incognito_man Posted April 23, 2019 Share Posted April 23, 2019 2 minutes ago, rcon14 said: I guess it depends on what someone means by "luxury" or "splurge." But I guess, you'd be taking that player anyway, hopefully? you draft needs can change significantly by adding a top 12 pick to your team. if you badly need an OT and take one at 12 and have another high-floor OT vs a high-ceiling WR available at 30 that are in the same tier, you can now select the high-ceiling WR rather than the high-floor LT. It's not like double-dipping at a similar position in later rounds. Selecting 1 first rounder changes your valuation for guys available w/ your 2nd first-rounder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted April 23, 2019 Share Posted April 23, 2019 2 minutes ago, Lodestar said: Don't forget Malik McDowell, 35th overall pick in 2017 who never played a snap. Think a fair number of Packers fans wanted him. love him in clockwork orange Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norm Posted April 23, 2019 Share Posted April 23, 2019 5 minutes ago, rcon14 said: I'm not arguing that he's wrong, I'm saying the Chiefs are making a mistake if they think Clark playing 7-tech is different than Ford playing 7-tech when that's the position they're both playing anyway. It doesn't make any sense. Ford's position does not change. He's a 7 in a 3-4 and a 7 in a 4-3. That's fair. But teams are allowed to have different opinions on the same player right? I'm not disagreeing with your assessment. Honestly I'm just teasing you because you obviously jumped in because that last argument was in your head still man lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PossibleCabbage Posted April 23, 2019 Share Posted April 23, 2019 I think the thing about the extra first round pick is that there have been situations in the past where the Packers have been on the clock in the first and had a higher grade on a non-premium position player, and made the sensible, responsible choice to take the lower graded player at the more valuable position: Bulaga over Dez, or Raji over Crabtree for example. Having a second first, assuming you didn't already do something silly like "take a tight end in the top 20" and instead did the sensible, responsible thing, you can afford to splurge a little I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted April 23, 2019 Share Posted April 23, 2019 10 minutes ago, rcon14 said: There is no reason to make a weird or luxury pick at 30. Why would you not just take your top player at 30 regardless of whether or not you had 12? It makes zero sense. There's a difference between making a weird or luxury pick at 30 and taking a bit more risk than you would normally make. Your FRP is supposed to be the pick you're most confident will hit. If Jeffery Simmons is available at 30, it's going to be hard to pass on him even if you don't think he plays in 2019. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rcon14 Posted April 23, 2019 Share Posted April 23, 2019 Just now, incognito_man said: you draft needs can change significantly by adding a top 12 pick to your team. if you badly need an OT and take one at 12 and have another high-floor OT vs a high-ceiling WR available at 30 that are in the same tier, you can now select the high-ceiling WR rather than the high-floor LT. It's not like double-dipping at a similar position in later rounds. Selecting 1 first rounder changes your valuation for guys available w/ your 2nd first-rounder. Yes, of course adding a player changes, but it doesn't change that you shouldn't treat your pick weirdly. If you sign a FA w/similar value to #12 overall, that doesn't suddenly make #30 a luxury pick. That's all you've done by drafting a guy at 12. I completely acknowledge that who you pick at 12 should impact who you select at 30, but it shouldn't be "oh we have two firsts let me spend one of them on Drew Lock or a Runningback" (which I also acknowledge is not something anyone here said, but it is something I have seen from others). That part is my problem, not having 12 impact who you select because of course it will. It's another player on the roster. It's gonna change the value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rcon14 Posted April 23, 2019 Share Posted April 23, 2019 2 minutes ago, Norm said: That's fair. But teams are allowed to have different opinions on the same player right? I'm not disagreeing with your assessment. Honestly I'm just teasing you because you obviously jumped in because that last argument was in your head still man lol It is my crusade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PossibleCabbage Posted April 23, 2019 Share Posted April 23, 2019 Regarding the Simmons thing, specifically the high school incident that's on tape, I think there's real value from a PR perspective to be able to say "well, we didn't like him as much