Exactly my point.

 

Just to get you on record again here, if in the event that we can't trade down in the draft , you would rather pass on our pick until the mid teens, risk Lamp being selected by a team before us, all to save 2.5 million in cap??

 

 

I don't think I would risk losing him. I truly believe I could get him at #12, but let me make this perfectly clear. I would trade down. I don't want the #4 pick. I believe making a deal which gets you something is better than staying at #4 and getting nothing. So, if I get something in return for the #4 pick that is less than what the "trade value chart" says, that's o.k. by me, as long as I get the player I want and an additional pick or two. I don't live and die by the "trade value chart."

---

That's because most of you are in love with a player in the top 5. I'm not. I think this is a deep draft, but I see no difference between the players who could go #1 overall and players who could go #25 overall. In fact, I happen to like the group slotted to go in the middle to end of the first round better than I do the players slotted in the top 1-10 overall. 

I  understand this.

 

In most years where it is loaded at the top, there is usually at least one stud QB, one or two LTs, and a couple of stud pass rushing DEs.

 

This year, there is no Andrew Luck caliber prospect at QB, there are no stud LTs, there is one definitive stud DE, and one other in Thomas who is kind of a tweener without the prototypical DE length that Garrett and Clowney have.

 

As it pertains to some of the Jaguars' needs, it seems the first round value is guys deemed to be 10-25 or so.

 

There are some good players that, at this point, seem to project as top 5-10 players, but none seem to fit big needs for this team.  You could argue Thomas and Allen are guys who, if they aren't gone, represent player types already met by guys already on the roster.

 

There is some chatter a QB may go as high as 6 or maybe a little higher, but the same talk suggests none of those guys are ready to contribute this year, so even if you were inclined to replace Bortles this year, this year's QB crop doesn't seem to possess the immediate answer.

 

There are 3 DBs that seem to carry top 5-10 grades, but again,arguably, there is no gaping hole on the Jaguars that could be filled by these guys thanks to free agency within the last two years.

 

That leaves positions like RB, TE and G that are generally viewed as positions you don't draft in the top five because you can get them later.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

Its terrible value accepting a trade like that for a 7th round pick.

 

Then use the first round pick on a player you have total confidence in instead of risking him going to another team all to save a few million. Theres a reason you never ever see teams voluntarily move down the draft for free when they can't get a trade down... 

 

While it's not ideal, Minnesota did it a couple of years ago. They skipped over their pick like 3 times in round one and still got their guy. 

---

No one was making the comparison of them as players, just two separate examples of things you said that were just straight up idiotic.

 

 

It's not idiotic when I'm proven to be right in like 3 years. 

---

I'm pretty sure Jay has been setting himself up for months, for this ultimate troll job. Nobody who pretends to know as much as he does about prospects, and the draft, would consider doing any of the nonsensical things he's said in this thread. Should be b& for trolling.

 

 

I advocate trading down for an O-Linemen. I've been saying this for a couple months. That's not trolling. Lots of people want this to happen.

---

I  understand this.

 

In most years where it is loaded at the top, there is usually at least one stud QB, one or two LTs, and a couple of stud pass rushing DEs.

 

This year, there is no Andrew Luck caliber prospect at QB, there are no stud LTs, there is one definitive stud DE, and one other in Thomas who is kind of a tweener without the prototypical DE length that Garrett and Clowney have.

 

As it pertains to some of the Jaguars' needs, it seems the first round value is guys deemed to be 10-25 or so.

 

There are some good players that, at this point, seem to project as top 5-10 players, but none seem to fit big needs for this team.  You could argue Thomas and Allen are guys who, if they aren't gone, represent player types already met by guys already on the roster.

 

There is some chatter a QB may go as high as 6 or maybe a little higher, but the same talk suggests none of those guys are ready to contribute this year, so even if you were inclined to replace Bortles this year, this year's QB crop doesn't seem to possess the immediate answer.

 

There are 3 DBs that seem to carry top 5-10 grades, but again,arguably, there is no gaping hole on the Jaguars that could be filled by these guys thanks to free agency within the last two years.

 

That leaves positions like RB, TE and G that are generally viewed as positions you don't draft in the top five because you can get them later.

 

 

Thank you. You get it. I wish everyone on this board was as intelligent as you. You summed up everything I've been trying to say, but in a much clearer way. Maybe they will understand your summary. 

