Jump to content
JaguarCrazy2832

Do we overuse the phrase "Could have drafted him later" ?

Recommended Posts

Words/phrases I despise in draft season:

"Generational Talent"

"Reach/overdraft"

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MWil23 said:

Words/phrases I despise in draft season:

"Generational Talent"

"Reach/overdraft"

 

I add "value pick" to your list.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎29‎/‎04‎/‎2018 at 12:59 PM, JaguarCrazy2832 said:

I feel like we always hear this a ton throughout the draft to the point where at some point it cant all be true.

An example is Cleveland(which i know is problem going to make me lose any credibility with this thread) They took Mayfield at 1 and immediately people here and my friends say they could have had him at 4. Can you really be sure of that? I agree, I would have rather had Barkley or Chubb at 1 but with as much value that people put on the QB, why roll the dice on them? If they took Barkley at 1, the Giants either trade down to a team that wanted a QB or take one right? The Jets were always going to take a QB after that trade up so it is possible that 2 QBs would have already been gone before #4. We saw Rosen fall which says that alot of teams that needed one simply didnt think he was worth trading up that far to get him so its unlikely the Browns viewed him as this cant-miss type or they could have rolled the dice and taken the best QB at 4 after best player at 1. 

Same thing with Kolton Miller. He is wildly viewed as someone that could have been had later but do we honestly think he would have fallen by 31 other potential teams and the Raiders could have traded back and got him? Most everyone thinks he was a reach by our standards but isn't it safe to assume someone else was looking there too in the teens?

Does anyone else think that phrase is overused and have other examples of it?

 

100%

If you want the player more than anyone else draft him now regardless of what anyone says. If Mayfield becomes a hall of fame QB and you lost him because you got clever thinking you could get him at 4 then you will regret it for eternity. Same with any other pick. Back your own judgement or you shouldn't be a GM.

There's no such thing as 'value' in the draft.  If you draft a really good player in the 3rd round that the experts thought would go in the 7th round then then let the experts play with their little graphics showing why other teams got great value with their 3rd round career backup QB who was projected to go at the end of the 1st whilst your poor value 3rd rounder wins you games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/29/2018 at 11:32 PM, Jakuvious said:

Absolutely, yeah. There's a solid four months of draftniks, professional and amateur, adjusting their boards and basically steadily shifting toward very similar results, and I think by the time the draft rolls around, everyone has forgotten that those boards really don't have much at all to do with the actual draft's results. I think NFL teams have far more specific boards, and the vary more greatly than draft analysts in what they're looking for. And over the years, we've all seen "reaches" pan out and "steals" bust. I feel like this is especially talked about in regard to trades. Every time a team trades up for a player unexpectedly, people freak out that it was unnecessary, and then almost always it turns out that some other team was interested, or at least the team trading up had reason to believe the player wouldn't last. Honestly, I think it's more beneficial after the draft to examine why teams made the moves they did, as opposed to the usual grading system of "I had this player at #50, he went #90, so amazing pick" and vice versa.

Honestly, I'm reaching the point in reacting to the draft where I'm kind of starting to trust/distrust based on front office track record as opposed to pre-draft boards. Aside from the trade up for Mahomes I haven't been enamored with anything KC has done in years at the time of the draft, but it always pans out. Whereas I've loved every Browns draft class since the Manziel mistake, and they're still Brownsing so far.

Believe me, judging a draft by a GM's past performance probably will make you a genius in the draftnik community. Past performance is always the best yardstick for judging how good or bad a team's draft will likely be, at least until they start actually playing the following year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering the draft becomes completely unpredictable after the top 5 picks and turns into a crap shoot for experts and fan predictions, hell yes it is. It's still fun to try though.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The toughest part of all the "could have had them later" talk is you just dont know other people's boards. I think we all agree that when the Jaguars took Tyson Alualu, we all were shocked and considered it a colossal reach but apparently reports came out that several teams behind us had him as their BPA on the board. So while most everyone thinks Kolton Miller was a big reach at 15, he might have gone right after. Now it doesnt change how we perceive him as a player but it does make things interesting. 

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



×