delusions of grandeur Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 Funny you mention that, Seattle unsuccessfully tried to trade down because Carpenter was projected as a 2nd rounder. Yet this is the can't miss pick that the Falcons should have made, the one that the Seahawks finally said "fuggit" and reached on the pick they couldn't get rid of... Shame our GM doesn't base draft decisions on getting lucky with a reach they didn't want to make Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 No the part you bolded was that "it wouldn't have made a difference yesterday", and I believe that, even though there's no way to prove it. IMO, they'd improve the O-line but still struggle to put up points with less weapons against a great pass rush.. I didn't say there were no immediate impact players, but there were no clear ones like Julio. It's easy to say with hindsight that this 4th rounder was really worth more, but there's no way of knowing that the Falcons would have fared any better with those picks. And again, the O-lineman you mentioned wasn't available, and the other one your own team felt was a reach in the second. Why would the Seahawks risk waiting until the 3rd for Moffit, if they felt he was such a can't miss pick in the second? I could probably argue how every time struck out on a pick by drafting one guy over another, but that's far easier to say with hindsight than at the time (and even with hindsight, you have no way of knowing that they would have made the difference). Maybe what the Falcons really need is a better scouting dept. If I'm a GM then I've gotta trust that they can net me more better players with 5 picks vs one. Then again, I'm only an armchair GM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MustOfBeenDrunk Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 Speaking of this weeks lines ** Don't know where to verify this but read that This is only the 2nd time in playoff history that the road team in the second round is a favorite. could this be true ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 Yet this is the can't miss pick that the Falcons should have made, the one that the Seahawks finally said "fuggit" and reached on the pick they couldn't get rid of... Shame our GM doesn't base draft decisions on getting lucky with a reach they didn't want to make You're right I don't know what I was thinking. The Falcon's 2011 draft day trade was the best trade evah! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 Speaking of this weeks lines ** Don't know where to verify this but read that This is only the 2nd time in playoff history that the road team in the second round is a favorite. could this be true ? Quite possible considering they always play a higher seed with home field advantage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 Maybe what the Falcons really need is a better scouting dept. If I'm a GM then I've gotta trust that they can net me more better players with 5 picks vs one. Then again, I'm only an armchair GM. Maybe if the Saints realized what they had in Sproles, Thomas and Ivory, they wouldn't have a wasted 2 first rounders and a second rounder on a RB they don't need in the slightest.... Kinda funny how you all have gotten a free pass after committing so many resources to position that didn't turn out to be big need, yet the Falcons get blasted for only offering a few mid-round picks on top of what your GM did, to jump up all the way from the bottom to the top of the draft and get a can't miss guy who actually DID feel a need. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 (edited) Maybe what the Falcons really need is a better scouting dept. If I'm a GM then I've gotta trust that they can net me more better players with 5 picks vs one. Then again, I'm only an armchair GM. One of the byproducts of looking at various drafts to determine how much more likely early 1st round picks are of being great or even good players as late first round picks was seeing how few draft picks overall amount to anything more than very replaceable players. Of course, people love to point to this player or that player after the fact and point out how good a player a team could have gotten late in the 2nd round or such. But, the reality is that, on average, it's actually not often anyone they'll remember in a few years. Mind you, the same is actually true for early 1st round picks, how many of them end up not being all that. So, with that in mind, at the time the trade was made, you could make a great argument that they were overpaying. Because they were certainly limiting their chances of getting a great player by putting all their eggs in one basket. However, it appears to be paying off, because there's every reason to believe that Jones is, in fact, the goods. That he's somewhere between on his way to and already a game changer. That they would be very, very fortunate to have landed a player that great in the five picks they gave away. That, unless they're better at doing this than other teams, at least 2-3 of those 5 picks, statistically speaking, would be either complete misses or guys who did little more than hold down a roster spot for a few years until someone better came along. Edited January 9, 2012 by detlef Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godtomsatan Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 Quite possible considering they always play a higher seed with home field advantage. I'm not sure if it's 2nd ever, that makes sense I suppose. However, the home teams are 10-10 straight up on divisional weekend over the last 5 years. That almost is convincing enough for me to put a lot of faith in Houston. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 (edited) Maybe if the Saints realized what they had in Sproles, Thomas and Ivory, they wouldn't have a wasted 2 first rounders and a second rounder on a RB they don't need in the slightest.... K That was a problem with the lockout - they had the draft before they could sign free agents and thus did not have Sproles when they drafted Ingram Edited January 9, 2012 by Big John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 I'm not sure if it's 2nd ever, I doubt it, as there were definitely more road favorites in the league championship games and wildcard round games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 You're right I don't know what I was thinking. The Falcon's 2011 draft day trade was the best trade evah! You know that's not what I'm saying, after the result yesterday. My point was that expecting a markedly different outcome by not making the trade is foolish... But have fun criticizing other team's shortcomings, while your team is playing golf during the playoffs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godtomsatan Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 I doubt it, as there were definitely more road favorites in the league championship games and wildcard round games. I thought he just meant divisional weekend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MustOfBeenDrunk Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 I doubt it, as there were definitely more road favorites in the league championship games and wildcard round games. This is only the 2nd time in playoff history that the road team in the second round is a favorite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 That was a problem with the lockout - they had the draft before they could sign free agents and thus did not have Sproles when they drafted Ingram Ah, forgot about that.... But if people want to use hindsight to dismiss the Julio move (when at the same time, the Falcons planned to address defense in FA, which I will admit they did a piss-poor job there; but also may have not planned on Dahl walking), then I think it's equally fair to use hindsight to say that the Saints committed quite a lot of resources to the RB position, when they could have used the 1st and 2nd rounder and cash elsewhere. I'm guessing most will give them a free-pass because they're ready to compete now, and can afford a few wasted draft picks, but if it's not clear that the picks would make a difference for the Falcons now, I'm plenty happy with a guarantee that we'll have a difference maker for years to come. They gambled that Julio was the only missing piece and lost this go round, but I don't think it's evident that the Falcon's ceiling would be any higher without him. [/endrant] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MustOfBeenDrunk Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 After doing a quick search this is all I came up with http://beyondthebets.com/2012/01/09/mailba...ild-card-round/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 while your team is playing golf during the playoffs The Hawks offense scored just as many points last Sunday. Was Julio Jones caddying for Sidney Rice? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 The Hawks offense scored just as many points last Sunday. Was Julio Jones caddying for Sidney Rice? Nope sorry, even in your wildest dreams, Rice would still get injured before they got off the driving range. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 That was a problem with the lockout - they had the draft before they could sign free agents and thus did not have Sproles when they drafted Ingram Thanks for answering that quickly BJ. Not to mention the likelihood of losing Bush and the questions surrounding the injury to Ivory and how long he would be out. BTW, Moving up for Ingram virtually only cost them a 2nd round pick. They moved up from their 2.24 pick to get 1.28. It basically only cost them a late 2nd to borrow the 1st round pick for this upcoming draft. Now had the Saints totally flopped and ended up with what would have been a high first for this season then I would agree that it probably wasn't a wise move, but considering the RB situation the Saints were facing I thought it was the right one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 (edited) Thanks for answering that quickly BJ. Not to mention the likelihood of losing Bush and the questions surrounding the injury to Ivory and how long he would be out. BTW, Moving up for Ingram virtually only cost them a 2nd round pick. They moved up from their 2.24 pick to get 1.28. It basically only cost them a late 2nd to borrow the 1st round pick for this upcoming draft. Now had the Saints totally flopped and ended up with what would have been a high first for this season then I would agree that it probably wasn't a wise move, but considering the RB situation the Saints were facing I thought it was the right one. It still costs the first rounder you use on him too, no matter if it's "borrowed" from next year or not. It's still a first and second you don't have by trading up. So that's 2 quality draft picks you spent to move up to the late first. The Falcons had alot further to jump, but it was really only 3 quality draft picks from 2 drafts. Compared to the value of jumping from 27th to 6th overall, the 4ths were just lottery tickets. All of us who play dynasty know how much more a top pick is worth, compared to moving up to the late first... But anyways, we'll agree to disagree before this turns into a pissing match. I thought Ingram was a good pick at the time, but even with hindsight to know who they "should" have drafted, I don't see the Falcons being a bigger contender without Julio. A bunch of draft picks isn't enough to overcome weaknesses, and it's unfortunate that a can't miss WR wasn't either... yet anyway. He should still have a long productive career ahead of him.... Edited January 9, 2012 by delusions of granduer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 It still costs the first rounder you use on him too, no matter if it's "borrowed" from next year or not. It's still a first and second you don't have by trading up. So that's 2 quality draft picks you spent to move up to the late first. The Falcons had alot further to jump, but it was really only 3 quality draft picks from 2 drafts. Compared to the value of jumping from 27th to 6th overall, the 4ths were just lottery tickets. All of us who play dynasty know how much more a top pick is worth, compared to moving up to the late first... But anyways, we'll agree to disagree before this turns into a pissing match. I thought Ingram was a good pick at the time, but even with hindsight to know who they "should" have drafted, I don't see the Falcons being a bigger contender without Julio. A bunch of draft picks isn't enough to overcome weaknesses, and it's unfortunate that a can't miss WR wasn't either... yet anyway. He should still have a long productive