(05-19-2021, 07:23 PM)TheDuke007 Wrote:

(05-19-2021, 11:23 AM)NYC4jags Wrote: How about you simply consider how many years we've watched this team suck, and how many former Jags have gone on to be contributors on winning teams elsewhere while we plodded along to a losing record in the same season?  

If it doesn't make you question moves like Josh Oliver and Josiah Scott, you probably haven't been paying close enough attention.

How is the team sucking in prior years relevant? It's relevant because it was partially a result of bad personnel decisions. My argument is that personnel decisions may currently be taking place without adequate due diligence. I for one, am sick of nad personnel decisions and am praying I'm not seeing the first signs that the new regime won't improve from what we've been subject to historically.  Even if we agree that Caldwell made stupid trades, that doesn't mean EVERY trade in the NFL is stupid. This trade wasn't made by Caldwell. I didn't call any trade stupid. I'm questioning the reasoning behind moving on from players that may still have something to offer without getting them in camp first to be certain. 

I know you weren't replying to me, but personally, I not only questioned, but disagreed with the Josh Oliver trade.  Trades are case by case.  There are big differences between the two trades:

1.  Cornerback is one of our strongest and deepest positions.  Tight end was a position with no depth and a desperate need.  

2.  At the time, most would have considered Oliver third on our depth chart at a position where teams usually keep at least three.  In other words, I would have projected him on our 53 man roster.  I did not project Scott on our 53 man roster and didn't even really consider him on the bubble.  Even with an injury to one of our other cornerbacks, I would still have projected Claybrooks and possibly others over him.

3.  We got a 6th round pick from a team likely to be drafting early for Scott (plus a player) versus a likely very late seventh rounder for Oliver.  Keep in mind that there are only seven rounds.  The difference between the pick for Oliver and every UDFA may end up only being a few players.  Oliver was traded for the garbage of garbage picks.

4.  The pick for Oliver was conditional.  We only got the pick if he made the team.  It creates a logical argument that many on here seemed unable to follow.  There's two scenarios.  Either he makes the Ravens or he doesn't.  If he doesn't, we get absolutely nothing from the trade.  If Oliver is good enough to make the Ravens, then he very likely would have been good enough to make the Jaguars.  Given the Jaguars desperate need at the position, that would have been far more valuable than a very late seventh rounder.  There was zero downside to keeping Oliver.  There's a big difference between not wanting a free raffle ticket (Oliver) versus not wanting to pay $5 for a raffle ticket (Scott).

5. Oliver played little because he was injured.  Scott didn't play because he just wasn't good enough.  This was despite playing on a really bad team that got decimated by injuries at his position and he still played minimally.  The guy just wasn't going to make a team at a position where the three best players returned, the top free agent signing was at his position, and the 33rd overall draft pick were used at his position.  Getting a sixth rounder for Scott is better than just cutting him and getting nothing.
As I've already expounded upon in the thread, this gripe wasn't about Josiah Scott's rookie tape (which is often not indicative of a player's actual career) it was about not bothering to see an athlete perform in person when you have the opportunity - but  instead  moving on from a mid round pick because he doesn't suit the desired traits of your coordinator/scheme.  I find it a lazy and inadequate form of roster evaluation.