(04-24-2022, 02:36 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]Strong vibe from Baalke in that presser he wants to trade out of #33 to gain more picks.
That could get very interesting.
I heard the same. Baalke stated that his own history has been to trade down and acquire picks.
Some interesting trades from last draft, near pick 33...
2021-
Denver got 2-35 and 6-219, and gave up 2-40 and 4-114
NE got 2-38, and gave up 2-46, 4-122, and 4-139
Chicago got 2-39 and 5-151, and gave up 2-52, 3-83, and 6-204
(04-24-2022, 03:05 PM)Bullseye Wrote: [ -> ] (04-24-2022, 02:36 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]Strong vibe from Baalke in that presser he wants to trade out of #33 to gain more picks.
That could get very interesting.
He cited his own history of trading back, but I think under the right circumstances, he could trade up.
I just saw a mock where the Chargers missed out on their RT in the first, so they traded back to 33, and the Jaguars wound up with Olave.
Depending upon what they gave up, I don't think I would have a problem with that.
Yeah, he certainly mentioned he'd prefer to trade back rather than up, but scenarios exist where they may need to move up to get their guy and they have the ammo to do so.
Then later on, when talking about 33 in particular he implied there's a good chance the phone rings from other teams wanting to move up to that spot.
He said they have their 2 or 3 guys they want at 33, but if those guys are gone, they could move out of the spot and gain picks.
Note: I am paraphrasing and including a few specifics I believe he implied in these comments. Others may interpret Baalke differently.
(04-24-2022, 03:10 PM)ATLjag Wrote: [ -> ] (04-24-2022, 02:36 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]Strong vibe from Baalke in that presser he wants to trade out of #33 to gain more picks.
That could get very interesting.
I heard the same. Baalke stated that his own history has been to trade down and acquire picks.
Some interesting trades from last draft, near pick 33...
2021-
Denver got 2-35 and 6-219, and gave up 2-40 and 4-114
NE got 2-38, and gave up 2-46, 4-122, and 4-139
Chicago got 2-39 and 5-151, and gave up 2-52, 3-83, and 6-204
Thanks for that info.
Good barometer on what we might expect if they do field calls for 33.
(04-24-2022, 03:12 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ] (04-24-2022, 03:05 PM)Bullseye Wrote: [ -> ]He cited his own history of trading back, but I think under the right circumstances, he could trade up.
I just saw a mock where the Chargers missed out on their RT in the first, so they traded back to 33, and the Jaguars wound up with Olave.
Depending upon what they gave up, I don't think I would have a problem with that.
Yeah, he certainly mentioned he'd prefer to trade back rather than up, but scenarios exist where they may need to move up to get their guy and they have the ammo to do so.
Then later on, when talking about 33 in particular he implied there's a good chance the phone rings from other teams wanting to move up to that spot.
He said they have their 2 or 3 guys they want at 33, but if those guys are gone, they could move out of the spot and gain picks.
Note: I am paraphrasing and including a few specifics I believe he implied in these comments. Others may interpret Baalke differently.
Your interpretation is the correct one. I believe trading up would be least likely of the three scenarios, and trading back would be his preferred option unless one of the guys they are targeting are there at 33.
This conversation reminds me of TMD, how he used to bash the team for never trading back. I can only recall once in this team's history the team traded back in the draft (Shack Harris in 2007). I think there is a strong chance the team trades back from 33. But it would be something of a curious move since Pederson seemed to downplay the depth at WR and IOL. If the team is trying to accumulate some additional 3rd and 4th round picks, I wonder what position they would be after this year. LB and TE maybe?
(04-24-2022, 03:27 PM)Bullseye Wrote: [ -> ] (04-24-2022, 03:12 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah, he certainly mentioned he'd prefer to trade back rather than up, but scenarios exist where they may need to move up to get their guy and they have the ammo to do so.
Then later on, when talking about 33 in particular he implied there's a good chance the phone rings from other teams wanting to move up to that spot.
He said they have their 2 or 3 guys they want at 33, but if those guys are gone, they could move out of the spot and gain picks.
Note: I am paraphrasing and including a few specifics I believe he implied in these comments. Others may interpret Baalke differently.
Your interpretation is the correct one. I believe trading up would be least likely of the three scenarios, and trading back would be his preferred option unless one of the guys they are targeting are there at 33.
This conversation reminds me of TMD, how he used to bash the team for never trading back. I can only recall once in this team's history the team traded back in the draft (Shack Harris in 2007). I think there is a strong chance the team trades back from 33. But it would be something of a curious move since Pederson seemed to downplay the depth at WR and IOL. If the team is trying to accumulate some additional 3rd and 4th round picks, I wonder what position they would be after this year. LB and TE maybe?
