CurseReversed
-
Posts
1,309 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Articles
Downloads
Posts posted by CurseReversed
-
-
16 hours ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:
What the hell?! I’ve never heard of this soulless, Urkel looking mofo and I did a ****load of PFN mock draft simulations over the last month. We are so completely screwed. Our front office is lucky there are no hitmen in my price range.
I am all in for a go fund me campaign. We need to do something about all these crazy unknown athletes being drafted.. Unacceptable.
-
I am having a hard time understanding the availability of some of these 7th round picks. I had never heard Toney's name before but after just 20 mins of watching his highlights and looking at his stats and athletic profile, It seems like he should have been taken much higher.
He is like a 99% percentile athlete who had production and made lots of big plays over multiple years. There are probably plenty of negatives I don't know about and he is obviously undersized for a DE but the plays he makes jump off the screen because of his obvious athleticism. He screams potential. I also don't know his injury history or if there are any character concerns, but if he fits the mold character wise, there are so many things to like about him, Its just crazy that nobody took him earlier. I mean, we are talking about a guy who would be one of the most athletic people in the NFL at his weight from the moment he walks onto the field. In the 7th round.
And not some Reyes type guy from another country but a productive college player with plenty of experience. I would have done whatever it took to get these 3rd-4th round picks off the board in the 7th, so I can see why they traded for more. Unbelievable value here IMO. good work WFT.
I think that its possible that a lot of these 7th round studs were downgraded because they were undersized at their position. In other words, because they didn't compare well with the other players available in their specific position grouping, they slid through the cracks as tweeners.
Maybe that is how the WFT finds good value in the draft. By grading them as just football players or maybe as special team prospects, they would compare extremely well to almost anyone available at their size. I think Del Rio loves these hybrid athletic tweener types for their flexibility and also their value in the draft. If so, I really like the approach and philosophy.
-
4
-
-
I think it was the intangibles that sold them on Davis. Yea he is a super athlete but in his press conference I noticed an attitude to him that I really liked. He was very calm but confident and assertive. Not timid at all, someone who seemed like he would command attention and respect in a football huddle. But that is just a hunch on him.
-
1
-
-
I like Davis. I think he has a great attitude and the demeanor of a leader. He will be great.
But also why did they just show the whole WFT draft board... WTF?
-
i think it will be davis
-
4
-
-
Random Draft predictions.
Wft tries to trade up for Sewell if he slides.
Saints trade up for Jones if SF doesnt take him.
Patriots trade up for Lance.
-
Just now, KDawg said:
I think it depends on what you mean "in the hole".
I think Jones is going to be an adequate QB at the next level but never anything franchise carrying. Cousins-like. Maybe not quite him, maybe a touch better. But that kind of ballpark.
I wouldn't want that to be my 1st rounder.
But I wouldn't be mad if he were my QB... if that makes sense?
That makes perfect sense and I think a lot of people feel that way about him. He is good but just not good enough to get value as a top pick. I get that. I see something a little more with him, something that could be special. He will need a good team and coach though.
-
I guess I am in the hole for Jones more then anybody here. I can understand taking Fields or Lance over him though. Those are dangerous dudes.
It might be possible that the Saints are sniffing around on Jones now that they think SF might not draft him. Jones seems like a good fit in the NO system,even more then SF. He is a good replacement for Brees.
-
4 minutes ago, DWinzit said:
It would mean ignoring LT and going something like - Moehrig, Werner, Tremble/Jordan which would be an outstanding take and still have one more pick in the 3rd
I think that excellent Lucas signing buys them some time on LT. It would be great if they could find a gem in the middle rounds or in a deep trade back but mostly they need defenders early.
-
1
-
-
25 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:
If they are at 19, I think there is a good chance they trade back if they hopefully find a trading partner.
Moehrig IMO is the best coverage FS in the draft, J. Holland IMO being the next best coverage guy. High floor player. He's not my top desire at 19 but he likely would be the best free safety we've had since Sean. He's decent against the run, too.
