(05-03-2023, 03:40 PM)rpr52121 Wrote:

(05-02-2023, 08:45 AM)NYC4jags Wrote: Getting stuck with that many late picks is a failure any way you want to slice it. It wasn't their intent. 

Yes, it is absolutely the result of circumstance more than it is GM execution, but they rolled the dice gaining all those picks with the intent of packaging them to move up. 

Then they got stuck with them.

 A high number of long shots to make the roster will likely help our depth improve a little bit, and maybe we even unearth a starter or rotational guy, but the reality is we've got 6-8 players freshly added that are gonna get cut on August 29th or sooner. 

The strategy was swing and a miss. I don't hate them for swinging on the pitch, but they didn't connect. 
Pardon the drawn out baseball analogy, but all we can do is hope that a few of these long shot additions can bunt us around the bases at this point. 

Doesn't mean this is going to turn out to be a bad Jags draft class. Could end up a great one when we look back on it in 2025.

I agree that they didn't have a plan B. 

I think the plan B should have been maybe trade the late round picks for vets that other teams may be cutting for salary cap reasons. Still probably doesn't net you starters, but probably better rotational/depth players. Plus given the CBA, the original team would probably be eating most of the cap/dead money hit. 

They would have probably needed to foresee this as a potential issue though, and try to do these back in Feb/March. I think the draft issues probably come back to sitting on their laurels a bit too much back in Feb/March.

Just how would that work? If we trade for the dude, we're taking on the very same cap burden, and last I checked we were not swimming in cap room. If the guy is too pricey for the other team to handle, he's probably well beyond any reasonable glimmer of fitting inside our tiny window of space.

---

(05-03-2023, 03:53 PM)Craigukjag Wrote: How can drafting more players be a failure, by all accounts every trade back they still selected the player they intended to at that position so all that happened is we got a few extra swings with lower round picks, better to swing on 5/6 players than just the one

(allegedly)

it's rare that a GM is gonna address the media and state "we were hoping to get [dude], but we traded too far back and had to settle for [guy] instead."

even if you settled, you're going to hype the guy like he was the prize from the get-go.

---