PDA

View Full Version : Analyzing the Trades


R8R H8R
04-28-2012, 06:52 PM
While everyone is going back & forth about the newest Broncos, I thought I would go back and analyze the 5 trades(yes 5!) we made to eventually give us the 7 players that just got drafted.

There has been a lot of talk about how we got shafted and left value on the board on the two trade-backs out of the 1st round Thursday night, so I'll start there. For the record, I am using a traditional point draft chart to determine the value.

( ) - the number in parentheses is the chart point value.

Trade back #1:

We traded the #25(720 pts.) pick in the 1st to the Pats #31.
We receive their #31(600 pts.) & their 4th # 126(54). Based solely on point value we lost 720-646= -74 points in this deal. This is the equivalent to a mid-4th on the chart.

So clearly we lost value here. I think once Dre and maybe a couple of others went off the board, EFX may have telegraphed too much that they wanted out and Bellicheat took advantage. But does this make EFX the laughing stock of the league like some has suggested? No, not by a long shot. It just means they wanted out worse than the Pats wanted to go up, which the Pats rarely do.

Trade back #2:

Traded #31(600 pts.) to the Bucs for their 2nd #36(540) and swapped 4ths to move up to #101(96). The difference in point value between #126 & #101 is 50 points. So we gave away a pick worth 600 for 540 + 50= -10 points. In other words, we only lost 10 points and that is the equivalent of a high-mid 7th. Not worth crying about, imo. This one is close enough.

Trade up:

Traded our 3rd #87 (155 pts.) & our 4th #120(54) to the Browns for their 3rd
#67(255 pts.). So we gave up 209 pts. to go up 20 spots and get a pick worth 255 pts. We won this trade just based on point value, and 46 pts. is approximately a late 4th equivalent. This takes a bit of the sting out of the Pats trade, and if Hillman is anywhere near a Sproles "type" player, we definitely win.

Traded Tim Tebow & 7th for 4th & 6th:

The point value system is meaningless here so we can only look at the players we got.
The 4th turned into Phillip Blake- C. FWIIW, Mike Mayock really liked this pick. He thinks he can immediately back up at C & play G also. Thinks he will push to start in a year or so. If true, the Walton haters should be happy.
The 6th turned into Danny Trevathon- LB. All I know about him is he has WW size and from the same school, and is highly productive. If Fox/JDR likes him, I like him.

It will take 1 to 3 years to see who won this trade, but I think if Blake pushes to start in a couple of years and if Trevathon is only a WW clone, we did OK on this one. OTOH, if Tebow leads the Jets to a SB within 3 years, and these players flop, then we're screwed. :)

Traded Brandon LLoyd for the Rams 5th #137:

This is the 2nd pick in the 5th round so it makes the pick more valuable than usual. With this pick we chose Malik Jackson DE/DT. Since Lloyd most likely would have left us anyway in FA if we kept him, this was probably the best we could do. However, is Jackson any good? We'll find out, but he plays at a position of need and I trust Fox/JDR on defense.

Summary:

While time will tell on the players, I think EFX clearly saw the value in this draft between the 2nd and 4th rounds. The way to look at this is- are we really better off taking either Hightower or Martin with a 1st? Or are we better off with what we got for the trade back-- Wolfe and Omar Bolden?

If Omar's knee hold up- he says he's healthy- he could be a real steal, and they killed two birds with one stone. But again, time will tell.

rbackfactory80
04-28-2012, 06:56 PM
Nice, thoughtful, well-written post.

Unfortunately it lacks DRAMA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You fail

DENVERDUI55
04-28-2012, 06:56 PM
The point value system is meaningless here so we can only look at the players we got.

The whole draft chart you are using is meaningless. It is outdated and irrelevant now. We find out who won in 5 years.

Lestat
04-28-2012, 06:57 PM
the only thing that would have truly pissed me off was if DeCastro was there at our pick and we passed on him. outside of that the draft as a whole was done well by EFX, we had some interesting trade moments but all in all the plan was well executed and ended up in our favor with the value we landed and the way we moved up and down the draft.

