Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

[url=http://www.vox.com/2014/5/7/5683448/how-nfl-teams-ignore-basic-economics-and-draft-players-irrationally]How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally - Vox[/url]

I thought this was a very good article about the draft and how trading picks usually ends up being a very bad thing. It's also why I was against trading so much for RGIII a couple years ago.


I found this quote by Eric DeCosta to be the key to it all.


[quote][B]We look at the draft as, in some respects, a luck-driven process. [/B]The more picks you have, the more chances you have to get a good player. When we look at teams that draft well, it’s not necessarily that they’re drafting better than anybody else. It seems to be that they have more picks. There’s definitely a correlation between the amount of picks and drafting good players.[/quote]


You want to know the difference between good teams and bad ones? Bad ones trade their picks away for gambles, while the smart ones know that it's a numbers game.

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

The simplified approach always seems to be the most effective in the draft. It's not that drafting requires zero skill, because then first rounders wouldn't be any more productive than other rounds. It does require some skill. But given how typically bad are NFL teams are with drafting, it makes no sense to be overconfident about your own drafting abilities.

If you can tell the difference between a good player and a bad player in the draft, you're ahead of the curve. Don't get too concerned with upside, character, positional need, or whatever. Just take the best player. It's pretty easy.

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

The draft is always interesting because there seems to be a lot of 'reach' picks that boils down to weather the front office knows better then everyone else or making you wonder if they're being too cute for their own good.

In regards to the RG3 trade I still say it was more than worth it. Actually I'm starting to think that it might have been a steal for us.
[IMG]http://s15.postimg.org/lvsmvldgr/RG3_Trade.png[/IMG]
Now picture this. In an alternate universe the Rams get buyers remorse after which they call the Redskins and say we will give you the following

Redskins would recieve:
[COLOR="DarkRed"]Greg Robinson - OT
Janoris Jenkins - CB
Michael Brockers - DT
Alec Ogletree - MLB/ILB
Steadman Bailey - WR[/COLOR]

Rams would receive:
[COLOR="Navy"]RG3 -QB [/COLOR]

I imagine most of us would say hell no.

Granted its not an apples to apples comparison but also keep in mind that the 2013 QB class was pretty underwhelming talent wise and this year we might have found ourselves begging to draft Johnny Leaf I mean Manziel.

Right now had we not taken RG3 we likely would have Cousins as our QB which wouldn't have been horrible but I think a lot of us are a lot more comfortable with him as a backup. Sure you could say maybe they would have taken Wilson instead but I think its well known at this point after Luck and RG3 that Shanahan liked Cousins the most.

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

[quote=Dirtbag59;1071850]The draft is always interesting because there seems to be a lot of 'reach' picks that boils down to weather the front office knows better then everyone else or making you wonder if they're being too cute for their own good.

In regards to the RG3 trade I still say it was more than worth it. Actually I'm starting to think that it might have been a steal for us.
[IMG]http://s15.postimg.org/lvsmvldgr/RG3_Trade.png[/IMG]
Now picture this. In an alternate universe the Rams get buyers remorse after which they call the Redskins and say we will give you the following

Redskins would recieve:
[COLOR="DarkRed"]Greg Robinson - OT
Janoris Jenkins - CB
Michael Brockers - DT
Alec Ogletree - MLB/ILB
Steadman Bailey - WR[/COLOR]

Rams would receive:
[COLOR="Navy"]RG3 -QB [/COLOR]

I imagine most of us would say hell no.

Granted its not an apples to apples comparison but also keep in mind that the 2013 QB class was pretty underwhelming talent wise and this year we might have found ourselves begging to draft Johnny Leaf I mean Manziel.

Right now had we not taken RG3 we likely would have Cousins as our QB which wouldn't have been horrible but I think a lot of us are a lot more comfortable with him as a backup. Sure you could say maybe they would have taken Wilson instead but I think its well known at this point after Luck and RG3 that Shanahan liked Cousins the most.[/quote]

To me the calculus is even simpler than that. If Sam Bradford isn't a franchise QB, and I am starting to think he definitely isn't, then the Rams lost the trade. They could have had RG3 for themselves.

