, RB2/3 or TE1 numbers this year, in most cases he must be taken ahead of a roster longshot or guy that will be 4th or worse on a depth chart.
I've seen drafters look 4 or 5 years ahead with players, which is basically a lose now and hope for the best philosophy. With the constant turnover of coaching staff, offensive schemes and players it is too easy to overstate the potential of a player and overlook someone performing right now.
When doing a dynasty start up, you need to obviously mix experience and youth, but if you have to lean one way or the other I'd prefer to lean towards the experienced players. They can be had much later and your roster will looked stacked for a run at 2014. Future years can be used to grab youth at positions where you have a little too much age.
In an established league, if you have depth at a position look to trade away a bench player for a starter this year. This year is a fairly deep year for wide receivers with 12 taken in the first 2 rounds, so if you are short on receiver quality maybe grab 3 of them at the expense of an average running back group. If you are strong at receiver, look to grab one of the few potential franchise backs early. The Tight End and Quarterback options are limited as well, so target players carefully knowing the tendencies of your league mates.
In summary, don't look too far ahead with your roster. The title in 2014 is there to be won.
Adam Harstad: I disagree with Jason and Andy. 11 out of 12 teams end any given year without a title. Odds are great that you will be one of them. If you grab too many veterans too early, then when you fall short of that championship you will have sacrificed that long-term core that you should have been building, and you won't have anything to show for it. The guy who drafted Adrian Peterson in the 1st round of startups last year probably isn't feeling too great about it unless he wound up with a championship. The guy who drafted Dez Bryant or Julio Jones probably has far fewer regrets.
I did a startup with several other staff members last offseason and I built an incredibly young team. In the first ten rounds, I selected a total of two players who had celebrated their 26th birthdays; Jordy Nelson and Pierre Garcon, who at the time were 28 and 26, respectively. And even they proved a bit too old for my tastes; I packaged Pierre Garcon and Jordy Nelson in trades that netted me Percy Harvin and Julio Jones after those players' respective injuries.
This isn't to say that I avoided veterans entirely. Late in the draft it can make a lot of sense to gamble on veterans. Last year I nabbed Danny Woodhead and Knowshon Moreno very late (and was able to trade them before the deadline to get younger and more talented). And lest I be accused of only listing my good picks, I also grabbed Matt Schaub, Brandon Pettigrew, and Danario Alexander. I took some chances on older veterans who had a clear and compelling argument for short-term production. Some of them worked out. Some of them did not. The point is that by this point it was so late in the draft that it didn't matter whether it worked out or not- the odds of success were so low that I might as well focus on short-term rewards. By focusing my early picks on youth, though, I was able to weather underperformance from some of my players. Guys like Rob Gronkowski, Robert Griffin III, Stevan Ridley, Montee Ball, Tyler Eifert, and Ben Tate fell short of what I expected from them in year 1... but because they were so young, they retained their value, and in many cases even gained value.
The goal in dynasty is, of course, to have a strong mix of production and youth... but that's a long-term goal. You can't get there from day 1. If you try to get that mix in the startup, you'll get beaten out in the short term by those who focused exclusively on production, and you'll get beaten out in the long term by those who focused exclusively on youth. Instead, I find it's best to get the youth part of the formula all locked down and build up layers of production over the coming seasons. My goal in year 1 of a startup is simply to enter year 2 with a roster that I could not have possibly drafted if I were participating in another startup that year. If I were to draft a new team today, there is no way I could replicate the roster of the team I drafted last year. That, to me, is a success. I want two players who are going in the first round, or three players who are going in the first two rounds, or five players who are going in the first three rounds. I want twelve players who are being drafted in the first eight rounds. I want a roster that is better than any I could achieve in a brand new league, and then in year 2, my goal is to compound that advantage even more in year 3. And eventually, if I keep compounding my advantage, I wind up with a league-destroying juggernaut of a roster featuring five players who are getting drafted in the first two rounds and ten players who are going in the first four rounds. But it's not something that happens in a single season; it's a long process, and the first step on that process is building a roster that's going to hold its value over the coming year. And if I happen to get a few more breakouts than I was anticipating and win a title in the first year, that's just gravy.
