Analysis of Romo / Portis Trade

Now that the season is over, we can evaluate the Romo / Portis trade.  Here are the QB and RB averages from week #7 to #17, using only players who played 5 games or more during that span:

QBs
1. Brady 26.6
2. Roeth 20.3
3. Brees 20.0
4. Romo 18.6
5. P Manning 17.5
[no QB was excluded due to not having played the minimum of 5 games]

RBs
1. LT 16.1
2. Westbrook 15.3
3. S-Jax 14.0
4. J Lewis 13.8
5. Portis 13.0
[L Johnson was excluded because he only played 2 games]
 

So a trade that involves QB4 and RB5 is lopsided? 

To look at it from another angle, for every week I picked a starting lineup for Beaud and UJ as if the trade had not occurred.  For Beaud, every week that Romo started, I calculated the differential between Romo and Roeth (except week 17 where I used Rivers since Roeth did not play).  For the RB position, I compared the projected averages from the website I use.  If Parker's projection was above Portis, I assumed that Beaud would have started Parker even if the trade had not happened.  If Portis had a higher projection, I calculated the differential between Portis and Parker's actual scores that week.  For UJ I did the same.  If Romo had a higher projection than P Manning, I assumed UJ would have started Romo instead of P Manning and I calculated the differential in the actual scores.  If P Manning had a higher projection for a particular week, I assumed that trade or no trade did not make a difference for UJ - P Manning would have been the starter anyway.  For the RB, if UJ started Portis, then I calculated the differential between Portis and the RB that UJ benched (J Lewis or E James).  If UJ elected to bench Portis in a particular week, then obviously the trade had no impact.  For the rookie, when UJ started Jacoby Jones, I calculated the differential between Jones and the rookie who had the higher projection.  Here are the results
 

Beaud week #7-17

-15.5

0.0

-10.0

0.0

30.5

18.5

6.5

8.5

-34.3

-22.8

-29.0

UJ week #7-17

 
For example, in week #7, Beaud started Romo (who scored 11.25 pts) but Roeth was benched with 25 pts.  At RB, Beaud started K Jones and Parker (LT was on bye) but K Jones' projection was lower than Portis.  Portis scored 15.75 pts and K Jones 14 pts so the trade cost Beaud 1.75 pts for the RB and 13.75 pts for the QB, for a total of 15.5 pts lost in week #7.  In week #11 it was the other way around.  Beaud scored 30.5 more points due to having made the trade than if Beaud had not traded.  In total, Beaud lost 47.5 pts due to making the trade (gain of 0.75 pt at the QB position and loss of 48.25 pts at the RB position).  In total for weeks #7-17, UJ scored 55.0 more points due to the trade (gain of 9.75 pts at QB, gain of 43 pts at RB, gain of 2.25 pts at ROO). 

Based on the differentials above, I calculated the impact on rank-points every week.  Beaud would have finished 1 rank-point higher in the standings if there had been no trade (so no real impact... Beaud have won the league anyway), and UJ would have finished 9.5 rank-points lower without the trade so UJ would have finished in 7th place instead of 5th place. 

CONCLUSION:

Next time you comment on a trade made by other teams, be careful about publicly displaying your weak trade evaluation skills - you might look foolish in the process. 

Also, if you dare request a veto on someone else's trade, make sure it's an obvious case of collusion rather than your own personal opinion of who won the trade. 

PQBFL Home | Season 2007 | Standings 2007 | Leaders By Position 2007