The Consigliere

Double Post

Id want more. It's not enough. If the league consensus, wrong though I think it, is Daniels easily #2, I want more than a mid 2nd for moving to 3rd, whether I like Daniels or not. Which is funny, in dynasty, I just try to get trades done quickly, but w/this, I'd be more like my older brother, trying to strangle the life out of my trade partner to force the Godfather offer lol.

Not close for me, if I'm trading with the Raiders, I want 3 future firsts and at least another future 2nd and future 3rd on top of this year's 2nd. They say no, I say, I'm good. The raiders are a mess of a build with some good vets, a handful of good youngsters, and mostly crap. We empty out their pockets of futures and it's like the Nets-Celtics trade from years ago, Golden Loom stuff, yes please. Im not doing it for less than a H. Walker style overpay.

I would add JJ to that mix, but yeah, if the actual pick is Daniels, and the Raiders try to move up to 2 to make it happen, I'd do that trade, I'd prefer moving back to taking Daniels at 2, but I know that's not gonna happen. After 3 months of looking at these guys, I remain a Daniels Skeptic, not a denier so much, but definitely a skeptic, and I'd rather have the pot of gold than risk giving a way such a giant collection of goodies, especially knowing the raiders would be wrecked and our future picks quite high. I'd stay at slot for Maye, I'd move down if it was JJ as well. I'm at 2 for Caleb and Maye, but not Daniels (or JJ). Minny is temping, but I think they can fix/reboot that team quicker, the Giants and Raiders are better partners because both suck, but w/the Giants going for Maye, I wouldn't want that. Its complicated lol.

You'd be making a huge mistake. Relevant details: 17-5 in regular season. 4-2 in playoffs (6 TD's against 1 pick) 21-7 overall for a .750 winning percentage. Well those are team stats man. Dude also finished 5th in QBR in 5 starts in '22 and 1st in QBR starting a full season in '23. Playoff #'s are just "okay" at best. He hasn't been bad, or even below average, but he hasn't been scinitilating either, but lets also acknowledge he was accomplishing all this as a 7th rounder thrust into the starting lineup, and then playing 8 months after suffering a complete tear of his UCL, which he actually continued to play with after the niners ran out of QB's. I don't know where he ends up? It may just be an average or above average QB, but right now his #'s say he's much better than that. Efficency Metrics: True Passer Rating: 1st QBR: 1st Expected Points Added: 1st Production Premium: 4th Red Zone Accuracy: 10th Deep Ball Accuracy Rating: 3rd Clean Pocket Accuracy Rating: 18th Deep Ball Catchable Pass Rate: 1st Pressured Catachable Pass Rate: 5th Catchable Pass Rate: 12th Completion Percentage vs Man: 2nd Completion Percentage vs Zone: 17th Passer Rating vs Man (1st) Passer Rating vs Zone (6th) We would be enormously lucky to land a guy at 2 who produces these #'s in his second year, particularly on top of that with a UCL complete tear less than 9 months earlier. Needless to say, I'm highly skeptical Daniels comes anywhere close to any of this in year 2 or honestly any QB we take, these kind of #'s by and large are a fantasy come true, pretending otherwise strikes me as crazy. Are their concerns? Yep. Size and hand size are definitely concerns but there's no question early returns from Purdy are a grand slam level hit for a top of the 1st round pick, for a 7th round pick, we're talking Brady type numbers, but is that gonna continue. I don't know. But hell yes I'd take this every day at #2 and twice on sunday as they say.

Unless you know for a fact he's actually Brock Purdy, which is impossible, but the current Brock Purdy, is worth a #2 overall pretty easily (especially if he was on the first year of his rookie contract).

That's what shawn siegele said over at rotoviz and he's not lazy with comps, and rotoviz is analytics focused too. His view was Daniels if healthy is Burrow and Lamar had a kid. I don't see it, at all, but otoh, Siegele is not just some dude. He's legit, I am more just, "some dude" on my best day, so I gotta respect the take...if we get him, at least people I respect think he's quite special. I'm a bit more skeptical needless to say.

Gibbs II and 2012 is pretty slim pickings, that's some dedication. 49 here, its kind of wild to think that I first posted here when some people posting around here were in elementary school, heck, if you include CPND, some posters were apparently around 5 years old when I first started posting circa 1996 (21 back then).

I think the age thing just means, on average, Robinson has two more years of utility before the roof caves in, Stevenson probably has 1, but yeah, it's kind of silly. I'd also add that most analytics people feel that Robinson's hyper efficient '23 is simply not sustainable as he's never been this efficient ever, including with Alabama, it just looks like an outlier of outlier seasons, and you get the sense with the Ekeler signing that they agree. I think Robinson is gone after '25, and Ekler is spackle to get us to the selection of a RB in the '25 or '26 draft. We'll ride those guys out for 1-2 more max. The one reason I might give them the edge is simply that their starting OL and reserves are probably better than ours, at least last season anyway, period, and that's more important than anything else. If we land a legit OL in the first 70 picks though, we might catch up there. I'd much rather have our pass catchers, so I give us the edge in playmaking.