Since that trade, playoff appearances: Redskins 1, Rams 0

I don't see how any Skins fans who lived through the great lost decade could see the RG3 trade as anything but a win for us especially when compared with the players the Rams used their picks on. That isn't a knock on any player they took, or groups of players, but moreso a reflection that the Skins had all those players in some way shape or form. We had Chris Samuels, Champ,even Lavar and on and on. But in this league, at this time, a qb is not the same as all of those positions combined, it's the glue that holds the rest together. Or the frosting that ties the layers of the cake together.

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

[quote=Schneed10;1071859]To me the calculus is even simpler than that. If Sam Bradford isn't a franchise QB, and[B] I am starting to think he definitely isn't, then the Rams lost the trade. They could have had RG3 for themselves.
[/B]
[/quote]

Who says RGIII is a franchise QB? Beyond one year in a gimmicky offense, what has he shown you that leads you to believe he's a franchise QB? It's a bit premature to be calling him one right now. Let's give it a couple more years.




[quote=CRedskinsRule;1071879]I don't see how any Skins fans who lived through the great lost decade could see the RG3 trade as anything but a win for us especially when compared with the players the Rams used their picks on. That isn't a knock on any player they took, or groups of players, but moreso a reflection that the Skins had all those players in some way shape or form. We had Chris Samuels, Champ,even Lavar and on and on. [B]But in this league, at this time, a qb is not the same as all of those positions combined, it's the glue that holds the rest together. Or the frosting that ties the layers of the cake together[/B].[/quote]


This mindset is exactly why we'll continue to be a bad team and why GMs will continue being driven by their egos instead of using intelligence. Listen, one of the top GMs in the NFL is telling you that it's somewhat based off of luck, and that the more picks you have, the higher chance you have at succeeding.

I hear time and time again from Skins fans..."why can't we be like the Ravens, Patriots or Steelers?" When is the last time you've seen any of those teams give up a ton of picks for one player in the draft? If anything, you see these teams move down in the draft to collect more. It's not just about having better scouts, it's about having more chances. I'm not saying that scouting doesn't play a part, but for the majority of it, more picks means higher chance of landing studs. Which would you rather have? One lottery ticket or ten? That one may be a dude as well as the ten lottery picks, but it's about giving you the best chance. It's a numbers game.

Also, to counter the point in bold. The past two super bowl winners were won with teams with so-so QBs. Russell Wilson and Joe Flaaco are no world beaters to say the least.

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

So he showed a pic of Eli and one of Rivers and said it wasn't worth it or the Chargers made out on the deal ,how? Rivers while better season stats ,hasn't had a whiff of a super bowl ,while Eli on the other hand has brought the Giants 2 ,intangibles and chemistry ,two things that people still don't think matter .

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

[quote=Giantone;1071894]while Eli on the other hand has brought the Giants 2 ,intangibles and chemistry ,two things that people still don't think matter .[/quote]Just like Trent Dilfer brought the Ravens a superbowl, right? :laughing-

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

[quote=Dirtbag59;1071850]The draft is always interesting because there seems to be a lot of 'reach' picks that boils down to weather the front office knows better then everyone else or making you wonder if they're being too cute for their own good.

In regards to the RG3 trade I still say it was more than worth it. Actually I'm starting to think that it might have been a steal for us.
[IMG]http://s15.postimg.org/lvsmvldgr/RG3_Trade.png[/IMG]
Now picture this. In an alternate universe the Rams get buyers remorse after which they call the Redskins and say we will give you the following

Redskins would recieve:
[COLOR="DarkRed"]Greg Robinson - OT
Janoris Jenkins - CB
Michael Brockers - DT
Alec Ogletree - MLB/ILB
Steadman Bailey - WR[/COLOR]

Rams would receive:
[COLOR="Navy"]RG3 -QB [/COLOR]

I imagine most of us would say hell no.

Granted its not an apples to apples comparison but also keep in mind that the 2013 QB class was pretty underwhelming talent wise and this year we might have found ourselves begging to draft Johnny Leaf I mean Manziel.

