Team building theory 2021 edition. | Page 3 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Team building theory 2021 edition.

What do you do with #3 if no trade down available?

  • QB

    Votes: 9 6.6%
  • WR

    Votes: 62 45.3%
  • T

    Votes: 66 48.2%

  • Total voters
    137
Give me the best reciever for a couple of reasons.

1) The gap between Smith/Chase and the next is a drop-off
2) The gap between Sewell and the next talent level is not that huge: Rashawn Slater - NORTHWESTERN, Christian Darrisaw - VIRGINIA TECH, Samuel Cosmi - TEXAS, Alex Leatherwood - ALABAMA
3) Finally taking this season as the example which of the following would has helped us out more? Sewell or a top notch reciever?
I agree with this POV. If Miami feels they've gotten 2/3 of the equation settled with Tua at QB and Jackson at LT, WR then becomes the top priority at #3? Weighting the differences between Chase and Smith will eventually give way to who Miami may select between the two. The issue that must be answered is who separates better to give Tua the room he needs to maximize his skill?

As for pick #18. RT may still be on the table, especially considering how the OL failed from the Denver game on. The pressure allowed from the OL was relentless. Miami needs to figure out, very quickly if they need to continue to address that issue. Do they hold off until day two? Do they move Flowers to the bench? Move Kindley to LG and Hunt to RG and draft a more pass protection applicable RT?

As we all know offensive and defensive units performances can vary from season to season. If Miami feels they can live with what they have on defense, based on the Improvement in 2020, they may decide to attack the offense in the draft at the 3 weakest spots WR, RB and OL? Question becomes, when and where?

All these questions need to be answered. If not, It's back to the drawing board with potentially a completely different set of F/O personnel.

Lastly, never discount the potential of Miami selecting another QB at #3. You just never know, what is going on in their minds, now that they've secured the #3 pick.
 
Warning: This is another one of my TLDR; post.

About this time last year I made a post about positional value in the draft. Things were pretty straightfoward as it pertained to the Fins; they basically needed everything so it was easy to draft for positional value, which they did with their 1st 2 picks. At the top of the draft, value wise, QB >>> LT >> WR, and what do you know, Fins drafted a QB followed by a LT.

Things are going to be murkier this season as they find themselves at the top again with both of the top value positions filled to an extent. The way the NFL is setup makes it very hard for teams to commit to a pure value strategy when it comes to the draft. The free agency being before the draft sets teams up to build a good part of their team through FA, and leave them trying to fill remaining holes through the uncertainty of the draft.

This is mostly to make sure vets are getting taken care of first... This only makes sense so dont expect it to change, but its not ideal for teams trying to build their teams the right way. In other words, NFL GMs would be much more likely to draft exclusively for value if they knew FAs was right around the corner to fill in the gaps.

All that being said, the Fins clear objective this off-season should be to go from bum to one on offense, as they did on D this season. Offense success mainly runs through the QB position, the WRs and the OL, followed by TEs and RBs. I will focus on the #3 pick in this post as its the most interesting one for many reasons, one of which is the Fins can actually pick anyone they want with that pick minest 2 players.

QB

There's no doubt if the Fins find themselves in position to draft a QB in the top 5, this would be the pure value option to make. And its not even close. But when it comes to the overall strategy of building a top 5 offense, it gets complicated.

If the Fins want to optimize the QB position, they need to upgrade the receiving options. To be realistic, they could very well need 2 top notch WRs and a decent slot. The draft isnt the only place to get those players, but the #3 pick gives you a 100% shot at one top notch option and could very well give you 2 of them if you split the value in a trade down.

There's also the fact that the pure value of picking the QB here doesnt translate to simply adding the value of Tua + the value of the drafted QB as only one of them gets to see the majority of the snaps on offense(hopefully). While you do split the risk, you dont necessarily increase upside. Simply put, the loser of the starting job only retains implied value, meaning there's no on fied value of increasing offensive production.

There's no FA move to be made on any QB except for backup(which is beyond the scope of this post) so Im not going to go there.

Tackle

The 2nd option is to bypass QB and draft the Tackle. The difference here is even if the Fins already have a tackle on team, adding the value of Jackson on top of the value of Sewell applies. Both can start on the offensive line and contribute to offensive success. Whether its the optimal way to go to go from bum to one on offense warrants a dicussion. The obvious yay here is that there's no value mistake being made, the obvious nay is that this might not be the optimal route to take in your strategy of building a top offense.

