If you want Foster, do you throw out Tate first in auction? (1 Viewer)

[tombonneau]

Curious to people's auction strategy with a RB1 whose handcuff is proven RB30 range. I'm thinking of throwing Tate out first and getting him for hopefully normal value, which would theoretically suppress Foster's max price e in the eye's of other bidders since his very solid handcuff is already gone.

More importantly, if instead you get Foster first at his value or a little over, everyone else knows you're going to pay whatever it takes to get his handcuff and you will most certainly end up overpaying for Tate if you want to have him.

Worst case scenario, you miss out on Foster and end up dealing Tate if you want after the draft for an above-market price.

 

[johnadams]

I don't see Tate as a pure handcuff. He has pretty strong value in his own right. Though I like the gambit of putting Tate out first as I suspect you will get some insight into how much Foster is going to cost based on how much interest there is for Tate, but you will not be able to get Tate for pure handcuff pricing.

 

[tombonneau]

I don't see Tate as a pure handcuff. He has pretty strong value in his own right. Though I like the gambit of putting Tate out first as I suspect you will get some insight into how much Foster is going to cost based on how much interest there is for Tate, but you will not be able to get Tate for pure handcuff pricing.

Yes, I agree he's not going to come at a typical handcuff pricing as he's still going to cost you a RB30 price but I agree he has value in his own right as a RB3 regardless.

 

[acme]

i predict there will be others who also have their eyes on Foster and if you throw out Tate first he is likely to go at an inflated price. i do like the strategy (or 'gambit' as J.A. so eloquently put it) of nominating a lower tiered / handcuff guy first, but since Tate is so closely associated with Foster, it won't make him cheaper-- instead it may make him costlier.

seems to me many guys 'blow their wad' in the first 5 rounds or so and aren't willing to spend so much on a 'backup' when they're down to their last 20 bucks. if you already have Foster and you wait (and wait) i think you will get him cheaper.

my 2¢,

-Wile E.

 

[Gawain]

It is likely that someone else will throw Foster out as well. Assuming that you can nominate him five rounds after Tate goes is a risky proposition.

 

[Perfect Tommy]

If you want to pony up for Foster, I don't like the idea of putting up Tate first. It is better to put Foster up first and see what it takes to get him. If you don't get him you don't have to overpay for Tate. If you do get him, then you know you do want to overpay for Tate if necessary. By nominating Tate first, you are forced to pay up for him before you know if you need him or not. You never know what somebody else is going to bid on a player so you can't assume you will get him at an acceptable price. Also, in my experience, players rated well below the top players who are nominated early go for more than they would later on. Everybody has money and they don't feel the pinch of running out yet. If they like Tate, they can afford to pay whatever they think he is worth. As the draft wears on, some bidders get low on money and can no longer afford to participate in the bidding for Tate even if they like him.

I like to nominate players I am down on who are cheap now as somebody will pay a high price for somebody I don't want. If there is a player I really want, I just nominate him. Suppose you coyly wait on Foster while you see all the other top RBs go, some at prices you consider pretty good. But you are saving up for Foster. When he finally comes up, somebody else wants him just as much as you do. Now you are forced to overpay for him or let him go. If you let him go then you will wish you bid more on the other players. By nominating Foster early, you will know whether you got him or whether you need to be actively bidding on the other players.

People speak of waiting out the overbidding and swooping in and getting lots of bargains at the end. In my experience, that can work but it is very dangerous. It is more likely that the good players will run out altogether and you will be left with a lousy starting lineup and excellent depth. I like to make sure I spend my money on top players and keep my balance in line with the other players until the end when I like to make sure to have an extra dollar for every spot so I get all the lower end players I want.

 

[loqutis]

It is likely that someone else will throw Foster out as well. Assuming that you can nominate him five rounds after Tate goes is a risky proposition.

That's what I would do and watch everyone scramble.

 

[loqutis]

Listen to perfect tommy. No one really wants to blow their wad in the first few players. Everyone sits back and then pounces as the tip players start to dwindle.

Put foster out as the first player and you'll get him cheaper than foster, 8 players later.

 

[tombonneau]

Listen to perfect tommy. No one really wants to blow their wad in the first few players. Everyone sits back and then pounces as the tip players start to dwindle. Put foster out as the first player and you'll get him cheaper than foster, 8 players later.

You and perfect tommy just nailed it with two Thanks. Smart strategy talk like this that gets me thinking is what makes this board so $$ in June and July

 

[J Giles Band]

Listen to perfect tommy. No one really wants to blow their wad in the first few players. Everyone sits back and then pounces as the tip players start to dwindle. Put foster out as the first player and you'll get him cheaper than foster, 8 players later.

Good advice from both. One word of caution, however. Never lose sight of the fact that every auction is different. It is no more likely you'll get a player cheaper in the beginning of the auction than you will in the middle or waiting until the end.The amount you will pay for a player is ultimately a function of your league mates and the ebb and flow of each individual auction. If most guys in your league tend to blow their $ early, you might hold off nominating Foster. If quite a few usually save their $ until the end, nominate him early.In my league there are always one or two guys (one in particular) who save their $ until the end, inflating the cost of the last few stud players. So the advice from the guys above certainly fits my league.One thing I have noticed over the years is a short window at some point in the middle of the auction where players go at a discount. The key in any auction is recognizing when this window occurs (whether beginning, middle or end) and nominating or buying at that time.This is the stuff that makes auctions a blast. Good luck and enjoy.

 

[geoff8695]

If you want to pony up for Foster, I don't like the idea of putting up Tate first. It is better to put Foster up first and see what it takes to get him. If you don't get him you don't have to overpay for Tate. If you do get him, then you know you do want to overpay for Tate if necessary. By nominating Tate first, you are forced to pay up for him before you know if you need him or not. You never know what somebody else is going to bid on a player so you can't assume you will get him at an acceptable price. Also, in my experience, players rated well below the top players who are nominated early go for more than they would later on. Everybody has money and they don't feel the pinch of running out yet. If they like Tate, they can afford to pay whatever they think he is worth. As the draft wears on, some bidders get low on money and can no longer afford to participate in the bidding for Tate even if they like him.

I like to nominate players I am down on who are cheap now as somebody will pay a high price for somebody I don't want. If there is a player I really want, I just nominate him. Suppose you coyly wait on Foster while you see all the other top RBs go, some at prices you consider pretty good. But you are saving up for Foster. When he finally comes up, somebody else wants him just as much as you do. Now you are forced to overpay for him or let him go. If you let him go then you will wish you bid more on the other players. By nominating Foster early, you will know whether you got him or whether you need to be actively bidding on the other players.

People speak of waiting out the overbidding and swooping in and getting lots of bargains at the end. In my experience, that can work but it is very dangerous. It is more likely that the good players will run out altogether and you will be left with a lousy starting lineup and excellent depth. I like to make sure I spend my money on top players and keep my balance in line with the other players until the end when I like to make sure to have an extra dollar for every spot so I get all the lower end players I want.

Really This is consistent with my auction experiences as well.

 

[geoff8695]

...One thing I have noticed over the years is a short window at some point in the middle of the auction where players go at a discount. The key in any auction is recognizing when this window occurs...

This is so true. And so frustrating when the discount players are at a position you're already too heavily invested in...