A Review of "The Billion User Table" from 1729.com

(Before I get into my summary and thoughts on the article, I want to say that it was the best sales pitch for BitClout that I’ve seen on the internet, and I’m not even sure if it was intentional or not. It lays out a clear example of the small chance of complete domination by BitClout and that is enough that it should be taken seriously. I signed up for a BitClout account, same as my Twitter handle @cdjarrell, public key BC1YLih56UY4D3zR9UzWvfcER9tntox73hzbstfJ9QTfxxuAmckshV1)


Here is the article from Jon Stokes https://1729.com/the-billion-user-table. 1729 is a website from Balaji Srinivasan that wants to help people learn about crypto through challenges and tasks. This challenge/task was:

Write a review of this post on your social media page or (ideally) at your own domain. You can offer feedback, correct errors, or propose extensions; we ask only that you be constructive. We'll award up to ten $100 prizes to the best ten reviews.

--------------------------------


In summary, the argument for The Billion User Table is that instead of each app/company keeping their own proprietary store of user information, a single, public, decentralized spreadsheet could be kept on the blockchain that everyone could easily access and securely use. Put another way, it’d be the mother of all APIs: able to seamlessly share sensitive, personal information across any service or platform anonymously, privately, and securely. 


I view it almost as the single sign-on (SSO) to rule them all, in Lord of the Rings terms: you could instantly download any app, sign in with your blockchain digital identity (DID) private key, and it would pull all of your personal info directly into the app. The new app is seamlessly customized with no effort from the user but also with their total trust, again because it’s on the blockchain.


The Billion User Table might also lead to scenarios where the apps look to enable certain features for certain tiers/types of users; giving power users more control over their influence in the apps. Another useful possibility is an AI that ephemerally tests different apps that are not fully downloaded for a preview of what they could do if fully enabled, almost as an alternate realities App Store combinator. 

For example: The User Table could allow an AI program to see how your data from the TripAdvisor app you already have downloaded and use to plan your dream “remote work road trip around the US” could possibly line up with AirBNB or VRBO data (apps that you haven’t downloaded) of their vacancies and then could suggest places to stay along the way with the dates and locations already pre-programmed by the TripAdvisor data. Maybe they even offer you a discount to book the entire trip with VRBO over AirBNB or something! Then you could choose who to fully share your data with when you download those apps and use them to their capabilities.


The ultimate end goal would be to take on someone like Google, one of the Web2 digital identity behemoths that might or might not be able to adapt to Web3 (remains to be seen). The first question you ask is: how could you possibly take on Google? Well one way you could start is by becoming a more convenient/safe/beneficial product for the user than Google is currently as a SSO/DID. From there, you adapt.


Just as water will always find the easiest path downhill, society adopts technology that reduces friction in things that it wants to do.


2021 NFL Mock Draft

A tradition unlike any other: completing a mock draft while understanding that almost every pick will be wrong


Pick Team Player Position/College
1 JAX Trevor Lawrence QB Clemson
2 NYJ Zach Wilson QB BYU
3 SF Justin Fields QB Ohio State
4 ATL Kyle Pitts TE Florida
5 CIN Ja'Marr Chase WR LSU
6 MIA Penei Sewell OT Oregon
7 DET Jaylen Waddle WR Alabama
8 CAR Patrick Surtain II CB Alabama
9 DEN Trey Lance QB North Dakota State
10 DAL Jaycee Horn CB South Carolina
11 NYG DeVonta Smith WR Alabama
12 PHI Rashawn Slater OT Northwestern
13 LAC Alijah Vera-Tucker OG USC
14 MIN Christian Darrisaw OT Virginia Tech
15 NE Christian Barmore DT Alabama
16 ARI Teven Jenkins OT Oklahoma State
17 LV Jeremiah Owusu-Koramoah LB Notre Dame
18 MIA Zaven Collins LB Tulsa
19 WAS Micah Parsons LB Penn State
20 CHI Rashod Bateman WR Minnesota
21 IND Kwity Paye EDGE Michigan
22 TEN Greg Newsome II CB Northwestern
23 NYJ Caleb Farley CB Virginia Tech
24 PIT Najee Harris RB Alabama
25 JAX Travis Etienne RB Clemson
26 CLE Jaelan Phillips EDGE Miami (FL)
27 BAL Trevon Moehrig S TCU
28 NO Mac Jones QB Alabama
29 GB Jamin Davis LB Kentucky
30 BUF Alex Leatherwood OT Alabama
31 BAL Creed Humphrey OC Oklahoma
32 TB Asante Samuel Jr. CB Florida State


