04-28-2021, 10:53 AM
(04-28-2021, 10:49 AM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: And went he went to New England he put up almost 1,100 yards at over 16.5 yards per carry, and again, helped the Patriots go to the Super bowl. Giving up a 1st for a WR who helps you go to the Super Bowl that very year is never a bust. Doubly so when you can recoup most of that draft capital by trading him again.
The Patriots gave a 1st, got a WR who helped them get to the Super Bowl, and then traded him and got a 1st: Great deal for the Patriots.
The Rams gave a 1st, got a WR who helped them get to the Super Bowl, and then traded him and got a 2nd: Great deal for the Rams.
Not sure how those can be seen as busts.
- - - - -
When the Vikings traded for Bradford, he had played 21 of the previous 48 games, not 16, but yeah.
Desperation aside, Bradford had played at least 10 games in 4 of his 6 years (or 67% of the time) at the time of the trade. Jimmy G has played in at least 10 games only 1 out of 7 years (or 14% of the time). Bradford had played at least 14 games 3/6 years. So there was some hope that was built upon at least a little proof.
Also Bradford was a 1st overall pick, which helps the perceived value/desireability.
Because if you get 1-year production out of any guy you take with a 1st round pick everyone in the world will agree that's a bust. The fact the teams didn't see the need to keep him around shows what they actually thought, no matter how you'd like to frame it they didn't think he was worth keeping. Recovering something back for him helps but in context to this discussion no one is flipping 34 year old Julio Jones at the end of two years for another 1st.
As for Bradford, he was injury-prone at that moment and had never had any real success. Jimmy has been to a SB and was one missed deep ball from a championship, which helps perceived value and desirability. I think they get a 2nd for him, I guess we will find out.
