AKM311 Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 I did a search, but did not find this. Very interesting IMO! Case study: In 2005, Denver traded the 25th pick of the first round for Washington's third choice in 2005, which was the 76th pick, and first choice in 2006. The Broncos then swapped Washington's first choice in 2006 to San Francisco for the Niners' second and third in 2006, which were the 37th and 68th picks. Here's the discount-to-present-value based on the chart. Denver gave up the 25th pick in 2005 (worth 720 points) for the 76th pick in 2005 (worth 210 points), the 37th pick in 2006 (worth 530 in 2006 but only 245 points in 2005 owing to discounting) and the 68th pick in 2006 (worth 250 points in 2006 but only 100 points in 2005 owing to discounting). Thus Denver traded a choice worth 720 points in 2005 for picks worth 555 points when taking into account that the Broncos received two of the three choices in the future. The economic concept of "discounting to present value" assumes the future is less valuable than the present. Take your picture now, take it again in five years, and you'll know what I mean! http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=easterbrook/060502 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPstretch Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 hell yeah espn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terpfan Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 Umm... yay? LOL I think it was worth it. Fact is, if we didnt make that move last year we would still not have a QB of the future, much less one with Campbells talent and a year of experience. Multiply the Brunell worriers by 10. Definately a good move by the FO. Everyone, including myself, was questioning the trading of a future pick to get Rocky. But the last two times we did it (Campbell and Cooley) Id have to say it has worked out pretty well. Quality over quantity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UltimateSkins Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 Nice find. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renegade7 Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 That makes absolutly no sense to me, but if it's pro-redskins, I'm cool with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanishomelette Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 Take that Denver fan, lol. We're rollin' in draft points woohoo! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manasseh Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 I'm more interested in the players than the numbers. This gets a little complicated because of additional trades made with the picks. I think this is basically how it breaks down. In exchange for Jason Campbell, taken in the 2005 drafts, the Broncos received: 76th in 2005 - Karl Paymah 37th pick in 2006 - Javon Walker 68th pick in 2006 - pick traded in order to move up in 1st round and take Jay Cutler I have a feeling the Broncos are happy with the scenario, and don't feel like they lost. I don't think Paymah did much last year. Time will tell how Walker and Cutler turn out, as well as Campbell. All things considered, I still like the deal for us. I just think having Campbell in the system last year is going to end up being huge in the long run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mammy487 Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 Too many numbers for me to comprehend.... ill take your word! :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PresidentClinton07 Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 Too many numbers for me to comprehend.... ill take your word! :doh: Im not even going to try to comprehend the numbers. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. S Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 ehh, numbers numbers, blah blah blah. Denver got a starting or nickel CB, a stud receiver, and a potential franchise QB and replacement for Plummer. We got a potential franchise QB as well. Time will tell, but gaining Javon Walker gives them the edge in my opinion, as well as a decent CB. I seriously dont understand the obsession with the point system. It seems like it has come up even more the last two seasons, I do not recall anyone talking about the point system in the Bailey/Portis trade. The fact is picks are picks, no matter when they happen, and the Jets and Broncos have been enjoying our picks for the last two seasons. The only trade that seems worth it so far is the trade for Cooley that sent a future 2nd rounder for a current 3rd rounder. Am I happy with the outcomes of all the other trades so far, yes, but if Campbell does not pan out, we will look pretty dumb. I have faith it will work out though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest santana4prez Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 I'm more interested in the players than the numbers. This gets a little complicated because of additional trades made with the picks. I think this is basically how it breaks down.In exchange for Jason Campbell, taken in the 2005 drafts, the Broncos received: 76th in 2005 - Karl Paymah 37th pick in 2006 - Javon Walker 68th pick in 2006 - pick traded in order to move up in 1st round and take Jay Cutler I have a feeling the Broncos are happy with the scenario, and don't feel like they lost. I don't think Paymah did much last year. Time will tell how Walker and Cutler turn out, as well as Campbell. All things considered, I still like the deal for us. I just think having Campbell in the system last year is going to end up being huge in the long run. This post sounds alot easier than the numbers chart. Great Post. Once again the Skins and Broncos each won in a trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freeSeanT. Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 In Gibbs I trust! The guy could take a dump in box, stamp a guarante on it, and I'd probably pay for it. As long as my man ain't goin to the clank, our D will dominate in '06! Cambpell will be a good pro and efficient enough to run Gibbs' offense. He's going to make a ton of plays with his legs to make up for his average passing game. But at the end of the day, we'll all look back and say thanks to a QB who kept the Burgundy and Gold in the fight the whole way and had high level of success that defines a great career. Hail to the Redskins... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeHateMe Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 Value numbers aside, that trade enabled Denver to draft thier QB of the future as well as obtaining a top notch WR for the now. Hindsight, theyre never taking that one back. Just like the Skins arent either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
