Quote:
Originally Posted by Dam8610
Ballard absolutely gets paid to evaluate NFL players as well as college players. His job is to assemble the most talented roster possible. By definition, that will include some acquisitions that are not draft picks. Trading for Buckner was a big risk as well. He gave up the 13th pick, and that was a home run in terms of value. Of course in hindsight it seems obvious that it was the right move, but Buckner could've come in and been terrible, and everyone would've said he never should've traded away such a valuable asset for Buckner. That's what everyone said about the Trent Richardson trade, and rightfully so, because Trent Richardson was awful. Once again, this highlights the difference good talent evaluation makes.
I understand that sometimes change is a necessary catalyst, but change for its own sake is how you become the Cleveland Browns or the New York Jets.
|
We have totally different memories of the Buckner trade. I remember everyone on this board as well as every single article praising this deal and pointing out that it was only possible because there were two stud tackles in SF and they couldn't pay both. There was only real the risk of injury. I do understand how valuable Ballard and apparently you feel that thirteenth pick was, especially after the stud Malik Hooker we got at 15. My point being that draft choice was a much bigger gamble than Buckner was (it turned out to be that other stud Tristan Wirfs was taken at 13). My larger point is that the primary and by far most important evaluation made is trying to project how college players will play in the NFL. That is still the basis for building teams. Of course you evaluate NFL players but that isn't where you make your money as a GM.