The Dimensionality of Our Thoughts, Knowledge, and Real-World Experiences


"Stupidity is the same as evil if you judge by the results." - Margaret Atwood

Bad ideas are the same as bad actions if you only judge by the real-world results.

We usually don't think of our thoughts, knowledge, or real-world experiences as having dimensions, like space and time do. But these do indeed have dimensional properties and can be described as such with simple mathematical examples and diagrams.


Some highlights below include:

  • Thoughts are one-dimensional and aren't "real", but we can create real knowledge by acting on our ideas
  • Knowledge is two-dimensional, real, and can be seen/heard/read by others. Knowledge = Ideas x Action
  • Real-World Experience is three-dimensional, real, can be seen/heard/read AND can be felt by others. Real-World Experience = Ideas x Action x Environment
  • Wisdom is what stands in the end after the summation of all of our experiences over time


Let's get going.


________________________________________


1st Dimension = Thought Value



Picture a number line [-10] on the left to [+10] on the right, centered around the number [0]. The numbers represent value added to your life, both positive value [+] and negative value [-].



Zero represents your current position in life -- we'll call this your Initial Starting Position.  Everyone starts at [0] on this number line because that's where they currently are at in life. 


Whenever we have a thought or idea, we're going to assign a value to that thought. We'll call this Thought Value.


Any idea that benefits your Initial Starting Position is considered a [+] Idea; since it adds positive value to your life we'll move on the number line to the right, regardless of if the idea is a small benefit or a large benefit to your life. The best possible idea you could have regarding any given scenario would be considered a [+10] Idea, whereas no idea/no positive value added to your current situation is a [0] Idea.



We don't only have good ideas unfortunately, so any bad idea would be considered a [-] Idea. These are given a negative Thought Value and move your position to the left on the number line. The worst possible idea -- the idea that would hurt you the most in life -- would be considered [-10] Idea and a bad [0] Idea doesn't hurt you at all.



Now this next bit is very important: since your Thought Value had both a magnitude (7) AND a direction (right [+]), it's technically considered a vector of [+7]. The opposite negative Thought Value vector would be [-7] (7 to the left [-]).


Here's something interesting about vectors: vectors are one-dimensional. Since we're saying this Thought Value is a vector, Thought Value is also one-dimensional


Why is this important? 


While the thoughts and ideas that we have matter greatly to us, it's tough to hear but they don't really matter that much to the rest of the real world. How many thoughts have you had over the years? And the ones that stayed as just thoughts, what did they amount to in the end? Think of the energy it takes to have a thought, any thought, whether good or bad. It's negligible. Good ideas by themselves are a dime a dozen.

But there is something we can do to make those ideas real and create real-world value. 


We can act on them.


________________________________________


2nd Dimension = Knowledge Value


We're now going to add another number line to the one before, this one similarly centered around the number [0]. However, now the second number line is going to be oriented vertically, with [-10] on the bottom and [+10] on the top. Plus, this new vertical number line (the Y-axis to our Idea X-axis) doesn't rate an idea like the horizontal one. This one rates whether the action that we took on the idea was positive or negative.



You may have two important questions: 
1. How can an action on an idea be considered positive or negative? 
2. How do we know how this action is applied -- whether the positive action is added to the positive idea, or if it's multiplied times it?


Let's first dive into how an action on an idea can be considered positive or negative. 


