stevemcqueen1

2019 Comprehensive Draft Thread

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, goskins10 said:

 

 

So what do KY Fl clips have to do with Scherff? He was injured some but overall he was still very good. It's easy to just throw out - he was not good. Of course you can find isolated plays where he got beat. You can do that for even the very best players in the NFL. 

 

But a random comment of he wasn't particularly good is not a good argument. 

 

 

It’s difficult to respond to this courteously, I have to acknowledge the irony of it, but I’ll let the rest go.

 

 

46 minutes ago, JoggingGod said:

Scherff was great last year until he went down.

 

Not in real life, though. 

 

Bio
2018 PFF Grades
Offense 70.1 
#13 G
Run Block    
Pass Block    
Elite
 
High Quality
 
Good
 
Above Average
 
Average
 
Below 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SemperFi Skins said:

 

Or Jared Cook in FA... or Martellus Bennett out of retirement since his brother is now playing in NE.....

 

Pats have many options, after all, they're the Pats... They'll be in the Super Bowl every year until they're not.

 

I actually thought Cook was already signed with the Saints, but I see he hasn't yet so I agree he's still on the table for the Pats. 

 

They could easly walk away from the draft with a pretty damn good one though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

On defense, the only thing I think you can't draft as a BPA is a pure box safety like Abram or Rapp.  Kind of a bummer, because they could have been really nice value in the middle of the 2nd.  But Collins's contract means we have to make it work with him over the next two seasons.

 

 

 

Shoop speaks glowingly of what Abram can bring in coverage, he’s not known for being particularly effusive in his praise, but those two had a special bond, Abram is brilliant - according to miss st coaches, he recognized things before some of the staff, he studies relentlessly, but that start on his 40 was... not explosive, that can often be the sign of a guy who can’t cover as well as we’d need.

 

I need an Abram 3-cone, we certainly can’t have another DB who brings a 7.33.

 

 

2 minutes ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said:

 

I actually thought Cook was already signed with the Saints, but I see he hasn't yet so I agree he's still on the table for the Pats. 

 

They could easly walk away from the draft with a pretty damn good one though.

 

Cook signs, Gronkowski returns, the Patriot way.

Edited by volsmet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, volsmet said:

 

It’s difficult to respond to this courteously, I have to acknowledge the irony of it, but I’ll let the rest go.

 

Not sure how being courteous should ever be a problem. I was not rude in my response to you. Just asked that you provide something too support your position. If you took it otherwise I really can't help with that. I honestly am not seeing how that makes responding with courtesy difficult.  

 

Not sure what the irony is. I have in previous posts on the subject talked about him getting to the second level better than anyone else. That he stands people on most of the time. How he holds his blocks. He also suffered from rotating Cs and Moses in and out - yes I know Moses did not miss games but he missed a lot of , so he gets out of position sometimes but that's going to happen with all the different Oline configurations the team had (more on this next). Just because you did not read that far back does not mean it didn't happen.

 

Most important is that trying to measure someone on last year with all the injuries - yes that is the FOs fault but still a fact for the players - is a bit narrow in scope. But from what I saw when he played he played very well - not perfect but very well - oddly enough that's what PFF says below that you posted - so thanks.  

 

If your concern is my mention of the clips from a game that meant nothing to the conversation, that may have been an oversight on your part to make it clear it was a different subject, which is fine. Just acknowledge it - "Sorry that was a different topic I forget to make that clear." We all do it. Not a problem just own it. But without it I have to assume you were trying to use that a some sort of defense, which really makes no sense.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

Not sure how being courteous should ever be a problem. I was not rude in my response to you.

 

 

 

 

tenor.gif?itemid=5043510

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, volsmet said:

 

Edited

 

If you thought what I said was rude then you are taking this way to sensitively. And the snarky responses and silly gifs does not make it any better for you. 

 

I am done here. Have at it. 

Edited by goskins10
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Don’t want to confuse @goskins10 - this tweet has nothing to do with the gif above. 

 

 

 

Darrin Hall, another interesting RB prospect.

 

3 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

If you thought what I said was rude then you are taking this way to sensitively. And the snarky responses and silly gifs does not make it any better for you. 

 

I am done here. Have at it. 

