2016 ES GMs mock draft - and we're spent.

[goskins10]

So the Chief's front office scolded some of it's scouts, which unfortunately didn't get them some updated information on picks until after the draft concluded. Silly scouts, dragging their feet for our draft

Edit

Not going to go into every single teams information like last year (as some people didn't really like it and I don't have quite as much free time), but will look for some interesting things that jump out at me to post. I'll also post info for anyone that actively requests it.

 

Can you show the entire list? I understand not commenting. That's a lot of work. But for those not in the top or bottom 5, it might be interesting to see where they ended up.

[ZRagone]

Texans totally deserve that, lol. But I'm guessing taking my 3rd round pick out of the equation would lead to a big jump up.

Mike Thomas was definitely your big hit. He had a +/- of -29.69, which meant his final +/- defaulted to the maximum low (-17.30).

Kevin Hogan and Kenny Clark were both significant negatives (-5.02 and -6.95). Frackrell (+3.84) and Nick Vigil (+4.74) were your two best.

The Texans coming in 5th from the bottom was a mix of two things. The Mike Thomas pick being a big drag down, and a lot of people having very solid drafts which made is easier for one big reach to swing things.

 

Can you show the entire list? I understand not commenting. That's a lot of work. But for those not in the top or bottom 5, it might be interesting to see where they ended up.

Sure. I'll put them in spoilers to save space.

Adjusted Value (Average was +1.34)

1. Saints ~ 8.51

2. Rams ~ 7.71

3. Chiefs ~ 6.85

4. Falcons ~ 6.32

5. Colts ~ 5.43

6. Bucs ~ 4.97

7. Chargers ~ 4.86

8. Browns ~ 4.71

9. Ravens ~ 4.38

10. Eagles ~ 4

11. Steelers ~ 2.98

12. Seahawks ~ 2.64

13. Bears ~ 1.96

14. Vikings ~ 1.59

15. Jets ~ 1.5

16. 49ers ~ 1.43

17. Cardinals ~ 1.34

18. Patriots ~ 1.28

19. Bengals ~ 1.08

20. Packers ~ 0.86

21. Cowboys ~ 0.55

22. Bills ~ 0.09

23. Panthers ~ -0.11

24. Titans ~ -0.49

25. Raiders ~ -1.83

26. Broncos ~ -1.87

27. Dolphins ~ -2.18

28. Texans ~ -2.69

29. Redskins ~ -4.52

30. Giants ~ -5.41

31. Jaguars ~ -6.27

32. Lions ~ -6.84

(I changed the weight for steals/reaches to increase the impact of very early round steals and decrease the impact of reaches there, as the first is harder to do at the top and the later is quite easy with so many potential players. I also decreased the impact of both later in the draft, since it was being a bit too impactful. Ultimately though, this had only a little impact on the overall rankings)

Total Talent (Average was 40.96)

1. Cowboys ~ 67.53

2. Browns ~ 63.2

3. 49ers ~ 61.75

4. Bears ~ 50.2

5. Raiders ~ 49.5

6. Steelers ~ 47.8

7. Packers ~ 46.3

8. Ravens ~ 44.5

9. Chargers ~ 43.5

10. Eagles ~ 43

11. Patriots ~ 42

12. Bucs ~ 41.5

13. Seahawks ~ 41

14. Jets ~ 40.75

15. Jaguars ~ 39.35

16. Falcons ~ 39

17. Redskins ~ 38.8

18. Vikings ~ 38.5

19. Titans ~ 38

20. Dolphins ~ 37.5

21. Broncos ~ 36.73

22. Colts ~ 36.5

23. Saints ~ 36.35

24. Chiefs ~ 36

25. Bengals ~ 35.5

26. Lions ~ 34

26. Bills ~ 34

28. Texans ~ 33.5

29. Rams ~ 33

30. Panthers ~ 32

31. Giants ~ 29

32. Cardinals ~ 20.5

Average Talent Value (Average was 5.04)

