2022 Comprehensive Draft Thread

[Thinking Skins]

I posted this on twitter, but how do people define BPA. There are things like system fit, higher ceiling vs higher floor, locker room mentality, how much his game improves his teammates, position importance, college productoin vs combine production vs senior bowl production, coachability, etc. I feel like we saw that Rivera and co. took a lot of these things into account when picking Dotson Mathis and Robinson. They all compliment our own guys very well (I don't like that type of philosophy because what we have can and will change), but they all also showed they can take on more of the role if they need to, all were productive older players who probably can hit the ground running. 

 

And I think even doing BPA by something like an average of lists is a bad way of doing it. If we like these guys and there is one team willing to take them higher than their average (which must be true by the definition of average) then we need to pick them higher than  that team. Dotson would have gone to GB if we didnt' pick him. Mathis was rated high by other teams (Standing said so in his anonymous talking to GMs). So that shows we were on top of getting the guys we wanted. 

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

Have we already covered the leaked Cowboys draft board?  They only had 1st round grades on 14 players, and a 2nd round grade shown for 20 more players.  Although the list could have continued for 2nd rounders on another page.

 

They drafted a "high 2nd round" OT Tyler Smith over their 1st round graded safety Lewis Cine.  I didn't realize they really devalue the safety position and don't care much about it.  They haven't taken a safety in the 1st or 2nd rounds in 20 years.  2002 was the last year they took a safety early in the draft.

[RandyHolt]

16 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

No, all the tape on these guys don't just show their best plays.

Play along then?

[KDawg]

1 minute ago, RandyHolt said:

Play along then?

 

I did.

[RandyHolt]

5 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

I did.

OOPS I missed it but maybe it was the merge. For the record the vids I saw showed 0 negative plays but I know you study game tape/far more.

Edited May 5, 2022 by RandyHolt

[KDawg]

3 minutes ago, RandyHolt said:

OOPS I missed it but maybe it was the merge. For the record the vids I saw showed 0 negative plays but I know you study game tape/far more.

 

You can search on YouTube for full games. I use the highlight videos as my "what is he capable of" viewing and then dive into the games to see if those are flash or routine and what they do well outside of the highlights. I know guys like SIP, Steve, clskinsfan, DWinz, Chump and others do the same/similar as well. 

 

But yes, to your point that watching the highlights is a ****ty way to form an opinion I am in 100% agreement and that's what most do when they watch this stuff and form their takes. 

Edited May 5, 2022 by KDawg

[Anselmheifer]

1 hour ago, CTskin said:

 

Unrelated to your post, but for the sake of rambling:

I loved the Rivera hire, but when it comes to the talent on the field, I’m not seeing any improvement from when he took over. His career draft and FA history are meh so I’m just not able to put on the B&G colored glasses and give him the benefit of doubt on all of the reaches in this draft.

This is just an intellectually lazy/dishonest take. Maybe you actually do think your moves would have been better. But, you don’t think the roster going into next year is better than the roster in 2019?

 

https://www.hogshaven.com/platform/amp/2019/9/3/20847680/redskins-release-first-unofficial-roster-depth-chart-for-the-2019-regular-season
 

That depth chart featured Case Keenum as QB1 over Dwayne Haskins

 

Wr: Terry McLaurin, Paul Richardson, Trey Quinn

 

TE:Jordan Reed(washed), Vernon Davis, Serena sprinkle

 

RB:Derrius Guice, AP, Chris Thompson(washed)

 

It’s not even close. The roster now is way, way better. 

 

[Thinking Skins]

1 hour ago, Burgold said:

 

That's pretty much where I stand. On the other hand, I very much fear us being horrific on third downs again. If a defense can't get stops or turn the ball over then playmakers don't mean much. 

 

I'm glad we got Dotson, Robinson, Howell, and Turner, but whether it's by scheme, player growth, or player acquisition we have to figure out how to make it so easy for teams to get a first down. More, we need to make it less easy for teams to get a first down by completing the easiest of throws to tight ends or running backs in the flats. There were so many wide open (no defender within three yards of the receiver) on third downs last year despite max coverages where we only ever rushed four.

This is interesting because I think that Mathis helps our third downs more than anybody. I was saying it on twitter on draft day (and I'm not a film guy) but if he can occupy blockers and keep our LBs clean then whoever is in there at ILB can have a real good day. And then  if he can collapse the pocket the way Matt I was doing then we can get that interior pressure that eliminates the opportunity to step up. 

