Jump to content

Final Mock 2022


Madmike90

Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, Madmike90 said:

I don't think anyone has ever said differently.

Gotcha.  But then why do some feel they need to defend their mocks so fiercely?  And this is not a personal shot at you.

All I've been saying all along is that it's possible a more appropriate way to do this is to mock more than one prospect at each position as opposed to only one.  A fall back pick or a second choice who also plays the same position.

For instance.  We debated Winfrey vs Hall.  You're correct in your opinion that on paper Winfrey has better physical traits and is the more a pure 3 tech.  But Hall is also a DT whose been used in that same way in college.  So he's not really an experienced 3-4 DE.

I would love to draft Winfrey is he's Poles/Flus top guy at that position but not knowing that I've simply added a second option who may also be a fit and a guy they also like.  Your response was they only sent DB coaches to look Marcus Jones......really?  Do you honestly believe that?

Maybe all I'm trying to do here is suggest ways that you "mockubators" could make your mocks more interesting to guys like me who often ignore them when from Mock v1.0 to Mock v.5.0 there is so little consistency.  I don't believe it works that way in a war room.

Edited by soulman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Sugashane said:

Either you're REALLY good at mocks or REALLY bad at the other to make that comparison. 😂

 

Just playing though, I understand what you're saying. 

If I'm that bad at it it's only because I don't practice it enough.  🤣

So just let me move my club and mark my balls and you can play through.  😁

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, soulman said:

Gotcha.  But then why do some feel they need to defend their mocks so fiercely?  And this is not a personal shot at you.

All I've been saying all along is that it's possible a more appropriate way to do this is to mock more than one prospect at each position as opposed to only one.  A fall back pick or a second choice who also plays the same position.

For instance.  We debated Winfrey vs Hall.  You're correct in your opinion that on paper Winfrey has better physical traits and is the more a pure 3 tech.  But Hall is also a DT whose been used in that same way in college.  So he's not really an experienced 3-4 DE.

I would love to draft Winfrey is he's Poles/Flus top guy at that position but not knowing that I've simply added a second option who may also be a fit and a guy they also like.  Your response was they only sent DB coaches to look Marcus Jones......really?  Do you honestly believe that?

Maybe all I'm trying to do here is suggest ways that you "mockubators" could make your mocks more interesting to guys like me who often ignore them when from Mock v1.0 to Mock v.5.0 there is so little consistency.  I don't believe it works that way in a war room.

A mock shouldn't be a linear as that...you can't just say "well if we don't get Winfrey take Hall" because if you have a 10 player gap in talent between the two players and say 3 of those players are at OL or WR you should pivot to one of them as you also have needs there...you could post a crazy amount of mocks based off the idea of if player A isn't there but then I would pivot to player B,C or D at another position then then dominio effect would lead to a ton of other changes...it's what makes doing a mock impossible to get right...that said it is also what makes the real draft so fascinating...

From everything I've read about the draft it is very inconsistent even in war rooms on the day of the draft...teams have a feel for what others will do but if just one or two teams do something different like trade up or take a player who might not be an obvious need it resets the entire board for all 32 teams...it's basically the butterfly effect...that's why during the draft they set up cots at the facilities because of how much work goes into adjusting between picks...the other clear indicator of how random picks can be is how many times have you heard a prospect say he never even spoke to a team before they drafted him...some of that is smokescreen...some of that is we didn't think we would be picking him but the way the board fell it was our only real option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, soulman said:

Maybe all I'm trying to do here is suggest ways that you "mockubators" could make your mocks more interesting to guys like me who often ignore them when from Mock v1.0 to Mock v.5.0 there is so little consistency.  I don't believe it works that way in a war room.

I like you soul but I think you take mock drafts a little too serious my man.

A few things to note about this comment here;

1) I'm afraid the extremely high (and seemingly unrealistic) standards that you appear to be looking for in a mock draft on the internet is going to be VERY hard to find anywhere no matter where you look. Your essentially setting yourself up for failure if that's what your looking for because nobody on this site an active GM who can give you details about their particular war room (which changes between each team BTW). And to keep it 100....I wouldn't want the Bears GM to post any mocks ANYWHERE on the internet.  Packers GM...sure...all day long.....please do....but that's not reality either.

