VanS 2018 NFL Draft Prospect Rankings

[GSUeagles14]

30 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

So because my rankings look a little too much like the talking heads, I'm not thinking for myself?  That's amusing.  Considering I have 2 QBs with 1st round grades (Darnold and Rosen), one RB (Saquon Barkley), one WR (Calvin Ridley), and 3 OL (Kolten Miller, Mike McGlinchey, and Quenton Nelson) with 1st round grades but yeah I don't think for myself.

And no I'm not asking for anything special, I'm just asking for a little bit of support other than citing your eye test.  You made the claim a couple of days ago that Josh Allen was an accurate passer.  You're more than welcome to make that claim, but I'm going to need more than an arbitrary "eye test".  Not a single example was made.  Not one.  It's like saying that the earth is flat, but with NOTHING concrete to support that argument.  You're more than welcome to come up with your own rankings, but when one of your random rankings turns out to be right don't completely ignore the rest of your rankings.  Your 2017 rankings were no more correct than anyone else's, despite you "thinking for yourself".  If you want to come up with out there rankings, go right ahead but I want to hear a bit more to support those rankings.

woah... the earth isnt flat? 

[Forge]

47 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

So because my rankings look a little too much like the talking heads, I'm not thinking for myself?  That's amusing.  Considering I have 2 QBs with 1st round grades (Darnold and Rosen), one RB (Saquon Barkley), one WR (Calvin Ridley), and 3 OL (Kolten Miller, Mike McGlinchey, and Quenton Nelson) with 1st round grades but yeah I don't think for myself.

And no I'm not asking for anything special, I'm just asking for a little bit of support other than citing your eye test.  You made the claim a couple of days ago that Josh Allen was an accurate passer.  You're more than welcome to make that claim, but I'm going to need more than an arbitrary "eye test".  Not a single example was made.  Not one.  It's like saying that the earth is flat, but with NOTHING concrete to support that argument.  You're more than welcome to come up with your own rankings, but when one of your random rankings turns out to be right don't completely ignore the rest of your rankings.  Your 2017 rankings were no more correct than anyone else's, despite you "thinking for yourself".  If you want to come up with out there rankings, go right ahead but I want to hear a bit more to support those rankings.

I'm going to skip over everything else, and focus on the important part of this. You have first round grade on Kolton Miller? 

[ronjon1990]

42 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

So because my rankings look a little too much like the talking heads, I'm not thinking for myself?  That's amusing.  Considering I have 2 QBs with 1st round grades (Darnold and Rosen), one RB (Saquon Barkley), one WR (Calvin Ridley), and 3 OL (Kolten Miller, Mike McGlinchey, and Quenton Nelson) with 1st round grades but yeah I don't think for myself.

And no I'm not asking for anything special, I'm just asking for a little bit of support other than citing your eye test.  You made the claim a couple of days ago that Josh Allen was an accurate passer.  You're more than welcome to make that claim, but I'm going to need more than an arbitrary "eye test".  Not a single example was made.  Not one.  It's like saying that the earth is flat, but with NOTHING concrete to support that argument.  You're more than welcome to come up with your own rankings, but when one of your random rankings turns out to be right don't completely ignore the rest of your rankings.  Your 2017 rankings were no more correct than anyone else's, despite you "thinking for yourself".  If you want to come up with out there rankings, go right ahead but I want to hear a bit more to support those rankings.

It's his personal rankings. It's a forum post, not a job. If he wants to put up a raw list without ANY support, let him be. Nobody posts on here to simply get chided by the nit-picky. Not citing evidence for opinion is not only not part of the forum's rules but it's also something literally EVERY poster on this board is guilty of. 

As this thread has gone on, he's answered people's questions as far as his rankings go. That's kind of the point here. And what exactly is he supposed to base it off of? Box scores? The eye tests of others? What scouts have to say based on.... their eye tests? Examples are eye tests after all. 

[Broncofan]

2 hours ago, ronjon1990 said:

It's his personal rankings. It's a forum post, not a job. If he wants to put up a raw list without ANY support, let him be. Nobody posts on here to simply get chided by the nit-picky. Not citing evidence for opinion is not only not part of the forum's rules but it's also something literally EVERY poster on this board is guilty of. 

