Potential Pats trading partners (up or down)...

[Snake Eyes]

No offense, but you're dead wrong. It's ADVISABLE or not, depending on many factors and points of view, but Brother Metaphor has clearly demonstrated that it is REASONABLE.


Again: No offense, but Brother Metaphor's comment that the Chart is "not foolproof" CLEARLY illustrates that he is NOT applying "absolute values" that for some reason you claim he is: You have just illustrated a perfect example of a Straw Man Argument: INVENTING the other guy's position, in order to knock it down.

For the record: I have NO interest in making the trade he proposes.

1 - How is something "reasonable" yet not "advisable"? If something makes sense to do why would you advise against doing it?

Using one of those words rather than another is distinction without difference, something makes sense or it doesnt, I don't see Dareus as providing more value than Wilkerson & Brooks, if someone can show me he does provide more value than I'll support that position but to do so because someone chose to ascribe a certain point value to a position and assume that draft value exists correspondingly does not make sense.

2 - He said it's not foolproof but decided to use it to try to back up his point and work out a hypothetical trade scenario, what is the point of using that chart if he's then not prepared to stand by it?

So long as he's using it to defend his point there is nothing illogical about me criticizing that use of it, otherwise he'd kinda have the best of both worlds, wouldnt he? He can use it to support his points when he chooses but then claim that it's not foolproof when I point out problem with it.

Good on him for trying to work out a hypothetical trade but I think I demonstrated how we could gain more value by NOT making that trade. Yet again, if someone can show me how Dareus is more valuable than Wilkerson & Reed please do so.

Yet again, The draft point chart does NOT correspond to reality!

 

[IllegalContact]

no value in trading up to 11 or 12 until that pick is on the clock

 

[Snake Eyes]

no value in trading up to 11 or 12 until that pick is on the clock

That’s a great point, the relationship between the players picked vs. those not yet pick makes a huge impact to the other teams in their own supply/demand analysis, which can fluctuate as the draft goes on.

 

[Snake Eyes]

Are you honestly telling me that you don't know the difference between "reasonable" and "advisable"??

When somebody attacks a guy ~ Metaphor ~ and does so completely without basis, then gets shown that they were WAY out of line...and finally proves themselves incapable of manning up and admitting they were wrong, as you just have...there is no purpose in pursuing the dialogue further. You may have the last word, but forgive me if I give it the attention it warrants.

1 - I don't see any meaningful difference between calling a trade of #11 for #60 + #17 trade "reasonable" as opposed to "advisable", if anyonee can explain to me why I'm wrong I'll be in their debt.

2 - There is a difference between attacking a person and disagreeing with a point, I never attacked Metaphors, I just disagreed with him, OTOH you did attack me.

 

[Metaphors]

1 - How is something "reasonable" yet not "advisable"? If something makes sense to do why would you advise against doing it?

Using one of those words rather than another is distinction without difference, something makes sense or it doesnt, I don't see Dareus as providing more value than Wilkerson & Brooks, if someone can show me he does provide more value than I'll support that position but to do so because someone chose to ascribe a certain point value to a position and assume that draft value exists correspondingly does not make sense.

Reasonable (in the context I used it) meaning not excessive, within the bounds of "reasonable" thought. Advisable means recommended or wise. There is a clear difference.
It is reasonable to not have 6 months salary in emergency savings. It is not advisable.
It is reasonable to drive 20 MPH above the speed limit on a lightly traveled interstate. It is not advisable.

Removing the difference between the two results in a perspective where others who do not adhere to your definition of wise choices are necessarily operating outside the bounds of reasonable thought. That either makes you a politician or one of my kids.

2 - He said it's not foolproof but decided to use it to try to back up his point and work out a hypothetical trade scenario, what is the point of using that chart if he's then not prepared to stand by it?

I explained my reasoning behind the trade. That is what I stand behind. The trade value analysis was unbiased data supporting my contention that the trade was relatively sane for both teams.

So long as he's using it to defend his point there is nothing illogical about me criticizing that use of it, otherwise he'd kinda have the best of both worlds, wouldnt he? He can use it to support his points when he chooses but then claim that it's not foolproof when I point out problem with it.

You would be correct if I only used the trade value chart...saying that the Pats should trade just because the values match up. That is clearly not the case so you really don't have any basis in that respect. Criticizing a trade up to get Dareus or Quinn when you would rather stick and take Wilkerson/Reed is perfectly legit. I might even be convinced to agree with you.

Good on him for trying to work out a hypothetical trade but I think I demonstrated how we could gain more value by NOT making that trade. Yet again, if someone can show me how Dareus is more valuable than Wilkerson & Reed please do so.

