(05-06-2024, 10:52 PM)cland Wrote:

(05-06-2024, 10:06 PM)TheDuke007 Wrote: What is the source on this?  I've heard it said multiple times, but they must be using some bizzarro-world point chart.  When I pull up a points chart off the internet (such as DraftTek), it shows the Jaguars actually losing from a points perspective.  Below are the calculations:

The #17 spot is worth 950 points while the #23 spot is worth 760.  This means the Jaguars lost 190 points by moving down.

The Jaguars get the Viking's 3rd and 4th rounder next year.  However, it is commonly accepted that future picks are worth 1 round lower than a pick in the current draft.  As such, those picks should be treated as 4th and 5th rounders.  The Vikings' draft position next year is unknown.  If we assume that they are at the same spot next year as this year (#10 overall), those picks are worth 74 and 33.5 points respectively.  Add the 24.6 points for the #167 overall in 2024 draft, and you only come to 132.1 points.  We lost 57.9 points.

Even if we assume the Vikings are drafting #1 overall next year, we still would lose the trade by 31.4 points.

I would have to assume that the "points chart" showing that we won doesn't take into consideration that future picks are worth less than current picks.  If I do the calculations assuming all three picks were this year, then yes, it's true that the Jaguars would then "win" the trade.  However, even then, it's by a margin of 128.6 points or a very late 3rd rounder.  That's nice, but I would still have a hard time believing that could be the 9th most lopsided trade in NFL history.  Again, I would like to see the source.  I think someone is doing some creative math.

The biggest part of the trade is that the Vikings got a steal by getting Dallas Turner (ranked #9 on the consensus boards) at #17.  So from their point of view, even if the trade to move up from #23 was overpriced (if you don't take in the next-year factor,) it was enormously cheaper than going up to ninth spot to get him.  It looks like a win-win deal.

While I probably would have taken Dallas Turner myself, we have no clue if the Vikings got a steal in Dallas Turner.  We like to talk about steals but he's only a steal if he produces.  We'll see how the next couple years go.

---

(05-08-2024, 08:15 AM)Mikey Wrote:

(05-07-2024, 12:47 PM)Jaguarmeister Wrote: I thought I was being plagiarized for a moment.

https://www.duvalpride.com/showthread.ph...pid1620448

https://www.duvalpride.com/showthread.ph...pid1620466

Great minds and all that I guess.

Value charts be danged. The trade is only a bargain if next year's darft is as deep AND we don't flush the picks. I like the early picks, you're gonna get more talent out of those selections. Amassing volumes of day 3 picks is perfect for a roster rebuild. Safe to say we can all agree that ain't where we are.

Now if next year is just as loaded and potential late first/early second guys fall to that third rounder (and they fit our needs), it's a win. Otherwise, we exchanged firsts to get the guys we both wanted where they fit, and the rest of the deal was just formality. Would have much rather gotten a late second this year than a 3rd, 4th and 5th to move. Not as many picks, but I'm not looking to fill out my punt coverage team.

"lopsided" is hilarious when you think the value that puts the trade over the top are the likes of D. Prince, Tyler Lacy, or Snoop Conner. Perspective is important.

If the Vikings flounder this year that third could be a top 70 pick.  With another possible top 100 pick with it.  Waiting until next year is a gamble for sure but it could pay out huge.  It remains a great move no matter what if Thomas is the guy.

---