As this thread has gone on, he's answered people's questions as far as his rankings go. That's kind of the point here. And what exactly is he supposed to base it off of? Box scores? The eye tests of others? What scouts have to say based on.... their eye tests? Examples are eye tests after all. 

To be fair, though, if we want to learn from others, then it helps to have some tangible method/approach.   The most successful methods are those that have some foundation or rationale that is plausible, and can be reliably reproduced over time.   It doesn't have to be perfect, no method is.   But a successful methodology or approach is going to be more successful in the long run than one-off assessments amalgamated over time.

It's not a job, but it also helps to see behind the curtain.   It's how methodology and approaches improve over time.   And if pulling back the curtain reveals only monkeys in charge, well, it helps to know too.  I mean, then at least I'll know to bring bananas next time.

I'll be upfront and point out it's tough to be the lone voice in the wilderness.  It takes courage to be that voice.   But it's also fair to see what's behind the outlier take.   That way we can learn something valuable either way (even if it's random variance, there's almost always something to be gained/learned).  No one is forced to do this, but without this step, it's pretty easy to see how occasional hits gets written off as random variance.

[Iamcanadian]

2 hours ago, ronjon1990 said:

It's his personal rankings. It's a forum post, not a job. If he wants to put up a raw list without ANY support, let him be. Nobody posts on here to simply get chided by the nit-picky. Not citing evidence for opinion is not only not part of the forum's rules but it's also something literally EVERY poster on this board is guilty of. 

As this thread has gone on, he's answered people's questions as far as his rankings go. That's kind of the point here. And what exactly is he supposed to base it off of? Box scores? The eye tests of others? What scouts have to say based on.... their eye tests? Examples are eye tests after all. 

You miss the point, VanS likes to remind people over and over when he gets one right, so it is only fair to take him to task when he is wrong!!!

I like the fact that he likes Ragnow so high, Mayock just agreed with him, but to place him above Nelson just seems off the charts to me!
I absolutely hate his RB, WR and LB rankings, but that is just me.

In a sense, he is not a true draftnik, because he is far more interested in how they will pan out in say 5 years over predicting the draft and there is nothing wrong with that and he sure makes things interesting!!!

[ronjon1990]

2 hours ago, Iamcanadian said:

You miss the point, VanS likes to remind people over and over when he gets one right, so it is only fair to take him to task when he is wrong!!!

I like the fact that he likes Ragnow so high, Mayock just agreed with him, but to place him above Nelson just seems off the charts to me!
I absolutely hate his RB, WR and LB rankings, but that is just me.

In a sense, he is not a true draftnik, because he is far more interested in how they will pan out in say 5 years over predicting the draft and there is nothing wrong with that and he sure makes things interesting!!!

Oh I'm well aware he was right on Alvin Kamarra and that Joshua Dobbs is going to be an MVP caliber QB in a couple years and that he and Greg Zeirlein share the same opinion of Lamar Jackson. However, you can't take him to task on THIS post for being wrong when the draft hasn't happened yet. Are some guys ranked too high? Maybe. But the NFL has an organization known as the Browns (and my Raiders sometimes) known for taking guys ridiculously high for no apparent reason other than a shot in the dark. 

You find Ragnow being placed above Nelson off the charts- ask VanS why. He's made a couple posts here already that address questions being asked that weren't part of the OP. 

While he may not be a true "draftnik", neither is Mel Kiper. And being interested in where they will pan out in five years? Well I'm pretty sure GMs ask themselves the same thing when they make their boards (particularly for the first couple of rounds). It does play a part, even if not a huge one. 

IE: If a GM thinks Royce Freeman is going to be better than Nick Chubb in 5 years, he'll likely take him if he's looking for a RB. 

