The Games of Draft season

[MHS831]

Terrible move. I would chat this guy up at any chance. If he shied away from talking about a player, changed the subject ect. then you know it's someone they like. If he goes on and on about how great someone is then you know it's a player they don't like. Playschool.

I thought the same thing when I read that part. How long before everyone figured that out?

[MHS831]

and this is exactly why so many people were originally calling what Rivera was doing a smoke screen; it is very very typical to talk up guys you don't like to a ridiculous extent when it comes to the draft.

fwiw, I don't know that was what Rivera was doing. He was just asked questions about Newton, and I see no reason why he would answer them negatively even if he didn't like the guy.

Yeah, the press has their own agendas. The coaches have theirs. The scouts have theirs. Lies and truths are blurred. However, is it more likely Rivera would embellish or lie about Cam than if he was talking about Willie Smith, OT ECU, a player they hope falls to the sixth round? Of course. The higher the stakes, the more the positioning. But if the press only asks about 1 player then the coaches are only talking about 1 player and that player gets all the ink. Case in point: How many articles have been written about Dareus? The press finds that boring. Doesn't sell papers like drafting a QB does. Rivera is not asked much about DTs, only the QBs. In fact, even the 2 QBs considered to be possible #1 picks do not get equal press. According to Gantt, who knows nothing, it is a one-horse race. We shall see.

[mav1234]

Gantt said it was a one horse race from the start. It's no surprise he is sticking to his guns. He's either got inside information or is stubborn as hell... or both.

[MHS831]

Gantt said it was a one horse race from the start. It's no surprise he is sticking to his guns. He's either got inside information or is stubborn as hell... or both.

I have to look at this from Hurney's perspective. He has a ton of pressure on him.

[Woodie]

If a team wants a certain QB and they think we want him, they will offer us a trade. If we tell everyone what we are doing because we have the first pick, they might offer the trade to Denver. Unless you want offers, There is no real need to smokescreen with the first pick. I also agree that they probably do not know for sure yet.

Another aspect is that if we do get a trade down, then we don't want other teams to know who we might target at that spot. So the misinformation even at #1 is not just to try and generate trade interest in a player another team covets, but to keep another team from leapfrogging us to get the player we really want a few picks later.

For instance, we want Dareus, but feel while he's worth a #3 or 4 pick, #1 is too high. So we get a trade down, and if we can make other teams think we are really targeting another player, then that might prompt a team to stand pat and not try to move up for him because they don't believe we are overly interested. Or, it might make Denver think they could drop a couple of spots so a team can jump us to get the player they think we are targeting and still get Dareus later.

My point is that even at #1 we have reason not to be upfront about which way we are leaning. The problem with guys like Gantt is that he hears something from Rivera that makes sense to him (in other words, agrees with his opinion), and chisels his opinion in concrete...not realizing that what he heard may actually either not be accurate or simply partial info. While guys like Shefter flip flop on a daily basis because they are hearing so many different things that seem difinitive at the time, but then hear something completely different that sounds just as difinitive later, and can't separate the truth from lies.

[OchoNueve]

You got to assume in the next few weeks once we have narrowed down whom we think is at the top of everyone's board we will make a last ditch push and announce a name or two of who we are going to select to try to get a team to "bite" at a trade.