Right Guard Redux: Jay Gruden On Right Guard: 'I Feel Good About That Spot'

[redskinsfan]

Multiple times actually. Strangely enough Skinsdad has even thrown it out back in the old Jason Campbell really dark years.

Any of that hater-ade justified?

 

[Sharkinva]

Any of that hater-ade justified?

I dont know. Would it be considered Justified when I called a move a mistake and it turned out that way??

 

[redskinsfan]

I dont know. Would it be considered Justified when I called a move a mistake and it turned out that way??

When they hate on you, shark, I'd take it as a sign of respect.

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

how can 5 not be the right spot if the giants take him at 9 ? i am sorry but he is a top 10 player in this draft based on ratings so if he is there , and he addresses a need you have to look at him strongly

I know we are just repeating ourselves at this point but I still do not understand why you don't get it that the 5th pick is not the same as the 9th pick. Teams give up picks to jump from 9 to 5 for a reason, because the 5th pick is more valuable.

 

[Sharkinva]

I know we are just repeating ourselves at this point but I still do not understand why you don't get it that the 5th pick is not the same as the 9th pick. Teams give up picks to jump from 9 to 5 for a reason, because the 5th pick is more valuable.

NO teams give up picks to jump spots because they fall in love with a particular player and figure that player is worth the guys they will give up in order to get him. If the Skins had no fear that RG3 would have been there at #6, there would have been no reason to trade up to get him. Its not so much about the value of the pick as it it what you are willing to give up to get a particular player.

 

[redskinsfan]

NO teams give up picks to jump spots because they fall in love with a particular player and figure that player is worth the guys they will give up in order to get him. If the Skins had no fear that RG3 would have been there at #6, there would have been no reason to trade up to get him. Its not so much about the value of the pick as it it what you are willing to give up to get a particular player.

But the point is that the jump between picks represents a certain value. The issue of why a team decides to trade up is a separate issue altogether. In this case, a nine-to-five jump equals a second round pick this year. That's the 'what' of the issue of pick trading -- i.e., value = second rounder. The 'why' is that some team may want Scherff. The issue then becomes whether the 'why' (Scherff) justifies the 'what' (second rounder).

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

But the point is that the jump between picks represents a certain value. The issue of why a team decides to trade up is a separate issue altogether. In this case, a nine-to-five jump equals a second round pick this year. That's the 'what' of the issue of pick trading -- i.e., value = second rounder. The 'why' is that some team may want Scherff. The issue then becomes whether the 'why' (Scherff) justifies the 'what' (second rounder).

Exactly. Dad is acting as if the 9th pick and the 5th pick have the same value. That's like saying $20 is the same as $15.

 

[redskinsfan]

Exactly. Dad is acting as if the 9th pick and the 5th pick have the same value. That's like saying $20 is the same as $15.

Do you think he'd give me $20 if I gave him $15?

 

[skinsdad62]

really? it isnt like that at all money is money people are people

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

really? it isnt like that at all money is money people are people

And value is value. And 9 is not 5. And...and...and....

 

[j_y19]

I dont know. Would it be considered Justified when I called a move a mistake and it turned out that way??

"Appears" to have turned out that way......I know im probably just grasping at straws at this point, but he has one more year to turn it around.

 

[skinsdad62]

the 5th best player or the 9th best is of little consequence

 

[redskinsfan]

the 5th best player or the 9th best is of little consequence

You have got to be kidding, right? Let's put it this way, what would Scotty demand from the team with the 9th overall pick if they wanted to trade down to our #5 overall?

Let's put this in some perspective. Last year, the Bills traded their 9th overall pick to the Browns, who held the #4 overall pick (which they used to take Sammy Watkins). Aside from swapping first rounders, they Bills gave up their first rounder this year (which is why the Browns have two first rounders now) and a fourth rounder. What you may perceive as a small numerical gap in draft picks belies the fact that the jump you're describing is huge.

 

[Sharkinva]

You have got to be kidding, right? Let's put it this way, what would Scotty demand from the team with the 9th overall pick if they wanted to trade down to our #5 overall?

Let's put this in some perspective. Last year, the Bills traded their 9th overall pick to the Browns, who held the #4 overall pick (which they used to take Sammy Watkins). Aside from swapping first rounders, they Bills gave up their first rounder this year (which is why the Browns have two first rounders now) and a fourth rounder. What you may perceive as a small numerical gap in draft picks belies the fact that the jump you're describing is huge.

Redskinsfan... the mistake in your logic is this. The 5th pick is worth no more or less than the 4th or 9th pick. What gives the pick itself value is the teams desperation or love affair with a player and the determination of WHAT they are willing to give up extra in order to make sure they get said named player. What happens if we desperately want to trade OUT of the 5th spot yet no one below us has a player that they feel they will miss out on unless they trade up to our spot to get him?? What then is the trade value of the 5th pick?? Bupkus thats what.

So lets expand a bit further... Supposed we cant trade out but the guy they really want is rated 5 spots lower on the big boards (because this is the litmus many are living off of in determining players draft worth) Do we then take the player rated higher on the big board but that we actually dont want or have a need for, or do we "reach" and take the guy we wanted even though according to the big board he isnt worth the 5th pick?

 

[skinsdad62]

You have got to be kidding, right? Let's put it this way, what would Scotty demand from the team with the 9th overall pick if they wanted to trade down to our #5 overall?