DENVERDUI55
04-28-2012, 07:00 PM
the only thing that would have truly pissed me off was if DeCastro was there at our pick and we passed on him.

What do you mean he was close enough to trade up one spot for?

R8R H8R
04-28-2012, 07:01 PM
Nice, thoughtful, well-written post.

Unfortunately it lacks DRAMA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You fail

EFX IS TEARING THIS TEAM APART!!!!!






How is that? :giggle:

Abqbronco
04-28-2012, 07:03 PM
Dude! Stop killing the mood with logic and intellect. Thinking things out and trying to explain the process is stoooooopid!!!!

R8R H8R
04-28-2012, 07:05 PM
The whole draft chart you are using is meaningless. It is outdated and irrelevant now. We find out who won in 5 years.

It is all we have until someone invents a new and relevant one. But in a way I agree to a point, if these guys are players and help us win, then it doesn't really matter what the value chart says. But I don't want to wait 3-5 years to find out, so thus the chart it is.

baja
04-28-2012, 07:20 PM
The whole draft chart you are using is meaningless. It is outdated and irrelevant now. We find out who won in 5 years.

You have to factor in the old supply and demand rules here. Every team knew there was not much value in the bottom third of round one over round 2 (and there were plenty of good players in the next several [trade bait]rounds too ) so there was not the that much interest to trade up into the bottom third of round 1. Every draft is unique and in this one we did fine on the trades considering. Minni is the only team that paid a high price that's on them not us. Course one must ask why didn't we offer the trade to Minni.

Lestat
04-28-2012, 07:28 PM
What do you mean he was close enough to trade up one spot for?

the Steelers were not gonna trade down with DeCastro on the board. that's too sexy a pick for them, works for their idea of a Steelers lineman.
what i meant was if DeCastro was there at #25 and we then traded back, i doubt #23 or #24 were gonna deal their picks with the way they turned them in quickly.

if the Steelers had passed on DeCastro and then we traded back with him staring us in the face i would have had to question the sanity of Elway.
but since we didn't have a shot at him with the Steelers taking him, it
's a moot point so we got nice value overall that served us well in the entire draft.

Lestat
04-28-2012, 07:31 PM
You have to factor in the old supply and demand rules here. Every team knew there was not much value in the bottom third of round one over round 2 (and there were plenty of good players in the next several [trade bait]rounds too ) so there was not the that much interest to trade up into the bottom third of round 1. Every draft is unique and in this one we did fine on the trades considering. Minni is the only team that paid a high price that's on them not us. Course one must ask why didn't we offer the trade to Minni.

it's entirely possible that Minny didn't ignite trade talks up they saw their guy falling and started reaching out to teams late and offered up the #98 to ensure a team wouldn't say no. it's possible they didn't call us or weren't interested in our pick due to thinking they didn't need to go up that high at first.

baja
04-28-2012, 07:32 PM
the Steelers were not gonna trade down with DeCastro on the board. that's too sexy a pick for them, works for their idea of a Steelers lineman.
what i meant was if DeCastro was there at #25 and we then traded back, i doubt #23 or #24 were gonna deal their picks with the way they turned them in quickly.

if the Steelers had passed on DeCastro and then we traded back with him staring us in the face i would have had to question the sanity of Elway.
but since we didn't have a shot at him with the Steelers taking him, it
's a moot point so we got nice value overall that served us well in the entire draft.

Question; Did Minni make their trade before or after DeCastro came off the board?

Tombstone RJ
04-28-2012, 07:33 PM
The whole draft chart you are using is meaningless. It is outdated and irrelevant now. We find out who won in 5 years.

well until there is a NEW chart or some new way to have an objective idea of what draft picks are worth on a sliding scale then I appreciate R8R H8R's effort.

baja
04-28-2012, 07:33 PM
it's entirely possible that Minny didn't ignite trade talks up they saw their guy falling and started reaching out to teams late and offered up the #98 to ensure a team wouldn't say no. it's possible they didn't call us or weren't interested in our pick due to thinking they didn't need to go up that high at first.

good point!

