Regarding "Value" in Trades

by danrain12345 | 3 years ago | 1 Comments

When a trade comes up on the submissions channel, people spend a considerable amount of time arguing the "value" of certain deals, and who is getting the better end of it. In my opinion, that approach is generally not appopriate because of one overarching fact: People value their players differently.

Now I'll be the first one to admit I'm not the greatest "Madden GM". I think negotiations are incredibly exhausting. I'm not a great salesman either, in contrast to other guys in the league.

What I do have, however, is plenty of online CFM experience over five cycles. I know the game well, and I have a good underdstaning of what I want on my team and what I don't. For example, I'm never a guy that runs a lot of man; so knowing that, why would I invest much in a "man" corner?

When it comes to wide receivers, I care a lot about speed. It means a lot to me knowing a certain guy can burn the top off of an opposing defense on any given play. I think it adds an important dimesnion to my offense. If my opponent knows he has to protect the bomb, it opens up options underneath.

Now here's the thing: not everyone plays the game the same way. A guy like, for example, CMass, may not value speed as much. He'd rather throw a short drag, slant, or crosser to a slow reciever, but fire it in with his gunslinger QB. Both approaches to the game are fine and effective.

For six seasons, I've reluctantly carried Michael Thomas as my WR1. He's slow as hell, and barely gets separation on a good day despite consitently being "99 everything" all cycle. Honestly he was the most frustrating asset on my team because I knew he was never going to be a threat deep.

Why did I keep him then? Literally for one reason and one season only: route apprentice. I liked the extra hot routes, that's literally it. If he didn't have that ability (or if we went ability-less) he would sure as hell not have been on my team. In fact, I would have traded him before S1. I think it was one of my biggest GM regrets of the cycle that I held onto him for this long despite liking the one redeeming quality about him so much.

So when I found out Norman Fletcher received HRM this offseason, I knew that Michael Thomas was gone. He was essentially zero value to me at that moment, as my QB can give those routes to literally anyone on the field. His WR1 spot, in my opinion, would better be served to someone with a little more speed.

The question was, during the 24 hour re-sign period, could I potenitally tag and trade him instead of just losing him to FA? Thankfully, Ben stepped into my DMs, offering me a 96 speed receiver with mid to high 80s in every significant recieving attribute. 

Now, to an outsider's point of view, the deal looks incredibly imbalanced, and I understand that. A 96 overall XF receiver for an 81 star. The blasphemy! But to me, that 96 speed guy will thrive under my offensive scheme, much more than MT could ever dream to given the circumstances. And guess what, I bet MT will do great things in SF, much to the NFC West's dismay.

But you know what? The deal made both teams better, and I'm okay with that.