Panninho

Why shouldn't you? If you say, based on the relative athletic score, the Washington Commanders knocked this draft out of the part you'd also be correct because our draft class scored the highest on the average RAS. I really do not understand the point because everything that was said was just in the context of this metric.

Well if you stop reading there, sure. But the sentence finishes with "based on the consensus draft board". So based on this metric they did knock it out of the park with regards to the players they took. But for one year it's just one more data point, that doesn't necessarily mean all that much. However, if you do this every year, history has shown that your chances are quite good you are gaining strength relative to the field. So adding draft classes like this will help in the long run, even if this individual one doesn't pan out. Don't know what's so controversial about this.

It's not an opinion. It's basically just aggregating all data from journalists' mock drafts on the internet and then looking at average draft position (range) of each player. Then you look for each player whether it was a reach or a steal based on where this player got drafted. The consensus draft board is actually a pretty nice dataset to compare draft classes to, with metrics like second contracts earned and wins above replacement. The NFL does not really outperform these boards in general. Teams that often reach according to the consensus board usually also perform worse than other teams. This says nothing about the individual players and draft classes though. It's just looking at trends on an aggregate level. I think the reason why our draft class is held in very high regard is that firstly, we got a lot of good players because we had so many assets. Hence, our draft class is strong in absolute terms even though it might not be relative to the assets we invested. And secondly, the Jayden Daniels pick was a pretty strong reach according to the consensus draft board which usually undervalues QBs. According to the board we reached on every player except for Newton, Sainistril and Jean-Baptiste. Like I said, it doesn't mean anything for the individual draft class though. It just might become a problem if you do this every year. You can read more about the thought process and data here: https://www.wideleft.football/p/the-2024-nfl-consensus-big-board

I hope we bring in some kickers for training camp. Whether they are UDFA, free agents or kickers from the UFL. Brandon McManus has a worse career percentage of FGs made than Joey Slye (who ironically is now with the Jaguars), so we didn't really upgrade there. Never understood the McManus signing for 3.5 million in the first place, he has been average at best recently. If McManues wins the job in an open competition - great. But I want to have that competition. There are great kickers out there who just need a chance and we haven't really had a good kicker in forever and I am not very confident that that's going to change with McManus now.

Got to be a relative importance of the individual scores. No idea how Kent weighs the numbers against each though.

I think it's who we had to pick. He was a first round talent that slipped to the second round. Some thought he was the best DT in the class, PFF had him as the 11th overall player. Yeah, we got two great DTs but if such a guy is available in round 2 and there is no reasons for that (injury, character) - take him. Reaching on a position of need is the Rivera trademark move in such a situation. Or even reaching on a player where you have no need (Mathis) for that matter. I think these picks is how you build a great roster over time. For me, it'S the most exciting pick in the draft so far because it shows that Peters is all about getting great players regardless of need. This is a pick successful franchises like the Eagles or Ravens would have also made and everyone would be like "how the **** did that happen again?".

Yeah, that is probably true. But we did not decide against Maye because he was a huge project that basically lacks all fundamentals of QB-play. We picked Daniels because we preferred him. And the league did not see Maye as a huge project or they wouldn't have taken him at #3.

Can we please let this lazy analysis die? Our team clearly preferred Daniels, that's it. The Patriots didn't hesitate and draft Maye right afterwards at #3. The Giants and Vikings tried hard to trade up for him. No one does that for a player like you are describing here. Clearly many in the NFL did not share that sentiment. On another note:

Who would you trade down with for future draft picks? Imagine team X is calling you and wants e.g. #36 or #40 and you could trade 40 for their first rounder next year (or something comparable). You probably ain't going to do that trade with the Chiefs but there are surely teams you expect to suck next year which would make it interesting (e.g. Broncos, Patriots, Raiders, Texans). Don't think it's realistic anyways but I think it's worth a thought if teams come calling.

Was hoping for Nate Wiggins might make it to our pick. It's mind-boggling to me how the Ravens and the Eagles, almost irregardless of where they draft each year, have a great player fall into their lap without them doing anything about it. Yesterday, we read reports that the Eagles were desperate to trade up for a CB and then they ultimately stay put at 22 and once they are up, all corners are still available. Must be some black magic in that area between Philadelphia and Baltimore.