(08-04-2022, 08:20 PM)flgatorsandjags Wrote:

(08-04-2022, 01:13 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: 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.

It's called when BPA meets need, it happens.  Just because you draft a guy that fits a need doesn't mean you didn't follow and trust your board.  When players keep coming off the board and a guy falls and he is at the top of your board and he fits a need why not trade up if you have him rated high enough and the picks to do so.

You are wasting your breath.

If they don't draft in the perfect order of the speculated draft chart for the team it's means they are basing their draft., regardless of how similarly the options at that pick are rated and Just view a linear progression of value with no wiggle room, with the assumption they you have more insight and understanding their process than the actual professional drafters.

I can explain and show multiple examples until you are blue in the face of draft picks being completely taken off the board way before their consensus value. It is called reaching in-case you are unfamiliar with that term

It doesn't matter.

No matter how factual the evidence is, if it doesn't fit their pre conceived shallow notions of how the draft should work based on their imagination and pure speculation, you might as well be speaking speaking with a brick wall.

They aren't dealing with reality. Just dealing with the way they wished it all would work.

.It's called being hard headed and having shallow understandings of how things actually work in a business world plus being caught up in their own hubris.

---