 

It was a laughable blend of irony & ignorance, with hint of sanctimony. 

funny-gif-nobody-got-time-for-that.gif

 

 

You revealed some interesting control issues; it’s fascinating what goofballs on the net reveal unwittingly. 🤝

Edited by volsmet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scherff was alright last season.  He had a bad start to the season but started playing well a couple games in then got hurt.  A 70 on PFF's grading for OLs actually isn't that bad.  Their OL scoring is strange, and tends to have wider variations in number scoring than the actual variation in play warrants.  Their run blocking grade weighting is also really heavy, which I think is problematic because grading run blocking is super subjective and reliant on knowledge of the scheme and blocking concepts the team runs and there is simply no way their graders have access to that info.  The best OLs in the league will frequently sit somewhere in the 75-79 range of their grading scale.

 

Scherff is a keeper if he can remain healthy, but I would trade him in a heartbeat to get Haskins.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

Scherff was alright last season.  He had a bad start to the season but started playing well a couple games in then got hurt.  A 70 on PFF's grading for OLs actually isn't that bad.  Their OL scoring is strange, and tends to have wider variations in number scoring than the actual variation in play warrants.  Their run blocking grade weighting is also really heavy, which I think is problematic because grading run blocking is super subjective and reliant on knowledge of the scheme and blocking concepts the team runs and there is simply no way their graders have access to that info.  The best OLs in the league will frequently sit somewhere in the 75-79 range of their grading scale.

 

Scherff is a keeper if he can remain healthy, but I would trade him in a heartbeat to get Haskins.

 

I'm inclined to agree, What would you assess Scherffs trade value at?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sherff was a casualty of a decimated line. Once Trent and Luavo went down, everything we ran went through the right side. Moses is a better pass blocker than a run blocker, and it makes it hard to run the offense through the right unless we are pulling the left guard. Without a 2nd guard, we pretty much had nothing but AP magic. Sherff's been great since he's been here. Just about everyone should get a pass after the injuries last season. Except the FO for relying on Luavo to stay healthy.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said:

 

I'm inclined to agree, What would you assess Scherffs trade value at?

 

I have no clue.  I don't have a feel for how guards are valued any more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, volsmet said:

 

It’s difficult to respond to this courteously, I have to acknowledge the irony of it, but I’ll let the rest go.

 

 

 

Not in real life, though. 

 

Bio
2018 PFF Grades
Offense 70.1 
#13 G
Run Block    
Pass Block    
Elite
 
High Quality
 
Good
 
Above Average
 
Average
 
Below 

PFF is an awful o-line indicator. Awful.

 

The is the same site that said the Skins had a top 12 line in 20114.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, goskins10 said:

 

If you thought what I said was rude then you are taking this way to sensitively. And the snarky responses and silly gifs does not make it any better for you. 

 

I am done here. Have at it. 

 

Don't worry about it man, just tell @volsmetthat you punched Will Grier in the face today and ran over his cat with your car and he'll immediately be your BFF.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, volsmet said:

Edit  - 

 

This all started because i suggested you made a random statement with nothing to support it. Everything since then has been nothing but personal attacks. Let's see if we can get this back to football. 

 

I will start: 

I get you do not think Scherff was very good last yr. But nothing you have provided demonstrates that. Even your own data from PFF (who have their own problems) shows him to be at least better than average. The problem with PFF is that while they do a good job of measuring things situationaly, like most others that evaluate lines they do not take into account the players around them. One bad player on the line can bring the rest down. And with all the injuries last year it is pretty hard to evaluate this oline. But still they had him as better than average. 

 

I have isolated him where I could but to be fair it's not every play. There is nothing I saw that indicated he was as you put it "not very good." In fact he was very good much of the time. If you can provide some data - all i was asking for to start with - that shows he was consistently not very good then i would be interested in seeing it.

 

The direction this goes is up to you. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

Scherff is a keeper if he can remain healthy, but I would trade him in a heartbeat to get Haskins.

Al is that you? "I'd trade Lashay in a heartbeat in order to get Schroeder."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, JoggingGod said:

 

No

 

How the hell could we possibly trade to the #4 spot before the draft and assume we'd still get the QB we wanted? There's nothing stopping a team from jumping up to #2 or #3. That makes no sense. Unless we have the basic structure of a deal in place but it only goes through if our guy falls to 4 (assuming Haskins here). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

How the hell could we possibly trade to the #4 spot before the draft and assume we'd still get the QB we wanted? There's nothing stopping a team from jumping up to #2 or #3. That makes no sense. Unless we have the basic structure of a deal in place but it only goes through if our guy falls to 4 (assuming Haskins here). 