2) You're always free to post your own mocks that best suite you and your standards. I can't speak for everyone here but I personally enjoy reading different trade options and opinions about certain players even if I disagree with it. In fact, disagreeing with what someone says is what I do best lol. In case you haven't notice lol.

All jokes aside though, nobody is saying the mocks they put together are exactly as they think will happen or even close to it. Everyone knows that all it takes is one wrong prediction and everything else is screwed. But that's not the point of doing a mock in the first place. The point in creating mocks on this site is just something to do for fun in the offseason while also generating different conversations to talk about rather than whether Pringle is a good WR or not.

Why not accept it for what it is and embrace it? Have fun and discuss your differences in player choices and why.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Madmike90 said:

A mock shouldn't be a linear as that...you can't just say "well if we don't get Winfrey take Hall" because if you have a 10 player gap in talent between the two players and say 3 of those players are at OL or WR you should pivot to one of them as you also have needs there...

That is precisely what happens in the real world.  And I'm not saying that other positions of need are not an option.  They may be.  It all depends on how the team sees it's own board.  If filling a specific position first is a priority then yes, Winfrey is gone so Poles retreats to his second DT choice whom he may have ranked nearly identically to the other.  Windy's mock took that approach.

Poles or any imaginary GM could also pivot to his highest ranked player at another position.  If in doing the mock someone wanted to show three options for that pick they could easily to that by indicating them as choice 1-2-3.  That could cover three players at the same position or at three different positions depending on where that pick falls.  They could even trade back for the #2 or #3 choice.

Here's my suggestion. 

Instead of including all of the verbiage about the pick which is very easily found on any number of sites that scout and rank the players why not spend time briefly stating why #1 is your guy instead.  Then list your other options for that pick and why those players are your fall back picks.  Seems to me that would create more interest and debate by showing an entire strategy per pick.

For example.

My pick at #39 is Perrion Winfrey.  He's the top 3 tech DT available at this pick.  If he's taken ahead of me my second option is Kyler Gordon.  We're in need of another CB and Gordon is ranked as the next highest player on my board.  If Gordon has been taken I'll opt for Tulsa OT Tyler Smith but may also trade back to pick up a 4th round pick if the situation warrants it and I find a trade partner.

There's three options for that pick using three different players at three different positions and depending on which you draft your board now changes a bit down line if you still need to draft a DT.  So maybe Hall or another option is in the mix at #48.  I guess what I don't get is why anyone would want to spend time on the longer narratives about the players that's only a repeat of what's printed elsewhere.  If I want know why you like Winfrey I can look him up in several other draft guides and quite frankly I do this constantly.

Another reason I won't spend time on mocks is that after three rounds the picture begins to blur as far as whose still undrafted and also how a GM might approach his remaining picks.  BPA?  Position specific?  Developmental guys? Special Teams?   I can't help but think that from from the 4th round on the guessing game only becomes more intense to mock because it must be in war rooms as well.  Even if I did my own mock at most it would in all likelihood be a three round mock because day 3 is nothing but a crap shoot.

I'm not trying to ruin your fun Mike I'm just suggesting an alternative way to present choices is all.

Edited by soulman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JAF-N72EX said:

I like you soul but I think you take mock drafts a little too serious my man.

A few things to note about this comment here;

1) I'm afraid the extremely high (and seemingly unrealistic) standards that you appear to be looking for in a mock draft on the internet is going to be VERY hard to find anywhere no matter where you look. Your essentially setting yourself up for failure if that's what your looking for because nobody on this site an active GM who can give you details about their particular war room (which changes between each team BTW). And to keep it 100....I wouldn't want the Bears GM to post any mocks ANYWHERE on the internet.  Packers GM...sure...all day long.....please do....but that's not reality either.

2) You're always free to post your own mocks that best suite you and your standards. I can't speak for everyone here but I personally enjoy reading different trade options and opinions about certain players even if I disagree with it. In fact, disagreeing with what someone says is what I do best lol. In case you haven't notice lol.

