Would you consider these two at #12 and #30?

[Pugger]

15 hours ago, Cheech said:

First, before you put words in my mouth, stop, and then don't.  

You mentioned the 2010 draft.  Let's look a little closer. 

How many of those busts were taken there because of "positional value" bull****?  If 32 teams could go back and re-draft the 2010 draft, where would Gronk go?  Where would Tyson Alualu be selected?  Anthony Davis? There is a hell of a lot of "premium positions" that didn't turn into jack **** at the NFL level.  

1	1	St. Louis Rams	Sam Bradford	QB	Oklahoma	Big 12
	1	2	Detroit Lions	Ndamukong Suh †	DT	Nebraska	Big 12
	1	3	Tampa Bay Buccaneers	Gerald McCoy †	DT	Oklahoma	Big 12
	1	4	Washington Redskins	Trent Williams †	OT	Oklahoma	Big 12
	1	5	Kansas City Chiefs	Eric Berry †	S	Tennessee	SEC
	1	6	Seattle Seahawks	Russell Okung †	OT	Oklahoma State	Big 12
	1	7	Cleveland Browns	Joe Haden †	CB	Florida	SEC
	1	8	Oakland Raiders	Rolando McClain	LB	Alabama	SEC
	1	9	Buffalo Bills	C. J. Spiller †	RB	Clemson	ACC
	1	10	Jacksonville Jaguars	Tyson Alualu	DT	California	Pac-10
	1	11	San Francisco 49ers	Anthony Davis	OT	Rutgers	Big East	from Chicago via Denver[R1 - 1]
	1	12	San Diego Chargers	Ryan Mathews †	RB	Fresno State	WAC	from Miami [R1 - 2]
	1	13	Philadelphia Eagles	Brandon Graham	DE	Michigan	Big Ten	from San Francisco via Denver[R1 - 3]
	1	14	Seattle Seahawks	Earl Thomas †	S	Texas	Big 12	from Denver [R1 - 4]
	1	15	New York Giants	Jason Pierre-Paul †	DE	South Florida	Big East
	1	16	Tennessee Titans	Derrick Morgan	DE	Georgia Tech	ACC
	1	17	San Francisco 49ers	Mike Iupati †	G	Idaho	WAC	from Carolina [R1 - 5]
	1	18	Pittsburgh Steelers	Maurkice Pouncey †	C	Florida	SEC
	1	19	Atlanta Falcons	Sean Weatherspoon	LB	Missouri	Big 12
	1	20	Houston Texans	Kareem Jackson	CB	Alabama	SEC
	1	21	Cincinnati Bengals	Jermaine Gresham †	TE	Oklahoma	Big 12
	1	22	Denver Broncos	Demaryius Thomas †	WR	Georgia Tech	ACC	from New England [R1 - 6]
	1	23	Green Bay Packers	Bryan Bulaga	OT	Iowa	Big Ten
	1	24	Dallas Cowboys	Dez Bryant †	WR	Oklahoma State	Big 12	from Philadelphia via Denver and New England[R1 - 7]
	1	25	Denver Broncos	Tim Tebow	QB	Florida	SEC	from Baltimore [R1 - 8]
	1	26	Arizona Cardinals	Dan Williams	DT	Tennessee	SEC
	1	27	New England Patriots	Devin McCourty †	CB	Rutgers	Big East	from Dallas[R1 - 9]
	1	28	Miami Dolphins	Jared Odrick	DT	Penn State	Big Ten	from San Diego[R1 - 10]
	1	29	New York Jets	Kyle Wilson	CB	Boise State	WAC
	1	30	Detroit Lions	Jahvid Best	RB	California	Pac-10	from Minnesota [R1 - 11]
	1	31	Indianapolis Colts	Jerry Hughes	DE	TCU	MWC
	1	32	New Orleans Saints	Patrick Robinson	CB	Florida State	ACC
	2	33	St. Louis Rams	Rodger Saffold	OT	Indiana	Big Ten
	2	34	Minnesota Vikings	Chris Cook	CB	Virginia	ACC	from Detroit[R2 - 1]
	2	35	Tampa Bay Buccaneers	Brian Price	DT	UCLA	Pac-10
	2	36	Kansas City Chiefs	Dexter McCluster †	RB	Ole Miss	SEC
	2	37	Philadelphia Eagles	Nate Allen	S	South Florida	Big East	from Washington [R2 - 2]
	2	38	Cleveland Browns	T. J. Ward †	S	Oregon	Pac-10
	2	39	Tampa Bay Buccaneers	Arrelious Benn	WR	Illinois	Big Ten	from Oakland [R2 - 3]
	2	40	Miami Dolphins	Koa Misi	DE	Utah	MWC	from Seattle via San Diego[R2 - 4]
	2	41	Buffalo Bills	Torell Troup	DT	UCF	C-USA
	2	42	New England Patriots	Rob Gronkowski †	TE	Arizona	Pac-10	from Chicago via Tampa Bay and Oakland[R2 - 5]
	2	43	Baltimore Ravens	Sergio Kindle	DE	Texas	Big 12	from Miami via Denver[R2 - 6]
	2	44	Oakland Raiders	Lamarr Houston	DE	Texas	Big 12	from Jacksonville via New England[R2 - 7]
	2	45	Denver Broncos	Zane Beadles †	OT	Utah	MWC
	2	46	New York Giants	Linval Joseph †	DT	East Carolina	C-USA
	2	47	Arizona Cardinals	Daryl Washington †	LB	TCU	MWC

