Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiefsFanatic
Why?
We don't get 1st round talent in the 1st round because we are always picking in the 30s.
Would you trade FAU and Rice for a true #1 receiver, on a rookie deal, for 5, FOR FIVE years? If not, you are wrong.
I would trade 3 years of FAU and Rice, and 3 years of Karlaftis and Skyy Moore, or whatever bust of a receiver we draft in the second round after drafting a second rounder at the end of the 1st round, for 5 years of having a true number one receiver.
We don't really need to draft a lot on defense since we are the youngest snap adjusted defense in the NFL, and other than receiver, and maybe a TE, we really don't need to draft a lot on offense.
So, why is a bunch of second round maybes more valuable than a possible generational wide receiver?
|
But you can’t frame it like this because it’s not the way it works.
You can’t just say - would you trade these players taken at this position whom we already know exactly what they are and what they’ve been doing and in return we’re going to get a clear #1 receiver. That’s not the trade. And it’s definitely not 3 years of those guys - it’s 5 of the 1’s and 4 of the 2’s.
The relevant conversation is trading 3 1’s and 2 2’s in the future as a starting point for the discussion.
Because rather than the pick being Skyy Moore, it could be Chris Jones. Rather than Karlaftis, it could be McDuffie.
If I said the trade was 5 years of McDuffie and the first 4 years of Chris Jones’ career plus 2 more 1’s and another 2, are you sure that’s a trade you’d make? (That’s as unfair a way to frame it as you just did.)