Jumping to a full frame Z, what to keep, what to sell?

Thank you all for the very useful replies.

So I had made a hugely wrong assumption on the full frame architecture.  I had assumed that the same pixel density found on the DX D7100 would be persisted on these new sensors.  For example, my D7100 has 6000x4000 pixels in a (approx) 24x16mm sensor.  I thought that a 7 year newer camera would now have a 36x24mm sensor with 9000x6000 pixels.  Thus, if you were doing a DX crop mode in the middle of the sensor, you'd still get 6000x4000 pixels, and if you were doing full frame you'd get a massive 9000x6000.  But nope, apparently not.  Even with the Z6ii you still have 6000x4000 and now each pixel is physically larger.

After some further reading I see that smaller pixels are not actually a desirable thing in terms of their light sensitivity and noise properties.  Sure, you get more resolution, which can add detail, but everything else seems to be a downside.  Big eye opener for me!

So in a nutshell, the advantage of full frame is NOT more resolution, but rather the same resolution with "better" pixels in each spot.  All of this completely gets rid of any desire I had to keep using the DX lenses in DX mode.  So those and the FTZ are out the window.  The AF-D lenses won't autofocus.  So yeah, like everyone has said - dump it all :/

Question on the new plan...  in terms of pure macro photography (let's take the example of using focus stacking to shoot a watch) how would the Z 70-200/2.8 compare to the Z 105/2.8 micro?  The 105 can focus to 1' and the 70-200 can focus to 1.6'.  If the 70-200 were at 200mm and 1.6' away, wouldn't that give at least as much macro capability as a 105mm at 1' distance?   I'm sure there are other aspects to consider as well, but just wondering if getting a 24-70 and a 70-200 up front would cover all the bases, or if I'd truly want that dedicated 105.