Did Grier Make the Right Choice Trading from 12 to 6?

[Padfoot]

Considering how quickly the Eagles deal happened, I think it's obvious that the Phins wouldn't have moved out of #3 if they didn't already have that deal in place to go back up. So I don't think staying at #12 was ever an option.

But for the sake of argument, if you wanted one of the top 4 receivers, then yes it was absolutely the right choice. The Eagles, Lions, Panthers, and Giants were all potential landing spots for the last two receivers once Pitts and Chase were off the board. Staying at 12 nearly guarantees you miss out. You can't look at the picks now and say, "oh look, the Lions and Panthers didn't go receiver, so the Phins could've just traded up over the Giants." The Lions and Panthers COULD have taken a receiver at their spots. Grier can't know what their boards looked like.

Even with the hindsight of how to board fell, you can't assume it would've gone the same way if the Phins stayed at #12. Maybe the Lions or Panthers had Waddle graded higher than Sewell or Horn, and so if the Eagles take Smith at #6, maybe one of them takes Waddle. Or maybe if the Rodgers news doesn't break, the Broncos take a QB. Then the Cowboys don't want to trade out because they get their target in Surtain. Then the Giants take the last receiver right in front of us.

The only guarantee going in was that the top three picks were QBs. So if you wanted one of the top four receivers, you needed to be at #6 or #7 to guarantee one of them.

 

[gerblack]

For the sake of discussion was moving up the right decision? Obviously, Grier was right about those playmakers going quickly. None of the top receivers made it out of the top 10.

Who would have been available at #12? I assume the Eagles would have drafted Waddle or Smith at 6. Dallas likely takes Parsons at 10 instead of 12.

I love the Waddle pick. Miami desperately needed a playmaker on offense. He did cost two #1's, though.

The right move? Worth the price?

He didn't cost 1's he came with an extra one in 2023. Miami always wanted to stay close enough to take him and knew that 6 was right about where it was so I think people keep assigning the cost of moving to the wrong spot.

 

[AdamD13]

It is what it is.

 

[Durango2020]

Dolphins put themselves at 6 to allow for leverage. If you stay at 12 you may not even get 1 of the 4 receivers, so it was a good strategy to move up.
At 6 anything can happen and in a worst case scenario you at least have the option of selecting the best of the 2 remaining receivers which they did.
Apparently Dolphins valued Waddle more than Chase, but not sure how factual that is.

Giving up a first was the price and it seems to have worked out for them as they did want Waddle. Unless you have a crystal ball you really cannot tell what will happen during the draft so you have to position to be able to make the best move rather for things to fall to you.

 

[fin111]

For the sake of discussion was moving up the right decision? Obviously, Grier was right about those playmakers going quickly. None of the top receivers made it out of the top 10.

Who would have been available at #12? I assume the Eagles would have drafted Waddle or Smith at 6. Dallas likely takes Parsons at 10 instead of 12.

I love the Waddle pick. Miami desperately needed a playmaker on offense. He did cost two #1's, though.

The right move? Worth the price?

no flatly. the clear move was to stay at 3 and get THE PLAYER that is a top 10 nfl player for a decade. pitts is predicted to be that. chase is given a chance to be a top 20 (hes being called the best recover to come out since 2011 and julio jones).

having a very late pick 1st round pick 2 years from now does not make up for losing out on pitts or losing out on chase.
i feel the way most experts do: miami thought they would get one of these 2 at 6. they were wrong. you build the strongest team, not get lost in the draft picks game like belichick does.

now is waddle good. yes. by all accounts he could be as good or better than tyreek hill. his breaks are awesome. and no one will catch him. if he stays healthy he should be a very good player.

you dont draft 3rd very often. not with flores as the coach. i think qb would have been the wisest pick with a pick that valuable at 3. 2 shots at one franchise qb. if not a qb, you take the player who makes you most dominant for a decade. that is pitts. that is chase i think too. waddle doesnt make you as good as you are with one of them. and what we have left in compensation after trading back up does not make the difference.

 

[fin111]

Coming out of this draft without getting one of Pitts, Chase,
Smith, or Waddle would have been disastrous. So, picking up an extra first rounder, while still getting Waddle has to be termed a success.

