detlef Posted August 20, 2007 Share Posted August 20, 2007 For starters, I've written back for clarification because I can't completely understand the dude. Here's the e-mail I got... I get Lt, er, #1 pick you get #5 and #12 and your turn. I will take your 1st pick (2nd turn pick) in the 4th round (round being 1-18) for the 5 pick and your second to last pick in the draft for the 12. 4 top 20's for the #1...... Intersting. For starters, I think the throw in pick at the end needs to be scratched because it makes our rosters uneven. Obviously he just screwed this up and it isn't a major part of the trade. As I see it, if I agree, we end up like this... 8 team league I get: 1.05, 2.04, 2.08, 3.01, 5.01 He gets: 1.01, 3.05, 4.04, 4.08, 5.05 Now, one of the top 4 seems hell-bent on Manning. I'm not sure if he's just blowing smoke. So, that leaves me with Addai at 5. I come back with a very solid RB2 at 12 and still tab two top flight WRs at 16/17. That compared to LT plus the 16/17 swing but without the guy at 12. Thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted August 20, 2007 Share Posted August 20, 2007 Yeah - is this guy a freakin' lawyer? Damnation, that's difficult to decipher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted August 20, 2007 Author Share Posted August 20, 2007 Yeah - is this guy a freakin' lawyer? Damnation, that's difficult to decipher. actually he is! At any rate, assuming I figured out what he's saying, what are your thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted August 20, 2007 Share Posted August 20, 2007 Okay, if what you have surmised is correct, you should absolutely take the deal. It gives you 4 picks in the first 17 picks including a top 5 pick. That more than matches any output by Tomlinson and the other picks you have listed with the 1.01 - by a wide margin, in fact. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh 0ne Posted August 20, 2007 Share Posted August 20, 2007 It gives you 4 picks in the first 17 picks including a top 5 pick. That more than matches any output by Tomlinson and the other picks you have listed with the 1.01 - by a wide margin, in fact. Pretty tough to argue with. I tried, since I like arguing with BB, but I couldn't come up with anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TDFFFreak Posted August 20, 2007 Share Posted August 20, 2007 Okay, if what you have surmised is correct, you should absolutely take the deal. It gives you 4 picks in the first 17 picks including a top 5 pick. That more than matches any output by Tomlinson and the other picks you have listed with the 1.01 - by a wide margin, in fact. What he said. Take the deal and run. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted August 20, 2007 Share Posted August 20, 2007 I tried, since I like arguing with BB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted August 20, 2007 Author Share Posted August 20, 2007 Okay, if what you have surmised is correct, you should absolutely take the deal. It gives you 4 picks in the first 17 picks including a top 5 pick. That more than matches any output by Tomlinson and the other picks you have listed with the 1.01 - by a wide margin, in fact. Dude pulled the offer when I asked him to clarify. I was certainly leaning that way. However, it actually doesn't automatically make sense. So, for the sake of simplicity, we'll assume I went RB/RB at 5 and 12 and RB/RB at 1 and 32. Those are the picks that were being traded. Going by the Huddle 120, I could have ended up with Addai and Westbrook. Mind you, neither is a given as they are ranked 4 and 11 respectively. Also going by the Huddle 120, I could end up with Brandon Jacobs at 32. If you add up the combined pts based on DMD's projections, I get about 70 more points from LT + Jacobs than Addai plus Westbrook. Of course, everyone's version of who they would take at those spots may differ, but in a theoretical analysis... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh 0ne Posted August 20, 2007 Share Posted August 20, 2007 Dude pulled the offer when I asked him to clarify. I was certainly leaning that way. However, it actually doesn't automatically make sense. So, for the sake of simplicity, we'll assume I went RB/RB at 5 and 12 and RB/RB at 1 and 32. Those are the picks that were being traded. Going by the Huddle 120, I could have ended up with Addai and Westbrook. Mind you, neither is a given as they are ranked 4 and 11 respectively. Also going by the Huddle 120, I could end up with Brandon Jacobs at 32. If you add up the combined pts based on DMD's projections, I get about 70 more points from LT + Jacobs than Addai plus Westbrook. Of course, everyone's version of who they would take at those spots may differ, but in a theoretical analysis... I think what you're missing is that with your top 4 picks of the first 17, you will handily outscore his top 4 picks, which include LT, and then the 21st, 28th, and 32nd pick. Going by the huddle, you'll have LJ, Steve Smith, Peyton and Edge. He'll have LT, Portis, Fitzgerald and Roy Williams. Not even close my friend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted August 20, 2007 Share Posted August 20, 2007 Dude pulled the offer when I asked him to clarify. I was certainly leaning that way. However, it actually doesn't automatically make sense. So, for the sake of simplicity, we'll assume I went RB/RB at 5 and 12 and RB/RB at 1 and 32. Those are the picks that were being traded. Going by the Huddle 120, I could have ended up with Addai and Westbrook. Mind you, neither is a given as they are ranked 4 and 11 respectively. Also going by the Huddle 120, I could end up with Brandon Jacobs at 32. If you add up the combined pts based on DMD's projections, I get about 70 more points from LT + Jacobs than Addai plus Westbrook. Of course, everyone's version of who they would take at those spots may differ, but in a theoretical analysis... In a theoretical discussion, your 5 picks listed would outscore his 5 picks listed by about 10% to 15%, depending upon scoring system - and that's the way you evaluate this trade, or any trade for that matter, involving high draft picks. That's a hugh difference. Unless you stepped on your dick in the draft or got incredibly unlucky with injuries during the season, you would have come out of this trade way ahead of not only your trading partner but most if not all of the rest of the league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted August 20, 2007 Share Posted August 20, 2007 Dude pulled the offer when I asked him to clarify. You need to lecture him on contracts & offer/acceptance/consideration, since he's a lawyer. It's always a bad policy to present offers in bad faith... