A trade chart is a map, not an acceptance price
Pilot Values are relative weights. They help compare assets under one consistent set of assumptions, but they do not claim that every manager will accept the printed price. League demand, roster shape, and trade deadlines can move the real market.
Search all 220 assets
Values are relative trade weights, not projected points. Change the format to expose where career runway and current-season production diverge.
| Rank | Asset | Pos. | Dynasty | Tier | Format gap | Risk |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Puka NacuaLAR · Dominant volume when active; role is not the question. | WR | 98 | Elite | 0 vs redraft | Low |
| 2 | Drake MayeNE · Ascending dual-threat quarterback with long runway. | QB | 97 | Elite | +5 vs redraft | Low |
| 3 | Bijan RobinsonATL · Three-down usage and age create an elite profile. | RB | 97 | Elite | -2 vs redraft | Low |
| 4 | Ja'Marr ChaseCIN · Elite target share, quarterback pairing, and liquidity. | WR | 97 | Elite | 0 vs redraft | Low |
| 5 | Jayden DanielsWAS · Youth and dual-threat upside carry a premium. | QB | 96 | Elite | +5 vs redraft | Medium |
| 6 | Jahmyr GibbsDET · Explosive receiving value travels across formats. | RB | 96 | Elite | -4 vs redraft | Low |
| 7 | Jaxon Smith-NjigbaSEA · Young alpha receiver with an elite volume profile. | WR | 96 | Elite | 0 vs redraft | Low |
| 8 | Josh AllenBUF · Elite weekly ceiling and rare Superflex liquidity. | QB | 95 | Elite | +1 vs redraft | Low |
| 9 | Amon-Ra St. BrownDET · Reliable route volume and red-zone involvement. | WR | 95 | Elite | +1 vs redraft | Low |
| 10 | Malik NabersNYG · Age and target dominance outweigh the wider 2026 redraft range. | WR | 94 | Elite | +12 vs redraft | Medium |
| 11 | Trey McBrideARI · Elite target earning at a scarce position. | TE | 94 | Elite | +5 vs redraft | Low |
| 12 | Jeremiyah LoveARI · The 2026 first-round back already carries a premium blend of youth and projected workload. | RB | 93 | Elite | +7 vs redraft | Medium |
| 13 | Justin JeffersonMIN · Bankable target earning and long prime window. | WR | 93 | Elite | +2 vs redraft | Low |
| 14 | Rome OdunzeCHI · Career runway shapes this tier-based baseline. | WR | 93 | Elite | +9 vs redraft | Medium |
| 15 | Lamar JacksonBAL · Rushing creates a durable weekly scoring floor. | QB | 92 | Elite | -1 vs redraft | Low |
| 16 | Drake LondonATL · Prime-age target volume supports a top-tier profile in both redraft and dynasty. | WR | 92 | Elite | +2 vs redraft | Low |
| 17 | Brock BowersLV · Massive positional edge, especially with a TE premium. | TE | 92 | Elite | +8 vs redraft | Low |
| 18 | C.J. StroudHOU · Career runway shapes this tier-based baseline. | QB | 92 | Elite | +9 vs redraft | Medium |
| 19 | Ashton JeantyLV · Youth and projected workload support dynasty demand. | RB | 91 | Elite | +3 vs redraft | Medium |
| 20 | CeeDee LambDAL · High target concentration creates a strong floor. | WR | 91 | Elite | -1 vs redraft | Low |
| 21 | Dalton KincaidBUF · Career runway shapes this tier-based baseline. | TE | 91 | Elite | +9 vs redraft | Medium |
| 22 | Joe BurrowCIN · High-volume passing profile with strong insulation. | QB | 90 | Elite | +4 vs redraft | Medium |
| 23 | Jalen HurtsPHI · Goal-line role remains a major value lever. | QB | 90 | Elite | 0 vs redraft | Medium |
| 24 | De'Von AchaneMIA · Game-breaking efficiency with a wider workload range. | RB | 90 | Elite | -1 vs redraft | High |
| 25 | Ladd McConkeyLAC · Route skill and quarterback stability support the floor. | WR | 90 | Elite | +2 vs redraft | Low |
| 26 | Omarion HamptonLAC · Youth and a rising workload create a strong two-format profile. | RB | 89 | Tier 1 | +2 vs redraft | Medium |
| 27 | Nico CollinsHOU · Efficient alpha profile in a productive passing game. | WR | 89 | Tier 1 | 0 vs redraft | Medium |
| 28 | Marvin Harrison Jr.ARI · Dynasty value retains more patience than redraft. | WR | 89 | Tier 1 | +7 vs redraft | Medium |
| 29 | Tee HigginsCIN · Current role and multi-season utility shape this tier-based baseline. | WR | 89 | Tier 1 | +3 vs redraft | Medium |
| 30 | Tucker KraftGB · Career runway shapes this tier-based baseline. | TE | 89 | Tier 1 | +9 vs redraft | Medium |
| 31 | Patrick MahomesKC · Stable long-term job security and elite ceiling outcomes. | QB | 88 | Tier 1 | +5 vs redraft | Low |
| 32 | Garrett WilsonNYJ · Target talent is strong; efficiency range remains wider. | WR | 88 | Tier 1 | +3 vs redraft | Medium |
