Julius Thomas - Overvalued? (1 Viewer)

[Eminence]

I personally think that Julius Thomas is a sell high this off-season. People have him ranked up there with Gronk and Graham but I don't think he fits the bill. In a year where Peyton Manning set the record for most Passing Yard and most Passing Touchdowns, Thomas put up a line of:

65 / 788 / 12 TD

I don't expect Peyton Manning to throw 53 Touchdowns again next season and I bet we see an increased emphasis in Denver's running game overall. I think it would be safe to pencil in Thomas for a 7 - 8 touchdowns, 55 catches, and about 700 yards.

Which, while solid, is production you can get elsewhere.

 

[Ghost Rider]

When you say sell, what do you mean? If you mean in keepers and dynasties, I suspect that most owners who got him this past year got him really late in drafts or for almost nothing in auctions, so there is no need to sell when you can keep him for pretty cheap.

Now, if you think he will be overvalued in redrafts in 2014, then I might agree with you. Then again, I might not.

 

[ghostguy123]

Just because he is ranked #3 doesnt mean he is ranked up there with Graham and Gronk.

1...2........................................................3

I agree to an extent that he is a sell high, but so is basically any player coming off a great year. Just because he may not produce the same stats doesnt mean his value isnt right.

 

[Eminence]

When you say sell, what do you mean? If you mean in keepers and dynasties, I suspect that most owners who got him this past year got him really late in drafts or for almost nothing in auctions, so there is no need to sell when you can keep him for pretty cheap.

Now, if you think he will be overvalued in redrafts in 2014, then I might agree with you. Then again, I might not.

Fixed, thanks for making my thread better.

But yeah, meant he's overvalued in all formats both Dynasty and Redraft. Don't think he's going to sniff last year's production and all it's going to take is one sucker (out of the other 11 people in your league) to chase the previous year.

Meanwhile, your eyes are downfield for the next Julius Thomas. Tyler Eifert, Gavin Escobar, Ladarius Green, etc.

Or you take what you get for trading Thomas and use it to scoop up a veteran like Jason Witten or Greg Olsen + Draft Pick.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

There are very few players I'd bet on catching 12 TDs year over year, so yeah, if someone is willing to pay for that, I'd sell. But I don't think too many people are willing to pay a ton for him considering the depth at the TE position right now.

 

[ConnSKINS26]

If you're the one who sold him for Wright and the 1.10 in the trade thread...that wasn't selling high. I think you know you made a bad deal and now you're trying to get the Shark Pool to validate the thought behind it.

 

[Eminence]

If you're the one who sold him for Wright and the 1.10 in the trade thread...that wasn't selling high. I think you know you made a bad deal and now you're trying to get the Shark Pool to validate the thought behind it.

Huh? Do you have to be such an internet tough guy all the time? You don't have to agree with me.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

If you mean in keepers and dynasties, I suspect that most owners who got him this past year got him really late in drafts or for almost nothing in auctions, so there is no need to sell when you can keep him for pretty cheap.

Good point, why sell a guy who's going to be cheap to keep?

 

[ConnSKINS26]

If you're the one who sold him for Wright and the 1.10 in the trade thread...that wasn't selling high. I think you know you made a bad deal and now you're trying to get the Shark Pool to validate the thought behind it.

Huh? Do you have to be such an internet tough guy all the time? You don't have to agree with me.

Internet tough guy? I think you're thinking of someone else.

I saw your trade in the trade thread, where you didn't sell Thomas high. And you started a thread about selling Thomas high. Where does my logic fall apart? If I'm wrong, that's all you had to say.

Nowhere did I say I disagreed with you, btw. I said YOU didn't sell high.

 

[msudaisy26]

I think you have to find the right Bronco's fan to sell high. I tried to sell him during the year in my dynasty league and I couldn't get much for him because everyone kept saying the Bronco's are having a record year, and when Peyton retires he won't be worth anything.

If you sold him for 1.10 and Tim Wright I like you sold low. He should at least fetch a mid first this year or 1.10 and a true prospect like Ertz, Green, Reed, Eifert.

 

[Eminence]

If you're the one who sold him for Wright and the 1.10 in the trade thread...that wasn't selling high. I think you know you made a bad deal and now you're trying to get the Shark Pool to validate the thought behind it.

Huh? Do you have to be such an internet tough guy all the time? You don't have to agree with me.

Internet tough guy? I think you're thinking of someone else.

I saw your trade in the trade thread, where you didn't sell Thomas high. And you started a thread about selling Thomas high. Where does my logic fall apart? If I'm wrong, that's all you had to say.

Nowhere did I say I disagreed with you, btw. I said YOU didn't sell high.

I think it's a sell high. I guarantee I wouldn't be able to swing a trade like that at the end of next off-season.

EDIT:

Everyone on here gave me flack for trading David Wilson for Cordarelle Patterson straight-up last year. But hey, I'm laughing all the way to the bank now! This is kind of what makes a shark move... a shark move.

 

[Eminence]

ConnSKINS26, want to play in a Dynasty League with me?

 

[ConnSKINS26]

If you're the one who sold him for Wright and the 1.10 in the trade thread...that wasn't selling high. I think you know you made a bad deal and now you're trying to get the Shark Pool to validate the thought behind it.

Huh? Do you have to be such an internet tough guy all the time? You don't have to agree with me.

Internet tough guy? I think you're thinking of someone else.I saw your trade in the trade thread, where you didn't sell Thomas high. And you started a thread about selling Thomas high. Where does my logic fall apart? If I'm wrong, that's all you had to say.

Nowhere did I say I disagreed with you, btw. I said YOU didn't sell high.

I think it's a sell high. I guarantee I wouldn't be able to swing a trade like that at the end of next off-season.