All jokes aside though, nobody is saying the mocks they put together are exactly as they think will happen or even close to it. Everyone knows that all it takes is one wrong prediction and everything else is screwed. But that's not the point of doing a mock in the first place. The point in creating mocks on this site is just something to do for fun in the offseason while also generating different conversations to talk about rather than whether Pringle is a good WR or not.

Why not accept it for what it is and embrace it? Have fun and discuss your differences in player choices and why.

 

I've just suggested some alternatives as far as how the info in the mock is presented JAF.  Something like I proposed to Mike where there is a more full blown strategy for each pick.  For example;  A primary pick plus two options should my primary have already have been taken off the board.  I just believe that's a bit closer to how it all goes down on Draft Weekend is all.  If each team has a "go to" alternative if the guy they wanted most is gone why not try doing a mock that way where there are no "Oh Crap" moments?

Something like how Poles and Flus handled their disappointment over Ogunjobi not passing his physical.  They were obviously prepared for that possibility and immediately moved to their option #2 without hesitation.  I have to think it works pretty much the same way in any war room.  I can't see doing it that way as being anything but even more thorough in evaluating players who rank around where the Bears will be picking.  Hitting on one player is hard but with three options the odds increase a hit on one.

I also don't feel it would impair any of the debate or discussions of that mock.  It might even enhance them.  What I don't believe enhances them is doing yet another bio or personal scouting report that can just as easily be gotten from any other draft guide and more likely in even greater detail.  Not including more than a brief reason for that pick would save the time needed to add two more options for that pick.  What a posters fallback strategy is in round two is of far more interest to me than a punter in round 7.

I really don't enjoy creating a mock draft but if I ever was to do one it would come right before the draft and it would include my options should my guy get snatched away from me a few picks earlier.  My only rationale for it is that's how I believe life works whether it's in an NFL War Room, at the grocery store, buying a car, or who I might have asked to my Junior Prom.  Life is all about options and in my case I've chosen so poorly in one category so many times it's why I'm still single and will remain so......LOL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, soulman said:

That is precisely what happens in the real world.  And I'm not saying that other positions of need are not an option.  They may be.  It all depends on how the team sees it's own board.  If filling a specific position first is a priority then yes, Winfrey is gone so Poles retreats to his second DT choice whom he may have ranked nearly identically to the other.  Windy's mock took that approach.

Poles or any imaginary GM could also pivot to his highest ranked player at another position.  If in doing the mock someone wanted to show three options for that pick they could easily to that by indicating them as choice 1-2-3.  That could cover three players at the same position or at three different positions depending on where that pick falls.  They could even trade back for the #2 or #3 choice.

Here's my suggestion. 

Instead of including all of the verbiage about the pick which is very easily found on any number of sites that scout and rank the players why not spend time briefly stating why #1 is your guy instead.  Then list your other options for that pick and why those players are your fall back picks.  Seems to me that would create more interest and debate by showing an entire strategy per pick.

For example.

My pick at #39 is Perrion Winfrey.  He's the top 3 tech DT available at this pick.  If he's taken ahead of me my second option is Kyler Gordon.  We're in need of another CB and Gordon is ranked as the next highest player on my board.  If Gordon has been taken I'll opt for Tulsa OT Tyler Smith but may also trade back to pick up a 4th round pick if the situation warrants it and I find a trade partner.

There's three options for that pick using three different players at three different positions and depending on which you draft your board now changes a bit down line if you still need to draft a DT.  So maybe Hall or another option is in the mix at #48.  I guess what I don't get is why anyone would want to spend time on the longer narratives about the players that's only a repeat of what's printed elsewhere.  If I want know why you like Winfrey I can look him up in several other draft guides and quite frankly I do this constantly.

Another reason I won't spend time on mocks is that after three rounds the picture begins to blur as far as whose still undrafted and also how a GM might approach his remaining picks.  BPA?  Position specific?  Developmental guys? Special Teams?   I can't help but think that from from the 4th round on the guessing game only becomes more intense to mock because it must be in war rooms as well.  Even if I did my own mock at most it would in all likelihood be a three round mock because day 3 is nothing but a crap shoot.

