Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Why aren't we acquiring compensatory picks?


DMathematics
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, DMathematics said:

But we could have signed Corbett and still got the picks we just signed to many people its a a balance that's all i'm saying you don't have to be all the way in or all the way out 

Those players are all starters. Woods is solid for the price. Wilson fills a huge need. Corbett seems to be doing well according to most on here. And Bozeman got hurt. Who you giving up. Bozeman is either highly overrated or still going to be a steal. But the Panthers would have been crazy not to sign him. It’s still one of the strangest deals I’ve seen a player take. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Toomers said:

Those players are all starters. Woods is solid for the price. Wilson fills a huge need. Corbett seems to be doing well according to most on here. And Bozeman got hurt. Who you giving up. Bozeman is either highly overrated or still going to be a steal. But the Panthers would have been crazy not to sign him. It’s still one of the strangest deals I’ve seen a player take. 

You are completely correct those players are good in the spots they are in now but I was just giving context to what's been going on the last couple years this year we may have found good players to offset but that's certainly not always the case 

  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, DMathematics said:

You are completely correct those players are good in the spots they are in now but I was just giving context to what's been going on the last couple years this year we may have found good players to offset but that's certainly not always the case 

In the past they have. But things have also changed and with limited picks available, it’s changed the way you sign players. 
 

   Bradberry and signing Bridgewater was more what you describe and it was/and still is blasted for how bad a move it was. Plus the bonus of basically giving the 3rd to the Saints for Teddy. But paying him 31M for a below average season and a late pick hurt much worse. Under the current system, Bradberry would have been a 4th at best. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DMathematics said:

taking a victory lap for being WRONG is extreme weirdo behavior lol 

You said 3rd and the best it can become is a 4th. Now throw in decreased value of FUTURE picks vs current and 5th is probably right while 3rd is absolutely wrong. Strop trolling…

  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ForJimmy said:

You said 3rd and the best it can become is a 4th. Now throw in decreased value of FUTURE picks vs current and 5th is probably right while 3rd is absolutely wrong. Strop trolling…

We were both wrong but he acted like he was right for me being wrong lmao 

  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Sure it does, maybe not every position and not every draft.  You have to admit the hit rate goes down the further in the draft you get.  Would you more readily find a generational talent at the #2 pick or #19 pick?  High picks are considered "busts" if they doesn't pan out, whereas guys drafted later don't have that level of scrutiny upon them.  Different expectation levels.  If Styles does indeed go #2, I already listed the rarefied air that he would be in.  Maybe he doesn't set the League on fire, but my gut feeling is he does.  Again, you don't take an off-ball LB #2 if he is just a 'really good' player.
    • To illustrate my point, I watched (and commented on the Huddle) that Rozeboom would often wait a full second (or close to it) before taking his first step.  I assume that he probably had issues with false steps, a faulty practice that can take an ILB out of the gap completely.  Watch Luke and you see a step with the snap, and rarely was it a false step.  Rozeboom may have had 100 tackles (speculating) but initial contact was 2-3 yards on the defensive side of the ball.  Luke's 100 tackles were made 1-2 yards from the LOS.  Over the course of a year, Luke was much more productive (more fumbles, fewer long gainers, more OL penalties, fewer first downs, etc) that Rozeboom, but on the stat sheet, they both had 100 tackles.  In fact, Rozeboom's inefficiency kept him on the field more (more first downs, fewer OL penalties, turnovers, and punts) so he should have MORE tackles.   I would like to see stats that break down those things.   For example again, Josh Norman was slow--4.68 or so at CB.  However, his anticipation speed was incredible.  He made as many plays as a 4.4 CB.  I had one coach (college--later became the head coach at WCU) tell me that slower players have to use their brains more to still be around.  Elite athletes can just get by on their physical superiority.  He added, "Rarely does a football player run full speed.  Most of the time, they are not, so the 40 time is misleading stat.  Smart players overcome shortcomings--when the elite athlete becomes average (slows with age, advances in level of competition) they struggle against smarter (football IQ) competition.  
    • Obviously tongue in cheek hyperbole. But we do not need a first round RB to competete for a championship. We need intelligent roster building. That to me is the complete opposite of intelligent roster building because it is a prime resource at a devalued plug and play position when we have needs across the defense.
×
×
  • Create New...