Jump to content

2024 NFL Draft Discussion

MacReady

By MacReady
in Green Bay Packers

 Share

Recommended Posts

NFLGURU

NFLGURU

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, Leader said:

Hmmm....this is impressive.

 

The Packers will like the age of Allen and he's a big guy who can carry the load.  I'm not sure where Allen goes in this draft, but I do believe if the Packers sign Dillon, his effort and production will disappear. JMO. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MantyWrestler

MantyWrestler

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Big, fast, powerful, outstanding locker room and workout guy, super young. Better footwork, vision, and patience then given credit for. Doesn't fight the football when he catches it, will be a willing and capable blocker. 

Not a top of the line long speed guy, but does everything else at a very high level. 

 

Doesn’t run with the power you’d think a guy just shy of 250# would but has very good vision and is at least as fast as Dillion on film.

Just scratching the surface like I believe you implied. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Old Guy

Old Guy

Posted
Posted

This site has 6 quarterbacks in its top 13 players for the '24 draft. I don't think Sanders is coming out, his father already said so. I hope they are right. More good players sliding down to our pick at 32. 

NFL DRAFT 2024 Overall Prospect Rankings - Page 2 (nfldraftbuzz.com)

Here is the latest draft order. Nine out of the top 12 teams could use a quarterback. I only counted the Bears once but as bad as they are at selecting QB's maybe they should pick two. Out of those teams, three very likely won't select a quarterback. Two, Arizona and the Giants are heavily invested in their current ****ty quarterback. The other, the Jets, their GM (Rodgers) won't allow it. 

NFL Draft order 2024 after Week 12: The Patriots jump up (msn.com)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HighCalebR

HighCalebR

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Old Guy said:

They don't have many first-round grades on guys, which I think is accurate. This doesn't seem like a great draft class. 

The guys they got "scouting" are pretty well respected in the twitterverse. A good jumping off point to start looking at dudes if you don't watch college ball. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PossibleCabbage

PossibleCabbage

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Rainmaker90 said:

What exactly does he do extremely well?

I mean, he's mobile and he can make NFL level throws, but his footwork is messy and his ball-handling is erratic.  More pressing is the fact that he's small and not especially durable.  He's absolutely not something I'd be looking for as a starter, but could be a high end backup who could sustain you during a brief starting QB absence.  No idea what that's worth in the draft, but a 2 is rich for my blood.

He probably goes somewhere in the Hendon Hooker- Sam Howell area of the draft.

Edited by PossibleCabbage
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OneTwoSixFive

OneTwoSixFive

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Old Guy said:

They don't have many first-round grades on guys, which I think is accurate. This doesn't seem like a great draft class. 

When was the draft class that had MORE THAN 32 players as first round guys. Never, is the answer. If you are tying players grades to a round, then a dozen or maybe even more players will fail to be graded as first rounders every. single. year........... even though they are taken in the first round.

If you want to separate the top tiers of players, don't do it with a system that patently doesn't work , but instead call players above a certain level something other than 'first round players', like upper-tier players - and if a player scores above a certain pre-determined score then they are upper tier players and we can break this infatuation we see every year with tagging maybe 1/3rd of players that go in round one as having 'not having first round grades'. 

Pursue this further - if 12 players who do not have first round grades do go in round one, then those 12 players cannot count for round 2 grading, so where does a round two grade stop - halfway through the round, a third of the way ? The further you go the stupider it gets - by round three you might not have a single player with a 3rd round grade, as they have all been taken already.

If you intend to describe players in terms of first round grades, then as a minimum, the number of players with that grade each year should average 32, not, say, 20. In effect you should be lowering the bar enough that on average 32 players meet the grade. Now, with that standard, it is easy to see that if only 28 players make that grade it is deemed a poor year, but if 35 make it, it is a good year for that round (and it need not only apply to round 1). If you still insist on having maybe 20 players or possibly less with this top grade, then don't describe it as round one players, find a better term.

I guess you could partially describe a round with two numbers. The grade of the top rated player in the round, and the mean grade of all picks in the round, ie add all grades together and divide them by 32 (assuming no team has forfeited a first round pick). Of course this doesn't tell you everything, like the break points where the grades fall off, but there needs to be a better way of describing the relative talent in different drafts.

actually the best way of describing a draft may be the simplest. Each position group could be described in general terms like, a great year for top end players but with poor depth, a bad year overall, or a banner year, or lacking in top end talent but plenty of depth, or a very good year for the lighter weight edge guys, or big and fast receivers, run stopping DTs etc, etc.

Yes, I admit this does trigger me - I have a rant every year on this.

Edited by OneTwoSixFive
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...