In this example, imagine you had a [+7] Idea at work; for instance, you realize a way to cut supply costs by 10%.
  • [+] Action on this [+7] Idea would be to email it your boss with some quick supporting facts. Let's consider this a +4 Action
  • [0] Action would be doing nothing with this [+7] Idea and letting it pass
  • [-] Action on this [+7] Idea would be doing the opposite of the [+] Action above = NOT saving 10% after having that [+7] Idea by choosing to avoid telling your boss about it. In this case, this would be considered a [-4] Action

Now, to the second question from before, how can we know if this Action is added to or multiplied times the Idea?


The answer is Ideas and their Actions have a multiplicative relationship and their values should be multiplied. Consider this simple math question as proof: if you took a [0] Action (or better yet didn't take any action at all) on a [+7] Idea, would the combined Idea-Action be unchanged in total value at [+7] -- thus indicating an additive relationship since [+7] + [0] = [+7] -- or would the new total value be [0] -- thus indicating a multiplicative relationship since [+7] x [0] = [0]


The relationship between Ideas and Actions is multiplicative, since taking a [0] Action on a [+] Idea results in... nothing happening.

Ideas without actions go nowhere, and actions without ideas produce nothing. Think about how much energy is required to have a good or bad idea -- it's negligible. Ideas without actions are worthless. 

Here's an exciting thing about vectors though: when you multiply two one-dimensional vectors together, you get two-dimensional plane! This two-dimensional plane is knowledge.




Knowledge isn't a fancy degree, it's what you do with that degree.  Knowledge is not using complicated language when writing, it's what you convey with that writing.

  • [+] Idea x [0] Action [0] Knowledge Value
  • [-] Idea [0] Action [0] Knowledge Value

Conversely, think about the opposite scenario:

  • [0] Idea [+] Action [0] Knowledge Value
  • [0] Idea [-] Action [0] Knowledge Value

"Action without knowledge is foolish and knowledge without action is futile." -  Jim OShaughnessy


There's a big difference in the real world between one-dimensional vectors like Thought Value vs. the two-dimensional plane of Knowledge Value: knowledge can be written down, talked about, and shared with someone right next to you or with someone that lived centuries ago half a world away, but thoughts only exist in our heads. 


The key is taking action; whether something small like jotting it down or something more involved like writing a 10,000 word blog post or giving a TED Talk about it. Taking action instantly changes something ephemeral into something real, something that can be molded, built upon, and made much larger than ever imagined before. 


But you have to act on it. 


If you don't, then the real two-dimensional Knowledge Value will forever stay an imaginary one-dimensional Thought Value.



The good news -- and this is something that has been hammered home by Charlie Munger throughout the years -- is that you add [+] Knowledge Value to your life in two different ways, since [+] x [+] = [+] AND a [-] x [-] = [+]! 


What does this mean? You can add positive value to your life by getting smarter AND by avoiding being stupid. Add [+] Knowledge Value to your life by acting positively on good ideas AND by actively avoiding or doing the opposite of bad ideas.



There's another big difference between Thought Value and Knowledge Value: while Thought Value is limited to [-10] to [+10], since Knowledge Value is created by multiplying two of these 10's together it can range from [-100] to [+100]. That means that if you're just going by value added, knowledge can have a much bigger impact on your life. 


It's important to remember though that this excess can be both good [+] and bad [-]. So moral of the story: don't take a [-] Action on a [+] Idea since [-] x [+] = [-] or take a [+] Action on a [-] Idea since [+] x [-] = [-].



Unfortunately though, we know that the world isn't fully in our control and we can't just add [+] Knowledge Value to our lives and cut out [-] Knowledge Value; some things are completely out of our control.


________________________________________


3rd Dimension = Experience Value


Believe it or not, we're now going to add a third number line. This new XYZ graph has a third, diagonal axis ranging from a [-10] Environment rating where you find yourself in a situation that works negatively towards your knowledge (imagine that you had a really bad boss that felt threatened by everyone else) to a [+10] Environment that is friendly to your knowledge (like having a great boss and mentor).