 

I'll add this.  If you want to bump a player up or down a board based off of ANYTHING, it should be the scheme that he's best suited for and not his position.  The Packers won't be drafting J. Taylor if they are serious about running a zone scheme.  He could be a really nice player, but if he doesn't fit the scheme he won't be drafted.  Hock just so happens to fit the LaFleur offensive system like a glove.  

Oops.  One edit.  I'd be careful with putting Jonah Williams in your top 10.  Quite a few scouts are pegging him as a guard, and that, according to you, should drop him waaay down that list of yours.  

You are looking at this with 20/20 hindsight.  On the day of the draft you don't have that luxury.

[OneTwoSixFive]

1 hour ago, pacman5252 said:

I agree with what you’re saying. A few things though;

1. There are positional value purests on this board. The mention of a TE, wr, or guard ticks them off

2. Especially at pick 30, I think the positional value arguement kind of falls apart (I’m all for edge, j will, or stud DL at 12). There are typically truly like 15-25 real first round talents in the draft. You aren’t getting a real blue chip player at a value position at 30. Using OT since you mentioned a tackle at 30. Haven’t you noticed that after Williams, most people are grading that second teir of ots (Dillard, Taylor, Edwards, little, mcgary)  their OTs as prospects 30-80 and the lists are kind of interchangeable? That is because these aren’t real first round tackles and are more development tools projects. You can take swings on redshirt development players rounds 4-7. Pick 30 is a little rich. Why not get a guy who doesn’t need to develop as much and is a stud at the position?

For your point 2. At #30 you will be making a very good choice indeed,  if you are getting a blue chipper at any position. You might get lucky but I'd be looking at a solid red chipper there (with just a chance to be a blue). The way I view OTs is that any of Ford/Dillard/Taylor are great value at #30. Cajuste is decent value. Little MIGHT be value there (all in the eye of the beholder, he certainly has "round one feet"). I see Risner as a small step down (but still good, and value at #44).

Then we have Edwards (high-ceiling, low-floor guy) that is more of a risk. I could probably find a pick I'm more comfortable with at #44, but if you love his tape then take him there. Then we are on the slippery slope down to Howard and Scharping. Bleacher Report has McGary down at #169. This is why I have OT at #30. I am hopeful this area is a bit of a sweet spot for OTs (though due to demand, it is possible pickings might be thin, even there). Would I reach for Risner at #30 if there was a run on OTs, probably not, though it's close. I might  switch tactics and look for a good guard instead (like Deiter or Lindstrom) anywhere after #44.

