Finster.. what precisely do you have against my post #89? You keep saying we're ignoring that 4th pick but it wasn't ignored from the very outset. This whole issue comes down to the specific use of the phrase "give up" as opposed to "picks that were traded". Like I said.. you try writing "give up" in an actual written contract where you promise to "give up" 3X+Y, and you'll pay 3X+Y, not Y. These analogies with money are spot on. Anyway.. we're going round and round. I'm going to "give up" with this discussion unless there's a novel response (e.g. like a serious counter response to post #89).
Classic! I think though, that in this case we've all lost some brain cells trying to figure out what's currently going on in this thread.
Sounds like when folks were saying that we gave up our first to move up and take Dion Jordan...lol Check this out..literally we only gave up our 2nd to move up, but in terms of accruing value, we softened that 2nd round loss by the value gained from moving 12 to 3.. In was highway robbery at the time.
btw.. to make this (deliberately) more ambiguous (for fun). We gave up pick #186 + two picks in 2017 to get Carroo. You guys know that we got that pick #186 BACK with a 2nd trade (we traded picks #196 and #227 for #186 lol) Not quite sure how often that happens.. where a team gives away a pick, then trades back for it. So maybe we gave up 4 picks to draft two players, Carroo and Grant.
How ever many we had at one time is actually irrelevant, we bought one with 3, then USED the one. We didn't give the NFL those three picks for Caroo, we gave them to Min for one pick, and then USED that pick on Caroo. Same thing as before, show me which of the picks was not used, no one has taken up that challenge, because it's impossible to disprove that empirical data. 3rd, 6th, 3rd, 4th.
That's a different scenario Deej, that was an in-round swap, you go into the deal with a 1st round pick, and walk out with a 1st round pick, even though 3 picks were involved it's a net loss of 2 picks. This is exactly where I think folks are getting confused, because it's pretty rare to have a trade where there isn't an in-round swap, it's pretty rare to just buy into a round, it took us 3 picks to buy 1 pick, then use the pick we spent 3 picks on.
No you had 4 in total. At one point you had a chevy, a vw, and a Toyota. That's 3. Then you had a ford. That's 4. Again you didn't have 4 at one time, but you did have 4 in total.
It is not different. The Dolphins used the 2017 3rd round pick in 2016, and used two picks to make that happen. Maybe you are confused by the fact that the "in-round" swap took place over a year.
You just explained it for Dion Jordan. 1st, 1st, 2nd. Or Look at William Hayes. 6th and 7th. So Hayes is 2 picks?
One way to make it die: start a Tannehill debate. EXCEPT: this is a Tannehill thread and I think this thread "going Carroo" speaks volumes about how different the perception of Tannehill is this offseason from previous ones. In previous years you'd never have a chance to get away from the Tannehill Civil War. Real winner of this thread: Tannehill.
I agree generally with what you say. My only point of disagreement is that Lazor actually did a good job with his offensive design, and this is shown by his playcalling when Miami were tied or behind. The short version of his failing is that whenever he was behind he abandoned the run and opposing Ds were able to take advantage of his known tendencies. This was compounded by his taking away the audible/inactive feet which shows up particularly in the blitz splits. I would say the real problem with Lazor was his arrogance. Whenever there was a failing he never accepted it could be his fault. He blamed his QB for not following instructions, so he took away the audible. He knew better than his HC so he didn't change his run/pass ratios even after Dan Campbell publicly committed the team to running more. The Lazor stats are useful in being able to show in the numbers that a significant portion of the offensive troubles in 14/15 were due to the OC, not the personnel executing his play calls. There have been a lot of theories put forward regarding Tannehill's performance that are not borne out by the stats [for example: Tannehill was taking sacks because he was holding onto the ball too long, when the stats showed he was amongst the quickest in the league at getting the ball out of his hand; Tannehill having a bad deep ball when the problem was, for whatever reason, the Tannehill/Wallace connection specifically not Tannehill's deep ball generally].
Hell we've had the deep ball to wallace come up and that didn't really get any traction. That's normally good for 3 pages by irself. I even tried to get a liitle bit of fire going with the blitz/audible connection to stop the thread going full Carroo and the spark just didn't take.
We traded 3 picks to Min for the 86th pick correct? So 3 picks gone, but one in hand, I don't think there is any argument up to this point. Now, how did we use that pick? Use being the key word, and remember we're already out 3 picks, so when we use that pick it's now 4.
Sherman took away the audible, not Lazor. He never got it back under either. What he had under Lazor was different. It wasn't a pure audible but he had many options.
The "options" he had were useless and obviously weren't effective. It is why not only did Gase give Thill the ability to audible he actually included his input into game planning.
We didn't swap for Dion in a way where our original 1st round pick = the 1st round pick we spent to draft him. All picks in a given round are not equal.
The Dolphins never had 4 picks, though. It's not like we had 4 picks in the 3rd round and gave 4 picks to the league for Carroo. It's not like we had 4 picks, gave three to the Vikes (for their permission to draft Carroo) and then gave the 4th pick to the league for Carroo. The Dolphins had 0 third round picks. They turned 3 later round draft picks into 1 pick. 3=1...not 3+1. Then they used that 1 pick to get Carroo. 1=Carroo. Again, 3=1=Carroo. Not 3+1= Carroo.
I don't see anyway to say it better then danmarino just did. When someone says you spent 4 picks, I would assume that means that we spent value of 4 picks, that's just not the case here. We traded 3 picks for 1 we haven't spent anything yet, we just did a transition of value for value (its a completely other discussion if we got = value). Then we drafted Carroo. So you can look at it 2 ways, we either just spent 1 pick(strictly speaking we only had 1 pick at the time of the pick), or we spent our 3 picks to get Carroo, but you can't add them cause we didn't create extra value in the transaction. As Danmarino said its 3 = 1 = 1 at no point was extra value added to what we had at the start of the draft.
You see how you aren't counting the pick we used on him? "It's not like we had 4 picks, gave three to the Vikes (for their permission to draft Carroo) and then gave the 4th pick to the league for Carroo." Yeah, it kind of is like that, we didn't start out with 4 no, Min didn't give us their permission, in fact Caroo had nothing AT ALL to do with that trade, but after that trade we were out 3 picks, PRIOR TO DRAFTING Caroo. So the score is, we're out 3 picks, and we do not yet have Caroo. Then we need the leagues permission to draft Caroo, and what the league NEEDED from us was a pick, so we're out 3 picks and the league still NEEDS yet another pick before they will relinquish Caroo's rights to the Miami Dolphins. 3 picks(6th, 3rd, 4th) went to Min, 1 pick(3rd) went to the league, 1 player went to the Dolphins.
Caroo wasn't involved much last year, he only caught 3 passes, but there were 2 plays that stood out to me. One play he didn't even catch the ball, but he put a move on a CB and smoked him like a turkey and was wide open deep, the QB(can't remember if it was RT or MM) overthrew him in or just before the EZ. The other play was his TD, vs SF, in which he displayed everything you want to see from him, catching the ball with his hands away from his body, stiff arming the defender and running through the would be tackler. http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-...nte-Carroo-stiff-arms-defender-for-15-yard-TD I still actually have high hopes for the kid, I think he was digesting the O last year and before all is said and done I think he'll be a heck of a WR.
