Jump to content

Two Additional Trade Evaluation Charts: Range of Mid-1st to Just Inside Top-10 Pick.


Recommended Posts

Either way, we got our FQB minus the development time usually required and one familiar with the offense. He is also the Day 1 leader of the team and will make the team relevant and the focus of the NFL coverage nationally.

https://twitter.com/tejfbanalytics/status/1650603183809462272?s=20

Overall, the Jets essentially gave up a 2023 second and a 2024 first plus some fodder. However, we can sum and then compare the value each team received to try to figure out what the Jets valued Rodgers at. Thankfully, Tej Seth of SumerSports already did that for us:

image.thumb.png.468ef379be73d297b8e2048ad3466bc0.png

Using the picks included and their respective values within the Fitzgerald-Spielberger draft pick values, the Jets traded the equivalent of the 3rd overall pick for Aaron Rodgers. 
 

But there’s also a 2nd evaluation based on future pick discounts. I’m “Old School” Jimmy Johnson Trade Value chart—which is the equivalence of Pick #16

image.thumb.png.cd838413656eef82aff6717c9d9b7445.png

 

Edited by 32EBoozer
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steal of the century.  
 

San Francisco traded up to the No.3 overall pick prior to the 2021 draft to select Lance, giving up three first-round picks. Lance played sparingly as a rookie, appearing in six games with two starts. He entered 2022 as the starter, but suffered a season-ending ankle injury in Week 2.

 

now mr irrelevant has his job.  The draft is weird lol. 

  • Upvote 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Not discounting future picks" is incredibly stupid, though; it says you should value a pick next year exactly the same as a pick this year, which is obviously wrong.

Discounting that 1st round pick by a round, which is the usual metric teams use, lands the excess value squarely at a mid-1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Doggin94it said:

"Not discounting future picks" is incredibly stupid, though; it says you should value a pick next year exactly the same as a pick this year, which is obviously wrong.

Discounting that 1st round pick by a round, which is the usual metric teams use, lands the excess value squarely at a mid-1

Agreed…. That’s why he added the re-evaluation in his 2nd chart

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Larz said:

Steal of the century.  
 

San Francisco traded up to the No.3 overall pick prior to the 2021 draft to select Lance, giving up three first-round picks. Lance played sparingly as a rookie, appearing in six games with two starts. He entered 2022 as the starter, but suffered a season-ending ankle injury in Week 2.

 

now mr irrelevant has his job.  The draft is weird lol. 

The Jets have spent an aggregate of a #2 overall pick, a #3 overall pick, and three second round picks — not to mention all the sucking it took to gather those picks — for the honor of drafting Darnold and then Zach. Results? Five consecutive seasons with the worst-rated starter in the NFL.

This deal was at worst fair.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Integrity28 said:

It’s not about what we gave up. It’s about what we do with what we held onto. All that matters is we have less “swings”, but if we hit on 1-3 plates it’s still a good draft.

Net Present Value is not a well-understood concept on football forums is what this trade and ensuing commentary has taught me.

  • Post of the Week 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...