Right now had we not taken RG3 we likely would have Cousins as our QB which wouldn't have been horrible but I think a lot of us are a lot more comfortable with him as a backup. Sure you could say maybe they would have taken Wilson instead but I think its well known at this point after Luck and RG3 that Shanahan liked Cousins the most.[/quote]


Love the analysis of draft values in the initial post. And Dirtbag -- this is a great breakdown above, pretty interesting. But your breakdown above for RG3 involves players picked by the RAMS. We may or may not have drafted better players, but they certainly would have been different players - based on our needs. A real way to compare would be to go back and consider BPA for us at those draft picks. We may or may not have traded back like they did, etc.

[QUOTE=Giantone;1071894]So he showed a pic of Eli and one of Rivers and said it wasn't worth it or the Chargers made out on the deal ,how? Rivers while better season stats ,hasn't had a whiff of a super bowl ,while Eli on the other hand has brought the Giants 2 ,intangibles and chemistry ,two things that people still don't think matter .[/QUOTE]


If Rivers played for the Giants all these years he might have three. Eli did not win those superbowls the defense did. Rivers is the better QB , but Eli plays for the better team.

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

[quote=punch it in;1071929]If Rivers played for the Giants all these years he might have three. Eli did not win those superbowls the defense did. Rivers is the better QB , but Eli plays for the better team.[/quote]


Nope , with the heat that Eli has taken , just from Tiki and Shocky when he first got there Rivers would have been crying for ever .The D played well because Eli stepped up .

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

[quote=HailGreen28;1071896]Just like Trent Dilfer brought the Ravens a superbowl, right? :laughing-[/quote]


Whatever helps you sleep at night .:doh:

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

if rg3 wins a superbowl and the rams don't...

still way too early to judge.

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

[quote=Giantone;1071931]Whatever helps you sleep at night .:doh:[/quote]Likewise, interception lover. :laughing-

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

[quote=HailGreen28;1071948]Likewise, interception lover. :laughing-[/quote]

I'll take his Super Bowls along with the INT's any day ,others would also .:spank:

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

[quote=That Guy;1071935]if rg3 wins a superbowl and the rams don't...

still way too early to judge.[/quote]

I agree. Its still way too early to tell if the RG3 trade was worth it.

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

[quote=Giantone;1071978]I'll take his Super Bowls along with the INT's any day ,others would also .:spank:[/quote]Just like Trent Dilfer. Wait, was Dilfer as interception prone as She-li? :laughing2

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

I do find it interesting that almost everything this article says a team should do the Skins dont do. Maybe that's why they have been so bad for so long.

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

I think some of you are missing the big picture. It's not just about the RGIII trade. It's about increasing your chances of succeeding, and you can do that through having more draft picks. Egotistical front offices burn their picks for a coveted player while the smarter ones (with good scouting) gather additional picks to have more chances of hitting that home run.

The draft is one big lottery. It's a crap shoot. A 1st rounder could easily bust, and a 6th rounder could become a hall of famer. Again, which would you rather have? One lottery ticket or five lottery tickets? Which one will give you a higher chance at winning the lottery? (clue: it's the five tickets)

Smart front offices keep their picks or trade them for more picks. Bad front offices trade their picks for particular players.

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

St. Louis has finished last in the west twice and third once. No playoffs, since the trade. Hasn't helped them

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

[quote=NC_Skins;1071989]Smart front offices keep their picks or trade them for more picks. Bad front offices trade their picks for particular players.[/quote]

Yes, this is the takeaway. A supplement to this is the philosophy of letting your UFAs walk instead of overpaying to keep them. A compensatory pick and cap space almost always puts you in a better spot than paying dannell ellerbe $7 mil/year lol. Likewise, some teams are vastly better than others at realizing when a player's nearing the end, and recouping some value for them via trade. If you want to be a successful GM in the nfl, following those two tenets will get you a long way.

And for the record, you can't declare winners and losers in the rg3 trade yet, and especially not via division titles. Pretty sure the NFC east doesn't have the 49ers and seahawks...

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

[quote=NC_Skins;1071837][url=http://www.vox.com/2014/5/7/5683448/how-nfl-teams-ignore-basic-economics-and-draft-players-irrationally]How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally - Vox[/url]

I thought this was a very good article about the draft and how trading picks usually ends up being a very bad thing. It's also why I was against trading so much for RGIII a couple years ago.


