I think it does match up. If draft history showed that we could get a quality replacement for Matt Moore in rounds 4 to 7, I would decrease my value of a 3rd pick for Moore.So, following that logic, we shouldn't really value 4th/5th/6th/7th round picks, is that correct?
I'm confused by your post. Your start off saying that a GM should not deviate from his evaluation of a player... but then you go on to explain that your reasoning is more along the lines of "players drafted in the later rounds don't pan out"
The question you ask in the first sentence does not match up with your reasoning. I'm not mocking, just hoping to understand your argument more.
All I'm saying is that - to me - Moore is worth more than a 4th round pick because it is highly unlikely we will draft a playmaker and/or a player in the 4th, 5th, 6th or 7th round which would give us more value than this veteran backup QB. In the 3rd round it is possible we might find a potential replacement or an impact player which is as good as Moore. I am not saying we shouldn't value picks from rounds 4 to 7 at all. But Matt Moore is worth more than that.