Jonathan Taylor vs James Cook
Jonathan Taylor prices 13.0 points higher for dynasty. Full tale of the tape below, then model the deal yourself.
Player comparison
| Metric | RB Jonathan Taylor | RB James Cook |
|---|---|---|
| Team | IND | BUF |
| Position | RB | RB |
| Age | 27 | 26 — leads |
| Redraft value | 80.0 — leads | 55.7 |
| Dynasty value | 62.0 — leads | 49.0 |
| VORP (redraft) | 69.4 — leads | 45.2 |
| VORP (dynasty) | 53.8 — leads | 40.9 |
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
62.0pts
Type to search players, then use the arrow keys and Enter to add one to Team A.
- RBJonathan TaylorIND · Age 2762.0▼3.87d
Team B receives
49.0pts
Type to search players, then use the arrow keys and Enter to add one to Team B.
- RBJames CookBUF · Age 2649.0
Verdict
Team A favoured
Net value · Team A
+13.0
Fairness
79%
RecommendationTeam B should request a 2nd or 3rd round draft pick to balance this trade.
Frequently asked
- Who has more dynasty value, Jonathan Taylor or James Cook?
- Jonathan Taylor carries the higher dynasty value: 62.0 against 49.0, a gap of 13.0 points on our 0–100 superflex scale. Jonathan Taylor is 27 and James Cook is 26, 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, Jonathan Taylor is worth more: 80.0 against 55.7. 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 RB is much smaller, which compresses the gap and makes draft picks comparatively more attractive.