[Shanedorf]

Good morning and nevermind

 

[SSG]

9 hours ago, Cheech said:

Right.  So instead of taking good players we end up with guys like Ahmad Carroll, Justin Harrell, Derrick Sherrod, and Datone Jones.  All positions of value that turned out really well, huh?  Screw that.  How many dumb *** decisions have been made by teams trading multiple picks to move up in a draft only to bust on a Pos QB?  I'll never forget laughing in the face of one of my best friends (Vikings fan) when they drafted Christian Ponder.  

If Jeffrey Simmons and TJ Hock are both there at 12, I'm taking Simmons, because he's the better player of the two.  But hell if I'm passing on Hock for a lesser player, such as a pass rusher who can't defend the run, just because he plays at a "position of value."  

And where the hell are people getting this notion that TE isn't a position of value in the first ******* place?  The only time the Packers offense has been worth a **** has been when we have a Jared Cook or Finley on the field.  If you can get George Kittle at 12, in an offense that's going to look a hell of a lot like Kyle Shannahan's - and he's the best player on the board, I'm running that card to the podium.  

 

 

Like you said previously, It comes down to talent.  If 2017's draft was to be done over, George Kittle is going to be one first 7-10 players off the board.  They aren't going to ignore his elite talent because he plays a position that some view as completely worthless to a NFL roster.  If San Fran was picking between Kittle and Solomon Thomas, who they took at 3, IMO Kittle would be an easy choice 10 out of 10 times. 

Outside of QB, I don't feel that one position is substantially more important than the other.  New England's roster shows exactly that.  They just played in what feels like their 20th Super Bowl.  Last year they traded their first and third round picks for a WR.  This last year they had 2 first round picks, with the RB they selceted being exponentially more important to the team's success than the Tackle who didn't play single snap this year.  Meanwhile their starting LT is a 7th rounder and their best front 7 player is a guy they drafted in the 4th round.  If the best team in the NFL can construct  one of the most successful dynasties in profesnional sports without valueing positions more than taelnt this whole "T's and DTs matter more than TEs and Guards" arguement is a lot of nothing. 

 

[OneTwoSixFive]

That kid (Simmons) can't catch a break. There is still the chance (at #12) of Oliver (small chance i admit), Wilkins, Gary. i might have to look closer at Lawrence to see how much he can impact the passing game, but I've never been a fan of guys much over 320 (I think he is 340) due to the likelihood of knee problems. I could go for Dre'Mont Jones a little later (say #44). I would still be interested in Simmons later, but given the wait needed and the increased risk, it would be somewhere like round 4.

[SSG]

34 minutes ago, Pugger said:

You are looking at this with 20/20 hindsight.  On the day of the draft you don't have that luxury.

Aren't both sides of the arguement using 20/20?  Because guys like Eric Ebron and Bubba Franks didn't work out as a high picks, TE suddenly becomes a worthless position that has no value to a NFL roster.  We should be signing terrible bottom of the roster guys like Mercedes Lewis or Lance Kendricks instead of using draft assets on the position?

[rcon14]

11 hours ago, Cheech said:

Right.  So instead of taking good players we end up with guys like Ahmad Carroll, Justin Harrell, Derrick Sherrod, and Datone Jones.  All positions of value that turned out really well, huh?  Screw that.  How many dumb *** decisions have been made by teams trading multiple picks to move up in a draft only to bust on a Pos QB?  I'll never forget laughing in the face of one of my best friends (Vikings fan) when they drafted Christian Ponder.  

If Jeffrey Simmons and TJ Hock are both there at 12, I'm taking Simmons, because he's the better player of the two.  But hell if I'm passing on Hock for a lesser player, such as a pass rusher who can't defend the run, just because he plays at a "position of value."  

