Little different question, I have my eye on a few TE's, which would you prefer to have? Aaron Hernandez, Rob Gronkowski, Scott Chandler, or Ed Dickson? I have Dallas Clark, but I would like a solid guy I can plug in if I dont feel good about the matchup. Here's where the WW and Trade questions come in. I have Dickson right now, I like him, I think he's a less used version of Hernandez. I could pick up Chandler off the wire. Hernandez and Gronowski are both rostered and would need to be traded for, the Hernandez owner wants Ben Tate which I think is too much, and the Gronkowski owner wants Starks, which I think might be about right. I talked to the Hernandez owner and we discussed doing my Dickson and Tate for his Sam Bradford and Hernandez, but that was before the injury news came out.
Let me know which you'd choose and why.
As always, thanks for looking and leave a link!!!!!
Might now be the time to sell high on Tate, of course depending on how long it takes Foster to get back of course, but even when he does come back Tate might still have good value. Getting Hernandez for him might not be a bad option, but if the guy wants Tate maybe you could eek a little more out of him.
I would hold on to Starks, when Hernandez gets back he will share time again with Gronkowski and I am sure there is something on waivers for TE you could grab, even if it had to be week to week. I like Starks to much and I am also trying to get him.
Also as you know injuries can linger and maybe Hernandez's will or not, but anyway this would be great for whomever has Gronkowski, and I think he is the better option anyway. So depending on Foster and his hammy, Tate for Gronkowski may not be that bad of an offer. Hope this helps
thanks for the help so far! I forgot to mention this is for the PPR league. I like Hernandez as he seems to get more targets then Gronk, him being out desnt really effect me as I have Clark to fill in until he gets back.
Dickson is on my roster, costs nothing Chandler would cost some scrub off the bottom to grab off the wire. Gronk would probably cost me Starks in trade. Hernandez would cost me Tate and Dickson for Hernandez and Bradford, which I think I might do if he accepts it, as I could use the QB options with my other being Flacco.
out of the TEs you listed I kinda like the deal for Hernandez but note there is risk with that injury he sustained. But in that deal you would get a better backup TE and like you said you would get more QB options with Bradford. Yes you lose Tate but you have plenty of depth at RB and it is a good time to sell high on him.
the second option is Gronk and I would try to trade Tate and state that Tate could start another week or two because Foster re injured that hamstring and if Tate continues to do well could well supplant Foster (would that actually happen right now a long shot but hey it is all about selling the point). But Gronk may not get as many passes but he is the better red zone option between him and Hernanadez, so while Hernandez gets you passes, Gronk will probably get you more TDs so it kinda offsets.
Im not sure if you have noticed but if you do the Tate & Dickson for Hernandez & Bradford, Both Bradford & Flacco have week 5 byes. I like both Starks & Tate. There stock continues to rise. Starks will continue to get more and more carries & is on a high powered offense which opens up the running game. Tate is also on a high powered offense and should see his carries increase now that Foster's hammy is still giving him trouble. Im not sure I would give up either 1 of those guys for an injured TE or Gronk because if/when Hernandez comes back 1 of them will lose some targets to the other. Does the Foster or Grant owner have anyone you are interested in? They might be interested in Tate or Starks and you could maybe get an upgrade at TE and another position. Sorry if this isnt the answer you were looking for, but I guess I value the RB position a little more than TE.