My impression watching him was the dude is special at anticipating in the pass game. His instincts and thereby I presume preperation look excellent. He seems to be right on top of so many passing plays. He finds himself around the ball in the passing game and running game. That would be quite a change from our free safeties who seem to be often a beat behind.
We gave up among the highest rate in the league of big plays in the passing game last year even though overall they did well against the pass. He'd IMO help put a stop to teams successfully going deep.
I'd be jazzed to get him even though I have some players I like more.
2 full years of experience and an obvious head for the game. Not something that many of the other LB guys have really IMO. They do have great intangibles though, just need more development.
-
1
-
-
30 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:
I'm glad everyone is coming around on Moehrig with me.
We are drafting a FS and then a LB and TE.
Finally!
FS, LB and TE in that order does sound ideal, with a bpa at any position mixed in after the 1st.
-
After going back and re-watching a lot of the players we have been talking about, this is my final super expert opinion rankings.
For the most part I think most people here are pretty aligned when it comes to LB's. We all really like Davis, Collins, And JOK, and for good reason, and I think its just a matter of slight preference in order or value at 19. Maybe some are out on Parsons, and for sure I like him, but I am far from sold either. Its hard to judge a personality from this far away. I think he might have the biggest outright bust factor because of this and that is something that should be considered. I don't know who will end up being the best of Collins, Davis or JOK, but I think they will all end up being decent Pro's, while Parsons, might be more likely to have an issue somewhere, who knows.
My order on these guys is still 1. Parsons, 2. JOK, 3. Davis, 4. Collins. But I dont' think that any of them would be BPA defender at 19 any more, maybe not even Parsons.
I like Moehrig now above the LB's as BPA defender at 19. The LB's all have great qualities and potential but they will have a steeper learning curve. Moehrig is a blue chipper who has more experience, higher fooball IQ and is a clear cut above his competition. He is a also a lot harder piece to find in the defensive scheme. We already have two hybrid guys in Collins/Curl so JOK seems great but he is a luxury there. Also there are a lot of other inside linebackers in the 2nd and 3rd that will probably still be huge upgrades. I don't know if you can say the same about the safeties. I love the idea of him being the next pro bowl, ball hawking free safety for the WFT. Solid pick.
As far as the QB's go I am all for trading up for any of the top guys if they are affordable. My only major difference of opinion from most here is in my preference of Jones over Lance. Any reasonable trade up they would do for Lance I would like for Jones even more. Fields would still be my top choice though. I have no rankings for the later guys but hope that if they grab one its in the late 3rd or 4th.
While its true a WR, OL or CB could end up being the BPA for me, it would either have to be somebody sliding heavy or a trade up or back beyond all of these guy's range.
Wishlist:
FIelds
Jones
Lance
Moehrig
Parsons
JOK
Davis
Collins.
-
5
-
-
20 minutes ago, seantaylor=god said:
I don’t agree. I think his current size is fine for the nickel LB role and I think he will naturally put on weight in an NFL program with proper nutrition and as he ages.
If you look at his pro day numbers. His arm length, wingspan, etc. all make me think he can get a little bigger. He will never be 250 but we don’t need him to be.
LB Jeremiah Owusu-Koramoah: 6-1.4, 221 pounds, 8 7/8” hands, 33” arms, 78 1/8” wingspan
You might be right that he will put on weight no matter what but I think he is better suited to play at this size and weight or less. I think first priority is you want him coming downhill on skill players and Athletic QB's in space, and making solid contact. Add 10 pounds to him and you could see that quick twitch open field skill set start to dwindle. Thats why I started to like him better then most of the other LB's/S guys because he is the best open field hitter. That is a delicate skill set and maintaining it at a high level requires a very fine balance of size and athleticism IMO. Look at how Collins has evolved, sometimes size and strength can work against you.
