Jump to content

The Strategy Expert

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

10 Good

About The Strategy Expert

  • Rank
  • Birthday 02/11/1979


  • Location
    Warren, MI

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Well that's just not true, I've seen analysts on other sources that thought Detroit could get a lot more than one first round pick, or at least one first round pick that was much higher in the round than potentially the bottom of the round that Dallas pick might be worth. And I don't care if you can show me 10 links to some analyst that says the Lions can't get a first round pick. That means nothing to me. Anybody that says that I would chalk up to them being ignorant and weak-minded and inept at evaluating the situation. I don't put any stock into illogical opinions, you can drive up a mass of those all day, they are collectively worth jack squat in my mind whether you have one of them or a million of them. Well it's funny how you talk about all these bloggers that told you what they thought Roy's value was, but I tend to feel, as you all know, that my assessments and ability for football management strategy is vastly superior to the majority of the population, so in my opinion it is my opinion that holds more credible weight for establishing that value. And it doesn't sound to me like you have asked for my input on the situation prior to the trade to influence your opinion. And I don't dispute the THIS deal was the better of any deal that those other teams might have been willing to offer, which is why they took THIS offer. I'm just contending they should have FORCED the Cowboys to pay more, or suck it up, deal with Roy on the team, and wait 'til next year when the Cowboys change their mind and realize we aren't going to let them bilk us without a fight. And my hunch is the Cowboys would have come up on price THIS season. But if they didn't, then I can live with it and the headaches of having Roy stuck here the rest of the season, no problem at all, because I am NOT selling at this price. There's no way. Now if Mr. Ford knocks on my office and says that he negotiated this deal and he's overriding my opinion well that's his prerogative, I'd just say well I urge you Mr. Ford to reconsider because we can do better, you hired me to figure this stuff out and I'm asking you to trust me, let me do, what I do, and I will make you happier when you see how this turns out. It's my job to lose, and that's why I have to try to implore you to NOT pull the trigger on this deal.
  2. Exactly my point again. WE NEED PICKS. Solution: Trade Roy for some good picks. Not some OK picks. That doesn't solve OUR problem. It only solves Dallas' problem, and just 3/4 solves our problem. It's not a fair enough trade. Dallas would and should be willing to pay more.
  3. First Point: Any trade is going to be done with the assumption that they have a wink-nod that Roy will extend his contract, which lowers the cost to the receiving team. The cost to the Lions for franchising him is the Lion's problem not the Cowboys, it doesn't hurt the Cowboys or help them if the Lions stick to their guns and want to overpay him just so Dallas can't have him. And the Lions have a TON of caproom next year to do just that, the numbers are VERY favorable for them to franchise a guy just to hold him and buy time, so the threat to not trade him and franchise him is 100% credible. Thus the Cowboys don't have hardly any leverage to dispute such a threat as being possible to invoke. 2nd point: Well sure, if YOU value Roy as not a great receiver, well then of course this is a bad trade for Dallas and great one for Detroit. This is clearly a situation where you have a HUGE gap in what you consider Roy's talent possibilities to be and what I value those at, as well as the Cowboys. If the Cowboys had your viewpoints on Roy then no way they make this deal. 3rd pt: This is why I'm pissed! Because we are desperate, and we need to make logical trades where we get close to market value on our players, and we gave away a sweetheart deal, that's terrible salvage value, absolutely unconscionable. We can't really win the SB in 2008, and there's no magical reason we couldn't wait til the offseason to do a deal and get more when we have time to get our negotiating skills honed and in check. Sure there was pressure to do a deal now, of course there is, and that's WHY this deal got done. Because of certain things we can't see being behind the scenes, but it's possible that the GMs of Detroit had been able to use this situation and flip it around to where they can sell it is a major score that THEY made happen. If their employers are being sold on this, then they gain security and clout. There are other dynamics at play. I'm not counting those in the evaluation of the trade. if I'm the GM I would never compromise my logical strategy judgment to gain street credit in THIS type of fashion. I would do the right thing for the benefit of the franchise and I would NEVER have made this trade. I would pull the trigger on something close to it, but not this trade, no way. It is against my programming to go against sound long-term logic for a franchise's benefit. 