And where the hell are people getting this notion that TE isn't a position of value in the first ******* place?  The only time the Packers offense has been worth a **** has been when we have a Jared Cook or Finley on the field.  If you can get George Kittle at 12, in an offense that's going to look a hell of a lot like Kyle Shannahan's - and he's the best player on the board, I'm running that card to the podium.  

 

This is a pointless discussion to continue because you're just building strawmen.

[CWood21]

11 hours ago, Cheech said:

You are proposing the idea of dropping a player based off of his position and not the level of talent that he possesses.  That's. How. Busts. Happen. Every. Year.  

I think you don't understand how positional value goes, if that's what you're getting out of it.  If you've got two equally graded players, how do you decide which player you're taking?  There's a lot of factors you can take into account: team needs, positional depth in the draft, likelihood of success later in the draft, etc.  Historically speaking, there's roughly a 50% success rate of drafting a good TE in the 2nd round and 39% in the 3rd round.  Compare that to the success rate of a DL in the 2nd round (26%) and 3rd round (27%).  Even though you have a better chance of having success drafting a TE (67%) in the first round than a DL (58%).  I'd argue that you're better off drafting a DL in the first round and taking a TE on Day than vice versa.  You're not "dropping" a player based on their position.  Positional value comes into play when you're comparing two prospects.

11 hours ago, Cheech said:

You've illustrated this point VERY well by insinuating that QB desperate teams are going to reach on players that have no business being drafted in the top 10, because they play a position of value, which in turn will cause top 10 players to drop to us at 12.  (See, this is key here.  You understand the concept but you've been unable to apply it past the QB position.  The exact same logic applies to edge, CB, DT and OT.  GM's reach for lesser players because of their position and inevitably pass on better players who I'm sure they later wish they would have drafted.)

QBs are a completely different animal.  Trying to use them as part of the argument one way or the other is a waste of time.  It's the most important in all of professional sports.

11 hours ago, Cheech said:

In regards to Hock, you've clearly not read enough on the guy.  Because what you've described is actually what talent evaluators are saying about him, not just me.  

Finally, you actually quoted me saying "If Hock is the best player available at 12, you take him."  You argued that he wouldn't be. 

I even clarified later: "IF Hock is BPA, you take him.  I don't know who is going to be available at 12.  I never even came close to insinuating that anyone else there would be a bust."  

So how is it now that I came to the conclusion that he's going to be the BPA at 12?  You really need to read what I say, and not what you think I said.  

Pretty sure Daniel Jeremiah just had Josh Jacobs as his #6 ranked prospect.  Should we assume that's the case?  No.  I'd rather have someone who has a wrong opinion than someone who just regurgitates other's opinions.  But let's say in the odd scenario that Hock was BPA on the board at 12 (he won't), what should the Packers do?  I'd argue that the Packers should shop their pick like hell.  I'd rather take 90 cents on the dollar than take Hock at 12.  I'd rather have an extra draft pick or two than take Hock at 12.  It's a poor use of resources.

[CWood21]

1 hour ago, SSG said:

Aren't both sides of the arguement using 20/20?  Because guys like Eric Ebron and Bubba Franks didn't work out as a high picks, TE suddenly becomes a worthless position that has no value to a NFL roster.  We should be signing terrible bottom of the roster guys like Mercedes Lewis or Lance Kendricks instead of using draft assets on the position?

No.  I'm arguing that the concept that TEs rarely make enough of an impact to justify the use of such a high draft pick.  Who is more important to make that NE offense crank?  Tom Brady or Rob Gronkowski?  What about Philadelphia?  Is it Ertz or someone else?  You don't need a superstar TE to be successful.

[CWood21]

1 hour ago, SSG said:

Like you said previously, It comes down to talent.  If 2017's draft was to be done over, George Kittle is going to be one first 7-10 players off the board.  They aren't going to ignore his elite talent because he plays a position that some view as completely worthless to a NFL roster.  If San Fran was picking between Kittle and Solomon Thomas, who they took at 3, IMO Kittle would be an easy choice 10 out of 10 times.