There's no FA move to be made here except for backups, not going there.

WR

This is the most interesting one of the bunch IMO, there are alot of ways to go about it and alot of them are very close calls. These kind of decisions(close value calls) always warrant the most discussion because very often, there's no completely wrong anwser and you get get 50% of people on one side, 50% on the other, going back and forth on it, no one is absolutely right and no one absolutely wrong.

The most straight foward way to go here would be to pick your prefered WR at #3, boom 1/3rd of your problem solved, off to #18. Problem here is you're making a value mistake. In a prefect world, you pick the WR between 7-10, or when the QBs and Tackles are gone. A trade down here would be ideal, to a spot where the WR is your absolute value move. You dont control the trade offers you get, but needless to say you listen.

Best case scenarion is you trade down, get an extra 2nd and pick your player. So the net mistake of picking the WR at #3 is a 2nd round pick(Or whatever you think would be the fair value of trading down)

Or you could try and fill the position in FA. The problem with FA is the higher the value of the position, the bigger the % of your cap is attributed to an overpayment. For example, over paying for a good RB in FA might me a 2-3M/per affair, when overpaying for a WR in FA could be as much as a 6-8M overpayment. These things add up quick, its basically why you want to draft high value positions, instead of overpaying, you're underpaying.

One thing the Fins need to figure out is: Is picking a WR #3, should that be our only option, a bigger loss of value than overpaying for one in FA? Another way to put this, Does it make sense to overpay for a WR in FA so we can avoid making a mistake picking one a #3 if overpaying for one is the bigger mistake? And the problem here is that this decision needs to be made before free agency, before they know what the offers will look like. Its a though spot to be in.

This can be avoided over time by drafting for positional value on a consistent basis... After a while, you're always stocked with young talent at high value positions which makes FA moves easy, you fill in the gaps with the added value from the draft. But every time you start drafting for need, you sacrifice value. Its always a balancing act between what do we want to look like this season and how do we want to run things on a consistant basis. The more you deviate, the more your results vary, and there's no telling if they'll vary towards good or bad.

So what do you do with #3?
Nice breakdow, yeah I take Sewell if I can’t move. Slight trade down to get Smith or Chas, LB at 1B, RB or BPA at 2A,
 
BPA is a cover for GM doesn't want to be responsible.
Just for academic sake, the BPA is a cb....we take him? We luck out with Hou, or else the BPA could very well be Surtain.
Or in 1986, the BPA is a qb, we take him?

Sewell = waste pick

86? Want to try again?
 
I think we will have a good idea which direction Miami will go at #3 by what we do in free agency leading up to the draft.

Even though I like Smith and Chase I don't think that's the direction they will go if we stay at 3. And may be too high to draft either Smith or Chase.

I'm guessing a trade down is first on Grier and Flores list.

If it was me, I would use our available money on JuJu S-S and Will Fuller.. those 2 would definitely shore up the WR core. Both are young, which is what they seem to like in FA's, and would be great additions.

Then, if they aren't sold on Tua they have the option of Fields or Wilson. If they are all in on Tua you can then go Sewell. I would want to have options if i was drafting.

At 1b you can look at RB, a pass rushing end or LBer. We have alot of holes to fill yet.

At 2a, more realistically would be the RB. Harris, Etienne, or Williams .
 
And then you're throwing to guys like Ford and Hollins again next season because you KNOW Parker and Williams and Grant are going to get hurt.
I would take the sure handed, contests for catches and physically dominant Bateman at 18 and Friermuth at 36
 
I think we will have a good idea which direction Miami will go at #3 by what we do in free agency leading up to the draft.

Even though I like Smith and Chase I don't think that's the direction they will go if we stay at 3. And may be too high to draft either Smith or Chase.

I'm guessing a trade down is first on Grier and Flores list.

If it was me, I would use our available money on JuJu S-S and Will Fuller.. those 2 would definitely shore up the WR core. Both are young, which is what they seem to like in FA's, and would be great additions.

Then, if they aren't sold on Tua they have the option of Fields or Wilson. If they are all in on Tua you can then go Sewell. I would want to have options if i was drafting.

At 1b you can look at RB, a pass rushing end or LBer. We have alot of holes to fill yet.

At 2a, more realistically would be the RB. Harris, Etienne, or Williams .
I don’t think JuJu fits in Flo’s locker room. The whole dancing on the logo and “Browns is Browns” make him look selfish and stupid. No thanks.
 
Faulty premises.
What do you mean by no trade down available?

