2016 Draft (1 Viewer)

[Freshcakes]

Was just going over the recent draft and our trades

1. We traded up for Vonn Bell and gave the patriots a 3rd and 4th rounder.

2. With the 3rd rounder they took Joe Thuney who is their starting OG

3. With the 4th rounder they took Malcolm Mitchell who is a good rookie WR


Now i'm wondering if instead of taking Mike Thomas with our original 2nd rounder we took a defensive player would we have been better in the long run.


Jarred Reed
Deion Jones (stud)
Carl Nassib (behemoth)


I absolutely hate this trading up strategy. There are so many good players and the draft is a crapshoot so you should've minimize your chances.

Imagine this draft haul

Rankins
Deion Jones
Joe Thuney
Malcolm Mitchell
David Onymetta
Lasco

We bolster the OL, bolster the DL, Add a playmaking LB, Add a WR.
More talent, better depth, better team.

Don't understand the logic of trading up always. Rarely, ok i get it. But almost every draft we do it. Multiple times. Has got to be changed.

 

[Brees2Graham4Six!]

Its not really fair to look at the draft in hindsight like that. I'd bet anything that if you showed Loomis where everyone would end up going, our draft class would not end up exactly the same.

 

[Freshcakes]

Of course hindsight is 20/20.

My basic point is by trading up all the time we shortchange this team in the long run.

I'm not say we should take a certain player instead of Mike Thomas. I simply offered a few players who were available at that time. I assume they were ranked in that general area.

Point is maximize the draft by acquiring as many players as possible and as much talent as possible.

 

[saintlad]

What I don't understand, is giving the Patriots more picks.

Why has no one followed their formula? You have a Franchise QB. You let your FA's walk to other teams, thus not hurting your salary cap. You collect Compensatory picks in the process.

Then trade with other teams who want to trade up, and collect more picks. Some my hit, but at least you have extra picks to get more quality picks.

 

[demented]

You're ignore the statistical odds though. There is a % chance of a player becoming a quality starter at each round of the draft. Just off the top of my head, it's like 1. 50%, 2. 34%, 3. 21%, 4. 13%, 5. 7%, 6. 3%. By trading a 3 and 4 for a 2, it's exactly the same % chance of selecting a quality starter. That's how the trade value chart was initially created. The 'bonuus' is that the chance of a player becoming a probowl quality starter is much much higher in rounds 1 and 2 than any other round. If you want impact players, you pretty much have to get them in the first 2 rounds.

Some teams believe they can identify starter caliber players at a higher rate in the lower rounds than average. They choose to accumulate extra picks and swing for the fences with bulk rather than quality. The Pats, 49's and Browns come to mind. Even if that strategy was worthwhile(I have my doubts), the Saints are OBVIOUSLY not the correct team to place a wager on when it comes to selecting mid round picks.