This third number value is also found by multiplying values together; to prove it once again we'll consider what happens when you apply [+] Knowledge Value in a [0] Environment; for example, take the [+28] Knowledge Value that we found by multiplying a [+7] Idea times a [+4] Action and multiply it times a [0] Experience, and what do you get? Nothing. If your bad boss does nothing with your email containing [+] Knowledge, the real-world result is [0].


By multiplying three different one-dimensional vectors together, we are essentially creating a three-dimensional rectangular prism of real-world experience that we can call Experience Value




Just like other 3D objects in the real-world, Experience Value is definitely real and can be seen/heard/read by others, just like 2D Knowledge Value can (and unlike 1D Thought Value - which exists only in our minds). But Experience Value differs greatly in one key area: in that it can be felt by others too! 


Knowledge Value can be found by reading words in a book and knowing their definition, but Experience Value is reading those same words and actually knowing how it feels to have lived those experiences; to have stumbled and fell, but you gathered yourself, got up, and completed your goal. You acted on ideas in the real world and the real world acted back, and you felt it. 


This means real-world experience is more important than just gaining knowledge: the potential magnitude of our real-world Experience Value (3D object of max value 1000) >>> Knowledge Value (2D object of max value 100) >>> Thought Value (1D object of max value 10)! Also important is that both of the values that you can add to your life that are "real" (experience and knowledge) dwarf the value of thoughts that just stay in our heads. 


We must be careful though, because even if we have a big [+] Idea and combine it with a big [+] Action, we could end up with a [-] Experience Value in the end if we introduce the [+] Knowledge into a [-] Environment. Imagine, like before, that you applied the same [+7] Idea with a [+4] Action but that you have a really bad boss that can be considered a [-5] Environment. Since we know we need to multiple these values together, it's [+7] x [+4] x [-5] = [-140] Experience Value in total.



If however you have a good, supportive boss, this would be considered a [+] Environment for this [+] Knowledge to be introduced into. Imagine that your good boss has established a [+5] Environment and finds your [+28] Knowledge Value worthwhile, so she then forwards it on to her director with her recommendation. The resulting real-world value is [+140] Experience Value in the end, since the [+7] Idea applied via a [+4] Action introduced into the [+5] Environment is [+7] x [+4] x [+5] = [+140].



In summary, we can end up with [+] Experience Values in four possible ways:
  1. [+] x [+] x [+] = [+] since [+] Idea [+] Action [+] Environment = good boss rewards you for bringing good ideas to fruition
  2. [-] x [-] x [+] = [+] since [-] Idea [-] Action [+] Environment = good boss rewards you for actively avoiding bad ideas
  3. [+] x [-] x [-] = [+] since [+] Idea [-] Action [-] Environment = bad boss that would harm you for trying to one-up them subconsciously encourages you to actively avoid good ideas
  4. [-] x [+] x [-] = [+] since [-] Idea [+] Action [-] Environment = you have a bad idea that you're successful in convincing your boss to try but it fails because of a non-receptive environment or because you both can't bring it to fruition

Therefore, if we want to add positive value in our lives, we should aim for these positive real-world outcomes, ideally in those first two scenarios above.


________________________________________


Using this dimensionality framework, we can make the argument that there's potentially a fourth dimension, just like three-dimensional space and four-dimensional time. While this idea isn't as fully formed as the previous three dimension, one could consider the summation of the three-dimensional real-world Experience Values over time as a fourth-dimension. I'll call this summation of experiences Wisdom Value.



Wisdom is what is learned -- or what truth stands -- from real-world experiences over the test of time. So if we add up all the real-world Experience Values, what is left over is wisdom. You could argue that Wisdom Value is found from addition, not multiplication, by considering what an additional real-world [0] Experience Value does to your total value. Here, it's clear that a [0] Experience Value doesn't cancel out all other Experience Values that we've accumulated over time, so the relationship must be additive, not multiplicative.


________________________________________


Thank you for following along.