as the guy we picked before him" as a deflection mechanism. If you spend your very first pick on a guy who did something he definitely should not have, that raises more uncomfortable questions than if you spend your 2nd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Posted April 23, 2019 Share Posted April 23, 2019 A few scenarios to ponder: 1. We draft for need at 12 and BPA at 30. or 2. BPA at 12, trade down from 30, draft for need wherever we trade down. 3. A mix of either of the first two Thoughts? Personally, I'd love to see us trade down with that idiot Gettleman and get picks 17 and 37 and then go: 17. Burns 30. CGJ/Dexter Lawrence 37. Irv Smith Jr. 44. Juan Thornhill/Jeffrey Simmons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norm Posted April 23, 2019 Share Posted April 23, 2019 6 minutes ago, rcon14 said: I guess it depends on what someone means by "luxury" or "splurge." But I guess, you'd be taking that player anyway, hopefully? I'm struggling for a good example but let's say Dez Bryant is on the board and he's your highest player. But you need OT and it's close with your top one and you're decently off at wr yeah? You take bulaga. Now let's say you had a pick a few picks ago and you took okung or Williams. Now you're still sitting pretty at wr but you aren't needing to worry about ot and now a guy high on your board who's a "luxury" you don't take because you feel you can. You obviously don't draft identically. I'm saying you might be more willing to go pure BPA if you feel good about what you already got first. It's not some insane thing where I'm asking to take some huge risk. There's just zero way who you already drafted doesn't matter. Just like any "early" picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norm Posted April 23, 2019 Share Posted April 23, 2019 7 minutes ago, incognito_man said: you draft needs can change significantly by adding a top 12 pick to your team. if you badly need an OT and take one at 12 and have another high-floor OT vs a high-ceiling WR available at 30 that are in the same tier, you can now select the high-ceiling WR rather than the high-floor LT. It's not like double-dipping at a similar position in later rounds. Selecting 1 first rounder changes your valuation for guys available w/ your 2nd first-rounder. God dammit incog. Don't read my thoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted April 23, 2019 Share Posted April 23, 2019 6 minutes ago, CWood21 said: There's a difference between making a weird or luxury pick at 30 and taking a bit more risk than you would normally make. Your FRP is supposed to be the pick you're most confident will hit. If Jeffery Simmons is available at 30, it's going to be hard to pass on him even if you don't think he plays in 2019. Correct - which defines the extra round 1 pick at 30 as a "bonus" pick. I think folks are defining down the semantics a bit more than necessary. Its an extra pick of potentially upper tier talent. It's a good thing. With Simmons (for example.....) the fifth year option we could have on him if selected at 30 would dovetail nicely with the time lost at the front end of the contract. Thats a bonus in my mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Penske Posted April 23, 2019 Share Posted April 23, 2019 17 minutes ago, Lodestar said: Don't forget Malik McDowell, 35th overall pick in 2017 who never played a snap. Think a fair number of Packers fans wanted him. I'm not sure you can factor that one in with the others completely considering the ATV accident is the reason he didn't play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PossibleCabbage Posted April 23, 2019 Share Posted April 23, 2019 2 minutes ago, Arthur Penske said: I'm not sure you can factor that one in with the others completely considering the ATV accident is the reason he didn't play. I mean the reason he fell from a projected high/mid first round pick was precisely because he was deemed to not be a stable, responsible, reliable individual... which might have had something to do with his recreational choices too. Like this was a guy who stood up at the combine and talked about how he could play all 11 positions on the defense better than anybody else. It's conceivable his overestimation of his own abilities got harshly confronted with the aforementioned accident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted April 23, 2019 Share Posted April 23, 2019 1 hour ago, Arthur Penske said: <br /> I've not made any sort of analytical study of this......but in a general sense I considered GB & SEA would be fishing in similar waters for TE and FS. So having them just ahead us at 29.......I dont know, but could lead to some leap frogging at the end of Round 1. Ultimately it will depend on how the GB/SEA boards mesh and who we/they want when. We shall see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.