RuntheDamnBall Posted July 28, 2014 Share Posted July 28, 2014 The sort of numbskull Spiller thread had me thinking this morning about good "football trades" where there was some combination of player-for-player involved. They're rare if not non-existent, with teams seeming to prefer to defer the return on a player in favor of draft pick assets. Because the draft is a place where big busts and home runs happen with the most frequency, this also means teams are thought to have really won or lost trades involving picks. I understand to an extent why this happens - teams generally have surplus value in players at certain positions. Yet often by the time this value is discovered (and often, in-season): 1) there isn't a match with another team that has a surplus in an area of need for Team 1 2) Everybody has draft picks, and parting with them doesn't represent risk in the current season 3) Everybody has draft picks, and notwithstanding a guess at where someone will finish, you can measure offers among teams a little more quantitatively. 4) The NFL is a sport that allows you to trade picks, where baseball isn't. Still, player-for-player moves are more frequent in each of the other major sports. 5) The NFL trade deadline is fairly early, meaning that a bad team can't dump its star running back, for, say, an intriguing OL prospect that isn't getting reps. Furthermore, good teams want to hold onto their good players, because injuries are so frequent. The only trade I could think of off of the top of my head was actually the draft-related Manning-for-Rivers one, which was unique of course in that neither guy had played a down for his team yet, and the trade was more complex because of it ended up involving 2004 draft pick Nate Kaeding, 2005 pick Shawne Merriman, and Roman Oben in a subsequent trade. Still, you can look at it as a trade that worked for all involved. The Giants got Eli and a couple of SB wins under his direction, and the Chargers achieved greater respectability after some down years, even if they didn't make a SB. Bennett-Bell-Dickerson also involved a bunch of picks. Sheppard for Hughes is one that we have to feel like the Bills won. What about others that didn't involve draft picks? And how many of these can be called good "football trades" where both sides benefited? Interested to see some examples from those that know the history better, as well as your own theories as to why we don't see these trades more often in the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
You herd it hear last Posted July 28, 2014 Share Posted July 28, 2014 There probably is a component of overvaluation your player and to undervalue the other guy. Making the occurrence even more unlikely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Says Posted July 28, 2014 Share Posted July 28, 2014 There are also salary cap implications Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted July 28, 2014 Author Share Posted July 28, 2014 Good answers so far. I suspect, to build on You Herd's point, that with many more specialized systems (and combinations thereof) in the NFL, there are even fewer matches of players that coaches deem "right" for their system -- compared to the other sports. The intense training for 16, 19 max games is another reason teams might feel shy about parting with assets that they have spent valuable development time on. In baseball, there's also greater control of non-active-roster players (in the 40-man roster for talent that is at the major league level or close) and the minor league systems. Players at the fringes in the NFL simply tend to end up as cut victims or trying to catch on. There's not enough time to identify that your third TE could be a star, for another team to agree with you on that opinion, and for both teams to match up on an equivalent value. Any good trades that I've missed, though? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oberyn Posted July 28, 2014 Share Posted July 28, 2014 Another factor is the differences between each team and their playbooks/schemes/verbiage that make taking a player anytime after training camp very difficult. In baseball, there is essentially no difference between what a player does on one team and what they would do on another; if you are an outfielder, you cover the same ground, throw to the same cutoff man, and, of course, bat the same way. In football, for, say, a wide receiver, there are completely different route trees, hot reads, playcalling/line of scrimmage verbiage to pick up and understand, and, as is always discussed, the "chemistry" that has to develop between you and the QB so that you are on the same page. As an example, look at 2 years ago when Buffalo picked up Traveris Jackson - it was the week before the season, and he sat on the bench inactive all year despite the Bills having dreadful QB play because he never had the time/reps necessary to learn the playbook and the players and everything else that is necessary to be successful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted July 28, 2014 Share Posted July 28, 2014 Good answers so far. I suspect, to build on You Herd's point, that with many more specialized systems (and combinations thereof) in the NFL, there are even fewer matches of players that coaches deem "right" for their system -- compared to the other sports. The intense training for 16, 19 max games is another reason teams might feel shy about parting with assets that they have spent valuable development time on. In baseball, there's also greater control of non-active-roster