Quote:
Originally Posted by Lotus
This is definitely true for high picks. But we still could have taken a developmental prospect lower.
And, although the positive value of what we actually did in the draft is clear, part of me still wonders how things might be different now and into the future if we had taken Ponder instead. Certainly he was overvalued pick-wise in the moment by the Vikes, but if he turns out to be a really good one, he'll end up being worth their 12th - or our 10th - pick.
|
I'm not sure Ponder was overvalued, many people expected him to go top 15. But what's kind of not discussed is that the Redskins didn't trade down with the intent of passing on Ponder. They knew the Jaguars liked Gabbert so they passed on him by trading down (and with Jacksonville), but they took a gamble that maybe, just maybe, Ponder would fall to them and they could add picks and get Ponder.
I'm not saying Ponder was the choice over Kerrigan had both been there at 16, that I don't know. But they didn't trade down with the intent of adding Kerrigan. They traded down with the intent of adding picks.
They knew the only team that might take Ponder between 10 and 16 was the Vikings. And in fact the Vikings were seriously considering Kerrigan.
Of course, all this would have been moot had Locker been there at 10.