Book Highlights: "The Physics of Life" by Bejan

This is a tweet thread summary of "The Physics of Life: The Evolution of Everything" by Adrian Bejan, a chair professor of Mechanical Engineering at Duke University amazon.com/Physics-Life-E…

Originally gaining popularity with his Constructal Law in 1996, 20 years later he described it as: "For a flow system to persist in time (to live) it must evolve freely such that it provides greater access to its currents"

[I'd sum it up as "A system that is allowed to evolve freely over time, whether alive or inanimate, will look to survive by becoming more efficient in distributing its resources." I think the idea has a lot of merit in parts but may not be Bejan’s one law to rule them all]

In a nutshell, "The Physics of Life" explores how freedom is the most basic -- yet overlooked -- property of nature. Every natural entity has a tendency to move and make it easier to move over time and relies on the freedom to change to survive

When movement stops, life generally ends. The thermodynamic definition of the dead state is when a system is in complete equilibrium with its environment. Dead state means “nothing moves”: not the system, and not its inner workings either

The opposite of this is the live state. Here the system is not in equilibrium with its environment and is constantly being pushed and pulled, heated and cooled. In nature nothing moves unless forced to and it moves relative to its environment. Movement is contrast made visible

All systems that flow -- from river basins to animal migration -- evolve yet remain imperfect. Tech evolution is about the evolving design of moving people, things, ideas, etc. across the globe. Every new technology is an abrupt change towards increasing the efficiency of flow

Technology (and science, education, and culture and others) are examples of ways we open channels and help liberate whatever flows. Peter Vadasz said, "Any society has as much freedom as the available technology can provide and support"

A society that flows is wealthy and has a greater tendency to reconfigure itself to flow more and become wealthier. There is no end to this evolving design -- there is just the time direction of the evolutionary changes and the rate at which changes are occurring

Good is a government that facilitates the movement of society, it gets better when it becomes more efficient -- opening channels, shortening and straightening paths, removing roadblocks, and reducing wait times. More openness is the evolution toward freedom

In a free market, a lot of these channels are businesses, as they allow for the better design changes to be tested and whatever is best is kept over time. That which works most efficiently survives

Let's change gears and talk about what knowledge is/isn't. Knowledge is ideas (design changes) and action (implementation). Knowledge is not a thick book filled with fancy words, it is what you do with what you learn from the book

Knowledge is not just intelligence; intelligence measures someone's ability to achieve goals in a wide range of environments. If we’re to differentiate between knowledge and intelligence, then intelligence is the capacity to possess, create, and convey knowledge

Knowledge is also not just data -- data is the plural of datum (a given), something that is known or held. Data are the facts that we accumulate based on hypotheses, observations, and measurements. Like ideas, data is useless without action

Often this action is questioning. Knowing how to come up with and investigate questions is paramount in science; cultures that encourage questioning flourish, those that don’t flounder. Bejan's advice: Encourage anything goes, welcome the amateur, and be ready to be proven wrong

Knowledge flows from high to low -- from those who have it to those who wish to acquire it. When either end has nothing to offer, there’s no potential energy difference and the flow stops. The saying goes that old news does not travel

Knowledge as a system has always evolved to flow more easily: from one-room schools/churches to universities, from libraries to journals and now the Internet. All of these were created to make the flow of knowledge easier and longer lasting

Even if an idea is great and obvious, how it is conveyed matters. A good idea sounds familiar. We all come from a culture that retains what is good and forgets what is not. "When in Rome do as the Romans do. If you can’t beat them, join them. Go with the flow"

Ideas naturally progress from simple to complex, for something complex has to have come after something simple. Yet, in order to communicate complex ideas effectively, they must be made simpler. The more widespread something is, the simpler or more efficient it is

Ex. in language, more widespread languages are understood by less widespread ones, but not necessarily the other way around. Speakers of Moroccan and Algerian dialects of Arabic understand Egyptian Arabic easily, since Arabic popular culture is produced mainly in Egypt

Ex. in sports, the most watched sports are those with the fewest words in their rule books: Soccer (FIFA) 21,891 words; Basketball (NBA) 29,581; Baseball (MLB) 46,797; Hockey (NHL) 59,065; and Football (NFL) 70,033 [What about cricket?]