Ha! Yeah, TMD would have lost his cool over Baalke by now so much that he may have earned another banning before getting a chance to enjoy discussing a trade down this year.
But I do recall him bashing that tendency and many others - real or perceived.
On positions of interest in a trade back :
I think IOL is still very much in play in that scenario.
After the Scherff and Shatley signings Pederson made comments about not being done at OL and even went on to discuss coveting a player with the versatility to play Guard or Center. I'd wager there's a player like that on their radar below 33 and above 106.
ILB, S, and TE could also be in the mix.
WR is a tough guess for me. I have no clear understanding of their intent or preference there.
(04-24-2022, 03:36 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ] (04-24-2022, 03:27 PM)Bullseye Wrote: [ -> ]Your interpretation is the correct one. I believe trading up would be least likely of the three scenarios, and trading back would be his preferred option unless one of the guys they are targeting are there at 33.
This conversation reminds me of TMD, how he used to bash the team for never trading back. I can only recall once in this team's history the team traded back in the draft (Shack Harris in 2007). I think there is a strong chance the team trades back from 33. But it would be something of a curious move since Pederson seemed to downplay the depth at WR and IOL. If the team is trying to accumulate some additional 3rd and 4th round picks, I wonder what position they would be after this year. LB and TE maybe?
Ha! Yeah, TMD would have lost his cool over Baalke by now so much that he may have earned another banning before getting a chance to enjoy discussing a trade down this year.
But I do recall him bashing that tendency and many others - real or perceived.
On positions of interest in a trade back :
I think IOL is still very much in play in that scenario.
After the Scherff and Shatley signings Pederson made comments about not being done at OL and even went on to discuss coveting a player with the versatility to play Guard or Center. I'd wager there's a player like that on their radar below 33 and above 106.
ILB, S, and TE could also be in the mix.
WR is a tough guess for me. I have no clear understanding of their intent or preference there.
Under normal circumstances, I would agree IOL would be in play assuming a trade back from 33 for extra 3rd and 4th round picks, especially Pederson's emphasis on the OL/protecting Trevor Lawrence. Besides, the 3rd round is typically a good round to find IOL (Mark Stepnoski, Vince Manuwai, Brandon Linder were all 3rd round picks). But if you assume that Pederson is honest/correct about the lack of depth at the position, the 3rd round may not be high enough to get one.
I think I would prefer Olave to getting an extra 3rd round pick, but having 3 or more 3rd round picks is appealing to me too.
It's already going to be impossible to fit all of our draft picks on the team as is. If we are trading back from 33 it better include quality extra picks and hopefully include moving up significantly with our six 6th and 7th rounders.
(04-24-2022, 04:04 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]It's already going to be impossible to fit all of our draft picks on the team as is. If we are trading back from 33 it better include quality extra picks and hopefully include moving up significantly with our six 6th and 7th rounders.
I'd rather trade up from #33 and get one of the elite WR's. Trading back, doesn't make a lot of sense to me. We already have a ton of picks.
I rather instead of trading back try to trade back into the first round. Trade pick 33 with one of out 3rds and see if we can get back into the first round. Throw in a 4 or so if high enough.
4 days to go
Come hither king hutch
(04-23-2022, 01:59 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ] (04-23-2022, 08:36 AM)Bullseye Wrote: [ -> ]In Case You Missed It, here is yesterday's press conference.
2. They have removed 20-30 players from the draft board because of character concerns. It shouldn't surprise me, but when I first heard it, that struck me as a big number.
Kind of weird. Normally, you hear a lot about certain players getting into trouble off the field, well before the draft. I haven't heard much of anything this year about anyone. The only thing I've really heard was about Devonte Wyatt, regarding a couple of domestic violence issues. To have 20-30 removed from the list for character concerns is surprising. Why haven't we been hearing any stories about these red flags?
I think we are misinterpreting this statement. The question/answer was specifically about the No. 1 pick. So I think it was more they want someone with elite character/leadership qualities for that pick, a la Trevor. That guy is gonna be one of the faces of the franchise. I think the answer was more that there were 20-30 players who didn't live up to those "elite expectations" for that particular pick, not that there are 20-30 players with big red flags.
(04-23-2022, 03:53 PM)Firesky Wrote: [ -> ]If they can't trade down, Travon Walker shouldn't be the pick. I don't have faith in our coaching staff to develop "raw athletes" Chaisson is exhibit A that we shouldn't take a project at #1 overall. I think Hutch or Thibs should be the pick, and I'd even take Karlaftis over Walker if they insist on going Pass Rusher.