End2round2sanders Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 The numbers system is stupid its what the players do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorSpirit Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 Basically, Denver made the move assuming they would get a top ten pick from the Skins in '06 and if that had happened, it would have been good for them. What they ended up with was almost the same pick a year later, along with the other picks but on the draft value chart, they lost. I found it funny that they ended up trading away the pick they got from the Skins. Gibbs > Shanny -bottom line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrimReefa Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 The Skins got the guy they wanted, the Broncos got extra picks. It looks like a win-win to me. Assuming Campbell works out. And Cutler. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lead Blocker Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 my head hurts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIDETHEWALRUS Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 this is the second positive thing espn has said about the redskins in a as many days...I guess I better head to confession the world is about to end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Sick Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 Not sure who that CB is or if he has done well, but it would seem that a Pro Bowl caliber WR + a QB of the future is > a QB of the future. Campbell may or may not be able to play earlier. If we had waited to this year to get our QB of the future, we would have had to trade up a lot, or end up with Brodie Croyle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newera Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 All in all it helped them get Cutler and us Campbell. That's the elementary analysis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 Yeah, mark me in the getting a QB of the future is not superior to getting a QB of the future, a Starting Wide Receiver and a DB camp. Statistics mislead. Similarly, I think the Rocky trade was expensive. Expensive doesn't mean bad, but it was very costly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzmuda Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 ehh, numbers numbers, blah blah blah. Denver got a starting or nickel CB, a stud receiver, and a potential franchise QB and replacement for Plummer. We got a potential franchise QB as well. Time will tell, but gaining Javon Walker gives them the edge in my opinion, as well as a decent CB. I seriously dont understand the obsession with the point system. It seems like it has come up even more the last two seasons, I do not recall anyone talking about the point system in the Bailey/Portis trade. The fact is picks are picks, no matter when they happen, and the Jets and Broncos have been enjoying our picks for the last two seasons. The only trade that seems worth it so far is the trade for Cooley that sent a future 2nd rounder for a current 3rd rounder. Am I happy with the outcomes of all the other trades so far, yes, but if Campbell does not pan out, we will look pretty dumb. I have faith it will work out though. You're mixing together two concepts here: decision making and player evaluation. Regardless of how the players turn out the decision to make the trade can be good or bad on its own. For example, if the Redskins traded away their first round picks for the next two years for the right to get the first pick in the fourth round of the 2007 draft, is that a good or bad decision? According to what you propose, it could be a good decision if the player picked becomes dominant enough. You can't judge a decision merely on its outcome - that is no different than judging the ability to predict the future. You have to judge a decision based on the information available at the time the decision was made and the decision-making process used to arrive at that decision. I've used the drunk driving analogy before, but it still fits. If you've had too much to drink but you decide to drive home anyway, whether that is a good or bad decision isn't whether you make it home safely or kill yourself and others on the way home. It is a bad decision because from the information you had available at the time you should have known you were not fit to drive. That the outcome happened to be favorable doesn't all of a sudden make your terrible decision a good decision. As such, TMQ's analysis is a bit off. If you wait to judge the trade until after every player picked has retired, again, you're not evaluating the trade itself, but the ability to predict the future. Since no one has the ability to predict the future, this is useless stuff except to start arguments on message boards. At the time, however, the decision to trade was a good one. I'll break it down. Redskins received 750 points of value at the time - Pick 25 = 750 points Broncos received about 660 points of value at the time - Pick 76 = 160 points - Following Year's 1st rounder ~ 420 points (discount the pick to a current year 2nd rounder in the same position) - Following Year's 4th rounder ~ 80 ponts (discount the pick to a current year 2nd rounder in the same position) You may disagree that discounting the draft pick is a bad idea. It's a perfectly valid financial concept however that is needed in this context. How about this trade? The Jets offer their first and very last pick in the year 2238 AD for the Redskins first pick in the 2007 draft. If you don't discount picks the Redskins are getting a better deal and should take it. The truth is, however, that picks today are worth more than picks tomorrow. TMQ did get this simple truth correct. If you don't disagree with discounting, you may think the chart is useless altogether. It isn't. It approximates what other teams think draft picks are worth - in other words, market value. You can't discount what other teams think, because that is what sets the market. Let me give another example. It would be like you going into your stock broker's office, and despite seeing IBM trading for $40 a share, stating that you wanted to purchase a share of IBM for $20 right now (no options or any other transaction, you wanted to straight up buy the stock immediately) because you don't believe in the market system. You'd be laughed out of the office. Whether good or bad, the majority of the league has bought into the draft value chart, so therefore, THAT determines the value of picks. As you can see, the decision to make the trade was a good one. Whether Campbell turns out to be a great, good, mediocre, or terrible QB will reflect less on the decision to make the trade and more on the information gathered by Redskins scouts and coaches along with the player evaluation procedures in-place at the time. Note that I did not say that Campbell's development is wholly dependent upon internal factors like scouting and coaching. Sometimes careers get derailed because of injury or other factors that simply can not be predicted. Sometimes careers get launched despite an otherwise lack of talent simply because of great coaching, surrounding talent (see Alvin Harper), or other circumstances. Still, how Campbell eventually develops can mostly be placed on the player evaulation processes in place at Redskins park when they decided to make the pick. If Campbell turns out, then it appears to be further validation that the Redskins have been making great player evaluations since the return of Gibbs. If he doesn't turn out, then it's a big hairy blemish on that record. I can see how it might confuse many to mix player evaluation and draft pick trade decision making when a certain player evaluation may drive a decision to trade up for a pick (as in Campbell's case). But the two concepts are, and must remain, separate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gusthecat Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 this is the second positive thing espn has said about the redskins in a as many days...I guess I better head to confession the world is about to end. ESPN is covering their proverbial a...., because they are afraid the Skins might win it all next year. Then how stupid would they look?:laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ajokah Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 What is this points and discounting. Are we at the grocery store. I have no clue about this point system and think its stupid. We wont know who got the better of the trade until each picks career is over. Until Jason Campbell steps on the field and produces some wins, I dont see how we got the best of that trade.:doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins4481 Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 In Gibbs I trust! The guy could take a dump in box, stamp a guarante on it, and I'd probably pay for it. Thats just plain sick! lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.