What did we give up in the RW Trade?

[TwoCentPlain]

If they didn't trade them then it was:

1st round, #20 TE Brandon Pettigrew, Oklahoma State
3rd round, #18 (82nd overall) WR Derrick Williams, Penn State

We have no idea how these players will turn out yet so there is really no way of knowing whether they made out on the deal or not. I also assume that we might have taken different players with those picks if we would have held onto them so there is really no way of knowing "what might have been".

Not a bad trade if you ask me. Of course, the Cowboys wouldn't have chosen Pettigrew. But, this is all the data we have to go on. 2009 was a weak draft for the 1st rd, also. All things considered, the Cowboys didn't give up a lot for Roy. We will know better at the end of the year.

 

[THUMPER]

Who would you have rather had with that the 1st and 3rd?

Certainly not the guys the Lions picked.

My point is that a 1st and a 3rd are too much for any WR. Other teams just aren't trading that much for WRs, just us.

DE Jared Allen was traded from KC to the Vikes for nearly the exact same picks but Allen had led the league in sacks the year before being traded and DEs are much more valuable than WRs. Roy was not even considered a top-10 WR in 2007.

Roy may turn out to be a very good WR for us but he will never be worth what we traded for him IMO.

edit: Most of the trades involving top WRs in recent years have been for 2nd round picks or lower:

Terrell Owens was traded from San Fran to the Ravens for a 2nd but it was rescinded. He was then traded to the Eagles for a 5th rounder and WR James Thrash.

Javon Walker was traded from Green Bay to Denver for a 2nd round pick.

I couldn't find any WRs in recent memory that were traded for 1st rounders unless it was to us.

 

[kmd24]

The guy I would have liked to see the Cowboys take at 20 would have been Oher, but I doubt that would have been their pick.

 

[theogt]

My point is that a 1st and a 3rd are too much for any WR.

This isn't really much of a point. If you can't come up with two players you would have rather had with those 1st and 3rd round picks, then obviously Roy Williams was worth more than those 1st and 3rd round picks.

I'm sure in 5 years, we'll be able to say, "We should have picked X and Y players at those spots" because it will be obvious that some player picked after those picks turned out to be a very good player.

But when you're picking players or trading picks, you don't have that luxury of hindsight. And based on the information we had at the time, I can't think of two players with those 1st and 3rd picks that I would rather have than Roy.

 

[THUMPER]

This isn't really much of a point. If you can't come up with two players you would have rather had with those 1st and 3rd round picks, then obviously Roy Williams was worth more than those 1st and 3rd round picks.

That doesn't make any sense at all. That's like saying, "I know I paid $10,000 more for that car than I needed to but since I couldn't think of anything better to do with that money it's OK."

I'm sure in 5 years, we'll be able to say, "We should have picked X and Y players at those spots" because it will be obvious that some player picked after those picks turned out to be a very good player.

But when you're picking players or trading picks, you don't have that luxury of hindsight. And based on the information we had at the time, I can't think of two players with those 1st and 3rd picks that I would rather have than Roy.

Again, you are missing the point because all you can think of is who we might have selected with those picks, but at this point we have ZERO idea of how anyone we might have picked would turn out.

The issue, again, is that we paid far more than the market value for a WR. That's it, nothing more than that. It doesn't matter who might have been available or who we might have selected that we might have wanted more than Roy Williams, just that we paid a lot more than the sticker price for him.

The bigger point I'm trying to make is that Jerry has done this a number of times and usually for WRs and it is hurting the team.

If that doesn't bother you then I have a car you might be interested in...

 

[Chocolate Lab]

I'm not a fan of trading first round selections because it handicaps the draft too much, IMO.

But we did, the third round pick was one we had added via previous trades and lower than our own third.

The biggest reason I'm happy with the Roy Williams trade is that it got Terrell Owens off the roster.

I pulled for Owens to do well here because I want the team to do well, but I always felt things would end badly. Having Williams allowed us to jettison Owens and put the focus back on team.

