The Psychology of Dynasty Ownership, Session Five: Value

Jeremy Schwob Posted On June 10, 2020

Editor’s Note: If you missed this series last year, click here for session one, here for session two, here for session three and here for session four. This article is also written by Jeremy Schwob, one of our Member Corner writers. This is Session Five: “Psychology of Value: Reconceptualizing objective value as entirely perception.”

“Look at market fluctuations as your friend rather than your enemy; profit from folly rather than participate in it.” – Warren Buffett

The concept of “value” in the dynasty community has long been compared to the stock market. We intend to be profitable as we invest in teams and players. These initial investments can pay off exponentially in the future by taking home a title. Even if full expectations are not met, it may be a slower-moving investment that is trending toward financial growth, despite a short-term loss. Though this can be initially relatable, there are some core shortcomings of such a conceptualization that can negatively impact our dynasty decision-making.

The players themselves, in a dynasty context, fluctuate in perceived value. This occurs for all players as you plan to continually increase the value of your overall stock portfolio. Sometimes it may feel that the rapid shifts parallel the anxiety of holding a stock. If you have read my previous articles, you may see me frequently put the “perceived” moniker in front of value. While this may seem insignificant or was completely overlooked, this is an important point in understanding what value is in dynasty. In essence, “value” in dynasty is our current conceptualization and attempt to quantify a player’s worth.

This becomes a larger conversation about value in general. Following with our pseudo-therapeutic structure of these articles, the concepts begin to build on one another. I have discussed biases previously and how they impact our perceptions and subsequent decision-making. While I discussed this primarily in the context of you as an individual dynasty owner forming such perceptions and biases (see Session Three) and eventually a sort of relationship with the player (see Session Four), I alluded to the fact that this can occur at a community level as well. These changing perceptions based on results, injuries, news, or narrative, can influence community ADP. Ultimately, this creates and dictates value.

Stock Market Analogy Issues

While the community has done a great job making an attempt to quantify value over the past decade or so, it has begun to be misused. This is especially true when conceptualizing value overall in the context of the stock market. In the Warren Buffet quote the article begins with, I wanted to emphasize his use of the word “folly.”

The fluctuating value can be quite enamoring while we track risers and fallers on a monthly or even more frequent basis with ADP or rankings. However, this folly can become a dangerous realization when we question why such changes occur. This could be because of team, contract, coaching, production, or injury changes (among other things). However, our individual reactions are important as well, but we will get to that.

Specific shortcomings related to the stock market conceptualization exist in that changes are a lack of opportunity for rapid monetary gain, value being perceptually and subjectively driven, the time-specific and momentary nature of perceived value, and the inability to access to a free market for asset exchange.

Lack of opportunity for rapid monetary gain

Following the “making money” goal of the stock market is a flimsy way to conceptualize the dynamics of perceived value shifts. The goal of dynasty leagues is certainly to win and make money, but the mechanism by which this occurs is on a much different timescale than the stock market. More explicitly, you can cash in on a short-term gain of stock, producing actual financial gain. In monetary terms, you cannot do this in dynasty as winnings are distributed annually after a grueling season and anxious playoff stretch. Even on a player value level, any “gains” are not able to be immediately rewarded, nor can losses that can be quickly and brutally incurred. This is especially true due to the varying nature of how dynasty can be perceived, which will be discussed next.

Value being perceptually and subjectively driven

Value can arise from a combination of many aspects, including but not limited to: age, prior production profile (college or NFL), projected production, athletic profile, draft capital, situation (e.g., team, surrounding players that the position may be influenced by or even dependent on, injury history, etc.), as well as more personal features. These more personal features may be determined by a model or process. Together these factors comprise our opinions of a player at varying levels. In theory, the totality of these characteristics plays into the commensurate value, yet each of these factors is weighted differently by the dynasty community resource, league, and owner.

I have previously discussed how rankings turn into mock drafts, which become real drafts, resulting in ADP, and culminating into trade calculators and consensus “value.” This is a noble attempt to condense this information into a few datapoints. Yet these perceived values are constantly referred to in communication as fact. This becomes problematic and frustrating in trade negotiations and even after the fact, where such data points (i.e., ranking, ADP, trade calculator, Twitter poll) are isolated as evidence. A majority may view something as a perceived value “win,” however this leads into the next flaw of our current perception of value (i.e., the time-specific nature).