I'm not trying to ruin your fun Mike I'm just suggesting an alternative way to present choices is all.

It 100% is not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Madmike90 said:

It 100% is not.

In my opinion it is and in many many post draft interviews it's also been laid out much like that.  Teams do have alternatives lined up for all of their earlier picks.  They have to.  Unexpected trades take place, a player they covet gets drafted before their pick, a player drops who wasn't expected to drop.  You're at #22 and this kid is a top ten pick on your board.  What caused him to drop?  Call around to see if anyone has better info.  Do you take him or stick with your board?  There's a run on OT.  Do I trade up to get one or lay back and hope or take another player at a different position?  Should I take a trade down deal and risk losing my best guy?

It's not a static deal Mike.  It's a constantly changing situation.  Why else would they call where they all meet "The War Room".  32 teams are doing battle over that years rookie crop each trying to find future All Pros and late round steals.  A mock draft is.....static.  I simply suggested a way to add some options to make it more realistic is all.  You don't have to do it.  It's only a suggestion.

But I'm done with this debate and all others that become a merry-go-round of opinions.  I told you that before.  Remember?

Instead, for your enjoyment and to share here's former Bears standout DT commenting in a video on Perrion Winfrey.

https://www.sportsmockery.com/chicago-bears/tommie-harris-thinks-perrion-winfrey-could-fits-bears-perfectly/

Relax and have a cuppa joe on me ok?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, soulman said:

In my opinion it is and in many many post draft interviews it's also been laid out much like that.  Teams do have alternatives lined up for all of their earlier picks.  They have to.  Unexpected trades take place, a player they covet gets drafted before their pick, a player drops who wasn't expected to drop.  You're at #22 and this kid is a top ten pick on your board.  What caused him to drop?  Call around to see if anyone has better info.  Do you take him or stick with your board?  There's a run on OT.  Do I trade up to get one or lay back and hope or take another player at a different position?  Should I take a trade down deal and risk losing my best guy?

It's not a static deal Mike.  It's a constantly changing situation.  Why else would they call where they all meet "The War Room".  32 teams are doing battle over that years rookie crop each trying to find future All Pros and late round steals.  A mock draft is.....static.  I simply suggested a way to add some options to make it more realistic is all.  You don't have to do it.  It's only a suggestion.

But I'm done with this debate and all others that become a merry-go-round of opinions.  I told you that before.  Remember?

Instead, for your enjoyment and to share here's former Bears standout DT commenting in a video on Perrion Winfrey.

https://www.sportsmockery.com/chicago-bears/tommie-harris-thinks-perrion-winfrey-could-fits-bears-perfectly/

Relax and have a cuppa joe on me ok?

I would have to side with JAF and Mike on this one. Have you ever heard of Deming's Theory of Knowledge? The long and short of it is for every complete process there are multiple steps that go into said process. Along with those steps there are any number of variables that can affect each step. Those variables in turn not only affect that particular step but can have a multitude of affects on the other steps and their variables. This describes the draft process perfectly. If someone did a mock as you suggest, with any hopes of it showing any credence of realism, it would be three pages long. I'm not sure I would have to the intestinal fortitude to even want to approach doing something like that for free. That sounds like a job. But, if that is what you desire, and I do respect your opinion, then I agree with JAF, you should give it a crack. I don't doubt it would at the very least be an interesting read.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bigbear72 said:

I would have to side with JAF and Mike on this one. Have you ever heard of Deming's Theory of Knowledge? The long and short of it is for every complete process there are multiple steps that go into said process. Along with those steps there are any number of variables that can affect each step. Those variables in turn not only affect that particular step but can have a multitude of affects on the other steps and their variables. This describes the draft process perfectly. If someone did a mock as you suggest, with any hopes of it showing any credence of realism, it would be three pages long. I'm not sure I would have to the intestinal fortitude to even want to approach doing something like that for free. That sounds like a job. But, if that is what you desire, and I do respect your opinion, then I agree with JAF, you should give it a crack. I don't doubt it would at the very least be an interesting read.