That's not the definition of a sell high. And you really don't know if you'll be able to trade Thomas for Wright and whatever player you get at 1.10, in a year. There's no way to know that. So it's a poor guarantee.Hell, who's to say he doesn't have an equally good season, or a better season, in 2014 if Decker leaves? He's a legitimately talented player. It's not like he's a scrub who happens to play with Peyton Manning--he's not Jacob Tamme after his decent year.

 

[ILUVBEER99]

Everyone on here gave me flack for trading David Wilson for Cordarelle Patterson straight-up last year. But hey, I'm laughing all the way to the bank now! This is kind of what makes a shark move... a shark move.

No you're not, you have a thread about not getting paid.

 

[msudaisy26]

Everyone on here gave me flack for trading David Wilson for Cordarelle Patterson straight-up last year. But hey, I'm laughing all the way to the bank now! This is kind of what makes a shark move... a shark move.

No you're not, you have a thread about not getting paid.

Beer 1 Eminence 0

 

[ConnSKINS26]

If you're the one who sold him for Wright and the 1.10 in the trade thread...that wasn't selling high. I think you know you made a bad deal and now you're trying to get the Shark Pool to validate the thought behind it.

Huh? Do you have to be such an internet tough guy all the time? You don't have to agree with me.

Internet tough guy? I think you're thinking of someone else.I saw your trade in the trade thread, where you didn't sell Thomas high. And you started a thread about selling Thomas high. Where does my logic fall apart? If I'm wrong, that's all you had to say.

Nowhere did I say I disagreed with you, btw. I said YOU didn't sell high.

I think it's a sell high. I guarantee I wouldn't be able to swing a trade like that at the end of next off-season.

EDIT:

Everyone on here gave me flack for trading David Wilson for Cordarelle Patterson straight-up last year. But hey, I'm laughing all the way to the bank now! This is kind of what makes a shark move... a shark move.

When you sold Wilson for Patterson, you traded a hyped up unknown for another talented unknown, and based on the market at the time you still weren't exactly selling high.

In this thread you're advocating selling a talented player who has already produced a top-5 season, high--for an unspecified amount that the market would consider "high", I assume, despite you not selling high in practice yourself. That's not a bad idea if you can really sell "high"--but you didn't, and Thomas isn't David Wilson.

 

[Eminence]

If you're the one who sold him for Wright and the 1.10 in the trade thread...that wasn't selling high. I think you know you made a bad deal and now you're trying to get the Shark Pool to validate the thought behind it.

Huh? Do you have to be such an internet tough guy all the time? You don't have to agree with me.

Internet tough guy? I think you're thinking of someone else.I saw your trade in the trade thread, where you didn't sell Thomas high. And you started a thread about selling Thomas high. Where does my logic fall apart? If I'm wrong, that's all you had to say.

Nowhere did I say I disagreed with you, btw. I said YOU didn't sell high.

I think it's a sell high. I guarantee I wouldn't be able to swing a trade like that at the end of next off-season.

That's not the definition of a sell high. And you really don't know if you'll be able to trade Thomas for Wright and whatever player you get at 1.10, in a year. There's no way to know that.

Hell, who's to say he doesn't have an equally good season, or a better season, in 2014 if Decker leaves? He's a legitimately talented player. It's not like he's a scrub who happens to play with Peyton Manning--he's not Jacob Tamme after his decent year.

How is that not a definition of a sell high? What could possibly happen in Thomas' career that would force his value to inflate anymore than playing in the Highest Scoring Offense of all time? I've got Manning pegged for 35+ Touchdowns next year. I've got Thomas pegged for 8 TDs and 700 yards; that's production I can get somewhere else.

Regardless of whether Decker stays or not, I think Thomas' numbers are going to decrease on virtue that Peyton Manning isn't going to throw for 53 Touchdowns next year. He's talented but if Gronk or Graham played with Peyton last year, they'd be flirting with 20+ Touchdowns.

I expect an increased focus on the run-game, as well.

 

[Eminence]

If you're the one who sold him for Wright and the 1.10 in the trade thread...that wasn't selling high. I think you know you made a bad deal and now you're trying to get the Shark Pool to validate the thought behind it.

Huh? Do you have to be such an internet tough guy all the time? You don't have to agree with me.

Internet tough guy? I think you're thinking of someone else.I saw your trade in the trade thread, where you didn't sell Thomas high. And you started a thread about selling Thomas high. Where does my logic fall apart? If I'm wrong, that's all you had to say.

Nowhere did I say I disagreed with you, btw. I said YOU didn't sell high.

I think it's a sell high. I guarantee I wouldn't be able to swing a trade like that at the end of next off-season.

EDIT:

Everyone on here gave me flack for trading David Wilson for Cordarelle Patterson straight-up last year. But hey, I'm laughing all the way to the bank now! This is kind of what makes a shark move... a shark move.

When you sold Wilson for Patterson, you traded a hyped up unknown for another talented unknown, and based on the market at the time you still weren't exactly selling high.

In this thread you're advocating selling a talented player who has already produced a top-5 season, high--for an unspecified amount that the market would consider "high", I assume, despite you not selling high in practice yourself. That's not a bad idea if you can really sell "high"--but you didn't, and Thomas isn't David Wilson.

I don't get it. When would Wilson's value have been any higher? How is that not a 'sell high'? I wouldn't be able to trade Wilson for Patterson now, you guys would laugh at me if I proposed that offer.

Isn't a "sell high" the act of selling a player knowing that their value will never exceed what it currently is? Therefore, you cash-in for assets that will iether hold their value better or increase in value?

