The Jungle is self-supported by showing advertisements via Google Adsense.
Please consider disabling your advertisement-blocking plugin on the Jungle to help support the site and let us grow!
We also show significantly less advertisements to registered users, so create your account to benefit from this!
Please consider disabling your advertisement-blocking plugin on the Jungle to help support the site and let us grow!
We also show significantly less advertisements to registered users, so create your account to benefit from this!
Questions or concerns about this ad? Take a screenshot and comment in the thread. We do value your feedback.
What does that draft say to you?
|
(05-02-2023, 08:28 AM)Mikey Wrote:(05-01-2023, 07:15 PM)I am Yoda Wrote: I don’t know if that’s necessarily a bad thing. The shelflife of running backs is so short compared to other offensive weapons. And to listen to so many valuators, talk about the quality of the one he drafted, you have to believe this is a starting quality running back that can really be effective for us behind and alongside ETN. So I don’t think it’s necessarily a bad thing to get a running back every year. I get the idea and sentiment, but, with the 88th pick? That's a tough one there for me. He has to hit some impressive marks for me as a rookie to justify that. At least 175 total touches over the course of 17 games. This would average out to 10 opportunities per game for him to make something happen. I hope he comes out and kills it though. If he hits 800 yards of total offense off of those 175 touches and averages out 4.5 yards per clip? Not a bad deal I guess. Hopefully he hits 5+ TD's. My thinking though. With Strange being added, and clearly fitting that mold of H-Back with TE hands, and the blocking ability there? We should see most of this RB group thrive. Should feel like last year's passing attack and philosophy meeting some of the things San Francisco likes to do from the backfield. Especially if Parish makes it and clears as an active FB on gamedays. That would be fun as hell man. Strange, Parish and any RB coming out of the backfield with the ability to fake some [BLEEP] and hit some nice underneath routes? I'll take that. ![]() "What do I know of cultured ways, the gilt, the craft and the lie? I, who was born in a naked land and bred in the open sky. The subtle tongue, the sophist guile, they fail when the broadswords sing; Rush in and die, dogs - I was a man before I was a king." We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today! (05-01-2023, 06:58 PM)rpr52121 Wrote:(04-30-2023, 11:10 AM)Khan Artist Wrote: Do you get the sense that people don't want to work with Baalke? Or maybe he just doesn't have a great understanding of how to value picks? 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. (05-02-2023, 08:45 AM)NYC4jags Wrote:(05-01-2023, 06:58 PM)rpr52121 Wrote: Everyone keeps harping on the "not trading back up" as a huge Baalke failure, and bring up the teams that traded up. 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.
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
(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 Because trading two fourth round picks + a fifth in order to move back into the third round may have yielded them a player with a higher probability to be an immediate impact player at a position of need. The "all accounts" you are describing I have only seen attributed to pick #27. They got Harrison despite two small trade backs to get him. It's a win, but... Unfortunately those tracebacks were intended to provide currency for adding another 3rd or 4th round pick. That didn't happen because they couldn't convince a team to give up their position in those rounds. So they were stuck with late round picks. Lots of them. The odds of producing valuable players from all those 5th, 6th and 7th rounders are not good at all. They did get a 2024 4th rounder in their move with the saints, so there's that. TLDR - Give me another pick in the third over two 4ths and a 5th. I like my chances better there. We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today! (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. 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. (05-04-2023, 12:47 PM)Mikey Wrote:(05-03-2023, 03:40 PM)rpr52121 Wrote: I agree that they didn't have a plan B. Exactly ! We traded back and still got some good guys. We entered the draft with a 1,2,3,4,4,6,6,6,7 nine picks. These were not at the beginning of the rounds like we are used to. We picked 13 times adding 2 5th round, 2 7th round and the Saints 2024 4th round pick. I am sure they might could have traded up if they were willing to give up some of next year's picks. If you look at the teams that moved up in the 4th and 5th rounds a lot gave up 2024 picks one round lower than the round they moved up in. (would you want to trade back for 6th and 7th round picks? really now) https://www.nfl.com/news/2023-nfl-draft-...since-star
A new broom always sweeps clean.
