How can anyone say they would take the unknown over a proven commodity?
Printable View
How can anyone say they would take the unknown over a proven commodity?
Well, it would depend on how good the proven commodity is. If we're talking AJ Feeley proven vs Unknown Bradford, I could see how one could make the argument for unknown over proven. What are you referring to specifically?
Proven as in a proven star or upper echelon player in the NFL
You never said that, you just said proven.Quote:
Originally Posted by bruce4life
How about the flip side, why should they take our unproven draft picks for their proven player? You just said, how could anyone take the picks over the proven player, why should the other team?
Yeah, I think AtlantaRamFan summed it up. You're most likely to take an unknown commodity if you're not satisfied with the known commodity.
I'm assuming this thread is about trading for a wide receiver or something like that, so I'd just point out that even players on other teams are not truly known commodities as far as the Rams are concerned. Randy Moss wasn't what the Raiders had hoped he would be in his time there. Roy Williams' first two seasons in Dallas did not come close to matching his production in Detroit. When Peerless Price was in Buffalo, they used to talk about him and Eric Moulds being options 1a and 1b; he faded into obscurity after he signed in Atlanta.
Draft prospects are not true unknowns either. It's not like teams are just picking names out of a hat. There's tape on them, interviews, workouts, etc.
Look at it like this - you need a car. You hear that a guy in the next town has a '79 Firebird with a blueprinted and balanced 455, with a Holley 750 double-pumper, N2O, 4-speed with Hays clutch, 411 rear end, and you've seen this thing run a quarter in 11.21. He's asking $12,500. The body looks to be in great shape, and from the first glance, you want it.
Then there's a new Dodge Challenger. It has the 5.7 liter Hemi, 6-speed manual, and is the deep pearl blue - which would look fantastic with gold stripes. The dealer is willing to cut the price down to $22,500.
The Firebird has a history of being fast. The Challenger hs never been on the street. The Firebird has a reputation of being the best. The Challenger...well, it looks like a killer.
So...what to do?
Let's look at the Firebird closely. The body looks good from a distance..but when you get close, you can see where rust has started, the body is beat up and filled with Bondo, the engine has a LOT of miles on it, and it has been in the shop for repair many times. You'll never get it back to perfect condition, but if you invest $8000-$10,000, you might have a real performer for a couple of years.
Now, the Challenger - brand new, not even a chip in the paint. LOW miles. It may not run low 11's...yet...but you CAN improve it's performance. If you take care of it, you can have a great car for at least 10 years, barring any accidents.
So, do you end up spending a total of $20,500-$22,500 for a used car, clearly past it's glory days, just because it looks hot and was once known for being a street king? Or do you spend the $22,500 on that new car, knowing only that it is better than most, and has potential to be even better than the Firebird at it's best?
I'd grab that Challenger in a minute.
That's why you sometimes take the unknown.
I immediately thought of that quote from American Beauty after RamsfanSam.Quote:
1970 Pontiac Firebird. The car I've always wanted and now I have it. I rule!
Excellent points. The older models with some wear and tear come cheaper, but may not be as good as their name anymore. If you want one in their prime, they are going to cost you picks and money.