Time-specific and momentary nature of perceive value

Because we do not know future outcomes (production, situation, injury, contract decisions, etc.), value must then be driven more by current aspects of these variables. Value is therefore time-specific and rooted in one particular moment. A trade perceived to be a value gain at this moment could turn out to be a loss a year, month, or even days later. The same shift could occur for a perceived loss. That future value comparison is only one time-specific data point that could again shift. The surrounding context by which value judgments and decisions are made also plays a role, so let’s discuss that as well within such an analogy.

Inability to access a free market for asset exchange

The classic mantra of “beauty is in the eyes of the beholder” rings true in dynasty. Unlike the stock market, the dynasty market is “illiquid,” as Jordan McNamara (@McNamaraDynasty) once discussed with me. This means that in dynasty leagues you cannot simply free trade for a predetermined and objectively consistent value, anytime you wish. Moving dynasty assets is contained by submarket restriction and requires a partner that is first and foremost willing to respond to a trade offer.

This is because there is another individual (or individuals across leagues) involved in that determining player worth within such value discussions. You may be able to make one deal in a league for seemingly less value and be unable to make a deal while giving up greater assets in another. Therefore, in practice, the concept of a player’s dynasty value becomes the culmination of subjective options and perceptions.

If you are able to communicate, a deal likely requires similarity (not necessarily identicality) in the perceived value of the player. Then it requires interest in making change, considering what you are offering, and responsiveness before something changes either party’s mind. The currency is even dissimilar as you are not dealing cash for the asset you are acquiring.

The most commonly available and utilized currency is players, which have an idiosyncratic and subjectively based “value.” Alternatively, we have access to draft picks, which are closer to predetermined “value,” though this perceived value is different based on a number of factors, including: time away from said pick(s) being on the clock (minutes, hours, days, weeks, years), the roster stages at which your team and potential trade partner are in (startup, contender, rebuild), and finally the perceived nature of the incoming rookie class (prior to even considering superflex, tight end premium, or devy if playing such a format).

Finally, actual currency in the form of blind bidding dollars is again short of a translatable feature due to the diminished player pool on which you may choose to use such assets. You may also ask about auctions, where these monetary finances can be used to purchased players. However, everyone begins with the same amount of money and likely spends it all as well. Additionally, this is rooted momentarily for the extent of the auction draft, then the aforementioned player-as-asset complications arise.

Therefore, the stock market representation doesn’t seem to fit in any logical capacity. Instead, I invite you to consider an alternate conceptualization.

Real Estate

Entertaining the concept of dynasty asset fluctuation in the realm of a real estate market may provide a better representation that would help better conceptualize value in dynasty. Before I discuss the parallels, I want to stop and highlight why this is important. This is something we do in therapy where we attempt to understand how the individual perceives the world. The purpose of defining the client’s conceptualization is not to determine a “right” and “wrong” representation. Rather, this can help illuminate difficulty and distress elicited by the individual’s structure to the self, their decision-making, and how they interact interpersonally.

Forming a more accurate, realistic, and clearly articulated working representation of ourselves as dynasty owners and the surrounding dynasty market may shift the way you view player “value,” changing player perceptions, rejected trades with concordant frustrating justification, or dynasty ownership in general.

In real estate, there may be community perspective shifts based on exterior design, interior style, location, neighborhood, school district, or even the economy in general, which causes the asset to appreciate or depreciate. Property value could even be influenced by the neighbors themselves if they are a nuisance or a difficult landlord in the instance of a rental property. For players, neighbors may represent the offensive line, quarterback, or other ancillary pieces of the offense, while a landlord may be the coach or GM who refuses to fix things in need of attention.

Player’s perceived value experiences similar changes driven by community perspectives presented in the form of rankings, drafts, ADP, and trade calculators, or even those less quantitative (i.e., player threads using data to support a player, trade polls, or retweeting beat reporter or coach quotes).

If you have been reading along in prior articles, there is also a personal, often emotional, and sometimes biased perception that dictates how we value a player. The same processes exist for our attachments to properties as well. Do you have fond or difficult memories attached to the house you grew up in? Do you have a favorite apartment or house you have lived in? You likely have particular reasons rooted in personal experience that drive the value of such a property to you. These sentimental attitudes can provide us additional comfort, attachment and purpose. However, they may also make remaining objective in our valuations more difficult.

