TwistedHusky
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2013
- Messages
- 7,109
- Reaction score
- 1,279
As I said, the Chargers did this for years.
Admittedly, we have had some STELLAR hits in the past - Sherman in the 5th, Wagner was in the 2nd, a couple of LBs, etc. But lately it looks like that run was more just chance, like flipping heads repeatedly - in the long run the #s even out.
For the most part, teams that do not hit on #1s either lose depth or struggle to find difference makers.
On the surface, we pick up a few extra picks moving back. But unless we can package those picks to move forward in the 2nd it just means we get more chances in rounds that have lower hit rates and much lower chances of getting an all everything player.
I used to be a big fan of stockpiling later round picks too, back when we turned 4th and 5th round picks into gold. But we haven't done that for some time.
And the few we did hit on, I might have just forewent in order to get some solid performers that were on the board we could have run with.
In this case, we clearly need secondary help - so on the surface it seems palatable, but the #s have a tendency to bite you in the tail.
Teams that don't hit on #1s tend to struggle over time.
Admittedly, we have had some STELLAR hits in the past - Sherman in the 5th, Wagner was in the 2nd, a couple of LBs, etc. But lately it looks like that run was more just chance, like flipping heads repeatedly - in the long run the #s even out.
For the most part, teams that do not hit on #1s either lose depth or struggle to find difference makers.
On the surface, we pick up a few extra picks moving back. But unless we can package those picks to move forward in the 2nd it just means we get more chances in rounds that have lower hit rates and much lower chances of getting an all everything player.
I used to be a big fan of stockpiling later round picks too, back when we turned 4th and 5th round picks into gold. But we haven't done that for some time.
And the few we did hit on, I might have just forewent in order to get some solid performers that were on the board we could have run with.
In this case, we clearly need secondary help - so on the surface it seems palatable, but the #s have a tendency to bite you in the tail.
Teams that don't hit on #1s tend to struggle over time.