Jump to content
Cadmus

Share Your 53 Man Roster Predictions

Recommended Posts

On ‎22‎/‎06‎/‎2018 at 10:55 PM, Golfman said:

Yeah, drafting a long snapper is still a bit of a head scrather to me as well. 

Why ?

A 7th rounder is a throwaway pick unlikely to make the team -  glorified UDFA. If you need a LS then you might as well identify the one you want and make sure you get him. Anything other than a 7th rounder I'd agree.

The punter is different - a 5th round is a decent pick (we drafted 2 receivers after him that people are hoping will be the answer at WR) when we didn't need a punter. He pretty much has to be a top 5 punter in the league pretty much immediately to justify that move - if he is then fair doos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mikemike778 said:

Why ?

A 7th rounder is a throwaway pick unlikely to make the team -  glorified UDFA. If you need a LS then you might as well identify the one you want and make sure you get him. Anything other than a 7th rounder I'd agree.

The punter is different - a 5th round is a decent pick (we drafted 2 receivers after him that people are hoping will be the answer at WR) when we didn't need a punter. He pretty much has to be a top 5 punter in the league pretty much immediately to justify that move - if he is then fair doos.

I don't think there's that big a difference between a sixth round pick and a seventh round pick. There is still a chance, albeit a small one, of getting an impact player in the seventh round. The problem I have with picking a long snapper is that no matter how good he is, he's never going to be an impact player. Long snappers are either competent or not competent. Almost all NFL long snappers are competent. The pick seemed to me like a bit of an overreaction to the problems the Packers had at long snapper last year. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But the punter has been fantastic from everything that I have read.  Not like he was a 3rd rounder that couldn't punt... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/24/2018 at 5:12 AM, Greg C. said:

I don't think there's that big a difference between a sixth round pick and a seventh round pick. There is still a chance, albeit a small one, of getting an impact player in the seventh round. The problem I have with picking a long snapper is that no matter how good he is, he's never going to be an impact player. Long snappers are either competent or not competent. Almost all NFL long snappers are competent. The pick seemed to me like a bit of an overreaction to the problems the Packers had at long snapper last year. 

I think the biggest difference between a sixth round pick and a seventh round pick is how well the scout does pounding the table!

seriously though the occurrence that a team’s sixth and seventh round picks have been sequential players on a team’s draft board can’t be all that rare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/24/2018 at 5:12 AM, Greg C. said:

I don't think there's that big a difference between a sixth round pick and a seventh round pick. There is still a chance, albeit a small one, of getting an impact player in the seventh round. The problem I have with picking a long snapper is that no matter how good he is, he's never going to be an impact player. Long snappers are either competent or not competent. Almost all NFL long snappers are competent. The pick seemed to me like a bit of an overreaction to the problems the Packers had at long snapper last year. 

There really isn't.  If you're lucky, you might have a few players left with a draftable grade in the sixth round.  In the 7th round, there's probably no chance of that happening.  Either way, you're generally starting to look at your UFA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 24 June 2018 at 10:32 AM, mikemike778 said:

Why ?

A 7th rounder is a throwaway pick unlikely to make the team -  glorified UDFA. If you need a LS then you might as well identify the one you want and make sure you get him. Anything other than a 7th rounder I'd agree.

The punter is different - a 5th round is a decent pick (we drafted 2 receivers after him that people are hoping will be the answer at WR) when we didn't need a punter. He pretty much has to be a top 5 punter in the league pretty much immediately to justify that move - if he is then fair doos.

Donald Driver disagrees

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bart Starr as well. 

I know Bart was drafted in the 17th round, but the pick number would probably put him in the 7th in a recent draft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, CWood21 said:
On 24/06/2018 at 11:12 AM, Greg C. said:

I don't think there's that big a difference between a sixth round pick and a seventh round pick. There is still a chance, albeit a small one, of getting an impact player in the seventh round. The problem I have with picking a long snapper is that no matter how good he is, he's never going to be an impact player. Long snappers are either competent or not competent. Almost all NFL long snappers are competent. The pick seemed to me like a bit of an overreaction to the problems the Packers had at long snapper last year. 

There really isn't.  If you're lucky, you might have a few players left with a draftable grade in the sixth round.  In the 7th round, there's probably no chance of that happening.  Either way, you're generally starting to look at your UFA.

I disagree with the idea of only a few players being draftable when you reach round 6. That is an entirely subjective viewpoint of where you set the bar for 'draftable player'...........and that is not even the same between one GM and another.

