Quote:
Originally Posted by Male29Dan
While there are quite likely numerous drafts where this type of thing is quite true, the fact of the matter is we have no idea who the best is of any position after only 1 year. Some guys take longer to develop.
Bottom line though - you always want the blue chip talent. Sometimes it doesn't pan out, as nothing is guaranteed, but you prefer the blue chip 100 times out of 100. That is not to imply that there won't be a tremendous prospect there at 9 (possibly someone that proves to be a better player than picked 1-8) but anyone would rather be higher vs. lower.
Sure, we beat the team the Eagles put on the field and I too bet they feel great about it. That said, I wish they felt a little bit worse.
|
True, you always want "blue chip" talent but when you're looking at such a narrow range of picks (in this case 6 vs. 9) whose to say where the drop off in talent is? Those picks are so close together that it's a virtual crap shoot. For example, look at ESPN's current player ratings. The 6th pick will get you a player rated 96 on a 100 point scale. The 9th pick will get you a 95. Hell the 13th pick, which was about a low as we could have gone, will get you a 94. How confident are you that a 96 is better than a 94? Me, not very because everyone's board will be a little different. McShay's 94 could be a 97 on our board. Look at where we had Lee rated last year relative to all the mocks.
So honestly I'm pretty indifferent between the 6th and 9th picks. There will be a ton of good players available at both slots. When you add in the fact that in order to move up we would have had to purposely tank it's just not worth it. IMO it was more important to the long term health of the franchise to reestablish a mindset after the team quit midyear.