They're WR's are pretty awful. Bourne's a jag, Osbourne is admittedly competent, and Demario did decent last year. I'm not sold on Stevenson, he was already an old prospect when he was drafted, and not athletic either, and now he's playing the age cliff year. I'd agree w/you that they're OL is better, I think their TE position is better too, RB, is probably us because Robinson is younger, and Ekeler was better though way past the age cliff (but less run on the tires, if that matters), rb might be a push or us, but WR its definitely us. The problem they have is: OL is better for them TE is better for now, but its old AND unathletic too, which means they have a higher floor but no ceiling (we have neither, admittedly) WR is largely yuck RB is below average And if its true that their GM is now the owners kid, kinda like Dallas has been, yikes. I think its reasonable to argue this: Chicago as a landing spot is just okay, C+/B- DC is a poor landing spot, I'd give us: D+ NE is a poor landing spot, I'd give them a D Minny is a great landing spot, I'd give them a B+ Oakland is a pretty crap landing spot too: Probably a C- That's kind of how I see it. What gives us an advantage is our FO is now pretty sound, same with coaching staff, Chicago is at best meh, NEW England looks worse, Minny not sure, and Oakland generally is meh to bad.... If I were a QB, as usual, I'd just want to fall like Rodgers did, to a good organization, good coaching staff, surrounding talent, with an aging QB who needs replacing. Like landing on Minny last year. Next best is a crappy team with a good staff and FO and solid OL and playmakers, worst case scenario is probably NYG, and New England, if we didn't have McLaurin and that F.O., I'd plug us in that group too. Likely landing spot will not be great for whomever gets the 3rd and 4th guy taken unless Minny is the team trading up (if one does).

That's very nice of you. Thanks :). In regards to your and Llevron's takes in recent pots, I've been posting at CPND, Extremeskins, bigsoccer (and to a lesser extent, hockeysfuture for the caps, and realgm for the wiz)_ for decades, and other than realgm (where I'm just a miserable, gloomy jack--- when I post), I definitely think you get functioning communities in forums best when you allow for debate, and the bifurcation that will automatically happen between the Glass is full, empty and poisoned set's, and those that defer to authority and not, those that follow the herd and those that don't, and then the individual nuances that make us all unique, you get a functioning board, so long as people behave with some degree of intellectual integrity. It even functions when people don't, but I think when people do it builds trust, which is why I try to make a point of admitting when I'm clueless about something (like why Lawrence is blech or that I know what will make a QB prospect successful or not), or that I was wrong....whether its McLaurin or Rosen, or Tua, or like half of the QB's I liked, or for stupidly ranking Reagor and Jefferson dead even years ago etc....there's a social capital we're all afraid of earning (because few like to admit they're wrong) that comes from intellectual humility be it in terms of assumptions, or an admission of fault or ignorance, I'd like to think. In the past I think I posted with what either was, or seemed like a hubris, I've worked on that, so its hopefully easier to discern that if I don't want Leggete and view him as a likely bust, it's because the profile is associated with 1 out of every 6 or 7 successful NFL WR's, while going w/guys like say Odunze 30 picks earlier, fill 5 out of 6 or 6 out of 7 buckets of guys who hit. I like to bet draft capital on guys who have profiles closely associated with hit rates, and don't worry (perhaps enough) about context for the guys that don't pass those thresholds....but if I do miss badly on a guy because of it, like McLaurin, I've got to learn if it's just the randomness of that 15-17.5% hit rate is gonna hit about once very 6.5 times, or was the reason a player like McLaurin more nuanced, and if looked under the hood, saw Curtis Samuel and Michael Thomas and Parris Campbell and KJ Hill, I could see why he might get lost in the shuffle the same way Joe Burrow was.....now I'm babbling though...Anyway, I'm trying to get my point across w/o hubris, and w/the humility that comes from knowing what I don't know, like who the hell will hit at QB, and admitting of the intellectual arrogance I also might have (like a strong sense of which QB's I think are more likely to bust). But I drafted far more combined shares of Levis, Richardson and Young than I did of Stroud last year, so really, what the hell do I know?

We guess, and pretend our guesses have more authority behind them than they really have, at least with QB's anyway. I'm almost inclined to give an inch from the angle that: at least they know enough to figure out who should be day 1, vs day 2 vs day 3 selections and the hit rates suggest they know what their doing when sorting QB prospects into those buckets, but we all know opportunity and reps are gold for QB's, and w/o them, its impossible to figure out or give a fair shot to day 3 guys and some day 2 guys so even that data is a bit distorted, but I still think its reasonable to say the league and the services, generally sort these guys right, and when they don't it smells more like randomness (say Tony Romo UDFA), than a fundamental problem w/even that level of the process. Otoh, the best two QB's from the '22 class were Howell and Purdy, and they went way way way way later than they should have in Howell's case, and with Purdy, maybe his as well (from the context as a college player, obviously Purdy turned out better than anyone, including his college coach probably expected).