You could equally claim there are 82 draftable picks left, if you have pick one in round six, and including comps - or you could even claim there are, say, 50 undrafted players on top of that, who were about as good as the late draftees. If 6th and 7th round picks are 'throwaways', teams wouldn't bother fighting over the undrafted FAs, which are even lower on any 'likely to succeed' list. What we are really talking about here is odds, the odds a player drafted here (6th-7th), can play enough meaningful snaps over several seasons to be good value. Even if they didn't play many snaps, but were available as backups for injuries that never happened to their unit, they are playing a role. 

Your viewpoint does stand up if you are looking back at the draft with 20/20 hindsight vision, and know which players met/exceeded expectations, then the number of successes are indeed few. But if that were the case, then you could also call any early round busts undraftable, which is a bit unrealistic, as the draft is all about perceived value AT THE TIME OF THE DRAFT. I do get where you are coming from, in that guys drafted in the 6th/7th seldom amount to much, but I don't tie that to whether they have a draftable grade. Saying "beyond 'this' point a player is not draft-worthy", conflicts with the reality that there is no such point, just a sliding scale of probability. PFW listed 246 players as draftable this year (6.3 grade or better), so in their view a lot more than 175 players (pick 175 is the first pick in round 6), were 'draft worthy'.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, 66PinG said:

Bart Starr as well. 

I know Bart was drafted in the 17th round, but the pick number would probably put him in the 7th in a recent draft.

Bart was 200th overall, which would put him 7 picks before ESB this year. (6th round)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, 66PinG said:

Bart Starr as well. 

I know Bart was drafted in the 17th round, but the pick number would probably put him in the 7th in a recent draft.

Changes from year to year with comp picks. In a lot of drafts in the last 20 years the 200th pick has been a COMP pick at the end of the 6th.  The last time it was in the 7th round was 20 years ago with the 1998 draft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, OneTwoSixFive said:

I disagree with the idea of only a few players being draftable when you reach round 6. That is an entirely subjective viewpoint of where you set the bar for 'draftable player'...........and that is not even the same between one GM and another.

You could equally claim there are 82 draftable picks left, if you have pick one in round six, and including comps - or you could even claim there are, say, 50 undrafted players on top of that, who were about as good as the late draftees. If 6th and 7th round picks are 'throwaways', teams wouldn't bother fighting over the undrafted FAs, which are even lower on any 'likely to succeed' list. What we are really talking about here is odds, the odds a player drafted here (6th-7th), can play enough meaningful snaps over several seasons to be good value. Even if they didn't play many snaps, but were available as backups for injuries that never happened to their unit, they are playing a role. 

Your viewpoint does stand up if you are looking back at the draft with 20/20 hindsight vision, and know which players met/exceeded expectations, then the number of successes are indeed few. But if that were the case, then you could also call any early round busts undraftable, which is a bit unrealistic, as the draft is all about perceived value AT THE TIME OF THE DRAFT. I do get where you are coming from, in that guys drafted in the 6th/7th seldom amount to much, but I don't tie that to whether they have a draftable grade. Saying "beyond 'this' point a player is not draft-worthy", conflicts with the reality that there is no such point, just a sliding scale of probability. PFW listed 246 players as draftable this year (6.3 grade or better), so in their view a lot more than 175 players (pick 175 is the first pick in round 6), were 'draft worthy'.

 

I read where the Patriots only have about 75-80 players on their draft board from year to year. After that, they dont feel the remaining players in the draft will be good enough to make their roster. Draftable depends on where your roster is at. If you have solid depth, a draft pick in the 6th or 7th round has as much chance of making your team as a undrafted FA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/19/2018 at 4:32 PM, Golfman said:

My bad if this was regarding Goodson. I thought this was about Rollins! 

I thought he was talking about Rollins too.  :$

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/24/2018 at 2:31 PM, DavidatMIZZOU said:

But the punter has been fantastic from everything that I have read.  Not like he was a 3rd rounder that couldn't punt... 

Yikes, that brings back memories!   lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, 66PinG said:

Donald Driver disagrees

Yes, every once in a while a player taken low or as an UDFA succeeds well beyond anyone's expectations but they are the exception rather than the rule.

Edited by Pugger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn’t call the LS pick bad. The NCAA produces about 3-6 LS a year that can play. By using a pick we locked our guy down

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



×