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

[j_y19]

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??

I agree with your point about taking account need when making your big board. Hence my original comment that if they want him, he won't be 5 slots lower on their board. In reality, need always influences the board. But to think that a RT/G is of the same value as as game changing WR or OLB is not being realistic. The League values these players more as they have the ability to change the course of a game. This is why they get paid more. And what makes you beleive that If we draft Schreff, he doesn't start the year as a backup, especially if he becomes a guard? Shark, you are not being honest with yourself. We need a better RT. But RT was not the reason why RG3 sucks. In fact, RT was not even the reason why he suffered so many sacks. But to say that a RT is as valuable as premier OLb, WR or QB is just wrong.

 

[Sharkinva]

I agree with your point about taking account need when making your big board. Hence my original comment that if they want him, he won't be 5 slots lower on their board. In reality, need always influences the board. But to think that a RT/G is of the same value as as game changing WR or OLB is not being realistic. The League values these players more as they have the ability to change the course of a game. This is why they get paid more. And what makes you beleive that If we draft Schreff, he doesn't start the year as a backup, especially if he becomes a guard? Shark, you are not being honest with yourself. We need a better RT. But RT was not the reason why RG3 sucks. In fact, RT was not even the reason why he suffered so many sacks. But to say that a RT is as valuable as premier OLb, WR or QB is just wrong.

Point one, Scherff is better or WILL be better than anything we currently have on the right side of the line.

Point two.. I dont think the line is what made Rg3 suck, but i do think improving the line and especially the right side improves our offense and the eam as a whole more so than another pass rusher... especially one who is still learning to be a pass rusher as Fowler apparently is.

Point three... I think Pass Rushers are by and large over rated considering the fact that very few actually Take over games. And considering we have had pass rushers from this team make the prow bowl on a 3-13 squad... i think the line IS in fact much more important at this point and time.

Lastly... as I have said before... over valuing the sexy pick has gotten us to the point where we are. So maybe we should take a hint from the division winners and fix what ACTUALLY ails this team even if it isnt sexy enough for every one on the face of it.

 

[redskinsfan]

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

Based on what? If that's the case, why didn't the Browns get a sixth rounder for swapping picks 4 and 9 between them and the Browns? If you can't see the huge disparity between the picks, we'll just have to disagree on that. I can tell you who wouldn't agree with you: 32 NFL GMs.

 

[redskinsfan]

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?

That is WRONG. The market for such a swap was set by the Browns-Bills trade last year when both teams traded their fourth and ninth overall picks. In exchange for getting the Browns fourth pick, the Bills had to give up their ninth overall pick, their first this year, and fourth rounder this year. In what world is there some qualitative equivalence between those types of picks?

 

[Sharkinva]

That is WRONG. The market for such a swap was set by the Browns-Bills trade last year when both teams traded their fourth and ninth overall picks. In exchange for getting the Browns fourth pick, the Bills had to give up their ninth overall pick, their first this year, and fourth rounder this year. In what world is there some qualitative equivalence between those types of picks?

If this is really the way you think, next time you are in Florida, please come by and buy a bike. Because I have sold Busa's for 1.5 times what they are worth to some customers. You think that should set the market value at $19k because I was able to r*pe some one desperate to be the FIRST to have the new model?? I mean by your take, thats what I should be able to sell them all for now right??

See what you are missing is that market value is what you HOPE to get, actual value is what the other party is willing to pay.

If the chart says the 5th over all pick is worth three extra picks, but no one WANTS the 5th pick... how much then is it worth in trade??

 

[redskinsfan]

If this is really the way you think, next time you are in Florida, please come by and buy a bike. Because I have sold Busa's for 1.5 times what they are worth to some customers. You think that should set the market value at $19k because I was able to r*pe some one desperate to be the FIRST to have the new model?? I mean by your take, thats what I should be able to sell them all for now right??

See what you are missing is that market value is what you HOPE to get, actual value is what the other party is willing to pay.

If the chart says the 5th over all pick is worth three extra picks, but no one WANTS the 5th pick... how much then is it worth in trade??

