Pioli on the #28 trade...

[psychoPat]

The SF Draft Room:

You want this guy? What do you think we should offer New England?

How about this year's fourth and next year's first?

Sounds good to me.

The Patriots Draft Room:

BB: OK, Scott, let's be quick here; we've got offers from Dallas and San Francisco. Dallas is offering their seconds this year and next year, the Niners are offering this year's fourth and next year's first. What've you got?

SP: (reaches for a big binder of information) Well, out of our simulations, the average pick for Dallas is 19.65. (flipping pages . . .) But about 90% of our simulations have the SF pick in the top half of round 1, with an average pick of 9.89.

BB: Good. I don't think we want a top-3 pick, but I'll take a 10.

SP: Only a 0.3% chance of them going top five, Bill.

BB: Good. Call the Niners and tell them we have a deal.

SP: Will do. Oh, BTW, Bill, right now our other simulations show a greater than 70% chance that we'll be able to convince the Raiders to part with a 4th for Moss, and to get Moss to reduce his salary.

BB: Excellent. . . . Josh--call Gillette and let them know we need an extra strength batch of Kool-Aid ready tonight!

Good, ah ... simulation !

 

[Patriot Missile]

Freaking Romo. Maybe it would of been Clevelands first pick(ala Quinn} next year had he not muffed the snap?

 

[patsox23]

Something that he didn't say that I will add to the conversation on his behalf, he fully expects SF to finish . 500 or worse. This would be in the 13-17 range or better.

A lot of you who already FEEL that SF will be ".500 or worse" are attributing this same theory to Pioli, based on nothing that he said. Someone else stated "BB clearly agrees with me that SF's not going to be very good next year."

I think people are reading WAY too much into this. It's a good trade and I'm happy with it - and I really hope you're right - but I don't think the trade PROVES anything as exciting as what you guys are assuming.

 

[BelichickFan]

A lot of you who already FEEL that SF will be ".500 or worse" are attributing this same theory to Pioli, based on nothing that he said. Someone else stated "BB clearly agrees with me that SF's not going to be very good next year."

I think people are reading WAY too much into this. It's a good trade and I'm happy with it - and I really hope you're right - but I don't think the trade PROVES anything as exciting as what you guys are assuming.

I'm attributing it to the fact that SF sucked last year (5th worst point differential) and have a lot of improving to do to be a legit .500 team, let alone better than that.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

No mention of Jon Beason? Now I know this is a work of fiction!

The SF Draft Room:

You want this guy? What do you think we should offer New England?

How about this year's fourth and next year's first?

Sounds good to me.

The Patriots Draft Room:

BB: OK, Scott, let's be quick here; we've got offers from Dallas and San Francisco. Dallas is offering their seconds this year and next year, the Niners are offering this year's fourth and next year's first. What've you got?

SP: (reaches for a big binder of information) Well, out of our simulations, the average pick for Dallas is 19.65. (flipping pages . . .) But about 90% of our simulations have the SF pick in the top half of round 1, with an average pick of 9.89.

BB: Good. I don't think we want a top-3 pick, but I'll take a 10.

SP: Only a 0.3% chance of them going top five, Bill.

BB: Good. Call the Niners and tell them we have a deal.

SP: Will do. Oh, BTW, Bill, right now our other simulations show a greater than 70% chance that we'll be able to convince the Raiders to part with a 4th for Moss, and to get Moss to reduce his salary.

BB: Excellent. . . . Josh--call Gillette and let them know we need an extra strength batch of Kool-Aid ready tonight!

 

[Brady-To-Branch]

I'm going to infer from this that Belioli agree with me that SF's #1 could be quite high next year. A future #1 and a #4 (regardless of what we traded it for), isn't a GREAT deal. If we had multiple offers, it probably wasn't a "dump at any cost" move. Logically that results in my concluding that they also think this could be a fairly high #1 - I still say it's going to be top ten.

It depends mainly on the the improvements of the other NFC West teams.

The Cards could be a surprise if they fix their OL problems. A good OL would make the Cards this year's answer to the '06 Saints.

Seattle needs Alexander to stay healthy. BTW, last year we're root against the Seahawks and this season we're rooting for them.

St. Louis choked both times against Seattle. IMO, they look like a last place team.

The 49ers have made great strides and almost on their division in 2006. IMO, they are a young team that's 2 years away from challenging in the NFC. I'm not expecting top 10, but if they don't make the playoffs, I'll take it.

 

[Broncos_OTM]

Denver traded its first rounder so the skins could draft campbell. most in bronco land thought it could have been a top ten. we ended up with 22

 

[Patriotic Fervor]

The SF Draft Room:

You want this guy? What do you think we should offer New England?

How about this year's fourth and next year's first?

Sounds good to me.

The Patriots Draft Room:

BB: OK, Scott, let's be quick here; we've got offers from Dallas and San Francisco. Dallas is offering their seconds this year and next year, the Niners are offering this year's fourth and next year's first. What've you got?

SP: (reaches for a big binder of information) Well, out of our simulations, the average pick for Dallas is 19.65. (flipping pages . . .) But about 90% of our simulations have the SF pick in the top half of round 1, with an average pick of 9.89.

BB: Good. I don't think we want a top-3 pick, but I'll take a 10.

SP: Only a 0.3% chance of them going top five, Bill.

BB: Good. Call the Niners and tell them we have a deal.

SP: Will do. Oh, BTW, Bill, right now our other simulations show a greater than 70% chance that we'll be able to convince the Raiders to part with a 4th for Moss, and to get Moss to reduce his salary.

BB: Excellent. . . . Josh--call Gillette and let them know we need an extra strength batch of Kool-Aid ready tonight!

Back in the late 60s, Dallas, newly emergent as a perennial power, announced at the draft that the Dallas Cowboys, "take Calvin Hill of Yale", amidst much snickering from other teams.

Scouting and player evaluation was different back then, but Tom Landry had the 'Boys on the forefront of technology. He explained, "Our computer told us Calvin Hill was the best athlete in the country". This was a time when computers weren't really in widespread use anywhere.

Turns out old Tom and his computer got the last laugh on that one.

(Your vignette featuring SP's dazzling array of statistical potpourri reminded me of this. Sorry if it's off the track a bit!)