A Top 5 season where his Quarterback smashed NFL records. Thomas was along for the ride. What would you consider a sell high? Tim Wright + 1.06?

 

[ConnSKINS26]

If you're the one who sold him for Wright and the 1.10 in the trade thread...that wasn't selling high. I think you know you made a bad deal and now you're trying to get the Shark Pool to validate the thought behind it.

Huh? Do you have to be such an internet tough guy all the time? You don't have to agree with me.

Internet tough guy? I think you're thinking of someone else.I saw your trade in the trade thread, where you didn't sell Thomas high. And you started a thread about selling Thomas high. Where does my logic fall apart? If I'm wrong, that's all you had to say.

Nowhere did I say I disagreed with you, btw. I said YOU didn't sell high.

I think it's a sell high. I guarantee I wouldn't be able to swing a trade like that at the end of next off-season.

That's not the definition of a sell high. And you really don't know if you'll be able to trade Thomas for Wright and whatever player you get at 1.10, in a year. There's no way to know that.Hell, who's to say he doesn't have an equally good season, or a better season, in 2014 if Decker leaves? He's a legitimately talented player. It's not like he's a scrub who happens to play with Peyton Manning--he's not Jacob Tamme after his decent year.

How is that not a definition of a sell high? What could possibly happen in Thomas' career that would force his value to inflate anymore than playing in the Highest Scoring Offense of all time? I've got Manning pegged for 35+ Touchdowns next year. I've got Thomas pegged for 8 TDs and 700 yards; that's production I can get somewhere else.

Regardless of whether Decker stays or not, I think Thomas' numbers are going to decrease on virtue that Peyton Manning isn't going to throw for 53 Touchdowns next year. He's talented but if Gronk or Graham played with Peyton last year, they'd be flirting with 20+ Touchdowns.

I expect an increased focus on the run-game, as well.

Do you even know what the definition of a "sell high" is?

Just because a player has a career year, and then you sell him...doesn't mean YOU sold high. It just means you sold him when you should have been ABLE to sell high. You didn't. Wright and 1.10 is not a sell high, even if it was the best you could get in your particular league.

You seem to have trouble understanding what a sell high actually is.

 

[Eminence]

If you're the one who sold him for Wright and the 1.10 in the trade thread...that wasn't selling high. I think you know you made a bad deal and now you're trying to get the Shark Pool to validate the thought behind it.

Huh? Do you have to be such an internet tough guy all the time? You don't have to agree with me.

Internet tough guy? I think you're thinking of someone else.I saw your trade in the trade thread, where you didn't sell Thomas high. And you started a thread about selling Thomas high. Where does my logic fall apart? If I'm wrong, that's all you had to say.

Nowhere did I say I disagreed with you, btw. I said YOU didn't sell high.

I think it's a sell high. I guarantee I wouldn't be able to swing a trade like that at the end of next off-season.

That's not the definition of a sell high. And you really don't know if you'll be able to trade Thomas for Wright and whatever player you get at 1.10, in a year. There's no way to know that.Hell, who's to say he doesn't have an equally good season, or a better season, in 2014 if Decker leaves? He's a legitimately talented player. It's not like he's a scrub who happens to play with Peyton Manning--he's not Jacob Tamme after his decent year.

How is that not a definition of a sell high? What could possibly happen in Thomas' career that would force his value to inflate anymore than playing in the Highest Scoring Offense of all time? I've got Manning pegged for 35+ Touchdowns next year. I've got Thomas pegged for 8 TDs and 700 yards; that's production I can get somewhere else.

Regardless of whether Decker stays or not, I think Thomas' numbers are going to decrease on virtue that Peyton Manning isn't going to throw for 53 Touchdowns next year. He's talented but if Gronk or Graham played with Peyton last year, they'd be flirting with 20+ Touchdowns.

I expect an increased focus on the run-game, as well.

Do you even know what the definition of a "sell high" is?

Just because a player has a career year, and then you sell him...doesn't mean YOU sold high. It just means you sold him when you should have been ABLE to sell high. You didn't. Wright and 1.10 is not a sell high, even if it was the best you could get in your particular league.

You seem to have trouble understanding what a sell high actually is.

How am I having trouble understanding what a "sell high" is?

IE:

David Wilson was being hyped as "the next big thing" in Dynasty. I didn't think he was all that talented and a bit overrated so I sold because I thought if I didn't sell him that his value would never be quite as HIGH as the moment I sold him. Hence, "sell high".

Kind of like the stock market, if you think a stock is going to go down in value, you sell it. If you think a player's value is going to go down, you sell him.

 

[ConnSKINS26]

If you're the one who sold him for Wright and the 1.10 in the trade thread...that wasn't selling high. I think you know you made a bad deal and now you're trying to get the Shark Pool to validate the thought behind it.

Huh? Do you have to be such an internet tough guy all the time? You don't have to agree with me.

Internet tough guy? I think you're thinking of someone else.I saw your trade in the trade thread, where you didn't sell Thomas high. And you started a thread about selling Thomas high. Where does my logic fall apart? If I'm wrong, that's all you had to say.

Nowhere did I say I disagreed with you, btw. I said YOU didn't sell high.

I think it's a sell high. I guarantee I wouldn't be able to swing a trade like that at the end of next off-season.

EDIT:

Everyone on here gave me flack for trading David Wilson for Cordarelle Patterson straight-up last year. But hey, I'm laughing all the way to the bank now! This is kind of what makes a shark move... a shark move.

When you sold Wilson for Patterson, you traded a hyped up unknown for another talented unknown, and based on the market at the time you still weren't exactly selling high.In this thread you're advocating selling a talented player who has already produced a top-5 season, high--for an unspecified amount that the market would consider "high", I assume, despite you not selling high in practice yourself. That's not a bad idea if you can really sell "high"--but you didn't, and Thomas isn't David Wilson.

