- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The purse for Chris Olave
Posted on 5/3/22 at 3:42 pm to Vacherie Saint
Posted on 5/3/22 at 3:42 pm to Vacherie Saint
quote:
So you are just going to blatantly ignore the success probabilities associated with higher round picks compared to mid-low round picks?
We traded a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd to move up for Olave.
2
Posted on 5/3/22 at 4:22 pm to SlowFlowPro
dont move the goalposts. I've already said I dont like the Olave deal. You were speaking on general draft philosophy so defend what you said; quantity is always better than quality.
Posted on 5/3/22 at 4:31 pm to SlowFlowPro
He doesn’t think the original trade into the 1st rd should be lumped together with then subsequent trade up to 11 lol
Posted on 5/3/22 at 4:35 pm to Vacherie Saint
quote:
You were speaking on general draft philosophy so defend what you said; quantity is always better than quality.
That's a straw man.
quote:
And the data doesn't say never trade up, just that you should trade up for QBs and superstar talents (which means top 7-ish at worst).
But otherwise, the whole thing is understanding teams aren't great at drafting. More picks gives you more bites at the apple, which is how you find those +EV scenarios.
The Saints feel that they are the outliers who can identify talent at a level that is a full deviation above all the other teams in the NFL.
Again: we traded a 1st, 2nd, and 2, 3rds (in terms of "early" picks) to move up. We didn't pick at an elite talent slot and paid like we were acquiring an elite QB.
Like Les says in OP, Olave has to be an all pro to justify that cost. If he's even just good, it's a terrible deal.
Posted on 5/3/22 at 4:37 pm to SlowFlowPro
They traded a 1st?
They swapped firsts.
They swapped firsts.
Posted on 5/3/22 at 4:52 pm to Chalkywhite84
quote:
They traded a 1st?
Where is our 2023 1st? Not with Nola
Posted on 5/3/22 at 6:28 pm to SlowFlowPro
Why are you debating me about an Olave move I don’t support? I don’t support it even when you take away the Philly trade you stuck in there which really has nothing to do with Olave.
Indeed
quote:
That's a straw man.
Indeed
Posted on 5/3/22 at 11:26 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Where is our 2023 1st? Not with Nola
They got back the 2022 first. That was a swap.
Posted on 5/3/22 at 11:52 pm to Chalkywhite84
quote:
They got back the 2022 first. That was a swap.
I argued this with another poster, the trade still cost us a first. If they traded our second this year along with our 2nd , 3rd and 4th next year to jump to the first round instead, then it would not have cost us a first. The trade still cost us a first round pick any which way you spin it.
This post was edited on 5/3/22 at 11:53 pm
Posted on 5/4/22 at 6:55 am to Townedrunkard
quote:
The trade still cost us a first round pick any which way you spin it.
They really want to make it sound not as bad. At least with the Davenport draft trade, the issue was saying how the actual pick was a cost (ie, it cost us 2, 1sts). Now they are pushing even that back to where Olave cost us nothing, essentially. We don't count the 1st used to pick him or the 2023 1st used to get 16 originally.
Posted on 5/4/22 at 7:16 am to SlowFlowPro
I can't math but in giving up next year's first they then received an extra first they never had to begin with this year.
I'm sorry, but I still consider that a swap of first rounders, regardless of the year. The Saints were able to select two first rounders this year and I am cool with that. I almost hope Payton returns to coaching, so the Saints can get some extra picks for him.
As far as the purse for Olave, perhaps the price was worth it for multiple reasons. Seems like getting Olave has made Michael Thomas incredibly happy. He seems more motivated than ever to play for New Orleans. At least I am hoping this is the case. He is already working with Olave.
I'm sorry, but I still consider that a swap of first rounders, regardless of the year. The Saints were able to select two first rounders this year and I am cool with that. I almost hope Payton returns to coaching, so the Saints can get some extra picks for him.
As far as the purse for Olave, perhaps the price was worth it for multiple reasons. Seems like getting Olave has made Michael Thomas incredibly happy. He seems more motivated than ever to play for New Orleans. At least I am hoping this is the case. He is already working with Olave.
