(05-02-2022, 02:56 PM)Jag149 Wrote:

(05-02-2022, 02:36 PM)Upper Wrote: 1. Trading the 2 6s for the 5th was a good trade in and of itself. It became bad because we took a guy who was literally over 100 picks farther down the consensus board. We made a big reach for a guy who plays the least valuable position in the sport and one that we have already invested heavily in. That's why that one was bad. If we had taken Waletzko, who went the very next pick, it would have been a nice trade.

2. Your 38-82 range for the points is calculating what the picks are worth as the draft is happening, not a year in advance. In general a year away means it's a full round less valuable. So we traded 28 points and got back around 20.

I did not know to factor in the the full round less. Thanks. 

So since the 2 trades happened at the same time then we need next years pick to be worth 16.6 to break even.
we gave up 14.6+11+27+1 = 42.6 points and got guaranteed 28 so 16.6 left. The 32nd 5th round pick is worth 19.8 so we didn't lose value?  Everyone but me must have known the one level less because it appears that is what they did.

It also could be worth a max of 34.

I think the important aspect to all of this calculating is that the decreased value being assigned to the future 4th is the present-day value. In other words, we'd have taken a loss if we tried to re-trade that future 4th this past weekend.

Because we did not, we'll essentially "accrue interest" on our investment (28 points) and be up anywhere from 34-82 points in overall draft capital next year as a result of our patience.

The other trade was a net gain (spent 25.6 to get 28 points), so in the end we'll come out ahead on both deals, value-wise.

Of course, as with every draft ever, the true test of a GM is what they do with the picks they have at their disposal. All the net profits in the world mean dookie if you take the wrong guys or let other teams take the next draft steal.

---