Round of applause for jrob

[Righteous]

On 6/13/2020 at 8:56 PM, charleytolar said:

This year's roster will be devoid of five draft picks in the 2nd and 3rd Rounds in Robinson's tenure. Marinate in that.

 

Like it or not is immaterial to the facts.

It seems you are only looking at trading one way in your criticism of Robinson.  However, through trades he also added 1 first round pick, 2 second round picks and 2 third round picks.  The value of the picks he received in trades far exceeds what his has given up every day, all day.  

Edited June 15, 2020 by Righteous

[h4t]

We are not certain to get a 3rd at this point though it is likely.  I don't know the formula and neither does anyone else.  It could drop to a 4th since we paid more for Beasley than Oakland did for Mariota.  If they count Sharpe, Johnson and Lewis we might be due more than a 3rd.  Someone who is an expert at comp picks, please enlighten me.

[charleytolar]

1 hour ago, Soxcat said:

 

Nobody has received any comp picks for 2021 yet......  We could receive a 3rd for Conklin.  So what is your point again?

 

What do you think it is? Damn, we had BETTER get a 3rd for Conklin or that move will be more disastrous than it seems!

[Callidus]

7 minutes ago, charleytolar said:

What do you think it is? Damn, we had BETTER get a 3rd for Conklin or that move will be more disastrous than it seems!

How have you not died on this cross yet?

[charleytolar]

2 hours ago, Righteous said:

It seems you are only looking at trading one way in your criticism of Robinson.  However, through trades he also added 1 first round pick, 2 second round picks and 2 third round picks.  The value of the picks he received in trades far exceeds what his has given up every day, all day.  

Well, we got a blockbuster deal for the 1-1 from the Rams. People were placated by the fact that we were "playing with house money" but each deal should be judged on its own merit. Seems like we frittered away a chunk of house money on a losing proposition. Out of that 2016 draft we got 1-8 Conklin, 2-33 Kevin Dodd, 2-43 Austin Johnson, 2-45 Derrick Henry, 3-64 Kevin Byard, 4- nobody, 5- nobody, and 6-X useless Sebastian Tretola. I believe only Henry and Byard will be reflected on next year's roster. 

 

I think we swapped #1 picks with the Rams in the 2017 draft for 1-5 Corey Davis and sent our natural 2-52 to the Browns in the Conklin deal. At 3-72 Taywan Taylor came and went. In a great move we got Jonnu Smith at 3-100. 4-SENT OF WITH TAYWAN TO MOVE UP, 5-155 a great pick in Jayon Brown, 6-218 Corey Levin, and 7- Josh Caraway, Brad Seaton, Khalfini Mohammed.

 

I do prefer trading back to trading up because a larger net increases your odds of getting valuable players. See above. The last two of our five selections in three rounds of that draft are the only ones which we might choose to keep. Anyone notice how, overall, J-Rob's picks throughout the draft have gotten better and better? Keep 'em!

[rns90]

25 minutes ago, Callidus said:

How have you not died on this cross yet?

He keeps on bringing this shit up every few months on a yearly basis.  At this point, it's futile.

 

2 minutes ago, Soxcat said:

 

The comp pick is based on how good and how big the player's contract is and is off set by free agents signed.  It could be a 3rd.  We won't know for sure for a while.  Again, it is normal for teams to lose some players to FA.  In fact the better job the GM does in drafting players the more he could lose.  Other teams don't want crappy players so your logic here is ass backwards and stupid.  If we end up signing Clowney we might cancel the comp pick out.  We also signed Beasley and since Casey was traded he doesn't count.  We did lose Mariota for what that is worth.  So saying we better get a 3rd for Conklin is beyond stupid and thus must be something you think.

 

https://www.nfl.com/news/2021-nfl-draft-compensatory-pick-projections-for-every-team-0ap3000001112252

 

No.  The comp pick "deadline" for signing free agents has passed.  Even if they sign Clowney, we still get a 3rd for Conklin.

[charleytolar]

26 minutes ago, Callidus said:

How have you not died on this cross yet?

You know, my son, if you don't want to discuss this stuff... you don't have to. 

[charleytolar]

Just now, rns90 said:

He keeps on bringing this shit up every few months on a yearly basis.  At this point, it's futile.

I don't believe I've ever started a thread about it. I just plug it in there where I find it to be disturbing.... I mean appropriate for others.

 

I keep citing evidence to back up these idea. I keep hearing "that's not how the draft works", but you can work the draft any way you want.

[Callidus]

5 minutes ago, charleytolar said:

You know, my son, if you don't want to discuss this stuff... you don't have to. 

I will give you points for that being kind of funny but you know it is still getting old 

[charleytolar]

15 minutes ago, Soxcat said:

Again, it is normal for teams to lose some players to FA.  In fact the better job the GM does in drafting players the more he could lose.  Other teams don't want crappy players so your logic here is ass backwards and stupid. 

In the Conklin, Evans, and Landry "deals" we drafted three players when we "could have drafted" seven in premium rounds 1 thru 4 had we just stayed put.

 

As a result, we now have to fill those roster spots with, AS YOU SAY, with other teams' "crappy players." Why would WE want those "crappy players" when other teams don't?

Edited June 15, 2020 by charleytolar

[rns90]

Yeah, you "could have".  But that doesn't happen.  Which is why 50% is considered doing well.

 

And if you're getting solid starters that far outweighs the back of the roster types for those later round picks you complain he traded away.  I mean your complaint about Landry.  You're assuming that we would have hit on those picks but you don't take into consideration injuries, player development, character or scheme fits.