Further, the title of his post is VanS 2018 NFL Draft Prospect RANKINGS... not a Mock draft. There is an entire section of the site dedicated to mock drafts where "draftniks" can go. I've had plenty of disagreements with VanS over prospects (ie: I see Tyrod Taylor, not Mike Vick when I look at Lamar Jackson). I wouldn't touch Lamar Jackson in the first 2 rounds if he insists on playing QB (ala Tim Tebow). I would rank Lamar Jackson below other more polished passers. In fact, I do believe that the only reason Lamar Jackson (or Josh Allen, and to a lesser extent Sam Darnold) even touches the first round is the "upside" that "draftniks" talk about that will pan out in probably "3 to 5 years". But someone coming onto his thread and ragging for no apparent reason other than to "take him to task" is both a form of trolling AND against the forum rules (which I've had to dissect for a mod regarding another user before, so yes, I know them well). 

So, forgive me if I choose to take a mod to task, when it's kind of their "job" to know better. 

[VanS]

10 hours ago, Forge said:

So were you super down on Jalen Ramsey? The biggest knock on him coming out was his ball skills. 

I get the appeal of a "ball hawk", but I think that interceptions, similar to touchdowns, can be a volatile statistic based on quite a few variables. Scrabble had 8 INTs one year, then only had one year with more than 1 the rest of his career. He wasn't any less of a corner during those other years. David Amerson had like 13 picks his junior year and 5 his senior year, but he wasn't a "good" cornerback. Sometimes it's also a byproduct of how the player plays. I do value turnovers, so I absolutely get this line of thought...but I think it requires a deeper dive than just the base statistics and you measure it out against how good that player actually is. 

Also, just a note...didn't most of Minkah's ints come from the safety spot 2 years ago filling in for Eddie jackson? Because that's kind of a different ball hawking - doesn't necessarily translate as a corner all the time. 

Not super down.  But I was not high on him.  I thought he would be an Antonio Cromartie level player.  Very good corner with a couple of Pro-Bowls.  I did not see best corner in the NFL coming.  So I could be wrong here but the main difference between Ramsey and Ward is size.  I still would have had Ramsey rated far ahead of Ward because I would be more confident in him because of the size even without the ball skills.  Ward has the ball skills/awareness and size going against him which is why I'm down on him.

[VanS]

On 4/25/2018 at 1:51 AM, Brit Pack said:

Label me a fan of your posts. For someone who doesnt watch college football but loves hearing opinions and watching some youtube cut ups, I like hearing your thoughts and similarly believe if after watching a few minutes of someone play they don’t jump out at you, then I’m not so interested. 

Question for you @VanS with the recent news of the combine drug fail of Callaway where do you put him in terms of getting drafted and  do you still believe he has got his head on straight?

I like the kid's game so much, I'm willing to give him as many chances as I possibly can to get his stuff together.  I've said it many times before, I don't think he's a bad kid.  He's just had bad influences.  I think if you can put him around some positive influences he can actually stay out of trouble long enough to fulfill his athletic potential.   NFL Network or ESPN recently reported that Callaway has been working out with Antonio Brown in the lead up to the draft.  And Brown has stated that he sees a lot of himself in Callaway and wants to serve as a mentor.  I believe that going to a stable franchise like the Pittsburgh Steelers with a hard-nosed head coach like Mike Tomlin and a veteran mentor like Antonio Brown would do wonders for Callaway.  Right now he looks like he's a screw up no matter the situation.  I don't believe that.  I think he's a product of his environment.  In a positive environment like Pittsburgh, I believe he can stay out of trouble and become a dynamic player in the NFL.

I know Randy Moss didn't have as many issues on his resume as Callaway but he did fall in the draft in 1998 because of character concerns.  He went to Minnesota where he had a veteran mentor he respected like Cris Carter and a hard-nosed head coach like Dennis Green.  That helped him mature, stay out of trouble, and he's now a first ballot Hall of Famer.  I believe that a similar environment with a strong head coach and a respected veteran to mentor him would help keep Antonio Callaway out of trouble.  He's not a lost case like Reuben Foster (who I didn't trust would stay out of trouble in the NFL at this time last year).

[VanS]

9 hours ago, CWood21 said:

So because my rankings look a little too much like the talking heads, I'm not thinking for myself?  That's amusing.  Considering I have 2 QBs with 1st round grades (Darnold and Rosen), one RB (Saquon Barkley), one WR (Calvin Ridley), and 3 OL (Kolten Miller, Mike McGlinchey, and Quenton Nelson) with 1st round grades but yeah I don't think for myself.