I don't get it. When would Wilson's value have been any higher? How is that not a 'sell high'? I wouldn't be able to trade Wilson for Patterson now, you guys would laugh at me if I proposed that offer.

Isn't a "sell high" the act of selling a player knowing that their value will never exceed what it currently is? Therefore, you cash-in for assets that will iether hold their value better or increase in value?

A Top 5 season where his Quarterback smashed NFL records. Thomas was along for the ride. What would you consider a sell high? Tim Wright + 1.06?

No, that's not what a sell high is. Thats WHY you would sell high. You'd have to actually get top value to be selling high, though.

 

[Eminence]

When will Julius Thomas be worth more? With a 38 year old Peyton Manning throwing to him? ...or a 39 year old Peyton Manning throwing to him? ...a 40 year old Peyton Manning? ...Brock Osweiler throwing to him?

 

[Eminence]

If you're the one who sold him for Wright and the 1.10 in the trade thread...that wasn't selling high. I think you know you made a bad deal and now you're trying to get the Shark Pool to validate the thought behind it.

Huh? Do you have to be such an internet tough guy all the time? You don't have to agree with me.

Internet tough guy? I think you're thinking of someone else.I saw your trade in the trade thread, where you didn't sell Thomas high. And you started a thread about selling Thomas high. Where does my logic fall apart? If I'm wrong, that's all you had to say.

Nowhere did I say I disagreed with you, btw. I said YOU didn't sell high.

I think it's a sell high. I guarantee I wouldn't be able to swing a trade like that at the end of next off-season.

EDIT:

Everyone on here gave me flack for trading David Wilson for Cordarelle Patterson straight-up last year. But hey, I'm laughing all the way to the bank now! This is kind of what makes a shark move... a shark move.

When you sold Wilson for Patterson, you traded a hyped up unknown for another talented unknown, and based on the market at the time you still weren't exactly selling high.In this thread you're advocating selling a talented player who has already produced a top-5 season, high--for an unspecified amount that the market would consider "high", I assume, despite you not selling high in practice yourself. That's not a bad idea if you can really sell "high"--but you didn't, and Thomas isn't David Wilson.

I don't get it. When would Wilson's value have been any higher? How is that not a 'sell high'? I wouldn't be able to trade Wilson for Patterson now, you guys would laugh at me if I proposed that offer.

Isn't a "sell high" the act of selling a player knowing that their value will never exceed what it currently is? Therefore, you cash-in for assets that will iether hold their value better or increase in value?

A Top 5 season where his Quarterback smashed NFL records. Thomas was along for the ride. What would you consider a sell high? Tim Wright + 1.06?

No, that's not what a sell high is. Thats WHY you would sell high. You'd have to actually get top value to be selling high, though.

But, I did get value...

 

[ConnSKINS26]

If you're the one who sold him for Wright and the 1.10 in the trade thread...that wasn't selling high. I think you know you made a bad deal and now you're trying to get the Shark Pool to validate the thought behind it.

Huh? Do you have to be such an internet tough guy all the time? You don't have to agree with me.

Internet tough guy? I think you're thinking of someone else.I saw your trade in the trade thread, where you didn't sell Thomas high. And you started a thread about selling Thomas high. Where does my logic fall apart? If I'm wrong, that's all you had to say.

Nowhere did I say I disagreed with you, btw. I said YOU didn't sell high.

I think it's a sell high. I guarantee I wouldn't be able to swing a trade like that at the end of next off-season.

That's not the definition of a sell high. And you really don't know if you'll be able to trade Thomas for Wright and whatever player you get at 1.10, in a year. There's no way to know that.Hell, who's to say he doesn't have an equally good season, or a better season, in 2014 if Decker leaves? He's a legitimately talented player. It's not like he's a scrub who happens to play with Peyton Manning--he's not Jacob Tamme after his decent year.

How is that not a definition of a sell high? What could possibly happen in Thomas' career that would force his value to inflate anymore than playing in the Highest Scoring Offense of all time? I've got Manning pegged for 35+ Touchdowns next year. I've got Thomas pegged for 8 TDs and 700 yards; that's production I can get somewhere else.

Regardless of whether Decker stays or not, I think Thomas' numbers are going to decrease on virtue that Peyton Manning isn't going to throw for 53 Touchdowns next year. He's talented but if Gronk or Graham played with Peyton last year, they'd be flirting with 20+ Touchdowns.

I expect an increased focus on the run-game, as well.

Do you even know what the definition of a "sell high" is?Just because a player has a career year, and then you sell him...doesn't mean YOU sold high. It just means you sold him when you should have been ABLE to sell high. You didn't. Wright and 1.10 is not a sell high, even if it was the best you could get in your particular league.

You seem to have trouble understanding what a sell high actually is.

How am I having trouble understanding what a "sell high" is?

IE:

David Wilson was being hyped as "the next big thing" in Dynasty. I didn't think he was all that talented and a bit overrated so I sold because I thought if I didn't sell him that his value would never be quite as HIGH as the moment I sold him. Hence, "sell high".

Kind of like the stock market, if you think a stock is going to go down in value, you sell it. If you think a player's value is going to go down, you sell him.

Would you sell that stock at a lower value than it's worth? No, you wouldn't. Because then, when you SHOULD be selling high, you'd be selling below market value.

That's what you did.

You had the TIMING of your trade right. You should have been able to sell high. But you didn't.

That's the difference.

 

[Eminence]

If you're the one who sold him for Wright and the 1.10 in the trade thread...that wasn't selling high. I think you know you made a bad deal and now you're trying to get the Shark Pool to validate the thought behind it.