You demonstrated it by saying 2 players you like are better than one I like. That ignores the fact that there are many other picks still in play (like I said, the Pats could still get Reed or maybe even Wilkerson even after trading up if they wanted to). If you think the difference between Wilkerson (who may not be there at #17) and Dareus/Quinn isn't worth the talent available at #60, that is a fine opinion to have. I just don't happen to agree.

Yet again, The draft point chart does NOT correspond to reality!

While the draft value chart isn't gospel, it is remarkably accurate when applied to trades that actually happened in reality. It is what it is. A useful tool when examining value of transactions where the end result can't be know at the time of the trade (the team trading down isn't sure exactly who they will get). Making it out to be anything more than that is just as silly as dismissing it entirely.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

1 ~ Go take a look at the 2007 Draft, yourself, as it's obvious that's it's you who needs the History lesson: Despite its infamous lack of quality, it still offered MANY Mid Round and Late Round Values, as virtually EVERY Draft does.

2007 was a special case; heading into the draft, the Patriots arguably already had one of the most talented rosters in NFL history.

Also, remember BB once said about one draft class that there were players being drafted in the third and fourth rounds that the Patriots had graded as UDFAs.

 

[MaineMan]

1 - How is something "reasonable" yet not "advisable"? If something makes sense to do why would you advise against doing it?

Easy. Something can be a "reasonable" choice, but not necessarily the best one. Unless and until circumstances change to make it the best choice, you "advise" against it.

Using one of those words rather than another is distinction without difference, something makes sense or it doesnt, I don't see Dareus as providing more value than Wilkerson & Brooks, if someone can show me he does provide more value than I'll support that position but to do so because someone chose to ascribe a certain point value to a position and assume that draft value exists correspondingly does not make sense.

This is conflating the highly variable and unquantifiable value of a specific prospect to a specific team/scheme with the nominal (but quantifiable) and unrelated value of draft pick positions. I say "unrelated" simply because, until the selection is actually made, no one but the team making the selection knows for certain who the pick is to be used for.

2 - He said it's not foolproof but decided to use it to try to back up his point and work out a hypothetical trade scenario, what is the point of using that chart if he's then not prepared to stand by it?

So long as he's using it to defend his point there is nothing illogical about me criticizing that use of it, otherwise he'd kinda have the best of both worlds, wouldnt he? He can use it to support his points when he chooses but then claim that it's not foolproof when I point out problem with it.

I don't think he's "backing up his point" or using the standard trade chart as some sort of "evidence". He's just using it as a point of reference which isn't intended to be exact or, IOW, "foolproof".

Good on him for trying to work out a hypothetical trade but I think I demonstrated how we could gain more value by NOT making that trade. Yet again, if someone can show me how Dareus is more valuable than Wilkerson & Reed please do so.

Opinion vs. opinion.

Yet again, The draft point chart does NOT correspond to reality!

Actually, it sorta does, if you're not muddying the waters with subsequent player selections. Absent that, most pick trades work out within a percent or two or three of the chart numbers.

 

[Snake Eyes]

Reasonable (in the context I used it) meaning not excessive, within the bounds of "reasonable" thought. Advisable means recommended or wise. There is a clear difference.
It is reasonable to not have 6 months salary in emergency savings. It is not advisable.
It is reasonable to drive 20 MPH above the speed limit on a lightly traveled interstate. It is not advisable.

Removing the difference between the two results in a perspective where others who do not adhere to your definition of wise choices are necessarily operating outside the bounds of reasonable thought. That either makes you a politician or one of my kids

Why is driving 20mp above the limit reasonable but not advisable? Wouldn't I have to take into account how valuable my time is, the liklihood of getting caught, the cost of the ticket, the effects the different speed have on my safety, etc?

My entire point is that the value is relative, even more so considering the dynamic process when every team's situation is constantly changing throughout the process. BB has been able to create tons of value through trading back, last year's draft is a perfect example, and grabbing a guy like Hernandez, who provides a ton of extra value to us given our use of multiple tight ends. He likely wouldn't have had the same value to a team like Indy, he'd really just be replicating what they already have, and not add much value.

I explained my reasoning behind the trade. That is what I stand behind. The trade value analysis was unbiased data supporting my contention that the trade was relatively sane for both teams.

I understand your reasoning for the trade, and while I disagree with your conclusion I don't think the reasoning was poor. Again, given our situation I think we'd gain significantly more value by keeping those picks, just my opinion.

