Not sure if you might be referring to me with the "but you could have got more inseason" since I did say that to you in this thread. Isn't it fair to say that sometimes its absolutely true and sometimes it's not? There is obvious risk in holding a player into the season, injury, under perform etc, and there are roster opportunity costs associated with waiting.
On the other hand, if it's an established player with a recently depressed market value (due to inj, suspension etc) holding that player into the season can make more sense and have a big payoff.
Sell early at a discount or hold into the season?
My definitive answer is, it depends
First, no it wasn't in response to anything you had said. The "you could have got more inseason" argument is made by a large proportion of the FF community and I just had always thought it was a fascinating subject. I think it is largely a fallacy in FFPC, but yes it absolutely depends. I am a fan of the idea that when the iron is hot (not in terms of depressed value because of injury, susp, etc, but because a trading partner is hot to trot) you should strike. So long as the deal is within an acceptable margin (which would vary from owner to owner - I am looser than many).
I have to agree with the notion that a player's (artificially) depressed value is likely to rebound if you wait, but where my main point lies is that the market is simply not that robust inseason so it
will be hard to find a partner, even if that value would/could be higher. But that is a broad generalization by me and some leagues are very active inseason and some aren't. Maybe a partner isn't that hard to find. Meno was talking about one of his $750 leagues and how sparse the trading is/was. However, what I have found is that consistently across leagues, the most robust trading period of time is between ~Jan 9th and March 31st. And it is by a lot.
The other consideration that can't be ignored is that if the debate centers around player X and his (perceived and possibly artificially) depressed value, is the dip really an aberration or is that player really going to keep falling in value due to real reasons like age, ability, situation, etc.? If my take is that I want to get rid of them then I tend to commit to that take. If I have a buyer within that margin I am game.
I know we had a back and forth about Kupp and Deebo last year where I had sold low. I don't know if you saw at all, it is likely you didn't, but I have posted in the SharkPool in a couple spots, as well on Twitter and in articles I have written this past season, that my trade last year was by far the worst trade I have ever made. That specifically my take on Deebo vs Aiyuk, coupled with being unbelievably wrong about Kupp, was a take I have never been more wrong about. Not just in terms of the take but in terms of the FF impact.
I don't think my roster or trading process was wrong per se, though, I was just wrong about those two players. The really big mistake I made in my process is that I always use calcs and rankings as milemarkers to get a sense of what the market thinks about given assets. I think most people know I have no qualms about taking deals that don't match market. But this was the *one* example out of 100s of trades each year where I didn't bother to throw it into a calc first and I would have benefitted greatly if I had. I would have either sold much higher or not found a buyer and held into the season where both players obviously blew up.
Ok rant almost over! One other thing is that by owning so many teams, the ability for me to shop assets around inseason goes down because my management bandwidth is already taxed so much. That is on me, not market dynamics.
But, everyone is more taxed inseason so...ok rant over!!