Stephen Holloway: Particularly in leagues which allow flex players, I generally tend to focus more on wide receivers than running backs. The wide receivers frequently have longer careers and longer periods where their production is at or near peak. My preference is toward younger wide receivers, but in order to develop sufficient depth, I don't intentionally stay away from players over a certain age.
Running backs are less of a priority Age is even less of a factor for me because the NFL has devalued the position and there are not that many who command an overwhelming portion of their team's opportunities and their careers are typically much shorter. If I can roster one or two primary running backs, then I don't mind constantly using the waiver wire to identify better temporary back-up plans and I expect to constantly cycle the lower level running backs, much more than any other position.
With quarterbacks, I prefer to have a consistently productive veteran and back him up with younger up an coming guys.
Chad Parsons: In terms of dynasty team-building, the first year of the league is the least-important to me as an owner. That means past-their-prime players are off of my draft board and young 'unproven' assets are consistent targets. Running backs are the biggest way to capitalize on this Y+1 mentality in a startup draft. Any running back with a starting role and not older than age 26-27 will cost nearly a fortune in draft captial. However, talented running backs viewed as currently 'blocked' from consistent touches can be scooped up at a discount. Through building a stable of wide receiver talent and a tight end or two, a team can take young talents at running back without fear of current year production. When the running backs develop and/or a top rookie back or two is added in the second season, the pass-catchers are still high-value assets and ready to carry the load as a perennial contender from that point forward.
And by the way, Adam literally stole my answer. "Did we just become best friends?" "Yup!"
Adam Harstad: Literally.
In reality, it's a continuum between how much one values the present against the future. Jeff Pasquino might lie on one end of it, with Jason Wood a little closer to the middle but still clearly on that side of the divide. Guys like me are on the other end of it. Some guys, like Chad, lie so far past me on the youth-vs-production spectrum that even I wonder if they're "like a fox" crazy or "like a fish on a bicycle" crazy. That's one of the beauties of dynasty vs. redraft, in my mind- there are as many different underlying philosophies as there are members in your league.
In truth, the guys on staff here are all really smart, accomplished, experienced dynasty owners. We all have plenty of trophies on our mantles that we can point to to prove our method works. And we're all right- all of our methods work. As Sigmund Bloom is fond of saying, every strategy ultimately boils down to picking the right players. If you do that, it doesn't matter which way you headed. If you went for a win-now squad and rostered Tom Brady, Roddy White, Steven Jackson, and Jason Witten, that probably didn't pay off for you. If you grabbed Peyton Manning, Andre Johnson, Matt Forte, and Vernon Davis, you probably did pretty well for yourself. My "youth-centric" approach worked because I got guys like Montee Ball, Justin Hunter, Rob Gronkowski, and Jordan Reed who either held value or gained it. If I'd instead grabbed, say, Trent Richardson, David Wilson, Kenny Britt, and Hakeem Nicks, I'd probably be rueing not spending some draft capital on more proven assets. I say that the late rounds are a great time to grab short-term vets because I managed to get Danny Woodhead and Knowshon Moreno there. If those picks had been Shonn Green and Michael Bush I wouldn't be holding them up as evidence of anything.
As the old saying goes, it's not about the Xs and Os, it's about the Jimmys and Joes. Any strategy you go with boils down to picking the right players when you're on the clock. For me, what has worked has been relying on youth as a cushion to protect against value shocks while I continuously upgrade my team. I think that's the ideal strategy, but any strategy is only as good as the players it leads you to.
Jeff Pasquino: I love Adam's perspective, mostly because it lies on the opposite of the spectrum of mine. Plus, if I wind up in leagues with lots of Adam-type owners, I can really rake in the value. Why? Because no one is going to want Tom Brady or Reggie Wayne, so I can get both of them cheap.
I am what I call a "middler", which means that I will go after both present value and also future upside. Do I like Devonta Freeman? Of course, but I am not going to chase his value at a position where he might not have a long lifespan (or ever materialize). I would rather have productive present day players who are undervalued.
