I just posted this in response to somebody on different thread, but I put some effort into it, and I would like to know what people think about it. I know there's been some disagreement over whether or not we should trade Foles. Here's what I assume a lot of people's reasoning to be, and here is my response to that:
...Foles is not evaluated yet, Vick is in decline. ... Yes its not Philadelphia Foles, but if we want to know what are we trading (?)away we should evaluate it first properly.
You need to evaluate every player before you trade them? If he is unevaluated then shouldn’t his value to us be what he was worth as a draft pick? i.e. Doesn’t it make sense that: If we draft a player with the 88th pick in the draft, and he is unevaluated, then we don’t know if he is worth more or less than the 88th pick. So if he is unevaluated, then he is worth what we paid for him at the moment (the 88th pick). If he is worth the 88th pick, then assuming the value of a pick in his draft is equal to the value of a pick in the current draft, then he is worth the 88th pick in the current draft. Now taking statistical probability into the equation, if he is unevaluated, then there is a certain % chance that he is worth more than his value as a pick (worded optimistically). The % chance that he is worth more than the value of his pick declines as the projected value increases. So assuming the probabilities are reasonable, the chance that he is worth more than the 34th pick is low. Now the question you need to ask yourself is: Would you take the low probability chance that he is worth more than the 34th pick, or would take the sure thing (100% chance) that he is worth the 34th pick and receive that as compensation in return for him?