This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
It's debatable. And it is counteracted by the fact that the 1st will be worth more OTC than it is today. The appreciation of the Y+1 1st is a given. The appreciation of the player is determined by his success, market forces, and random stuff you can't control like injury.
...or in this case the only team that had Mason.You're right, you're gambling that the talent you're expecting to get in Mason, and get it for an extra year, is worth more to you than the mythical player that you may not even GET next year.Concept Coop said:You're gambling that you'll like Mason more than any one player on the board at 1.XX--at least 6 spots higher than this pick, in a loaded RB class. I don't like those odds.Andy Dufresne said:But it does for those who drafted him in the first round this year too.
If you believe Mason to be a 1st round talent, it doesn't matter what year the pick comes from.
On top of that, you're willingly paying double his market value, as dictated by your league. I have a hard time believing that your league let him fall to 2.06, but won't move him for anything less than a first rounder.
As for the bolded, you know that's not true either. The rule of thumb in just about every league is that a pick in round X this year is approximately worth round x-1 for next year. And, it's not like you have the time to go to every team in the league and get the best deal. You can only deal with the teams that engage you.
No. In this case, Mason hadn't been drafted yet....or in this case the only team that had Mason.You're right, you're gambling that the talent you're expecting to get in Mason, and get it for an extra year, is worth more to you than the mythical player that you may not even GET next year.Concept Coop said:You're gambling that you'll like Mason more than any one player on the board at 1.XX--at least 6 spots higher than this pick, in a loaded RB class. I don't like those odds.Andy Dufresne said:But it does for those who drafted him in the first round this year too.
If you believe Mason to be a 1st round talent, it doesn't matter what year the pick comes from.
On top of that, you're willingly paying double his market value, as dictated by your league. I have a hard time believing that your league let him fall to 2.06, but won't move him for anything less than a first rounder.
As for the bolded, you know that's not true either. The rule of thumb in just about every league is that a pick in round X this year is approximately worth round x-1 for next year. And, it's not like you have the time to go to every team in the league and get the best deal. You can only deal with the teams that engage you.
If we're relying on Mason's 2014 production--I think we're compounding our mistake. If 2014 production is the goal, I have to think there are more certain options, at every price range.
Well that's where a lot of this argument hinges, doesn't it? If this were Sankey or Hyde then this conversation would be a lot different, wouldn't it?
My argument is not based on the individual asset, but the practice as a model. As I've said, we all have our guys and we've all done it. But putting yourself in a better position to land the next bargain (Mason at 2.06, Allen at 2.0X, etc) is best practice, IMO; not taking out a loan (with interest) to buy assets at full price.
According to MFL ADP he is worth a 1st rounder.
Trading a future first rounder for the 2.06 is a bad deal. Mason at 2.06 in 2014 is not the only example of our value not matching market value. It happens many times in every draft, every year. Rather than paying interest (1st for 2.06) for the right to pay fair price (1st for Mason, who we feel is a 1st round prospect) -- we should be looking for value. Mason at 2.06 is that. Mason for a future 1st is not. If we can't get Mason for less than he's worth, we should look elsewhere.Okay. Now I have no idea what you're talking about.
Sorry. Can't agree with that.Trading a future first rounder for the 2.06 is a bad deal. Mason at 2.06 in 2014 is not the only example of our value not matching market value. It happens many times in every draft, every year. Rather than paying interest (1st for 2.06) for the right to pay fair price (1st for Mason, who we feel is a 1st round prospect) -- we should be looking for value. Mason at 2.06 is that. Mason for a future 1st is not. If we can't get Mason for less than he's worth, we should look elsewhere.Okay. Now I have no idea what you're talking about.
Totally get this argument, but I also don't agree.Trading a future first rounder for the 2.06 is a bad deal. Mason at 2.06 in 2014 is not the only example of our value not matching market value. It happens many times in every draft, every year. Rather than paying interest (1st for 2.06) for the right to pay fair price (1st for Mason, who we feel is a 1st round prospect) -- we should be looking for value. Mason at 2.06 is that. Mason for a future 1st is not. If we can't get Mason for less than he's worth, we should look elsewhere.Okay. Now I have no idea what you're talking about.
It's a good point. The pick will appreciate safely for the year, and the pick may land high. But if you are in window now, and expect the pick at the end of the round, buying an end of the 1st talent this year, can pay off next year. You just assume some risk. Guys who bought Stacy or Ellington last year for a 2014 1.8 - 1.12 are much happier now. Although the guy who bough Franklin is not. The thing is I think you still have a project RB at the end of a future rd, I think it can make sense to start that project early. Sure you can hold the pick and trade it for a vet after it matures and that may be the safest route, I just don't think it's the only one.
I just think if your looking at project RBs it can make sense to start them earlier. I think any RB at the end of the round will probably not walk into the best situation, and you will have to wait a year or so for things to clear one way or the other.
Its not that bad but I like Patterson more than Ball and in nonPPR they maybe even for me but then Tate is likely worth more than 2.02/3.02 as well in a nonPPR.
Reed scares me too much with his concussion history. It could work out well for you though
It could cost you if you have some injuries, but I like it given you probably wouldn't have started them except bye weeks.
I like Kelce and have been getting Super Mart, Richardson, Bridgewater and Bortles with those picks so I'd take that side.
I still have false hope that TRich puts it together
It also opened up another roster spot for the guy getting the first, allowing him to hold onto one other player (rosters have to be at 31 prior to upcoming rookie draft - IDP league). That player is likely a 3rd DB or something similar, but it is something.
Yeah I agree. Neither DJax nor Maclin were in my starting lineup every week. I've already seen 2 reports from OTAs that Maclin has tweaked his hamstring and then did something to his knee yesterday. I'm just worried he won't make it through the season. I like DJax, but having Garcon already, it would be tough to play both of them at the same time plus Jordan Reed. Needed to diversify my team a bit.
Not in the leagues I'm playing apparently lol. I trade sending Reed for 1.12/2.12 and got told I wasn't even close.Concept Coop said:
Same league
I will take JT here
Think I would ride Witten out at this price in this format but getting your guy is always a good trade
What kind of roster sizes are we dealing with?
