rpfc

I will wait on that a few years...

Also, that points system tells me that I should trade picks 16, 17, and 20 for pick 1 - and that it be fair. I mean - lol...

Carlton would tell you to eff off. Why would they do that?

As DC said - formula is fine but don't dress it up into something it isn't.

It's great as a rough guide, 55, but equating a plethora of mediocre picks to one good pick and applying a players worth by adding all these numbers up is not giving a true reflection of worth. The lack of another model - other than case by case 'eye test' doesn't prove this more righteous.

RG3 was flat out one-dimensional and while that was a great dimension, he didn't want to improve and run a proper offence - we are getting a bit Inside NFL here but that trade was a terrible decision by Snyder and set up the Rams: http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/rams-send-players-acquired-in-rg3-trade-out-for-pregame-coin-toss-223532066.html My point isn't that bad luck should be foreseen but that trading up to get the top pick (or the 2nd) is frought because of what you have to give up to get it and if it doesn't pay off you will get people who will say you screwed up. It's not captain hindsight either, I remember plenty of people say to not do it but Snyder wanted his toy and now he can play with it himself, the team he owns certainly isn't.

The Rams seem to know more than you do. Honestly, if RG3 isn't a bust, then no-one is. Tebow won a Heisman, he also has been to the NFL Playoffs...how is he in the pocket? How are his mechanics? And he was taken at 25 in the first round... RG3 is an absolute bust at 2. And as someone not too partial to racial epithets - couldn't happen to a nicer team.

I didn't know that was what we were doing...

It also doesn't allow for how that draft class is rated, and by all accounts - it isn't a great class of kids (not that they know for sure). Also, I am aware of the numbers that the AFL have put on picks and I applaud it as it leads to more justice at the bidddng table for F/S and Academy but beware of applying it in a 'video game fashion' as I could amass 5 picks in the 30s of the draft and swap them for the the 2nd pick in the draft and this formula will tell me that is fair. But it isn't fair - the axiom quality over quantity applies here and that deal would be terrible. So beware when taking these numbers and applying them in all trade scenarios.

Nah, mate.

Well, the lower clubs still have to give over the picks, and I was responding to another poster.

Google "Redskins trade for RG3" It will give you [censored] nightmares... Shudder. Note: Yes, I am aware it was the 2nd pick overall...

lol I much prefer Nudge's ramblings then read the oh-so-plausible trade deals that posters concoct. 'Yeah, we can get 3 2nd rounders from GWS to give to GC to get the points to be eligible for Australian Idol if the bachelorette has an Academy player they won't relinquish...'

There is a restriction on how many 1st round picks a team can trade in consecutive years. If the MFC could survive how it was 'sanctioned/drafted/retained players' from 1999 to 2012 then trading some future draft picks for known talents won't ruin a club...

Nudge is back!!! Leave him alone, HT. Regale me with rumours, Nudge. Regale me!! Don't really want Rockliff but I will take him if necessary. Don't think Hannebury will come. Prestia - yes, please.

Yes, with intricate draft and trading proposals tha contain multiple points of failure and rely, at every point, for other clubs to be available with the picks we want to simply acquiesce. This isn't a video game. It's a bunch of reps trying to a multitude of things, but in the main, they are looking out for just one club - it is hard to do a litany of things in trade week.

From where I sit, Dom has more talent in close, has better vision with the footy and execution with the footy. I think he is a better footy player than Melksham. That isn't to say that players like Melksham are not required, but understandably, they don't excite. We are about to lose a player (hopefully with more than ND25 coming back) who is not as good a player as Melksham.

And you do listen often? I don't seek out his wisdom, no, but he knows football. Just had a problem with execution in his last stint... And you can delete posts should you deem them disregardable.

Plough must be brilliant by now...

So you are saying that this deal will happen or that Tomlinson wants it to happen? Wanna make sure I have got it straight...

There will be both.

When I hear 'we lack depth' I read it as saying 'we lack competition for places' but that is not a problem - we have had competition for places, but those competing for those places are just not very good. Our first problem is our midfield doesn't have bonafide stars (yet), and our second problem is our midfield doesn't run deeper than 6. That's our real problem with 'depth' - we move Jones, Vince, and Viney out for a rest or they are out of form and we feel it - this is being rectified but it really won't be rectified by getting more fringe players to provide 'competition.' These talents will still be beaten by deeper midfields.