The natural tendency toward easier movement is why knowledge grows. In the beginning, it spreads slowly only to a few. Later, the spreading begins a sharp rise that eventually trails off. When graphed, the evolving area of the growing flow would look like an S-curve

The idea invades society faster and faster and then consolidates slowly. How fast the idea is adopted is shown by how steep the S is; better ideas have taller and steeper S-curves, old ideas have full S-curves, fresh ideas have the beginnings and dead ideas the ends

For anything that spreads point to area, in the beginning the channels are few but large. Think of the heat’s aorta or a city’s highways – few but allowing large amounts of volume to be moved relatively quickly. They then flow to many smaller avenues

These "few large and many small" designs are viewed as whole architecture systems and are constantly concerned with improving their flow. They collaborate, adjust and go through the process again toward a better flowing system, which is also better for each subsystem as well

Anything that evolves has a hierarchy in movement. Hierarchy unites producers and users, allocated to areas in a natural vascular design that covers the globe. Hierarchy is how the flow most easily covers the available area or volume

Think about the hierarchy of streets in the city: the secret to connecting street lengths is that at all length scales, the time needed to travel slowly is roughly the same as the time needed to travel fast. The slow travel is over a shorter distance than the fast travel

[This reminds me of the movement of planets around the Sun: if you draw an asymmetrical X through its orbit, the planet will cover the smaller length of orbit in the same amount of time as it will the longer path. Think of tossing up a stick of unequal weight at its end]

Ex. time is usually proportional from walking out the door to driving on the city streets, from the streets to highways, from highways back down to time spent on streets, and finally to parking and walking in the door to work

We see this same principle in airport design (think about the ATL airport): the time to walk (short and slow) on the concourse is the same as the time to ride (long and fast) on the train. This time balance is the natural rule of construction of all urban design

Trucks move weight more efficiently on highways than they do on streets, and one truck can carry as much a hundred cars. From a per unit cost, size makes for efficiency + longer life span. We see this in everything: animals, airplanes, rivers, atmospheric jets, and rolling stones

Life can seem complicated, but really it consists of just two measurements: life span and life travel. Bigger rivers live longer and travel farther. Bigger animals live longer and travel farther. Bigger stones roll farther, and their movement lasts longer. Bigger waves as well

From mice to the whales, animals are correlated by surprisingly accurate formulas relating animal body size to flow. We even find this same pattern with man-made machines as well, as larger machines are more efficient than smaller machines, as there’s less friction per unit moved

The reality of economies of scale is rooted in physics, and means that large parts belong on large vehicles, and small parts on small vehicles. There must be a proportionality between the size of the motor vehicle and the size of the fuel load used by the vehicle

Every river basin is not unique, since they all have a rule of how they’re constructed -- the Constructal Law. Related, every human sprinter is not unique, because running for speed has a rule as well: in addition to size, a high stride frequency is also advantageous

The fastest animal sprinters (cheetahs, Arabian horses, greyhounds) have bodies with high centers of gravity. From 1900 to 2002, the average height of the fastest human sprinters has increased 2.5x faster than the average height of the human population during the same period

Bejan then goes on to say that for sprinters that are equally tall, the center of gravity in athletes of West African origin is 3% higher on average [longer legs?] than of European origin athletes, and this 3% difference in height translates into a 1.5% advantage in speed

Legs are for land, and torsos are for water. The reverse of the example above is that those equally tall athletes of European origin have on average torsos that are 3% longer, and make waves that are 3% higher, giving them a 1.5% advantage in swimming speed

In baseball, varying player heights emerge on the field since greater throwing speed is needed across greater distances (i.e. third basemen tend to be taller than the better second basemen). The team naturally allocates talent on the field, so that the team performs better

The bottom line is that bigger bodies travel faster and perform more work per distance traveled. The work requirement decreases from sea to land to air, and explains why the movement of significant animal mass around the globe has spread in the same direction over time