Maybe I'm not being clear enough on what I suggested BB.

All I suggested was to add another option or two for each of the earlier picks skipping that with Day 3 guys who are less likely to be immediate starters.  So in round 1-3 only the mock lists that posters top pick and his alternatives if "his guy" has been taken.  Chances are you won't need a third option so if someone wants to go with just a primary pick and one alternate pick it's his choice.

For example;

Mike likes Winfrey for our very first pick at #39 but Windy in his mock has him being taken off the board at #36 I think so he opts for Logan Hall as his first pick but actually trades back to take him.  Let's combine these two mocks into one the Mike put out there using what I'm suggesting.

Mike feels the 3 tech DT spot is our top need, and I don't disagree.  If we can draft Winfrey I'm all for it but I want a fall back player in the event Winfrey is gone.  So my mock makes Winfrey my pick because I feel he's the best available 3 tech DT available at pick #39. I add Logan Hall as my alternate describing him as somewhat of a hybrid DE/DT although he did play as a 3 tech DT in college. 

I don't need all of the excess verbiage justifying my picks.  Just a sentence or two indicating why these are my guys at #39 like I did in the previous paragraph.  I can very easily link one or more pages from a draft guide for each player for those who want to do more of their own research on both guys.  That alone will save time.  Now I do the same with my picks at #48 and #71.  One primary and one alternative.  That's it.

Personally I can't see how this would be any more complex than listing only one guy for each pick especially when you substitute a longer narrative about the guys with a link to their scouting reports which also have their measurables and testing numbers from the Combine and maybe their Pro Day as well.  There will be even more data for members to look at if they choose to do it.

If most are like me I'm gonna go to a scouting site and check the guy out anyway so I've made it easy for others by simply adding a link to those scouting reports to my mock.  That's all there is to it BB.  If I can find the time between now and Draft Weekend I will post a 3 pick mock using the format I've suggested using one primary pick and one alternate.  I will post links to their scouting reports but leave out the nice color pics which can take even more time to post and mean little in the overall analysis.

It's only a suggestion for using a somewhat different format than has traditionally been used.  No more, no less.

Edited by soulman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, soulman said:

In my opinion it is and in many many post draft interviews it's also been laid out much like that.  Teams do have alternatives lined up for all of their earlier picks.  They have to.  Unexpected trades take place, a player they covet gets drafted before their pick, a player drops who wasn't expected to drop.  You're at #22 and this kid is a top ten pick on your board.  What caused him to drop?  Call around to see if anyone has better info.  Do you take him or stick with your board?  There's a run on OT.  Do I trade up to get one or lay back and hope or take another player at a different position?  Should I take a trade down deal and risk losing my best guy?

It's not a static deal Mike.  It's a constantly changing situation.  Why else would they call where they all meet "The War Room".  32 teams are doing battle over that years rookie crop each trying to find future All Pros and late round steals.  A mock draft is.....static.  I simply suggested a way to add some options to make it more realistic is all.  You don't have to do it.  It's only a suggestion.

But I'm done with this debate and all others that become a merry-go-round of opinions.  I told you that before.  Remember?

Instead, for your enjoyment and to share here's former Bears standout DT commenting in a video on Perrion Winfrey.

https://www.sportsmockery.com/chicago-bears/tommie-harris-thinks-perrion-winfrey-could-fits-bears-perfectly/

Relax and have a cuppa joe on me ok?

It's factually incorrect...no team decides they are just taking one position and that is it...all teams stack their board for both need and value...if a player at a need position is ranked lower than a value pick they will pivot...it's the only thing that makes sense...

But don't worry your opinion and suggestion has been noted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Madmike90 said:

It's factually incorrect...no team decides they are just taking one position and that is it...all teams stack their board for both need and value...if a player at a need position is ranked lower than a value pick they will pivot...it's the only thing that makes sense...

But don't worry your opinion and suggestion has been noted.

Mike, we aren't connecting at all on this.  You seem to misunderstand what I'm saying or at the very least your responses indicate that.

We had this problem all along or so it seems so I'm just gonna drop it.  I understand my meaning, you don't.  Time to move on.

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...