Sign in to follow this  
csv2209

2020 Buy Low/Sell High Thread

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, dnorma2 said:

If ekeler classifies as selling high than this thread is meaningless ... Saying sell high on ekeler is like me saying sell high on mixon right now ... Or sell high on barkeley right now..  that has never been how sell high was used ... Or sell high on Akers .... If I bought a house and it lost 20 percent of it's value in a month that's not sell high ... That's cut my losses ... And if you think it's not going to get better that's an arbitrary opinion ... It could very well get better ... So you don't know if you are selling high for the future but you so know your not selling high from whence you purchased   

Please stop explaining what sell high and buy low are.  Everyone has their stance, tell us the players that qualify and why. Thats all. This thread does not need to turn into definitions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, JacobThunder15 said:

Please stop explaining what sell high and buy low are.  Everyone has their stance, tell us the players that qualify and why. Thats all. This thread does not need to turn into definitions

Sell high on joe mixon 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But low on Michael Thomas?

 

High ankle sprains can ruin entire seasons so I don’t know if I want him at all and that’s the first question.

If so, J Conner for Thomas non ppr. I have Snell and Conners injury doesn’t sound nearly as serious. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, dnorma2 said:

If ekeler classifies as selling high than this thread is meaningless ... Saying sell high on ekeler is like me saying sell high on mixon right now ... Or sell high on barkeley right now..  that has never been how sell high was used ... Or sell high on Akers .... If I bought a house and it lost 20 percent of it's value in a month that's not sell high ... That's cut my losses ... And if you think it's not going to get better that's an arbitrary opinion ... It could very well get better ... So you don't know if you are selling high for the future but you so know your not selling high from whence you purchased   

This. Others seem to not to get it but it’s not our duty to explain. If I’m being told Ekeler is a sell high and Corey Davis is a buy low, then this thread is bonkers. That’s my perspective. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, FreakFries said:

But low on Michael Thomas?

 

High ankle sprains can ruin entire seasons so I don’t know if I want him at all and that’s the first question.

If so, J Conner for Thomas non ppr. I have Snell and Conners injury doesn’t sound nearly as serious. 

Don't sell high on mixon ... I was just trying to show the threads stupidity ... But if the owner of thomas start winless for a few weeks you maybe get him fairly cheap ... He could be a season winning gamble ... Who knows but he is a buy low gamble for sure ... He ain't playing for another 2 to three weeks though... Saints will be careful 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sell high on Marlon Mack.  He's already played his best game of the season.

Futurama-Oh-I-Made-myself-sad.gif

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, CooL said:

This. Others seem to not to get it but it’s not our duty to explain. If I’m being told Ekeler is a sell high and Corey Davis is a buy low, then this thread is bonkers. That’s my perspective. 

Yes, we're aware. You've made that breathtakingly obvious on multiple occasion. What you've lacked in subtlety and nuance with other perspectives has been made up for with relentless replications of the same point and I think the rest of the thread would like to move on at this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, AnonymousRob said:

Yes, we're aware. You've made that breathtakingly obvious on multiple occasion. What you've lacked in subtlety and nuance with other perspectives has been made up for with relentless replications of the same point and I think the rest of the thread would like to move on at this point.

Taking the high road I see ... But maybe your right ... We are just to stupid to see the extreme subtlety and nuances of your argument ... Selling high and buying low applies to all players no matter what ... Now I'm starting to see what I been missing here lol 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, dnorma2 said:

Taking the high road I see ... But maybe your right ... We are just to stupid to see the extreme subtlety and nuances of your argument ... Selling high and buying low applies to all players no matter what ... Now I'm starting to see what I been missing here lol 

 

 

If this is the only way your brain can handle interpreting the concept OK. Seems to me people needing someone to tell you the obvious huge game from a bum and horrible game from a first round pick are 'new to fantasy.' Some here are capable of interpreting the concept on a more sophisticated level. I would suggest it would be more deserving of a discussion than the, again, OBVIOUS huge game from a bum and horrible game from a first round pick. The only people who will fall for a trade offer like that ....are the ones new to fantasy football.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, this guy right here said:

It's as high as they believe it will be. If you think someone has no value and you get value for him you've sold high.

No. The concept is exactly the same as selling anything else, like stocks. Say you buy a stock for $75(Ekeler) and it drops to $50. But you think it'll keep dropping, so you sell and say 'I sold high! It's going to $25'. No you cut your losses and got out. The 'high' in selling high refers to selling at the peak of it's value. You can take a commonly used term and modify it and call it a nuance but it's not really helping people have meaningful discussions.