This is a new coaching staff, so using the past few years of bad player development, esp with Chaisson should not be held against them.
Having said that, I just feel Hutch has as much upside as Walker probably does but it is being lost. I haven't seen anyone realistically thinking Walker will be 1st team all pro level or DPOY type player. Most people are saying Danielle Hunter or that level pass rusher. Yes, that would a great player for the Jags to have, but I think Hutch could be that level player as well.
(04-23-2022, 11:12 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ] (04-23-2022, 10:23 PM)Jag88 Wrote: [ -> ]^^ why. Oline would be a great pick. That would help the jags run the ball and give tlaw time to throw it. It's not as "exciting" perhaps as another selection, but it might just be what the jags need.
Because this OT class is terrible! Neal is an average RT at best, Ekwonu struggles in space and in pass protection and Cross needs a lot of work on his run blocking. None of these guys are anything close to elite OT's.
Completely agree. I've even seen a few scouts say of couple of those guys would be better served switching to Guard in a few years.
(04-24-2022, 04:51 AM)HandsomeRob86 Wrote: [ -> ] (04-23-2022, 11:23 PM)Jag149 Wrote: [ -> ]Nothing against you, but I'll take their evaluation of Neal over yours. Theirs is quite a bit different than yours.
Boselli has called every LT we drafted great for the last 15 years. None of them have been better than average at best and the majority were closer to replacement level than league average. Boselli track record is highly suspect in this regard, despite his own personal talents.
Boselli thinks like an offensive line coach and not like a scout. He believe he can "fix" any guy who comes into the league, and thus overrates them. This is especially true when they are signed/drafted by the Jags, because at that point he already feels they are "his guys". He has come out and flatly criticized a few offensive line guys but normally it seems like only once everyone is criticizing them.
(04-24-2022, 05:42 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ] (04-24-2022, 04:04 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]It's already going to be impossible to fit all of our draft picks on the team as is. If we are trading back from 33 it better include quality extra picks and hopefully include moving up significantly with our six 6th and 7th rounders.
I'd rather trade up from #33 and get one of the elite WR's. Trading back, doesn't make a lot of sense to me. We already have a ton of picks.
I don't think the Jags want use #33 for that trade up. So, if they are sending one of the 3rd rounders and a bunch of other picks, I just think it will be too expensive to trade up to get one of the elite WR who will all probably go in the 1st round. Maybe if one of them fall into round 2, they trade up for a WR. Having said that, I think there is a chance Watson slips into the 3rd round. He is a bit of a project, but he could easily be a winning lottery ticket.
(04-24-2022, 08:23 PM)rpr52121 Wrote: [ -> ] (04-23-2022, 01:59 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ]Kind of weird. Normally, you hear a lot about certain players getting into trouble off the field, well before the draft. I haven't heard much of anything this year about anyone. The only thing I've really heard was about Devonte Wyatt, regarding a couple of domestic violence issues. To have 20-30 removed from the list for character concerns is surprising. Why haven't we been hearing any stories about these red flags?
I think we are misinterpreting this statement. The question/answer was specifically about the No. 1 pick. So I think it was more they want someone with elite character/leadership qualities for that pick, a la Trevor. That guy is gonna be one of the faces of the franchise. I think the answer was more that there were 20-30 players who didn't live up to those "elite expectations" for that particular pick, not that there are 20-30 players with big red flags.
I don't think so. They specifically mentioned players removed from the board for character concerns, not as it pertained to the #1 overall pick. Why in the world would there be 20-30 legitimate candidates for the #1 overall pick they would have to weed out?
I have a feeling no one really wants to deal with our GM unless it is a deal in their favor. We will see.
We have 4 6th round picks and 2 7ths. Granted, these picks carry very little value I would absolutely if the oppurtunity came up use these picks to trade up in the 3rd/4th/5th to get better prospects as the chances of getting much of anything worth while in the 6th/7th is unbelievably low.
(04-23-2022, 04:41 PM)TheDuke007 Wrote: [ -> ] (04-23-2022, 03:58 PM)MojoKing Wrote: [ -> ]Am I the only one thinking they seemed kinda “meh” on Hutchinson in that presser?
Which makes me think he is the pick. They wanted to downplay their interest.
That, or if your goal is to trade back, don't broadcast that you're in love with a player at the top. That might scare some GMs from even calling to see what the price to move could be.
(04-24-2022, 03:05 PM)Bullseye Wrote: [ -> ] (04-24-2022, 02:36 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]Strong vibe from Baalke in that presser he wants to trade out of #33 to gain more picks.
