PatsFanStnfrd

The confusion surrounds what SF offered the Pats to move up to 33. From Pats All-access inside the draft room show, my recollection is the offer was the Pats 33 for SF's 3rd rounder in 2011 and a 3rd rounder in 2012. (BB rejected the deal because he wanted a 2nd rounder in 2012).

Peter King in his MMQB today, suggests that the SF offer included their pick at 45 in round 2 this year in addition to 3rd rounders this year and next. So, three picks for # 33 in total. This puts a very different cast on BB's decision to turn down this trade especially since King contends that Ras-I Dowling would have been available at # 45 (SF's original spot).
Cris Collinsworth on labor, NFL Network Top 100 players, more - Peter King - SI.com (Point 8, middle of page)

Regardless of whether Dowling would have been available, can someone definitively clarify whether King is right on SF's offer or SF only offered two third rounders?

Also. if King is right, don't you think that BB should have taken it?

patchick

Well, 3 picks later SF did make its trade -- for #45, #108 and #141. Those picks have a combined chart value of 563 points vs. 530 for the #36 pick they got, which is very close given the jockeying for QBs that was going on.

The package King claims they offered the Pats would have been worth about 860 points (including a deduction for time value of 2012 picks) in exchange for a pick worth just 580 points. The version reported elsewhere is much closer to expected trade values.

So while I can't offer any "definitive info," King's account doesn't sound especially plausible.

Sciz

Yeah, I agree with this. The trade at 36 shows that Bill wasn't going to get the value he wanted for pick 33.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Metaphors

Not only that, articles like this dance around a point instead of just saying it:

"Belichick let his infatuation with Dowling cloud his judgement and missed out on a team willing to significantly overpay (for no apparent reason) for pick #33"

"Belichick was too stupid to realize that his guy would almost certainly be available 12 picks later so trading down for anything would be great value"

You took apart the notion that SF was going to overpay for pick #33 (580 pts) with #45 and #76 (670 pts, for a differential equal to a high 4th)...and then was willing to throw in a 2012 3rd for good measure. But the other insinuations deserve equal scrutiny:

Belichick was overly locked onto Dowling...Nonsense. If he got a 2nd in 2012, he was willing to miss out on Dowling entirely. He just didn't get the value he was looking for and Dowling was the top guy on his board.

Dowling would be there at #45...I'd rate this one as 50/50 at best. Even if Dowling makes it past Buffalo at #34, there was an entire block of team from #40 to #44 (Dallas, Washington, Houston, Minnesota, Detroit) that could be targeting Dowling. That doesn't even count teams like SD (reached for Gilcrest at #50) and Philadelphia (reached for Jarrett at #54 and took Marsh at #90) trading ahead of the Pats for Dowling.

Trade value of SF's offer...Just looking at trade chart values only gives you part of the equation. You need the context of the draft class to make an accurate assessment. Belichick clearly saw the talent cliff in this draft class at around #75, so getting pick #76 likely didn't thrill him. Next year's class isn't setting up to be very deep so getting a future 3rd with the uncertainty of Juniors declaring probably wasn't appealing either. Getting a 2nd in what is looking like a superior (but top-heavy) 2012 class was his target and he couldn't get it.

patchick

Even that seems generous to me -- there was a huge dropoff in DB talent after Dowling & Williams.

convertedpatsfan

Agreed, especially with the very next pick being Williams. That very well could have been Dowling.

It also ignores the fact that DB-needy teams like Houston and Detroit were picking before 45. Both teams passed on corner in the 1st round despite it arguably being their biggest need.

I don't buy the trade offer report from King at all. And I certainly don't buy Dowling being available at 45.

If I had to guess, it was probably two separate offers, probably 45+76, and when that got shot down, 45+108 and others+next year's 3rd. And somewhere along the way, King heard it was all instead of separate transactions.

Sfpat

And Houston took a CB, Brandon Harris with their 2nd. Almost guaranteed they would have taken Dowling had he been available.

Sfpat

And Houston took a CB (Brandon Harris) with their 2nd pick. No way Dowling would have been available at 45

Fencer

Any negotiating strategy used by a mortal will have some combination of two aspects:

1. You take relatively fixed positions. Sometimes that means you leave a deal on the table that would be better than doing no deal at all. But it assures that any deal you do will be one you think is pretty favorable.

2. You take fluid positions. More deals get done. But often you'll take less favorable terms than you actually had to.

BB has always seemed to be pretty far toward the #1 end of the spectrum. That's been costly in cases like Asante Samuel. But it's also made for a bunch of favorable deals.

__________________
"To lose one parent may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose both looks like carelessness." -- Oscar Wilde

DropKickFlutie

Peter King has proven time and time again that he's just a moron with bad judgment. He's nothing more than a gossip queen at his best, but even doing that this idiot just falls for whatever he's fed by real insiders.

I'm completely certain that Patchick's assessment is spot on and King has no clue what he's talking about.