Mixon and Others

[AresGodOWar]

Davis comes into the league with the reputation of being a polished route runner. For all the talents of Treadwell and Doctson, they were and still are very raw. Titans being a run first team was/is to protect a young QB and maximize their personnel. Can't throw often if you don't have great options to throw to. Would expect the offense to evolve and grow as Mariota gets better.

Also I get that the Bengals have a lot of guys with character issues but Mixon hasn't been someone who habitually gets in trouble at least as far as anyone knows. One terrible incident and then the parking ticket thing. Some of the guys in the draft like Cook and Westbrook apparently have multiple issues and repeat offenses.

I don't agree they will change their gameplan because they have Davis now , I think they stick what they are good and grind the ball with Murray , Henry , Marioto and play solid D.. I think Davis helps with that game plan because now teams can't stack the box so they might run more

[Igwebuike 4 Prez]

How does everyone feel about where Mixon landed? Does this still mean he is still way behind Fournette and McCaffery? Gio and Hill are probably done there, Hill on his last yr of Rookie contract and Gio's contract can be basically nullified after this season.

Which of the 3 have more clout in PPR formats? I know in standard it's Fournette by a long shot...

I really hate where Dalvin went...

Cincy is not going to let go of both Hill and Gio after this season. Going forward, Mixon will be part of some kind of timeshare just like he was at OU.

Cook's situation isn't terrible. MIN coveting him enough to trade up says a lot. McKinnon's contract is up after this year. He is little to no threat for carries. Murray just isn't the talent Cook is. If Cook is providing more explosive plays, he should overtake Murray pretty early. Murray has only managed 4 ypc over the last 2 seasons. Now, he's going to a team with an inferior o-line.

[Vcize]

Cook's situation isn't terrible. MIN coveting him enough to trade up says a lot.

It really doesn't. I see this referenced a lot but there is no data to support it. Teams trade up for guys all the time and then sparsely even end up using them many times. While theoretically it sounds like it should be some kind of predictor in practice it really ends up being pretty irrelevant.

[Igwebuike 4 Prez]

It really doesn't. I see this referenced a lot but there is no data to support it. Teams trade up for guys all the time and then sparsely even end up using them many times. While theoretically it sounds like it should be some kind of predictor in practice it really ends up being pretty irrelevant.

How often do you see it referenced with players with 1st round grades? Why would you need data to support it? It's called common sense. MIN let their aging franchise RB walk and signed a stopgap option to replace him. They followed that up by not only using their first pick in the draft on a RB but also trading up to get him. If you think moving up for a player with a 1st round grade is irrelevant, then you're definitely in the minority.

[Vcize]

It really doesn't. I see this referenced a lot but there is no data to support it. Teams trade up for guys all the time and then sparsely even end up using them many times. While theoretically it sounds like it should be some kind of predictor in practice it really ends up being pretty irrelevant.

How often do you see it referenced with players with 1st round grades? Why would you need data to support it? It's called common sense. MIN let their aging franchise RB walk and signed a stopgap option to replace him. They followed that up by not only using their first pick in the draft on a RB but also trading up to get him. If you think moving up for a player with a 1st round grade is irrelevant, then you're definitely in the minority.

Common sense that makes more sense in our heads than it does in practice.

The Dolphins traded up, and not just up but pretty far up, for Leonte Carroo last year. Surely that meant they had biiiiiiig plans for him, right? How is that going right now?

The Broncos traded up for Cody Latimer. The Panthers traded up for Devin Funchess. The Ravens traded up for Maxx Williams. The Texans traded up for Jalen Strong. The Chiefs traded up for Chris Conley.

Common sense would dictate that it means some kind of special treatment/opportunity. But in practice, it doesn't. Outside of guys in at the very top of the draft, being traded up for doesn't seem to make any bit of difference in terms of opportunity or outcome.

[NumberKruncher]

I think each depends on your team. Rebuild I like Davis if I need rb 1 like Mixon and for a floor like Mc. LF solid pick slightly ahead of Mixon Cook 4 for me.

[onetwothree]

Common sense would dictate that it means some kind of special treatment/opportunity. But in practice, it doesn't. Outside of guys in at the very top of the draft, being traded up for doesn't seem to make any bit of difference in terms of opportunity or outcome.

The talent can justify the move up but then there are other variables in play that impact what ends up happening.

For example, Gase has called out Caroo for his effort and practice habits. Doesn't mean they were wrong in trading up for him but there was a factor that they couldn't account for in their scouting.

I'm sure you could find examples of guys who were great after their teams traded up for them if you wanted to.

The odds just favor guys who the team spent more than necessary to obtain for them to get more opportunities. GMs and coaches don't want to be wrong so they will keep trying to get more out of their guys or end up unemployed pretty quickly.

[Vcize]

I'm sure you could find examples of guys who were great after their teams traded up for them if you wanted to.

I literally just opened up a list of NFL trades and pulled out the first RBs/WRs/TEs that came up. I wasn't trying to cherry pick. I'm sure there are plenty that worked out, but at a higher rate than guys that were just drafted at the team's original spot? I'm not seeing it with a cursory overlook. Not at all.

The odds just favor guys who the team spent more than necessary to obtain for them to get more opportunities. GMs and coaches don't want to be wrong so they will keep trying to get more out of their guys or end up unemployed pretty quickly.

Again, what odds? The odds of what makes logical sense in our heads, or actual statistical odds based on the plethora of data we have available to study? I haven't run the numbers for the latter, but just skimming over it I would be shocked if there was any even minor correlation between a player being traded up for and having fantasy success vs. just being drafted at the original spot and having fantasy success.

In the end that's kind of my point. The odds DON'T seem to favor the guys that were traded up for. If it does, it's very minor. But when discussing a player people treat it like some MAJOR data point that takes precedence over many other far more relevant data points. Data points like a player's propensity to fumble, or a player's propensity to get injured, or a player's off the field concerns, or a player's pass blocking ability, or a player's SPARQ score.

Again I haven't actually run the numbers, but from a cursory overlook I would be shocked if all of those didn't have a larger correlation to a player's fantasy success than whether or not a player was traded up for. Yet people are focusing on the latter as if it's some trump card for not just one of those things, but all of them.

I'm not here to bag on Cook. I have the 6th pick so there's a decent chance I'll have him on my team if things break right. But whether or not a player was traded up for just does not seem to be the data point in practice that people make it out to be on discussion forums. It's just not a big deal.

[Igwebuike 4 Prez]

You are too caught up in data points and correlation to evaluate the situation itself. Each situation is different which is why all the examples you listed are irrelevant.

Cook is a 1st round talent who slipped because of off the field issues.

The Vikings moved up to make him their first selection in the ENTIRE draft after letting AP walk and signing a FA RB to what amounts to a 1-year deal with 2 option years.

Of the RBs on the roster, Cook is the most talented and under control longest.

Focusing solely on MIN trading up for him misses the entire point of evaluating Cook's landing spot.