| 33 | Sam LaPortaDET · Young touchdown and route upside stays valuable. | TE | 88 | Tier 1 | +4 vs redraft | Medium |
| 34 | DK MetcalfPIT · Current role and multi-season utility shape this tier-based baseline. | WR | 88 | Tier 1 | +3 vs redraft | Medium |
| 35 | Tyler WarrenIND · Career runway shapes this tier-based baseline. | TE | 88 | Tier 1 | +9 vs redraft | Medium |
| 36 | Caleb WilliamsCHI · Young quarterback value remains sensitive to development. | QB | 87 | Tier 1 | +9 vs redraft | Medium |
| 37 | Justin HerbertLAC · Current role and multi-season utility shape this tier-based baseline. | QB | 87 | Tier 1 | +3 vs redraft | Low |
| 38 | Jameson WilliamsDET · Career runway shapes this tier-based baseline. | WR | 87 | Tier 1 | +9 vs redraft | Medium |
| 39 | Kyle PittsATL · Current role and multi-season utility shape this tier-based baseline. | TE | 87 | Tier 1 | +3 vs redraft | High |
| 40 | Chris OlaveNO · Current role and multi-season utility shape this tier-based baseline. | WR | 86 | Tier 1 | +3 vs redraft | High |
| 41 | Zay FlowersBAL · Career runway shapes this tier-based baseline. | WR | 86 | Tier 1 | +9 vs redraft | Low |
| 42 | Colston LovelandCHI · Career runway shapes this tier-based baseline. | TE | 86 | Tier 1 | +9 vs redraft | Medium |
| 43 | Xavier WorthyKC · Career runway shapes this tier-based baseline. | WR | 85 | Tier 1 | +9 vs redraft | Medium |
| 44 | Bucky IrvingTB · Receiving role improves format flexibility, but the current redraft market is cooler. | RB | 84 | Tier 1 | +9 vs redraft | Medium |
| 45 | Rashee RiceKC · High target upside paired with availability uncertainty. | WR | 84 | Tier 1 | +1 vs redraft | High |
| 46 | Jordan LoveGB · Current role and multi-season utility shape this tier-based baseline. | QB | 84 | Tier 1 | +3 vs redraft | Medium |
| 47 | Kenyon SadiqNYJ · Career runway shapes this tier-based baseline. | TE | 84 | Tier 1 | +9 vs redraft | High |
| 48 | Baker MayfieldTB · Current role and multi-season utility shape this tier-based baseline. | QB | 83 | Tier 1 | +3 vs redraft | Medium |
| 49 | Kyren WilliamsLAR · Current role and multi-season utility shape this tier-based baseline. | RB | 83 | Tier 1 | +3 vs redraft | Medium |
| 50 | TreVeyon HendersonNE · Career runway shapes this tier-based baseline. | RB | 83 | Tier 1 | +9 vs redraft | Medium |
Tier breaks matter more than a one-point difference
Adjacent values often belong to the same decision tier. A manager should feel comfortable choosing the player who better fits the lineup. A wider break signals a change in ceiling, security, scarcity, or career runway that may require another asset.
- Elite anchors require a consolidation premium.
- Strong starters can move for need when values are close.
- Volatile depth belongs in ranges, not precise one-point debates.
- Future picks should be stress-tested as early, middle, and late.
The same chart should not be used for every league
Superflex increases quarterback replacement cost. Full PPR improves the floor of repeatable target earners. TE Premium widens the gap between difference-making tight ends and replacement options. Dynasty adds age, liquidity, and future picks, while redraft removes most long-horizon value. Use the chart as a baseline, then apply the actual format.
| Asset | Dyn. | Gap |
|---|---|---|
| Malik Nabers | 94 | +12 |
| Caleb Williams | 87 | +9 |
| Bucky Irving | 84 | +9 |
| C.J. Stroud | 92 | +9 |
| Bo Nix | 81 | +9 |
| Asset | Red. | Gap |
|---|---|---|
| Derrick Henry | 85 | +33 |
| Christian McCaffrey | 95 | +27 |
| Saquon Barkley | 91 | +17 |
| George Kittle | 86 | +16 |
| Dak Prescott | 75 | +14 |
Do not add four values and call the trade fair
Lineup spots are limited. The best asset receives full weight; extra assets receive diminishing weight because their points may remain on the bench. The discount should be smaller in deep leagues and larger when the receiving manager must cut useful players.
Build both sides of the trade to apply format, league size, roster direction, and package pressure.
Ja'Marr Chase versus CeeDee Lamb + a 2027 late second
The printed values are 98 versus 93 + 22. Raw addition makes the package 115, but Pilot's second-asset weight reduces it to about 111 before roster context. The package still leads on model value, yet the manager receiving two assets must price the lineup downgrade from Chase and the extra roster spot.
Put the framework to work
Change the league settings, build both sides, and inspect the value gap before you send the offer.