 

Anyways, I don't want to derail the thread so that's all I'll say about that.

Edited by owenmills
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, owenmills said:

No. The concept is exactly the same as selling anything else, like stocks. Say you buy a stock for $75(Ekeler) and it drops to $50. But you think it'll keep dropping, so you sell and say 'I sold high! It's going to $25'. No you cut your losses and got out. The 'high' in selling high refers to selling at the highest point you owned it. You can take a commonly used term and modify it and call it a nuance but it's not really helping people have meaningful discussions.

 

Anyways, I don't want to derail the thread so that's all I'll say about that.

 

We're both correct. 

 

Sorry you can't see/ admit it.

Just take the win that I recognize and agree with your argument.

Edited by this guy right here
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would you trade away injury prone conner for gordon? Especially with lindsay hurt

Edited by Mrv100k

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, this guy right here said:

 

If this is the only way your brain can handle interpreting the concept OK. Seems to me people needing someone to tell you the obvious huge game from a bum and horrible game from a first round pick are 'new to fantasy.' Some here are capable of interpreting the concept on a more sophisticated level. I would suggest it would be more deserving of a discussion than the, again, OBVIOUS huge game from a bum and horrible game from a first round pick. The only people who will fall for a trade offer like that ....are the ones new to fantasy football.

 

 

Interpreting the concept? .... I'm just using the concept in the way every fantasy article about sell high buy low is used .... If you want to start a thread entitled cut your losses that's fine ... But it's not sell high ... You can use words likes sophisticated all you want to describe your argument but it doesn't mean your argument is sophisticated ... All your doing is perverting concepts and than acting like your extremely intelligent and then insulting the other side ... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the frustrating thing, guys. Let's say we all agree to sell high on Corey Davis because he's a one week fluke and will turn into a bum again. If that's the case, who is buying? Why would anyone buy these sell highs if we all agree they're a sell high and are going to lose a lot of value in the coming weeks? If they're giving nothing of value then why are you selling for some scrub you're going to cut?

 

If we all agree a player is a buy low, why would anyone sell? Why would a single owner give away their player if every single person agrees their real value is much higher than than what we've seen thus far?

 

Literally the only way any of this happens is from different people looking at the exact same situation and coming to different results. Yes, that means literally every player mentioned in these threads can be seen as BOTH a sell high and a buy low, depending entirely how you think they're going to perform going forward. If the only acceptable answer is collective groupthink and zero difference of opinion then this entire thread, and forum as a whole, are largely useless. JFC.

spacer.png

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm interested in buying Mark Ingram. Seems his owners are really distraught and ready to chalk him up as a bust. I'm not ready to say he's lost the job to Dobbins. I think he's still going to get double digit weekly touches on what might end up being the best offense in football (Chiefs will probably be #1 but Ravens have a decent chance).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, AnonymousRob said:

Here's the frustrating thing, guys. Let's say we all agree to sell high on Corey Davis because he's a one week fluke and will turn into a bum again. If that's the case, who is buying? Why would anyone buy these sell highs if we all agree they're a sell high and are going to lose a lot of value in the coming weeks? If they're giving nothing of value then why are you selling for some scrub you're going to cut?

 

If we all agree a player is a buy low, why would anyone sell? Why would a single owner give away their player if every single person agrees their real value is much higher than than what we've seen thus far?

 

Literally the only way any of this happens is from different people looking at the exact same situation and coming to different results. Yes, that means literally every player mentioned in these threads can be seen as BOTH a sell high and a buy low, depending entirely how you think they're going to perform going forward. If the only acceptable answer is collective groupthink and zero difference of opinion then this entire thread, and forum as a whole, are largely useless. JFC.

spacer.png

Sigh.  This argument about the definition of buy low and sell high is as silly as the one several weeks ago in some thread about what "non-zero" means.  It's even sillier given that a grade school kid could explain the concept of buying low and selling high.

Of course there has to be different perceptions of value.  That's how the marketplace works.  There is a buyer and a seller.  If somebody didn't want to give something away and somebody didn't want possession, there is no exchange of goods. But everything - and in fantasy football every player- has a commonly accepted intrinsic value.  In this case, consensus ADP rankings.  You may tweak your own rankings yourself, but you would be the outlier.  You might assign second round value to Peyton Barber or Corey Davis, but 99% of the public would not.  If you are willing to give up Mike Evans for either of them, 99% of people would be smashing the accept button.  

