Interesting podcast from Kyle Crabbs - Locked on Dolphins. Someone referred him to a Bill Simmons podcast where a guest presented the idea that Chris Grier's move from 12 to 6 might not necessarily be about targeting a specific player or players, but instead, to put himself back in the mix in order to take advantage or any desperate teams willing to trade up and dish out another payload of picks - or if not, then you get the weapon. Key word - flexibility. Here's the Spotify link: https://open.spotify.com/show/1h5AvikBOVYhqtI7zuuUU7?si=638033a79be74d13 Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podca...ly-podcast-on-the-miami-dolphins/id1137170219 Stitcher: https://www.stitcher.com/show/locked-on-dolphins You're looking for today's podcast (Apr. 13th) - Power to the Pod LVII Here's the Simmons podcast: https://open.spotify.com/show/07SjDmKb9iliEzpNcN2xGD Dolphins from 48:46 Chris Grier hunting down other GM's and their picks like...
Honestly I think it's both. They didn't want or need to be at 3 to get guys they are interested in and I believe there several guys they would be happy with when the #6 came along. I also believe given what we have seen from Grier over the last few years is everything has a price. If they can get someone to overpay for #6 he will move it as long as he thinks he can still be in position to grab someone from the top of his board although it probably would not be one of the guys they have their eyes on at 6.
This isn't poker. You don't give up a 1st round pick and try to bluff someone trying to move up. Grier paid way over draft chart value to get the Eagles to move from 12 to 6. He's targeting a player or two.
This is exactly what I think they were saying. Grier is keeping his options open in a spot where he can grab either a blue chip player or a blue chip trade.
I agree with Tin Indian. I think if a QB falls he can capitalize but I also think there’s a drop off in talent after Lawrence, Wilson, Sewell, Pitts and Chase. We know some teams will chase Lance, Fields or Jones. He put us right where we need to be for the top OT, TE or WR.
I've believed all along that there's 3+ people we're targeting with that #3/#6 pick...no idea who...but they're definitely not locked on a single person or they wouldn't have traded back. My latest guess at the top-5 is QB, QB, QB, QB (ATL trades back), then Chase or Sewell at #5. If Atlanta stays at #4, I think they take Pitts. I'm personally curious if we'd be content with Chase, Pitts or Sewell at #6...or if we'd be okay taking Smith there. It almost has to be one of those four names, doesn't it? We didn't go look at Waddle or Parsons so I think they'd be out of that mix. I think the real grading comes down to the difference you see in the former three and the talent gap between them at their prospective positions. If you have them all relatively equal, then it almost doesn't matter. I'm also starting to learn towards Smith being the pick at #6 all-along since he will definitely be there for the taking. That would make the double trade back/up scenario almost 100% safe if we're only targeting one person- that's not true with Chase/Sewell/Pitts scenarios. And as I've said all along, Smith is almost unquestionably the best of the bunch overall for receiving...maybe the "skinny" part doesn't scare us. However, I DO NOT think we trade back in any scenario except for one where only two QB's go in the top-4. Sure, we could land an extra 1st by moving back...but we paid an extra 1st to move up. That doesn't make any sense. If Wilson or Fields somehow slides all the way to #6 though, then I think there's a possibility there that we do trade back....I just don't see it happening since we'd have to move into the teens to see real value. But if we do that, then what happens to our board? I just don't see it as much of a possibility.
Phew! When I read the title, I thought he'd been identified as some local nutjob preying on lone women walking home late at night....
I think it is a lot like poker. You have your hand (draft picks and players) and you have cards that are face up. How you act, the moves you make and the posture you take sometimes gets you to a win.
I’m good at 6 personally. I believe they’ll be a hall of fame caliber star on the board at a position of need for us. Also risky trading down to even 9 now. With Carolina no longer looking QB. Both Panthers and Lions drafting right behind us have the exact same needs as us.
I thought of something worse, to be honest. But, on the topic... I agree with Tin. While I think 6 is a great spot, I think Grier would be open to any opportunity to fleece a team that's desperate enough.
The one thing that has been fairly constant since Grier took over is he is very good at hiding his intentions for that 1st pick. The last couple drafts the pick has been someone they didn't even talk to much and you never heard them mentioned in chatter.
If this is actually what he is planing then it is a good move. The draft is about numbers. More picks the merrier. That would be what a good GM would do, but I am not sure Grier is one. This would be a dream draft, trading down from six to 19 while picking up a plethora of high value 2nd and 3rd round picks.
I like how we moved back up. The 49ers offered us a deal we couldn't pass up and in return it gave us leverage to move back up to 6 where we could potentially still get a great player. I like where we are at for this draft, and I hope we are done trading as far as the first round goes.
I want to stay at 6 because I think a difference maker is going to be there assuming Atl or whoever drafts at 4 doesnt take Pitts and then Cincy follows suit with Chase. I wouldn't be upset about trading back from 18 because I think there are 5-6 edge rushers, all with question marks, that some will be available later in the first round.
Trade chart does not apply in the top 10. Especially when QB's are in play. Everyone overpays in the top 10 short of it being a weak *** Dion Jordan fluke draft where there's practically no good players.
That one still hurts. 2013 was supposed to be our year for the draft and we completely pissed that one down our leg.
First clue should have been the Raiders letting that pick go for so cheap. Meanwhile in 2018 you got the Jets paying 3 2nd rounders (2 very high and one high mid) just to move up 2 spots. I would kill for a trade down opportunity like that.
Lane Johnson will always be the Miami Dolphin that never was. Never in my entire life have been more wrong when thinking I was absolutely certain for sure right. I remember mouthing the name...Lane Johnson, except....It was Dion Jordan.
The last several top 3 picks we have messed up. Dion Jordan, Jake Long, Ronnie Brown. Not strong drafts overall, but the better choices were there for the taking.
Even discounting the fact that Long was short lived due to injury, we should have taken Matt Ryan. Parcells had an old school mentality that devalued QB and he messed it up.
Jake Long was still a great player and without fresh injury would have been a potentially ball of fame player. Matt Ryan is overrated
Eh agree to disagree. In isolation, taking Jake certainly wasn't a sin, but devaluing QB and taking a dude like Henne later was an error we still haven't fully recovered from (fingers crossed for Tua). Ryan isn't a HoF, but he has had a very good career and was worth that selection imo. Hard to play the what-if games, but I just can't get behind the old-school mentality. We hired Parcells to make us into a team for a bygone era just as a new era was emerging. Bad choices all around.
Ryan would have been gone like Tannehill. There is more than one way to get a quarterback. Matt Ryan is not the answer and needs ridiculous offense talent to be successful. Dolphins would have never have him what he needed to succeed.
Jake Long was a beast until back issues got him. The line at that time was in huge need of help and he stepped in to solidify that. It's easy to look back now without the context and say he wasn't a great pick but I disagree.