(05-22-2021, 02:47 PM)SeldomRite Wrote:

(05-22-2021, 02:45 PM)The Real Marty Wrote: I'm starting from the position that Etienne was a very good pick, so it's gonna be hard for me to agree with you on any of that.

Of course if there was a better player at a different position perhaps we should've taken him but I just think that Etienne was the right pick at the right spot to begin with so that's where I come down.  

I happen to think Etienne is a fantastic player and in a year or two will all be glad we drafted him.  

So when you say, gee what if there was a better player we could've picked instead of him, I would say, of course if that was the case we should have picked that player, but I just don't think there was one.

Okay, I get it, you either don't understand or don't believe in draft value or don't understand the marginal value of a high round running back compared to those taken later. I won't bother you further on this.

No really I understand what you're saying but I think you guys are stuck in this drafting for need versus drafting for value debate and how to maximize the total value of all of your picks. 

And that's an interesting academic discussion but in the real world we have a coach who says I have a vision for the type of team I want to build and I want this particular player.  The chef gets to select the ingredients to make the dish he wants to make, and you're not the chef, so who are you to tell him what ingredients he needs to make his dish?

Beyond that I think there is a large marginal difference between Travis Etienne and the next best running back.  I don't subscribe to the theory that you never draft a running back in the first round because you can find them in later rounds.  History shows the best running backs are drafted in the first round and the next best running backs are drafted in the second round and so on and so on.  Same as any other position.

---