A second look at lions trade
basically the author says it was Williams and Paschal for Cine, Booth, Ingram and Asamoah
I don't think the national media slammed the Vikings organization quite as hard as local fans (not that vikingsterritory.com is anything but fandom) over that trade. Yes, the team got dinged a little but it wasn't the 'KAM got prison raped over this trade!' type anger.
@"Bullazin" said: https://vikingsterritory.com/2022/nfl-draft-2022/vikings-gms-trade-with-lions-tapped-as-one-of-best-moves-in-draftbasically the author says it was Williams and Paschal for Cine, Booth, Ingram and Asamoah
Well...when you put it that way.... :-)
You can make any transaction work in your favor by seeing it through a different lens. It's going to look real good for the Vikings in '22 when Cine is starting at safety and Williams is on that almost season-long "is he going to play this week?" watch. But '23 will be a different story.
Still, the Vikings should've gotten more in the trade down. Who moves all the way from 32 to 12 and somehow still gets that team's 2nd rounder?
When I first saw the trade (didn't get to watch draft, just checked in with my phone) and we dropped back to 32 and were getting a 2 & 3, I thought we must be getting a 2023 1st as well. Nope. Then I saw we were also giving them our 2. I couldn't believe it. IMO it was a bad trade value-wise. I think we did more with our picks than the Lions and probably will turn out better than them, but the value return was poor.
@"PurplePastor" said: ...... but the value return was poor.Yep. Don't think anyone is denying that. Hopefully KAM will learn from that. But its still about the players chosen and how they'll pan out.
@"MaroonBells" said:@"Bullazin" said: https://vikingsterritory.com/2022/nfl-draft-2022/vikings-gms-trade-with-lions-tapped-as-one-of-best-moves-in-draftbasically the author says it was Williams and Paschal for Cine, Booth, Ingram and Asamoah
Well...when you put it that way.... :-)You can make any transaction work in your favor by seeing it through a different lens. It's going to look real good for the Vikings in '22 when Cine is starting at safety and Williams is on that almost season-long "is he going to play this week?" watch. But '23 will be a different story.
Still, the Vikings should've gotten more in the trade down. Who moves all the way from 32 to 12 and somehow still gets that team's 2nd rounder?
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!!!
@"PurplePastor" said: When I first saw the trade (didn't get to watch draft, just checked in with my phone) and we dropped back to 32 and were getting a 2 & 3, I thought we must be getting a 2023 1st as well. Nope. Then I saw we were also giving them our 2. I couldn't believe it. IMO it was a bad trade value-wise. I think we did more with our picks than the Lions and probably will turn out better than them, but the value return was poor.Kinda like when the Vikings traded all those players for Herschel Walker - and the next day we found out it was draft picks too
Ok, literally not that bad; but it was that same kinda bad twist in your stomach.
I suspect that once Sauce, Stingley, and Wilson were gone, KAM needed to find a trade partner. He says he really liked Williams and was thinking of taking him, but that's probably not true. What's he going to say? There is nothing to be gained by saying he did not think Williams was worth a 12. So if he does not make the trade, he is left taking a player he does not want at 12 (Hamilton?) and the Lions make the same trade for 13 or 14 and still get Williams.
Same thing happened with the GB trade. GB wanted Watson. KAM did not. Either he makes the trade with GB or GB makes the same trade at the next spot.
In other words, the only way KAM could prevent the Lions or GB from getting Williams and Watson was to take them himself ad he did not want that.
