Quote:
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut
The value lost in that calculus is about a 1st round pick next season.
I'm not entirely sure what point you're trying to make there.
Risk is of COURSE mitigated by the amount of said risk you're taking on. Which is directly related to where the pick was made.
I mean...yeah. And? I'm fine with Moore at $15 million/season. I wouldn't have been fine with him at $30 million. It's not because I care about his take-home, it's because I care about how it impacts the cap and this what we can/cannot do around him. Again - a direct risk assessment.
That's...universal. It's every argument ever had about personnel on this board. Hell, it was what spun me up about Skyy.
What you're arguing is effectively a truism.
|
I’m not really arguing anything, more just trying to tease out your approach versus theirs and seeing where they diverge.
Before the draft, you seemed like you would’ve been okay with him in the second. And that’s pretty much on the basis of knowing nothing of the specific medicals and just taking him as the median case in the study that showed that only 1 of 15 OL really recovered from the injury to play at a similar level. Totally fair.
So then let’s consider that the Chiefs have a bit more of the specific medical information that - to them at least - puts him in a more favorable light versus said median. And then maybe they have him on their board in the 5ish range instead of your 10-15.
If you work with the above construct, then gap would seem to narrow between your taking him in the second to their doing so in the first. That’s all.