How much of a success won‘t be clear until we see how Pitts, Chase, and Waddle develop.

for all practical purposes it''s basically an early 2nd round pick in 2 years (sf had a massive amount of injuries last year. with shannahan and 2 even jimmy g level qbs hell likely at least be in the nfc championship. if lance hits his ceiling sb contenders).

 

[Awsi Dooger]

No. We could have done what Philly ended up doing and moving up a couple of spots to land Smith. Grier in his post day 1 PC said they had 4 players they were comfortable with at 1a, highly likely they were the four blue chip pass catchers. We ended up the whole thing with a net gain of a likely low 1st in two years time. NYG went from 11 to 20, got a 1st next year and a 4th rounder, for the swap of first and a 5th rounder. So in essence they got better compensation than we currently have from moving out of one of the most valuable spots in recent draft history. I wouldn't have done either of these trades, certainly not a month away from the draft, staying put and having our pick of the 4 we were targeting.

I would have held at 3, for all the reasons you mentioned. It was beyond sickening when somehow we got schooled in draft value by Dave Gettleman. The 49ers raved about the value of that full month to figure everything out. Meanwhile we could have taken advantage of a full month of other teams nervously craving a quarterback, or several. Who knew it would turn out to be Trey Lance? But that's the point I made when the trades happened: There were so many quarterbacks it was almost guaranteed to work out in Miami's favor.

Grier's net return was miserable, given the leverage we owned. Who cares if not many understand that? The same thing shows up in future book odds when Dolphin fans here and elsewhere are salivating to take ripoff odds.

Besides, it is immensely satisfying to sit back and allow panic buying to play out in your favor. eBay is not much of a seller's market anymore but 20 years ago during Tiger Woods' heyday it was awesome to sell golf clubs starting at 1 cent opening bid and have it sit at next to nothing for a full week, until the awesome flurry in the final minutes and especially seconds. You end up with far beyond your projection. Often I'd sell used clubs and get more than the price of the same club when new. Numerous buyers eye the auction all week at the bargain basement rate, then since they've invested so much time watching they feel compelled to invest, and then the competitive juices kick in and they end up spending far beyond intention.

That's the way this stuff works. I always prioritize situational influence. But you need the stomach for it. Grier had to be willing to get stuck. My dad never had that makeup. He'd list the same type of golf clubs ands start panicking if the bid didn't jump to the moon in the opening hour of a 7-day auction.

 

[fin111]

No. We could have done what Philly ended up doing and moving up a couple of spots to land Smith. Grier in his post day 1 PC said they had 4 players they were comfortable with at 1a, highly likely they were the four blue chip pass catchers. We ended up the whole thing with a net gain of a likely low 1st in two years time. NYG went from 11 to 20, got a 1st next year and a 4th rounder, for the swap of first and a 5th rounder. So in essence they got better compensation than we currently have from moving out of one of the most valuable spots in recent draft history. I wouldn't have done either of these trades, certainly not a month away from the draft, staying put and having our pick of the 4 we were targeting.

A lot rides on the success of a player who started 9 games in college, 5'9" slot receiver who was down the depth chart for much of his time at Bama. I hope they got it right, we'll have to wait and see, one thing I am pretty sure of though is of the 4 top pass catchers he's the one I think may need more time to transition to a NFL ready receiver than the others, he may in the end have the highest ceiling though.

hey geordie, i agree on your first paragraph points. and i have enjoyed reading your posts since i joined a few days ago. peace

 

[fin111]

I have no problem with the moves. It seems we got the #2 player on the FINS list(?) and we still have a #1 & a #3 in our pocket for next year. However, as it's been stated above, we really won't know until a year or 3 down the line,

the third is next year but will be very ate 3rd so like an early 4th. the very late first rounder will be in 2 years. :)

 

[fin111]

I would have held at 3, for all the reasons you mentioned. It was beyond sickening when somehow we got schooled in draft value by Dave Gettleman. The 49ers raved about the value of that full month to figure everything out. Meanwhile we could have taken advantage of a full month of other teams nervously craving a quarterback, or several. Who knew it would turn out to be Trey Lance? But that's the point I made when the trades happened: There were so many quarterbacks it was almost guaranteed to work out in Miami's favor.

