Union

Rookie Draft Picks and Trade Value: How to Value the 1.03

Mark Johnson Posted On March 2, 2017
Save To Favorites

Editor’s note: In case you missed it, we recently introduced our revolutionary Dynasty Trade Finder tool. The Trade Finder gathers information from several thousand dynasty leagues, allowing users to search recent trades involving players and draft picks, and filter by league scoring, size and starting lineup requirements. In addition to Mark’s research, we will soon be able to examine more deals involving individual draft picks (when MyFantasyLeague.com flips over to 2017 leagues).

Let’s assume both Leonard Fournette and Dalvin Cook land in spots conducive to immediate production vis-à-vis the 2017 NFL Draft, and that both remain perched atop this year’s rookie draft class.  The next two names on most everyone’s boards are, in no holy order, Corey Davis and Mike Williams.  Some swear by one, some swear by the other.  Lately, news of Davis’s minor ankle injury, which will largely keep him from participating in the NFL Combine, have many ranking Williams over Davis.  However, others (like me) still view Davis as the better prospect.  If you want to hear the case for both sides, head over to the dynasty debate between Adam Tzikas and Mike Valverde.

This piece will not be an at-length discussion about who will, or who should, be taken with any particular draft pick; it is an article intended to provide you with the perceived trade value of each of this year’s first-round rookie picks.  My reason for pointing out that so many are split between Davis and Williams as to who the perceived third-best rookie in this year’s draft class is, is to begin illustrating just how small the gap is between the perceived value of the 2017 1.03 and 2017 1.04.

In my earlier pieces from this series, I examined the perceived value of the 2017 1.01 and 2017 1.02 respectively.  There is a noticeable gap between the perceived trade value of the 2017 1.01 and 2017 1.02.  While it is very small, I attribute there being any gap at all to the 1.01 providing its owner with the ultimate power of choice.  Anything could go wrong with one of the two star running back prospects (or both), and having the 1.01 provides insurance. 

Interestingly, my research has shown me that, to perhaps an even more significant degree, the same is true as it pertains to the 1.03 and 1.04.  There is a noticeable drop off in terms of trade value between the 1.02 and 1.03, and a quick look back at my previous piece while reading this one will help illustrate this.  However, I found the most interesting aspect of the perceived value of the 1.03 to be the obvious connection it has to the ‘Williams vs. Davis’ debate.  So, while this piece is not the place for an extensive debate thereon, that debate is the clear elephant in the room here, and must be addressed. 

Just as I did for my previous pieces in this series, I ran countless Twitter polls, used trade calculators, took to our dynasty forums, and more, to formulate a consensus value for the 2017 1.03.  Using the results from my market research, I sought to develop examples of “fair” and “unfair” trades based on that data (see below). 

Teaser: you might find the public’s take on what makes an even trade for the 1.03 hard to believe.

[am4show have=’g1;’ guest_error=’sub_message’ user_error=’sub_message’ ]

Unbalanced Trades: Buyer Wins

  • Example 1
  • Example 2
  • Example 3
  • Example 4
  • Example 5
  • Example 6
    • Seller sends: 2017 1.03
    • Buyer sends:  2017 1.06 + 2017 1.09

As we move through the 2017 rookie picks in this series, many of the names will appear familiar, and for good reason.  Slowly but surely, as we work our way through the first round, these players will begin marking where the public’s perceived value of these picks turns.  And, I must say I was genuinely surprised to see the public’s perception of Gronk’s value has fallen as far as it has.  I won’t belabor points I discussed in my previous articles, but check this out.  Here’s a look at what a reliable dynasty trade calculator thinks of Gronk for the 1.03:

Screen Shot 2017 02 27 at 13.17.17

And, here is what the Twitter world thinks of the same trade:

The trade calculator and twitter poll cannot both be right.  Where do you stand?  We all know about Gronk’s injury history, and that he’s in all likelihood closer to the end than the beginning, but I would have expected this to have at least been viewed as a balanced trade.

To a lesser degree, I was intrigued by the public’s opinion regarding Matthews and Moncrief.  At this time last year, Moncrief’s value was soaring, and Rotoworld would not shut up about the camp/pre-season Matthews was having.  Now, for a stab at fresh meat at the position, the majority of the public would walk over hot coals barefoot to dole out either Matthews or Moncrief along with a late 2017 first. 

