At what pick do you start to consider trading up

[theogt]

So you hate getting players like Tony Dorsett, Emmitt Smith or more recently, Mike Jenkins.

OK.

Emmitt and Jenkins were small trades up. I don't mind trading up a few spots. But I agree with the other poster, if you're trading up 5-10 spots (or more), it becomes silly. The price you pay for such an inexact prediction is just too much and hence borderline arrogant.

 

[Screw The Hall]

So you hate getting players like Tony Dorsett, Emmitt Smith or more recently, Mike Jenkins.

OK.

Yes of course that's exactly what I meant. I hated getting all of those guys.

I have to admit it does sound a bit silly when you put it like that. But allow me to backtrack for a second and pull the proverbial foot out of my mouth for making a blanket statement so that I might better explain what I actually meant.

When you have enough ammunition like we had in both the Emmitt Smith and Mike Jenkins draft years I don't mind moving up (I don't recall the scenario for Dorsett off the top of my head) because the whole reason to work the draft for extra picks is to afford yourself the luxury of having some versatility. I get that.

However when your draft isn't set up like that, take this year for instance, I prefer not throwing extra picks at what is an inexact science anyway. The theory of course being numbers increases your odds at being successful at what is sometimes a glorified guessing game anyway.

Of course there are and should be exceptions, which is where my previous post missed the mark. If someone just sticks out as "that much better than everyone else" on your draft board then that would be cause to make a move. I just think those are rare circumstances.

 

[Stash]

Emmitt and Jenkins were small trades up. I don't mind trading up a few spots. But I agree with the other poster, if you're trading up 5-10 spots (or more), it becomes silly. The price you pay for such an inexact prediction is just too much and hence borderline arrogant.

My stance is that I would have preferred 2-3 impact players over the 12 mediocre ones they drafted last season.

 

[Hostile]

So you hate getting players like Tony Dorsett, Emmitt Smith or more recently, Mike Jenkins.

OK.

We also traded two 3rd round picks to the Saints so we could move up to select Quincy Carter.

Not every trade up ensures an Emmitt or Tony. Sometimes you get a Crankcase.

 

[Screw The Hall]

My stance is that I would have preferred 2-3 impact players over the 12 mediocre ones they drafted last season.

I think you may end up getting 2-3 impact players out of that draft before it's all said and done and not have to give up the depth that the number of picks afford this roster.

 

[texmex]

Jerry doesn't value the position of safety enough to trade up for Eric Berry or Earl Thomas

 

[big dog cowboy]

My stance is that I would have preferred 2-3 impact players over the 12 mediocre ones they drafted last season.

A little early for that assessment isn't it? Or were you in the "we should trade Aikman" crowd who said he would suck after his rookie year?

 

[dbair1967]

We also traded two 3rd round picks to the Saints so we could move up to select Quincy Carter.

Not every trade up ensures an Emmitt or Tony. Sometimes you get a Crankcase.

Sure you win some and you lose some. But you have to reply on your scouts. In the examples of Dorsett, Smith and Jenkins, our scouting department was top notch. In the example of Q Bong, it was obvious we had a poor scouting department and even more poor decision making process.

Would you trade alot of picks to move up and draft a Troy Aikman or John Elway? Absolutely you would. Sure there was uncertainty, but it was also universally thought that these two guys were probably the highest rated QB prospects of the draft era.

 

[theogt]

My stance is that I would have preferred 2-3 impact players over the 12 mediocre ones they drafted last season.

Roy Williams and Buehler (not joking) were both immediate impact players acquired with last year's draft picks. On top of that we got a slew of other picks that may end up being pretty good.

 

[dbair1967]

My stance is that I would have preferred 2-3 impact players over the 12 mediocre ones they drafted last season.

Its only been one year, to say they are all mediocre right now is kind of silly.

3-4 years from now, a few of these guys might be really dependable, quality players.

 

[Hostile]

Sure you win some and you lose some. But you have to reply on your scouts. In the examples of Dorsett, Smith and Jenkins, our scouting department was top notch. In the example of Q Bong, it was obvious we had a poor scouting department and even more poor decision making process.

Would you trade alot of picks to move up and draft a Troy Aikman or John Elway? Absolutely you would. Sure there was uncertainty, but it was also universally thought that these two guys were probably the highest rated QB prospects of the draft era.

Michael Vick was going to revolutionize the way QB is played. Think Atlanta would like a Mulligan?

 

[dbair1967]

Emmitt and Jenkins were small trades up. I don't mind trading up a few spots. But I agree with the other poster, if you're trading up 5-10 spots (or more), it becomes silly. The price you pay for such an inexact prediction is just too much and hence borderline arrogant.

I agree to a certain extent, but it depends on what you are trading up for exactly. I wouldnt trade up 20 or so spots in the first round to get a safety prospect, or a guard. But if my team needed a dominant LT or pass rusher, elite CB or franchise QB and I could move into position to get said player, I'd think long and hard about it. Especially if its a player like a Troy Aikman, John Elway or Anthony Munoz. Guys you are about 99.9% sure are franchise players with not only the elite talent, but the character and work ethic to go with it.

 

[dbair1967]

Michael Vick was going to revolutionize the way QB is played. Think Atlanta would like a Mulligan?

Michael Vick was an athelete, not a QB.

On a comparitive scale, his draft grade was nowhere near a guys like Aikman, Elway, Manning etc etc

 

[Stash]

I think you may end up getting 2-3 impact players out of that draft before it's all said and done and not have to give up the depth that the number of picks afford this roster.

I'd be interested to know who you feel fits that role.

I honestly don't see many - if any - candidates.

 

[Hostile]

Michael Vick was an athelete, not a QB.

On a comparitive scale, his draft grade was nowhere near a guys like Aikman, Elway, Manning etc etc

We had so much confidence in Aikman we used our 1990 1st round pick on Steve Walsh.

 

[Hostile]

I'd be interested to know who you feel fits that role.

I honestly don't see many - if any - candidates.

I think 3 of them do, but that is just my opinion.

 

[Stash]

A little early for that assessment isn't it? Or were you in the "we should trade Aikman" crowd who said he would suck after his rookie year?

I mentioned my disappointment when the draft happened and not much has occurred to change my opinion.

 

[dbair1967]

We had so much confidence in Aikman we used our 1990 1st round pick on Steve Walsh.

And Jimmy had a very valid reason for doing it. He's explained it several times.

He also knew he'd get a premium in return for whichever QB he decided to trade, and it was obvious after that initial training camp which player that was going to be.

While Walsh ultimately was a massive bust, it was pretty much a concensus in 1989 that Walsh would have been a top-5 pick or so had he entered the 1990 draft instead of the 89 supplemental draft.

 

[Screw The Hall]

I'd be interested to know who you feel fits that role.

I honestly don't see many - if any - candidates.

Firstly I think Buehler has to qualify as an impact player for us now. That was just a tremendous addition last year.

I am extremely high on Brandon Williams and I also like Mike Hamlin as well. Those would be my 2 picks.

I think several others have starter potential but should at least be decent depth down the line here such as Jason Williams and Victor Butler.

edit ... I would like to add that I am not wowed by this draft. But I do think it could shape up much better than the colossal bust many have it pegged to be.

 

[Stash]

Roy Williams and Buehler (not joking) were both immediate impact players acquired with last year's draft picks. On top of that we got a slew of other picks that may end up being pretty good.

Buehler was about the best of the bunch.

And I wouldn't consider the Roy Williams trade a "win".

The organization has drafted more "good" than "bad" recently, but last year's left me disappointed.