Bingo.

And like speedkilz said, the guy we probably would've got was Maclin. It kind of stinks that he fell that far to where we could have reasonably got him (especially since he went to the Eagles) because I think he'll be pretty good.

But still, he's coming from the spread offense, and you don't know how those guys will translate to the pro game. And even if he turns out to be a good one, rookie WRs almost never do much and aren't ready to be a true lead WR in any case.

And I still think people forget how talented Roy is. He's big, fast, athletic, and has great hands. If he'd been a rookie in this draft, he'd almost surely have been a top-10 pick, maybe even a top-6-7 pick. It's just that he was in Detroit and he was hurt here last year, so everyone thinks he's a JAG. He's not. Watch him now that he has a good QB.

 

[theogt]

That doesn't make any sense at all. That's like saying, "I know I paid $10,000 more for that car than I needed to but since I couldn't think of anything better to do with that money it's OK."

No, that's a terrible analogy, because you're assuming you could keep the $10,000 which you couldn't. You can't just keep that 1st and 3rd round pick. You have to spend it.

So the better analogy is, you have $10,000 and you have to spend it on something or else you lose it. You can spend it on a new car. Or you can spend it on something else, but you can't think of anything else you'd rather spend it on than the new car.

So what do you do? You spend it on something else you want or need less than the car? No, that's just silly.

Again, you are missing the point because all you can think of is who we might have selected with those picks, but at this point we have ZERO idea of how anyone we might have picked would turn out.

The issue, again, is that we paid far more than the market value for a WR. That's it, nothing more than that. It doesn't matter who might have been available or who we might have selected that we might have wanted more than Roy Williams, just that we paid a lot more than the sticker price for him.

The bigger point I'm trying to make is that Jerry has done this a number of times and usually for WRs and it is hurting the team.

If that doesn't bother you then I have a car you might be interested in...

Your problem is that you're thinking that 1st and 3rd round picks have some inherent value beyond the players that you could possibly obtain with the picks. You can't look at picks in a void and say a 1st round pick is always worth X. A first round pick is only worth what you could possibly use it for. If there's nothing but 3rd round talent, then is it really "worth" a 1st round pick? Absolutely not. Stop thinking of things in a vacuum.

You can't say, "no receiver is ever worth a 1st and 3rd round pick" because there's no set value to 1st and 3rd round picks. Some 1st and 3rd round picks can be much more valuable than others, which can be almost worthless.

You can, however, say "1st and 3rd round picks, on average are worth X." But that's a meaningless statement when you're faced with actual knowledge of what they're worth to you.

 

[superonyx]

That doesn't make any sense at all. That's like saying, "I know I paid $10,000 more for that car than I needed to but since I couldn't think of anything better to do with that money it's OK."



Again, you are missing the point because all you can think of is who we might have selected with those picks, but at this point we have ZERO idea of how anyone we might have picked would turn out.

The issue, again, is that we paid far more than the market value for a WR. That's it, nothing more than that. It doesn't matter who might have been available or who we might have selected that we might have wanted more than Roy Williams, just that we paid a lot more than the sticker price for him.

The bigger point I'm trying to make is that Jerry has done this a number of times and usually for WRs and it is hurting the team.

If that doesn't bother you then I have a car you might be interested in...

I understand your point but it isnt as simple as saying we paid much more than market value. The value of each draft pick changes by the year based on the talent level of that particular draft. In this years draft a number 1 pick doesnt have the same value as a number one pick in a different year. I will look back and see what we missed or who we may have been able to draft instead and use that to determine is we made a good trade or not.

I am not crazy about draft picks. I have seen way more draft picks turn into nothing than turn into good players. I actually agree with Jerry on the value he puts on draft picks vs some on the other teams. For example, a pro bowl corner (lito shephard) was traded for a 2nd round pick. How can a proven player that is still young and has been voted to multiple probowls be less valuable than a project that you draft in the second round? The league is draft pick crazy when most draft picks turn into filler.