It's a very simple plan - compare today's redraft ADPs to Dynasty startup ADPs and you will find players that fall in Dynasty startup leagues. If I get those players - not collecting all of them, but just a few - I will be ahead for that given year. I will still devote about 30-35% of my roster to prospects, but 20-25% will be veterans who can help me win now. So what if I have to rebuild next year? There will be even more veterans that can be sold for next to nothing next offseason. I still remember buying Peyton Manning a few years ago in a Dynasty league for a first round pick, and many thought I was nuts. I will still make that trade today for a 36-year old (then) stud who might have 3-5 years left of elite QB productivity rather than gamble that my (hopefully late) first round rookie pick will pan out and contribute when I need him.
As far as the "window" I look for, I don't even try and look beyond four years, and really emphasize Year 1 (40%), Year 2 (30%) and Year 3 (10%). The 10% is left for Year 4 and beyond, which sounds very short-sighted until you look at how much the NFL changes every single season. Go back and look at the top draft picks in 2011 and 2012 and you will see what I mean. Between coaching changes, players getting hurt and age overall, the league changes shape and form every few seasons anyway. Sure you might get Calvin Johnson or Adrian Peterson, but those guys are more exceptions rather than the rule.
Dan Hindery: I tend towards Adam's strategy as well. I would generally describe my goal during a startup draft as twofold:
- Assemble the youngest roster possible that I believe can that still can make the playoffs year one, and
- Acquire as many ascending assets (players/picks that will be worth more in the future than now) as possible to build towards my goal of future domination.
In my experience, if owners decide they are completely and totally going to blow off competing year one (often on purpose to get the #1 rookie pick), they can find themselves off in the wilderness longer than expected with too many unproductive players. By maintaining a dual focus on both youth and immediate success, I find it a bit easier to stay on track and temper the risks a bit. I try not to go too overboard with drafting only young guys with a questionable shot at being productive players.
I do focus very much on youth though. My strategy makes it a bit tougher to actually be the favorite year one. I will pass on a player like Adrian Peterson or Matt Forte in favor of Giovani Bernard or Montee Ball for example. I will draft A.J. Green over Calvin Johnson or Brandon Marshall. At TE, I will be targeting young players like Tyler Eifert, Charles Clay and Zach Ertz over Jason Witten and Vernon Davis. This strategy forces me to focus on the young guys who I really think are poised to breakout now and play well right away (not multiple years down the road). If a couple of the younger guys exceed expectations, I can always flip a pick or youngster for an older player on a team that has fallen out of contention to make a real run in year 1.
The one area where I do find some common ground with Jeff however is that I pride myself on being able to stay flexible in my strategy and will on occasion take a more "win now" approach. Through the first three rounds I will always target younger players who are also big fantasy producers. Once I get to the fourth or fifth round, I can then take stock of how the draft is unfolding and try to determine if the draft seems headed in a "youth crazy" direction. If the draft is not overly "youth crazy" I will proceed with Plan A of assembling my young roster that I hope can contend quickly. If however the draft is trending really young with rookies and young guys flying off the board early and often, I will then pivot to Plan B and try to scoop up a mix of youth and veterans and really focus in on winning the first year title.
For example, I started a draft last offseason with Jamaal Charles, Randall Cobb and Rob Gronkowski. This is the type of start I prefer with 3 guys at an average age of about 24 at the time who I projected for big seasons in 2013 (injuries happened so that didn't come to fruition). By the time the early 4th rolled around, all of the rookie RBs who I was hoping to target (Bernard, Bell and Lacy) were gone. This was a league that drafted developmental players and had a lot of owners all focused on building a long term juggernaut, so it was not surprising that the value was just not there with the younger players. I instead was able to grab some guys like Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Anquan Boldin, Pierre Garcon, Chris Johnson, etc. and succeed with the "win now" approach.
Overall, I am generally in favor of a youth based approach aimed at contention early and at least a shot at a "dynasty" by year 3. Most of the time, I think the veterans end up over drafted and there is a lot of value to be had with the younger emerging players. However, on the rare occasions when that is not the case, it is smart to adapt and go "win now" if there is veteran value that simply cannot be passed up.