4th pt: You lost me, what draft comp? You mean the comp pick for NOT signing him?? That's irrelevant, because it doesn't apply. My scenario calls for a franchise tag which eliminates the comp pick. And it's about getting value from the Cowboys that they WOULD have or SHOULD have been willing to pay. They WOULD have/ SHOULD have paid more, or if not, then there loss and chance to pay more next year when they realize they still had gap in between their personal breakeven point and the latest proposed price. The Lions just failed at closing the gap. It's sub-standard negotiating skills. 5th pt: Exactly. It MAY take a long time to get a winning product, but it takes LESS time if you get a higher price for Roy than you did. It was a counterproductive results compared to what they COULD have / SHOULD have got. And since it takes a long tim to win, no reason to sell now on an 11 game final to the season as opposed to 16 games next year, with more time, and more desperate suitors that STILL have WR needs, INCLUDING the Cowboys. What you think that they were going to NOT want him next year? What would have changed? We already pretty much agreed he couldn't have lowered his stock further, I mean c'mon his image and play was terrible so far, he most likely would have realized he was stuck here for the season and tried harder being in you know, a contract year! Still, the more we talk about this trade, the more I'm liking it less and less and less. lol
  4. Some would say Dallas is run by nutjobs that think like me.
  5. Oh I don't have an exact number in mind. I'm not just going to pick a number for picking's sake, I'd have to think about it for a while. Whatever number I end up with is just a number, I have a feel for what Roy is worth and what number I chose to label him as wouldn't change this in my mind of it being a good deal or not. I'm committed to it not being a good deal, and I haven't heard anything yet to convince me otherwise. Also, when this story first broke I didn't hear about the 7th rounder we gave up as of yet. So we just got nicked for another small one, but big deal, I am not going to whine over a 7th rounder, the value is too low to make a significant impact on the degree of the deal, but still it's a pinch more of sour added to the deal. I'll tell you what, if we can trade Ernie Sims for a similar package then I'll jump on board as being happy OVERALL with the trades.
  6. Wow, I completely disagree. No way to check this as a bad deal? That's preposterous, because it IS flat out not a good deal for the Lions. To argue that this is a good trade is just... well, I feel the same way you feel about it just on the other side.
  7. Quite simply, we already previously agreed to a mortgage, and the garage is included, so we incur no new costs for inventory storage, the mortgage deal on the house/garage is a sunk cost and not relevant.
  8. Nope. 1) I certainly have a lot more than 20 minutes to save the Corvette, you have completely missed that point. 2) My point exactly, the market price is 50k, my desperate to sell price with all factors included of my unfortunate situation gives me my floor of 45k because I am IN A PINCH. But I'm not taking 40k! 3) Not true at all, not even close. His stock could EASILY go up. His stock was already rock bottom, he did nothing this year but piss and moan. He was FAR MORE likely to do better in the next 11 games than worse, hell he couldn't hardly do worse. And when he's franchised next year in the offseason, now he's available for 16 games not 11, PLUS whatever long term deal hints you might get on a future contract. You completely missed it on those 3 bullet points, and that's why there is a discrepancy between you being happy with the trade and myself not being happy with the trade. Plus you are double counting the draft picks by mentioning them above, that's already factored in, that IS the 40k in my analogy, that's my compensation, I'm already clear on what that perceived value is to me. That's my cash. You want the car, I want the cash. I just want 45k and you are only offering me 40k. Logic sides with me that you have to close the negotiating gap moreso than I do, because a stalemate results in a large hit to you than the hit to me. Don't get me wrong, I WANT to sell you the car really bad. But not when you have twice as much to lose as I do. You can do the logical thing and come up on price, or you can go to sleep tonight knowing you lost 10k in pure profit by passing on an opportunity with a 10k commission sitting on the table. I'm going to lose sleep knowing I passed on a 5k commission for myself, but well you win some and you lose some, and today we are both going to lose some because you failed to agree on closing a deal that was still above your breakeven point, not sure why you would want to deviate from your own pre-set and determined breakeven point, but well it's your life and your business. I can at least sleep tonight knowing that while I did miss out on the deal, at least I adhered to a valid and logical stance, and well yeah I won't get the money today, but next month when the new buyer season opens and I pull 46k instead and I get an even better deal it will make it all better. And because I'm a nice guy I'll buy you a free lunch, that way you only miss out on a shade below 10k of net marginal value, cause I will feel bad that you missed out on a piece of the commission pie.