1. Rams ~ 6.6

2. Colts ~ 6.08

3. Saints ~ 6.06

4. Chiefs ~ 6

5. Bucs ~ 5.93

6. Falcons ~ 5.57

7. Ravens ~ 5.56

8. Redskins ~ 5.54

9. Chargers ~ 5.44

10. Steelers ~ 5.31

11. Browns ~ 5.27

12. Cowboys ~ 5.19

13. Packers ~ 5.14

14. Seahawks ~ 5.13

15. Cardinals ~ 5.13

16. Jets ~ 5.09

17. Bengals ~ 5.07

18. Bears ~ 5.02

19. Bills ~ 4.86

20. Giants ~ 4.83

21. Vikings ~ 4.81

22. Texans ~ 4.79

23. Eagles ~ 4.78

24. Titans ~ 4.75

25. 49ers ~ 4.75

26. Panthers ~ 4.57

26. Raiders ~ 4.5

28. Patriots ~ 4.2

29. Dolphins ~ 4.17

30. Broncos ~ 4.08

31. Jaguars ~ 3.58

32. Lions ~ 3.4

Players 3rd round or better

1. Browns ~ 5

1. Cowboys ~ 5

1. Bears ~ 5

1. 49ers ~ 5

5. Chiefs ~ 4

5. Ravens ~ 4

5. Chargers ~ 4

5. Rams ~ 4

5. Falcons ~ 4

5. Seahawks ~ 4

5. Packers ~ 4

5. Saints ~ 4

13. Vikings ~ 3

13. Bucs ~ 3

13. Colts ~ 3

13. Eagles ~ 3

13. Jets ~ 3

13. Bengals ~ 3

13. Giants ~ 3

13. Steelers ~ 3

13. Dolphins ~ 3

13. Bills ~ 3

13. Panthers ~ 3

13. Patriots ~ 3

13. Broncos ~ 3

26. Titans ~ 2

26. Redskins ~ 2

26. Jaguars ~ 2

26. Lions ~ 2

26. Texans ~ 2

26. Raiders ~ 2

32. Cardinals ~ 1

Absolute Value [Doesn't take into account maximum positive/negative] (Average was -11.65)

1. Falcons ~ 22.57

2. Colts ~ 18

3. Bucs ~ 13.86

4. Chargers ~ 12.88

5. Chiefs ~ 12.83

6. Steelers ~ 12.5

7. Saints ~ 10.2

8. Browns ~ 9.64

9. Rams ~ 7.8

10. Seahawks ~ 2.13

11. Ravens ~ 0.63

12. Packers ~ 0.13

13. Eagles ~ -0.67

14. Bengals ~ -2

15. Cardinals ~ -4.25

15. 49ers ~ -4.25

17. Cowboys ~ -4.82

18. Patriots ~ -5.6

19. Panthers ~ -9.14

20. Bears ~ -10.22

21. Jets ~ -10.71

22. Raiders ~ -15.36

23. Titans ~ -20

24. Vikings ~ -22.25

25. Redskins ~ -23.17

26. Bills ~ -24.71

27. Broncos ~ -26.38

28. Texans ~ -26.43

29. Giants ~ -40.83

30. Lions ~ -67.5

31. Jaguars ~ -80.5

32. Dolphins ~ -97.22

[ComManDersFan57]

Can you show the entire list? I understand not commenting. That's a lot of work. But for those not in the top or bottom 5, it might be interesting to see where they ended up.

 

Yes ZRagone, if you have time. It would be interesting to see how your grades compare to the ones I will compile after the real draft.

[DogofWar1]

Me right now:

[skinny21]

 

Mike Thomas was definitely your big hit. He had a +/- of -29.69, which meant his final +/- defaulted to the maximum low (-17.30).

Kevin Hogan and Kenny Clark were both significant negatives (-5.02 and -6.95). Frackrell (+3.84) and Nick Vigil (+4.74) were your two best.

The Texans coming in 5th from the bottom was a mix of two things. The Mike Thomas pick being a big drag down, and a lot of people having very solid drafts which made is easier for one big reach to swing things.

First of all, thanks for putting this together, very interesting. I originally thought I was dead last, so I got that going for me, haha.

So, if I'm reading things right (that'd be a first), if I had taken an average valued guy in the 3rd I would have jumped to 4th? I'll take it! Lol.

[ZRagone]

So, if I'm reading things right (that'd be a first), if I had taken an average valued guy in the 3rd I would have jumped to 4th? I'll take it! Lol.