We've seen who Peyton Barber and Corey Davis are.  Maybe this is the year that they finally put it all together.  So you want to buy.  Great.  And maybe they do return second round value when the season is done. But you're not buying low compared to what the commonly accepted intrinsic value is of the player.  You're buying high and hoping it goes higher.  In most cases, this concept fails.  There are however exceptions, such as Devante Parker of last year.  

The point of this thread is to find value (buying low) and to capitalize on inflated value (selling high).  And every transaction does indeed rely on having somebody think the opposite of what you do.  Somebody will think that Corey Davis is only going to continue to skyrocket and smash.  And they will thinking they're buying low and getting in before it goes even higher.  Somebody will allow that transaction to occur.  I'm suggesting in this scenario that somebody would be you.

Back to football.  I want to buy low on DJ Chark,  He only caught 3 for 25 and a TD.  Owners might be disappointed and without the TD it would have been abysmal.  But Minshew only threw 20 passes.  Got to think that they'll need to throw more in the future. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, cheezor42 said:

Buy low AJB and Diontae Johnson come to mind 

 

As a Diontae owner, I wouldn't even remotely consider selling him "low" after 10 targets in week one. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, FreakFries said:

But low on Michael Thomas?

 

High ankle sprains can ruin entire seasons so I don’t know if I want him at all and that’s the first question.

If so, J Conner for Thomas non ppr. I have Snell and Conners injury doesn’t sound nearly as serious. 

I can't see a scenario where anyone makes this trade. Conner is injured and looked terrible. Thomas is injured but most likely whenever he returns, you are getting a top 3 WR. Getting Conner does not help a team in the near future and may not in the long term either.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MMLSU said:

I can't see a scenario where anyone makes this trade. Conner is injured and looked terrible. Thomas is injured but most likely whenever he returns, you are getting a top 3 WR. Getting Conner does not help a team in the near future and may not in the long term either.


I see what you’re saying and that could happen but high ankle sprains can ruin entire seasons. 
 

How confident can you be that MT is effective when he cones back? 100%? 75%?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, CooL said:

Sigh.  This argument about the definition of buy low and sell high is as silly as the one several weeks ago in some thread about what "non-zero" means.  It's even sillier given that a grade school kid could explain the concept of buying low and selling high.

Of course there has to be different perceptions of value.  That's how the marketplace works.  There is a buyer and a seller.  If somebody didn't want to give something away and somebody didn't want possession, there is no exchange of goods. But everything - and in fantasy football every player- has a commonly accepted intrinsic value.  In this case, consensus ADP rankings.  You may tweak your own rankings yourself, but you would be the outlier.  You might assign second round value to Peyton Barber or Corey Davis, but 99% of the public would not.  If you are willing to give up Mike Evans for either of them, 99% of people would be smashing the accept button.  

We've seen who Peyton Barber and Corey Davis are.  Maybe this is the year that they finally put it all together.  So you want to buy.  Great.  And maybe they do return second round value when the season is done. But you're not buying low compared to what the commonly accepted intrinsic value is of the player.  You're buying high and hoping it goes higher.  In most cases, this concept fails.  There are however exceptions, such as Devante Parker of last year.  

The point of this thread is to find value (buying low) and to capitalize on inflated value (selling high).  And every transaction does indeed rely on having somebody think the opposite of what you do.  Somebody will think that Corey Davis is only going to continue to skyrocket and smash.  And they will thinking they're buying low and getting in before it goes even higher.  Somebody will allow that transaction to occur.  I'm suggesting in this scenario that somebody would be you.

Back to football.  I want to buy low on DJ Chark,  He only caught 3 for 25 and a TD.  Owners might be disappointed and without the TD it would have been abysmal.  But Minshew only threw 20 passes.  Got to think that they'll need to throw more in the future. 

 

 

Yes - this.  I don't see why it's so hard for people to grasp this.  Trade values are ALWAYS going to be subjective to different owners.   You use that knowledge to create an offer.  If a guy has been burned by week 1 injury in the past, he might be more willing to give away Michael Thomas for a lesser name than usual.  A guy may have watched the Giants and think that Saquon will be facing 8 man fronts all year, so they want to bail.  Maybe in their mind they're "selling high" based on his name strength.   If a team is 0-2, they tend to go into panic mode, and you can get some good trade offers through because they want to 'shake it up.'     

 

It's always subjective, and the better you know your league mate tendencies, the easier it is to work a trade to your advantage.  

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.