So what would it cost? Could we get up there with a 2nd, a 3rd and a 5th, or are we going to have to include both 2nd's?

Nah, regime's change, but stupidity is always right around the corner, doing push ups.

Definitely does a nice job of illustrating why I'm so distrustful of Daniels. I am utterly baffled at people's insistence on ignoring 80% of Daniels CV, and fixating on what, 20-25% of Maye's. It's very odd. It may not matter, but man oh man is the history not favorable to guys w/those kinds of trend lines, the positive to me anyway is that Daniels wasn't awful earlier, like say, Pickett, he was solid to good, but still, it's pretty wild to ignore a giant chunk of a player's cv and fixate on '23 alone which its patently obvious, at least people quoted in media are doing with Daniels, if not the team necessairly. Projecting exclusively off the ideal season is a fools errand the vast majority of time.

So are the Chargers going Alt, a different OL, or Nabers?

See JK Dobbins. Healthy throughout college as a bell cow in the Big 10, an injury riddled disaster in the NFL. Past injury history is no predictor of future injury trends, though it can be suggestive.

Can't believe I still haven't seen all that movie, I need to watch it for Halloween Month next year.

What you see sometimes lies to you and you to yourself....it's inherently biased. You bring yourself into what you're watching and logging.

The $$$ means something, it's just how important the something is that's open to question.William Hill has him as a heavier favorite with implied odds as 98%, meanwhile as mentioned earlier, they have Maye as implied odds of 18%. Doesn't make a lot of sense....trying to hedge is the best answer here. They're weighting things via the press, and trying to reduce risk that sharps lay huge bets if they put Maye where he should be which is +3000 to +4500 if they're giving you 1.14 on Daniels, but they're not, they have him at +450 instead this morning, which means basically: They don't trust the narrative enough to risk $$$ on it at all and sharps killing them if they raise the line. You can come much closer to trusting it if Maye climbs into the thousdans by thursday afternoon, especially +2500 or more payout. Otherwise, in Vegas' view, this thing is much closer to 80/20 than it is 98/2.

Crews is pretty sweet, though Skenes looks like a grand slam to this point, so lucky to land that pick in '23 rather than '24.

Lawrence is my "Haskins" example. I was basically on auto pilot with that guy pretty early, and have been left utterly stunned. Is he really just average? Just Mediocre? Was it because he got really dinged up last year? Was he screwed up by having his rookie year botched by Pervin Liar (probably my favorite Jim Rome regloss of a guy's name ever)? I don't know, but I definitely think I was on confirmation bias autopilot eventually on Lawrence. 100%. I wasn't even paying attention to risk and critiques by '20-'21 with him.

Not only that, but when people look at game tape, whether they picked a favorite or not, they come in with bias. Some people intuitively hate rb's who avoid contact, and love rb's who stick guys like Derek Henry, so they're going to love guys who physically destroy their bodies on their first rookie contract, Earl Campbell style, while guys who simply use their athleticism to avoid hits have decade long careers and more...we not only bring biases in before we watch tape on whom we like, we also bring biases in in terms of what we like to see, and why, and often, the biases are totally wrongheaded. It's one of the many reasons I'm suspicious of tape grinding in general. A good example, we've got a huge Corum fan here who thinks he just may be the best runner ever in certain aspects of his game, or close to it, meanwhile his over under is 80.5 on william hill. Whose right? We'll find out in a few years time (in that case, I think the NFL and William Hill are right, but who knows).

Tyjae Spears fell for the same reason. Great young back, but its highly unlikely he makes it to a second contract or at least beyond a 5th year. 5 years as a starter, interesting, that's the projection with Spears too.

Sometimes its probably just tone. I'm still convinced a good chunk of the anti-Daniels contingent is like me: There are just way too many pieces of his profile that mirror past busts, way, way, way too many, and way way way too much fixation on one season from his college career. It just reads as the NFL botching yet another QV eval for really simple reasons, and fixating on stupid, easily correctable issues with Maye, which do not connect at all to bust risk profiles, at least w/hits in the pass (maybe a bunch of historical busts busted in part because of mechanical flaws, and feet, but it's hard to argue that it's a defining negative trait when such a huge percentage of NFL hits at the position historically needed a lot of work on mechanics, and feet, or thrived w/o fixes).... To me, anyway, it's not that I'm sure Maye will hit, I've been looking at these QB's since the Aundray Bruce going #1 overall draft, and I've watched this enough to get a sense for historically what is alarming in profiles, and what bothers me more, so I've transitioned from my last drafts of just trying to have favored guys ('21) into just looking for profiles w/fewer pockmarks that matter to me. Daniels feels to a lot of us like a guy who gives off that bust stench. Maye feels less so, and so it feels crazy that we're sort of pushing ahead, hell or highwater, regardless w/Daniels. It feels willfully stupid. Hopefully it isn't. I admit to having no clue how or why guys hit, I'm just alarmed when a guy ticks as many do not draft/high risk boxes as Daniels does, especially many of the ones I freak out the most about (overage, 5th year, throwing with anticipation piece, p2s ratio and just how many of those guys stunk etc).