 

On the other hand, what I want on offense is somebody who can beat the zone. I wanted London for that because that was something I saw him do a lot on the film (again, not my speciaty) but appearantly that's what Dotson does as well. And what I also like is that we have the potential to be a big play offense. So with the continuing addition of speed we have Terry, Samuel, Gibson, Brown and now Dotson who can take it to the house as well as a TE who can take it vertial. It gives us a lot more options on offense other than just being a grind it our offense. 

[Voice_of_Reason]

22 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

I posted this on twitter, but how do people define BPA. There are things like system fit, higher ceiling vs higher floor, locker room mentality, how much his game improves his teammates, position importance, college productoin vs combine production vs senior bowl production, coachability, etc. I feel like we saw that Rivera and co. took a lot of these things into account when picking Dotson Mathis and Robinson. They all compliment our own guys very well (I don't like that type of philosophy because what we have can and will change), but they all also showed they can take on more of the role if they need to, all were productive older players who probably can hit the ground running. 

 

And I think even doing BPA by something like an average of lists is a bad way of doing it. If we like these guys and there is one team willing to take them higher than their average (which must be true by the definition of average) then we need to pick them higher than  that team. Dotson would have gone to GB if we didnt' pick him. Mathis was rated high by other teams (Standing said so in his anonymous talking to GMs). So that shows we were on top of getting the guys we wanted. 

This is a really good post. And in a way it cuts to the crux of the draft analysis/converage issues.

 

Each team has their own way of setting their board, based on their GM, FO, scouts, values, etc.  There is no "right way" and there is no "wrong way."  A lot of it comes down to the methodology the GM (or whoever is running the draft) comes up with.  

 

The inputs about a specific player include (but are not limited to)

- Scout evaluation of tape

- Coaches evaluation of tape

- Scheme fit

- Culture fit/"off the field red flags"

- Medical

- interviews/personal visits

- combine and pro-day workouts and measurables

- senior bows evaluation

 

Let's say each of those categories gets a grade, and then each team has some way of getting to a final grade on the player.  The way they get there might be different from team to team.  There will be 32 different evaluations of each player, one for each team, and they might vary wildly just because of the different people doing the evaluations.  

 

Then you factor in other things, like position value and team needs.

 

Then what a lot of teams do is start to "group" guys into tiers and rank and stack them.  Again, that is going to vary wildly by team.  One team could completely fall in love with a player for whatever reason and then put them in a higher tier.  Other teams might think he's good, but in a lesser tier.  Or it's possible some teams would have more players grouped together, and other teams might have more groups.  

 

It's all impossible to know how it is going to fall out by team. When you tally it all up, there are hundreds of people across the league involved in doing these evaluations, and 32 different processes with 32 different ways of determining value.  

 

When the "experts" make their boards, they actually really only consider 3 things:

- Tape Review

- Measurables

- Input they might receive from others, which would include teams and agents.  (which all could be a lie.)

** To some extent, if there is an existing, obvious injury, they take that into account.  For example, "recovering from a torn ACL." They have access to injury history, but they don't have access to medicals, so they can't really factor that in.  

 

They DON'T get to "interview" the players.  They don't have access to medicals.  They don't really know about scheme fit per team.  They don't get to see them interact with coaches.  There is so much they CAN'T do, not because they don't want to, but because it's physically impossible.  

 

So the simple answer to your question "how do you define BPA" the answer is, "it depends on the team.  And every team will be different."

 

Which is why I get SO upset with all of these arrogant ass hats like Thor who do 1/3 of the evaluation (granted, an important 1/3), and then set their "big board" based on their OWN values, and then scream bloody murder when the draft doesn't line up to it.

 

The key is, you HAVE to trust your evaluation.  You have to trust your board.  You have NO idea what the other 31 boards say.  The teams don't know, the players don't know, the agents sure as **** don't know, nobody knows.  So, you can't pick players based on who you think other teams will not pick so they might be there at your next pick.

 

That's why "reaches" are not a thing.

 

VALUE, you can say, might be a thing, but it's less the value of a player, and more the value of a position.  You don't pick a kicker in the first round. You want to use high picks on expensive positions, and "key" positions.  But even then, there is nuance to it, because at the end of the day, every position is valuable.  