Posted on 5/4/22 at 7:28 am to SaintEB
quote:
Right. Its all relative to performance. Do we have a Justin Jefferson or a Lequan Treadwell? We can't know this yet.
Exactly. And I would say Justin Jefferson would be worth extra 2nds, 3rds, and 4ths. It just depends upon your team and how the player works out.
Posted on 5/4/22 at 9:19 am to beauchristopher
quote:
I'm sorry, but I still consider that a swap of first rounders
Even with this logic, we still don't have a 1st in 2023
quote:
I almost hope Payton returns to coaching, so the Saints can get some extra picks for him.
This is similar to the "well it's a comp pick" argument. We want all the picks we can get. The cost of this trade is completely independent of a future CSP trade.
Posted on 5/4/22 at 10:16 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Even with this logic, we still don't have a 1st in 2023
That was Loomis logic. He said we get to pick our 2023 player a year early. But it took a bunch of picks to get there.
Gave up a 2023 1st (and a bunch of other stuff) to get a 2022 1st. Then, took a 2022 1st (and a bunch of other stuff) to get from 16 to 11. So I get where the "swap" logic comes from. You gave up a 1, get a 1 back (if we forget about all of the other picks that were used too).
Posted on 5/4/22 at 10:23 am to SaintEB
Yeah I get that, but that logic works to avoid saying "we used 2, 1sts on Olave" (like with Davenport).
This "swap" argument pretends that we didn't have to use a future 1st, so there isn't a cost involved. That's hogwash. It only seems cute/clever b/c it's not 2023 and we haven't felt it yet.
This "swap" argument pretends that we didn't have to use a future 1st, so there isn't a cost involved. That's hogwash. It only seems cute/clever b/c it's not 2023 and we haven't felt it yet.
Posted on 5/4/22 at 10:47 am to Lester Earl
This organization is awful at just being patient and picking in a pool based on what they have. I hate it. It's boom or bust for them. Examples, draft a few years ago is a complete bust. When you have all these picks fill your team up with young guys. You can't sustain a roster of high paid vets and expect to get to the next level. You need a talented roster of young lower paid players to compensate. If there was ever a time to use picks to rebuild it was now. They act like they still have Brees on the roster and can win a SB. Bros, you're not winning anything with Jameis Winston at QB. Someone needs to say it.
This post was edited on 5/4/22 at 10:49 am
Posted on 5/4/22 at 11:35 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
This "swap" argument pretends that we didn't have to use a future 1st
You used a future first to acquire a first now. Right? You had a 2022 and a 2023. Now you have two 2022 and no 2023. The swap argument is hogwash because of all the other picks you had to give up to get that extra 2022 1st.
In Davenport's case, you used a 2019 1st to acquire an extra 2018 1st, then used those two 2018s to get down to #14 to get him. One player, two picks. This year, two players, two picks, ignoring all the 2s, 3s, and 4s needed to get the extra 2022 and then to go from 16 to 11.
Posted on 5/4/22 at 12:30 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
He doesn’t think the original trade into the 1st rd should be lumped together with then subsequent trade up to 11 lol
Its extremely dishonest to suggest the Philly deal was part of some grand scheme to sell out the future for Chris Olave.
To say that we "gave up" what was traded out in the Philly deal "for Chris Olave" is disingenuous af. Unlike the Washington trade, The Philly deal had nothing to do with Olave when it was made - it was pure assets for assets.
Posted on 5/4/22 at 12:39 pm to SaintEB
On the net, the number of first rounders in the years associated with the deal(s) did not result in a loss of 1st round choices for New Orleans. They went from a #18 and an unknown 2023 slot to an #11 and #19 on 2022 with no 1st in 2023. That could be a good deal if the Saints fetch a low slot next year or the 2023 draft ends up being weaker than 2022.
This is really about all those lower round picks that vanished in order to make that happen.
This is really about all those lower round picks that vanished in order to make that happen.
This post was edited on 5/4/22 at 12:43 pm
Posted on 5/4/22 at 12:47 pm to Vacherie Saint
quote:
Its extremely dishonest to suggest the Philly deal was part of some grand scheme to sell out the future for Chris Olave.
I don’t care if it was planned or not. But that was the cost anyway you want to slice it
Page 10 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News