career ahead of him.... Oddly, I actually feel the Falcons got a good deal, but not because of what the 6th pick is worth relative to the 27th. When I started evaluating drafts and how likely picks were to pan out based on where they were in the first round, I found there wasn't a whole lot of difference between the first 10 and the last 10. And, when salaries were unfettered it actually meant that early first round picks were actually worse than late ones. Now at least the money thing is worked out. None the less, in theory, it wasn't a good move for the reasons above. In reality, however, it appears to be because Jones seems to be as advertised. That he could be Megatron in a couple of years and I doubt Detroit would trade Megatron for a couple of special teamers and some marginal starters, which is, statistically what a realistic expectation for what they could have gotten with the picks they traded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 But anyways, we'll agree to disagree before this turns into a pissing match. I thought Ingram was a good pick at the time, but even with hindsight to know who they "should" have drafted, I don't see the Falcons being a bigger contender without Julio. A bunch of draft picks isn't enough to overcome weaknesses, and it's unfortunate that a can't miss WR wasn't either... yet anyway. He should still have a long productive career ahead of him.... Yeah, we'll agree to disagree. This by no means was ever meant to be a pissing match. Again, FWIW, I think the Falcons scored with the pick. I just don't think it was what they needed to accomplish their goal and may actually be hindering them as a result. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 (edited) Yeah, we'll agree to disagree. This by no means was ever meant to be a pissing match. Again, FWIW, I think the Falcons scored with the pick. I just don't think it was what they needed to accomplish their goal and may actually be hindering them as a result. That could likely be the case too... It just would have taken so much more to accomplish that goal, that they almost just had to go with the guys they had for this window, and hope Julio could be the missing piece. Perhaps this team did need a few years to fortify weaknesses, but then they may never have another chance at a guy like Julio, as Roddy and Tony G will be on the decline and gone in a few years.... Hell, the way Roddy keeps dropping the ball, I already like Julio more than him. I know we had the discussion before that the Falcons might have been close enough before to get by on offense with just Roddy, Tony G, and a lesser WR, and address weaknesses elsewhere, but it's more clear now that they probably weren't that close to where even hitting on all those picks would have mattered.... (ETA, and really I'd point to the failures in scouting of Dunta and Edwards, as well as letting Dahl walk, as way bigger contributors to the weaknesses, and I think that's where the blame should go 100% to Dmitroff). Edited January 9, 2012 by delusions of granduer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Croe Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 I can see the Giants trying to grind it out this time. I think they are better at clock control than a 1000 yard passing day by the QB's. +1 As to the AFC games, I could definitely see NE covering that spread but it's just too big for me to get comfortable with, especially since DEN's OC has shown that he'll now open the playbook a little bit before the middle of the 4th quarter. DEN is playing with house money right now and could manage a solid game. My lean would be to the NE end, but I couldn't bring myself to putting anything on it. And there's not a chance in hell I'd play the BAL/HOU game. HOU with that D getting 8 is tempting, but that means Yates will have to play well, and taking that chance playing in BAL is just too much risk. And there's no way I'd ever give 8 and take a team QBed by Flacco. Thi one could end up being an old fashioned slobber knocker with either team struggling to get to double digits on the scoreboard. Wouldn't touch the BAL/HOU game either, not even with the over. Dude, I agree. But whatever the reason a lot of people like the Giants to keep it close and have a shot. I have seen it all over. I think people are up on the Giants right now (2007 plays into that I think), and people are a little down on GB with the L at KC, a poor D, and the Giants playing them toe to toe in week 13. I do think it is too much Giant love though. We shall see. No such thing as too much Giant love. I agree that beating GB at the tundra is a tall order, but seeing how the giants play when all are healthy and clicking has to be a little intimidating for any team. Just like when watching NE come back from 21-0 and score 6 straight or Rodger's first 12 games of the season this year - it is hard to find a way to stop that momentum. I think Giants are all over Rodgers Sunday in a close game that can go either way. I'll say this, 2007/2008 makes me believe they at least have a chance. After they were so inconsistent that year, I did not think for a second they would win at Dallas, at GB and then vs. the undefeated Pats. I was floored when they did it, still am. It taught me a team can get hot at the right time and shock the world. This GB team I think is probably better than all three of those opponents that year, so it's going to be extremely difficult to win even if the Giants play a really good game. But I'll be tuned in and more hopeful than I ever would have been in the past. +1 I almost lost faith until the second beating of the cowboys Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Croe Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 I'm thinking a three game teaser NO +6.5, DEN +23.5, NYG +18.5 (sounds almost too good to be true) use that as a hedge against my Giant +$320 money line Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 I'm thinking a three game teaser NO +6.5, DEN +23.5, NYG +18.5 (sounds almost too good to be true) use that as a hedge against my Giant +$320 money line You sure you've got that right? Where in the world do you get a 10 point teaser, to take the Saints from a 3.5 point favorite to a 6.5 point underdog? What kind of odds do you get on that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.