That's the answer. 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Peter Schrager on NFLN this morning is getting ready to release his mock2 tomorrow and has been out at the owners meetings visiting with GM's.  He said his new mock has the Giants taking a QB but its not Haskins.  

 

I'm not advocating a trade up because I hate the idea but Schrager seems fairly "in the know" with info.

Edited by HigSkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, HigSkin said:

Peter Schrager on NFLN this morning is getting ready to release his mock2 tomorrow and has been out at the owners meetings visiting with GM's.  He said his new mock has the Giants taking a QB but its not Haskins.  

 

I'm not advocating a trade up because I hate the idea but Schrager seems fairly "in the know" with info.

I think if a GM told a reporter their true draft plan, Why wouldn't they just issue a press release? Yes, stuff like this makes us click on the bait, but this time of year it's posturing, smoke, and mirrors. Hell, they only team with a clear cut choice is Az, and they're still jockeying for a better offer.

Last year our FO hinted that they really wanted a RB. They passed on Guice in the 1st, and when he was still available in the 2nd we opted to trade back instead. Luck, and luck alone had him still there at #59

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, bowhunter said:

I think if a GM told a reporter their true draft plan, Why wouldn't they just issue a press release? Yes, stuff like this makes us click on the bait, but this time of year it's posturing, smoke, and mirrors. Hell, they only team with a clear cut choice is Az, and they're still jockeying for a better offer.

Last year our FO hinted that they really wanted a RB. They passed on Guice in the 1st, and when he was still available in the 2nd we opted to trade back instead. Luck, and luck alone had him still there at #59

 

Yes, there is a lot of BS thrown around right now but this one lines up with what their local talk show guys have been saying, like Boomer/Gio and Tiki/Teirney.  They aren't on Haskins.  My point is referenced to posts above.  if they want Lock they might have to jump the Giants at #6. 

 

I don't like a trade up for either Lock or Haskins, would rather they let the draft come to them and maybe Haskins drops if that's who they are after.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mistertim said:

 

How the hell could we possibly trade to the #4 spot before the draft and assume we'd still get the QB we wanted? There's nothing stopping a team from jumping up to #2 or #3. That makes no sense. Unless we have the basic structure of a deal in place but it only goes through if our guy falls to 4 (assuming Haskins here). 

 

You answered your own question.  Skins find out what it would take to trade up to #4.  When the pick is on the board the team holding the pick decides whether to pick or accept one of the deals being offered.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, HigSkin said:

 

Yes, there is a lot of BS thrown around right now but this one lines up with what their local talk show guys have been saying, like Boomer/Gio and Tiki/Teirney.  They aren't on Haskins.  My point is referenced to posts above.  if they want Lock they might have to jump the Giants at #6. 

 

I don't like a trade up for either Lock or Haskins, would rather they let the draft come to them and maybe Haskins drops if that's who they are after.

HigSkin, I still think their main target has been and still is Rosen.  Just a guess on my part.  Brother trading with brother makes sense, in this case of this year's draft for what Allen/Snyder, FO and what Jay wants.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Just listened to Cooley on Grier. He said he likes him. But he prefers Lock.

 

He is NFL ready as for his prep. WV ran a ton of NFL concepts according to him. He is really good presnap.  Sees the field well.  Throws well on the move but not always.  Good pocket prescense. Is fairly accurate. Sees blitz well. Throws well with anticpation.  Sees and understands zone coverage and exploits it well.  Overcomes adversity well.

 

He's a gun slinger and can tell he is a smart Qb.  He has met him and likes his personality -moxie-confidence.

 

The negatives: he looked like crap at UF so he had to evolve into what he is today. He didn't always have it so to speak.

 

He is a decent athlete but not a great one. His arm strength isn't hot. He has an elongated delivery which is a bit odd looking and hurts his ability to put mustard on the ball. 

 

Fumbles in bad situations. He is too careless under pressure. Throws too many balls behind receivers especially to his left.  Doesnt throw well off his back foot. Way too stuck on downfield progressions before checking down.

 

Overall, he sees him as good value in the third round. He goes there is something about Grier which makes him like him but there is too much risk to take him high in the draft.

 

I'd summarize it as Cooley sees a smart overachiever in Grier who plays with moxie and has moments but is too inconsistent as for his accuracy and doesnt have the arm strength to be anything special. But he likes his intangibles to the degree that he sees he possibly can become a good starter in this league but not to the degree where he'd heavily bet on it.

 

He thinks from his own personal exposure to Grier coupled with knowing Jay - thar Jay will dig Grier's personality.

 

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now