---

While it's not ideal, Minnesota did it a couple of years ago. They skipped over their pick like 3 times in round one and still got their guy.

The Vikings ran out of time while trying to make trades. They got skipped by us and and another team...it wasn't an intentional strategy.

---

I think I've made it abundantly clear that I see no one at the top of the draft that I'm enamored with and I want to trade down. I truly believe we will be fielding a lot of offers for the #4 pick. There is quality there and I believe 100% that we will have an opportunity to move down and select either Ramczyk, Lamp or Fenney. That's what I want. I see them as safe, "can't miss" selections. 

I don't know that we'll field too many offers for the #4 pick, unless teams start salivating over the QBs, in addition to the DBs.

 

Thing is, at face value, not too many teams after us have immediate needs a QB.

 

Tennessee is okay with Mariota.

The Jets need a QB

The Chargers still have Rivers, though it seems they are in full rebuild mode, and it would make sense for them to take one now.

Carolina has Cam Newton

Cincinnati is set.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

Thank you. You get it. I wish everyone on this board was as intelligent as you. You summed up everything I've been trying to say, but in a much clearer way. Maybe they will understand your summary.

No we all understand that part. Its the intentionally moving down for free to the mid teens if we can't get a trade part that is ridiculous.

---

I'm pretty sure Jay has been setting himself up for months, for this ultimate troll job. Nobody who pretends to know as much as he does about prospects, and the draft, would consider doing any of the nonsensical things he's said in this thread. Should be b& for trolling.

Every year I come to this board bc I love the draft and I love talking about prospects and reading others opinions but by the time the draft happens my spirit has been broken by the trolls and the people who enjoy being contradictory just to get a rise out of someone. This place is exhausting. Just like the Jags every season.....but damn it I keep coming back.

---

The Vikings ran out of time while trying to make trades. They got skipped by us and and another team...it wasn't an intentional strategy.

 

 

How do you know it wasn't intentional? Because they said so?

---

 

double post

---

I'm being totally serious here and most people aren't gonna like this answer, but I would totally do it. I would pass on the pick. It was done in a draft a few years ago by Minnesota. They just simply let the clock run out the the next team in line jumped in and made their selection. The Vikings were then able to jump back in at any point and make their pick. I would use the same tactic. I would let the clock run out if I didn't get a trade partner. I would then wait it out until I did get a trade deal or until I got to a point where I would be comfortable taking an O-Lineman. I don't wanna miss out on a guy that I consider to be "can't miss". 

I understand you are not thrilled with what appear to be the options in the top five, but no way can I endorse this.

 

If you recall when Minnesota passed in 2003, they were actually trying to execute a trade with Baltimore who was trying to get Leftwich, but due to interference from Jacksonville, the trade was never executed.  There were about 3-4 teams that jumped in ahead of them in rapid succession, and those 3-4 picks came off the board in a pace I had never seen before or since.  Minnesota did not purposefully try to do that, and were lucky the guy they wanted, Kevin Williams, did not get away from them in that flourish.

 

If I were completely dissatisfied with what was there at four (and I'm not.  For the record, I have advocated taking Lattimore or Hooker at 4 under would be an acceptable result for myriad reasons), I would either trade down, or failing that, take the player at the position I would really want even if it turned out to be a reach at 4.  In trading down, there is always the risk that someone now ahead of you will take the player you want, or they will trade out allowing another team targeting your player to leap ahead of you.  At least if you are stuck at 4, you control the talent pool as long as you are on the clock.

 

But no way I intentionally pass because I don't like the value at 4.  You risk surrendering draft position chasing ideal value with no guarantee you will get the guy you want, without anything in terms of additional draft picks or a player to show for it.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

Solomon doesnt have a length issue lol he has 33 inch arms which is 1/4th shorter than khalil mack. Hes not a tweener, hes an edge player stanford used inside. Nobody skips their own pick voluntarily to save a couple mil. Thats [BLEEP] stupid. You take the top guy on your board.

---

No we all understand that part. Its the intentionally moving down for free to the mid teens if we can't get a trade part that is ridiculous.

