(Yesterday, 09:57 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: 1. Who is to say they did try to trade down and could not find a trade partner?
2. How do we know if Bengals choosing Fairchild caused others to trade down as they wanted him and their next guy up was further away?
I think if the guy you have spent months mocking with your secnd round pick and 3rd best LB on your board is there, you take him. There is no telling if team who took 4th best LB on their board but was targeting Knight would not have traded up in front of Bengals and stole him from us.
So, no the team seemed committed to Knight and it would be crazy the guy you mocked available and then trade down and possibly losing him,
1. The pick right in front of us traded down, and a pick a couple picks later, and another one in our vicinity. Pretty solid evidence that trade partners eere there to be found, yes? Though it is impossible to know for sure.
2. We ran to the podium. The pick was in immediately. If we tried to trade down & could not, it would have taken more time. But it did not happen. We picked immediately. Hence, we did not try to trade back. That is basic deductive reasoning.
3. Golden even admitted they ran to the podium. He said he was waiting eith baited breath for 17 picks to take him.
All this is out there and not in dispute. We did not try & trade back in Rd2. And we took a guy most/all guys had as a 3rd/4th round guy mid 2nd. We fell in love with the guy and reached for him and eschewed trading down because of it.
I get it. I just don't think it was the best use of the pick, and was opportunity lost. That is why it was a C/D pick for me.
Further even if he was taken, I think we still could have gotten a useful LB later. Martin went before #81, but Stutsman, Kiser, & Simon were all available in the 3rd, not to mention Carter.
Plus, we had Pratt on roster and brought in Burls in FA.
But that has nothing to do with Knight the player. He is a plug & play 2 down Mike/SAM LB who should be able to duplicate Pratt's production, and even has better length to set the edge, but likely won't be much better. I'd grade the player as a B. A in the locker room. We could have drafted someone at #49 who would hav represented a bigger upgrade over present circumstances, IMHO (Ratledge, Watts, etc).
Now, if that pick lets us waive Pratt AND we get a another useful player with that $$$, then the whole trade down/reach/value argument goes totally up in smoke. Which is still possible, but pretty slim FA pickings at the moment.
Your whole schtick about you cannot know for sure does not mean anything. If you could not voice an opinion on something draft related unless we knew for sure what our internal discussions were or what would have happened differently if we'd have changed our pick prior would prevent any discussion about anything. It is a moot point. So what?
As for Fairchild, the analysis is similar. But we needed a dang guard and he was probably the best of what was left. But he probably would have been there 10-15 picks later (Grant was). But he is closer to ready than Grant. And has a good ceiling and athletic traits. I like the player more than the pick/choice again. He is probably my favorite pick we made, or the one that annoyed me the least.
But I don't like putting works in progress in front of Burrow. I'd have gone higher with G and risked LB for later. Or risked Fairchild to try and ger more picks and taken Grant (another guy who likely needs a year). That would have also made Volson expendable and perhaps allowed us to sign a starting level guard in FA.
Now, like with Knight, we could still get there. If Fairchild looks ready to start in camp, we could cut Volson and use that $$ for another player. Though the Rivers pock makes a FA G much less likely. Still, if that is how it pans out, I'd like the pick a lot more. And, once again, the whole value/reach & trade doen argument pretty much goes up in smoke.
Though teading back twice, getting extra picks, still landing our guys, AND freeing up more $$ to improve the roster would still have been the best scenario.
Bottom line is, you love the picks and I don't. There is nothing wrong with either position. And I fervently hope you end up being right.
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
![[Image: Truck_1_0_1_.png]](https://card.psnprofiles.com/2/Truck_1_0_1_.png)
