Second look at the Lions trade? The first time was bad enough...
Quote: @Wetlander said:
Second look at the Lions trade? The first time was bad enough...
It's like rubbernecking, you have to look at least twice 
Quote: @minny65 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
...
No doubt, value was poor by any chart and majority of fans/media in terms of value. But we might benefit in the long run...might. Again, judge in 3 years blah blah. Most point value charts, actually all, that I looked at indicated that to drop down from 12 is about even with 32 and 34. But I also agree that we should have got more to drop from 12 to a divisional rival. Like Maroon and others have said we should have got the Lions #1 for 2023 instead of either pick 32 or 34. Point wise we might be have been able to get an additional Lions 4th rounder this year which was pick 97. We can all assume that it would probably be a top 10 next year.
So a trade in our favor would have been: Lions get 12
Vikings get 32, next years 1st round, and this years pick 97.
That would have been a very good trade - IMO.
We would be left with: 32,46,77,97
So we take Cine at 32 and lets say we still need to trade to 42 to get Booth. Draft value says to move from 46 to 42 we would have to give up around 40pts or a 5th rounder. But we also could have taken the chance that Booth falls to 46. None of the teams in between 42 and 46 took a CB. That said I like the Booth pick better then Cine. But if just reverse the order what does it matter. I am going to pretend we picked Booth at 32 and then moved up for Cine to 42. Makes me feel better and it is all about my comfort folks Also, I am not a fan of the Ingram or Asamoah picks for two different reasons.
In the 77 range that I would have targeted would have been the Travis Jones DT- CT. Then Dylan Parhan (G - Memphis)was pick 90 and we had 97 so within range of a move up and giving away very little - IMO.
Draft would have been in order (for me): Booth, Cine, Travis Jones, and Parham....... and a top pick for 2023!!!
Not all trade charts are suggesting that the Vikings lost
the Lions trade. I would agree that most
of the older more established trade value charts do suggest that we lost that
trade, and that most people were disappointed because we’ve internalized those
historical trade charts. That said, some
of the newer trade charts that are more analytically based (which I assume are
more in alignment with Kwesi) state that we won the trade based on point values
in those charts. These charts differ
because they’re based on the expected player performance.
Here is an example of one such trade value chart:
https://overthecap.com/draft-trade-value-chart/
Quote: @medaille said:
@ minny65 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
...
No doubt, value was poor by any chart and majority of fans/media in terms of value. But we might benefit in the long run...might. Again, judge in 3 years blah blah. Most point value charts, actually all, that I looked at indicated that to drop down from 12 is about even with 32 and 34. But I also agree that we should have got more to drop from 12 to a divisional rival. Like Maroon and others have said we should have got the Lions #1 for 2023 instead of either pick 32 or 34. Point wise we might be have been able to get an additional Lions 4th rounder this year which was pick 97. We can all assume that it would probably be a top 10 next year.
So a trade in our favor would have been: Lions get 12
Vikings get 32, next years 1st round, and this years pick 97.
That would have been a very good trade - IMO.
We would be left with: 32,46,77,97
So we take Cine at 32 and lets say we still need to trade to 42 to get Booth. Draft value says to move from 46 to 42 we would have to give up around 40pts or a 5th rounder. But we also could have taken the chance that Booth falls to 46. None of the teams in between 42 and 46 took a CB. That said I like the Booth pick better then Cine. But if just reverse the order what does it matter. I am going to pretend we picked Booth at 32 and then moved up for Cine to 42. Makes me feel better and it is all about my comfort folks Also, I am not a fan of the Ingram or Asamoah picks for two different reasons.
In the 77 range that I would have targeted would have been the Travis Jones DT- CT. Then Dylan Parhan (G - Memphis)was pick 90 and we had 97 so within range of a move up and giving away very little - IMO.
Draft would have been in order (for me): Booth, Cine, Travis Jones, and Parham....... and a top pick for 2023!!!
Not all trade charts are suggesting that the Vikings lost
the Lions trade. I would agree that most
of the older more established trade value charts do suggest that we lost that
trade, and that most people were disappointed because we’ve internalized those
historical trade charts. That said, some
of the newer trade charts that are more analytically based (which I assume are
more in alignment with Kwesi) state that we won the trade based on point values
in those charts. These charts differ
because they’re based on the expected player performance.
Here is an example of one such trade value chart:
https://overthecap.com/draft-trade-value-chart/
Ok, the vast majority, my bad
Quote: @medaille said:
@ minny65 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
...
No doubt, value was poor by any chart and majority of fans/media in terms of value. But we might benefit in the long run...might. Again, judge in 3 years blah blah. Most point value charts, actually all, that I looked at indicated that to drop down from 12 is about even with 32 and 34. But I also agree that we should have got more to drop from 12 to a divisional rival. Like Maroon and others have said we should have got the Lions #1 for 2023 instead of either pick 32 or 34. Point wise we might be have been able to get an additional Lions 4th rounder this year which was pick 97. We can all assume that it would probably be a top 10 next year.
So a trade in our favor would have been: Lions get 12
Vikings get 32, next years 1st round, and this years pick 97.
That would have been a very good trade - IMO.
We would be left with: 32,46,77,97
So we take Cine at 32 and lets say we still need to trade to 42 to get Booth. Draft value says to move from 46 to 42 we would have to give up around 40pts or a 5th rounder. But we also could have taken the chance that Booth falls to 46. None of the teams in between 42 and 46 took a CB. That said I like the Booth pick better then Cine. But if just reverse the order what does it matter. I am going to pretend we picked Booth at 32 and then moved up for Cine to 42. Makes me feel better and it is all about my comfort folks Also, I am not a fan of the Ingram or Asamoah picks for two different reasons.
