Observation 13

If you haven’t read the previous two observations, please scroll down and check them out. Full disclosure: DT has had a great career, I have to admit this. For reasons unimportant to this investigation he has never been one of my guys and I don’t have him in any leagues.

When looking at them in a vacuum and just choosing sides there was about a 60/40 split. Then again we looked at giving the 1.03 for DT and it was pretty even. We now see some more discrepancy in the two sides with the final question:

image

So what do we know? We know most people will not give up DT for the 1.03 alone. We also know that only a slight majority would give the 1.03 for DT. We also know over 60% chose DT over the 1.03 when posed against each other. This all leads to DT having slightly more value in a vacuum, which should not be too surprising. We live outside of a vacuum though, or at least I hope you do, so let us go down the rabbit hole. (If you’d rather not, just scroll to the end in bold. I’m a “choose your own adventure” kind of guy.)

Depending on where you look at ADP data, these two pieces are about a round apart with DT in the second round and the 1.03 in the third. Going along with ‘the change in aging assets after a draft’ from my previous post, DT is currently 28 years old and the 1.03 itself does not carry an age. Treadwell is 20 and Doctson is 23 giving between a five and eight year difference to DT. Here is some info on DT from Rotoworld.com

image

The asset available at 1.03 has a number of possibilities but is a relative unknown. (I’d like to point out, though we know what DT has done we do not know what he will do.)

This has to be part of why twice as many people answered “no” to giving DT for the 1.03 than “yes”. There are two schools of thought when it comes to vets at age 28. One says they have three to four years of top production left which can be used to win championships. The other says their best years are most likely behind them so get out before they decline. Generally an “unknown” is a little scary and carries more risk. Those wanting to play it safe will usually choose the “known” quantity.

A small part I believe factoring into this is how the ’16 class is being viewed. There has been a lot of talk about how “underwhelming” the prospects are and how next year looks better. When comparing anything to the last two classes, it’s going to look like a downer. I personally think people are too down on this class.

The final contributor and common thread through all of this is roster construction through the two trains of thought I mentioned earlier. Digging into ADP the owner who took DT in the second mostly took a younger but proven WR like Evans or Watkins then in the third it goes all over with either a young WR like Moncrief or even Luck or a RB. This leads me to believe it is a more “win now” approach to drafting. With MFL down I did not see how things went last year but I imagine it was pretty close to the same. A win now team is going to be less willing to sell DT for an unknown especially if they made it to the playoffs this past year. Having taken DT with a second round pick makes him a core asset and taking a player in a “down class” would feel like a loss. And even still, barely over 50% would even give up the 1.03 for DT.

The owner taking the third rookie is more of a wild card. It looks like they average being in the nine spot but the overall pick of 1.03 ranges from 25th to 43rd. This is an early third out to a mid fourth and is much harder to predict. The 1.03 side of this is really more important from the perspective of past ADP though. If an owner earner 1.03, they will treat it differently than if they received it in trade.

The 1.01 is a little easier to predict as it is mostly a late second rounder paired with Hopkins and in some instances the 1.02 or 1.03 as the third round picks. This discovery leads me to believe those owners are riskier players. They are probably looking to ensure what they believe is a longer future of winning without having to move those assets because of an age decline, often labeled “agists”.

It looks to me there is a better than decent chance an owner in your league will ask for more than DT or more than 1.03 in a trade between the two. Pay attention to how other owners build their rosters and why they have their draft picks, it can be taken advantage of if you are paying attention.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s