Jordan Love vs C.J. Stroud
Jordan Love prices 3.6 points higher for dynasty. Full tale of the tape below, then model the deal yourself.
Player comparison
| Metric | QB Jordan Love | QB C.J. Stroud |
|---|---|---|
| Team | GB | HOU |
| Position | QB | QB |
| Age | 27 | 24 — leads |
| Redraft value | 37.8 — leads | 34.2 |
| Dynasty value | 37.8 — leads | 34.2 |
| VORP (redraft) | 8.1 — leads | 4.6 |
| VORP (dynasty) | 8.1 — leads | 4.6 |
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
37.8pts
Type to search players, then use the arrow keys and Enter to add one to Team A.
- QBJordan LoveGB · Age 2737.8
Team B receives
34.2pts
Type to search players, then use the arrow keys and Enter to add one to Team B.
- QBC.J. StroudHOU · Age 2434.2
Verdict
Team A favoured
Net value · Team A
+3.6
Fairness
90%
RecommendationTeam B should request a 2nd or 3rd round draft pick to balance this trade.
Frequently asked
- Who has more dynasty value, Jordan Love or C.J. Stroud?
- Jordan Love carries the higher dynasty value: 37.8 against 34.2, a gap of 3.6 points on our 0–100 superflex scale. Jordan Love is 27 and C.J. Stroud is 24, 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, Jordan Love is worth more: 37.8 against 34.2. 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.