Page 2 of 2
Posted: Sun Jun 03, 2007 10:08 pm
by Redskin in Canada
wormer wrote:Yea...I did not really word that exactly how I wanted to but you actually make my point... They are being given a bad draft grade based on NON-draft-day activties. Meaning, the 2007 draft should be looked at on it's own merits.
You are right. The draft was what it was based on the number and round of picks. I would call it good.
But the personnel management decisions made -preceding- and -impacting- on the draft were, mmmmh, just bad. Feel better now? I do.
Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2007 11:34 am
by Chris Luva Luva
wormer wrote:Meaning, the 2007 draft should be looked at on it's own merits.
I think they got graded badly for the lack thereof.
wormer wrote:I would also accept trades made on draft day that got them players and/or picks.
But that's not the draft.
wormer wrote:Saying they had a bad draft cuz the traded thier 3rd round pick 9 months ago makes no sense to me.
It does when X player under performs (for whatever reason) and the team is screwed because they need depth and can't get it because the pissed away Y amount of draft pics.