(04-30-2023, 02:30 PM)wassy04 Wrote:

(04-30-2023, 12:45 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: There are a ton of pick value charts out there.

They had ammunition to get back into the third by packaging two fourths and a sixth - and a number of scenarios to get back into the 4th
Baalke admittedly tried and failed to make it happen.

It's a tough break.
Wasted value on players of low probability to make the team.

I know in theory you could offer value but that doesn't mean there's a bunch of teams willing to do it. If everyone is aware there isn't value further down it implies the teams value the 6/7ths even lower than the models.

There's not many if any examples this year of teams trading into the 3rd round from miles back.

o  No. 56 overall (Round 2) 340
o  No. 88 overall (Round 3) 150
o  No. 121 overall (Round 4) 52
o  No. 127 overall (Round 4) 45
o  No. 130 overall (Round 4) 42
o  No. 160 overall (Round 5) 28
o  No. 185 overall (Round 6) 18
o  No. 202 overall (Round 6) 11
o  No. 208 overall (Round 6) 9
o  No. 226 overall (Round 7) 3
o  No. 240 overall (Round 7) 1

So if we wanted to make an approximately fair offer, we're saying we'd need all three 4ths just to get into round 3 again. Worth it? Were we really willing to give up that much and were other teams still not interested. 

Obviously none of us know but you can get an idea of how difficult it is to try and create another 3rd rounder without giving up your own one.

We could've gone up from 88, 10-15 places perhaps but would've likely been giving up a lot still. 

I kind of think taking a bunch of dart throws/role players is a better strategy personally.

It was a gamble by Baalke and it didn't pay off.

I don't put it 100% on the FO and staff they couldn't find a partner, but it is a failure at the end of the day. 

Baalke has now used a first, a third, a fifth and two sixths in three drafts at RB for a pass first team. 
That third rounder with ball security issues does need to pay off.
We had greater needs.

---