That comparison does make some sense but it still doesn't work perfect. That higher percentage lottery ticket may be worth more than those other ones but it can not help you fill more than one position. Only multiple tickets can give you the opportunity of winning multiple times.
This is also a year in which there doesn't seem to be any clear cut number 1 QB, except apparently in the Bear's eyes.
So I'm assuming you're more of a fan of quantity instead of quality...
I'm not stoked with the QB pick but if Pace believes that his player then I'm all for it. We didn't give away a farm of picks like the Texans did. We still have our 1st and 2nd next year. We are still in a good position.
It depends on the situation. When the team only has a couple major needs then you can take bigger risks in order to increase you chances at finding a quality player. When you have many positional needs and there doesn't seem to be a clear cut difference maker worth trading up for then I value quantity in order to increase the odds of finding more starting players.
The Bears obviously didn't see this draft the same way I did and that's ok. I hope they're right but it doesn't mean I have to change my opinion. When the move they make works out I'll gladly admit I was wrong. If it fails miserably then I will not be very happy.
Correct comparison with lottery would be: high 1st rd pick, a thousand tickets low 1st rd pick, 500 tickets 2nd rd 300 tickets ... 7rd 1 ticket
All that represents is the value of the picks and the increased odds of them being successful. It does absolutely doesn't nothing to fill multiple positions of need on the team. Five picks is fewer than seven. Did giving up those two picks increase their odds of getting a difference maker? Maybe but I don't think so. I still think they could have gotten him with their original pick.
Reports are that SF was going to trade out no matter what, so another team would have jumped in and taken a QB. It could have been a different QB but if Mitch was Pace's guy than he couldn't take that chance. He might not have gotten Mitch at #3. We'll never know.
If Pace was the only one bidding for the pick then yes, if SF really wanted the Thomas he could have gotten Mitch at #3. But I have no doubt that Lynch told Pace who was on the other line. In that case, even though the Chiefs/Texans/whoever might have paid more, it was more important that SF get a top pic this year in order to get the guy they wanted (Thomas) rather than end up in the middle of the draft pack picking a lower ranked player on their board.
All the reports are that SF had multiple offers. Pace did what he had to do to get his guy.
Again, the draft is a lottery, so you have to have a ticket, preferrably multiple. But unlike the randomness of a lottery, some tickets are weighted different, 1sts are more likely to hit then 2nd's, and 3rds etc. You want picks, but if you can use those low end tickets to grab a better 1s ticket then you do it and you don't look back.
Again 30% shot of a 3rd rounding becoming a starter, and that list of Bears picks, and ALL 67th and 111th picks should give you an understanding that what was given up to get THEIR guy was really quite minimal.
That comparison does make some sense but it still doesn't work perfect. That higher percentage lottery ticket may be worth more than those other ones but it can not help you fill more than one position. Only multiple tickets can give you the opportunity of winning multiple times.
This is also a year in which there doesn't seem to be any clear cut number 1 QB, except apparently in the Bear's eyes.
Yes, but they can trade back in the 2nd or 3rd to replenish and get extra picks. But QB is the only position that really matters. I know people hate that but it's the truth.
In who's eyes was there no consensus? the "experts" that said there shouldn't be a qb drafted in the first? Or the 3 or 4 teams that looked to trade up w/SF to get Mitch(no one was trading up for Mahommes or Watson).
That comparison does make some sense but it still doesn't work perfect. That higher percentage lottery ticket may be worth more than those other ones but it can not help you fill more than one position. Only multiple tickets can give you the opportunity of winning multiple times.
This is also a year in which there doesn't seem to be any clear cut number 1 QB, except apparently in the Bear's eyes.
Yes, but they can trade back in the 2nd or 3rd to replenish and get extra picks. But QB is the only position that really matters.
In who's eyes was there no consensus? the "experts" that said there shouldn't be a qb drafted in the first? Or the 3 or 4 teams that looked to trade up w/SF to get Mitch(no one was trading up for Mahommes or Watson).