I found this quote by Eric DeCosta to be the key to it all.





You want to know the difference between good teams and bad ones? Bad ones trade their picks away for gambles, while the smart ones know that it's a numbers game.[/quote]

That is an interesting quote when you consider it comes from one of the most respected and I would say a very successful front office. One thing the Ravens do not do very often is trade picks away.

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

[quote=takethecake;1071993]Yes, this is the takeaway. A supplement to this is the philosophy of letting your UFAs walk instead of overpaying to keep them. A compensatory pick and cap space almost always puts you in a better spot than paying dannell ellerbe $7 mil/year lol. Likewise, some teams are vastly better than others at realizing when a player's nearing the end, and recouping some value for them via trade. If you want to be a successful GM in the nfl, following those two tenets will get you a long way.

And for the record, you can't declare winners and losers in the rg3 trade yet, and especially not via division titles. Pretty sure the NFC east doesn't have the 49ers and seahawks...[/quote]

I've been saying this for years and the primo examples for me we're Jon Jansen and Randy Thomas.

I will also agree with the 'mo picks 'mo better philosophy, however I believe going after QB is perhaps the exception. I think the first thing you do when you are building a team is go out and get your QB. And not wait. Do the research and get your number one choice whatever it takes. We did that with RG3 and it was about damn time and I'm OK with it if it fails. I just hope they have the stones to do it again if it does.

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

[quote=NC_Skins;1071882]Who says RGIII is a franchise QB? Beyond one year in a gimmicky offense, what has he shown you that leads you to believe he's a franchise QB? It's a bit premature to be calling him one right now. Let's give it a couple more years.
[/quote]

Fair point. I am operating under the assumption he is - because the only year that he didn't show franchise QB qualities was the one in which he was recovering from a devastating knee injury. Excuse, maybe. But if he looks dynamite again this year now that he's healthy, everyone and his brother will firmly believe he's a bonafide franchise guy.

But you're right, until that happens it's early to jump the gun.

In general I agree with the notion that more picks = better. But the one exception to that is QB, I believe. Transcendant QBs can be worth giving up multiple picks because of the significance of their position.

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

Sure, more picks gives you a better shot at getting good players. But let's not forget how bad our FO has been over the years even when they did have picks. Remember Vinnie's 3 second round picks, all busts--Fred may still play somewhere, but the other two were just awful. My feeling is we've neglected scouting for a long time. It's an institutional failing. We just don't seem to care that much about it or we think it's pretty easy to do. Maybe that's beginning to change with Allen, but we'll see. (Fingers crossed!)

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

[quote=NC_Skins;1071989]

Smart front offices keep their picks or trade them for more picks. Bad front offices trade their picks for particular players.[/quote]

That's is one opinion and there are situations that prove it wrong .

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

You have to seperate QB trades from everything else.

Trading a pick for Jason Taylor was not smart, trading a pick for TJ Duckett not smart... Trading Champ Bailey + a Pick for CP, not the best trade. I'd be inclined to never let the skins trade picks. In this era where QBs can make such a difference, you can't say no.

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

I think people are misinterpreting what DeCosta meant when he said the draft is a luck-driven process. Sometimes, it makes a lot of sense to take a big personnel risk and try to hit on a once in a generation player if you believe you can. But that's where the luck element comes in: way more often than not, you're just going to beat yourself.

If Griffin turns out to be the best quarterback in the history of the franchise, no one is going to care how much of the Rams roster was built through that trade. It won't matter. But -- and this is coming from someone who thought Griffin was one of the five best players in the 2012 draft coming from Baylor -- the odds aren't ever in your favor. And the teams that best understand this aren't picking in the top ten.

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

[quote=Evilgrin;1072035]You have to seperate QB trades from everything else.

Trading a pick for Jason Taylor was not smart, trading a pick for TJ Duckett not smart... Trading Champ Bailey + a Pick for CP, not the best trade. I'd be inclined to never let the skins trade picks. In this era where QBs can make such a difference, you can't say no.[/quote]

Preach

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

Portis took us to the dance on his back meanwhile Champ was getting schooled by Marty Booker. Joe Gibbs is perfect. Champ was great while Darrell Green played.

