Jimmy Graham NE Patriot?

[OhExaulted1]

Yeah, I meant 2 play-off trips. It happens whenever I try to write before my second cup of coffee

I figured as much, I wasn't trying to twist your nuts.

And yes, Manning is the biggest part of that team. But a huge reason why Denver even had the cap room to sign him comes from the Cutler trade.

Even including Manning's contract, the Denver offense was ranked 14th in amount spent the year that he signed. You can probably figure 20 to 25 teams would have wanted Manning, but only a handful could even field a competitive offer.

Only a handful were suitable to Manning's liking is more like it. He sure as hell wasn't going to, say, Jacksonville. Point is really good players get paid eventually. You can only turn the roster over so many times without keeping some and if you don't someone else will pay them, and it's not always a bad team that does.

Welker's deal wasn't really that big of a deal. It was actually less than what we were offering in terms of guaranteed money. But again, they can't make that offer if Thomas is making $10-$14M like a top #1 would. Those draft picks provide a lot of financial flexibility.

Again, he'll (Thomas) be making that somewhere for someone very soon.

As for hoarded picks, I am not quite sure what you mean.

Obviously trading up or down looks better or worse if you actually hit on the picks. But I'm really not sure what you mean by the hoarded picks not working out.

You just stated what I meant. Some work out, some don't. I'm betting KC fans look back and say, jeez, we had the #93 pick in 2010 and took a TE named Tony Moeaki, then the Saints took Graham 2 picks later. That's why I lean a little more towards a solid bet than a shot in the dark.

Yeah, hindsight is easy but if there's a proven, sure thing staring you in the face, well....

 

[convertedpatsfan]

You just stated what I meant. Some work out, some don't. I'm betting KC fans look back and say, jeez, we had the #93 pick in 2010 and took a TE named Tony Moeaki, then the Saints took Graham 2 picks later. That's why I lean a little more towards a solid bet than a shot in the dark.

Yeah, hindsight is easy but if there's a proven, sure thing staring you in the face, well....

I think that just increases the case for having MORE picks actually.

Sure, the Chiefs could say they should have taken Graham. But what about the Saints? They drafted Patrick Robinson and Charles Brown ahead of Graham. They're lucky he was even still around.

The 2000 draft will always be remembered because we drafted Tom Brady, but let's not pat ourselves on the back too much. Don't forget we selected Adrian Klemm, J.R. Redmond, Greg Robinson-Randall, Dave Stachelski, Jeff Marriott, and Antwan Harris before Brady.

There are ways to improve your projections and potential fits but ultimately, nothing is 100% guaranteed, whether it's the draft or free agency or trade. But by increasing the total number of chances, you also increase the potential to do well.

If a team hits on 50% of their draft picks but has 10 picks, they still get more production than if a team hits on 80% of their 5 draft picks (5 players vs. 4 for those who hate math...double-checking since I'm still on coffee #1...). Having more picks means having more chances to be right. People love to hang onto those bust picks, but the Patriots generally make more picks than most. It's similar to how Brett Favre leads the league in TDs and INTs. He played a lot, he threw a lot, he's going to have a lot more chances for both than most.