Re: Drafting Strategy of Thomas Dimitroff
posted at 4/22/2013 12:56 PM EDT
In response to stewart7557's comment:
In response to mia76's comment:
It is very easy to look at the player chosen in a trade up and say 'brilliant move', but what doesn't get looked at is the lost opportunity that was given up to move up. To be specific, they gave up two 1st rounders, one 2nd rounder, and 2 fourth rounders for a single wide receiver. He is good, but would anyone here actually make that trade for the Pats today for Jones? Or really for any receiver?I doubt it.
That is just a huge lost opportunity for any team. You are saying that Jones by himself is better than say a starting OG, starting DE, a #3 CB, and a rotational DL and OL combined. Now picks are not necessarily going to pan out so maybe you drop half of that haul. But what have you really gained ... 2011 - Wild Card loss and record of 10-7, Conference Champ loss and 14-4.
If BB had made that trade and gotten those results almost every poster on this board would be listing all the players they didn't get because of the trade, and calling for his head.
Admittedly that was a lot to give up for J. Jones and clearly there is an opportunity cost in making this type of trade but lets assume that Atlanta and Dimitroff believed they were already strong in most positions and believed they were a player or 2 away from competing for a championship. Given that scenario (and I contend that's exactly the Patriots situation - they need to improve their pass rush and add 1 more WR) isn't the more logical strategy to target and pursue a player that you feel will give you the best opportunity to correct whatever deficiency you have?
As Pat Eng stated so well - the Pats need talent not quantity of players and targeting and moving up in the draft increases the likelihood you will get an impact player while picking later or moving back increases the chances of you will fail
I understand all of that, but two points:
1. The GM miscalculated if the WR pick was to take them over the top because he hasn't.
2. If you had used every one of the picks given up on a single WR (5) I bet you would have found one with comparable production. Too lazy to check the WRs taken at or after each of the picks, but you get my meaning. And I am not suggesting the team would ever do that - but 2#1s and 1#2 pick would likely have resulted in a higher chance of a higher impact player than a single WR. Throw in the 2 4th rounders as gravy.
Again - if you are the GM of the Patriots, Ravens, SF, Seattle, Denver, or and any other 'contender' you care to name - can you think of a single WR on any team you would trade the 27th, 59th, 124th picks this year and your first and fourth rounder next year - not talking about for a college player, but for a NFL player with an actual track record. We got an idea of Seattle's valuation of a top flight offensive skill position player - Harvin was acquired for #25, #214, and a next year 3rd rounder - and I would say he is just as dynamic a player.
Or another question from the recent Pats drafts. Would you trade Gronk and Hern straight up for Jones? We have a desperate need at WR. And as far as draft cap, Gronk and Hern were #42 and #113 in a single draft (2010), so you could get player like them and a bunch of depth folks for the price Atlanta gave up in 2011, not even counting the 2012 cost.