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

[quote=Evilgrin;1072035]You have to seperate QB trades from everything else.

Trading a pick for Jason Taylor was not smart, trading a pick for TJ Duckett not smart... Trading Champ Bailey + a Pick for CP, not the best trade. I'd be inclined to never let the skins trade picks. In this era where QBs can make such a difference, you can't say no.[/quote]

I'm inclined to think the portis trade was close to a wash. Otherwise...this.

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

T0t4lly 0ffIcal. Potatoeskins win RG[(84*7^2)-4113] trade.
[IMG]http://www.corbisimages.com/images/Corbis-42-16508917.jpg?size=67&uid=c9824151-c4e3-4bfe-8eea-d48907aa287f[/IMG]
[url=http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/05/12/report-stedman-bailey-suspended-for-four-games/]Report: Stedman Bailey suspended for four games | ProFootballTalk[/url]

#Winning #Tigerblood

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

NC Skins, I wanted to ask you this question(s) before, when this thread was still active, but I kept forgetting.

So anyway, are you happy with how our new FO worked the draft? We traded back and picked up more chances twice, and while the value of the selections can be argued, we did add more chances for a hit. Or would you have rather us stayed at the top of each round and had a chance at a more talented player? Just wondering because you posted this thread and link after the draft, so I was curious whether you were praising this FO for the draft, or condemning our last regime(basically over one, albeit big, trade-up).

Edit: Partially asking because as we all know, Shanahan liked to trade back, sometimes to Redskins fans' chagrin. But I suppose when he seen a special QB talent like Griffin, he felt justified in moving up, even with the price he payed.

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

ESPN did a poll on who won the trade and 80% thought the Rams won out. I think most Redskin fans are sold on RG3 being a franchise QB. I still see him being somewhat of a project in the pro game and that's why I would have never made the deal. Now if we gave up the picks to get Luck? I make that deal. I think it's a big year for not only Griffin, but also the Rams as they look ready to take the next step in a brutal division.

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

We won't know the true "winner" of the trade for years. Pointless to even try to judge it now. It's like grading a draft before the players even step on the field.

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

[quote=Mattyk;1072748]We won't know the true "winner" of the trade for years. Pointless to even try to judge it now. It's like grading a draft before the players even step on the field.[/quote]

That is very true but if you kept score and since the NFL is about winning:

Redskins: 2012 NFC East Champions, 2012 Rookie of the year, "Potential Franchise QB"
Rams: Beat the Redskins in 2012, QB coming off a torn ACL

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

[quote=Dirtbag59;1071850]The draft is always interesting because there seems to be a lot of 'reach' picks that boils down to weather the front office knows better then everyone else or making you wonder if they're being too cute for their own good.

In regards to the RG3 trade I still say it was more than worth it. Actually I'm starting to think that it might have been a steal for us.
[IMG]http://s15.postimg.org/lvsmvldgr/RG3_Trade.png[/IMG]
Now picture this. In an alternate universe the Rams get buyers remorse after which they call the Redskins and say we will give you the following

Redskins would recieve:
[COLOR=darkred]Greg Robinson - OT
Janoris Jenkins - CB
Michael Brockers - DT
Alec Ogletree - MLB/ILB
Steadman Bailey - WR[/COLOR]

Rams would receive:
[COLOR=navy]RG3 -QB [/COLOR]

[B]I imagine most of us would say hell no.
[/B]
Granted its not an apples to apples comparison but also keep in mind that the 2013 QB class was pretty underwhelming talent wise and this year we might have found ourselves begging to draft Johnny Leaf I mean Manziel.

Right now had we not taken RG3 we likely would have Cousins as our QB which wouldn't have been horrible but I think a lot of us are a lot more comfortable with him as a backup. Sure you could say maybe they would have taken Wilson instead but I think its well known at this point after Luck and RG3 that Shanahan liked Cousins the most.[/quote]

IDK Dirtbag...I would imagine almost all NFL GM's would make that deal You have 4 really good starters there plus Bailey has serious potential.