Huh? Do you have to be such an internet tough guy all the time? You don't have to agree with me.

Internet tough guy? I think you're thinking of someone else.I saw your trade in the trade thread, where you didn't sell Thomas high. And you started a thread about selling Thomas high. Where does my logic fall apart? If I'm wrong, that's all you had to say.

Nowhere did I say I disagreed with you, btw. I said YOU didn't sell high.

I think it's a sell high. I guarantee I wouldn't be able to swing a trade like that at the end of next off-season.

That's not the definition of a sell high. And you really don't know if you'll be able to trade Thomas for Wright and whatever player you get at 1.10, in a year. There's no way to know that.Hell, who's to say he doesn't have an equally good season, or a better season, in 2014 if Decker leaves? He's a legitimately talented player. It's not like he's a scrub who happens to play with Peyton Manning--he's not Jacob Tamme after his decent year.

How is that not a definition of a sell high? What could possibly happen in Thomas' career that would force his value to inflate anymore than playing in the Highest Scoring Offense of all time? I've got Manning pegged for 35+ Touchdowns next year. I've got Thomas pegged for 8 TDs and 700 yards; that's production I can get somewhere else.

Regardless of whether Decker stays or not, I think Thomas' numbers are going to decrease on virtue that Peyton Manning isn't going to throw for 53 Touchdowns next year. He's talented but if Gronk or Graham played with Peyton last year, they'd be flirting with 20+ Touchdowns.

I expect an increased focus on the run-game, as well.

Do you even know what the definition of a "sell high" is?Just because a player has a career year, and then you sell him...doesn't mean YOU sold high. It just means you sold him when you should have been ABLE to sell high. You didn't. Wright and 1.10 is not a sell high, even if it was the best you could get in your particular league.

You seem to have trouble understanding what a sell high actually is.

How am I having trouble understanding what a "sell high" is?

IE:

David Wilson was being hyped as "the next big thing" in Dynasty. I didn't think he was all that talented and a bit overrated so I sold because I thought if I didn't sell him that his value would never be quite as HIGH as the moment I sold him. Hence, "sell high".

Kind of like the stock market, if you think a stock is going to go down in value, you sell it. If you think a player's value is going to go down, you sell him.

Would you sell that stock at a lower value than it's worth? No, you wouldn't. Because then, when you SHOULD be selling high, you'd be selling below market value.

That's what you did.

You had the TIMING of your trade right. You should have been able to sell high. But you didn't.

That's the difference.

Could you explain why you think Julius Thomas is worth more than the 1.10 and Tim Wright? I think it's pretty even.

 

[ConnSKINS26]

When will Julius Thomas be worth more? With a 38 year old Peyton Manning throwing to him? ...or a 39 year old Peyton Manning throwing to him? ...a 40 year old Peyton Manning? ...Brock Osweiler throwing to him?

Are you dense? It's not about Thomas being WORTH more. You may be right, he might never be worth more than he is today. It's about what you actually trade him for. It doesn't matter if he IS a sell high (like I said, you could be right about that) if you don't actually sell him high.

 

[MoveToSkypager]

Kind of like the stock market, if you think a stock is going to go down in value, you sell it. If you think a player's value is going to go down, you sell him.

I don't have much experience with stocks (maybe you can give me some advice). It sure didn't seem like you sold high, since you sold Thomas for cheaper than you could have.

 

[Eminence]

When will Julius Thomas be worth more? With a 38 year old Peyton Manning throwing to him? ...or a 39 year old Peyton Manning throwing to him? ...a 40 year old Peyton Manning? ...Brock Osweiler throwing to him?

Are you dense? It's not about Thomas being WORTH more. You may be right, he might never be worth more than he is today. It's about what you actually trade him for. It doesn't matter if he IS a sell high (like I said, you could be right about that) if you don't actually sell him high.

But I did sell him high. Just because you undervalue the 1.10 and Tim Wright doesn't mean it isn't fair value. It just means you're wrong. I lapped that trade up like a Kitten and milk. Would you prefer I traded Thomas for a guy who ended up being overvalued but appeared to be a good trade in the meantime?

 

[ConnSKINS26]

If you're the one who sold him for Wright and the 1.10 in the trade thread...that wasn't selling high. I think you know you made a bad deal and now you're trying to get the Shark Pool to validate the thought behind it.

Huh? Do you have to be such an internet tough guy all the time? You don't have to agree with me.

Internet tough guy? I think you're thinking of someone else.I saw your trade in the trade thread, where you didn't sell Thomas high. And you started a thread about selling Thomas high. Where does my logic fall apart? If I'm wrong, that's all you had to say.

Nowhere did I say I disagreed with you, btw. I said YOU didn't sell high.

I think it's a sell high. I guarantee I wouldn't be able to swing a trade like that at the end of next off-season.

That's not the definition of a sell high. And you really don't know if you'll be able to trade Thomas for Wright and whatever player you get at 1.10, in a year. There's no way to know that.Hell, who's to say he doesn't have an equally good season, or a better season, in 2014 if Decker leaves? He's a legitimately talented player. It's not like he's a scrub who happens to play with Peyton Manning--he's not Jacob Tamme after his decent year.

How is that not a definition of a sell high? What could possibly happen in Thomas' career that would force his value to inflate anymore than playing in the Highest Scoring Offense of all time? I've got Manning pegged for 35+ Touchdowns next year. I've got Thomas pegged for 8 TDs and 700 yards; that's production I can get somewhere else.

Regardless of whether Decker stays or not, I think Thomas' numbers are going to decrease on virtue that Peyton Manning isn't going to throw for 53 Touchdowns next year. He's talented but if Gronk or Graham played with Peyton last year, they'd be flirting with 20+ Touchdowns.