He's definitely not going to top 7-10.  He's a Day 1 pick, but he's not going that high.  Trubisky, Mahomes, and Watson all get bumped up because of positional value.  Myles Garrett obviously is still going up there.  Marshon Lattimore and Jamal Adams are likely staying in the top 10.  That's 6 right there.  You'd probably have JJSS, Alvin Kamara, Kareem Hunt (pre-suspension), etc. that would likely go before him.

[SSG]

4 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

He's definitely not going to top 7-10.  He's a Day 1 pick, but he's not going that high.  Trubisky, Mahomes, and Watson all get bumped up because of positional value.  Myles Garrett obviously is still going up there.  Marshon Lattimore and Jamal Adams are likely staying in the top 10.  That's 6 right there.  You'd probably have JJSS, Alvin Kamara, Kareem Hunt (pre-suspension), etc. that would likely go before him.

I'll agree to disagree.  We obviously have entirely differant opinions of what quility TE play is and their worth to an offense.  

This isn't fantasy football.  Kittle is an all pro, record setting TE (despite terrible QB play) who's also an elite blocker.  I think he'd get bumped for the QBs, Lattimore and Garrett but there is definetely an arguement after that.  Alvin Kamara is a great 3rd down back but he's yet to show anyone he's a 3 down guy.  Karrem Hunt's a mediocre athlete who's production is the result of the offense he plays in.  Someone might look at JJSS's stats and make the arguement but I don't see it.  The chances of JJSS replicating the 88/ 1375/ 5 TDs in San Fran with CJ Bethard and Nick Mullens is slim too none IMO.  

It's crazy to me that you truely believe that talent still wouldn't matter to NFL teams 2 or 3 years into their NFL careers.  Kittle showed an unlimited ceiling last year.  That was a historic season despite his QBs being as bad as any in the NFL.  

[SSG]

50 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

No.  I'm arguing that the concept that TEs rarely make enough of an impact to justify the use of such a high draft pick.  Who is more important to make that NE offense crank?  Tom Brady or Rob Gronkowski?  What about Philadelphia?  Is it Ertz or someone else?  You don't need a superstar TE to be successful.

 

New England made a bigger draft investment into Gronk than any of their WRs, any of their starting offensive lineman and all of their edge rushers.  Not only that, he's the 3rd highest paid player on their team.  New England clearly thinks TE is a lot more important to their success than you do.  If New England is the example, they showed us that you can run a high power offense regardless of the player you have at LT.  They showed us that pass rushers are one of the easier things to find in the league and absolutely don't require a big investment.  They showed us that outside of QB, that RB is the next most important position on an offense.

Philly is another terrible example.  Zack Ertz has been their leading receiver over the last 3 years and they just used their top pick on a TE in this last draft.  Pretty clearly that they value their TEs substantially more than you value them for them.  They wouldn't have made the playoffs in back to back years or won the Super Bowl last year without him.  Philly's won games regardless of the revolving door QB, OL, RB, WR or on their defense.  Whether it was their high draft pick or the career journeyman whom they picked up off the bottom of the NFL trash heap.  

[Pugger]

3 hours ago, SSG said:

Aren't both sides of the arguement using 20/20?  Because guys like Eric Ebron and Bubba Franks didn't work out as a high picks, TE suddenly becomes a worthless position that has no value to a NFL roster.  We should be signing terrible bottom of the roster guys like Mercedes Lewis or Lance Kendricks instead of using draft assets on the position?

I hope we draft a TE this spring.  We need to find a permanent solution to this position instead of throwing money at guys like Kendricks and Lewis - and Graham frankly.  If one of the TEs coming out this year turns into the next Gronk or Tony Gonzales, then great.  But until they put on pads we won't know.  This is true for every position in every draft.  If we call a position worthless because a player didn't work out then every position is worthless because players have bombed at every position.  I don't know if Bubba Franks didn't work out.  He wasn't the second coming of Gronk so perhaps he was over-drafted but he was productive for a while.

