I like X and Drake, but X was up and down, you can make an argument for him or Max, both were up and down, we need better play from both, both are shaky deep, X cost us a top 10 pick in rounds 2 and 4 when the consensus view on him was bottom of the 2nd. Drake was good, I just think thats a high pick for a guy like him, we got just as many big plays from Williams and he was undrafted. I view the top of round 3 as the end of the "potential plug in starter" section of the draft, so philosophically I'm only drafting potential starters at this point of the draft, specialty players later, that's my draft philosophy anyway.
That's incorrect. They had 3 picks (6th2016,4th2017,3rd2017) => They swapped 3 picks with one pick (3rd2016)=>They picked a player. At the start they had 3 picks in the end they had one player. You cant count the pick they used to select him because it wasnt Dolphins draft capital from the beginning, they acquired it by swapping it (overpaying) with three picks. Let's value the draft capital cost of Carroo now. 17 points the 6th rounder, 195 points the 3rd rounder and 72 points the fourth rounder (I took the mid round value since our draft position wasnt known). The total is 286 points, by the chart (not perfect but the only available instrument to calculate draft capital value) 286 points is bottom of the second round value (62nd overall). Like I said earlier we overpaid for that pick but not as much as you said in the previous post.
I look at the players we took in FA as need positions. We only have two LBs on the roster so we NEEDED another one just to field a team. I'm sure we'll add at least two or three more before camp. As for the DL...we signed some run stuffers which is what we needed. None of these signings are world beaters, but they provide depth at least. I see these FA signings as stop gaps until we can draft guys to fill their roles in the future. Building through the draft is the right way, and I think the FO is using the FA pool to add stop gaps until we can fill the position thru the draft. We have too many holes to fill it in one draft, so let some of these players have 2 and three year deals. It'll take that many drafts to get the right players in here.
So we got Tunsil for nothing? because by your logic, since we traded for that spot and it wasn't original Dolphins draft capitol, you can't count it, so we didn't use a 1st round pick on Tunsil? You always count the pick that is used, I mean, that is the pick that was used, how can you not count it. Again, you are using swapping math, like the X pick, there were 3 picks involved in that trade, we traded a 2nd and a 4th for another 2nd, but what we did is swap 2nds, in other words, it cost us a 4th round pick to move up 5 spots, so even though 3 picks were involved, it only cost us 2, because there was a swapping in round 2, we did not lose a 2nd round pick. This is not the case with Caroo, they used 3 picks to buy a pick; X trade = a 2nd and a 4th for a 2nd, 3 picks involved, Dolphin impact= used a 2nd round pick to draft X, lost a 4th round pick, 2 picks. Caroo trade = a 3rd and 4th in '17 and a 6th in '16 for a 3rd in '16, 4 picks involved, Dolphin impact= acquired an extra 3rd round pick used to draft Caroo, lost '16 6th rounder, '17 3rd and 4th round picks, 4 picks. You follow the tally, after the X trade we were out 2 picks, a 2nd to draft X, and a 4th. After the Caroo trade we were out 4 picks, a 3rd to draft Caroo, a 6th, and a 3rd and 4th the following year.
You serious? Tunsil case: he cost us one first round pick. We swapped our 1st for eagles 1st + Maxwell + Kiko, then we drafted Tunsil. I'll put the Caroo situation in another way, to follow your example so you can understand better: We swapped our 6th rounder with their 3rd rounder and to move up one hundred spots we paid a 3rd and a 4th. It's the same thing as the Howard pick, except we moved up a bit more. You can say Caroo cost us "a 3rd round pick" OR he cost us "the amount we paid to get that pick" but not both.
"And on a side note...it's way too early to call the Carroo trade a bust. If he breaks out this year...and he could...it would be a fair trade." How can he break out (sans injury) buried on the depth chart?