players (in the 40-man roster for talent that is at the major league level or close) and the minor league systems. Players at the fringes in the NFL simply tend to end up as cut victims or trying to catch on. There's not enough time to identify that your third TE could be a star, for another team to agree with you on that opinion, and for both teams to match up on an equivalent value. Any good trades that I've missed, though? The sport with the most frequent "trades" is the NBA. Mainly because a star is a star and there are many situations where nothing is ran and someone just needs to "ball." Learning a whole new playbook in football is tougher and there isn't room for creativity, or taking over. You missed Welker to the Pats for a second and seventh. Not a good trade, but a trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFunPolice Posted July 28, 2014 Share Posted July 28, 2014 I agree that playbooks, systems, and coaches' egos all play into it. There are a few player for player trades each season (you mentioned Sheppard for Hughes) but none of those players have big contracts. I think the salary cap hit is the biggest reason not to trade any "name" players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted July 28, 2014 Author Share Posted July 28, 2014 The sport with the most frequent "trades" is the NBA. Mainly because a star is a star and there are many situations where nothing is ran and someone just needs to "ball." Learning a whole new playbook in football is tougher and there isn't room for creativity, or taking over. You missed Welker to the Pats for a second and seventh. Not a good trade, but a trade. True about Welker, but I was looking for player-for-player trades. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2020 Our Year For Sure Posted July 28, 2014 Share Posted July 28, 2014 (edited) Portis for Champ Bailey springs to mind, but that might've also involved pick(s). Edited July 28, 2014 by Aaron Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dhg Posted July 28, 2014 Share Posted July 28, 2014 (edited) There probably is a component of overvaluation your player and to undervalue the other guy. Making the occurrence even more unlikely. Darcy? Is that you posting on TBD? Finally coming clean about it? Edited July 28, 2014 by dhg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted July 28, 2014 Author Share Posted July 28, 2014 Portis for Champ Bailey springs to mind, but that might've also involved pick(s). Good spot. Interesting article on that one. http://www.denverbroncos.com/news-and-blogs/article-1/Remembering-The-Trade/3abbaba0-0779-4623-9254-9aafe8d3de14 You've got to feel like anytime a running back is being moved for a top-5 player at a skill position, that the team trading the RB wins. Even if the RB is all-world. It's just such an interchangeable position, though I won't deny that Portis was fantastic for a good stretch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted July 28, 2014 Share Posted July 28, 2014 Good spot. Interesting article on that one. http://www.denverbro...54-9aafe8d3de14 You've got to feel like anytime a running back is being moved for a top-5 player at a skill position, that the team trading the RB wins. Even if the RB is all-world. It's just such an interchangeable position, though I won't deny that Portis was fantastic for a good stretch. RB's have the shortest lives as well, look how long Bailey has been playing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Malooga Posted July 28, 2014 Share Posted July 28, 2014 (edited) Lots of interesting stuff out there on this topic...I personally think it has to do with continuity and getting fair value, especially at skill-positions. Largest trades in NFL history... http://en.wikipedia....l_League_trades NFL Trade Value PT. #1... http://grantland.com...rt-1-50-assets/ NFL Trade Value PT. #2... http://grantland.com...-assets-part-2/ What holds back NFL trades? (this article probably has the legit answers you are looking for...scheme, skepticism, financial plan, etc.) http://espn.go.com/n...back-nfl-trades Player trades? Rare in the NFL, except for Eagles... (quote from this article) http://www.nytimes.c...wanted=all&_r=0 With 53 players in an N.F.L. locker room and the value placed on player development, teams are less willing to sacrifice a player or take on another for short-term gain. That is why a deal is more likely to be made for a draft pick than for another player. Edited July 28, 2014 by Bob Malooga Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted July 28, 2014 Share Posted July 28, 2014 Lots of interesting stuff out there on this topic...I personally think it has to do with continuity and getting fair value, especially at skill-positions. Largest trades in NFL history... http://en.wikipedia....l_League_trades NFL Trade Value PT. #1... http://grantland.com...rt-1-50-assets/ NFL Trade Value PT. #2... http://grantland.com...-assets-part-2/ What holds back NFL trades? (this article probably has the legit answers you are looking for...scheme, skepticism, financial plan, etc.) http://espn.go.com/n...back-nfl-trades Player trades? Rare in the NFL, except for Eagles... (quote from this article) http://www.nytimes.c...wanted=all&_r=0 Good info there. I do miss the days where player-for-player trades were much more common. Dennis Shaw for Ahmad Rashad was great for the Bills. Bob Chandler for Phil Villapiano was a win-win for both teams. But then again, there was the Lamonica trade DOH. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts