Bianconero Posted April 14, 2020 Share Posted April 14, 2020 Just now, Rockice_8 said: In that scenario I'm taking Pittman or Reagor over Claypool. I find Claypool much more explosive than Pittman but I'm in the minority 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby816 Posted April 14, 2020 Share Posted April 14, 2020 3 minutes ago, Rockice_8 said: That bust rate stat factors in bad class for all prospects including bad OT classes. It's not picking and choosing which drafts to use it is all encompassing. This class has zero correlation to 2014 so if you think the WRs in that class outperformed the OTs doesn't matter in the slightest when trying to figure out players in this one. I think overall it just painted a picture that in a draft class that had highly ranked OTs AND WRs that it showing over time how those guys did. There's hits and misses at both positions on that draft at those spots. That's why I posted it. It wasn't a pro WR or pro OL post. It was me showing a similar class with similar ranked players and how is shook up from 1-48 picked on both those positions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby816 Posted April 14, 2020 Share Posted April 14, 2020 2 minutes ago, Bianconero said: Thomas is a safe pick. That's why I have him ahead of Becton. Becton for me has A LOT of work to do to be good at the NFL level. And for me the 11th pick with what else will be there... shouldn't be that much of a project. But that's just my take. Thomas I think will be very solid at the NFL level. But I don't think he will ever he "great" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingOfNewYork Posted April 14, 2020 Share Posted April 14, 2020 5 minutes ago, Rockice_8 said: In that scenario I'm taking Pittman or Reagor over Claypool. Reagor yes, Pittman? No Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingOfNewYork Posted April 14, 2020 Share Posted April 14, 2020 5 minutes ago, Bianconero said: I find Claypool much more explosive than Pittman but I'm in the minority Same. Pittman doesn’t do it for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby816 Posted April 14, 2020 Share Posted April 14, 2020 1 minute ago, KingOfTheDot said: Same. Pittman doesn’t do it for me. Yup me either. Game doesnt translate great to the NFL. Id he happy with him with a 3rd perhaps. But not at all at 48. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJC33 Posted April 14, 2020 Share Posted April 14, 2020 3 hours ago, Bobby816 said: I think the point was just made that these OTs can bust just as easy as the WRs. I know that history says that the WR is more likely to bust. But history doesn't have 3 great WRs every draft. There's pretty much no such thing as a complete prospect, so anybody can nitpick a players game to find a weakness. For me the 3 WRs are can't miss players and I think they will all be great pros. I like to keep pointing to the 2014 draft bc it was similar to this one at the 2 positions we're discussing. While the draft is known for its WRs... lets not forget that OL was big that draft year as well. 2014 draft at OL and WR... 2nd: Greg Robinson 4th: Sammy Watkins 6th: Jake Matthews 7th: Mike Evans 11th: Taylor Lewan 12th: OBJ 16th: Zach Martin (OG) 19th: Ju'Wuan James 20th: Brandin Cooks 28th: Kelvin Benjamin 33rd: Xavier Su'a-Filo (OG) 35th: Joel Bitonio (OG) 39th: Marquise Lee 42nd: Jordan Matthews 43rd: Weston Richburg 44th: Cyrus Kouandijo 45th: Paul Richardson So I ask would you be happy with a Robinson, Matthews or James? Doubt we are thinking OG at 11 so seeing a great player like Martin doesn't really apply to us or this (I do like Ruiz a lot). Disregarding statistics that span over 10 years to single out the 2014 draft (Which coincidentally heavily favors WRs) because you believe it's a good comparison is the absolute definition of a subjective argument. You do see this, right? How about we look at 2016.. Would you rather: Conklin, Stanley, Tunsil, Decker OR... Coleman, Fuller, Doctson, Treadwell Knowing what we know now ..There's no impartial comparison of a single previous class.. SAMPLE SIZE IS EVERYTHING.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDotNova Posted April 14, 2020 Share Posted April 14, 2020 28 minutes ago, KingOfTheDot said: WRs that went before 48 9. Jacksonville- Jeudy 13. San Francisco- Lamb 15. Denver- Jefferson 21. Philly- Ruggs 22. Minnesota- Aiyuk 30. Green Bay- Higgins 34- Indy- Mims 48- New York- Claypool after 48 50- Chicago- Hamler 55- Baltimore- Raegor 56- Miami- Pittman 57- LAR- Duvernay Which mock? What OT were available at 48? The drop off in prospect at WR from 11 to 48 is big. Lamb (potential all pro) to Pittman (potential solid number 2). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby816 Posted April 14, 2020 Share Posted April 14, 2020 8 minutes ago, NJC33 said: Disregarding statistics that span over 10 years to single out the 2014 draft (Which coincidentally heavily favors WRs) because you believe it's a good comparison is the absolute definition of a subjective argument. You do see this, right? How about we look at 2016.. Would you rather: Conklin, Stanley, Tunsil, Decker OR... Coleman, Fuller, Doctson, Treadwell Knowing what we know now ..There's no impartial comparison of a single previous class.. SAMPLE SIZE IS EVERYTHING.. Its the most accurate of all the classes to compare to this one. You named the 2016 class... yet those WRs were not hyped like these 3 are. I used the class I did... bc BOTH the OTs AND the WRs were hyped. And it doesn't support what I say. I feel like some of you half way read posts. I repeatedly have said I wont be unhappy with an OT. Me showing that class shows fails at WR as well (Watkins hasn't lived up to his spot, Benjamin, Lee, Matthews are all on there). I didn't just bring up the successes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bianconero Posted April 14, 2020 Share Posted April 14, 2020 2 minutes ago, SDotNova said: Which mock? What OT were available at 48? The drop off in prospect at WR from 11 to 48 is big. Lamb (potential all pro) to Pittman (potential solid number 2). But what is the drop off between Lamb (13) for instance and Mims (34)? I'm not sure what it will be in 2 years. I'm sure someone said something similar about he draft that everyone is comparing this WR class to, 2014: What's the drop off from Mike Evans (7) to DeVante Adams (53) or Allen Robinson (2.61)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KimuraGod Posted April 14, 2020 Share Posted April 14, 2020 39 minutes ago, KingOfTheDot said: WRs that went before 48 9. Jacksonville- Jeudy 13. San Francisco- Lamb 15. Denver- Jefferson 21. Philly- Ruggs 22. Minnesota- Aiyuk 30. Green Bay- Higgins 34- Indy- Mims 48- New York- Claypool after 48 50- Chicago- Hamler 55- Baltimore- Raegor 56- Miami- Pittman 57- LAR- Duvernay Iv been banging the drum about Duvernay for the last two weeks and since then he’s shot up draft boards. Going to shut my mouth now. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr.O Posted April 14, 2020 Share Posted April 14, 2020 Tony Pauline is saying a lot of team are viewing Claypool as exclusively a TE(many teams apparently have him as TE1) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KimuraGod Posted April 14, 2020 Share Posted April 14, 2020 1 minute ago, Dr.O said: Tony Pauline is saying a lot of team are viewing Claypool as exclusively a TE(many teams apparently have him as TE1) If that’s the case he’s gone mid to end of first for sure then Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bianconero Posted April 14, 2020 Share Posted April 14, 2020 Just now, Dr.O said: Tony Pauline is saying a lot of team are viewing Claypool as exclusively a TE(many teams apparently have him as TE1) I think that he is most definitely the most talented player who can be labeled as a TE Side note about Pauline: How accurate has he been? I think with Idzik, IIRC, he was pretty tapped in, but not so much with Macc and now Douglas? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby816 Posted April 14, 2020 Share Posted April 14, 2020 4 minutes ago, Bianconero said: But what is the drop off between Lamb (13) for instance and Mims (34)? I'm not sure what it will be in 2 years. I'm sure someone said something similar about he draft that everyone is comparing this WR class to, 2014: What's the drop off from Mike Evans (7) to DeVante Adams (53) or Allen Robinson (2.61)? Some misses in between like Benjamin, Lee, Matthews, Richardson, Latimer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.