[DJ's left nut]

I don't think there's any basis for your position that it would've cost a 2nd and next year's third. A 4th and next year's third is far more likely based on what Denver gave up.

But ultimately, the 4th simply doesn't matter. If you truly think Jones is this good, you should've taken him at 28 and gotten the 5th year option.

Again, just look at the amount of talent this team has gotten from the waiver wire and/or as UDFAs - we're better at getting a massive pool, pitting them against each other and separating the wheat from the chaff that way. When you're not tied to any of those players because you've expended no draft capital, it's going to be a true meritocracy. That's how guys like West and Ware are able to stick; they simply played their asses off. But Ware wasn't going to make the team over Davis until Charles got hurt - why? Draft capital.

Drafting a slew of 4th rounders isn't any more likely to yield positive contributions than simply throwing numbers at the problem and using that roster spot on the guy that plays the best. I don't see anything in Ehringer that says he's better than Pughsley but he'll make the team before Pughsley because we used a pick on him.

A pick virtually guarantees a roster spot and given the extremely low success rate of 3rd day picks, it's actually a pretty inefficient use of that spot. When weighed against everything, that 4th round pick has so very little value (and again, people openly acknowledge this when supporting picks like Robinson).

I don't mind the player even if I think he's redundant and a poor allocation of draft capital given our needs. But I hate the approach even more.