R8R H8R
04-28-2012, 07:35 PM
You have to factor in the old supply and demand rules here. Every team knew there was not much value in the bottom third of round one over round 2 (and there were plenty of good players in the next several [trade bait]rounds too ) so there was not the that much interest to trade up into the bottom third of round 1. Every draft is unique and in this one we did fine on the trades considering. Minni is the only team that paid a high price that's on them not us. Course one must ask why didn't we offer the trade to Minni.

That is a good question. The only thing I can think of is maybe EFX thought they could get better value with two trades rather than in one. If so, then they miscalculated. OTOH, maybe the Vikes never considered trading up until OZZIE proposed it to them? Who knows? ???

Mogulseeker
04-28-2012, 07:35 PM
Also, we signed a couple UDFAs that were written off as 4th round value and we drafted a player in the 4th who had 2nd round value.

So who knows.

I do know that Fox has build a Super Bowl team based on defense once with a guy named Jake Delhomme at QB and now we have Peyton Manning.

DENVERDUI55
04-28-2012, 07:42 PM
well until there is a NEW chart or some new way to have an objective idea of what draft picks are worth on a sliding scale then I appreciate R8R H8R's effort.

Well what I paid for a house in 92 doesn't really matter now right? Picks are worth more now days.

Lestat
04-28-2012, 07:46 PM
Question; Did Minni make their trade before or after DeCastro came off the board?

well after, the Lions and Steelers took like 2 mins each to make their picks if that long. it was rapid fire.

Tombstone RJ
04-28-2012, 07:52 PM
Well what I paid for a house in 92 doesn't really matter now right? Picks are worth more now days.

this is not a good analogy for this situation, sorry. Again, until there is a new way to value draft picks, the only way to see the trade value is with the old system. I'm not saying it's accurate, I'm saying it's the only way to get a ballpark estimate on the values.

Lestat
04-28-2012, 08:00 PM
Well what I paid for a house in 92 doesn't really matter now right? Picks are worth more now days.

terrible analogy, the value for a house is relative to inflation or poor markets.
there is no updated draft chart to reflect what has or hasn't changed.

you have the new rookie wage scale, team needs, overall draft strength and several other factors.

the value is about supply and demand right now until the chart is updated you can only go off of that as a starting point and then determine where to go from there. hell the 49ers got a future 3rd round pick and a current 6th for a 4th.

doesn't mean another team couldn't have gotten the same deal but one team had a demand and the 49ers had the supply at the right time.

titan
04-28-2012, 08:05 PM
the Steelers were not gonna trade down with DeCastro on the board. that's too sexy a pick for them, works for their idea of a Steelers lineman.
what i meant was if DeCastro was there at #25 and we then traded back, i doubt #23 or #24 were gonna deal their picks with the way they turned them in quickly.

if the Steelers had passed on DeCastro and then we traded back with him staring us in the face i would have had to question the sanity of Elway.
but since we didn't have a shot at him with the Steelers taking him, it
's a moot point so we got nice value overall that served us well in the entire draft.

Klis said the Broncos had targeted DeCastro at pick #25 - if he was there the Broncos would have taken him and not traded back. Once the Steelers took DeCastro the Broncos traded back (and they made that trade on the fly while they were on the clock - not much time to shop).

R8R H8R
04-28-2012, 08:12 PM
terrible analogy, the value for a house is relative to inflation or poor markets.
there is no updated draft chart to reflect what has or hasn't changed.

you have the new rookie wage scale, team needs, overall draft strength and several other factors.

the value is about supply and demand right now until the chart is updated you can only go off of that as a starting point and then determine where to go from there. hell the 49ers got a future 3rd round pick and a current 6th for a 4th.

doesn't mean another team couldn't have gotten the same deal but one team had a demand and the 49ers had the supply at the right time.

True, and thank you.

Why did Shanny appear to overpay for the 2nd pick? Because RG111 was the pick, and Shanny thinks/hopes he can win a SB with him. We'll see.

And why did EFX appear to give up value by trading back? Probably because the rest of the league knew what they did, that there wasn't much difference between the back third of the 1st round and the 1st third of the 2nd round. Thus, they couldn't get a desperate trading partner.