  9. Sorry I just completely disagree with your rationale. For one, it is completely illogical to assume a 100% chance that Roy is never going to live up this "value". I'm not suggesting the odds are even high, that's not terribly relevant. It doesn't matter to Dallas if he WOULD have played well or NOT well for US. They only care about what he does for them. That's the carrot they are pricing out. That's far more relevant than what his worth is to us, because it doesn't matter how one uses it, an asset is an asset, and what I do with that asset isn't the same as what you might do with an asset. Let's say I was dirt poor and I had a brand new Corvette I won on a game show and I can't afford the insurance on it so it sits in my garage and collects dust. Well the car's worth 50k, so you can give me 50k or I'll find somebody else to do business with. Maybe I'll let you talk me into 45k because I'm desperate and in a hurry to do something and I'll take a hit to get it done with, but I"m not going to stoop to 40k. Try all you want. Sure it's 40k more than I had before, but I'm only losing 5k on my end, cause 45k is my breakeven price to sell, so I'm only giving up 5k of perceived value whereas you are giving up 10k since you can value the car at 50k. If you can walk away with losing 10k on the margin of an opportunity then I can live with losing 5k, you're losing more than me on marginal differences. If that's how you want to play it, then so be it. Call me when you change your mind. Oh and feel free to threaten me on the way out saying I can't close my 5k loss to a number less than 5k, I have a track record of proving people like you wrong virtually 100% in situations similar to this. I will get my price or closer to it than you're offer, and when I lose 4k on margin by getting stuck at 41k with somebody else, you still lose your 10k margin of an opportunity. Have a nice day Jerry.
  10. That's exactly what they did, in concept. The nomenclature and application was surely modified in some way. But that's all my OE% does is rationalize things with a logical baseline for purposes of making decisions and then executing maneuvers when you end up on the good side of the logical-strategy breakeven line. Looks like the Cowboys quickly extended the contract too, so they probably have a sweetheart deal because Roy is really excited to be there. It may be presumptions to say so, but I'm going to guess that Roy got less than what he could have got, so in the game between the Cowboys and the Lions and the Cowboys vs. Roy Williams, It looks like the Cowboys probably won both rounds. Look for Jerry Jones and on the tube tonight with some serious perma-grin.
  11. No, I'm assuming the same general risk that is always at play. You are assuming the first rounder we draft doesn't blow out his knee or become a bust as well. I'd rather assume that Williams doesn't blow out a knee moreso than assume an end of the round first rounder is going to be a pro bowl talent in the NFL.
  12. Man you can't compare this trade to the Randy Moss trade in the slightest. There were massively different dynamics at play in that situation, it's nothing remotely close to this one.
  13. Well whatever helps you sleep at night! Oh, and I'm twice as insane about football as baseball. There's a bigger discrepancy of mistakes in the Lion's organization than the Tigers as well as the average NFL team compared to baseball. It's really, really bad throughout the league. Jerry Jones however looks like he runs a really tight ship on logical organizational decisions. Logic trumps everything in the world of game theory, and he seems to have a really solid grasp of logic from my observations at a glance.
  14. I am the last guy on the planet to be a candidate for an "attention whore". Your post is what the bait is, and it's uncalled for and a waste of everybody's time. If you don't know how to assess me as a person correctly, then don't bother trying, or I'm going to call you out for an invalid diagnosis, Mr. Wongabit.
  15. No, no, no. That's not how you evaluate a trade. That's very poor logic. Yes the Lions get something in return, but they could have, and should have got more. They lost to the breakeven point of what they could have got if they negotiated successfully, and they fell short of that mark by a significant amount that is worth complaining about. The Lions lost overall on this deal, because they received compensation back below the break even point, thus they have incurred an opportunity cost of the differential of what they had potential to get if they handled negotiations more efficiently. I see you are happy with the trade, well that's fine, your entitled to you opinion on your evaluation of the trade. The Lions did a disservice to the team however with this trade. I just call them like I see them.
  • Create New...