[Voice_of_Reason]

14 minutes ago, Anselmheifer said:

This is just an intellectually lazy/dishonest take. Maybe you actually do think your moves would have been better. But, you don’t think the roster going into next year is better than the roster in 2019?

 

https://www.hogshaven.com/platform/amp/2019/9/3/20847680/redskins-release-first-unofficial-roster-depth-chart-for-the-2019-regular-season
 

That depth chart featured Case Keenum as QB1 over Dwayne Haskins

 

Wr: Terry McLaurin, Paul Richardson, Trey Quinn

 

TE:Jordan Reed(washed), Vernon Davis, Serena sprinkle

 

RB:Derrius Guice, AP, Chris Thompson(washed)

 

It’s not even close. The roster now is way, way better. 

 

With recency bias, I think people just forget how absolutely bare the cupboard was coming out of 2019 because we had 3 pretty good first round DL players an an probowl guard. Ok, and I guess a rookie WR who was showing he could play.

 

That's about it.  WRs were a rookie McLaurin, Harmon, Richardson, and a bunch of other guys who weren't good.

 

AP was fine at RB, but he was ancient and his career was basically over.  

 

Jeremy Sprinkle was the TE, Jordan Reed was hurt the entire year. 

 

They still played the 3-4 in base, which put a bunch of players out of position.  On defense, sure, they had Allen, Payne and a rookie Sweat (who was playing OLB), but they also had Dunny and Josh Norman at CB, Collins and Nicholson at Safety ...

 

Ron has basically overhauled the roster to "reputable" WITHOUT signing any really big free agents to do it, unless you count Samuel and WJIII as "big name FAs."  I see both as second tier FA signings.

 

They have drafted pretty well, filled in role players, found a few gems, and rebuilt most of the roster.

 

The big issue was QB. They were screwed at the QB position.  They tried to get Stafford, they couldn't.  Fitz got hurt after 16 snaps.  There were no real viable top-end options available either in the draft, FA or trade this year.

 

It really all hangs on the QB. The roster looks a ton better if Wentz plays well.  

 

I guess it also hangs on Montez and Young, and to a lesser extend, Allen and Payne.  They have to revert to form.  

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

13 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

With recency bias, I think people just forget how absolutely bare the cupboard was coming out of 2019 because we had 3 pretty good first round DL players an an probowl guard. Ok, and I guess a rookie WR who was showing he could play.

 

That's about it.  WRs were a rookie McLaurin, Harmon, Richardson, and a bunch of other guys who weren't good.

 

AP was fine at RB, but he was ancient and his career was basically over.  

 

Jeremy Sprinkle was the TE, Jordan Reed was hurt the entire year. 

 

They still played the 3-4 in base, which put a bunch of players out of position.  On defense, sure, they had Allen, Payne and a rookie Sweat (who was playing OLB), but they also had Dunny and Josh Norman at CB, Collins and Nicholson at Safety ...

 

Ron has basically overhauled the roster to "reputable" WITHOUT signing any really big free agents to do it, unless you count Samuel and WJIII as "big name FAs."  I see both as second tier FA signings.

 

They have drafted pretty well, filled in role players, found a few gems, and rebuilt most of the roster.

 

The big issue was QB. They were screwed at the QB position.  They tried to get Stafford, they couldn't.  Fitz got hurt after 16 snaps.  There were no real viable top-end options available either in the draft, FA or trade this year.

 

It really all hangs on the QB. The roster looks a ton better if Wentz plays well.  

 

I guess it also hangs on Montez and Young, and to a lesser extend, Allen and Payne.  They have to revert to form.  

 

 

Ron inherited a 3-13 team and a 3-13 roster.   Much better shape than before.  Culture has done a 180, too. 