I expect an increased focus on the run-game, as well.

Do you even know what the definition of a "sell high" is?Just because a player has a career year, and then you sell him...doesn't mean YOU sold high. It just means you sold him when you should have been ABLE to sell high. You didn't. Wright and 1.10 is not a sell high, even if it was the best you could get in your particular league.

You seem to have trouble understanding what a sell high actually is.

How am I having trouble understanding what a "sell high" is?

IE:

David Wilson was being hyped as "the next big thing" in Dynasty. I didn't think he was all that talented and a bit overrated so I sold because I thought if I didn't sell him that his value would never be quite as HIGH as the moment I sold him. Hence, "sell high".

Kind of like the stock market, if you think a stock is going to go down in value, you sell it. If you think a player's value is going to go down, you sell him.

Would you sell that stock at a lower value than it's worth? No, you wouldn't. Because then, when you SHOULD be selling high, you'd be selling below market value.That's what you did.

You had the TIMING of your trade right. You should have been able to sell high. But you didn't.

That's the difference.

Could you explain why you think Julius Thomas is worth more than the 1.10 and Tim Wright? I think it's pretty even.

Because a late 1st and a TE2 isn't selling high when you look at what Thomas is worth to some owners right now. I don't have a problem with it if you're happy with what you got and couldn't do better in your specific league, I just have a problem with you calling it a sell high.

 

[Eminence]

Timothy Wright: 65 Catches / 788 Yards / 12TD

Julius Thomas: 54 Catches / 571 Yards / 5TD

The Broncos threw for 55 Touchdowns. Thomas accounted for 21% of them.

The Buccaneers threw for 22 Touchdowns. Wright accounted for 22% of them.

Wright caught 11 less passes in 131 less attempts. I think it's a value play and that Wright will probably finish with 10 - 15% less production than Thomas next season. The 1.10 makes up for that margin.

 

[ConnSKINS26]

When will Julius Thomas be worth more? With a 38 year old Peyton Manning throwing to him? ...or a 39 year old Peyton Manning throwing to him? ...a 40 year old Peyton Manning? ...Brock Osweiler throwing to him?

Are you dense? It's not about Thomas being WORTH more. You may be right, he might never be worth more than he is today. It's about what you actually trade him for. It doesn't matter if he IS a sell high (like I said, you could be right about that) if you don't actually sell him high.

But I did sell him high. Just because you undervalue the 1.10 and Tim Wright doesn't mean it isn't fair value. It just means you're wrong. I lapped that trade up like a Kitten and milk. Would you prefer I traded Thomas for a guy who ended up being overvalued but appeared to be a good trade in the meantime?

So then we've confirmed that you don't know what a sell high actually is. That's a start.

 

[Eminence]

When will Julius Thomas be worth more? With a 38 year old Peyton Manning throwing to him? ...or a 39 year old Peyton Manning throwing to him? ...a 40 year old Peyton Manning? ...Brock Osweiler throwing to him?

Are you dense? It's not about Thomas being WORTH more. You may be right, he might never be worth more than he is today. It's about what you actually trade him for. It doesn't matter if he IS a sell high (like I said, you could be right about that) if you don't actually sell him high.

But I did sell him high. Just because you undervalue the 1.10 and Tim Wright doesn't mean it isn't fair value. It just means you're wrong. I lapped that trade up like a Kitten and milk. Would you prefer I traded Thomas for a guy who ended up being overvalued but appeared to be a good trade in the meantime?

So then we've confirmed that you don't know what a sell high actually is. That's a start.

I don't understand. What do you suppose would be a "sell high" for Thomas? Wright + 1.02? Who in their right mind would go for that? I play with competent people in my league.

 

[ConnSKINS26]

Timothy Wright: 65 Catches / 788 Yards / 12TD

Julius Thomas: 54 Catches / 571 Yards / 5TD

The Broncos threw for 55 Touchdowns. Thomas accounted for 21% of them.

The Buccaneers threw for 22 Touchdowns. Wright accounted for 22% of them.

Wright caught 11 less passes in 131 less attempts. I think it's a value play and that Wright will probably finish with 10 - 15% less production than Thomas next season. The 1.10 makes up for that margin.

Its still not a sell high. Selling high is a term that directly relates to generally accepted market values.

 

[Eminence]

Since we've established you don't think Wright + 1.10 is a sell high. Please tell me at which point you think it becomes one.

Wright + 1.10
Wright + 1.09
Wright + 1.08
Wright + 1.07

Wright + 1.06
Wright + 1.05
Wright + 1.04
Wright + 1.03
Wright + 1.02
Wright + 1.01

...?

 

[MoveToSkypager]

;lmao:

This thread rules.

Maybe selling high means making a trade after a few bong rips. That explains the Julius Thomas for Tim Wright and the 1.10.

 

[Eminence]

;lmao:

This thread rules.

Maybe selling high means making a trade after a few bong rips. That explains the Julius Thomas for Tim Wright and the 1.10.

Read the post above this one, same question.

 

[ConnSKINS26]

When will Julius Thomas be worth more? With a 38 year old Peyton Manning throwing to him? ...or a 39 year old Peyton Manning throwing to him? ...a 40 year old Peyton Manning? ...Brock Osweiler throwing to him?

Are you dense? It's not about Thomas being WORTH more. You may be right, he might never be worth more than he is today. It's about what you actually trade him for. It doesn't matter if he IS a sell high (like I said, you could be right about that) if you don't actually sell him high.

But I did sell him high. Just because you undervalue the 1.10 and Tim Wright doesn't mean it isn't fair value. It just means you're wrong. I lapped that trade up like a Kitten and milk. Would you prefer I traded Thomas for a guy who ended up being overvalued but appeared to be a good trade in the meantime?