R8R H8R
04-28-2012, 08:16 PM
Klis said the Broncos had targeted DeCastro at pick #25 - if he was there the Broncos would have taken him and not traded back. Once the Steelers took DeCastro the Broncos traded back (and they made that trade on the fly while they were on the clock - not much time to shop).

That makes sense now, and explains the poor value in the Pats trade. But I don't understand why they didn't have that scenario planned and a potential trading partner all ready to go.

Carmelo15
04-28-2012, 08:17 PM
the Steelers were not gonna trade down with DeCastro on the board. that's too sexy a pick for them, works for their idea of a Steelers lineman.
what i meant was if DeCastro was there at #25 and we then traded back, i doubt #23 or #24 were gonna deal their picks with the way they turned them in quickly.

if the Steelers had passed on DeCastro and then we traded back with him staring us in the face i would have had to question the sanity of Elway.
but since we didn't have a shot at him with the Steelers taking him, it
's a moot point so we got nice value overall that served us well in the entire draft.

Broncos were taking DeCasro. Mike Klis reported this already

Carmelo15
04-28-2012, 08:18 PM
Klis said the Broncos had targeted DeCastro at pick #25 - if he was there the Broncos would have taken him and not traded back. Once the Steelers took DeCastro the Broncos traded back (and they made that trade on the fly while they were on the clock - not much time to shop).

This

baja
04-28-2012, 08:25 PM
That makes sense now, and explains the poor value in the Pats trade. But I don't understand why they didn't have that scenario planned and a potential trading partner all ready to go.

Maybe DeCastro was only one of two or three players they had decided to take at 25 and he was the last one to go one pick before the Broncos section causing a mad scramble. If I remember correctly they were on the clock for almost the full time allotted likely searching for a trading partner.

Lestat
04-28-2012, 08:32 PM
Broncos were taking DeCasro. Mike Klis reported this already

i know, that's why i said that's the only thing that would have pissed me off.
there was no chance we wouldn't have taken him and it was a no brainer type of pick.

Tombstone RJ
04-28-2012, 08:36 PM
I really dislike the stellers. It's crap like the DeCastro pick and the fact that the Broncos wanted him and the idiot stellers get him the ticks me off.

baja
04-28-2012, 08:41 PM
I really dislike the stellers. It's crap like the DeCastro pick and the fact that the Broncos wanted him and the idiot stellers get him the ticks me off.

Ya we shouldn't have beat them and he would be ours. Damn Tebow! ;D

Rohirrim
04-28-2012, 08:43 PM
Ya we shouldn't have beat them and he would be ours. Damn Tebow! ;D

No. It was the guy who wrote the schedule. If we have a tougher schedule we never get to that game.

Lestat
04-28-2012, 08:54 PM
No. It was the guy who wrote the schedule. If we have a tougher schedule we never get to that game.

i blame king neckbeard. if we're 2-3 instead of 1-4 tebow mania doesn't happen and we pick top 15 instead.

baja
04-28-2012, 08:57 PM
i blame king neckbeard. if we're 2-3 instead of 1-4 tebow mania doesn't happen and we pick top 15 instead.

Well no than you gotta blame McD because it was him that brought neck beard in in the first place.

Lestat
04-28-2012, 09:03 PM
Well no than you gotta blame McD because it was him that brought neck beard in in the first place.

in that case i blame Pat Bowlen for being a gutless drunk and allowing McD to have GM powers. if he doesn't give him those powers Cutler and Marshal are still here, Tebow is never drafted, we never have those issues and Elway likely isn't running the team.

now... TOP THAT!

manchambo
04-28-2012, 09:03 PM
You have to factor in the old supply and demand rules here. Every team knew there was not much value in the bottom third of round one over round 2 (and there were plenty of good players in the next several [trade bait]rounds too ) so there was not the that much interest to trade up into the bottom third of round 1. Every draft is unique and in this one we did fine on the trades considering. Minni is the only team that paid a high price that's on them not us. Course one must ask why didn't we offer the trade to Minni.