Well, not exactly. Every pick is somewhat modified based on the average +/- (before any adjustments) for their given section in the round. Had you taken a higher rated player, that would've affected the average for that section of the draft, which would then affect every other persons pick that came during that same section.

If I gave you the average of all the other people in that same section of the draft, minus your pick, it would bump the Texans up to 25th on the list with a -1.01 rating. Had you made the best steal of that section of the draft (putting you one spot better than the best in that round), you would've jumped up to 18th.

[ZRagone]

As a note, still looking at a few things and making little tweaks. If it changes anything up significantly I'll update the old posts and make a post letting people know it's been changed.

[goskins10]

 

Mike Thomas was definitely your big hit. He had a +/- of -29.69, which meant his final +/- defaulted to the maximum low (-17.30).

Kevin Hogan and Kenny Clark were both significant negatives (-5.02 and -6.95). Frackrell (+3.84) and Nick Vigil (+4.74) were your two best.

Edit

 

 

Thank you so much for putting this together! It at least gives me some idea how I did based on some kind of unbiased metrics. This was the first time I have done something like this.

 

It was really a lot of fun! I am definitely up for doing it next year. Unlike others though, instead of taking the same team, I would probably look for another team. It really helps you get to know the other teams in the NFL. Hope we do this again!

 

Again, too much fun - yes I realize I am sick, but so is everyone else...   

[Wildbunny]

As a note, still looking at a few things and making little tweaks. If it changes anything up significantly I'll update the old posts and make a post letting people know it's been changed.

 

I still believe that you keep on holding your clipboard upside down regarding these facts

[ZRagone]

Players receiving maximum negative score of -16.81 (adjusted +/- for them listed below in order)

1. Will Anthony, -106.81 (literally not on any big boards I could find)

2. Yannick Ngakoue, -36.86

3. Lloyd Carrington, -33.73

4. Mike Bercovici, -31.88

5. Mike Thomas, -29.69

6. Shawn Oakman, -21.40

7. Ronald Blair, -21.36

8. Josh Forest, -17.75

9. Beniquez Brown, -15.85

10. Jayron Kearse, -15.12

11. Willie Henry, -14.90

Top Five Steals in final +/-

1. Jason Spriggs, 18.94

2. Derrick Henry, 17.72

3. Leonard Flloyd, 16.92

4. Shon Coleman, 16.75

5. Jonathan Bullard, 15.42

Paxton Lynch and Reggie Ragland (12.32), Laquan Treadwell (12.95), and Mackensie Alexander (14.91) were some very good steals in the 1st by the metrics.

Roger Lewis (12.10), Kevon Seymour (11.07), and Ryan Smith(13.97) were some of the bigger late round steals.

The only double digit reach in the first round was Ryan Kelly at -11.88 on the final +/- (Before GHH gets all up in arms, from a non-metric stand point I like the pick for the Skins)

[styx491]

Rams #1 in Average Talent Value and #2 in Adjusted Value. Hell yea! Gonna post a draft summary soon!

[ComManDersFan57]

Wow, I got a top five steal! Thanks for taking your time to do this Z.

[ZRagone]

Rams #1 in Average Talent Value and #2 in Adjusted Value. Hell yea! Gonna post a draft summary soon!

Yeah. My Metrics loved your draft. Treadwell, Cook, and Bullard were all top 50 players which helped your average talent value. Cook was likely the biggest thing holding you back from taking the top spot in the final value rankings, as he had a -5.43. But every other pick had a Final +/- greater than 5.

[daveakl]

Is the Oakman value pre rape charge or post?

[Reaper Skins]

- Paxton stock is rising.  I didn't trust someone not to make a deal with the Skins so had to move up for him, but I still think he goes before where I got him at 20.

- I think Jonathan Jones will go before I drafted him too.  

- And despite that debacle in the third where I tried for Cash, I still think Jayron Kearse is getting waaaay to much grief and will be an unexpected gift.   Whoever ends up with him will get instant impact on gameday even if its only initially on special teams.  I'd also try peg him as FS rather than SS to capitalize on ball skills, coverage and athleticism

[daveakl]

Is the Oakman value pre rape charge or post?