 

 

You gave me the parameters of the scenario. If I can't trade down, I don't have many options. If I would've taken Lamp with #4, I would've been roasted as well, but I'm certainly not changing my mind about the players at the top of the draft. As far as trading down, I would take a lesser deal, because I don't want the #4 pick. If you have a car that you don't want and it's just taking up room in your garage and you don't have enough space to store more important items, but you know the blue book value is $6500, are you gonna turn down an offer for $5500?  I wouldn't. The #4 pick is like that car to me. Yes, according to the "trade value chart" we should get a mint to move down from #4 into the teens, but if no one offers that, you have to take what the market dictates. If all I can get is a lower first round pick and an additional 2nd rounder for our #4 overall, I take it. It's better than being stuck with a pick I don't want. 

---

You gave me the parameters of the scenario. If I can't trade down, I don't have many options. If I would've taken Lamp with #4, I would've been roasted as well, but I'm certainly not changing my mind about the players at the top of the draft. As far as trading down, I would take a lesser deal, because I don't want the #4 pick. If you have a car that you don't want and it's just taking up room in your garage and you don't have enough space to store more important items, but you know the blue book value is $6500, are you gonna turn down an offer for $5500?  I wouldn't. The #4 pick is like that car to me. Yes, according to the "trade value chart" we should get a mint to move down from #4 into the teens, but if no one offers that, you have to take what the market dictates. If all I can get is a lower first round pick and an additional 2nd rounder for our #4 overall, I take it. It's better than being stuck with a pick I don't want. 

You're losing it man. Nothing wrong with a trade down at all. No issue with that whatsoever. 

 

The issue is simply your opinion that in the event of no trade being possible, that you'd rather intentionally skip on picking anybody until the mid teens.

---

Its all good to admit it was a bad take as we have all pointed out.

---

I don't know that we'll field too many offers for the #4 pick, unless teams start salivating over the QBs, in addition to the DBs.

 

Thing is, at face value, not too many teams after us have immediate needs a QB.

 

Tennessee is okay with Mariota.

The Jets need a QB

The Chargers still have Rivers, though it seems they are in full rebuild mode, and it would make sense for them to take one now.

Carolina has Cam Newton

Cincinnati is set.

 

 

What about teams like Arizona, Washington (who I have taking a QB, because I doubt Cousins signs a new deal with them and they cannot Franchise him anymore), Cleveland, New Orleans, Buffalo (they show little to no confidence in Tyrod Taylor), Houston, Kansas City or even Pittsburgh as Ben Roethlisberger as been contemplating retirement? It also would not surprise me if the Chargers were looking for a new QB as well. Rivers is older, has made hints about an impending retirement and has openly said he wasn't thrilled about moving to L.A. All of these teams could be looking for an immediate starting QB, an upgrade at QB or someone to eventually replace their current starting QB. Heck, there should be at least a couple of teams salivating at the chance to get one of the DB's or even Fournette as well. I still am very hopeful we will get several offers for the #4 pick. 

---

What happens when the media or the guy you drafted after waiting till twelve asks you what took so long lol


"Yeah we didnt want to pay #4 overall money he wasnt worth but we took him later and saved a couple bucks"

---

I understand you are not thrilled with what appear to be the options in the top five, but no way can I endorse this.

 

If you recall when Minnesota passed in 2003, they were actually trying to execute a trade with Baltimore who was trying to get Leftwich, but due to interference from Jacksonville, the trade was never executed.  There were about 3-4 teams that jumped in ahead of them in rapid succession, and those 3-4 picks came off the board in a pace I had never seen before or since.  Minnesota did not purposefully try to do that, and were lucky the guy they wanted, Kevin Williams, did not get away from them in that flourish.

 

If I were completely dissatisfied with what was there at four (and I'm not.  For the record, I have advocated taking Lattimore or Hooker at 4 under would be an acceptable result for myriad reasons), I would either trade down, or failing that, take the player at the position I would really want even if it turned out to be a reach at 4.  In trading down, there is always the risk that someone now ahead of you will take the player you want, or they will trade out allowing another team targeting your player to leap ahead of you.  At least if you are stuck at 4, you control the talent pool as long as you are on the clock.

 

But no way I intentionally pass because I don't like the value at 4.  You risk surrendering draft position chasing ideal value with no guarantee you will get the guy you want, without anything in terms of additional draft picks or a player to show for it.

 

 

I wasn't really advocating it. I openly advocate trading down, but I was given what I consider an unrealistic scenario where we would get no offers what so ever for the #4 pick. That would in no way change my mind from taking the exact same players I wanted all along though. Under the scenario I used, I would just be getting Lamp at #12 instead of reaching for him at #4. Either way, I want Lamp and he's my target with our first pick. 

---