I've written about this flawed interchangeability between value and worth you're getting into. Value is an objective thing, whereas worth is subjective. For instance, a piece of real estate can be appraised by use of well-established objective criterion. That's called value. However, depending on the circumstances, the worth to a buyer and seller may drive the price up or down. For instance, if a seller needs money fast and is willing to unload it for a 10% discount, they are selling the real estate below the real property's value because instant money to them is worth it. This, of course, doesn't change the fact that the property has a set amount of value.

As with real estate, the value of a draft pick can also be assessed at a certain worth. That doesn't mean, however, that a distressed trader or tradee can vary the the price for the trade due to circumstances giving rise to the distress. As an example, if a team sees the clock running down on its selection, it may be willing to trade a pick for less than it's actually worth because it's screwed up by failing to plan properly. Like the real estate hypo I posed, this doesn't mean the pick doesn't have the value it's been assessed at.

The difference between nine-to-five is roughly a first rounder and fourth rounder the next year. And that's assuming Scherff is rated at nine and Fowler is rated a five. By taking Scherff at five, you essentially are giving up on first and later round pick the next year.

Tell me anyone that thinks that's a prudent choice.

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

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.

Very true. And the Bills were willing to spend a ton to move up as illustrated earlier. And we can find a hundred other examples of the BUYER willing to give up a lot to move up a few spots.

Which is why the claim that the 9th pick is the same as the 5th is simply not true. Of all the disagreements I've had here this is the one that is the most perplexing. The 5th pick is more valuable than the 9th pick. End of story.

 

[redskinsfan]

Very true. And the Bills were willing to spend a ton to move up as illustrated earlier. And we can find a hundred other examples of the BUYER willing to give up a lot to move up a few spots.

Which is why the claim that the 9th pick is the same as the 5th is simply not true. Of all the disagreements I've had here this is the one that is the most perplexing. The 5th pick is more valuable than the 9th pick. End of story.

Amen to that. And Shark is wrong on how the buyer is the force driving value. Picks have certain values. Worth can be determined by the buyer, seller, or both. Anyone that follows real estate and/or car sales knows that all too well.

 

[j_y19]

Amen to that. And Shark is wrong on how the buyer is the force driving value. Picks have certain values. Worth can be determined by the buyer, seller, or both. Anyone that follows real estate and/or car sales knows that all too well.

IN reality, it's just like a capital market. It's supply and demand. Which is why usually just a couple of positions dominate the top of the draft. It's much harder to find a dominate WR (QB, LT, OLB, CB) than a dominate RT. So when you believe you have a chance at one, you jump on it. Now this doesn't mean you don't take a RT if you believe he is the BPA available to you. You just don't want to reach for a RT because you need one while forgoing another player that can be special at a position where the supply of special players is minimal.

 

[redskinsfan]

IN reality, it's just like a capital market. It's supply and demand. Which is why usually just a couple of positions dominate the top of the draft. It's much harder to find a dominate WR (QB, LT, OLB, CB) than a dominate RT. So when you believe you have a chance at one, you jump on it. Now this doesn't mean you don't take a RT if you believe he is the BPA available to you. You just don't want to reach for a RT because you need one while forgoing another player that can be special at a position where the supply of special players is minimal.

Exactly. Draft picks and players that have an otherwise objective value can change, sometimes dramatically, depending on the circumstances. Again, there's a difference between value (objective) and worth (subjective).

 

[skinsdad62]

you will never convince me that taking a guy that has been mocked as high as 7 and mostly 9 is a reach at 5

i am not talking about some BS trade value chart or what you can get for a stinking pick

i am saying the a guy you freaking draft at 5 is as talented as the guy at 7 or 9

i dont think there is a cowboy fan in america whining about them taking a 3rd round center (projected ) at 23rd overall considering he is a 2x pro bowler in 2 seasons . ask them if they want him back ?