Anything has to have balance to succeed, however. The primary objective of commercial airplanes is to carry people and freight a certain distance while using as little fuel as possible. The amount of fuel is proportional to the work delivered by the engine over the distance

To minimize fuel used, the total force must be reduced, given two constraints: the total mass is fixed and the wings must support the weight of the whole thing. The proportionality that naturally emerges is that the wingspan should be almost equal to the plane's length

This proportionality is also seen when building fires: they end up being about as tall as they are wide. To the ancient Greeks, "pyra" means wood to be set ablaze. So, the pyramids of Egypt are literally three-dimensional renderings of how the Greeks made their fire

This evolutionary design phenomenon is universally applicable: we want greater access, more freedom, less problems and friction, and longer life. These ideals guide us, like the natural urges to feel comfort, see beauty, and experience pleasure

In the end, it is good to be dissatisfied. It is good to be hungry, to want to do better. This is why Victor Hugo’s advice is timeless: "Change your opinions, keep your principles; change your leaves, keep intact your roots"

After all, optimism goes hand in hand with making choices with purpose. In humans, this means making choices for a better life in the future. Hope sustains life, and life means movement; for without movement, there is no life

[In summary, I enjoyed Bejan’s examples of life striving for greater efficiency, and loved the discussions on balance, proportionality, freedom, and movement. But “The Physics of Life” can lose focus and claim for the Constructal Law to do too much at times] / The End

Dolphins Trade Up Scenarios for the 2020 NFL Draft

I wanted to realistically look at trade up scenarios for the Miami Dolphins from the 5th overall pick in the 1st round (pick 1.5) of the 2020 NFL Draft. The draft point scenarios use draft pick points from Drafttek. 


There's really only three scenarios for the Dolphins if they intend to use pick 1.5 on a QB: the "Must Have Joe" scenario where they are in love with Joe Burrow and will do what it takes to get him, the "Must Have Tua" scenario where they think Tua Tagovailoa is a MUCH better prospect than Justin Herbert , and the "Fine with Tua or Herbert" scenario (or Jordan Love at a later pick).


"Must Have Joe" Scenario:
  • The way you have to think about it as not that the Bengals really want Joe Burrow, you must think like they already have Joe Burrow. That's what they expect, their fans expect, the whole world expects; so for them to not have Joe, they would effectively be losing Joe, and the Bengals would want a premium akin to what people typically assign to losses as compared to gains (two to one). Given the 1300 draft point difference between pick 1.1 and 1.5, the Bengals would want 2600 equivalent draft points at least. In my mind, this is nothing less than all three Dolphins 1st rounders this year and either two 2's or a 1st rounder next year. So 4 1st rounders for the 1st overall pick this year in your "Must Have Joe" Scenario

"Must Have Tua" Scenario:
  • If you want the peace of mind that you'll get Joe or Tua, you trade up to pick 1.2. I assigned a 50% premium on the Redskins draft points that they'd want to move down to 1.5, but really they'd probably want a premium between 50-100%. If you fully believe in both quarterbacks, I don't see the Redskins saying no to all three Dolphins 1st rounders this year as that'd be a 78% premium paid on the difference in draft points. And I think there's a good chance the Redskins would accept pick 1.5 with either the combo of picks 1.18 + 2.56 or 1.26 + 2.39 and then a future 3rd rounder throw in
  • If you think that the Redskins really want Chase Young and feel comfortable just trading up with the Lions at pick 1.3, I could see pick 1.5 + either pick 1.26 or two 2nd rounders getting that trade up done. Unfortunately you probably can't close on this deal until right before or during the draft, as you make it easy for the Chargers or some wildcard team to jump to pick 1.2 and then you have to cough up even more to match their offer
  • If the Giants were to call while on the clock and say they have a deal in place with the Chargers, only then do I see the need to jump up from pick 1.5 to 1.4. But if that were the case you would have to beat the supposed Chargers offer or maybe just swap 3rd round picks with the Giants to make up the draft points difference

"Fine with Tua or Herbert" Scenario: (or Jordan Love at a later pick)
  • If you're truly fine with either scenario, just stick at pick 1.5