Let's put this in some perspective. Last year, the Bills traded their 9th overall pick to the Browns, who held the #4 overall pick (which they used to take Sammy Watkins). Aside from swapping first rounders, they Bills gave up their first rounder this year (which is why the Browns have two first rounders now) and a fourth rounder. What you may perceive as a small numerical gap in draft picks belies the fact that the jump you're describing is huge.

the talent of the 5th or 9th best player ratings are of little consequence hence picking the 9th rated guy doesnt really matter

 

[j_y19]

Redskinsfan... the mistake in your logic is this. The 5th pick is worth no more or less than the 4th or 9th pick. What gives the pick itself value is the teams desperation or love affair with a player and the determination of WHAT they are willing to give up extra in order to make sure they get said named player. What happens if we desperately want to trade OUT of the 5th spot yet no one below us has a player that they feel they will miss out on unless they trade up to our spot to get him?? What then is the trade value of the 5th pick?? Bupkus thats what.

So lets expand a bit further... Supposed we cant trade out but the guy they really want is rated 5 spots lower on the big boards (because this is the litmus many are living off of in determining players draft worth) Do we then take the player rated higher on the big board but that we actually dont want or have a need for, or do we "reach" and take the guy we wanted even though according to the big board he isnt worth the 5th pick?

First, if they really want him, he won't be rates 5 slots lower on their board. Second, there absolutely is value between the 5th pick and th 10th pick. If I'm not mistaken, on the trade value matrix, it's equavalent to a high second round pick. Finally, in the real world, what player could they realistically choose (one who is considered by most a top 5 pick) that we don't need? OLB? Nope, we need pass rushers. WR? Nope, we have 2 WRs that are approaching 30 and are very expensive. One, if not both will be gone after this year. QB? I don't even need to explain that one.

 

[Sharkinva]

First, if they really want him, he won't be rates 5 slots lower on their board. Second, there absolutely is value between the 5th pick and th 10th pick. If I'm not mistaken, on the trade value matrix, it's equavalent to a high second round pick. Finally, in the real world, what player could they realistically choose (one who is considered by most a top 5 pick) that we don't need? OLB? Nope, we need pass rushers. WR? Nope, we have 2 WRs that are approaching 30 and are very expensive. One, if not both will be gone after this year. QB? I don't even need to explain that one.

Why not dude?? I thought the big board was supposed to concentrate solely on talent VS where you think a guy stacks up in draftable order. If not, whats the point in having a big board??

Secondly the trade value matrix is actually at best a guide line, at worst a joke. It tries to quantify the one thing you really cant. You are trying to say well if team A wants to trade up to this slot to get their player, it should cost them this much. But if that were the case, we really got screwed on the RG3 deal.

You are under the mistaken ideal that value is determined by the seller and the item for sale. When in actuality, value is ALWAYS determined by how much the BUYER is willing to spend.

 

[skinsdad62]

Why not dude?? I thought the big board was supposed to concentrate solely on talent VS where you think a guy stacks up in draftable order. If not, whats the point in having a big board??

Secondly the trade value matrix is actually at best a guide line, at worst a joke. It tries to quantify the one thing you really cant. You are trying to say well if team A wants to trade up to this slot to get their player, it should cost them this much. But if that were the case, we really got screwed on the RG3 deal.

You are under the mistaken ideal that value is determined by the seller and the item for sale. When in actuality, value is ALWAYS determined by how much the BUYER is willing to spend.

true

 

[j_y19]

Why not dude?? I thought the big board was supposed to concentrate solely on talent VS where you think a guy stacks up in draftable order. If not, whats the point in having a big board??

Secondly the trade value matrix is actually at best a guide line, at worst a joke. It tries to quantify the one thing you really cant. You are trying to say well if team A wants to trade up to this slot to get their player, it should cost them this much. But if that were the case, we really got screwed on the RG3 deal.

You are under the mistaken ideal that value is determined by the seller and the item for sale. When in actuality, value is ALWAYS determined by how much the BUYER is willing to spend.

I'd ask the same question of you? What's the point of having a big board if you don't adhere to it?
As for the trade value matrix, you may think it's a joke but every one of the 32 NFL teams use it when determining trade value. Finally, you are under the mistaken impression that the draft is where you fill immediate needs. In fact, they draft is how you strategically build your team over the ,long haul. Reaching for a RT or G when you could have a premier pass rusher or WR is a strategic, long term mistake, especially when the draft is full of talented OTs.

 

[Sharkinva]

I'd ask the same question of you? What's the point of having a big board if you don't adhere to it?
As for the trade value matrix, you may think it's a joke but every one of the 32 NFL teams use it when determining trade value. Finally, you are under the mistaken impression that the draft is where you fill immediate needs. In fact, they draft is how you strategically build your team over the ,long haul. Reaching for a RT or G when you could have a premier pass rusher or WR is a strategic, long term mistake, especially when the draft is full of talented OTs.

I would agree accept for the fact that we have spent the past 15 years chasing after the premier pass rusher or WR and have ingnored simple things like the ability for an offensive line to actually BLOCK which is why we are in the position we are in now.

Secondly you have a big board to assign value to players in a bubble. As in if we ignore everything except for who we think the best to worst players are from 1-what ever. How ever if you draft in a bubble and never address needs in the draft, you end up in just as bad a shape because rarely is the best player on the board even going to remotely address a need, and eventually needs tend to build up.

Secondly if you dont think TEAMS big boards take into account team needs, you are being highly unrealistic.

Third... if the draft is so full of talent, why then wouldn't you take the most talented player at a position of NEED over drafting a backup period??