 

2019 Starters

 

• *ProBowl, +1st-tm All-Pro

Pos	Player	Age	Yrs	GS	Summary of Player Stats	Drafted (tm/rnd/yr)
	Offensive Starters
QB	Case Keenum	31	7	8	160 for 247, 1,707 yards, 11 td, 5 int, & 9 rushes for 12 yards and 1 td
RB	Adrian Peterson	34	12	15	211 rushes for 898 yards, 5 td, & 17 catches for 142 yards and 0 td
WR	Kelvin Harmon	23	Rook	8	30 catches for 365 yards, 0 td
WR	Terry McLaurin	24	Rook	14	58 catches for 919 yards, 7 td
WR	Paul Richardson	27	5	6	28 catches for 245 yards, 2 td, & 1 rush for yards and 0 td
TE	Jeremy Sprinkle	25	2	13	26 catches for 241 yards, 1 td
LT	Donald Penn	36	12	15
G	Ereck Flowers	25	4	16
C	Chase Roullier	26	2	14	1 fumble recovered
RG	Brandon Scherff*	28	4	11
RT	Morgan Moses	28	5	16
	Defensive Starters
LDE	Jonathan Allen	24	2	15	6.0 sacks, 0 interceptions, 1 fumble recovered
NT	Daron Payne	22	1	9	2.0 sacks, 0 interceptions, 0 fumbles recovered
RDE	Matthew Ioannidis	25	3	15	8.5 sacks, 0 interceptions, 0 fumbles recovered
LOLB	Montez Sweat	23	Rook	16	7.0 sacks, 0 interceptions, 0 fumbles recovered
LILB	Cole Holcomb	23	Rook	15	1.0 sacks, 0 interceptions, 0 fumbles recovered
RILB	Jonathan Bostic	28	6	16	1.0 sacks, 1 interception, 0 fumbles recovered
ROLB	Ryan Kerrigan	31	8	12	5.5 sacks, 0 interceptions, 0 fumbles recovered
CB	Quinton Dunbar	27	4	11	0.0 sacks, 4 interceptions, 0 fumbles recovered
CB	Josh Norman	32	7	8	1.0 sacks, 1 interception, 0 fumbles recovered
SS	Landon Collins	25	4	15	1.0 sacks, 0 interceptions, 0 fumbles recovered
FS	Montae Nicholson

 

[Voice_of_Reason]

^^ The fact that Kelvin Harmon was a starting WR should tell you everything you need know about the roster of that team.

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

On 5/4/2022 at 9:20 AM, Voice_of_Reason said:

PSA: go listen to Kiem’s podcast with Logan Paulsen.  It’s great. Football focused.  About the players.  Balanced.  None of this stupid media invented value and grade crap.

 

im on business travel but can summarize tonight if folks want me to.

 

Also, I posted a rant in the “reach” thread and took Thor Niestrom to task. I found another person I’m going to take to task; Kevin Sheehan’s producer Brendan.  Dude has no idea what he’s talking about.  Heard him on Standig’s podcast and came away dummer than when I started.  

 

Even though I've whined recently about Sheehan because of his negative takes on Wentz and glass half full takes about the NFC East rivals among other things -- he's a smart guy and very entertaining IMO.  His producer Brendan is just reflex negative about everything about this team -- while also being glass half full about the rest of the NFC East.  

 

They are both are so high on Philly, I can feel it growing too so by the end of the off season i think its elevating with them as to them winning a division to maybe winning the SB.   Last year their man crush was on the NY Giants.  Sheehan claims last year it was about Philly for him too and ignored that he ever had a fascination with the Giants -- even though he was much further hyped about NY and among other things said he's a Daniel Jones believer and thought Barkley would be the best player in the division that year.

 

While Sheehan can be a bit dishonest or he's good at blocking out those memories about what he's gotten wrong, he will admit to some of it but pretend the rest of it never happened -- he can at least be positive at times and again I forgive it all because in my book he's really entertaining.    I don't think Sheehan's chemistry is that great with Brendan.  I don't mind negativity from Brendan or anyone also but its so constant and predictable and his delivery of it comes off so sour that it's boring and annoying to listen to for me. 

Edited May 5, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[Darrell Green Fan]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

Despite my earlier comments I'm really looking forward to seeing Dotson play.  

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[Voice_of_Reason]

4 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Even though I've whined recently about Sheehan because of his negative takes on Wentz and glass half full takes about the NFC East rivals among other things -- he's a smart guy and very entertaining IMO.  His producer Brendan is just reflex negative about everything about this team -- while also being glass half full about the rest of the NFC East.  

 

They are both are so high on Philly, I can feel it growing too so by the end of the off season i think its elevating with them as to them winning a division to maybe winning the SB.   Last year their man crush was on the NY Giants.  Sheehan claims last year it was about Philly for him too and ignored that he ever had a fascination with the Giants -- even though he was much further hyped about NY and among other things said he's a Daniel Jones believer and thought Barkley would be the best player in the division that year.