Maybe our back ups won’t get humiliated as much now in the preseason games. Maybe
(05-04-2023, 08:50 PM)Jag149 Wrote:(05-04-2023, 12:47 PM)Mikey Wrote: 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. You may have inadvertently pointed out what went wrong with our ability to trade up in the 2023 draft. ![]() We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today! (05-04-2023, 08:57 PM)NYC4jags Wrote:(05-04-2023, 08:50 PM)Jag149 Wrote: Exactly ! We traded back and still got some good guys. We entered the draft with a 1,2,3,4,4,6,6,6,7 nine picks. These were not at the beginning of the rounds like we are used to. We picked 13 times adding 2 5th round, 2 7th round and the Saints 2024 4th round pick. I am sure they might could have traded up if they were willing to give up some of next year's picks. If you look at the teams that moved up in the 4th and 5th rounds a lot gave up 2024 picks one round lower than the round they moved up in. (would you want to trade back for 6th and 7th round picks? really now) LMAO !!
A new broom always sweeps clean.
If there was a player they wanted bad enough they could have traded away some of next year’s picks.
Next years picks can’t be traded rounds 2,3,4,5 are all tied to the Calvin Ridley trade, this year will determine which pick it is but as of right now they’re tied up
05-05-2023, 06:17 AM
(This post was last modified: 05-05-2023, 06:26 AM by The Real Marty. Edited 1 time in total.)
(05-02-2023, 08:45 AM)NYC4jags Wrote:(05-01-2023, 06:58 PM)rpr52121 Wrote: Everyone keeps harping on the "not trading back up" as a huge Baalke failure, and bring up the teams that traded up. If they got the same guy at #27 that they were going to draft at #24, and gained picks in the process, how is that a failure? Or even if they had 4 guys they rated about the same, and got one of them at pick #27, how is that a failure? Isn't it possible that trading down wasn't so much a "strategy" as it was an opportunity? Free picks. We judge the draft like we're all-seeing, all-knowing gods of the draft. When in reality, we don't have any clue about who these players are, or what went into these decisions. Then we act like we're the smartest guy in the room, and would have done so much better than Trent Baalke did, but guess what? I'm the smartest guy in the room, because I know that I don't know [BLEEP] about the draft or the players in it, compared to an NFL GM. We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today! (05-05-2023, 06:17 AM)The Real Marty 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. I know I've said it in the thread already, but their admitted intent with gaining the picks was to use them as currency to move up later. Then they couldn't do it. Not sure how to explain that more plainly.
05-05-2023, 08:29 AM
(This post was last modified: 05-05-2023, 08:30 AM by The Real Marty. Edited 1 time in total.)
(05-05-2023, 08:19 AM)NYC4jags Wrote:(05-05-2023, 06:17 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: If they got the same guy at #27 that they were going to draft at #24, and gained picks in the process, how is that a failure? Or even if they had 4 guys they rated about the same, and got one of them at pick #27, how is that a failure? Isn't it possible that trading down wasn't so much a "strategy" as it was an opportunity? Free picks. But if you accept their explanation, then you also have to accept that they lost nothing as a result, because they still took the player they had targeted all along. It's like if someone hands me $10, and I intend to use it at the bar, but the bar is closed, have I failed? Or have I gained $10? All this bull [BLEEP] about a "failed strategy" implies that they actually risked something, and lost something as a result, when actually, if you accept their explanation, they risked nothing and lost nothing, but gained extra picks for free. (05-05-2023, 08:29 AM)The Real Marty Wrote:(05-05-2023, 08:19 AM)NYC4jags Wrote: I know I've said it in the thread already, but their admitted intent with gaining the picks was to use them as currency to move up later. Then they couldn't do it. They are literally admitting the failure to get back into a higher round where players have a higher probability of producing in the NFL. If you think that's bull [BLEEP], take it up with them. I didn't say it, Trent Baalke did. (05-05-2023, 08:29 AM)The Real Marty Wrote:Dude.(05-05-2023, 08:19 AM)NYC4jags Wrote: I know I've said it in the thread already, but their admitted intent with gaining the picks was to use them as currency to move up later. Then they couldn't do it. They tried to gather more picks in an attempt to use those picks to move back up in the later rounds. Then, no one would trade with them and they were stuck with the picks. Their initial strategy didn’t work and they had to use more picks in this draft than they intended to. We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!