@"dadevike" said: I suspect that once Sauce, Stingley, and Wilson were gone, KAM needed to find a trade partner. He says he really liked Williams and was thinking of taking him, but that's probably not true. What's he going to say? There is nothing to be gained by saying he did not think Williams was worth a 12. So if he does not make the trade, he is left taking a player he does not want at 12 (Hamilton?) and the Lions make the same trade for 13 or 14 and still get Williams. Same thing happened with the GB trade. GB wanted Watson. KAM did not. Either he makes the trade with GB or GB makes the same trade at the next spot. In other words, the only way KAM could prevent the Lions or GB from getting Williams and Watson was to take them himself ad he did not want that.I agree with you on the GB deal but I doubt the Lions could have gotten Williams if we didn't make that deal. Almost certainly not for the same package. The Texans were slated to pick at 13 but moved down 2 spots to 15. Eagles jumped up to take Jordan Davis at 13. Convincing the Texans to move all the way down to 32 would have been tricky. Baltimore took Hamilton at 14 and wasn't moving. Then WRs went at 16 and 18.
The point is they might have been able to get Williams but there were only a couple other teams who may have done it and I'm not sure any of them wanted to drop all the way back to 32. We'll never know.
I agree with whoever said it above-- hopefully KAM learns his lesson on this and tries to get better value for any trade downs in the future. He did a great job on that with the GB trade.
@"dadevike" said: I suspect that once Sauce, Stingley, and Wilson were gone, KAM needed to find a trade partner. He says he really liked Williams and was thinking of taking him, but that's probably not true. What's he going to say? There is nothing to be gained by saying he did not think Williams was worth a 12. So if he does not make the trade, he is left taking a player he does not want at 12 (Hamilton?) and the Lions make the same trade for 13 or 14 and still get Williams. Same thing happened with the GB trade. GB wanted Watson. KAM did not. Either he makes the trade with GB or GB makes the same trade at the next spot. In other words, the only way KAM could prevent the Lions or GB from getting Williams and Watson was to take them himself ad he did not want that.The Lions trade was a loss in value. We should have got more or given less. The Packers trade was a gain in value and a good trade - IMO
Second look at the Lions trade? The first time was bad enough...
@"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 :)
@"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/
@"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 :)
@"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
@"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 itThe 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.
@"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.
@"pattersaur" said:@"dadevike" said: I suspect that once Sauce, Stingley, and Wilson were gone, KAM needed to find a trade partner. He says he really liked Williams and was thinking of taking him, but that's probably not true. What's he going to say? There is nothing to be gained by saying he did not think Williams was worth a 12. So if he does not make the trade, he is left taking a player he does not want at 12 (Hamilton?) and the Lions make the same trade for 13 or 14 and still get Williams. Same thing happened with the GB trade. GB wanted Watson. KAM did not. Either he makes the trade with GB or GB makes the same trade at the next spot. In other words, the only way KAM could prevent the Lions or GB from getting Williams and Watson was to take them himself ad he did not want that. I agree with you on the GB deal but I doubt the Lions could have gotten Williams if we didn't make that deal. Almost certainly not for the same package. The Texans were slated to pick at 13 but moved down 2 spots to 15. Eagles jumped up to take Jordan Davis at 13. Convincing the Texans to move all the way down to 32 would have been tricky. Baltimore took Hamilton at 14 and wasn't moving. Then WRs went at 16 and 18.The point is they might have been able to get Williams but there were only a couple other teams who may have done it and I'm not sure any of them wanted to drop all the way back to 32. We'll never know.
I agree with whoever said it above-- hopefully KAM learns his lesson on this and tries to get better value for any trade downs in the future. He did a great job on that with the GB trade.
I really have no issues at all with the GB trade - even if it was with a division rival. I did not like the Detroit trade when he made it and I still don't, for the reasons you mentioned. I'm just trying to understand Kwesi's thought process. I just don't think he liked ANY of the remaining players at 12.Kwesi is undoubtedly a smart guy. He knows the trade value charts better than anyone here. He probably knows how fans are going to react when he trades with a division rival and gets less than the popular charts say he should get. (He also knows the trade value charts are just rough guides.) I'm trying to figure a logical process by which he justifies that trade in his mind.
Edit Post (mod action — author will see a notice)
Warn Poster
Suspend User (3 days)
The user will be suspended for 3 days and will receive an email with the reason and information about how to appeal.