 

While Sheehan can be a bit dishonest or he's good at blocking out those memories about what he's gotten wrong, he will admit to some of it but pretend the rest of it never happened -- he can at least be positive at times and again I forgive it all because in my book he's really entertaining.    I don't think Sheehan's chemistry is that great with Brendan.  I don't mind negativity from Brendan or anyone also but its so constant and predictable and his delivery of it comes off so sour that it's boring and annoying to listen to for me. 

They fired Sheehan's previous producer, I don't remember who it was, but he was better.  

 

I don't listen to Sheehan's radio show often, just the podcast, so this was my first chance to listen to him.  

 

I still listen to Sheehan from time to time, but I think he's completely lost his mind due to 25 years of post-Snyder-Distressed-Syndrome.  He can be entertaining at times, but he's also become just so dour.  

 

For entertainment purposes, I actually really like (and have always liked, going back to when he was a beat reporter in the 00's) Bram.  And he and his producer Callow have a really good rapport.  

 

I get that he's the "voice of the team" and he is going to not be quite as critical as others, but he is still critical and still (I think) fairly balanced.  He calls them on what he thinks he needs to call them on, and defends them when necessary.  He's not the next Larry Michael.  For that matter, neither is Julie Donaldson.  Though she skews much more team friendly, for very obvious reasons.

[mistertim]

2 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

^^ The fact that Kelvin Harmon was a starting WR should tell you everything you need know about the roster of that team.

 

 

To be fair though, Harmon was just one of the most recent in the long line of Washington mid or late round WRs who everyone thought would be our Marques Colston. Remember Marko Mitchell? 

[Voice_of_Reason]

Just now, mistertim said:

 

To be fair though, Harmon was just one of the most recent in the long line of Washington mid or late round WRs who everyone thought would be our Marques Colston. Remember Marko Mitchell? 

How can I not?  

 

I remember saying prior to that year that as much as I didn't like Jay, it was the worst Roster of his tenure here.  

 

That was the year Jay inactivated AP for the first game only to have Guice get hurt again, right?  I think they were placing a WHOLE lot of stock in the Guice bucket.

 

The whole thing was just bad.  Really bad.  That was one of the worst teams I've seen play, and I've seen a lot of bad teams.  It didn't get that much better with Ol' Coach Cal either...

[Voice_of_Reason]

I have another example of how the 32 team's draft boards are all wonky, and how they differ from the "expert's" big boards.  

 

Just look at the QBs:

 

QBs are ALWAYS over-drafted.  Like, literally every year, people go up and grab QBs because they exist and people need QBs.

 

The Rams traded up to #1 to take Goff.

 

The Bears traded up to get Trubisky.

 

Yet this year, one QB was taken in the first, Pickett, a #20 to the Steelers, and then the next one didn't go until the third round.  There was also a surprise with a non-consensus top 5 QB picked until Ridder in the 3rd.

 

The "expert's draft boards were all over the place on QBs. They all had them in different orders. But almost all of the mocks and the big-boards had at least 2, if not 3 going in the first round. and 5 going in the first 2 rounds, or at least rated in the top 70 on the big boards.  ONE went.  

 

31 teams disagreed with that thinking.  The only team to pick a QB in the first were the Steelers, and EVERYBODY thought they were taking Willis and they took somebody else.

 

Now, the media pundits are all saying, "this team got good value" or "a steal" for drafting QBX at pick 100+ when they had them rated as a top 70 prospect. Like the opposite of a reach.

 

WRONG.  It's not good value.  It's EXACTLY the value the team placed on them based on their evaluation.  Not more, not less.

 

I think this is one of the clearest examples the experts try hard, do a lot of research, but their "big boards" don't line up with the team's big boards.  

[KDawg]

5 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 

 

WRONG.  It's not good value.  It's EXACTLY the value the team placed on them based on their evaluation.  Not more, not less.

 

 

 

I'll counter this.

 

There are some guys that teams really like but they don't take them earlier because they feel another position or player is a better fit for them at that slot.

 

And then the player they liked is still hanging around a pick or two later, who is high on their board, and they take them.

 

The boards don't always fall in picture perfect order for these teams. Meaning they may have a guy 70th overall, but they think the guy at 72nd makes more sense for them in the moment and go with him. And then they get the other guy at 125 instead.