[styx491]

Going into the 2016 NFL Draft, the Rams needed an offensive overhaul and needed to replace key losses in the defense, especially the secondary. We finished last season with an anemic offense that had the groundwork in place for future success but needed to be built up. Todd Gurley is a great football player to build an offense around and Tavon Austin a playmaker at wide receiver that every team wants. Unfortunately, Tavon masqueraded as a good #1 while his true role is as a great #2. Tavon Austin is not leading man material. Similarly, Nick Foles is not leading man material. Foles, like Austin, did what he could and showed his true ceiling as a great backup quarterback and potential sideline player-coach. Glaring needs were seen at WR and QB, and with Jared Cook leaving as well, another need was created at TE.

 

Our war room approached this draft with offense in mind. We wanted to aggressively fill our obvious needs yet still try to gain as much talent as possible. We knew our offense could not compete with the top defenses in the league and several sparks were required. Our main priorities were a franchise quarterback and a franchise wide receiver. Our double 2^nd rounders (one of which we received from the Eagles for Sam Bradford) made this possible.

 

We tried hard to trade up into the top 10 and get Goff/Wentz, but once both those guys were gone, our strategy changed strictly to BPA. As we analyzed teams that picked before us, we realized Laquan Treadwell may fall to us at 15. Treadwell graded in as a top 10 overall player on our board and was by far the best wide receiver in the draft. There was zero hesitation in grabbing Treadwell and we addressed a huge need when our time came to pic. Laquan has all the tools to be the next Terrell Owens, but with the opposite attitude. He is a locker room leader and a force to be reckoned with on and off the field. Whoever our quarterback would be, (at this point the plan was Paxton Lynch or Connor Cook with one of our 2 second round picks) he would have this monster of a receiver to throw to and gain chemistry with for years to come. However, the Cardinals trading up to draft Paxton Lynch changed our strategy.

 

Our war room again began reaching out to teams to move back into the first round strictly to draft Connor Cook, who we graded as the #3 QB in the class with a 1^st round grade since he fit our offense so well. We needed Connor Cook, plain and simple. Thankfully we brokered a trade giving up one of our 2^nd round picks and our 3^rd round pick for the 28^th overall pick. LT just got his gunslinger; one that’s experienced in a pro-style offense and surrounded by an excellent running attack. CC to LT for years!

 

With the top 2 needs addressed, we switched to strictly BPA and Jonathon Bullard fell into our laps, much like Treadwell fell into our laps. We graded Bullard as a 1^st round talent and he will be plugged right into the defensive line rotation. He has excellent size, great fundamentals, is very tough, and played in a pro style defense at Florida.  Dude doesn’t miss tackles, period. He will be a quiet force in the Rams defensive front not gaining superstar stats but instead making impact plays. Bullard will anchor the run defense for years to come.

 

After Bullard and with no 3^rd round pick, we had some time to really research and draft a “gem” with our 4^th round pick. We had needs at CB and FS as well as offensive line, but we did not want to reach in the 4^th to address a need when a guy like Tyler Matakaevich falls into our lap. Like Bullard, Tyler is a tackling machine. The 2015 Bronco Nagurski Award winner and three-time first-team All-American Athletic Conference pick accumulated over 100 tackles in EACH SEASON for the Temple Owls, totaling 493 for his career. Let me say that again: he had over 100 tackles in EACH of his 4 seasons at Temple. In his sophomore year, he led the nation with 8.8 solo tackles a game. He had 40 tackles behind the line of scrimmage, five interceptions, and five pass breakups during his award-winning senior season. He has every tool necessary to become solid starter at ILB for years to come (except for height). His talent level eclipses any need based pick.

 

We stayed BPA with our last pick in the draft, our 6^th rounder and were HOPING to pick up someone for our secondary. Again, as was the theme of our draft so far, Bryce Williams was sitting there just waiting for us. We graded him as a 3^rd rounder and were ready to pick him with our 3^rd round pick to replace Jared Cook at TE. Picked in the 6^th, he could overtake Tyler Matakavich as the steal of the Rams draft. He needs to improve his football IQ and run blocking, but this guy is 6’6” 260 and played against some tough defenses for a much underrated football program at ECU. He has the potential to take over as the main target up the middle and down the seam. With Bryce and Laquan, we gained a lot of size and pass-catching ability for our air attack. Connor should mesh well with them. Add in Tavon Austin and baby you got a stew going.

