From Peter Kings MMQB April 24 on CNN.Com: Reminds me of last year before the draft when then-Houston GM Charley Casserly, trying to gauge interest with teams below him for the first overall pick, called New Orleans, Tennessee and the Jets. Casserly asked Jets GM Mike Tannenbaum, "You interested in moving from four to one?'' "Sure,'' said Tannenbaum. "What else are you going to give me for it?'' You gotta like a GM with that kind of Moxie!
Awesome. We've seen it with the Thomas Jones singing - and the antithesis of it with the kevan barlow signing - but I have the sense that Tannenbaum drives a pretty hard bargain.
We all knew Barlow was a knee jerk signing as soon as it happens. We didn't lose much in that month, cause we actually got something for Jolley and Bollinger that wasn't gum that had already been chewed. I like the hard bargaining approach of Tannenbaum, even if he has made some silly moves, i.e. Barlow.
He makes a good point, the first overall pick is not really the best place to be. The money you have to give to that one player is so out of control and the risk that the player will be a bust is always there. While it's nice to get a big name player, a middle of the round first round pick is a better pick not becuase of the quality of player but the overall pick, the player might be similar talent wise and the risk money wise is drastically less. Notice how many teams year after year try to trade out of the top 2 or 3 and can never do it.
I think those draft value charts are such BS-- it makes it so hard to make a "Fair" trade. For us to move up #1 last year, we would have had to trade the 4th, 29th and 35 pick I think-- that is just out of controll for a guy who may or may not work out, and will command 27 million in Gauranteed $$. If we wanted to trade to #1 this year, our entire draft has a value of about 1600 out of the 3000 points necessary to get to #1. Our entire draft and Vilma may get it done (not that I'm suggesting it)
I agree, I always have agreed. I would prefer 4 players in the top 100 than 1 first round draft pick. Face it, it is a guessing game, who is to say the 1st pick is better than the 10th pick? So far Mangold is better than Brick. More often than not there is someone in the first 100 picks that is better than the first guy taken. Then you factor in the cap hit and it is just a huge risk for an unproven commodity.
I think you guys are taking the comment too seriously, Obviously he was joking with someone he knows. The tone was probably intended to say I would love to trade up but I am not going to overpay.
The point of that was nobody in their right mind wants to trade up to the top 5. They have to give up the farm to get there and then pay through the nose for the priveldge of signing a potential bust. Good GMs would never consider it.
