Start with comparable evidence.
Both players use the same release, format, league size, and composite scale. Rank is context, while the percentage gap measures the trade difference.
Compare 48 distinct players across dynasty Superflex, dynasty 1QB, tight end premium, and redraft—then measure the exact effect of standard, half-PPR, full-PPR, or six-point passing touchdowns. Every answer updates from the same validated market release.
Both players use the same release, format, league size, and composite scale. Rank is context, while the percentage gap measures the trade difference.
The scoring model uses observed per-game profiles and subtracts same-position replacement. Players do not receive generic PPR or passing-TD bumps.
Injuries, lineup need, manager preference, and future outcomes remain outside the score. Close values should be treated as a tier, not false precision.
Matchups were selected from meaningful current value neighborhoods, not generated as every possible name combination. No player appears twice, giving the collection 48 unique evidence profiles.
If the value gap is less than roughly five percent and stays small across formats, the evidence does not support demanding a large add. Choose for roster need, timeline, and your own risk tolerance. The calculator remains useful for balancing a full package.
Audit the model →Start with the dynasty market that matches your quarterback format, compare the value gap as a percentage rather than rank alone, and then check the scoring-specific table. A small gap means the players are trade peers; it does not create a precise required add.
Yes. Fantasy Trade Target recalculates each player from an observed per-game scoring profile and compares the change with same-position replacement. That can widen, narrow, or occasionally reverse a baseline value gap.
No. The model uses each quarterback’s observed passing touchdown rate and subtracts the change for a replacement-level quarterback. It does not apply the same blanket multiplier to every QB.
No. The higher current market value is the baseline answer, but 1QB scarcity, redraft horizon, reception scoring, and tight end premium can change the gap. Roster construction and risk preference still sit outside the model.