You would be correct if I only used the trade value chart...saying that the Pats should trade just because the values match up. That is clearly not the case so you really don't have any basis in that respect. Criticizing a trade up to get Dareus or Quinn when you would rather stick and take Wilkerson/Reed is perfectly legit. I might even be convinced to agree with you

You demonstrated it by saying 2 players you like are better than one I like. That ignores the fact that there are many other picks still in play (like I said, the Pats could still get Reed or maybe even Wilkerson even after trading up if they wanted to). If you think the difference between Wilkerson (who may not be there at #17) and Dareus/Quinn isn't worth the talent available at #60, that is a fine opinion to have. I just don't happen to agree.

You are correct, there are other picks in play and it's possible that we can still get Reed with another, but that also means we can't get yet another player with that pick. I'm especially greedy and want a plethora of players in this draft, which actually might not be the smartest thing but I still want them. IMO the kep that we should be shooting for is maximizing our value, a trade to #11 might very well be the way to do that, I admit that I've only seen limited footage of these guys and only have a small amount of data to base my opinions on, if shown that the trade down has more impact I'll change my opinion.

While the draft value chart isn't gospel, it is remarkably accurate when applied to trades that actually happened in reality. It is what it is. A useful tool when examining value of transactions where the end result can't be know at the time of the trade (the team trading down isn't sure exactly who they will get). Making it out to be anything more than that is just as silly as dismissing it entirely.

I'd like to see more data on it as it applies to trades and how those trades have worked out for teams, to me it doesnt make sense but I will change my opinion if proven wrong.

 

[Deus Irae]

1 ~ Go take a look at the 2007 Draft, yourself, as it's obvious that's it's you who needs the History lesson: Despite its infamous lack of quality, it still offered MANY Mid Round and Late Round Values, as virtually EVERY Draft does.

I've gone over it time and again.

2 ~ Wrong. DEAD Wrong. As usual.

First, the irony of your comment isn't lost on me, although you probably missed it.

Second, my point was correct, and inherent in the very nature of what we're discussing.

"Most of the "Depth of talent" players are just replacing other "Depth of talent" players, effectively giving little or no gain."

They are "depth of talent" players, not starters. For the most part, and notice the word "Most", they will be relatively fungible. I'm sorry you don't see the obvious there.

3 ~ It's quite obvious ~ to most ~ that Zoltan Mesko has immense potential to be a special player.

He'll still be a punter. As I noted:

"No punter has been taken in any round higher than the 5th since 2007. It's a position that's historically drafted low."

 

[Snake Eyes]

Easy. Something can be a "reasonable" choice, but not necessarily the best one. Unless and until circumstances change to make it the best choice, you "advise" against it.

These choices are made during the draft, so the trade would have to make sense at that point, and they're done with the intention of maximizing value, so a trade only makes sense if it provides more perceived value than all of the alternatives, so it really can't be reasonable yet not advisable.

This is conflating the highly variable and unquantifiable value of a specific prospect to a specific team/scheme with the nominal (but quantifiable) and unrelated value of draft pick positions. I say "unrelated" simply because, until the selection is actually made, no one but the team making the selection knows for certain who the pick is to be used for.

Ok, so if the draft is that variable and also value specific depending on the needs/scheme of a team and also dependant on the availability of the players that you anticipate will be available (also dependant on other team's needs) how can we assign a simple #11 = #17 + #60 formula and expect it to correspond with what is happening on a particular team?

If we can sign some solid players in free agency that takes a load off of our draft needs, which can allow us to trade some picks to the next draft if we want, but the upshot of it is that our needs went down allowing greater flexibility. A QB desperate team that thinks Blain Gabbert is the next Peyton Manning would likely value that 1st round pick vastly more than their later round picks.

I don't think he's "backing up his point" or using the standard trade chart as some sort of "evidence". He's just using it as a point of reference which isn't intended to be exact or, IOW, "foolproof"

You can use it that way if you want but I don't understand how it provides any value: things are all going to change like crazy once the draft starts and the clock begins ticking, the values are going to change with every pick and with every trade offer.

Opinion vs. opinion

Yes, and I've admitted as such. Again, I have very limited knowledge of these players and of the Patriot's internal situation so my opinions are probably worth a grain of salt. If Dareus is likely to have a greater impact then #17 + 60 then it makes sense, I just haven't seen anything yet that has made me think it's the case in this draft.

Actually, it sorta does, if you're not muddying the waters with subsequent player selections. Absent that, most pick trades work out within a percent or two or three of the chart numbers.

How can you accurately evaluate things without those muddied waters, those muddy waters are the draft?