(08-04-2022, 12:27 PM)flgatorsandjags Wrote: (08-04-2022, 12:06 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: As I said, exceptions exist.
I'd take a RB in the first round if my roster was well rounded with starters at positions of greater value, and a player I deemed "very rare" in talent was available at RB.
Perfect storm scenarios alter typical methodology.
I'll leave it alone for a while after this post, but all I'm trying to get across is that GMs pass up the top guy on their board all the time to select a player more valuable to their roster needs - and I don't get why ppl continually think that it is uncommon or bad.
It's normal.
Posters tell me "GM so-and-so would NEVER do that."
Really? If I can show you 4 examples of that GM trading UP to select a player his roster needed, why would you think he's above seeking out needs in the draft?
I just don't understand the odd misperception that crowd is clinging to, but whatevs. I'll put down my torch and get off my soapbox until next year's draft.
More On Topic:
I'm very excited to see Etienne on the field this year.
My travel schedule is light this Fall, so I'll get to actually attend most of the home games in OCT/NOV/DEC
Can't wait for us all to have some good stuff to talk about here.
Drinking the kool-aid by the gulp right now.
I think we all know this, those are usually the ones looking for another job in short order, as Arians has said. Then there are soe that stick to their board and take the top guy even if its not a big need, as Pederson has stated. That's what most of us hasn't wanted the team to do and it's a breath of fresh air to see this regime not do it like Dave did. We lost Yawn and Ramsey and Dave went and drafted CJ and Chaisson to fill those needs when you have much better players sitting there. I'm not buying those guys were at the top of Dave's board when it was our pick, but it was the huge needs. If you can take the best player each time when it's your pick the rest will work itself out
A. Keim and Arians traded up to take a player to replace Mathieu when he tore his ACL and declined - so that doesn't fit with any notion that Arians doesn't address needs in drafts. He does. (and that's just the first example that springs to mind with him)
You're just interpreting some soundbite quote as
gospel instead of treating it as a general comment on draft philosophy.
B. Pederson ans Baalke drafted needs with every single early and mid pick except for Muma
In fact Fortner and Conner were blatant needs that they reached for according to many draft analysts as they were selected higher than nearly everyone projected them
This regime was looking to replace Linder and obtain security for two injured running backs. They needed those guys, they targeted those needs in the draft and even reached a little bit for them.
Maybe they didn't do it as badly as Caldwell, but it's the same thing. They were just (hopefully) smarter about not reaching too far. We'll see.
I'm not going to debate it further. Let's just move on in disagreement. I don't need to be right or wrong here, and you clearly won't change your opinion. I'd rather the topic return to focus on Etienne.
