(05-02-2022, 02:56 PM)Jag149 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-02-2022, 02:36 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]1. Trading the 2 6s for the 5th was a good trade in and of itself. It became bad because we took a guy who was literally over 100 picks farther down the consensus board. We made a big reach for a guy who plays the least valuable position in the sport and one that we have already invested heavily in. That's why that one was bad. If we had taken Waletzko, who went the very next pick, it would have been a nice trade.
2. Your 38-82 range for the points is calculating what the picks are worth as the draft is happening, not a year in advance. In general a year away means it's a full round less valuable. So we traded 28 points and got back around 20.
I did not know to factor in the the full round less. Thanks.
So since the 2 trades happened at the same time then we need next years pick to be worth 16.6 to break even.
we gave up 14.6+11+27+1 = 42.6 points and got guaranteed 28 so 16.6 left. The 32nd 5th round pick is worth 19.8 so we didn't lose value? Everyone but me must have known the one level less because it appears that is what they did.
It also could be worth a max of 34.
I think the important aspect to all of this calculating is that the decreased value being assigned to the future 4th is the present-day value. In other words, we'd have taken a loss if we tried to re-trade that future 4th this past weekend.
Because we did not, we'll essentially "accrue interest" on our investment (28 points) and be up anywhere from 34-82 points in overall draft capital next year as a result of our patience.
The other trade was a net gain (spent 25.6 to get 28 points), so in the end we'll come out ahead on both deals, value-wise.
Of course, as with every draft ever, the true test of a GM is what they do with the picks they have at their disposal. All the net profits in the world mean dookie if you take the wrong guys or let other teams take the next draft steal.
(05-02-2022, 03:29 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ] (05-02-2022, 03:18 PM)Mikey Wrote: [ -> ]....or you could state #2 as we spent 28 points this year to get 50-60 next year.
If there were any investment that allowed me to double my capital in one year, I'd take that in a heartbeat. The knock in present-day value accounts for the wait period required to get the full value of the pick. So next year, the other team is short 50-60 points in pick value, but can brag on their year-old 28-point pick(s).
If we had no intention of using the pick this year, even if the pick only nets say, 35 next year, we're still ahead on the deal. It not a loss unless you only look at the immediate value. Think longer term.
Of course I'm thinking long term, so was every other team who has ever traded for a future pick. Yet somehow Baalke is the only one who has managed to do that and not gain serious value by allowing a team to take his pick a year early.
Baalke basically gave the Bucs a loan at a rate far cheaper than any other banker in history. That's bad business.
I hear you and agree on that. The one thing we cannot under estimate is we had 12 picks this year. I can not fathom us taking 12 guys in the draft this year. They used many to trade up where
they saw value but at that time during the draft they could see they wouldn't need them all. Heck they may have been trying to get some swapped to next year for all we know.
The commentators indicated the trade with the future pick was offered first and Baalke called Tampa and was able to put together what amounted to a 3 way trade. i can;t see them making stuff up to make Baalke look good...lol
(05-02-2022, 03:20 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ] (05-02-2022, 03:06 PM)Jag88 Wrote: [ -> ]I'm interested to see if these 2 new cbs can win a spot and who will be cut.
One of them is meant to compete with Claybrooks to backup Agnew as a returner and provide DB depth.
I'd say he has a chance.
Ok I see. I seen both of them have some ability to play safety as well.
(05-02-2022, 03:29 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ] (05-02-2022, 03:18 PM)Mikey Wrote: [ -> ]....or you could state #2 as we spent 28 points this year to get 50-60 next year.
If there were any investment that allowed me to double my capital in one year, I'd take that in a heartbeat. The knock in present-day value accounts for the wait period required to get the full value of the pick. So next year, the other team is short 50-60 points in pick value, but can brag on their year-old 28-point pick(s).
If we had no intention of using the pick this year, even if the pick only nets say, 35 next year, we're still ahead on the deal. It not a loss unless you only look at the immediate value. Think longer term.
Of course I'm thinking long term, so was every other team who has ever traded for a future pick. Yet somehow Baalke is the only one who has managed to do that and not gain serious value by allowing a team to take his pick a year early.
Baalke basically gave the Bucs a loan at a rate far cheaper than any other banker in history. That's bad business.
So turnabout is fair play. We got a steal in a break-even trade to jump back into the first, they get a decent deal to grab a corner from Sam Houston St.
In the end, I think we got the better of both of those deals. I fail to see the issue here.
(05-02-2022, 03:40 PM)rpr52121 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-02-2022, 03:29 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]Of course I'm thinking long term, so was every other team who has ever traded for a future pick. Yet somehow Baalke is the only one who has managed to do that and not gain serious value by allowing a team to take his pick a year early.
Baalke basically gave the Bucs a loan at a rate far cheaper than any other banker in history. That's bad business.
Both the 1st and 3rd trades were with Tampa. How do we know they were done completely in isolation?
Baalke said they were, but it way it played out by trading back up right before it seems weird. Almost like the trading for next years pick was already basically agreed to and then the Jags were like oh wow this RB we like is still here, let's go get him.
...apologies, posted my response of essentially the same facts before I read this.
(05-02-2022, 10:11 PM)TheDuke007 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-02-2022, 03:06 PM)Jag88 Wrote: [ -> ]I'm interested to see if these 2 new cbs can win a spot and who will be cut.
I'm not surprised that the Jaguars brought in some competition for backup cornerback. Herndon and Claybrooks played poorly last year. Additionally, Junior and Brown both played special teams which is often a big factor in the final roster spots. Junior is the small school player who hopefully slid under the radar for some NFL teams. Brown, a first team SEC player, was rated much higher than his draft spot by some people. CBS Sports had him as the 88th best prospect in the draft. At least a couple of other sites had him projected as a 4th rounder. They are bubble players, but I think both have a decent chance at making the final roster.
Looking at what we have with our 90 guys, many should be hearing foot steps this year. I am hoping for a real interesting competition during training camp and preseason for a spot on the roster.