Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="OldSchool101" data-source="post: 959628" data-attributes="member: 10086">I’m on both sides. I didn’t like the collateral and I can understand that point. Would’ve preferred to at minimum switch Day 3 picks such as a 4th for our 5th.Yet we have to have allowances for supply and demand. The WR demand was high at the top (Day 1)  and the supply was medium-low. Once our #22 came around the best players available were mostly Defenders. Evidenced by 8 Defenders taken over the next 11 selections(#22-32 overall). It wasn’t just the Packers there..  not 1 team selected an Offensive Skill position until our selection of Watson.Then 7 more WR were selected by pick #54 overall (22nd pick in Rd2) That just shows you how dangerous it would have been to wait.  We got the first WR selection of that grouping and it cost us ~100 points to do so (depending on which chart) you could say we gave away about a #100 overall type selection premium for the ability to take our first choice.I think that’s pretty reasonable. Especially when we now know Pickens and Watson are likely gone before #53.We essentially gifted MN a bonus 3rd Round compensatory</blockquote>

Total: 302 (members: 2, guests: 300)