You are vastly underrating Harper, and Jenkins, while not always good, was still a key piece for a few of those years.

And Ingram cannot be compared to 2 picks when we aren't talking about the VALUE of where these guys are taken. You keep putting value in when I'm talking strictly has a guy played a role or not.

So saying Colston, Strief, Graham, etc. have great value is also equally non important in this.

It was never the value I was arguing. It was the fact that guys we have taken early always have a role(hell even Brown though he sucked arse), where as we are below 50% in rounds 3-7 as far as finding guys to contribute. While that is good, it isn't the near automatic most people say it is and it is NOT better than the 1-2 round success despite the lack of picks. That was my original point.

Again, my argument has nothing to do with the value of the picks at all.

And I separated the UDFAs for a reason because we have been very successful there, but we've also had so many complete busts there too(especially on guys people here were creaming their pants over). All the stuff I was talking about was strictly in the draft itself.

This post was edited on 4/13/14 at 1:09 pm

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by blueslover

deeper than deep south

Member since Sep 2007

22792 posts

Posted on 4/13/14 at 1:20 pm to bonethug0108

NFP had a series of articles on this specifically. Here are a couple, more there if ya look-

https://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Which-teams-are-the-most-efficient-in-the-NFL-Draft.html

https://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Boom-or-bust-A-look-at-draft-probabilities.html

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by adono

River Ridge

Member since Sep 2003

7307 posts

Posted on 4/13/14 at 1:24 pm to bonethug0108

quote:
Again, my argument has nothing to do with the value of the picks at all.

Then there's no reason to continue this conversation. I don't know how "success" can be determined without consideration of the cost vs. performance element...that doesn't make sense to me.

We'll agree to disagree!