This story is unavailable.

Let me preface this by announcing that I am nit-picking. It was a good article; I’m not trying to imply that improperly phrasing one sentence somehow negated the article or the point you were trying to make. I’m just anal-retentive.

“Philadelphia invested not just the no. 2 overall pick in Wentz, but the five picks it traded”

Actually, Philly only invested one of those, not both. A better, more accurate way to grade their picking Wentz, in my opinion, is to look at it as they invested the five picks it traded on Wentz. They didn’t use the 2nd pick on him, they used five picks on one player.

If you prefer to look at it as they used the 2nd overall pick on him, that’s equally valid (although less useful, less precise, in my opinion), but you can’t look at it as *both*. They didn’t invest “not just” the 2nd “but [also]” the five picks; it’s one or the other.

Like what you read? Give Eric Schulz a round of applause.

From a quick cheer to a standing ovation, clap to show how much you enjoyed this story.