PossibleCabbage

Also for absurdly overvaluing the role of the running gamer in the modern NFL, both in paying incredible money to RBs, but also in allocating resources towards "things that enable/inhibit the running game on offense/defense" and away from things which enable/inhibit the passing game.

I mean, ESB and MVS had vastly more productivity in 2018 than basically any WRs drafted that late ever had as rookies. So some of that might be :"they had opportunity and their QB is good" but it would be wrong to discount that they will most likely continue to improve. People are sleeping on these guys *just* because of where they were drafted.

2019 was not a strong WR class. Don't mistake "the best one this year" for a player who is actually good. Guys who would see the field before Allison and the sophomore guys ran out quick in 2019.

I'm honestly kinda surprised no one got anything out of Smith eventually on the "toolsy OL who needs serious technique work, develops on his second or third NFL stop" plan a la Greg Robinson.

Back half of that 2016 first round is rough- we've got 5 players with their options picked up compared to 3 guys who have been shipped off to other teams.

I would have taken Warring instead of Sternberger.

I feel like "half" is going to be impossible to measure with any degree of confidence, so I will go with "the glass contains liquid, but it could accommodate more liquid."

I think one issue as to why college guards and right tackles are valued less in the draft may be because college teams seem to play their most athletic OL at left tackle and their smartest (or next smartest if the left tackle is a sharp cookie) OL at the center, then fill in the rest of the positions as needed. Like you can take a college left tackle and make him a guard or a right tackle, but if you're taking a college left guard you have to wonder why they didn't have him playing one spot to the right or left.

Doesn't this also apply to WRs? Sure, there are some real good WRs who were first round picks (and high ones at that) but there are a lot of really good WRs who were 2nd round or later picks.

My preference is that any safety who absolutely needs to be paired with a coverage guy is downgraded, since Earl Thomases are much rarer than Kam Chancellors. People always got much more excite about Kam though, even though the other guy was more important.

Everything I have heard was that Lock was the #1 QB on the Broncos' board, ahead of Murray and Haskins certainly ahead of Jones. It honestly would not surprise me if they had Jones as the 5th (or later!) QB.

I partly blame fantasy football for this epidemic of "taking WRs is fun and exciting, but drafting OL is not" in the popular consciousness despite the fact that OL have much more to do with offensive success than wide receivers do.

My biggest quibble with the Cards at #1 is that Arizona had an absolutely horrendous offensive line last year, and they did precisely nothing to address it before round 6 in the draft. If you're drafting 3 WRs before one OL, then you had better have one of the best OL units in the league or I'm not going to like your draft much. Now Kingsbury might say "we're going to get the ball out before rushers can get there" but I am skeptical of that working; after all rushers were getting to Rosen in <2 seconds a lot last year.

But, I mean Isabella wasn't really good at much at UMass besides "being faster than everyone else on the field" a fact that wasn't true as soon as the senior bowl. Sure, he can in theory learn how to catch, how to run routes, etc. but it's pure projection with him.

Not that "people quote scouting reports of Jones at each other" isn't scintillating discussion, I want to point out another low key head scratcher- Andy Isabella went 2 picks before DK Metcalf. I mean, obviously the frame is extremely different but both are examples of "the idea of the player is much better than the actual player, who isn't bad per se." Both the actuality and the idea of DK Metcalf are better than that of Isabella.