That could get very interesting.
He cited his own history of trading back, but I think under the right circumstances, he could trade up.
I just saw a mock where the Chargers missed out on their RT in the first, so they traded back to 33, and the Jaguars wound up with Olave.
Depending upon what they gave up, I don't think I would have a problem with that.
Oh my. That would be phenomenal.
(04-24-2022, 10:56 PM)Jag149 Wrote: [ -> ]I have a feeling no one really wants to deal with our GM unless it is a deal in their favor. We will see.
I think if we intend to move off pick 1 the deal is not going to be in our favor.
I have no idea why Baalke thinks 33 is such a hotspot, the late firsts are the peak value picks thanks to the fifth year option. Most everyone who wants a guy bad enough to trade up to 33 probably will want that same guy enough to pay a little more for 28-32. I could be wrong, wouldn't be the first time.
(04-25-2022, 09:27 AM)Mikey Wrote: [ -> ] (04-24-2022, 10:56 PM)Jag149 Wrote: [ -> ]I have a feeling no one really wants to deal with our GM unless it is a deal in their favor. We will see.
I think if we intend to move off pick 1 the deal is not going to be in our favor.
I have no idea why Baalke thinks 33 is such a hotspot, the late firsts are the peak value picks thanks to the fifth year option. Most everyone who wants a guy bad enough to trade up to 33 probably will want that same guy enough to pay a little more for 28-32. I could be wrong, wouldn't be the first time.
Because teams picking in the 34-50 range will have 24 hours to stew over their potential desire for a player available at 33 that won't be there when their pick is due.
It's a sound theory, but like most everything draft-related, it is dependent on how the preceding picks actually transpire.
(04-25-2022, 12:21 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ] (04-25-2022, 09:27 AM)Mikey Wrote: [ -> ]I think if we intend to move off pick 1 the deal is not going to be in our favor.
I have no idea why Baalke thinks 33 is such a hotspot, the late firsts are the peak value picks thanks to the fifth year option. Most everyone who wants a guy bad enough to trade up to 33 probably will want that same guy enough to pay a little more for 28-32. I could be wrong, wouldn't be the first time.
Because teams picking in the 34-50 range will have 24 hours to stew over their potential desire for a player available at 33 that won't be there when their pick is due.
It's a sound theory, but like most everything draft-related, it is dependent on how the preceding picks actually transpire.
I've heard this theory, but have always questioned it. Yes, other teams have all day to think about a trade. However, haven't they been thinking about it for weeks? I believe teams go into the draft already knowing that if _______ player is available at the _______ spot that they are willing to offer _________ in trade.
Has anyone on the internet done an analysis on this? I would be curious if the pick is traded more often and did they get more in value.
(04-25-2022, 09:27 AM)Mikey Wrote: [ -> ] (04-24-2022, 10:56 PM)Jag149 Wrote: [ -> ]I have a feeling no one really wants to deal with our GM unless it is a deal in their favor. We will see.
I think if we intend to move off pick 1 the deal is not going to be in our favor.
I have no idea why Baalke thinks 33 is such a hotspot, the late firsts are the peak value picks thanks to the fifth year option. Most everyone who wants a guy bad enough to trade up to 33 probably will want that same guy enough to pay a little more for 28-32. I could be wrong, wouldn't be the first time.
Last year, there were 3 trade ups to the first 7 picks in the 2nd round. Other GMs have referenced previously that they often get calls for high 2nd round picks from other teams that may have a 1st round grade on a particular prospect....obviously moving up in the 2nd is less costly than moving up in the 1st for many. Also, if a team is looking for a starter at a particular position that may lack depth in a draft, a team may want to trade up to this area of the draft if there is a fear the position may be run out of projected starters before their pick. And, human nature often sets in, that GMs begin to covet a player that is available after sleeping on it overnight. ...there can be many reasons.
(04-25-2022, 01:05 PM)TheDuke007 Wrote: [ -> ] (04-25-2022, 12:21 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]Because teams picking in the 34-50 range will have 24 hours to stew over their potential desire for a player available at 33 that won't be there when their pick is due.
It's a sound theory, but like most everything draft-related, it is dependent on how the preceding picks actually transpire.
I've heard this theory, but have always questioned it. Yes, other teams have all day to think about a trade. However, haven't they been thinking about it for weeks? I believe teams go into the draft already knowing that if _______ player is available at the _______ spot that they are willing to offer _________ in trade.
Has anyone on the internet done an analysis on this? I would be curious if the pick is traded more often and did they get more in value.
100% contingent on who falls out of the 1st rnd unexpectedly and which team covers that player