I Agree that the WFT needs some size in the middle which is why I only started to really like JOK after others suggested the mid round MLB pick to compensate. That is an ideal scenario to me.
-
I remember you talking about Simmons last year SIP. Its funny I can't think of a single player I have looked at that you had not already posted an extensive write up on. You and others on this board are so thorough, I can't even calculate how much value it has brought to my time here. I hope WFT pays some of you guys one day. I would guess there are a lot of people getting paychecks at redskins park that bring far less value to the franchise then some of the posters here.
But back to Simmons, wasn't one of his biggest negatives his lack of physicality? I don't remember him ever being the kind of intimidator that JOK is. He was more touted on his versatility and athleticism at his size. I just can't see a guy like JOK disappearing like that in the NFL. He is going to have an impact somewhere, literally and figuratively. I can see why teams would want to move him to safety. It is smarter to take some pounds of of him and let him roam free to hit and make plays, then to add some pounds to him and try to keep him closer to the LOS.
-
2
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:
It involves mountains of variables, but facts are still facts, you can look at any time period in the modern era, and the hit rate goes down, like real down, after round 1, and especially after round 2, quite sharply. There are innumerable reasons as to why, sometimes it's not even the player, Houston Destroyed Derek Carr before they even had a chance to evaluate him. Some organizations are good at this, others are very bad at it, landing spot and opportunity matter a lot. Tons of variables. Regardless, if you take a QB in round 1, your chances of a hit are better, full stop.
End of story.
If you want to roll the dice down the line as the cupboards are slowly picked bare, you can and every once in a long, long while you might get a hit, but are you gonna build a strategy around that hit rate? I see no point in it. I can justify day 2, based upon profile a bit, because 2nd rounders sometimes hit at a decent rate especially if you go back further in time, same with 3rd rounders.
Btw, I am not saying at any point, and I think that I've made this clear, that you can't get a player here, or you absolutely will get a player here, you can get a QB hit anywhere, it's just the odds, and some odds are worth playing, and some odds are a poor use of draft capital. It's the same reason why taking an OL on day one or day 2 is always a great idea, they just hit more, they just do, and you can always use more depth. Some of the hit rate, however, is probably simply a byproduct of it being the heaviest positional requirement on any given team (w/5 starters).
After all this, I'm not sure on QB's, obviously there's some value to scouting because QB's hit at higher rates the higher you go in a given class, but I'll always wonder how much of that is tied to opportunity, a QB selected on day 3 isn't going to get the same opportunities to fail and learn, and eventually succeed as a QB selected in the top 10 after all. None of this is an exact science, and my stridence in the argument is more about the efficacy of each approach than any being actual good or safe approaches. None are, just some are less bad approaches as others.
The odds of what did happen are not the odds of what will happen. Full stop. This isn't a roulette wheel or a dart board or even a craps table. Its not random. It is humans judging humans. Not a science but a skill. Using this skill will lead to better results, which is why players chosen earlier will always be better. If that wasn't the case they might as well throw darts. It's not about whether or not A QB taken early will be better, its about whether you can judge a QB's chances of succeeding solely by a statistical model of how things played out in the past. It might be indicative at best but its not totally predictive.
-
I have done some intense research into the history of QB's and draft position and found that the hit rate on QB's drafted as the 5th, 6th, and 7th overall pick is basically 0% over the past 35 years. So picking a winner their is going to be nearly impossible. The stats prove it.
-
2 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:
No because you're not looking for individual player examples, you're looking for the approaches that consistently yield the most hits, or the fewest misses, what generates the most consistent win rate.
Brady was an accident, not a strategy, if he was a strategy he would have been selected ahead of guys like Gio Carmazzi and Tim Rattay (who my local niners took instead of the home grown Brady, they'd make the same mistake five years later when they ignored local no-cal Aaron Rodgers for Urban's guy, Alex Smith).