Now if the Lions would have traded him for a 2nd round pick and we have up a 1st then thats a different story. Or maybe if we could have gotten Boldin instead with a 1st round pick then we can compare and say who would be better for this team.

 

[CATCH17]

Jerry gave up a little extra because he felt like Roy Williams was the missing piece to a Superbowl last year.

It was a gamble but it was a risk worth taking IMO.

Especially when you consider what kind of draft that was.

 

[theogt]

I understand your point but it isnt as simple as saying we paid much more than market value. The value of each draft pick changes by the year based on the talent level of that particular draft. In this years draft a number 1 pick doesnt have the same value as a number one pick in a different year. I will look back and see what we missed or who we may have been able to draft instead and use that to determine is we made a good trade or not.

You said this much more clearly and succinctly than I did.

But on the last sentence, you can't wait until after everything pans out to determine if it was a good decision. You determine the validity of the decision based on the knowledge you had at the time of the decision. Just like in poker -- if your hand has a 70% chance of winning and you end up losing, you don't go back and say I should have folded. No, you make that same decision every time based on the knowledge you have at that time.

 

[DaBoys4Life]

Micheal Oher

 

[THUMPER]

No, that's a terrible analogy, because you're assuming you could keep the $10,000 which you couldn't. You can't just keep that 1st and 3rd round pick. You have to spend it.

This wasn't a draft-day trade, it was made early during the season so we didn't have to spend those picks for several months and we had no idea at the time who might be available with those picks.

Again, no other team is spending those high picks on WRs which tells me that no other team believes that WRs are worth that much.

So the better analogy is, you have $10,000 and you have to spend it on something or else you lose it. You can spend it on a new car. Or you can spend it on something else, but you can't think of anything else you'd rather spend it on than the new car.

So what do you do? You spend it on something else you want or need less than the car? No, that's just silly.

We could still have bought a car as well as something else we wanted, that's the point you seem to be missing here. Would it have been the same car? Who knows. The Lions wanted to dump Williams and might have traded him for the 3rd round pick alone after the season. We will never know because Jerry didn't wait. He saw what he wanted and paid what he wanted to pay to get it but it cost us the opportunity to pick up another player that we might have needed.

With that 1st round pick we could have selected Percey Harvin, Hakeem Nicks, or Kenny Britt. Now we have no idea how any of those 3 guys will play this year or whether they will be Pro-Bowl players at some point in their careers or not, we just don't know. We also don't know how Roy Williams will do this year. I do agree that it is a bit more sure with him than with a rookie and that's why I don't mind trading for him, but I do mind giving up more than we should have.

The 3rd round pick was #82 overall and there were 5 WRs taken within the next 6 picks. Again, we have no way of knowing how any of them will turn out but we could have selected 2 WRs with those picks and had a good chance of at least one of them being a good player for us.

The point is that we could have gotten a car anyway, or even two of them for the same price we paid for Roy.

Your problem is that you're thinking that 1st and 3rd round picks have some inherent value beyond the players that you could possibly obtain with the picks. You can't look at picks in a void and say a 1st round pick is always worth X. A first round pick is only worth what you could possibly use it for. If there's nothing but 3rd round talent, then is it really "worth" a 1st round pick? Absolutely not. Stop thinking of things in a vacuum.

You can't say, "no receiver is ever worth a 1st and 3rd round pick" because there's no set value to 1st and 3rd round picks. Some 1st and 3rd round picks can be much more valuable than others, which can be almost worthless.

You can, however, say "1st and 3rd round picks, on average are worth X." But that's a meaningless statement when you're faced with actual knowledge of what they're worth to you.

I disagree. Draft picks do have a value which is why they are traded for something, hopefully of equal or greater value. Sometimes that is another draft pick(s) and sometimes it is for a player. Teams have set the value of WRs at no higher than a 2nd round pick.

Let's use the car analogy again. If I want to buy a used 2004 Ford F150 pickup, I look online to see what they are selling for and check the Blue Book value to see what the ballpark price should be. Throw into this that I am also buying an economy car for my daughter to drive while at college and have enough to purchase both.