No consensus based on every piece of news leading up to the draft and me basing my opinion on it. This is all based on my opinion since I will never know what the Bears were thinking. I'm not going to change my opinion just because the Bears went a different way. I'm going to stick with my opinion and I'll be right or wrong. Just like the Bears now have to stick with the move they just made. In a few years we'll find out who had the better game plan.
This is actually the first year in a while that the Bears really surprised me and made a move I did't agree with. Like I said before, I hope they're right. I have no problem being proven wrong.
All that represents is the value of the picks and the increased odds of them being successful. It does absolutely doesn't nothing to fill multiple positions of need on the team. Five picks is fewer than seven. Did giving up those two picks increase their odds of getting a difference maker? Maybe but I don't think so. I still think they could have gotten him with their original pick.
Reports are that SF was going to trade out no matter what, so another team would have jumped in and taken a QB. It could have been a different QB but if Mitch was Pace's guy than he couldn't take that chance. He might not have gotten Mitch at #3. We'll never know.
If Pace was the only one bidding for the pick then yes, if SF really wanted the Thomas he could have gotten Mitch at #3. But I have no doubt that Lynch told Pace who was on the other line. In that case, even though the Chiefs/Texans/whoever might have paid more, it was more important that SF get a top pic this year in order to get the guy they wanted (Thomas) rather than end up in the middle of the draft pack picking a lower ranked player on their board.
All the reports are that SF had multiple offers. Pace did what he had to do to get his guy.
Thats my MSU looking at what I know/read/heard.
I still think the 49ers completely played the Bears. The problem is we most likely will never know the truth.
That comparison does make some sense but it still doesn't work perfect. That higher percentage lottery ticket may be worth more than those other ones but it can not help you fill more than one position. Only multiple tickets can give you the opportunity of winning multiple times.
This is also a year in which there doesn't seem to be any clear cut number 1 QB, except apparently in the Bear's eyes.
Yes, but they can trade back in the 2nd or 3rd to replenish and get extra picks. But QB is the only position that really matters.
In who's eyes was there no consensus? the "experts" that said there shouldn't be a qb drafted in the first? Or the 3 or 4 teams that looked to trade up w/SF to get Mitch(no one was trading up for Mahommes or Watson).
Thats the problem with the draft experts. Quite frankly once Roger said the Browns are on the clock, the only rankings that matter are the individual teams. Everything else at that point in meaningless. Apparently the 'experts' were wrong because 3 teams valued the QBs enough to trade up and get one, including a team that already has someone at QB who the 'experts' call the model game manager. Didn't the Chiefs have other pressing needs than QB?
Whats telling to me that often the experts go back and write a revised draft grade column years later. Why? Because they were wrong at the time. The experts around here almost never post that they were wrong. Which I find hilarious. Because some of the same posters spouting about this pick were the same guys spouting about Floyd. You even have the guys who posted multiple times that no QB was worth a first round pick suddenly claiming they liked Mitch all along. um...yeah.
Yes, but they can trade back in the 2nd or 3rd to replenish and get extra picks. But QB is the only position that really matters.
In who's eyes was there no consensus? the "experts" that said there shouldn't be a qb drafted in the first? Or the 3 or 4 teams that looked to trade up w/SF to get Mitch(no one was trading up for Mahommes or Watson).
Thats the problem with the draft experts. Quite frankly once Roger said the Browns are on the clock, the only rankings that matter are the individual teams. Everything else at that point in meaningless. Apparently the 'experts' were wrong because 3 teams valued the QBs enough to trade up and get one, including a team that already has someone at QB who the 'experts' call the model game manager. Didn't the Chiefs have other pressing needs than QB?
Whats telling to me that often the experts go back and write a revised draft grade column years later. Why? Because they were wrong at the time. The experts around here almost never post that they were wrong. Which I find hilarious. Because some of the same posters spouting about this pick were the same guys spouting about Floyd. You even have the guys who posted multiple times that no QB was worth a first round pick suddenly claiming they liked Mitch all along. um...yeah.
Your focus on other posters really amazes me, and its not sarcasm
Reports are that SF was going to trade out no matter what, so another team would have jumped in and taken a QB. It could have been a different QB but if Mitch was Pace's guy than he couldn't take that chance. He might not have gotten Mitch at #3. We'll never know.