[Cheech]

7 hours ago, OneTwoSixFive said:

For example, you need to look and see where the talent level dropoffs are AT EACH POSTION GROUP. Certain groups, the ones that require difficult-to-find traits, are less deep because of the rare skills needed, and as a consequence the better guys go fast.

Well written post.  You've nailed the nuance of value vs depth.  Instead of quoting it all, I'll start with this. 

Yes.  I think you do have to take the talent level dropoff into consideration.  I'd add - after the blue-chip players are gone.  There are only 10 - 15 in each draft.  When you have a chance to take one, you do it. 

Devin White is another player that fits into the Hock discussion.  Even less of a position of need, but sure seems to be a blue chip player who can play 3 downs and do everything a modern ILB should be able to do.  

Picking an ILB impacts your ability to fill holes in the early rounds of the draft.  I'd argue that work absolutely has to be done in free agency so that you're not picking for need once the draft comes along.  I think that's exactly what happened to Ted in some of his worst drafts.  FWIW, Gute made it clear that he'd be active in this free agency period by trading HHCD away mid-season.  He referenced the fact that keeping HHCD and waiting for a comp pick didn't factor into his decision to trade him because he planned on being active so the pick would have likely been lost anyway.  

I'd be terribly disappointed and honestly surprised if Gute still needed to fill starting positions at EDGE (x2) RG, FS, and SS when the draft comes around.  

[vegas492]

17 minutes ago, Cheech said:

Well written post.  You've nailed the nuance of value vs depth.  Instead of quoting it all, I'll start with this. 

Yes.  I think you do have to take the talent level dropoff into consideration.  I'd add - after the blue-chip players are gone.  There are only 10 - 15 in each draft.  When you have a chance to take one, you do it. 

Devin White is another player that fits into the Hock discussion.  Even less of a position of need, but sure seems to be a blue chip player who can play 3 downs and do everything a modern ILB should be able to do.  

Picking an ILB impacts your ability to fill holes in the early rounds of the draft.  I'd argue that work absolutely has to be done in free agency so that you're not picking for need once the draft comes along.  I think that's exactly what happened to Ted in some of his worst drafts.  FWIW, Gute made it clear that he'd be active in this free agency period by trading HHCD away mid-season.  He referenced the fact that keeping HHCD and waiting for a comp pick didn't factor into his decision to trade him because he planned on being active so the pick would have likely been lost anyway.  

I'd be terribly disappointed and honestly surprised if Gute still needed to fill starting positions at EDGE (x2) RG, FS, and SS when the draft comes around.  

I'm a fan of White and I've long thought that if you wish to transform a defense, get two good DL and put a stud ILB behind them.  We have Clark.  Daniels is okay.  I think they can grab a stud DL at #30 if they wanted....which brings me to White.

I've watched his film on YouTube.  Do you have any game film you can point me to where he shows he can play ILB in the NFL?  All of his clips are of him absolutely destroying guys when blitzing a gap.  I can't find much on him trying to diagnose a play.  And the little I've seen, his instincts aren't great.  But his speed/agility is.  And he brings an amazing pop when he gets to a guy.

I know there is great love for White, but I'm not seeing elite ILB traits in him....and that may be due to his highlight reel being full of blitzes when he is never touched.  

I've watched film of Mack Wilson and came away more impressed with him.  Much better instincts.  Better in coverage (because I didn't see much of White dropping in his highlight clips).

If my theory is true...DL with an elite LB...I can't help but wonder about a Christian Wilkens selection at #12 and Wilson at #30 to get it done.  Maybe White at #12 and Tillery at #30 could get it done, too.

Again...curious if you have any links to share regarding White...more than his YouTube highlight reel.