(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

---