In real estate, this may alter your objective price of a property due to the salience of your memories attached to the property. In dynasty, this may cause you to turn down objective offers because your player has resided on your roster for a while, you have encountered positive experiences with them, and you have become attached. Alternatively, this can work negatively as well as such negative experiences with a property decrease both the market’s perceived value and your perceived value. This may arise from not meeting performance expectations as the player burns a hole on your roster, you have negative experiences with the player in your lineup, and you have then become detached from the player. See my Session Three article for the development and maintenance of this “dynasty depression” mechanism.

Consider misalignment in trade talks, when each of you gets frustrated about the other’s view on players. You may pick out perceived value points (i.e., ADP, trade calculator value, or rankings), production points (i.e., production totals, production efficiency, or positional finish), or even narratives of expected optimism and pessimism from opinions, quotes, or commentary. Many times, I see these used in isolation. They are each an important aspects to include in our thoughts about players, but the resulting values are different based on the “homeowner” (the owners perception of the players involved, especially if they are particularly attached to a player), the “neighborhood” (makeup of team whether rebuilding or contending), or the “real estate market” overall (ADP, current trade calculator value). Use, but do not misuse, these tools. Isolating a single piece of information and prove another “wrong” is not the intended purpose.

It is especially important to remember that, at their core, these are opinion-based data points at one singular time point. As mentioned earlier, “beauty in the eye of the beholder.” In real estate, a perceived fabulous deal on a house may not be of interest to a buyer if it doesn’t fit their specific desires. One may become interested if the cost is significantly lower than what the market would perceive as the current cost. However, this doesn’t make the person wrong for having a different opinion. It means that their opinion is different than that of others.

Strategies or decisions like value-based drafting or selecting the “best player available” can exemplify differing opinions depending on how we are determining said value. For example, for some, selecting the best “value” may be based on ADP or consensus rankings, regardless of roster construction. Others may be guided more by personal rankings, tiered rankings, rankings tailored to a scoring system, or their own biases. However, psychologically utilizing “value” in this way is exemplary of a defense, in that it justifies our own opinion by telling ourselves that there is a sound basis to our decision. Before pushing back against this, again realize that this does not mean such strategies or decisions are “wrong.” There are many ways to make decisions in dynasty. The important thing to remember is that there is not a “right.”

Such a value-based explanation may be defensive, since it conveys the assumption that your method of conceptualizing perceived value is optimal, and currently correct. This crutch justification for our decision-making should be reframed with honesty that it is our opinion that this player is the best selection, rather than simply saying “because… value.” The suggestion would be to temper our discussion of such “value” justifications, judgments, and arguments as anything other than differences of opinion.

While it is fairly easy to find out perceived value dictated by what most people would do, it is important for us to define our own mentality and characteristics of perceived dynasty valuation. So, let’s talk about some specific roles and tendencies in real estate that may resemble thoughts and behaviors of dynasty owners. These are divided into player-specific tendencies and roster-wide tendencies.

Player specific

Flipper – looking strictly for players you because of what you perceive them to be worth currently which you expect to increase so that you can make a perceived profit
Bargain hunters – buying players on the cheap, sometimes offending others with offers, sometimes striking gold with misperceived assets
Renter – looking only in a one-to-two-year window with players with the intention of getting immediate production and then moving them
Forever home hunters – drafting a player in a startup or rookie draft or acquiring a player in a trade with the intention of having them for their entire career
Neighborhood enthusiasts – placing importance on what team the player is on (maybe your hometown or favorite team, high scoring offenses, bad teams playing from behind, etc.)
School district zealots – emphasis where the player went to school, focusing on college production over NFL production
Beachfront buyers – attracted by the buzzed-about, hot ticket players focusing on the optimal outcomes

