Dynasty vs. Redraft: Who won the Randy Moss trade?
Posted Oct. 12 at 06:50 AM
Some owners love dynasty leagues, with its annual progression and evolving storyline that goes beyond the results of one season. Others prefer redrafts and the opportunity to gun for a title, then wipe the slate clean and start all over again with a new cast of characters the following season. Both have their advantages and can make for a compelling league.
But you know what's really strange? When you get to see both formats in the same league. I know that sounds impossible, but when Randy Moss was traded from New England to Minnesota, we saw a dynasty team deal a player to a redraft team.
The Patriots netted a third-round pick (after plucking Moss from Oakland for a fourth-rounder more than three years ago) and added to their growing collection of 2011 draft choices. Even with the trade for Deion Branch, the Patriots improved their draft situation.
But the Vikings are basically renting Moss for the 2010 season (the trade was not contingent on a new deal) in an effort to give Brett Favre a much-needed weapon to make a final (?) Super Bowl run. The team came close to a title last year, and a disappointing 1-2 start coupled with the loss of receiver Sidney Rice caused the team to take action. So here we are.
Aside from the statistical impact of these moves, fantasy owners will probably judge the trade by their game format preference. If you’re a redraft person, you might see it as a win for the Vikings. The Patriots are certainly not better without Moss (even including Branch) and they need their weapons to compete in the challenging AFC. The Vikings are much better with Moss, and even though they fell to 1-3 in his debut they’re a more competitive team. If they do make the playoffs and take another shot at a Super Bowl run, Moss will have a lot to do with it. If the window is closing, why not make the most of the 2010 season?
Well, dynasty players will tell you why: Giving up a third-round pick to rent a guy is costly. In a couple of years, where will be team be with no Favre and no Moss? They need their draft picks to re-stock the roster and stay competitive. But New England is looking great for the future. This trade gives them another pick to use on players, trade to move up several spots, or trade them for veterans (or picks in a future draft).
They weren't going to re-sign Moss, so they got something for him now. They still have a lot of weapons, so they’ll likely be competitive today and tomorrow.
Now, I’m not saying either position is right or wrong. Yes, the NFL is a dynasty league but there are other factors involved -- like money. Fan interest generates dollars, puts people in seats and keeps merchandise moving in stores. You can’t always look to the future, or the fans won’t pay for tickets and gear today. There has to be a balance. As a franchise, New England has that balance. Minnesota is still looking for its first Super Bowl title, so a win-now philosophy is obviously important for an impatient fan base that knows Favre is at the end of his career.
But there’s no doubt that Minnesota’s goals are set in the present (ditching Sage Rosenfels also isn’t part of a plan that focuses on the future). If everything works out for them and they turn things around, the fans won’t be complaining. Likewise, if New England stumbles due to lack of a deep threat, their fans might wonder what could have been. But a couple of years from now, when the Vikings look very different on offense and the Patriots did something with that pick, fans will be able to gauge whether a “redraft” or “dynasty” perspective won out last week.
As a fantasy owner and football fan, which side of the trade looks better to you? Share your opinions below.
You can reach Michael Murillo at email@example.com.
Posted by ANDY RICHARDSON | Oct. 12 at 09:38 AM
I think every remotely competitive NFL team should be trying to win this year. One measly draft pick is nothing. The odds are against that pick being a really good player (as Belichick has proved in recent years; they've blown a lot more high draft picks than they've hit on). If it is a really good player, he might get hurt, or not be good enough to help the team win a future Super Bowl. Randy Moss is a proven commodity who at the very least IS good enough to help a team get to a Super Bowl. Trading for him might increase the chances of not only Minnesota winning an extra game or two and getting to the postseason this year, and/or resigning him and having him for 2-3 more years, while the Patriots reduced their odds of winning this year and only increased the number of darts they get to throw at the draft board next year. Hope they don't select the next Chad Jackson, Laurence Maroney, or Kevin O'Connell. Consider that the Jets gave up a third-round pick for Favre, and it didn't pan out. They've actually shelled out a whole bunch of picks in recent years for veteran players, or to trade up on draft day. And here they are, with one of the league's best teams (today anyway), because they've hit on more of those picks, and free agent pickups, than the Patriots have (or most other teams) in the last 5 years or so. I love dynasty leagues, but if you're close to the top, as the Patriots were (and still are), you don't trade away proven commodities that can help you get there for unknown future picks you might easily blow.
Posted by Joe Savitsky | Oct. 12 at 02:10 PM
For the rebuttal to Andy's argument, I present Exhibit A: Dan Snyder and the Washington Redskins. Exhibit B is Roy E. Williams. Going back a ways, Exhibit C would of course be Herschel Walker.
Posted by ANDY RICHARDSON | Oct. 12 at 08:40 PM
There's a difference between trading for a player and clearly giving up far too much for one player. Plus Snyder's biggest gaffes have been whopping contracts for players well past their prime. I don't think giving up a draft pick for a player has been so terrible for him in the case of Portis, Santana or McNabb. Certainly once you start giving up three high picks for a single player, as in the williams and walker cases, you're taking it too far.
Posted by JOHN MACHO | Oct. 13 at 12:31 AM
Both teams won, which is how a trade should work. Moss was disgruntled and had to go by end of season anyway. Minnesota desparately needed a receiver (and now a corner).
Add a Comment
Already a registered user? Please sign in to add comments.
To add comments, you must become a registered user of our site. To register, please click here.