 

You don't even understand why they traded for Evans.  You just read that scouting report and said "they should have just stayed put and taken Leonard".

[charleytolar]

12 minutes ago, Callidus said:

I will give you points for that being kind of funny but you know it is still getting old 

This goes way further than I want it to, but I find most people's "objections" are not well-founded (as in NOTHING OFFERED BUT A DISSENTING OPINION) and easy to overturn.  The daring trade-ups do offer an initial rush but then so does heroin. Then come the long-term implications so I think it deserves to be thought out more thoroughly. 

[charleytolar]

4 minutes ago, rns90 said:

Yeah, you "could have".  But that doesn't happen.  Which is why 50% is considered doing well.

 

And if you're getting solid starters that far outweighs the back of the roster types for those later round picks you complain he traded away.  I mean your complaint about Landry.  You're assuming that we would have hit on those picks but you don't take into consideration injuries, player development, character or scheme fits.

 

You don't even understand why they traded for Evans.  You just read that scouting report and said "they should have just stayed put and taken Leonard".

Have you read any of this?!

 

At this point, 50% is the best we can do if Evans and Landry prove out. There are two components to the draft: 1) how many draft assets you have, and 2) how you realize those assets. When you compromise #1, what you do with the second part becomes a "no-fail" proposition. See my example: we got 3 picks in Rounds 1-3 out of what could have been 7 picks in Rounds 1-4. 

 

If your picks in the first four rounds are "back of the roster players", you need a new GM. The four picks we lost were a 2nd, two 3rds, and one 4th. We had to fill those empty roster spots with later draft picks or FA which is a crap-shoot.

 

I completely understand why they traded for Evans: scheme fit. If you understood at all what was going on here, you would realize that I campaign for staying from the get-go. This debate goes back to the 2016 draft. It didn't just get born when Leonard won Rookie of the Year. I hadn't even looked at that scouting report until last week.

 

FOR THE ELEVENTH TIME... I never suggested Leonard. He was just an illustration that if we had to have a linebacker, we could have stayed put and just drafted Leonard, kept our 4th rounder, and probably been more than okay.

 

BTW, no one has stepped up and told me which all-pro or all-conference NFL player they would not want on our roster because of "scheme fit." Still waiting.

[Righteous]

52 minutes ago, charleytolar said:

Well, we got a blockbuster deal for the 1-1 from the Rams. People were placated by the fact that we were "playing with house money" but each deal should be judged on its own merit. Seems like we frittered away a chunk of house money on a losing proposition. Out of that 2016 draft we got 1-8 Conklin, 2-33 Kevin Dodd, 2-43 Austin Johnson, 2-45 Derrick Henry, 3-64 Kevin Byard, 4- nobody, 5- nobody, and 6-X useless Sebastian Tretola. I believe only Henry and Byard will be reflected on next year's roster. 

 

I think we swapped #1 picks with the Rams in the 2017 draft for 1-5 Corey Davis and sent our natural 2-52 to the Browns in the Conklin deal. At 3-72 Taywan Taylor came and went. In a great move we got Jonnu Smith at 3-100. 4-SENT OF WITH TAYWAN TO MOVE UP, 5-155 a great pick in Jayon Brown, 6-218 Corey Levin, and 7- Josh Caraway, Brad Seaton, Khalfini Mohammed.

 

I do prefer trading back to trading up because a larger net increases your odds of getting valuable players. See above. The last two of our five selections in three rounds of that draft are the only ones which we might choose to keep. Anyone notice how, overall, J-Rob's picks throughout the draft have gotten better and better? Keep 'em!

Yes, he has found his stroke.  I think that has more to do with knowing the schemes the team play and plugging players in who do what we desire well.  And as your argument originally was about traded picks (not the players chosen), I just wanted to let you know he has netted better value than his has traded away.  So if you are judging Robinson on traded picks, he is doing exceptionally well in that area too.  IMHO.

[charleytolar]

3 minutes ago, Soxcat said:

 

No moron, we traded our 1st to the Rams in 2016 and got the 1st for Davis in that trade.  Henry was drafted with one of the picks we traded for.  Dodd was our regular pick so has no bearing on the trade.  Johnson gave use 4 years of decent depth although he never rose up like we hoped.  Again, that was 2016 and many teams picking in that draft have lost players.  It is a normal part of the NFL to not keep all your early draft picks.  Glad to see you still have no idea what you are talking about.  Conklin was a good draft pick.  Just because it worked out he left in FA is now irrelevant.  Unless you are dumb enough to argue we should have kept him instead of Henry because of what we gave up for him?  

 

As for the house money use some common sense.  We had 3 2nd round picks in 2016 to go with Conklin and 2 1st round picks in 2017.  Having more picks is nice but at some point you have to reconcile all those players and we ended up losing Conklin this year.  I have little to complain about and will certainly not turn into a babbling idiot like some even if I did.  But that is what idiots do.  They ignore Conklin, Henry and Byard as being solid picks and focus on someone like Tretola.  Get a life.  

 

Focus on Tretola? Who's the babbling idiot? 

 

I know everything you  tried to "school" me on. The only mention I believe I made in this thread of the 3 second round picks was something to the effect of "Thank God we had three because only the third one is paying off" I never connected Dodd to the trade. I just listed all the selections from that year where with a 1st, three 2nds, and a 3rd only the last of the 2nds and the 3rd will have impact beyond their rookie contract. Conklin got a big contract because tackles are at a premium and the Browns still drafted a tackle at 1-6 or so even after signing Conklin.

 

I never remotely suggested keeping someone because of the cost of acquistion. Quit trying to put words in my mouth.

 

Opportunity wasted is just wasted.

 

En guarde!