And no I'm not asking for anything special, I'm just asking for a little bit of support other than citing your eye test.  You made the claim a couple of days ago that Josh Allen was an accurate passer.  You're more than welcome to make that claim, but I'm going to need more than an arbitrary "eye test".  Not a single example was made.  Not one.  It's like saying that the earth is flat, but with NOTHING concrete to support that argument.  You're more than welcome to come up with your own rankings, but when one of your random rankings turns out to be right don't completely ignore the rest of your rankings.  Your 2017 rankings were no more correct than anyone else's, despite you "thinking for yourself".  If you want to come up with out there rankings, go right ahead but I want to hear a bit more to support those rankings.

You know what's funny, I've never touted my 2017 rankings.  I know better than to think one year proves anything.  In 2012, it looked like RG3 would be a superstar.  Now how does he look?  A lot can change in the next 2-3 years.  That's why I've always said, lets talk about who was right and who was wrong about the 2017 draft in 2020 when these guys have almost gotten through their rookie contracts.  That's when we'll know who was really right or wrong.

And before you bring up Alvin Kamara, the only times I've ever mentioned him is when someone else likes to point out that I had Josh Dobbs rated as the #1 QB in last year's draft (as a means of suggesting I don't know what I'm talking about).  And its only at that point that I bring up the fact that I was right about Alvin Kamara being the top RB in the class.  Its almost always just as a defense.  Not me trying to act like I'm a know it all and totally infallible.

[Broncofan]

4 hours ago, ronjon1990 said:

Oh I'm well aware he was right on Alvin Kamarra and that Joshua Dobbs is going to be an MVP caliber QB in a couple years and that he and Greg Zeirlein share the same opinion of Lamar Jackson. However, you can't take him to task on THIS post for being wrong when the draft hasn't happened yet. Are some guys ranked too high? Maybe. But the NFL has an organization known as the Browns (and my Raiders sometimes) known for taking guys ridiculously high for no apparent reason other than a shot in the dark. 

You find Ragnow being placed above Nelson off the charts- ask VanS why. He's made a couple posts here already that address questions being asked that weren't part of the OP. 

While he may not be a true "draftnik", neither is Mel Kiper. And being interested in where they will pan out in five years? Well I'm pretty sure GMs ask themselves the same thing when they make their boards (particularly for the first couple of rounds). It does play a part, even if not a huge one. 

IE: If a GM thinks Royce Freeman is going to be better than Nick Chubb in 5 years, he'll likely take him if he's looking for a RB. 

Further, the title of his post is VanS 2018 NFL Draft Prospect RANKINGS... not a Mock draft. There is an entire section of the site dedicated to mock drafts where "draftniks" can go. I've had plenty of disagreements with VanS over prospects (ie: I see Tyrod Taylor, not Mike Vick when I look at Lamar Jackson). I wouldn't touch Lamar Jackson in the first 2 rounds if he insists on playing QB (ala Tim Tebow). I would rank Lamar Jackson below other more polished passers. In fact, I do believe that the only reason Lamar Jackson (or Josh Allen, and to a lesser extent Sam Darnold) even touches the first round is the "upside" that "draftniks" talk about that will pan out in probably "3 to 5 years". But someone coming onto his thread and ragging for no apparent reason other than to "take him to task" is both a form of trolling AND against the forum rules (which I've had to dissect for a mod regarding another user before, so yes, I know them well). 

So, forgive me if I choose to take a mod to task, when it's kind of their "job" to know better. 

Without derailing the topic further - taking a poster "to task" for what they've posted is completely fair - as long as it's on-point, and not on the person.    Accountability on what ppl have posted is entirely fair game, as long as the insults aren't flying, or it's entirely personal.    It should come with the realization that no one will get it right.  But if someone's methodology / analysis merits praise, or agreement, or disagreement - that's how people learn.   And I'm quite certain Mods are aware of this, with or without dissection.    

