Who would you pick: Will Blackmon at #5 or Mike Wallace

[cuzinvinny]

Stay at 8 and pick Michael Floyd

 

[DolfanDuBbZ~]

Philbin doesn't pick the players, Ireland does.

Brandon Marshal would like to object on your statement, and say BULL****! If you don't think Philbin has influence over what is going on, then you have no clue. :thanks:

 

[DcRy82]

Drop back and take Hill. Hopefully Richardson is sitting there when we pick to coax somebody to trade up with us. (Bengals at 17)

 

[LarryFinFan]

Just looking at the obvious things here, but

a) Philbin's history has been to find/develop WRs that were not stud, 1st round guys.
b) His history also suggests that trading for high priced/high compensation WRs is not in his DNA.
c) Blackmon probably belongs in the top 5, but trading up for anything other than QB just isn't prudent for us.
d) WR is a need, but not the greatest need at this point.
e) As good as he might be, he can't play QB.
f) If we acquire a QB (Flynn, Manning) in FA, we won't be able to afford Wallace's salary under the cap.

These are just a few of the things on the top of my head, but lets see where we are with the rest of the team before we start talking about trades in the draft...who knows, we may not need a Blackmon by that time ?? Ok, that's kinda weak, but it's possible...

 

[NYinBostonFin]

Just looking at the obvious things here, but

a) Philbin's history has been to find/develop WRs that were not stud, 1st round guys.
b) His history also suggests that trading for high priced/high compensation WRs is not in his DNA.
c) Blackmon probably belongs in the top 5, but trading up for anything other than QB just isn't prudent for us.
d) WR is a need, but not the greatest need at this point.
e) As good as he might be, he can't play QB.
f) If we acquire a QB (Flynn, Manning) in FA, we won't be able to afford Wallace's salary under the cap.

These are just a few of the things on the top of my head, but lets see where we are with the rest of the team before we start talking about trades in the draft...who knows, we may not need a Blackmon by that time ?? Ok, that's kinda weak, but it's possible...

People keep saying Philbin doesn't need a true #1 WR.....but how come he had a #1 with Jennings, with a great supporting WR cast (much better than what we have) including a monster at TE?

 

[theguy]

I'm not sure why people think moving up 3 spots is going to cost a "fortune". Most teams have the draft picks numerically valued like this chart:

http://www.draftcountdown.com/features/Value-Chart.php

I'm not aware of any missing draft picks we've traded away so it works out numerically to swap 1st's and give them our 3rd and 4th this year. Since we gained two 3rd's from the Marshall trade, we're really just missing a 4th this year. We'll also have an additional 3rd next year. If Blackmon is anywhere near as good as Marshall, we would have cut our #1 WR's salary in half and turned this year's 4th pick into next years 3rd pick. Doesn't sound too terrible. Of course, we would need Blackmon to fit the bill because that's the crux of this hypothetical talk.

Moving to the top 3 picks would be cost prohibitive. This isn't a trade that needs to be done before the draft so we can just wait and see if the vikings take him with the 3rd pick. If they do, oh well, plan B. If they don't, think about trading up in front of the rams.

Trading down for Wallace sounds a bit scary. You would have to squeeze the rest of our salary cap space and make a sizable offer to out bid the Steelers efforts to retain him. We would also want to trade down as far as possible to get the best value in giving up a low first rounder for Wallace. This would in turn give us more draft picks. If we're spending all of our money trying to sign Wallace, we won't have money to sign the 10-12 guys we're trying to draft in trading down.

 

[DolfanDuBbZ~]

I'm not sure why people think moving up 3 spots is going to cost a "fortune". Most teams have the draft picks numerically valued like this chart:

http://www.draftcountdown.com/features/Value-Chart.php

I'm not aware of any missing draft picks we've traded away so it works out numerically to swap 1st's and give them our 3rd and 4th this year. Since we gained two 3rd's from the Marshall trade, we're really just missing a 4th this year. We'll also have an additional 3rd next year. If Blackmon is anywhere near as good as Marshall, we would have cut our #1 WR's salary in half and turned this year's 4th pick into next years 3rd pick. Doesn't sound too terrible. Of course, we would need Blackmon to fit the bill because that's the crux of this hypothetical talk.

Moving to the top 3 picks would be cost prohibitive. This isn't a trade that needs to be done before the draft so we can just wait and see if the vikings take him with the 3rd pick. If they do, oh well, plan B. If they don't, think about trading up in front of the rams.

Trading down for Wallace sounds a bit scary. You would have to squeeze the rest of our salary cap space and make a sizable offer to out bid the Steelers efforts to retain him. We would also want to trade down as far as possible to get the best value in giving up a low first rounder for Wallace. This would in turn give us more draft picks. If we're spending all of our money trying to sign Wallace, we won't have money to sign the 10-12 guys we're trying to draft in trading down.

That chart and your write up go out the window. With the RAMS getting a ransom for the #2 pick, you start there. 3 x 1st round picks.

 

[theguy]

That chart and your write up go out the window. With the RAMS getting a ransom for the #2 pick, you start there. 3 x 1st round picks.

I did say moving to a top 3 pick would be cost prohibitive. That's why we avoid moving to the vikings spot. There's a premium on trying to acquire a top 3 pick. The chart shows an exponential decline in draft value which makes sense and adheres to the premium that the skins paid to move to the 2nd overall pick. For the skins to swap their 6th pick and the rams 2nd pick, they would have to make up about 1000 points in value. If you're in the top 1/3 of the league (possible playoff team), you would need to give up two 1sts to make up the difference (future picks have lower value for their uncertainty in both draft position and talent in the future drafts). So the Skins overpaid a premium by a 2nd rounder.

Some teams will value their picks more and attach a higher draft value, but that does not shift the values of the entire draft. Draft value is also not linear. We might have to pay a slight premium to move from 8th to 5th, but that depends on the bucs situation. If they're looking for more draft picks and aren't in love with anyone on the board at 5, why not slide 3 spots to pick up two additional picks in the same year?

BTW, this isn't some magical chart I made up. This chart is referenced all over the interwebs by football analysts and espn citing that this is the chart the pros use. To give a recent example, everyone's favorite Tim Tebow was selected with the 25th overall pick in 2010 worth 720 points. Denver gave away their 43rd, 70th, and 114th picks totally 776 points of value.

 

[DKphin]

Will Blackmon "Tadpole", why would we go after him. He was drafted by the GB Packers in 2002 in the 4th rd. I do not think he made it after the 3rd year. Now if you are talking about Justin Blackmon, this thread makes a little more sense. Sorry, I had to do it.