I think this exactly right and when you think about it it tends to confirm that our front office had things assessed correctly. They thought there was no one there worth picking rather than picking later so they traded back. Other teams basically agreed so no one was willing to pay a high price to move up. If teams were clamoring to give value to get into our spot you'd have to ask yourself why we aren't making the pick ourselves (unless of course the only player we value at the spot is in a position we don't need--OT is about the only position I think would qualify). But tearing your hair out over a handful of points on the value chart is just silly.

baja
04-28-2012, 09:14 PM
in that case i blame Pat Bowlen for being a gutless drunk and allowing McD to have GM powers. if he doesn't give him those powers Cutler and Marshal are still here, Tebow is never drafted, we never have those issues and Elway likely isn't running the team.

now... TOP THAT!

Well if that is the case than we have none other than Mike Shanahan to blame for this theft of DeCastro. Had he not become a palace building ego manic that ran the team into the ground the gutless drunk would not have had to raise his ugly head and shiit all over bronco land with his steel trap judgments and decisions.
.

DENVERDUI55
04-28-2012, 09:17 PM
i blame king neckbeard. if we're 2-3 instead of 1-4 tebow mania doesn't happen and we pick top 15 instead.

We could blame Phillip Rivers for screwing up a kneel down or Marion Barber for running out of bounds too.

Rohirrim
04-28-2012, 09:22 PM
Well if that is the case than we have none other than Mike Shanahan to blame for this theft of DeCastro. Had he not become a palace building ego manic that ran the team into the ground the gutless drunk would not have had to raise his ugly head and shiit all over bronco land with his steel trap judgments and decisions.
.

In that case, it's Elway's fault, because if he doesn't keep winning all those years, Shanahan doesn't keep the job as long as he did.

baja
04-28-2012, 09:24 PM
In that case, it's Elway's fault, because if he doesn't keep winning all those years, Shanahan doesn't keep the job as long as he did.

Well in that case we it is clearly on the New York Yankees for not making an offer Elway could not refuse.

BroncoBeavis
04-28-2012, 09:26 PM
What's with all the talk of the rookie wage scale lowering draft chart value.

If anything the new rookie scale increased the pick value.

baja
04-28-2012, 09:29 PM
What's with all the talk of the rookie wage scale lowering draft chart value.

If anything the new rookie scale increased the pick value.

Correct

I was wondering when someone was going to catch that.

Rohirrim
04-28-2012, 09:35 PM
Well in that case we it is clearly on the New York Yankees for not making an offer Elway could not refuse.

Somehow, it's got to be Mark Hermann's fault.

Lestat
04-28-2012, 09:37 PM
Well if that is the case than we have none other than Mike Shanahan to blame for this theft of DeCastro. Had he not become a palace building ego manic that ran the team into the ground the gutless drunk would not have had to raise his ugly head and shiit all over bronco land with his steel trap judgments and decisions.
.

aw **** it, you win ^5

baja
04-28-2012, 09:43 PM
Somehow, it's got to be Mark Hermann's fault.

Pzzzzzt. Failed to make connection. You lose. ;D

baja
04-28-2012, 09:46 PM
aw **** it, you win ^5

Ah don't give up so easy I can see three of four deeper levels you could go. ;D

broncocalijohn
04-28-2012, 09:53 PM
From RdR H8R: "Since Lloyd most likely would have left us anyway in FA if we kept him, this was probably the best we could do."

We would have received some compensation for whoever signed him. Not sure if it would have been a 5th rounder but if so, we improved to the front of the 5th round. Only a 2013 pick to the top of the 5th round would have given us a better scenario. I am not sure if we would have received a 4th rounder for Lloyd.

R8R H8R
04-28-2012, 11:48 PM
From RdR H8R: "Since Lloyd most likely would have left us anyway in FA if we kept him, this was probably the best we could do."

We would have received some compensation for whoever signed him. Not sure if it would have been a 5th rounder but if so, we improved to the front of the 5th round. Only a 2013 pick to the top of the 5th round would have given us a better scenario. I am not sure if we would have received a 4th rounder for Lloyd.

You're right, and I forgot about it, we would probably received a comp pick for Lloyd if/when he left us in FA. But the calculation for comp picks is apparently real complicated, and we wouldn't have gotten it until 2013 anyway, so definitely it was the right thing to trade him in October.