Originally posted by RollinWith21n52:
Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:
If you're going to grade each pick, I like that you're giving unequal weighting....seems to make the most sense. I also think that since trading picks for players adds value to the team (and perhaps even more so especially when you're trading late round picks for those veterans), those should be factored in as well. You're essentially getting value for picks that generally have little-to-none, especially for a roster as loaded as ours.
Specifically, we should factor in trading for Colt McCoy (likely #2 QB) with the pick we got in exchange for Taylor Mays, and for picking up Boldin (likely #2 WR) with a late round 6th.
Here's the issue. Lets take Harvin. If you consider getting a player like Harvin at #26 overall (I believe that's where Seattle picked), he'd be an A+. But he's older, and has a MASSIVE salary. You can't compare him to a player making $1.5MM/yr when he'll be making close to 6 times as much. Not in a salary cap league. To lesser extent this applies to all veteran acquisitions. With Boldin, the issue is that he'll be here for 1 year. So the consideration is the probability that a 6th round pick pans out is low, but if he does pan out (it happens), even in a low impact role, he could be around for years. How do you value Boldin for 1 year at $6MM vs. Kyle Williams for 5 years at <$1MM? KW isn't the offensive weapon that Boldin is but he returns punts (when he doesn't drop them) and has potential to develop into a quality #4/5 and slot player. It gets tricky, but you do have a very valid point. Its an important future iteration.
Time is the key factor, which is why grading drafts right after they've happened is kinda goofy at best.
But in 2016 for example, we'll be able to place more objective values on the picks we made and the veterans we traded picks for based on actual results (individual and team). Don't get me wrong, placing grades on current/recent draft classes is fun, but it's also incredibly subjective.