You want to build a strategy around what is the most successful approach, and that's taking them early. It's not fool proof, you're gonna miss 50% of the time, probably more than that in bad years like '19, '13-'14 etc, but you've got a reasonable chance of hitting, 1 in 2. You try the patriots strategy, I'm just spit balling, but it would absolutely shock me if dart throws at 175ish or later in a draft hit more than like .75-2% of the time. I suppose it could be as high as 2.5-3%, but that's unlikely to me. And someone just posted a study referencing this very question which echoes my sentiments. If you talk about hit rate for future final four performances, it's even higher.
What good is that statistical model if your scouts are good at scouting qb's from a specific school or state? Or if some draft classes are better then others. If you like a guy in the 3rd, is he automatically going to succeed at a rate that is predicted by statistics for 3rd rounders...no. Its going to be how well you scouted him that will make the most difference. Of course players chosen earlier are more likely to succeed but its common sense and even though it can be statistically proven, its not a science. If I did a statistical model that showed QB's drafted in slots 21-27 or something random like that, never panned out, would that be a good indicator of whether to draft someone at 22 in any future year? No, I dont think so. There are limits to the extrapolation of these stats....
-
13 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:
As for outlier hits, it's exceptionally small, hence the outlier:
Dallas hit on Romo and Dak (which is nuts) ('03 and '15 or '16)
We hit on cousins ('12)
Seattle hit on Wilson (not an outlier in the same way, but still outside the top 2 rounds, in '12)
Rams hit on Kurt Warner '99
New England Hit on Brady '00
and that's it. We've got 5 hits, + Wilson, over the past what, 22 years of drafts, and that's across hundreds of QB's (or maybe a hundred plus, feel free to add a guy or guys if I forgot one).
Again, the hit rate is so tiny as to be essentially pointless as a strategic approach. You could kinda justify it as a dart throw if you don't like the prospects and you really believe in the talent, especially if a guy slipped, but as a plan, it's straight up nuts.
Wasn't there just some article that someone posted about how only one of the first round Qb's selected in the past..10 or 15 years...I forget how many exactly, were still with the teams that drafted them? It seems like finding a consistent winner anywhere in the draft is an outlier. All those outliers you named account for a lot of wins in the past few decades . Even Eli won 2 superbowls...two! Was it because he was a first round pick? Can you see how the statistics can be misleading? I think the WFT should try to get one of the top QB's in this draft, not because they are first rounders but because I think they will be good. But I also think it will be perfect NFL irony when one of the midrounders ends up being the best of this epic QB crop. Even if Mac Jones is the best at #3 overall, it will still be slightly ironic.
-
44 minutes ago, JoggingGod said:
No you can’t get a QB anywhere in the draft. Stop with this narrative. Look at the god damn statistics. The chances of getting a successful QB earlier are unbelievably higher than late. Not to mention a prospect like Wilson literally just went first overall recently.
Why do any front offices bother picking QB's after the first round? Are they all just ignorant of statistics, or maybe just looking for only backups?
-
32 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:
There aren't many outliers, and it's important to note, you're looking at the outliers across decades. You just mentioned a pair from '00 and '03. There have been 17 drafts since then, and not a lot of Day 3/UDFA hits period since. It does happen, but it's exceptionally rare.
Over the past 20 plus years Tom Brady has appeared in 10 super bowls. Doesnt that make him the standard? How could the standard be the outlier at the same time? Is that too small a sliver of time? Who was great before Brady, Montana? Third round pick. Drew Brees, Second round. Who has been a winner more recently, Wilson? 3rd round pick. Are they all outliers too?
I would argue that greatness itself is exceptionally rare, and is based on so many factors, that trying predict it on draft slot alone is over simplistic.