 

[redskinsfan]

you will never convince me that taking a guy that has been mocked as high as 7 and mostly 9 is a reach at 5

i am not talking about some BS trade value chart or what you can get for a stinking pick

i am saying the a guy you freaking draft at 5 is as talented as the guy at 7 or 9

i dont think there is a cowboy fan in america whining about them taking a 3rd round center (projected ) at 23rd overall considering he is a 2x pro bowler in 2 seasons . ask them if they want him back ?

Let's put the chart aside: what about that trade between Buffalo and Cleveland last year?

 

[skinsdad62]

Let's put the chart aside: what about that trade between Buffalo and Cleveland last year?

what about it ? so you could get more picks at a spot or the other but how does that affect the talent of the players being drafted ? nothing player 5 on the filed is not much different then player 9 on the field talent wise either guy should be a great player

 

[redskinsfan]

what about it ? so you could get more picks at a spot or the other but how does that affect the talent of the players being drafted ? nothing player 5 on the filed is not much different then player 9 on the field talent wise either guy should be a great player

You're really missing the point: yes there is a difference between five and nine, and that difference is expressed in the trade struck between those two clubs.

Let me ask you this then: if the Rams come to us asking to trade our fifth for their 10th overall pick, what's a ballpark compensation you'd want in return?

 

[skinsdad62]

i am not missing the point your point has nothing to do with the players we are looking at . it has everything to do with percieved value of trades

 

[redskinsfan]

i am not missing the point your point has nothing to do with the players we are looking at . it has everything to do with percieved value of trades

Then why don't you answer the question: what compensation would you accept for trading out of the fifth pick to the 10th pick overall?

 

[skinsdad62]

the compensation has no effect on the talent on the field . that is about a hole different issue

the compensation the rams would have to give would be higher then any other team for me for other factors other then draft charts etc . they fleeced us then rubbed it in our faces last season .

so 2 1sts 3 seconds and a 3rd 4th and 5th and that does what for you ? you get more players ? whoopity doo but it doesnt make the 2 players anymore or less talented on the field which is my point

your point has nothing to do with that . it has more to do with auctioning

 

[redskinsfan]

the compensation has no effect on the talent on the field . that is about a hole different issue

the compensation the rams would have to give would be higher then any other team for me for other factors other then draft charts etc . they fleeced us then rubbed it in our faces last season .

so 2 1sts 3 seconds and a 3rd 4th and 5th and that does what for you ? you get more players ? whoopity doo but it doesnt make the 2 players anymore or less talented on the field which is my point

your point has nothing to do with that . it has more to do with auctioning

I'll tell you who'll disagree with you: Scot McCloughan. And 31 other GMs. If you're reaching for someone in the draft, you also have to first ask what value you're giving up. Then you've got to ask whether it's worth it. How this doesn't play into anyone's calculus is really mind-boggling. In Shcerff's case, you're giving up a 2015 second rounder or 2016 first and later round pick. And that's assuming Scherff is projected around nine or 10. If he's going higher than that, the value you're giving up escalates. The only way you can justify that is if you've got a crystal ball showing he's going to be far more than someone filling a dire need we have. He's got to be a 10-year starter, who's also a perennial Pro-Bowler.

 

[skinsdad62]

I'll tell you who'll disagree with you: Scot McCloughan. And 31 other GMs. If you're reaching for someone in the draft, you also have to first ask what value you're giving up. Then you've got to ask whether it's worth it. How this doesn't play into anyone's calculus is really mind-boggling. In Shcerff's case, you're giving up a 2015 second rounder or 2016 first and later round pick. And that's assuming Scherff is projected around nine or 10. If he's going higher than that, the value you're giving up escalates. The only way you can justify that is if you've got a crystal ball showing he's going to be far more than someone filling a dire need we have. He's got to be a 10-year starter, who's also a perennial Pro-Bowler.

yeah who has put that offer on the table ? and again if sherf is a better player who cares ?

 

[redskinsfan]

yeah who has put that offer on the table ? and again if sherf is a better player who cares ?

Who said anything about a trade in the post you've quoted? It's about giving up a value. And the consensus on Scherff is that his value lies between #10 and #15. So, what if Scherff is gone at #4? Do we take the next available o-lineman then?