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

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by Evilgrin

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.

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

[GTripp0012]

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.

[Gary84Clark]

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.

[Dirtbag59]

T0t4lly 0ffIcal. Potatoeskins win RG[(84*7^2)-4113] trade.

Report: Stedman Bailey suspended for four games | ProFootballTalk

#Winning #Tigerblood

[SirLK26]

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.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by SirLK26

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.

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.

[SirLK26]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

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.

Thanks.

[skinsfan69]

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.

[MTK]

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.

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

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.

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

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by EARTHQUAKE2689

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

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.

[Gary84Clark]

How many will the Rams keep pass their rookie contracts?