McFadden or the 1.1? (1 Viewer)

[obxlegends]

Assume for a minute you're not looking to acquire more rookie draft picks. What would have more value -- trading the 1.1 in a Dynasty Rookie Draft or drafting McFadden and then fielding offers as the summer goes along for veteran players? I'm basically looking for which option from a psychology standpoint (do people value the option of the 1.1 or will McFadden's value on say August 15th hold more value?) makes more sense.

 

[KellysHeroes]

Trading the Pick right before your Draft is the best value... once theres a name, it loses value... kind of like driving the car off the lot.

 

[Maroney=Speed]

Trading the Pick right before your Draft is the best value... once theres a name, it loses value... kind of like driving the car off the lot.

I Think we agree on just about everything. So it goes without saying You know your stuff.

 

[B Maverick]

giving someone the choice of whoever they want of the rookies is more valuable then mcfadden. As evident by the debates on this board, not everyone is on the mcfadden wagon so you would be limiting your field.

 

[BigTex]

Assume for a minute you're not looking to acquire more rookie draft picks. What would have more value -- trading the 1.1 in a Dynasty Rookie Draft or drafting McFadden and then fielding offers as the summer goes along for veteran players? I'm basically looking for which option from a psychology standpoint (do people value the option of the 1.1 or will McFadden's value on say August 15th hold more value?) makes more sense.

The once proud owner of the 1.1 pick is now the prouder owner of AD.

 

[Mr. Peterson]

Trading the Pick right before your Draft is the best value... once theres a name, it loses value... kind of like driving the car off the lot.

Yeah, someone used that analogy before and I liked it.

 

[jurb26]

giving someone the choice of whoever they want of the rookies is more valuable then mcfadden. As evident by the debates on this board, not everyone is on the mcfadden wagon so you would be limiting your field.

I think the question is designed to assume that McFadden's value with go up between the time of the draft and Aug 15th. I don't know how we are supposed to factor that in, but I think that was kind of what the OP was implying.

 

[B Maverick]

giving someone the choice of whoever they want of the rookies is more valuable then mcfadden. As evident by the debates on this board, not everyone is on the mcfadden wagon so you would be limiting your field.

I think the question is designed to assume that McFadden's value with go up between the time of the draft and Aug 15th. I don't know how we are supposed to factor that in, but I think that was kind of what the OP was implying.

That may be the case, but its only if he goes to a clearcut starting spot. If he ends up in Dallas, KC (i know these spots are unlikely) or someplace else where he could spit time, his value can go down. My point was that if he trades the 1.1 pick, there is more value since they can choose any of the 3 with the best spot. If he drafts McFadden its not a given that the value goes up as he hopes. If he ends up in a good situation then his value COULD go up. Its a risk either way.

 

[Gamma1210]

giving someone the choice of whoever they want of the rookies is more valuable then mcfadden. As evident by the debates on this board, not everyone is on the mcfadden wagon so you would be limiting your field.

I think the question is designed to assume that McFadden's value with go up between the time of the draft and Aug 15th. I don't know how we are supposed to factor that in, but I think that was kind of what the OP was implying.

That may be the case, but its only if he goes to a clearcut starting spot. If he ends up in Dallas, KC (i know these spots are unlikely) or someplace else where he could spit time, his value can go down. My point was that if he trades the 1.1 pick, there is more value since they can choose any of the 3 with the best spot. If he drafts McFadden its not a given that the value goes up as he hopes. If he ends up in a good situation then his value COULD go up. Its a risk either way.

It seems like you are saying the 1.1 has the most value now, before the NFL draft. I don't think this is true, I would even say McFadden is more valuable then the 1.1 because there will be lots of fluff articles about him and people will be looking for the next ADP.For all other picks, I think the pick is more valuable then the player. I just think the 1.1 is different because people are looking for the next star.

 

[King of the Wolfies]

I dont think there is an answer to this question. If McFadden goes somewhere its not RBBC, then he and the 1.01 have the same value. If he goes to a RBBC, then the pick has greater value. personally, I'd rather have the pick and adapt to the draft.

 

[Jeff Tefertiller]

In a year where there are at least two solid choices for the 1.01, the pick has more value. One or both will land in a good spot. To me, this is what makes the pick worth more.

 

[rzrback77]

In a year where there are at least two solid choices for the 1.01, the pick has more value. One or both will land in a good spot. To me, this is what makes the pick worth more.

Nothing against DMac, but when there are some folks out there that prefer Mendenhall or even Stewart, keeping options open provides more opportunity. I still think that DMac is the choice though.

 

[Gamma1210]

In a year where there are at least two solid choices for the 1.01, the pick has more value. One or both will land in a good spot. To me, this is what makes the pick worth more.

Nothing against DMac, but when there are some folks out there that prefer Mendenhall or even Stewart, keeping options open provides more opportunity. I still think that DMac is the choice though.

Looks like I am alone on this one. If I liked DMac, I wouldnt trade for the pick yet, I would hope he goes to NYJ or OAK and that Mendenhall goes to DET so that I could trade for the 1.02 for less and either get the guy I want (DMac) in a "bad" situation or as a backup, I get Mendenhall. Look at last year when there was even less arguement about the 1.01, but some people still took Lynch there because he was going to start sooner.

 

[cstu]

In a year where there are at least two solid choices for the 1.01, the pick has more value. One or both will land in a good spot. To me, this is what makes the pick worth more.

Nothing against DMac, but when there are some folks out there that prefer Mendenhall or even Stewart, keeping options open provides more opportunity. I still think that DMac is the choice though.

Looks like I am alone on this one. If I liked DMac, I wouldnt trade for the pick yet, I would hope he goes to NYJ or OAK and that Mendenhall goes to DET so that I could trade for the 1.02 for less and either get the guy I want (DMac) in a "bad" situation or as a backup, I get Mendenhall. Look at last year when there was even less arguement about the 1.01, but some people still took Lynch there because he was going to start sooner.

McFadden to the Jets is a great situation with their new OL. The Raiders, not so much due to the number of backs they have, but the OL looks decent. I don't think he's going to OAK though.If the Lions take Mendenhall then that would be bad as well since it would just be a ploy...To answer the question, the pick is almost always worth more than the player.