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

[quote=EARTHQUAKE2689;1072751]That is very true but if you kept score and since the NFL is about winning:

Redskins: 2012 NFC East Champions, 2012 Rookie of the year, "Potential Franchise QB"
Rams: Beat the Redskins in 2012, QB coming off a torn ACL[/quote]

If you're counting 2012 then you have to count 2013 as well, and this team won 3 games last year. Rams won 7 with no QB.

On a side note, people seem to be writing off Sam Bradford. He was having a pretty good year before he was hurt.

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

[quote=skinsfan69;1072752]IDK Dirtbag...I would imagine almost all NFL GM's would make that deal You have 4 really good starters there plus Bailey has serious potential.[/quote]

Well no doubt its solid and I genuinely believe that if Bradford stays healthy the trade will be one of the few win-wins in NFL history. However in terms of the players the Rams got, the way I feel is we've kind of had that caliber of players before and the best that happened was we eeked into the playoffs (Chris Samuals, Shawn Springs, Marcus Washington, Cornelius Griffin, and Randle-El (728 Yards in 07)). So it would be great to have those types of players but without a QB we wouldn't be a serious contender.

Granted again its not an apples to apples comparison as the Rams guys are younger not to mention different kinds of players but I honestly feel that the two most critical elements to winning a Super Bowl in this day and age are a top flight QB and Defense. And as tough as it is to put together an elite defense finding a QB the caliber of RG3 is exponentially harder.

I mean not to diminish the Seahawks scouting department but that number 1 ranked defense is essentially filled with guys who were no bodies going into the league. Some developed into elite pro bowlers like Sherman while many others have found great fits as rotational role players.

Re: Vox.com: How NFL teams ignore basic economics and draft players irrationally.
 

[quote=SirLK26;1072745]NC Skins, I wanted to ask you this question(s) before, when this thread was still active, but I kept forgetting.

So anyway, are you happy with how our new FO worked the draft? We traded back and picked up more chances twice, and while the value of the selections can be argued, we did add more chances for a hit. Or would you have rather us stayed at the top of each round and had a chance at a more talented player? Just wondering because you posted this thread and link after the draft, so I was curious whether you were praising this FO for the draft, or condemning our last regime(basically over one, albeit big, trade-up).

Edit: Partially asking because as we all know, Shanahan liked to trade back, sometimes to Redskins fans' chagrin. But I suppose when he seen a special QB talent like Griffin, he felt justified in moving up, even with the price he payed.[/quote]


I personally love the trade back with Dallas and felt like they bent Dallas over the table on that trade. Minnesota only gave up a 4th rounder to move up 8-9 spots back into the first round and Dallas gave up their 3rd rounder to move up 12 spots. When you look at the trade chart values, we gave up our pick worth 560 points and picked up two selections that combined a total of 630. Minnesota only gave up a mere 18 points between their compensation they gave up to move up to a loftier spot. As far as who they picked? I'm not a scout so there is no way I can judge the picks these guys made. I didn't have a issue with any of the picks, but I felt that the Murphy pick was a luxury pick when it was made. It seems like we had greater needs than a OLB. /shrug


I understand why Mike made the trade, but I also think Mike was a bit desperate as well. I didn't agree with it at the time due to the mere compensation, but it wasn't because I didn't like the player in return. I probably would have been happier to stay where we were and picked Tannehill and kept our 2nd and future 1st rounders. That's just me though because I do value more picks.

As far as those "polls" on who won the trade. Well, it's irrelevant on who won the trade based on the players picked. Rams won the trade based on value and that's the bottom line. It could turn out that all of the Rams players flops and RGIII goes to the hall of fame. On the other hand, RGIII may end up flopping and all of the Rams players picked end up in the hall of fame. Last scenario, all players on both sides of the trade could end up flopping. Who won the trade is the moment compensation is traded, and that's purely looking at it from a numbers perspective.

Matty is right though. It's still way too early in declaring any "winners" between any of the players involved in the trade. Hell, look how many years Brees took to blossom or how long it took the Chargers to see any dividends on Rivers from the Eli trade.

One more thing, it takes more than having just "more" picks to be successful. You still need a competent GM/scouting staff that knows how to pick players for their schemes. You can give all the picks in the world to idiots like Vinny and still field a shitty team.