Jump to content

Draft Day Thread: Day 1


MrOaktown_56

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, jimkelly02 said:

People here are funny with how they think We shouldn’t double dip in the 3rd on a WR  (like Shenault, Pittman, claybrooks, Higgins), if ones available, to be the  planned starter in ‘21 and replace 11M/yr 29yo often injured T.Williams but we really should spend a 3rd on Amik Robertson, Nearly have to. In fact people debated me for saying I’d simply wait to take him at 91 not 81.  
TopEnd starting sCBs cost 5-8M and even right right now you can take your pick of some good ones.  Decent #2 WRs like T.Williams go for 11M+ And even they’re hard to find in FA, there’s only a few per year.  
So don’t draft a future starting WR so you can draft a future starting sCB? Are you kidding me guys! This is just an example of wanting “my guys” and making arguments against everything that either doesn’t get me what I want or takes away from the resources needed to get me what I want.
 

I'd hope those who said we should draft Robertson aren't the same saying we shouldn't draft another WR. Otherwise, you have a point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, oakdb36 said:

I'd hope those who said we should draft Robertson aren't the same saying we shouldn't draft another WR. Otherwise, you have a point.

I’m not gonna start anything by going back and naming who said what.  I really didn’t mean it was an attack on any individual.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, jimkelly02 said:

People here are funny with how they think We shouldn’t double dip in the 3rd on a WR  (like Shenault, Pittman, claybrooks, Higgins), if ones available, to be the  planned starter in ‘21 and replace 11M/yr 29yo often injured T.Williams but we really should spend a 3rd on Amik Robertson, Nearly have to. In fact people debated me for saying I’d simply wait to take him at 91 not 81.  
TopEnd starting sCBs cost 5-8M and even right right now you can take your pick of some good ones.  Decent #2 WRs like T.Williams go for 11M+ And even they’re hard to find in FA, there’s only a few per year.  
So don’t draft a future starting WR so you can draft a future starting sCB? Are you kidding me guys! This is just an example of wanting “my guys” and making arguments against everything that either doesn’t get me what I want or takes away from the resources needed to get me what I want.

I'd be willing to bet that Shenault, Pittman, Claypool and Higgins are all off the board before we pick at #80. Taking another WR in the top 100 is risky because there's a good chance he's the 5th/6th guy on the depth chart as a rookie. 

I also find it hilarious how everyone here thinks it's just so easy to find starting WR's in the third round and beyond. Of the 25 WR's to put up 1,000+ yards last season only 9 of them were drafted in the third round or later. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Disclaimer:  I don’t trust governments and I don’t trust major sporting leagues...

so we know the GMs did a trial run did the draft a day or two before to try and iron out any kinks.... and one happened right away with Cincy on the clock.

is there any chance that prior to the draft coverage last night the league held a “rough” draft where all the picks were made but then last night the presentation version of the draft for the Tv audience was filmed....!idk something seemed prearranged.... almost to perfect

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, oakdb36 said:

Looks like a good %.

36%. Meaning 64% of those guys were drafted in the first two rounds. Also interesting to note that only 4 of those 9 have been able to consistently put up 1,000+ yards per year in Diggs, Allen, Edelman, and Golladay. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For all of the mid-round WR truthers on the forum. 

There were 28 WR's selected in the 3rd/4th round between 2016-2018. Only 5 of those 28 (17%) have become productive starters within their first 2-4 seasons. 

Those 5 are Michael Gallup, Cooper Kupp, Chris Godwin, Kenny Golladay, and DeDe Westbrook. 4 of those 5 went to teams with prolific passing attacks Gallup in Dallas, Kupp in Los Angeles, Godwin in Tampa Bay, and Golladay in Detroit. 

Edited by NYRaider
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, oakdb36 said:

Looks like a good %.