Unbalanced Trades: Seller Wins

  • Example 1
  • Example 2
  • Example 3
  • Example 4
    • Seller sends: 2017 1.03
    • Buyer sends: Stefon Diggs + 2017 1.08
  • Example 5
  • Example 6
    • Seller sends: 2017 1.03
    • Buyer sends: 2017 1.04 + 2017 2nd

First, I would like to point out that the public views selling the 1.03 for Gurley to be a big win for the seller.  Spoiler alert, I agree.  Funny thing is, most of the dynasty community could not be any further down on the guy right now.  To me, this is more about the dynasty community’s recent thirst for top running backs, and the consensus that, by the time the 1.03 is on the clock, the top backs in this class will be gone.  I view Gurley as a huge bounce-back candidate, and think you would be insane to pass up Gurley for that price tag.  Rant over. 

Also, do you remember when I said there was an elephant in the room?  I wasn’t kidding.  Typically, when you are trying to climb from the fourth overall pick to the third, it takes more than an arbitrary 2nd rounder.  Granted, there are years where we might not be enamored with any of our options at a particular draft slot, and so we opt to move back.  However, having taken the pulse of the dynasty community, it is clear this year is different when it comes to the public’s view of the 1.03 and 1.04.  Many are high on Williams and Davis, and there are clearly many who believe there is no difference whatsoever between them, and these individuals tend to view the transaction above as the buyer providing a free second rounder. I’m not among them.

Balanced Trades

  • Example 1
  • Example 2
  • Example 3
  • Example 4
    • Seller sends: 2017 1.03
    • Buyer sends: Lamar Miller + 2017 1.09   
  • Example 5
  • Example 6
    • Seller sends: 2017 1.03
    • Buyer sends: 2017 1.05 + 2017 1.09

One of the above trades was especially fascinating to me.  It appears the public believes Devonta Freeman is at this time precisely equal to the 2017 1.03.

It’s rare to find such a perfectly even split in public opinion, especially with respect to one player for one rookie pick.  When I ran the same poll for my last piece, the vote came down to 74% in favor of the 1.02 and 26% in favor of Freeman.  Earlier, I mentioned how some players will begin marking where the public’s perceived value of these picks turns.  Here is a prime example of just that.  Freeman likely would not be enough to acquire the 1.02 in most leagues, as most believe the promise of Cook or Fournette exceeds the proven commodity Freeman is.  However, when we turn to the 1.03, and the expected player/position changes to either Williams (WR) or Davis (WR), Freeman is exactly enough, in the public’s view.

Next, check out the Treadwell hate.  I get it.  He was a big-time disappointment as a rookie last season, but he’s freshly 21-years-old, and there’s plenty of time for him to get on the right track. 

Depending on the league, Treadwell was taken somewhere between the 1.02 – 1.04 last season, knowing he would need time to mature into an NFL receiver, so if you can get him this year PLUS the 1.05 in exchange for a two-pick drop, you ought to think long and hard about it. 

Before offering my conclusion, I will provide the same disclaimer I have the past two weeks.  The trades above align with the public consensus as of the writing of this article (2/25/2017).  As the pre-draft process unfolds, and the 2017 NFL Draft draws nearer, these examples of balanced trades will very likely become unbalanced buys as rookie pick values inflate as they do every spring.  So, it’s difficult to stand before you and say “this is a fair trade,” because things WILL change.  However, for those of you out there antsy with a trade itch you just cannot resist scratching, sales involving the 1.02 somewhere in the ballpark above should keep you remorse-free this time next year. 

Conclusion

As I did for my previous pieces, I dug as deep as possible to take the public’s pulse.  While I subtly sprinkled my opinion into this piece, I avoided getting bogged down in the minutia and turning this into an op-ed.  Instead, I did my best to remain objective and report the public’s views regarding the perceived value of the 2017 1.03.  If you’re interested in my takes on the trades outlined above, drop a comment below and I’ll do my best to respond as time allows.

Next week things will get far dicier as we shift our attention to the 2017 1.04. Stay tuned!

[/am4show]

Mark Johnson
Latest posts by Mark Johnson (see all)

Related Items:

Latest Articles

See All Articles
Group-3386-min

Part of the Betsperts Media and Technology Group

Betsperts
BNF - horizontal - dark
Betsperts Golf
Bleachernation
4for4

Copyright 2006-2025 Betsperts Media Group. All rights are reserved.

Find us here