Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Draft Talk
Trade Up Targets
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="OldSchool101" data-source="post: 1032154" data-attributes="member: 10086"><p>Exactly. Just for fun I’ve done hundreds of interactive Mocks across 3-4 Sites. I’ve went 3 primary Routes.</p><p>1. Stood Pat (40% of the time)</p><p>2. Traded Up (20% of the time)</p><p>3. Traded Back (40% of the time)</p><p></p><p>Within each method I’ve used dozens of derivatives. Many times I get caught in a worn hole by choosing a position that we have at high need and I love the player..but only to cross that same position at a better cost ratio a few picks later. My hypothesis is this happens regularly because certain players/positions that fit our team regularly cross our path due to supply and just plain relative draft neighborhood placement. I didn’t really realize it until I literally perfected a few hundred Mocks, but you learn quick after being burned on that a few times. I’ve even just stopped my Mock mid steam knowing this and restarted out of frustration because I already know I’m being led off a value cliff. The repetition might seem trivial to some in here. But it 100% gets you stronger at matching player/position/need/placement.</p><p></p><p>In my risk assessment across hundreds of Mocks (using multiple sites keep you honest because they value players differently) what I’ve learned is really do NOT be in a hurry to go after CB/RB/DL too early because those positions are thick mid draft AND they are regularly crossing our natural selections.</p><p>I LOVE addressing Guard around that 126 area. You also get a jump on those second/3rd tier OT using 88.91 because they often go 10-20 picks ahead of consensus due to global league positional value. So a LT rated 100-125 is gone by 105 overall if that makes sense?</p><p></p><p>One way to recoup your concern above is to trade back enough using 41 or 58 enough to recoup an extra pick from that 100-127 range. It’s stacked with players who match our need also. I do sometimes use a #255 packages or a future 6th Rounder etc. to attain that goal.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="OldSchool101, post: 1032154, member: 10086"] Exactly. Just for fun I’ve done hundreds of interactive Mocks across 3-4 Sites. I’ve went 3 primary Routes. 1. Stood Pat (40% of the time) 2. Traded Up (20% of the time) 3. Traded Back (40% of the time) Within each method I’ve used dozens of derivatives. Many times I get caught in a worn hole by choosing a position that we have at high need and I love the player..but only to cross that same position at a better cost ratio a few picks later. My hypothesis is this happens regularly because certain players/positions that fit our team regularly cross our path due to supply and just plain relative draft neighborhood placement. I didn’t really realize it until I literally perfected a few hundred Mocks, but you learn quick after being burned on that a few times. I’ve even just stopped my Mock mid steam knowing this and restarted out of frustration because I already know I’m being led off a value cliff. The repetition might seem trivial to some in here. But it 100% gets you stronger at matching player/position/need/placement. In my risk assessment across hundreds of Mocks (using multiple sites keep you honest because they value players differently) what I’ve learned is really do NOT be in a hurry to go after CB/RB/DL too early because those positions are thick mid draft AND they are regularly crossing our natural selections. I LOVE addressing Guard around that 126 area. You also get a jump on those second/3rd tier OT using 88.91 because they often go 10-20 picks ahead of consensus due to global league positional value. So a LT rated 100-125 is gone by 105 overall if that makes sense? One way to recoup your concern above is to trade back enough using 41 or 58 enough to recoup an extra pick from that 100-127 range. It’s stacked with players who match our need also. I do sometimes use a #255 packages or a future 6th Rounder etc. to attain that goal. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
No members online now.
Latest posts
Why I Love The 2026-2027 Green Bay Packers
Latest: OldSchool101
17 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
H
Josh Jacobs facing charges…
Latest: Heyjoe4
37 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2026 Roster Thread - Semi-Live
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
43 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Badgers Football 2025-2026
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
45 minutes ago
Wisconsin Badgers Forum
2026 Draft Rd 6 #35 K Trey Smack Florida
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
47 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Draft Talk
Trade Up Targets
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top