In the 77 range that I would have targeted would have been the Travis Jones DT- CT. Then Dylan Parhan (G - Memphis)was pick 90 and we had 97 so within range of a move up and giving away very little - IMO.
Draft would have been in order (for me): Booth, Cine, Travis Jones, and Parham....... and a top pick for 2023!!!
Not all trade charts are suggesting that the Vikings lost
the Lions trade. I would agree that most
of the older more established trade value charts do suggest that we lost that
trade, and that most people were disappointed because we’ve internalized those
historical trade charts. That said, some
of the newer trade charts that are more analytically based (which I assume are
more in alignment with Kwesi) state that we won the trade based on point values
in those charts. These charts differ
because they’re based on the expected player performance.
Here is an example of one such trade value chart:
https://overthecap.com/draft-trade-value-chart/
And can we all admit that it was not a "good" trade at least, right? Even without any chart. Just looking for a baseline but actually I think about 80% have already agreed to that. You can find anyone/chart indicating what you want.
Despite the trade, he improved the team overall. I'm ok with what he did. He will be judged by fans for how well the players our opponents took pan out. But I like what he is doing so far in free agency and draft. Hopefully he learns from his mistakes. Remember, Rick had a bit of a learning curve and improved over time.
I will wait to see how this turns out before jumping ship.
I really like what KAM did. He likely thought what I did (from a laymens view obvi). that this draft was weak at the top. There was no JJ sitting at 18, or even at 12 for that matter. There were alot of flawed picks at the top of this draft, either injury or limitations. I wasnt getting excited for Jameson Williams or a 2 down tackle like Davis or a nickel corner like the WA kid.
He did what someone that studies value trends and targeted that part of the draft. I was surprised he moved off 34 as that seemed to be the point of the first trade. But his move up for Booth was awesome and warranted.
The value of a dollar changes constantly. Why would the value of draft picks be set in stone. There was one QB taken on the first round and the 2nd dropped to what 80 something, The pick only has value of what is available at the time. A team is not giving as much for an injured wide reciever as a promising QB.Detroit did not have to take a wr at that pick if they did not feel comfortable with the value. They could have moved on to someone else with their pick.Value is only what somene will give you. If the pick had so much value some team would have offered it
Quote: @ap88ap28 said:
The value of a dollar changes constantly. Why would the value of draft picks be set in stone. There was one QB taken on the first round and the 2nd dropped to what 80 something, The pick only has value of what is available at the time. A team is not giving as much for an injured wide reciever as a promising QB.Detroit did not have to take a wr at that pick if they did not feel comfortable with the value. They could have moved on to someone else with their pick.Value is only what somene will give you. If the pick had so much value some team would have offered it
The Lions were in love with Jameson Williams and wanted to move up for him. Go read their GM's comments after they drafted him... they obviously valued him highly.
The problem was Kwesi undervalued our pick at 12 IMO. The Vikings didn't seem to hold Williams in the same regard as other players they liked. He forgot the other half of the trade and that is if someone really wants to move up, you better make sure to get a good deal.
By any charts out there, the Vikings received a "fair" deal (analytics chart, which I heard we won by 10%) or lost the deal if you are using recent draft precedent and older charts.
That's where I have my biggest gripe with the trade... Sure this draft may be "weaker" at the top than other drafts... but that was mainly because there were no top tier QB prospects. We were still picking top 12 and there were a couple blue chip guys (including Jameson) left at our pick. Kwesi undervalued our pick in the trade back, plain and simple. We could have gotten more value for trading out of the couple blue chip guys left.
Quote: @Wetlander said:
@ ap88ap28 said:
The value of a dollar changes constantly. Why would the value of draft picks be set in stone. There was one QB taken on the first round and the 2nd dropped to what 80 something, The pick only has value of what is available at the time. A team is not giving as much for an injured wide reciever as a promising QB.Detroit did not have to take a wr at that pick if they did not feel comfortable with the value. They could have moved on to someone else with their pick.Value is only what somene will give you. If the pick had so much value some team would have offered it
The Lions were in love with Jameson Williams and wanted to move up for him. Go read their GM's comments after they drafted him... they obviously valued him highly.
The problem was Kwesi undervalued our pick at 12 IMO. The Vikings didn't seem to hold Williams in the same regard as other players they liked. He forgot the other half of the trade and that is if someone really wants to move up, you better make sure to get a good deal.
By any charts out there, the Vikings received a "fair" deal (analytics chart, which I heard we won by 10%) or lost the deal if you are using recent draft precedent and older charts.
That's where I have my biggest gripe with the trade... Sure this draft may be "weaker" at the top than other drafts... but that was mainly because there were no top tier QB prospects. We were still picking top 12 and there were a couple blue chip guys (including Jameson) left at our pick. Kwesi undervalued our pick in the trade back, plain and simple. We could have gotten more value for trading out of the couple blue chip guys left.
Agree. I think the different approaches to the trade indicate how each team views itself.
Vikings see themselves as a team ready to compete for a championship right now. They wouldn't have a lot of use for a WR who won't play until mid to late year. I think Detroit is targeting a specific year to compete and it sure as hell isn't this year. I'd say it's 2023, but they need a QB. So probably 2024 if they draft one next year. Williams is a good pick for them given that timeframe.
|