 

Sure, you can say that if they took the guy ranked 72nd ahead of him than they probably should have accounted for that in the rankings, but sometimes your gut plays a role in selections.

 

Likewise for a situation where you're picking at 118. You select a guy you had ranked 90th at that slot and then at 150 you pick again and a guy you had ranked at 91st is still on the board... You get him then.

 

Is that not value to the team?

 

We don't know that - but that's what these conversations are. People stating THEIR value.

 

I have no problem with that. What I take issue with is acting like their value reflects the team's value. I love when mock drafters say, "I had him at a slight reach here but he's a great player." I don't mind that at all.

 

I hate when they say, "this is an obvious reach he would have been available a round later for sure". No. You can't know that. That goes away from giving an opinion to trying to pass something off as a fact. And that is big time different. 

[Voice_of_Reason]

1 minute ago, KDawg said:

I'll counter this.

I get your point. And I guess I somewhat agree.

 

But the fact of the matter is they got the player they wanted with the pick they used him on.   

 

Maybe they got lucky he was there later than they thought he would be.  

 

The word that bothers me is "value."   Because value indicates your comparing a result to an expected outcome, or a baseline.

 

Maybe we're saying the same thing here, but let's say they had a 3rd round grade on Howell.  And they picked him in the 5th. From one point of view, I could see the argument that is great value because you got the player much later than you expected.

 

However, on the flip side, it also means they passed on him at least once after "his place in line" came up.  It's true, maybe when they were picking in the 3rd and 4th, there were other folks rated ahead of him.  So, it wasn't until the 5th when they could grab him. I call that "lucky."  

 

If you want to define that as value, I won't argue with you. 

 

Now, if he turns out to be a starting QB you picked in the 5th round, I think we could say you're both lucky AND good. 

 

(And I have no doubt Howell is going to be our starter for years to come after he mercifully dashes the hopes and dreams of Wentz and TH that they have any shot to play...)

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

They fired Sheehan's previous producer, I don't remember who it was, but he was better.  

 

I don't listen to Sheehan's radio show often, just the podcast, so this was my first chance to listen to him.  

 

I still listen to Sheehan from time to time, but I think he's completely lost his mind due to 25 years of post-Snyder-Distressed-Syndrome.  He can be entertaining at times, but he's also become just so dour.  

 

For entertainment purposes, I actually really like (and have always liked, going back to when he was a beat reporter in the 00's) Bram.  And he and his producer Callow have a really good rapport.  

 

I get that he's the "voice of the team" and he is going to not be quite as critical as others, but he is still critical and still (I think) fairly balanced.  He calls them on what he thinks he needs to call them on, and defends them when necessary.  He's not the next Larry Michael.  For that matter, neither is Julie Donaldson.  Though she skews much more team friendly, for very obvious reasons.

 

I listen to Bram from time to time, he actually had decent draft coverage and he actually here and there has inside information about the team.

 

Sheehan is smart and entertaining but he's become IMO a bit too Skip Bayless like where he's obsessed with being right on his predictions and lol like Bayless he's not so sincere about what he gets right or wrong.  He will lets say get 5 predictions wrong but will act like he only got 2 of them wrong and act like he's owning up to his misses that way.   For example I've never seen him own up to his Darnold obsession and getting that wrong.  Or owning up to his fascination with the Giants and getting that wrong along with Barkley-Daniel Jones.  Or his Mac Jones "meh" and Kyle Trask is better.   He will own up for example of getting it wrong about Doctson eons ego.  He will ignore he ever said a word about the Giants and instead say he liked the Eagles more than most and he got that right.  the Eagles part is true but he was over the top a fan of the Giants prospects heading into that season.

 

I think what might have made him go off the rails on the prediction stuff was years ago, he liked Cory Clement, a RB in that draft, Cooley didn't.  And Clement had a decent run his rookie year, not much to write home about though but he had a good spell early on so Sheehan crowed at the time and then had a "meh" career.  But Cooley deemed Sheehan a "RB" guru because of getting that one right even though he really didn't, Clement faded fast.  Then he loved Kerryon Johnson.  Also a dude that flamed out.  I notice this draft he was crowing because he compared Garrett Wilson to Trevon Diggs and claimed he invented that comparison even though that comparison was being made for months by others (I am sure he missed that it happened but it did) -- but he crowed that some new mock drafters were piggybacking on his take.  