If Pace was the only one bidding for the pick then yes, if SF really wanted the Thomas he could have gotten Mitch at #3. But I have no doubt that Lynch told Pace who was on the other line. In that case, even though the Chiefs/Texans/whoever might have paid more, it was more important that SF get a top pic this year in order to get the guy they wanted (Thomas) rather than end up in the middle of the draft pack picking a lower ranked player on their board.
All the reports are that SF had multiple offers. Pace did what he had to do to get his guy.
Thats my MSU looking at what I know/read/heard.
I still think the 49ers completely played the Bears. The problem is we most likely will never know the truth.
Totally true, we will never know. Maybe years from now Pace and Lynch can write a record of what actually transpired. I'd love for a GM to do tht jut once. But they don't want to burn bridges like that. I'd love an honest accounting by Lovie and Angelo of what transpired during their tenure. Where they agreed and disagreed, how they approached the draft, what their draft boards looked like.....
Thats the problem with the draft experts. Quite frankly once Roger said the Browns are on the clock, the only rankings that matter are the individual teams. Everything else at that point in meaningless. Apparently the 'experts' were wrong because 3 teams valued the QBs enough to trade up and get one, including a team that already has someone at QB who the 'experts' call the model game manager. Didn't the Chiefs have other pressing needs than QB?
Whats telling to me that often the experts go back and write a revised draft grade column years later. Why? Because they were wrong at the time. The experts around here almost never post that they were wrong. Which I find hilarious. Because some of the same posters spouting about this pick were the same guys spouting about Floyd. You even have the guys who posted multiple times that no QB was worth a first round pick suddenly claiming they liked Mitch all along. um...yeah.
Your focus on other posters really amazes me, and its not sarcasm
I just remember what I have read and like challenging people who aren't consistent. Maybe thats the teacher in me, maybe its cause my family screwed me up (I'll go with...family screwed me up.) I know its a problem and believe it or not, I actually write each post twice in order to tone it down. I'm actually more of an idiot than I come across, and I come across as a pretty big idiot.
Reports are that SF was going to trade out no matter what, so another team would have jumped in and taken a QB. It could have been a different QB but if Mitch was Pace's guy than he couldn't take that chance. He might not have gotten Mitch at #3. We'll never know.
If Pace was the only one bidding for the pick then yes, if SF really wanted the Thomas he could have gotten Mitch at #3. But I have no doubt that Lynch told Pace who was on the other line. In that case, even though the Chiefs/Texans/whoever might have paid more, it was more important that SF get a top pic this year in order to get the guy they wanted (Thomas) rather than end up in the middle of the draft pack picking a lower ranked player on their board.
All the reports are that SF had multiple offers. Pace did what he had to do to get his guy.
Thats my MSU looking at what I know/read/heard.
I still think the 49ers completely played the Bears. The problem is we most likely will never know the truth.
Of course they did. And the Bears knew it and they were ok with it. It was predictable. If you are in the 2nd spot and the third spot who is in need of a QB and no QB is off the board yet and you are not going to take a QB, moving down one spot is a no brainer. Their preferred trade was with the Bears. They wanted Thomas. If they move down more than one spot ---- behind the team trying to move up to get a QB, they probably lose him. The Bears figured that any other team trying to get to #2 probably was also doing it for a QB, and that QB could be Trub. So the Bears know giving up 3 picks to move up one spot is being taken (although that is the going rate). The 49ers know they can live without a QB (God knows why...) so they take advantage of three picks from us to get who they would have anyway. Of course they took advantage of the situation.
I'm sure they could have gotten a much bigger haul from a team that was moving up from lower, but they wanted Thomas and the only way to be sure to get him was move down one spot. Still get your guy and get three more picks. Who wouldn't?
On the other hand, you have a QB you want and other teams are trying to get there to possibly take him also. You are going to pay less than anyone else to get him because you already have the #3. You can try to offer less knowing that the 49ers really only want to move down one spot, but if you go too low, the other offers might make the 49ers decide to go for the big haul. And you really need a QB.