04-16-2018, 08:48 AM
(04-16-2018, 12:50 AM)CornerBlitz Wrote: "You’ll get pretty much the same player at 15 that you’ll get at 21 that you’ll get at 40. I think you’d rather have two third-rounders in this draft, like the Bengals, rather than two first-rounders."
Essentially he's saying there is no difference between the player you draft at 15 than you would at 40. This is pure nonsense regardless of how you interpret the quote about having multiple third round picks instead of two first.
If this is the case we should trade our first round pick for a second round pick because hey, at least the contract will be cheaper and we will get the same type player.
i can understand a few spots but 30 spots, especially first to second round, cmon
It's not nonsense. In regards to this specific draft, he's pretty much correct. I explained it in the post above yours.
With this draft class I would 100% trade pick #21 for 2 2nds or a 2nd and a 3rd depending on where the picks were. As I explained, the Bengals will be essentially getting the same quality of player - only they would be getting 2 of them in the trade instead if 1 if they stayed there. This draft has a bunch (as in, like, 100ish) of B- to B+ talent, but only, like, 4 or 5 A's.