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted August 20, 2007 Author Share Posted August 20, 2007 I think what you're missing is that with your top 4 picks of the first 17, you will handily outscore his top 4 picks, which include LT, and then the 21st, 28th, and 32nd pick. Going by the huddle, you'll have LJ, Steve Smith, Peyton and Edge. He'll have LT, Portis, Fitzgerald and Roy Williams. Not even close my friend. The point you're missing is that I need to compare what I'm getting vs what I'm giving up, not how I'm doing relative to him. Just because it's a bad deal for him, doesn't make it a good deal for me. The 16 and 17 pick are there regardless, so I needed to compare the 1 and 32 vs the 5 and 12. Now, I just used RB/RB so I'd be talking apples and apples. Certainly it didn't need to go that way and I could have grabbed a stud WR at 12 (but I wouldn't have) and so on. At the end of the day, the only thing that mattered was would the 5th and 12th pick make my team better than the 1st and 32nd. I didn't skew the study. Both the guys I assumed I'd get at 5 and 12 were both ranked slightly ahead of those spots as was the guy I used for 32. The numbers came out with me getting 15% more points by staying pat. Remember, you can only start so many guys and in an 8 team league, there's plenty to go around. We added the flex player this year to avoid always having to bench a solid player. However, I'm guessing that will still happen if only to a lesser degree. What I'm getting to is that if you have a player who counts as a player and a half (or in last year's case 2 players) it is huge. If I have LT plus 4 good RB/WRs and you have 6 good RB/WRs it doesn't do you any good. Of course, the point is moot anyway since he pulled the offer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh 0ne Posted August 20, 2007 Share Posted August 20, 2007 The point you're missing is that I need to compare what I'm getting vs what I'm giving up, not how I'm doing relative to him. Just because it's a bad deal for him, doesn't make it a good deal for me. The 16 and 17 pick are there regardless, so I needed to compare the 1 and 32 vs the 5 and 12. Now, I just used RB/RB so I'd be talking apples and apples. Certainly it didn't need to go that way and I could have grabbed a stud WR at 12 (but I wouldn't have) and so on. At the end of the day, the only thing that mattered was would the 5th and 12th pick make my team better than the 1st and 32nd. I didn't skew the study. Both the guys I assumed I'd get at 5 and 12 were both ranked slightly ahead of those spots as was the guy I used for 32. The numbers came out with me getting 15% more points by staying pat. Remember, you can only start so many guys and in an 8 team league, there's plenty to go around. We added the flex player this year to avoid always having to bench a solid player. However, I'm guessing that will still happen if only to a lesser degree. What I'm getting to is that if you have a player who counts as a player and a half (or in last year's case 2 players) it is huge. If I have LT plus 4 good RB/WRs and you have 6 good RB/WRs it doesn't do you any good. Of course, the point is moot anyway since he pulled the offer. Indeed, I kinda got lost along the way and looked at it as a trade involving all 5 picks. My bad. 1-32 vs. 5-12 makes it a bit closer, but still would lean towards 5-12 imo, albeit in an 8 team league there is a lot more talent to go around. On the other hand, why the hell are you playing in an 8 team league in the first place? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted August 20, 2007 Share Posted August 20, 2007 (edited) so I needed to compare the 1 and 32 vs the 5 and 12. Yeah, and you come out about 10% ahead with the 5 & 12. You also neglect to state that with the 2 early picks that you are accessing higher tiered players than the rest of the league for your 3rd & 4th players on your roster which adds up also. Isn't that what we've been talking about all along? Edited August 20, 2007 by Bronco Billy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted August 20, 2007 Author Share Posted August 20, 2007 (edited) Yeah, and you come out about 10% ahead with the 5 & 12. You also neglect to state that with the 2 early picks that you are accessing higher tiered players than the rest of the league for your 3rd & 4th players on your roster which adds up also. Isn't that what we've been talking about all along? Dude, how's your math? Once again, for the sake of argument, I just went by the top 120 in the huddle. Also, to keep it simple, I took Westbrook at 11 rather than Steve Smith at 12 so it would be the same positions. So, for this discussion, I'm actually talking 5 and 11 vs 1 and 32. At any rate. According to the huddle top 120. That means Larry Johnson and B Westbrook vs LT and Adrian Peterson. If you give them a pt for every 10 total yards and 6 for every TD, LT and AP come out with 67 more points. Certainly this this is not exact but it is also not skewed in such a manner that would make either way look better than it does. The breakdown: LT 2030 yds 23 TDs AP 1500 yds 9 TDs LJ 1660 yds 15 TDs BW 1580 yds 11 TDs Believe me, I understand that, in theory the trade makes sense. That is precisely why I was seriously considering it. However, considering that LT is hands-down the #1 pick this year, it might not be so clear as you are saying. Think about it. Almost every year I've played, there's been some argument about who should be #1. LT or Ricky? LJ or LT? Faulk or Edge? Nobody is even bothering bringing that up this year. Edited August 20, 2007 by detlef Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sportsfan26 Posted August 20, 2007 Share Posted August 20, 2007 This was shown to me a few years ago, when I was offered a trade. http://footballguys.com/pickvalue.htm It is a tool to help you decide if a draft pick trade is given you good value. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cre8tiff Posted August 20, 2007 Share Posted August 20, 2007 Yeah - is this guy a freakin' lawyer? Damnation, that's difficult to decipher. It's not nice to play FF with your mexican dishwashers, detlef. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.