Lmao Thats probably the least informative stat I’ve seen in a while

64% Of 1k WRs went in top 2 rounds (64 picks)

36% percent  of 1k WRs went in round 3-7+ UDFA (192 picks)

The stats meaningless unless you count how many WRs went in rounds 1-2 and how many became 1k receivers And get a percentage chance of hitting on that.  Then do the same for me 3-7.


even then it’s assuming #1 is of equal value to a #256.  Even further, you’d have to assign a weight/coefficient to their actual draft position (Think draft value chart).  There’s way more value in #1 then #256!  They can’t possibly be compared as  equal attempts to find a 1k WR!

it’s literally a worthless stat!

Furthermore id assume there’s way less actual WRs drafted in the rounds 1-2 pool than rounds 3-7 pool.  

by this “stats” logic your better off just going with pure volume and spending picks 4,5,6,7 every year on WRs then spending a 1st every year.

im not trying to be mean but there’s isn’t a single logical thing about this stat. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jimkelly02 said:

im not trying to be mean but there’s isn’t a single logical thing about this stat. 

What about this stat: Only 5/28 WR drafted in the 3rd/4th between 2016-2018 have become productive starters in the first 2-4 seasons of their career. So if recent history has shown us anything it's what? That you shouldn't expect a mid-round WR to be a starter early in his career. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, NYRaider said:

What about this stat: Only 5/28 WR drafted in the 3rd/4th between 2016-2018 have become productive starters in the first 2-4 seasons of their career. So if recent history has shown us anything it's what? That you shouldn't expect a mid-round WR to be a starter early in his career. 

I really don’t care to enter this debate.... I don’t care honest to goodness I just was saying that stat is incredibly flawed.
 

your stat is much better .... it takes into account something in math called a denominator, lol

But still that stat is so wildly not considering a handful of different factors including a real bad sample size...
to be very brief:

‘16 class has 4 seasons, ‘17 class has 3 seasons, ‘18 class has 2 seasons, ‘19 class has 1 season

so each class has different Amount of opportunities.... at a position that is known to not have many 1k rookie WRs...

your weighting the ‘18 class heavy and the ‘16 class light

I don’t think your a stupid person.  You know what your doing.... your finding selective data to prove your point and ignoring whole sets of variables

Edited by jimkelly02
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, jimkelly02 said:

I really don’t care to enter this debate.... I don’t care honest to goodness I just was saying that stat is incredibly flawed.

You make it seem like it's a guarantee that we're going to find a WR in round 3 that can step in and be a starting #1/#2 outside WR in year two capable of replacing Tyrell Williams. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, NYRaider said:

You make it seem like it's a guarantee that we're going to find a WR in round 3 that can step in and be a starting #1/#2 outside WR in year two capable of replacing Tyrell Williams. 

No I said If a guy falls (Pittman, shenault, Higgins, claypool) and you can get them in round 3, when their a 2nd round value, id take them as a possible replace my for williams.  And I’ve said it several times that I’d only keep/cut Williams based on his performance in ‘20 but I’d put him expectations on him.  
So I’d take a good value WR in round 3 to hopefully be able to replace Williams if he doesn’t ball out worth 11m.  Williams could be really good this year or bust, he’s a very volatile performer year to year.

and your the one promoting way more 1+2 rd WRs become 1k receivers.... which is why I think if you can capitalize on a deep class and get 2nd round quality In the third round 

Edited by jimkelly02
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, jimkelly02 said:

No I said If a guy falls (Pittman, shenault, Higgins, claypool) and you can get them in round 3, when their a 2nd round value, id take them as a possible replace my for williams.  And I’ve said it several times that I’d only keep/cut Williams based on his performance in ‘20 but I’d put him expectations on him.  
So I’d take a good value WR in round 3 to hopefully be able to replace Williams if he doesn’t ball out worth 11m.  Williams could be really good this year or bust, he’s a very volatile performer year to year.

and your the one promoting way more 1+2 rd WRs become 1k receivers.... which is why I think if you can capitalize on a deep class and get 2nd round quality In the third round 

 I will say Williams looked like night and day before and after his injury. He can be an all around WR2 when he's healthy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MrOaktown_56 said:

 I will say Williams looked like night and day before and after his injury. He can be an all around WR2 when he's healthy.

Agreed. Williams will likely never be a high volume target but he's one of the best deep threats in the league. You don't really need him to be a 90+ catch guy when you have Waller. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...