I am serious, you are the guy who said "You cant count the pick they used to select him because it wasnt Dolphins draft capital from the beginning". But this is simple math, i'll lay it out for you; We used a 3rd round pick to draft Caroo, that is 1 pick we can no longer use, a 6th round pick that we can no longer use, and a 3rd and 4th this year that we can no longer use. Lets leave the actual picks out of it for a min, how many picks were not usable after we drafted him, a 6th and a 3rd and 4th, that's 3, now lets add the actual pick, that's 4. That is 4 picks, you cannot argue with math. As opposed to the X trade, we used 1 pick we can no longer use, and a 4th we can no longer use. Leave the actual pick aside, how many picks were not usable after we drafted him, a 4th rounder, now add the actual pick, thats 2. That is 2 picks, even though 3 were involved. The difference here is that we moved up in the 2nd for X, we still had a 2nd round pick, but with Caroo, we flat out purchased a pick we didn't have. That is why your logic works on the X trade, because it was a 2nd round swap, but your logic doesn't hold true with Caroo, because there was no swap, it was an outright purchase.
That's hilarious. Every purchase is a swap. Think about it. When you buy an apple you swap money for the apple. A purchase is just a particular case of swap. Even without considering that how about the idea of swapping our 6th for the 3rd sending a 4th and a 3rd for compensation? That is a swap, isnt it?
Wow, an apple for an apple is the swap in the context that we are talking about, if you buy an apple you are out that money, but if you swap apples you still have an apple. None of this matters though, i did the math for you, it's pretty simple, the pick we used on him, 1, the 6th round pick, 2, this years 3rd, 3, this years 4th, 4. Very simply, we got 1 draft pick out of those 4 picks, no way around that, show me how we got more than 1 pick out of those 4 and we have a conversation. You're using pick swap math, like the X trade, a 2nd and a 4th to get a 2nd, but we aren't out all 3 picks, because we entered the trade with a 2nd, and left the trade with a 2nd, we swapped 2nds.
If you swap for an apple (let's say in exchange you give in a red apple) you end up with an apple, but you lose the red apple. If you buy an apple you end up with an apple, but you lose the money. It's the same kind of process. Your math is dead wrong. But you can continue to believe it's right... let's say I'm amazed by your persistance.
LOL, that was funny, if you trade an apple for an apple you still have an apple, if you buy an apple you are out the money. 3rd, 6th, 3rd, 4th, those are the picks and we got 1 player with them, show me WITH MATH, how that doesn't = 4, you're trying to rationalize your way around math, lol, it's kind of funny, don't try and think around it, just do the math dude, addition and subtraction don't lie.
This isn't right. Miami traded the team’s sixth round pick in 2016, and their third- and fourth-round pick in 2017 to get back into the third round to select Carroo. That's 3. So, in math terms: 3rd round= 6th round(2016) + 3rd round (2017) + 4th round (2017) 1 = 3 ...... 3 is the answer
> means "greater than". The Dolphins spent 3 picks on Carroo. Let's try it this way. In the 2016 draft the Dolphins had no 3rd round pick to spend when they wanted to get Carroo in the 3rd round. So, they traded their 6th round in 2016, their 3rd round in 2017, and their 4th round in 2017. That's 3. 3 picks. What you're implying is that I have no money. However, I borrow $1 today and promise the lender to give them $3 dollars on payday. I buy a candy bar with my $1. Then I give the lender his $3 on payday. Now, my paycheck is $50. I now have $47. Have I spent $4 or $3? $50-$3 = $47 Clearly, I spent $3.
I actually picked up on what you meant the very first time you said it.....be patient with some of the others, they cant help it.
Come on Fin-O... I already wrote: "Being cautious about an injury prone player is valid. Being cautious about one player because another player was injury prone is not valid." I gave the guy a way out of his initial, very poorly stated, assertion. Instead he chose to ride with the "Cameron had injuries and so Thomas will end up like him" mantra. If he really meant what I wrote he would have just agreed. Instead he decided to throw more gasoline on himself.
Wasn't speaking about you Danny boy. He simply referenced us being excited over an ex-stud TE a few years ago only to see him make little to no impact on the field and how he is treading lightly because of this. He's not saying the are the same player who sleeps with the same women (Julius wishes I'm sure) who have some link to each other. He simply is comparing a situation when we were overly optimistic about a player who let us down....I agree with him actually. I'm on a wait and see approach with Thomas for a handful of reasons.
I wasn't saying you were referring to me. I was saying that I don't think he was saying what you think. I thought that at first too, but after I gave him an out and an option to better explain himself he refused and carried on with the "Cameron was injury prone so Thomas will end up like him" diatribe. Hell, I've shown him, as have others, that Steen had some very good games last season and yet he argues that too. He just won't change his mind no matter the proof he's shown.
