injured player strategy

If some of these redshirt players don't start showing up we really need to call in to question that strategy. Those are high picks and we need production.

Worked with Frank Gore.

Originally posted by English:

Worked with Frank Gore.

we didn't redshirt frank gore

Originally posted by outside4949:

Originally posted by English:

Worked with Frank Gore.

we didn't redshirt frank gore

I wasn't being entirely serious. But Frank dropped due to his injury.

I was to see Tank out there. Latt can wait a little.

Originally posted by outside4949:
If some of these redshirt players don't start showing up we really need to call in to question that strategy. Those are high picks and we need production.

What picks are you talking about exactly? The only injured player we picked high was Tank so far. Anyone else?

Picking in later rounds is a crapshoot more or less. You can count yourself lucky/knowledgeable if you get some solid backups there and you are THE king if you find some starters.
So, you can also go ahead and pick some injured players on day 3 who happen to have day two if not even day one talent.

BTW, we started this strategy last year, with Tank and Lattimore. And we continued this year, when we had a lot of picks anyway. Imho, way too early to discuss about this topic.
I mean, it's not like as if the majority or 50% of the picks were used for heavy-injured players.

^^ we had a couple this year i believe

I think it's a brilliant strategy.

We thought that our OLine was a major strength of the team and didn't need any immediate help. Thus far, they seem more than challenged, but it's still early.

We have 2 OLine guys on our "farm team" who will come in next year to compete.

As a major plus they are learning the schemes and will be more than familiar with our playbook coming in - VERY smart. Also, Lattimore should be completely healed and ready to add to the mix.

Also, Millard should be a major plus.

I really like the idea

I think this is a very good strategy when you have a good deep roster & can help replenish & stock players to keep who need more practice & work at there craft without exposing them to another picking them up or wasting a current roster spot

Originally posted by outside4949:
If some of these redshirt players don't start showing up we really need to call in to question that strategy. Those are high picks and we need production.

Exactly what high picks are you talking about? Carradine was the only high pick and we don't know what he can do since he's not even out on the field. Beyond that, you're talking a bunch of middle rounders, the vast majority don't end up making it in the NFL anyways. Go back a few drafts, look at the names of guys taken in the 3rd, 4th, 5th rounds and beyond and see how many you can place on current NFL rosters.

The strategy itself is not a bad one, you're racking up high level talent drafted lower and in some cases considerably lower than they may have been otherwise.

Silly to question the strategy now because we haven't seen the players. I'd only take issue with it if we made a habit of drafting players high (1st-2nd round) that are injured. To date, only one player falls into this category and the verdict won't be in on him for awhile.

I'm not a fan of this strategy, especially in day one or day 2 of the draft. I feel there's a reason most people dont value these injured players like we do because there's a chance they don't return from that injury at full strength..Maybe there's baalke needs to realize he's not outsmarting many with this strategy and find talent and if you want it, pay the price.. So far I haven't noticed major contribution from injured players .

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by outside4949:
If some of these redshirt players don't start showing up we really need to call in to question that strategy. Those are high picks and we need production.

What picks are you talking about exactly? The only injured player we picked high was Tank so far. Anyone else?

Picking in later rounds is a crapshoot more or less. You can count yourself lucky/knowledgeable if you get some solid backups there and you are THE king if you find some starters.
So, you can also go ahead and pick some injured players on day 3 who happen to have day two if not even day one talent.

BTW, we started this strategy last year, with Tank and Lattimore. And we continued this year, when we had a lot of picks anyway. Imho, way too early to discuss about this topic.
I mean, it's not like as if the majority or 50% of the picks were used for heavy-injured players.

That is BS. Lattimore was a 4th rounder, that is a legit mid-round pick. A 4th round pick can get you players like a Bruce Ellington or Martavis Bryant who is balling for the Steelers right now. If it was a proper low round pick like a 6th or 7th rounder I wouldn't argue with you. There is a reason why some teams steer away from injured players and why injured players drop in the draft because of the risk involved. We didn't, in other words we chose to gamble. Just like anything else in life, if you want to gamble you can either win big or waste away an opportunity which could have been better utilized like you knew all along. And since we are on the subject, it has already been 1 1/2 years and we still don't know what's happening with Tank. Let me ask you this, what if it turns out Tank can't play neither like Lattimore ? Would that change your view ?

Bottom line, I am not a fan of such a strategy. There was simply no need for us to take such gambles when we already had so many picks. I would argue we would have a better chance in finding a "healthy" gem even if we were to gamble on a lower round pick.

I don't under your penultimate line. The obvious time to gamble a pick or two is when you have so many.

Originally posted by English:
I don't under your penultimate line. The obvious time to gamble a pick or two is when you have so many.

Let me explain, what I was trying to say is when you have so many picks you already have a high enough chance in hitting on a healthy good player anyway whereas if you don't have enough picks you might think you need to gamble on an impact player even if he is injured.

Take Lattimore's draft class for example, we had 7 picks from the 4th to 7th, to me that's a pretty decent chance in finding a gem or at least a solid player. If you look at this year's draft, say the WRs, like I mentioned before good enough players like Bruce Ellington and Martvais Bryant were still around in the 4th to be had and there would be no need to gamble on an injured player. But, say if we had traded up and used up a good number of our mid to lower round picks in doing so and you are left with 1-2 picks, then you might be forced to take a gamble. Well, that's my own logic anyway.

Originally posted by Rascal:

Originally posted by English:

I don't under your penultimate line. The obvious time to gamble a pick or two is when you have so many.

Let me explain, what I was trying to say is when you have so many picks you already have a high enough chance in hitting on a healthy good player anyway whereas if you don't have enough picks you might think you need to gamble on an impact player even if he is injured.

Take Lattimore's draft class for example, we had 7 picks from the 4th to 7th, to me that's a pretty decent chance in finding a gem or at least a solid player. If you look at this year's draft, say the WRs, like I mentioned before good enough players like Bruce Ellington and Martvais Bryant were still around in the 4th to be had and there would be no need to gamble on an injured player. But, say if we had traded up and used up a good number of our mid to lower round picks in doing so and you are left with 1-2 picks, then you might be forced to take a gamble. Well, that's my own logic anyway.

One way of looking on it. I looked at it the other way. We had a whole bundle of picks. Let's try rolling the dice with the odd one or two of them and try to hit real paydirt, whilst covering needs with the other picks.