Jacoby Brissett vs Daniel Jones
Jacoby Brissett prices 1.7 points higher for dynasty. Full tale of the tape below, then model the deal yourself.
Player comparison
| Metric | QB Jacoby Brissett | QB Daniel Jones |
|---|---|---|
| Team | ARI | IND |
| Position | QB | QB |
| Age | 33 | 29 — leads |
| Redraft value | 39.7 — leads | 36.0 |
| Dynasty value | 37.7 — leads | 36.0 |
| VORP (redraft) | 10.0 — leads | 6.3 |
| VORP (dynasty) | 8.0 — leads | 6.3 |
Highlighted cells mark the stronger figure for that metric. For age, lower is treated as the advantage in dynasty formats.
Model this trade
Both players are already loaded. Add picks or extra pieces to either side to find the package that balances the deal.
Team A receives
37.7pts
Type to search players, then use the arrow keys and Enter to add one to Team A.
- QBJacoby BrissettARI · Age 3337.7
Team B receives
36.0pts
Type to search players, then use the arrow keys and Enter to add one to Team B.
- QBDaniel JonesIND · Age 2936.0
Verdict
Even trade
Net value · Team A
+1.7
Fairness
95%
RecommendationThis trade is fair and balanced.
Frequently asked
- Who has more dynasty value, Jacoby Brissett or Daniel Jones?
- Jacoby Brissett carries the higher dynasty value: 37.7 against 36.0, a gap of 1.7 points on our 0–100 superflex scale. Jacoby Brissett is 33 and Daniel Jones is 29, and dynasty pricing applies position-specific age decay on top of a market-derived value curve, not fantasy point projections.
- Which player is better for redraft leagues?
- For win-now redraft leagues, Jacoby Brissett is worth more: 39.7 against 36.0. Redraft strips out the age-decay term entirely, which is why the two formats can disagree on the same pair of players.
- How does league size affect this trade?
- Value is measured against the replacement-level starter at each position, and that baseline moves with league size. In a 14-team league the waiver pool is thin, so established starters like these hold more relative value. In an 8-team league the drop-off to a replacement QB is much smaller, which compresses the gap and makes draft picks comparatively more attractive.