-
QB's don't grow in draft slots either. How could Tony Romo be the exception? Is he another outlier with Tom Brady? How many other outliers have there been, seems like a lot? Which QB's are the outliers and which are the standard nowadays? Is Mahommes the ony standard now? What about Watson, Burrow, Wentz? What has anyone proven to make this new standard fact. Sorry I just don't see it. You can get a winner anywhere in the draft, and its been proven countless times. Just like its been proven that your more likely to get a player you want if you have the first chance to pick them. Both things are true, simultaneously.
-
Its possible that there is a sort of a mexican standoff scenaro brewing with the teams that want to trade up for QB. Nobody wants to trade first because then their competitors can trade ahead of them. Nobody knows exactly who will even be available and when. It might be a good strategy for the WFT to trade up to the top ten in advance to get a better deal. Its risky but they can wait to see how QB shakes out. If a qb they like is there then they take him, if not they get Parsons or someone else they like. Still a lot of great players to choose from.
-
On 4/22/2021 at 3:01 PM, RWJ said:
You know this is the case with any player at any position. Really, when you stop and think about it you really don't know what your gonna get until that player plays the game. Perfect example, look at Curl. I don't think anyone would have guessed he would have played as well as he did but he did. So when you draft you take a chance with every choice you make stats, Pro Days, analytics etc.. help, by all means but you just don't know until they play the game.
Very true, you really don't know until they play.
FInding a late QB is not the same as finding a golden ticket. The draft isn't a lottery and the results dictate the stats, the stats dont dictate the results. If the chances of finding a late round QB are so long, why would any team even try? Seems like waste of a pick, doesnt it? Yet every year, teams who have offices filled with professional evalulators pick QB's all through the draft, knowing all the statistics. The draft slot, in retrospect, is just an indicator, one of many. You can go back through the stats and find tons of them. They are called correlations. Correlation is not causality, and every new player has to be judged on their own scale, with their own odds, that is what scouting is.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:
I don't associate all those things you mention with Brady and Brees as intangibles. They both have very good field vision, have good pocket presence, know how to manipulate a defense. Neither has a rocket but both can make all the throws including going deep. The intangibles would be how hard they work at mastering their craft, how much they study, do their teammates like/trust them?
Mike Shanahan, Joe Gibbs among others said the main intangible is work ethic. And to an extent football intelligence and leadership. They've said they don't know a player's intangibles fully until they are in the building and see it in action. At least judging by leaks from scouts, etc -- the two QBs who have jumped out as far as intangibles based on interviews and things they've heard from their coaches are Mac Jones and Trey Lance.
I get the sense from beat guys their top target would be Fields, maybe Lance. Haven't heard anything about Jones aside from Keim in a podcost suggesting he doesn't think Jones would be a target but I forgot how he said it.
I used them as examples for Jones because they won games without obviously superior physical or athletic traits. Consistency, accuracy, field vision, learning defenses..etc might involve something inherent but most of those skills are developed. The intangibles are the qualities that speed these developments and apply them intelligently to win football games. There are so many things that Jones is good at already after just one full year of football, that I look at as proof of those intangibles already at work. I am being semantic really, we are already pretty much in agreement on Jones. Maybe I am just a little more optimistic.
-
1
-
2021 NFL Draft Day Thread
in The Stadium
Posted
Definitely agree with most of this. I love the the way the FO has a strategy from FA through the draft and sticks too it. Build a core of team guys that you trust, and then round out the roster with discount FA's that fit your culture and will at least be competitive. Then just draft BPA in every round you can, focusing on potential, versatility, and character. If the culture and coaching are good it should bring out the best in players who might have more room to grow and you will get a ton of value in the draft by anticipating it.
This slate of picks really feels special and I hope it is the future core of a championship team. Even the 7th round picks have impressive potential and thats what gets me excited about the class. There are so many years we havent even had all the picks and they still found good guys late. I knew they needed a year with a bunch of extra picks to really bring in a wave of talent that would take us to another level. This might be it.
I am really high on Toney in particular right now but I am sure i will get more crushes later. I think he could be the starting 5th rusher/OLB specialist at the half way point and will end up being a huge steal.