- Messages
- 79,281
- Reaction score
- 45,652
It is great that we have such passion for the NFL Draft. But, that passion should make us guarded when we want to praise or humiliate a decision maker for what they just did - despite the fact that most in the audience is scrambling to "know" a player in the moments before the microphone is turned on again.
The Cowboys do not have an environment where they enjoy a benefit of the doubt these days. They haven't in years and there is a very strong likelihood that until there are new faces making decisions for the franchise, this will not reverse. There are just too many examples of poor evaluations, conclusions, and decisions to ever "expect the best possible outcome" when the Cowboys defy conventional wisdom anymore.
But, that doesn't make for good analysis. Good analysis should be done only when enough information is available and that does not include making a list of all offensive linemen from Wisconsin, all trade down results from the past, and averaging out the best 5 mock drafts that you have read this week.
They decided to trade out of pick #18 to get #31 and #74 in return. It seems, without knowing what else was available, that they took a net loss on that transaction. It seems that they should have received a return of #31 and #61 (1st and 2nd) to trade back, but the 49ers obviously were not willing to do that. Logically, once you try to get #31 and #61 and they refuse, then you are left with 2 options (we assume): 1) take the player at #18 and play the conventional wisdom of trusting your board and your 4 month process or 2) trying to flip that opportunity for 2 quality players over 1.
The idea of trading back is one that I actually preferred before the draft started. I think we suspected that the bins might be rather picked over of premium players by the time they got on the clock. If they had 18 or 19 players graded in the 1st round, then they might get the least attractive of that grouping. However, if they could stack the deck with multiple solid players from the Top 2 or 3 rounds, then that might be the more efficient play.
Read the rest: http://sturminator.blogspot.com/2013/04/nfl-draft-2013-day-2-morning-thoughts.html
The Cowboys do not have an environment where they enjoy a benefit of the doubt these days. They haven't in years and there is a very strong likelihood that until there are new faces making decisions for the franchise, this will not reverse. There are just too many examples of poor evaluations, conclusions, and decisions to ever "expect the best possible outcome" when the Cowboys defy conventional wisdom anymore.
But, that doesn't make for good analysis. Good analysis should be done only when enough information is available and that does not include making a list of all offensive linemen from Wisconsin, all trade down results from the past, and averaging out the best 5 mock drafts that you have read this week.
They decided to trade out of pick #18 to get #31 and #74 in return. It seems, without knowing what else was available, that they took a net loss on that transaction. It seems that they should have received a return of #31 and #61 (1st and 2nd) to trade back, but the 49ers obviously were not willing to do that. Logically, once you try to get #31 and #61 and they refuse, then you are left with 2 options (we assume): 1) take the player at #18 and play the conventional wisdom of trusting your board and your 4 month process or 2) trying to flip that opportunity for 2 quality players over 1.
The idea of trading back is one that I actually preferred before the draft started. I think we suspected that the bins might be rather picked over of premium players by the time they got on the clock. If they had 18 or 19 players graded in the 1st round, then they might get the least attractive of that grouping. However, if they could stack the deck with multiple solid players from the Top 2 or 3 rounds, then that might be the more efficient play.
Read the rest: http://sturminator.blogspot.com/2013/04/nfl-draft-2013-day-2-morning-thoughts.html
