This week I'm looking at going Dickson to Kennedy or Milera (as many others are also looking at now that he wasn't named to play) the transaction sacrifices 1trade for around 60k added cash-flow this week compared to holding on to Dickson with a BE of only -20 odd and hoping he is named next week and then rises 20k or so.. (let's ignor their JS issues, potential to maintain scoring rate & the benefit of a slow burn cashcow) the question is then, how much added cash-flow is required to justify burning a trade? if 1trade = 50k added cash-flow in the first week and 150k over 3weeks then a "R3 correction" trade of Dickson to a better cashcow would be justifiable I use Dickson as an example but this applies to all cashcow rookies
If we all knew the exact formula we'd be brilliant at this game. Personally I'm not sure. If you already have the cash to direct swap Dickson to Milera I think you do it as a Round 3 correctional trade. If you don't have the cash then burning two trades for one rookie is probably over the top.
I would tend to agree but my question was more to see people's opinion on the value of added cash-flow vs the value of preserving trades at this stage of the season.basics of good business are about managing cash-flow but trades are a precious commodity so how much added cash-flow is 1trade worth? tough question I kno n there's no right or wrong answer just interested in people's opinion
I would suggest most coaches here would accept a burned sideways trade to get a good rookie is worth it.