So I start checking out F150s that are for sale. I find one that I always wanted but the guy selling it wants far more than it is worth. I really want it but if I buy it for what he is asking I cannot get my daughter the car she needs as well. Maybe she can work this year and go to college next year and I don't NEED to get her a car after all and I can get the truck I REALLY want!

There are other F150s for sale but this one is just the right color, year, engine size, etc. so I buy it anyway even though it costs me a lot more than another one would have. Plus my daughter will have to wait to get a car that she needed.

That's essentially what Jerry has done.

I do agree with whoever it was that said that trading for Roy Williams helped to get Terrell Owens out of here. Now THAT makes it worth whatever we paid for him!

 

[AdamJT13]

Teams have set the value of WRs at no higher than a 2nd round pick.

That's obviously not true, considering how many wide receivers are drafted in the first round.

 

[theogt]

This wasn't a draft-day trade, it was made early during the season so we didn't have to spend those picks for several months and we had no idea at the time who might be available with those picks.

Actually, that's not true at all. There was a very clear picture of what the 2009 draft would look like by the time we traded for him. You can even have a good picture of what the next year's draft will be during the current draft. This should always be a factor in trade and pick decisions.

We could still have bought a car as well as something else we wanted, that's the point you seem to be missing here. Would it have been the same car? Who knows.

Yeah, that's actually the point. You can't buy the SAME CAR. It's either a choice of a car you want or something else, including a car, that you don't want.

The Lions wanted to dump Williams and might have traded him for the 3rd round pick alone after the season. We will never know because Jerry didn't wait. He saw what he wanted and paid what he wanted to pay to get it but it cost us the opportunity to pick up another player that we might have needed.

That's just pure speculation. But the facts are, the Lions could have franchised him and gotten a 1st and 3rd. You can't argue that we have possibly gotten him cheaper without actually knowing if we could have possibly gotten him cheaper.

With that 1st round pick we could have selected Percey Harvin, Hakeem Nicks, or Kenny Britt. Now we have no idea how any of those 3 guys will play this year or whether they will be Pro-Bowl players at some point in their careers or not, we just don't know. We also don't know how Roy Williams will do this year. I do agree that it is a bit more sure with him than with a rookie and that's why I don't mind trading for him, but I do mind giving up more than we should have.

The 3rd round pick was #82 overall and there were 5 WRs taken within the next 6 picks. Again, we have no way of knowing how any of them will turn out but we could have selected 2 WRs with those picks and had a good chance of at least one of them being a good player for us.

The point is that we could have gotten a car anyway, or even two of them for the same price we paid for Roy.

And again, you completely miss the point. Of course we could have gotten another receiver. There are literally hundreds of them available. The question is, who would you have rather had. This shouldn't be such a difficult concept.

I disagree. Draft picks do have a value which is why they are traded for something, hopefully of equal or greater value. Sometimes that is another draft pick(s) and sometimes it is for a player. Teams have set the value of WRs at no higher than a 2nd round pick.

Well, that's where you're just confused, I guess. Because nothing, not oil, not dollars, not even cars have a set value. The value of everything, from draft picks to gold, changes based on the circumstances of the situation.

Let's use the car analogy again. If I want to buy a used 2004 Ford F150 pickup, I look online to see what they are selling for and check the Blue Book value to see what the ballpark price should be. Throw into this that I am also buying an economy car for my daughter to drive while at college and have enough to purchase both.

So I start checking out F150s that are for sale. I find one that I always wanted but the guy selling it wants far more than it is worth. I really want it but if I buy it for what he is asking I cannot get my daughter the car she needs as well. Maybe she can work this year and go to college next year and I don't NEED to get her a car after all and I can get the truck I REALLY want!

There are other F150s for sale but this one is just the right color, year, engine size, etc. so I buy it anyway even though it costs me a lot more than another one would have. Plus my daughter will have to wait to get a car that she needed.