Grier's net return was miserable, given the leverage we owned. Who cares if not many understand that? The same thing shows up in future book odds when Dolphin fans here and elsewhere are salivating to take ripoff odds.

Besides, it is immensely satisfying to sit back and allow panic buying to play out in your favor. eBay is not much of a seller's market anymore but 20 years ago during Tiger Woods' heyday it was awesome to sell golf clubs starting at 1 cent opening bid and have it sit at next to nothing for a full week, until the awesome flurry in the final minutes and especially seconds. You end up with far beyond your projection. Often I'd sell used clubs and get more than the price of the same club when new. Numerous buyers eye the auction all week at the bargain basement rate, then since they've invested so much time watching they feel compelled to invest, and then the competitive juices kick in and they end up spending far beyond intention.

That's the way this stuff works. I always prioritize situational influence. But you need the stomach for it. Grier had to be willing to get stuck. My dad never had that makeup. He'd list the same type of golf clubs ands start panicking if the bid didn't jump to the moon in the opening hour of a 7-day auction.

agree the compensation was light and the timing not helpful for maximizing picks, except i wouldnt call making the third pick with pitts and chase on the board getting stuck. in fact i think with players who are projected to be the best in the nfl for years to come, making the pick is more impactful than acquiring future picks.

 

[fin111]

This is how it should be viewed, IMO. Yeah, it was he right move if you wanted one of the top 4 offensive playmakers guaranteed while still adding a future first. It’s really as simple as that.

The 12th pick was merely the means to an end, which was to stay within range of one of those top pass catchers and still getting more picks in return.

And if what Grier/Flores say is true that Waddle was who they were targeting all along, then it turned out exactly how they planned.

agree teh 12 was a means to an end. re believing who the target was, i dont believe in santa cause it's in someone's interest to get me to believe it.

 

[fin111]

TBD by how important or not important that 2023 is.
If Tua fails to be what we him to be, then that pick could be solid gold.

IMO, If Tua looks good in 2021, then we could package the 2023 first to move up for someone in 2022 and we dont care if it's not as potent as a 2022 first.
A 2023 first is prolly worth a 2022 2nd in the 2022 draft. We're asking a team to appreciate it like an annuity.
If we're able to hoard it until 2023, then it has its actual 1st Round value.
Honestly, if Tua falls apart then my plan in 2022 is to get the best FA QB we can afford, and hopefully we manage the cap with all this in mind. That's where the Iggy pick shines like a diamond. A CB's gotta go to make that cap space.
I digress.

That 2023 pick is why we dont have Pitts or Chase right now, and that sacrifice will either be gold or fools gold.
TBD.

i think you are forgetting it's sf' pick. you are not likely to get an élite qb at 29-32

 

[fin111]

Man, I think Grier could sell you sand in the desert.
No Fkn Way did Miami Actually view Waddle over Pitts or Chase. They viewed Waddle and a future first round pick over Pitts and Chase, and the jury is out on how smart that actually was.

exactly! and this jury member already voted :)

 

[fin111]

He gambled to get Pitts or Chase. He lost. Should have taken Pitts at 3.

we're sharing a brain... :) of course all the nfl insiders knew had this info too.

 

[EJay]

Interesting. It's definitely different when you consider it as one trade, rather than two.

But Miami could have had Smith and an additional #1 pick next year with a trade like Philly/Dallas.

It's always unfair to judge things like this via hindsight. I mean, if any of these GM's knew when a player was going to come off the board -- they'd all make better decisions, right?

For example, let's assume MIA was hoping to land Javonte Williams at 36. They couldn't know that DEN was going to trade ahead of them.
Conversely, let's assume MIA had no interest in taking Javonte Williams at 36. The Broncos couldn't know that for sure. But they surrendered some assets they might not have needed to.

Considering Grier-Flores goals and, again, not knowing ahead of time what any of the other 31 org's were going to do or not do, I believe they made the appropriate moves to ensure they achieved their goal.

What they didn't have was the convenience of choosing from different scenarios out of hindsight.

As someone that championed hard for Devonta Smith -- I like the idea of MIA taking advantage of the deal NYG got from PHI. However I can't criticize Grier-Flores for not knowing how that would eventually play out. Because there was no way to know.

And I'm happy with Waddle.