100% available, just depends on your asking pricing.

With Lions or Eagles, take their two this year and third next year, they'll take the deal in a heartbeat. Trade down to get Smith or Chase. With the Hou second, we could get Waddle....then we will have Smith and Waddle next year. Watch out NFL.

I don't like to force to take Sewell. Sewell = waste pick
Waste? LOL

More like gift
 
I don’t think JuJu fits in Flo’s locker room. The whole dancing on the logo and “Browns is Browns” make him look selfish and stupid. No thanks.
I agree there. Maybe he learned a lesson.

He may have also lowered his value. Good for us.

I don't think he's been a bad character guy throughout his carreer, I could be wrong.
 
I'd only draft Sewell if we are 100% confident that we are able to move up from 18 back into the top 10 for Chase/Smith. And Grier doesn't seem that into moving up early in the draft.

I'd have to draft whoever I feel more comfortable taking that high out of Chase and Smith if we were stuck at 3. Not sacrificing the desperate need for an elite talent at WR. We don't need more JAGS. We need an alpha WR1 first and foremost.

Just as many of you are good with the WR options at 18 and beyond, I'm good with the tackle/guard options at 18 and beyond: Slater, Darrisaw, Mayfield, Leatherwood, Davis, Vera-Tucker, etc. Waddle will NOT be there at 18, and leaving this draft with Bateman for example as the top WR added, would be poor based on the position we are in.

Only way I'm taking Sewell at 3 is if we are able to bring in a Chris Godwin type WR. Then, I'd be okay waiting until 18 to take a receiver. But yeah, there's no chance I'm rolling into 2021 with Parker/Williams my starters, and waiting on WR increases those chances.
This
 
WR

This is the most interesting one of the bunch IMO, there are alot of ways to go about it and alot of them are very close calls. These kind of decisions(close value calls) always warrant the most discussion because very often, there's no completely wrong anwser and you get get 50% of people on one side, 50% on the other, going back and forth on it, no one is absolutely right and no one absolutely wrong.
First I want to pat myself on the back, as I write this, the WR poll option sits at exactly 50%... My prediction skills are unprecedented...lol!

On a more serious note, here's what I would do...

I prepare for the event where no trade down is available, in this case Im going for value with Sewell. Use FA to get a 2nd tier WR that provides me with an above average NFL production option. In this case, Im going after Curtis Samuel who fits the SEP profile Tua would thrive with, he's young and wont break the bank.

If a trade down opportunity does pop on draft day, I pounce on it(given its a fair deal obviously) and draft Chase/Smith with the first pcik in the 1st round. This sets up the Fins with Samuel and the best WR in the draft as additions to the WR room.

If I find myself drafting Sewel at #3, WR needs to be a priority beyond the next 3 picks, you dont want to force it but you have to feel confident that you're going to get the right opportunity on at least one of those picks.

Worst case scenario: You've added a top flight T to your OL and you missed on the top flight WR prospects getting one in the 2-3rd round. There's abolutely nothing catastrophic about it, considering you prepared for it in FA.

Best case scenario: You've got yourself a young up and coming WR in FA, added the best receiver in the draft on top of it and still have one 1st round pick plus the rest of the draft. This is absolute baller ****.
 
It's such a great position to be in with a draft that has three quarterbacks expected to go top 10, maybe top 5.

Ultimately, I think to maximize value, Miami's best move is a trade down.

I agree with you on wide receivers. I think the sweet spot for Smith and Chase is around 6 or 7 overall.

Looking at the quarterback needy teams, Carolina could be a perfect trade partner.
I read an article, that I cannot find now, which said that Slater from Northwestern is also a target of Cincinnati so he might push some WRs down the board too. I was a bit skeptical because I thought Cosmi was generally considered the second best OT this draft.
 
Faulty premises.
What do you mean by no trade down available?

100% available, just depends on your asking pricing.

With Lions or Eagles, take their two this year and third next year, they'll take the deal in a heartbeat. Trade down to get Smith or Chase. With the Hou second, we could get Waddle....then we will have Smith and Waddle next year. Watch out NFL.

I don't like to force to take Sewell. Sewell = waste pick
First of all, you can have a hypothetical conversation with any premise you want.

Second, it's hypocritical to state something is a faulty premise, then go with an assumption like 'Smith and Waddle" "look out NFL" like it's a factual statement that they will, unquestionably, be a dynamic duo at the next level.

I guess opinions are fine, unless they are someone elses?
 
Back
Top Bottom