The difficulties In Hitting Our Two biggest Needs: EDGE and RT

mayoclinic said:

Caleb Lomu
Gabe Jacas

Seems to be less difficult than we thought

Click to expand...

Cost is 2 4th rounders

Good job hitting on both needs.

LT, RT and swing tackle locked down for the next 4 years.

And still got the EDGE the team clearly targeted.

It did mean sacrificing our two fourth rounders. Only time will tell whether Lomu was worth missing out on potential future starters at safety and linebacker.

manxman2601 said:

It did mean sacrificing our two fourth rounders. Only time will tell whether Lomu was worth missing out on potential future starters at safety and linebacker.

Click to expand...

I just want to be clear. While I'm not completely sold on Lomu, this is really a discussion about what is gained vs what might have been lost.

On the plus side - Lomu might become our starting RT for the next decade. Heck, maybe even our starting LT for that same period. If either of those things happen, it will have been worth it, particularly the latter. I'm yet to be convinced but am happy to wait and see what happens.

On the minus side - We could have taken the trade down the Bills got at 31 and ended up with three 4th rounders. We could have taken Jacas with our first pick, still ended up with Crownover and had 3 4ths that could have become, for example, Jimmy Rolder, Zakee Wheatley and Trey Moore.

It will be interesting to evaluate in 2-3 years, but I want to be clear, if Lomu is a quality starter, it will be irrelevant.

manxman2601 said:

It did mean sacrificing our two fourth rounders. Only time will tell whether Lomu and Jacas was worth missing out on potential future starters at safety and linebacker.

Click to expand...

Fixed it for you.

mayoclinic said:

Fixed it for you.

Click to expand...

It didn't need fixing. We wouldn't have had to trade up for Jacas if we hadn't picked Lomu.

We wouldn't have had to trade up for Jacas if we hadn't traded up for Jacas.

You can't just assume that Jacas would have been the 1st player picked. The Pats could have picked McDonald, Bisontis, Stukes, etc.

mayoclinic said:

We wouldn't have had to trade up for Jacas if we hadn't traded up for Jacas.

You can't just assume that Jacas would have been the 1st player picked. The Pats could have picked McDonald, Bisontis, Stukes, etc.

Click to expand...

Maybe, maybe, maybe....

But that's all irrelevant to my point. If we had taken Jacas with our first pick after a trade back - that trade was there at 31 - I'm exploring the opportunity cost. But as I said, if Lomu is our starting tackle, right or left, for the next decade it's an irrelevant discussion.

The Pats clearly didn't want to do that, so it is definitely irrelevant.

They could have stuck at 63 and taken Keyron Crawford or Dani Denis-Sutton, and kept 131 and 202. They deemed the opportunity cost worth the trade up. Exactly the same as with Lomu.

mayoclinic said:

The Pats clearly didn't want to do that, so it is definitely irrelevant.

Click to expand...

The Pats might have been wrong, so it is a topic for discussion which makes it relevant on a message board.

mayoclinic said:

They could have stuck at 63 and taken Keyron Crawford or Dani Denis-Sutton, and kept 131 and 202. They deemed the opportunity cost worth the trade up. Exactly the same as with Lomu.

Click to expand...

They could have stuck at 63 and taken Keyron Crawford or Dani Denis-Sutton or maybe Jacas. Was the trade up necessary or was it just people panicking?

mayoclinic said:

Good job hitting on both needs.

LT, RT and swing tackle locked down for the next 4 years.

And still got the EDGE the team clearly targeted.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure why we simply assume that Lomu will be able to be a solid starter at RT (or Campbell even)