Jump to content

Quality over Quantity


Future GM
 Share

Recommended Posts

I understand that we are rebuilding and alot of draft picks sound nice, but I would rather have three player out of this draft that could be ten year starters than twelve draft picks and only two pan out. I guess what I am saying is trade up and get the best players we can get then to have a bunch of question mark guys like we have now.QuestionMark.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 62
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Future GM (3/21/2008)
I understand that we are rebuilding and alot of draft picks sound nice, but I would rather have three player out of this draft that could be ten year starters than twelve draft picks and only two pan out. I guess what I am saying is trade up and get the best players we can get then to have a bunch of question mark guys like we have now.QuestionMark.gif

  That was McKay's FA strategy. 

 And every year we had the same mantra, "The D started strong but injuries killed us."  Depth and scheme will always beat 2 or 3 good players.  Always. I mean always. Like every time always.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The draft is a lottery. I'd rather have 12 picks than start packaging them together to move up for a player who is probaly no more likey to succeed that perosn you'd get if you stayed put.

Rarely is there such a drop off in talent in the space of a few picks, warrants giving up upper or middle round picks to move up. Just think of Michael Jenkins and Jimmy Williams... IIRC  we gave up valuable 3rd round picks to move upand get both and neither have justified it -espcially when you consider some of the quality players that we've found in the 3rd like Schaub and Norwood.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The more picks you have, the higher likelihood you will have for getting more quality players.  Look at the last half of the first round last season (where we would be able to trade into).  Justin Harrel, Jarvis Moss, Leon Hall, Michael Griffin, Aaron Ross, Reggie Nelson, Brady Quinn, Dwayne Bowe, Brandon Meriweather, Jon Beason, Anthony Spencer, Robert Meacham, Joe Staley, Ben Grubbs, Craig Davis, Greg Olsen, and Anthony Gonzales.  Basically you have a 50/50 shot of getting a contributor in the portion of the first round that we'd be able to trade into.  We'd probably have to give up a minimum of 3 picks to get there though.  Not to mention the more money you have to pay them.  I'd rather keep the 3 picks to try to find 3 depth players then trade them in to have a 50/50 shot at an immediate contributor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have both in this year draft. 11 picks provide with a much need depth help. 4 of them in the top 50 helps with quality. And you don't know how many of the late round turn into superstar. Late round pick usually are the hardest working one. But we have both in this year draft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Future GM (3/21/2008)
what you are saying makes since but what happens is we spend too much money in fa and then have no money left for depth. If we draft good starters then you can get cheaper depth in fa.

We didn't spend alot of money in FA. We still have 15 mils ( I think) to sign this year draft picks. June 1st relase will likely help us out with more cap room. We can sign a good veteran player to provide even more depth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

halsey (3/21/2008)
Trading up does not guarentee more quality. The Falcons traded up with the Colts to get Michael Jenkins. The Colts used that pick to take Bob Sanders. More picks means more chances to find stars and more depth.

Wow... I didn't realise that the Colts used our pick to get Bob Sanders.

That's a great example of why we shouldn't waste valuable upper/middle round picks to trade up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Future GM (3/21/2008)
I understand that we are rebuilding and alot of draft picks sound nice, but I would rather have three player out of this draft that could be ten year starters than twelve draft picks and only two pan out. I guess what I am saying is trade up and get the best players we can get then to have a bunch of question mark guys like we have now.QuestionMark.gif

In this years draft, I think you can get both.

The falcons have right nimber of picks, Its jus is the GM going to draft the right players...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ukfalc (3/21/2008)
halsey (3/21/2008)
Trading up does not guarentee more quality. The Falcons traded up with the Colts to get Michael Jenkins. The Colts used that pick to take Bob Sanders. More picks means more chances to find stars and more depth.

Wow... I didn't realise that the Colts used our pick to get Bob Sanders.

That's a great example of why we shouldn't waste valuable upper/middle round picks to trade up.

Well, if you really want me to be technical........the Colts actually traded down from the Falcons pick again with Pittsburgh. The Steelers used the Falcons pick to take Ricardo Colcough. Yeah, the Colts pretty much outsmarted both the Falcons AND the Steelers on that one.

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_NFL_Draft

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Future GM (3/21/2008)
You just validated my point. You don`t win without good talent,  new england ,the gaints, dallas, or even the colts they all have SUPERSTARS that they drafted

But they didn't need to trade up to get those stars. That's where your point is faulted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Future GM (3/21/2008)
You just validated my point. You don`t win without good talent,  new england ,the gaints, dallas, or even the colts they all have SUPERSTARS that they drafted

You don't know which college player will be a superstar. You see great athlete in college, however when they go to the NFL, they're not that great. Reggie Bush is an example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

halsey (3/21/2008)
Trading up does not guarentee more quality. The Falcons traded up with the Colts to get Michael Jenkins. The Colts used that pick to take Bob Sanders. More picks means more chances to find stars and more depth.

I think I just threw up a little:hehe:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Future GM (3/21/2008)
I will take 2 first round picks over 3 second picks anyday. Bust are part of scouting and I pray the Falcons have fixed the problem with DM 

It still doesn't mean that those two first rounders are going to end up being good, quality players for you, especially if you don't know how to draft worth a ****.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Statick (3/21/2008)
Future GM (3/21/2008)
I will take 2 first round picks over 3 second picks anyday. Bust are part of scouting and I pray the Falcons have fixed the problem with DM 

It still doesn't mean that those two first rounders are going to end up being good, quality players for you, especially if you don't know how to draft worth a ****.

Amen to that. 3 second round are cheaper. you probably can add all their salary together and it doesnt even come close to a first rounder money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess you guys are right about the draft, you don`t know which college player is going to be a STUD. I just tired of watching other teams draft great players year in and year out. iT`S like they have the inside scoop on something and we don`t.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...