Roster-wide

First homers – new to dynasty, may have an idea of how you want to construct their roster, but it may not be your perfect vision, learning as you go
Real estate moguls – having countless rosters, no allegiances, only focused on making value profits
Upgraders – needing changes because there are too many kids (players) in the house and you need more room resulting in consolidating pieces into assets that have more perceived value to the owner
Reclaimer – picks up orphan teams for the challenge and the gratification of the restoration
Property accumulator – always shopping for more of a particular position or type of player to add depth
Vacation homer – rarely checks-in, doesn’t send or respond to trades
Mortgager – borrowing against credit in the form of selling future rookie picks years ahead of time to liquidate that asset for the present, can be done strategically as you are essentially reinvesting in your current team.
Retirement homer – bleeding future assets to try to remain competitive but in a less calculated way
Estate sale – team is dead, no future draft picks, aging assets, on the way to being orphaned or pushing full reboot without many young assets

Review these and label your own tendencies. How do you make value decisions within this real estate context? How might impediments in trade negotiations or perceived value discussion about property (dynasty assets) arise between these various perspectives? How might some of these mentalities co-exist? Overall, gaining a better understanding of the mentalities of others regarding value can be a more productive initial step than simplistic player value judgments.

As always, here is a take-home exercise to see how you can target a few players by defining your purpose upfront. This approach can help place less emphasis on the changes in perceived value and more on what your intended purpose of the player acquisition.

Exercise

Finding a Flip and a Forever

Flip

1. Select two-three players you would buy at a depressed cost. These are likely early-career players who have not yet lived up to initial perceived value or expectations.

2. How long would you commit to seeing it out with this player?

3. What would be your cash out price that you would be satisfied with? Is there another piece you would prefer to have that you think you could acquire for this player in the future?

Forever

1. Select two players you would like to acquire in a league (or across leagues) who you’d be willing to make a long-term commitment to.

– Player One: A top asset (maybe a player typically in rounds three through six of a startup draft).

– Player Two: A rookie or vet you think will produce but likely will not return an increase in perceived value going forward.

2. Commit at least three years to seeing it out with these players where you suppress your efforts to trade them, regardless of the initial investment. This player should align with your defined roster construction and player characteristics.

3. Suppress your ongoing urge to trade either of these players.

One’s immediate reaction may be to choose an elite asset as a forever piece, though that can be risky if you are remaining true to not trading them for three or more years. However, that is the owner’s choice. Everyone’s dream of a forever home is different. By engaging in this exercise, you are taking the stress off of the ever-changing perceived value status of these players. This is particularly important to help work on filtering out the negative trends in perceived value in the hope of weathering the storm.

Essentially, you are ignoring value shifts that may cause you to quickly alter your player perception or even make rash, regrettable decisions. Instead, you are settling in and enjoying a player for their production, while stabilizing the roster construction strategy by building around that player. This testing ground exercise can be done for additional players as well. Such an exercise begins building a fundamental skill of defining a process-driven motive, then carrying out aligned decision-making in the face of urges to react to perceived changes.

Conclusion

Psychologically, value as an objective construct in our dynasty context is a fallacy. Thinking of value as anything other than collective opinions that become solidified by more individuals holding that opinion and packaged as fact is problematic. Perceived value exists as one momentary datapoint. Value can be used to make us feel more content with our current decisions. This may help us justify our decisions in hindsight which may limit the psychological blow if the perceived value does not end up in our favor down the road.

Value, as currently constructed, is essentially a judgment by a person or group of people that express a subjective opinion on a decision. Yet, we utilize value as a finite, objective construct. That does not render ADP or rankings incorrect or useless. I’m saying that these sources of information are viewed as fact, when they are opinion-based. Where we encounter cognitive errors is when we misuse and miscommunicate value as truth about players.

Perceived value will, in all likelihood change, typically determined by opinion-based influences and decisions outside us. A hope is that we minimize the determination of “correct” side value judgments and be open to confronting our overreliance on consensus opinion. Instead, by instilling a conceptualization of value as momentary group perception we may facilitate improved communication amongst our leagues and the entire community. Increased reliance on our own processes rather than what most would do may help us better recognize our player value mentality, filter perceived value shifts, improve discussion about misaligned value perceptions, and find edges against consensus.

Ultimately, value is not simply impacted by perception; value is entirely perception.

Author
Recent Posts

Jeremy Schwob

Contributor at Dynasty League Football

Jeremy is a doctoral student in clinical psychology at Penn State. He is an avid fan of St. Louis sports and the Dayton Flyers. You can find him advocating for wide receivers and pushing that value is misused as fact on Twitter.