 

To sum, the Rams overhauled their offense and gained franchise players with Treadwell and Cook. We gained solid “core” players with Bullard and Matakevich who will strengthen our already great defensive front. Finally, we gained a physical threat and coverage mismatch with Williams at TE. We failed to address the secondary and we failed to address our offensive line, specifically the center position. We absolutely need a FS and another CB, but we had decided to go BPA first and BPA addressing needs second. ILB and DL were not needs, but the talent there was just too good to pass up. Overall, we are very happy with our haul and excited for the future!

[Wildbunny]

Players receiving maximum negative score of -16.81 (adjusted +/- for them listed below in order)

1. Will Anthony, -106.81 (literally not on any big boards I could find)

2. Yannick Ngakoue, -36.86

3. Lloyd Carrington, -33.73

4. Mike Bercovici, -31.88

5. Mike Thomas, -29.69

6. Shawn Oakman, -21.40

7. Ronald Blair, -21.36

8. Josh Forest, -17.75

9. Beniquez Brown, -15.85

10. Jayron Kearse, -15.12

11. Willie Henry, -14.90

 

I'm quite surprised to see Bercovici on this list and not find LaQuan McGowan.

I thought that McGowan would have cost me more than Bercovici. I knew that Berco at the end of the sixth was a bit of a reach, but I didn't expected it to show that it's a worse reach than McGowan.

There's really teams that intend to give a flyer on that 400lbs TE besides me?

[ZRagone]

Is the Oakman value pre rape charge or post?

A bit of both.

Three of the boards I used were updated within the past week. They have him rated 326, 290, and 113. There's also three boards that have him prior to that with rankings of 111, 92, and 79. Then one board didn't have him rated at all.

[ZRagone]

I'm quite surprised to see Bercovici on this list and not find LaQuan McGowan.

I thought that McGowan would have cost me more than Bercovici. I knew that Berco at the end of the sixth was a bit of a reach, but I didn't expected it to show that it's a worse reach than McGowan.

There's really teams that intend to give a flyer on that 400lbs TE besides me?

Bercovici had a aggregate ranking of 461 on the big board, while McGowan was 419.

Bercovici only appeared on my CBS rankings, while McGowan showed up on two others as well. CBS, the only one they both shared, had McGowan higher than Bercovici.

Additionally, reaches get penalized less and less the later into the draft we go, as late round flyers are the norm and I didn't want to have those massively swing a draft. As such, a reach in the mid 6th hurts a bit more than a reach in the early 7th.

When you take those things together it gives you the result.

[Wildbunny]

Thanks for the heads up ZR, but I still finds it surprising nonetheless.

 

Sometimes big boards are weird to me. I was looking at the NFL.com mock draft... Eck, with pick 3 the Chargers went on with Buckner? Then Elliott for the Cowboys and the Jags goes with Jack instead of Ramsey or Tunsil? That made absolutely no sense to me.

[Conn]

Thanks for the heads up ZR, but I still finds it surprising nonetheless.

Sometimes big boards are weird to me. I was looking at the NFL.com mock draft... Eck, with pick 3 the Chargers went on with Buckner? Then Elliott for the Cowboys and the Jags goes with Jack instead of Ramsey or Tunsil? That made absolutely no sense to me.

Big boards and mock drafts are different things though. A big board is just a straight talent ranking, a mock draft is some combination between what you think the actual NFL teams could and/or should do.

[PokerPacker]

Not going to go into every single teams information like last year (as some people didn't really like it and I don't have quite as much free time), but will look for some interesting things that jump out at me to post. I'll also post info for anyone that actively requests it.

Might I request a little more insight on the Packers' draft? I'm mostly curious due to the dissonance of where my draft falls in adjusted value metric compared to all the other metrics:

7th in total talent value

13th in average talent value

(T)5th in 3rd round talents

12th in absolute talent

...

...

20th in adjusted value

[RedBeast]

Who is gonna track what "GM" was the most accurate?

From there? Top down? Is who gets to choose their team for next year...best GM first choice of team, on down/etc...

[Wildbunny]

Big boards and mock drafts are different things though. A big board is just a straight talent ranking, a mock draft is some combination between what you think the actual NFL teams could and/or should do.

Both are still based on own perception. That's why ZR use 7 big boards to get a rather objective view of every and one player.

Both stuffs are heavily subjectives and I value smarts and instincts above everything else.