So then we've confirmed that you don't know what a sell high actually is. That's a start.

I don't understand. What do you suppose would be a "sell high" for Thomas? Wright + 1.02? Who in their right mind would go for that? I play with competent people in my league.

I'm sure you do. Which is why one of them was happy to trade 1.10 and Wright for Thomas.

It doesn't matter what I think a sell high for Thomas would be. It matters what the market says--and the dynasty market generally values Thomas higher than what you sold him for--so even if it turns out to be a good trade, it still wasnt a "sell high" at the time.

 

[Eminence]

When will Julius Thomas be worth more? With a 38 year old Peyton Manning throwing to him? ...or a 39 year old Peyton Manning throwing to him? ...a 40 year old Peyton Manning? ...Brock Osweiler throwing to him?

Are you dense? It's not about Thomas being WORTH more. You may be right, he might never be worth more than he is today. It's about what you actually trade him for. It doesn't matter if he IS a sell high (like I said, you could be right about that) if you don't actually sell him high.

But I did sell him high. Just because you undervalue the 1.10 and Tim Wright doesn't mean it isn't fair value. It just means you're wrong. I lapped that trade up like a Kitten and milk. Would you prefer I traded Thomas for a guy who ended up being overvalued but appeared to be a good trade in the meantime?

So then we've confirmed that you don't know what a sell high actually is. That's a start.

I don't understand. What do you suppose would be a "sell high" for Thomas? Wright + 1.02? Who in their right mind would go for that? I play with competent people in my league.

I'm sure you do. Which is why one of them was happy to trade 1.10 and Wright for Thomas.

It doesn't matter what I think a sell high for Thomas would be. It matters what the market says--and the dynasty market generally values Thomas higher than what you sold him for--so even if it turns out to be a good trade, it still wasnt a "sell high" at the time.

It dictates higher but you fail to say anything concrete? What would be a sell high? Wright + 1.05? Wright + 1.04? Come on man, if you're telling me mine wasn't a sell high; tell me what would have been. Since you're so sure of yourself, that is.

On Timothy Wright,

"In half-PPR he finished the season as the #14 TE and in weeks 8-17 he was the #5 scoring TE. All this in his rookie season."

 

[MoveToSkypager]

;lmao:

This thread rules.

Maybe selling high means making a trade after a few bong rips. That explains the Julius Thomas for Tim Wright and the 1.10.

Read the post above this one, same question.

How high am I at the time of the trade?

 

[ConnSKINS26]

When will Julius Thomas be worth more? With a 38 year old Peyton Manning throwing to him? ...or a 39 year old Peyton Manning throwing to him? ...a 40 year old Peyton Manning? ...Brock Osweiler throwing to him?

Are you dense? It's not about Thomas being WORTH more. You may be right, he might never be worth more than he is today. It's about what you actually trade him for. It doesn't matter if he IS a sell high (like I said, you could be right about that) if you don't actually sell him high.

But I did sell him high. Just because you undervalue the 1.10 and Tim Wright doesn't mean it isn't fair value. It just means you're wrong. I lapped that trade up like a Kitten and milk. Would you prefer I traded Thomas for a guy who ended up being overvalued but appeared to be a good trade in the meantime?

So then we've confirmed that you don't know what a sell high actually is. That's a start.

I don't understand. What do you suppose would be a "sell high" for Thomas? Wright + 1.02? Who in their right mind would go for that? I play with competent people in my league.

I'm sure you do. Which is why one of them was happy to trade 1.10 and Wright for Thomas.

It doesn't matter what I think a sell high for Thomas would be. It matters what the market says--and the dynasty market generally values Thomas higher than what you sold him for--so even if it turns out to be a good trade, it still wasnt a "sell high" at the time.

It dictates higher but you fail to say anything concrete? What would be a sell high? Wright + 1.05? Wright + 1.04? Come on man, if you're telling me mine wasn't a sell high; tell me what would have been. Since you're so sure of yourself, that is.

On Timothy Wright,

"In half-PPR he finished the season as the #14 TE and in weeks 8-17 he was the #5 scoring TE. All this in his rookie season."

A mid-1st plus Wright would be an alright price. That would be closer to market value, which is what dictates whether a trade is a "sell high" or not.

 

[Nugget]

You may have sold Wilson and Thomas at a high point, but you sold them for below percieved market value. Each league is unique, and you need to find a trade partner, but the consesus is you could have gotten more for Thomas at this point. If people percieve him to be the #3 TE in dynasty, why trade him for someone in the 15-20 range and a late first? You left money on the table.

 

[EBF]

He's a weak TE5 on my dynasty rankings behind Graham, Gronk, Cameron, and Eifert. I'm not really a fan at his expected cost.

 

[Eminence]

You may have sold Wilson and Thomas at a high point, but you sold them for below percieved market value. Each league is unique, and you need to find a trade partner, but the consesus is you could have gotten more for Thomas at this point. If people percieve him to be the #3 TE in dynasty, why trade him for someone in the 15-20 range and a late first? You left money on the table.

Does it help that this is a contract Dynasty League?

Julius Thomas (1 Year)

for

Timothy Wright (1 Year)

1.10 (2 - 4 Years)

It's pretty likely that Thomas ends up back in the FA pool at the end of the season anyway. I wouldn't want to use my Franchise Tag on him with an aging Manning and would rather roll the dice with a Rookie in a good situation.

 

[msudaisy26]

When will Julius Thomas be worth more? With a 38 year old Peyton Manning throwing to him? ...or a 39 year old Peyton Manning throwing to him? ...a 40 year old Peyton Manning? ...Brock Osweiler throwing to him?