 

The long and short for me is Sheehan, I don't care about your predictions and what you get right or wrong.     And if he wants to play that game, at least be honest about all of it.  Versus highlighting his victories and only owning up to some of his misses.  But regardless, I think he does really good shows.  But let go of this Bayless style prediction crap that he's been into in recent years.  But that's just me.  I still listen to him and like him though.

 

 

 

 

Edited May 5, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[The Consigliere]

On 5/4/2022 at 6:20 AM, Voice_of_Reason said:

PSA: go listen to Kiem’s podcast with Logan Paulsen.  It’s great. Football focused.  About the players.  Balanced.  None of this stupid media invented value and grade crap.

 

im on business travel but can summarize tonight if folks want me to.

 

Also, I posted a rant in the “reach” thread and took Thor Niestrom to task. I found another person I’m going to take to task; Kevin Sheehan’s producer Brendan.  Dude has no idea what he’s talking about.  Heard him on Standig’s podcast and came away dummer than when I started.  

I don't understand this kind of take. People have been grading drafts for decades, it's based on perceived value, you take the aggregate board, you take the players taken, where they're taken, and you see whether people got value, or not, and where people reached or not. Yes it lacks nuance, the nuance of reaching for Dotson is that we apparently did not see Burks and Skyy Moore and others in same tier as Dotson, I think that's clinically insane, but at least there's reasoning based upon it. That being said, I'm not going to give them a free pass for it either. 

 

If you have Dotson rated a legit tier above Moore, and Burks and because of that you take Dotson 8+ picks before he would've gone you sure as hell better be right about both Doston AND with Burks and Moore (I think they're wrong, at the very least with one of them, very possibly both), if they aren't, you can bash them even more, and yes media people are justified in taking issue with it, just as you can back pocket the idea that if they had traded down substantially there very possibly could have been a tier break happening, just as there was between 11 and 16 (with Hamilton, Jameson and Olave all flying off the board). 

 

As for taking Nystrom to task, why? Isn't the burden of proof on this FO and this organization in general? They've been bad to terrible for decades. The media's skepticism with us is warranted and on aggregate boards we did reach and reach big time on our first two picks, the two most valuable by far we had. It's nice that we got value, or at best neutral value with many of our day 3 picks and Robinson but he isn't wrong here. 

 

This does look like the worst draft we've had in years and years. Could change, but the value, based on where players were expected to go, isn't there. Maybe a few years from now, when we know what they are as players, and not just draft capital assets, it will be different, but I'm skeptical. I think Dotson will be fine, I disagree w/him about Olave, I don't see Olave being substantially more valuable than Dotson, it wouldn't shock me at all if they had similar career production markers, but I do agree that we risked a lot in trading down, because we traded legit shots at franchise changing talent, for quick fixes and there's nothing I hate more than a selection predicated on immediate help for a coach's job security (Dotson) over superior talent that will benefit us more long term (Jameson Williams), but that's if he's healthy, so who knows. I think in the fullness of time, Dotson will be a perfectly fine WR, somewhere between a 20th best in the league and 40th best in the league caliber guy, not a bust. I think the 2nd rounder will look stupid, incredibly stupid, just as it did on draft day. Robinson is fine, he'll excite people who miss the more punishing run game from decades ago, the Howell selection was a god send in terms of need and value, but that's still at best, what a 40-45% shot before draft capital submerged it far deeper (the reason that matters is that Howell is not going to get the attention, the work, and the practice with the first team that a guy I view as inferior like Pickett will get, and that automatically weakens the chances he hits-for Howell, landing with us wasn't really ideal, we're a franchise that hasn't drafted and developed a legit franchise stud QB since freaking sammy baugh, not exactly a great track record)....

 

I don't know, I'm going on and on so I'll stop, I's just reiterate before I do that I find the complaining about the grades as tiresome as people find the grades themselves, especially the misinterpretation of them, as grades of anything other than a perception of value gleaned from the draft. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[The Rook]

Rivera mentioned that there were several "other calls" on inquiry of trading before they selected Dotson.  I would sure like to know the other teams AND what the offers were.  I think I heard GB and Dallas rumored.

 

When I was doing all those draft simulations, I had some crazy trading like that. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Rook