That's essentially what Jerry has done.

I do agree with whoever it was that said that trading for Roy Williams helped to get Terrell Owens out of here. Now THAT makes it worth whatever we paid for him!

None of this made any sense, whatsoever.

 

[THUMPER]

That's obviously not true, considering how many wide receivers are drafted in the first round.

Well now obviously I am talking about in a trade.

Now that you're here, do you have any info on what WRs have been traded for over the past 10 years or so?

 

[theogt]

Well now obviously I am talking about in a trade.

Now that you're here, do you have any info on what WRs have been traded for over the past 10 years or so?

Look, the question is NOT whether someone has made a similar trade in the past.

The question is, would you have rather kept those 1st and 3rd round picks. And the only reason you would want to keep them is that you could have picked up better players than Roy Williams. So, who are those better players?

The fact that you can't answer that question shows which is more valuable between Roy Williams and those picks.

 

[THUMPER]

Actually, that's not true at all. There was a very clear picture of what the 2009 draft would look like by the time we traded for him. You can even have a good picture of what the next year's draft will be during the current draft. This should always be a factor in trade and pick decisions.

Now that is a completely ridiculous statement. The players haven't even declared for the draft yet. No one knows yet which underclassmen will declare, the combine has not yet been held, and the college football season has not yet been completed.

Talk about making no sense. All you had at that point was pure speculation as far as the draft is concerned.

Yeah, that's actually the point. You can't buy the SAME CAR. It's either a choice of a car you want or something else, including a car, that you don't want.

Or, a different car that you want. It isn't simply a choice between what you want and what you don't want. "Oh crap, we didn't get Roy Williams, I guess we'll just pass on our pick then.

That's just pure speculation. But the facts are, the Lions could have franchised him and gotten a 1st and 3rd. You can't argue that we have possibly gotten him cheaper without actually knowing if we could have possibly gotten him cheaper.

That's what I said, we have no idea what might have happened. Jerry wanted what he wanted and was willing to overpay to get it.

We could have gotten a different WR cheaper.

And again, you completely miss the point. Of course we could have gotten another receiver. There are literally hundreds of them available. The question is, who would you have rather had. This shouldn't be such a difficult concept.

It isn't a difficult concept at all. The issue is that Roy Williams was not the ONLY WR available and was not the BEST WR available.

Well, that's where you're just confused, I guess. Because nothing, not oil, not dollars, not even cars have a set value. The value of everything, from draft picks to gold, changes based on the circumstances of the situation.

I think you are the one who is confused. I can look online to see what Gold is selling for right now. In fact it is at $1006 per ounce as of this moment. See, a set price based on what the market says it is worth today.

The same is true for players and draft picks. Obviously, everything changes over time but on any given day you can find out what something is worth and the current market value for WRs in trade is not a 1st & 3rd based on what others are selling for.

None of this made any sense, whatsoever.

I'm sorry, I tried to get my point across and evidently I failed.

 

[THUMPER]

Look, the question is NOT whether someone has made a similar trade in the past.

The question is, would you have rather kept those 1st and 3rd round picks. And the only reason you would want to keep them is that you could have picked up better players than Roy Williams. So, who are those better players?

The fact that you can't answer that question shows which is more valuable between Roy Williams and those picks.

Since when do YOU get to decide what the question is dude?

I made a point and you made a counter-point. You asked a question and I considered it irrelevant to the point I was making because it addressed a completely different issue.

 

[Maikeru-sama]

So far, the main benefit of acquiring Roy Williams is that it allowed us to justifiably get rid of Terrell Owens, which is huge from a lockerroom standpoint.

 

[theogt]

Since when do YOU get to decide what the question is dude?

I made a point and you made a counter-point. You asked a question and I considered it irrelevant to the point I was making because it addressed a completely different issue.

I'm not going to sit here and do this line by line reply mess.

But if you don't see how the fact that you can't come up with a better use of the 1st and 3rd than Roy Williams means it was a good trade, then I can't help you.