Darrisaw or ETN

I'm with Marty on this one..

---

Purely on talent, I don’t know how you couldn’t be excited by the Etienne pick. Adds a totally different threat to the offence

---

I just love love love that your original response included your previous post with this gem:



The juxtaposition with your follow up is :chef's kiss:

I honestly feel we are saying the same thing. Just one school is calling it blorps and the other wants to call it floops. In the end, it's just darft, and always has been.

Think of pressers this way - no (sane) GM is ever going to come out and say "I refuse to take the best player available when our pick comes up if I can take someone else at a position of greater need." Even after the pick is made, they are going to either discount the position of the more talented player or overvalue the position of need in the face of less talent, and by doing so create a scenario where the player they choose is in their eyes the best option at that time.

Why is that so hard to grasp? We should all know floops when we see them at this point.

Was RB a need?  Or do you think that was the top player on their board?  That looks like a pure BAP pick to me

I think Trent Baalke couldn't spell cat if you spotted him the C and the T. I have no faith in their board. They undervalued need, and I'm happy to wager that after the fact we'll hear that they didn't think he'd make it to 33 so they jumped while they could...you know, the typical coach speak to explain away passing up other players.

I have never, ever said "draft for need" I have always said that it is a blend, and need is one of the factors. But if this attempt to shout "I told ya so" from your keyboard makes you feel better, shout away.

It's not the pick I would have made. I was leaning Tryon or Ojulari. Truth be told, when the Redacteds were on the clock I wanted us to start looking at trading up for Darrisaw. Compared to Etienne, the value was through the roof. Still shocked that Indy passed on a tackle, but I knew that we had to get in before them, because neither they nor the tacks were going to make a deal with us.

---

Yep I really started to think we might try to trade up when WFT was on the clock. Jumping our AFC rivals and getting Darrisaw would have been the right play.

---

Yep I really started to think we might try to trade up when WFT was on the clock. Jumping our AFC rivals and getting Darrisaw would have been the right play.

I honestly don't think we would have taken him, even if he fell to #25. They seem fixated that the O-Line is just fine. Warhop has them "snowed." This front office has tunnel vision.

---

Was RB a need?  Or do you think that was the top player on their board?  That looks like a pure BAP pick to me

I think Trent Baalke couldn't spell cat if you spotted him the C and the T. I have no faith in their board. They undervalued need, and I'm happy to wager that after the fact we'll hear that they didn't think he'd make it to 33 so they jumped while they could...you know, the typical coach speak to explain away passing up other players.

I have never, ever said "draft for need" I have always said that it is a blend, and need is one of the factors. But if this attempt to shout "I told ya so" from your keyboard makes you feel better, shout away.

It's not the pick I would have made. I was leaning Tryon or Ojulari. Truth be told, when the Redacteds were on the clock I wanted us to start looking at trading up for Darrisaw. Compared to Etienne, the value was through the roof. Still shocked that Indy passed on a tackle, but I knew that we had to get in before them, because neither they nor the tacks were going to make a deal with us.

"The under valued need" lololol.  It's clear you still don't understand what BAP drafting is and and at this point it's likely you never will.  You don't look at need when you are making your board, you rank them from the best player down regardless of need.  Etienne wouldn't of been there at 33 regardless if they say it or not imo, Buffalo would of taken him.

---

I think Trent Baalke couldn't spell cat if you spotted him the C and the T. I have no faith in their board. They undervalued need, and I'm happy to wager that after the fact we'll hear that they didn't think he'd make it to 33 so they jumped while they could...you know, the typical coach speak to explain away passing up other players.

I have never, ever said "draft for need" I have always said that it is a blend, and need is one of the factors. But if this attempt to shout "I told ya so" from your keyboard makes you feel better, shout away.

It's not the pick I would have made. I was leaning Tryon or Ojulari. Truth be told, when the Redacteds were on the clock I wanted us to start looking at trading up for Darrisaw. Compared to Etienne, the value was through the roof. Still shocked that Indy passed on a tackle, but I knew that we had to get in before them, because neither they nor the tacks were going to make a deal with us.

"The under valued need" lololol.  It's clear you still don't understand what BAP drafting is and and at this point it's likely you never will.  You don't look at need when you are making your board, you rank them from the best player down regardless of need.  Etienne wouldn't of been there at 33 regardless if they say it or not imo, Buffalo would of taken him.

The horse carcass will not reincarnate. Keep pounding away, though. Not going to rehash the same argument yet again.

---