It's tough to have lone dissenting opinions, to stand on an island.   As someone who's constantly criticized Elway's draft methods well before it became apparent there was problem (doing this after we won the SB was the low point in popularity of this take lol),  and was labelled as a crank for this, even when I qualified that Elway excelled in every other facet of GM at that time, I get it.  But as long as the criticism is on what's posted, and it's civil, then it's fair game.   I would expect no less.   It's how we learn from each other as a community.     

And as we all recognize, talent evaluation matters less on the results, but the process behind it - if the process is right, even if the results are wrong, success will keep coming.  If the process is flawed, success is just random chance, as there is always good / bad luck / Andrew Luck (!) involved in outcome determination.  Dissecting the process is actually the most important part to learning and improving.   It would be boring if we all agreed - so dissenting opinions should be expected, it's how we grow...from the discussion that ensues from it on the process.  It's a 2-way street there.

Anyways, back to regularly scheduled programming.

[MSURacerDT55]

12 hours ago, VanS said:

Denzel Ward has only 2 career INTs in 26 career games played.  Sure he was only a full-time starter on the outside this past season, but that is still a low turnover rate given the snaps he's played.  Beyond the numbers, just based on his tape, I see a guy who is almost always in the right position to break up a pass but he doesn't always turn his head around in time to knock the ball down or loose.  He reminds me a lot of Ronald Darby.  Another great cover corner with great ability to stick on his man but not a guy who makes game-changing plays in terms of creating turnovers.  At the corner position, I value guys who will create turnovers.  That is why I have Minkah Fitzpatrick ranked first.  He's had a lot of INTs in his college career and many of them returned for TDs.  He just seems to have a knack for finding the ball and that sort of ability seems to translate well to the NFL.

- False, we played a lot of nickel and he was a starter at slot with Lattimore and Conley = 2 year starter

- when he doesn't, he mirrors the receiver when he reads the receivers eyes and plays all the way through his hands, its a learned technique...lol

- You have zero way of quantifying if Ward could be big play or not at the next level

[CWood21]

11 hours ago, ronjon1990 said:

It's his personal rankings. It's a forum post, not a job. If he wants to put up a raw list without ANY support, let him be. Nobody posts on here to simply get chided by the nit-picky. Not citing evidence for opinion is not only not part of the forum's rules but it's also something literally EVERY poster on this board is guilty of. 

As this thread has gone on, he's answered people's questions as far as his rankings go. That's kind of the point here. And what exactly is he supposed to base it off of? Box scores? The eye tests of others? What scouts have to say based on.... their eye tests? Examples are eye tests after all. 

Except you don't put your rankings out in a PUBLIC forum unless you're expecting feedback.  And I can't speak for others, but I was repeatedly told as a kid that if I made a claim or opinion, I needed to back it up by examples.  That's LITERALLY all I'm asking for.  Support your stance.  I asked him why he had Josh Allen and Lamar Jackson as his top 2 QBs in another thread, and his reasoning was that he watched tape.  Not particular instances where he can say that he thought that was true.  Just that he "watched tape".  I can claim to watch tape and say that Mike Hughes is the best player in the draft.  But if you're going to choose something outside of the "norm", you should be ready to back it up.  And no, that's not group-think.

Take a video, break it down, and let's go from there.  He hasn't done that.

[ronjon1990]

On 4/24/2018 at 5:05 PM, CWood21 said:

 But when your rankings come out looking like you picked names randomly out of a hat, that says enough.

Oh yeah. Feedback.... ??‍♂️

[MikeT14]

I don't know about Top 10, but I truly believe had Facyson stayed healthy at Virginia Tech, he would have been a 1st rounder alongside Fuller.

[Broncofan]

7 minutes ago, ronjon1990 said:

Oh yeah. Feedback.... ??‍♂️

Criticism is fine too, if it's on-point, and not personally based.    If we don't critique or dissent, we don't learn.  It's why getting analysis and making the arguments on rationale/methods matters.  

I say this as the guy who got roasted for putting up pieces criticizing Elway's draft history the offseason AFTER we won the SB.   It wasn't fun, but as long as the criticism was on-topic, and not personal jabs, I have zero problem with it.