Are you dense? It's not about Thomas being WORTH more. You may be right, he might never be worth more than he is today. It's about what you actually trade him for. It doesn't matter if he IS a sell high (like I said, you could be right about that) if you don't actually sell him high.

But I did sell him high. Just because you undervalue the 1.10 and Tim Wright doesn't mean it isn't fair value. It just means you're wrong. I lapped that trade up like a Kitten and milk. Would you prefer I traded Thomas for a guy who ended up being overvalued but appeared to be a good trade in the meantime?

So then we've confirmed that you don't know what a sell high actually is. That's a start.

I don't understand. What do you suppose would be a "sell high" for Thomas? Wright + 1.02? Who in their right mind would go for that? I play with competent people in my league.

I'm sure you do. Which is why one of them was happy to trade 1.10 and Wright for Thomas.

It doesn't matter what I think a sell high for Thomas would be. It matters what the market says--and the dynasty market generally values Thomas higher than what you sold him for--so even if it turns out to be a good trade, it still wasnt a "sell high" at the time.

It dictates higher but you fail to say anything concrete? What would be a sell high? Wright + 1.05? Wright + 1.04? Come on man, if you're telling me mine wasn't a sell high; tell me what would have been. Since you're so sure of yourself, that is.

On Timothy Wright,

"In half-PPR he finished the season as the #14 TE and in weeks 8-17 he was the #5 scoring TE. All this in his rookie season."

I already told you selling high would have been a mid first 4 to 8 and a better tight end prospect, you could even change that to a receiver prospect like Hunter, Wright, Randle etc. A lot of us agree with you about selling high, but we disagree with what you got as selling high. Most of us feel you took slightly less then market value.

If Wright was such a great player then why have we seen links and reports like this since the season ended?

Quote

ESPN Bucs blogger Pat Yasinskas says the Bucs need to upgrade at tight end.
Converted wideout Tim Wright was a pleasant surprise in 2013, finishing with 54 catches for 571 yards and five touchdowns as an undrafted rookie. But he's a major liability as a blocker and his college coach, Greg Schiano, is gone. New boss Lovie Smith will likely be on the hunt for a more well-rounded tight end, allowing him to leave Wright in a strict passing-down role. He's a sell-high candidate in Dynasty formats.

Source: ESPN.com

 

[ghostguy123]

You didn't sell high because almost any owner with Wright and pick 10 would give it for Thomas.

Selling high does actually entail getting something close to his max value, not that.

It isn't bad", but it sure as hell isnt "selling high".

 

[ghostguy123]

You may have sold Wilson and Thomas at a high point, but you sold them for below percieved market value. Each league is unique, and you need to find a trade partner, but the consesus is you could have gotten more for Thomas at this point. If people percieve him to be the #3 TE in dynasty, why trade him for someone in the 15-20 range and a late first? You left money on the table.

Does it help that this is a contract Dynasty League?

Julius Thomas (1 Year)

for

Timothy Wright (1 Year)

1.10 (2 - 4 Years)

It's pretty likely that Thomas ends up back in the FA pool at the end of the season anyway. I wouldn't want to use my Franchise Tag on him with an aging Manning and would rather roll the dice with a Rookie in a good situation.

So you wait until 40 posts to say Thomas only has one year left on his contract for you...................lol. Yes it matters. Generally league structure and contract situation DOES matter.

But we definitely did establish you don't know what selling high is.

You have recognized which players are good sell high candidates, but the execution of it you are not understanding.

 

[jeaton6]

No time to read whole thread so not sure if this has already been stated but Thomas missed 2 full games this year. Pretty sure he was knocked out of one or two as well. So, having missed 8+ quarters or close to 15% of total games I'm not sure why you believe he can't repeat this performance. Yes the TDs likely won't be repeated but I don't see any reason why he can't up his receptions and yardage. In particular since he is likely to see increased targets next year. 10% manning yards regression, 20% TD regression + 15% more JT games plus 5% more targets equals more receptions and yardage. In PPR he should match next year easily.

 

[ConnSKINS26]

ConnSKINS26, want to play in a Dynasty League with me?

I honestly considered telling you I'd put you on the waiting list for one of my leagues if I have to replace anyone next offseason, because I don't think you're incompetent, you seem like you'd be active, I wouldn't mind winning your seed money, and it would be entertaining. But honestly, I don't like drama in my leagues and it follows you. And I mostly play with a certain network of owners in my dynasty leagues, you're kind of an unknown. Sorry.

 

[ConnSKINS26]

You may have sold Wilson and Thomas at a high point, but you sold them for below percieved market value. Each league is unique, and you need to find a trade partner, but the consesus is you could have gotten more for Thomas at this point. If people percieve him to be the #3 TE in dynasty, why trade him for someone in the 15-20 range and a late first? You left money on the table.

Does it help that this is a contract Dynasty League?Julius Thomas (1 Year)

forTimothy Wright (1 Year)1.10 (2 - 4 Years)

It's pretty likely that Thomas ends up back in the FA pool at the end of the season anyway. I wouldn't want to use my Franchise Tag on him with an aging Manning and would rather roll the dice with a Rookie in a good situation.

So you wait until 40 posts to say Thomas only has one year left on his contract for you...................lol. Yes it matters. Generally league structure and contract situation DOES matter.

But we definitely did establish you don't know what selling high is.

You have recognized which players are good sell high candidates, but the execution of it you are not understanding.

This, thank you. At least it's obvious that literally everyone else in the Shark Pool understands the concept of selling high.

 

[Terpman22]

Considering Wright will not be a tight end in 3 years, you sold low. I am not sure why you think this is Thomas' ceiling.