05-05-2023, 11:01 AM
(This post was last modified: 05-05-2023, 11:03 AM by MoJagFan. Edited 1 time in total.)
Prepare for many drafts like this if Trevor progresses and we don't get eaten alive by the salary cap. It won't be a splashy draft but it could be future players we need but didn't realize at the time of selection. Honestly I don't watch enough college football to know who anyone is anymore. I do watch an okay enough amount of Jaguar football to know that our flashy drafts were dud drafts.
Edit: Jeez auto correct drives me crazy. The darn chat bots make it worse. Glad that those bots aren't in these posts. That said my language skills could be better.
The Khan Years
Patience, Persistence, and Piss Poor General Managers.
(05-05-2023, 10:49 AM)Cleatwood Wrote:(05-05-2023, 08:29 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: But if you accept their explanation, then you also have to accept that they lost nothing as a result, because they still took the player they had targeted all along. It's like if someone hands me $10, and I intend to use it at the bar, but the bar is closed, have I failed? Or have I gained $10?Dude. I know they did not manage to use the extra picks to move up, but to call the whole transaction a failure, when they got the player they would have picked anyway, and got 3 extra picks without losing anything, is way overstating it. Like I said before, if someone hands me $10, and I intend to use it at the bar, but the bar is closed, have I failed? Or have I gained $10? (05-05-2023, 04:15 PM)The Real Marty Wrote:(05-05-2023, 10:49 AM)Cleatwood Wrote: Dude. You are not seeing this correctly. Let's say you were given your mythical $10 in the form of 10 chips at a casino. Two blue chips and 8 green chips. You're permitted to use the blue chips on a game that gives you a 1 in 5 chance of winning a sizable payout. The other 8 chips (green chips) must be used to play a game that gives you a 1 in 25 chance of a similar payout. However - you're informed that among the patrons of the casino there are likely persons willing to give you another blue chip in exchange for three of your green chips. You just need to find them. It would behoove you to improve your odds of a win by finding one of those patrons who likes to roll the dice. Or look at it this way - $10 dollars spent on more a worthy investment opposed to $10 spent on a lesser product in greater quantity. Now - departing from this analogy - let's just have a little reminder that we can't just add 13 rookies to our roster beyond August 29. We're going to have to release some of them before we really get a chance to know their true potential. So wouldn't it make more sense to have one higher rated prospect + five lower rated prospects instead of 8 lower rated prospects? Also - I think "calling the whole transaction a failure" may not be an accurate way to describe fans descriptions here regarding the glut of late picks. And speak for yourself with this "we judge the draft like all-seeing, all knowing gods..." bit. I'm only talking about basic probability and an admission by our own GM. |
Users browsing this thread: |
1 Guest(s) |
The Jungle is self-supported by showing advertisements via Google Adsense.
Please consider disabling your advertisement-blocking plugin on the Jungle to help support the site and let us grow!
We also show less advertisements to registered users, so create your account to benefit from this!
Please consider disabling your advertisement-blocking plugin on the Jungle to help support the site and let us grow!
We also show less advertisements to registered users, so create your account to benefit from this!
Questions or concerns about this ad? Take a screenshot and comment in the thread. We do value your feedback.