Race for the Draft

[HeadTrip]

Originally Posted by charger1_sj

So we disagree on who makes the evaluation?

Sorry Kemp, although I hold you in high regards to your player evaluation skills I'll take my method over your opinion. Simple reason many more qualified eyes and that's not saying that you're not qualified.

So in your opinion was Mouton a reach? Inquiring minds want to know.

How often do you have to take that "Mouton was a reach" drum you've been beating so fervently in for repairs?

[Kemp17]

Originally Posted by charger1_sj

So we disagree on who makes the evaluation?

Sorry Kemp, although I hold you in high regards to your player evaluation skills I'll take my method over your opinion. Simple reason many more qualified eyes and that's not saying that you're not qualified.

So in your opinion was Mouton a reach? Inquiring minds want to know.

The only person who I expect to trust my opinion is me. So no worries there. All I would expect from you is that if the media is crying "reach" and you, Mr. _sj, don't think so when you look at that same pick, that you'd be comfortable saying "not a reach" despite what the talking heads think.

And I thought Mouton was a reach. I've defended the player because I think it's only right to reserve judgement until a guy can prove himself, but I did think he was a reach when we took him.

[charger1_sj]

Originally Posted by Kemp17

The only person who I expect to trust my opinion is me. So no worries there. All I would expect from you is that if the media is crying "reach" and you, Mr. _sj, don't think so when you look at that same pick, that you'd be comfortable saying "not a reach" despite what the talking heads think.

And I thought Mouton was a reach. I've defended the player because I think it's only right to reserve judgement until a guy can prove himself, but I did think he was a reach when we took him.

Sorry Kemp, perhaps I haven't made myself clear in the past. I don't follow college football on a regular basis so I don't feel I have the ability to make a call on a guy unless I've throughly evaluated him. Not possible to do with so many colleges and college recruits.

I have not do date put Mouton down. This is more about the process, the draft and AJ Smith not Mouton. Being a reach is not a bad thing in fact it can be a very good thing if the GM making the selection is right. But it doesn't change the designation. My opinion of course.

[AK46um]

Originally Posted by andocug

Amazingly the the bottom 4 teams last year (STL, IND, MIN, TB) are all still in playoff contention...and have better records than us. DEN and CIN finished as the 2nd and 3rd worst teams in 2010 but made the playoffs in 2011. KC finished in the bottom 5 in 2009 and won the division in 2010. The bottom line is that fortunes can change quickly in the NFL.

Right now our O line is so bad that opposing defenses might just outscore our offense. Losing out might earn us the #3 pick, which is the ideal scenario IMO. In that scenario, I'd consider trading down to #5 and picking up an extra 2nd rounder. The #5 pick (Jammer, LT, Seau, Billy Ray Smith) has been very good to us.

With the numerous injuries piling up and the fact our offense is so out of wack I see us losing at least 2 more games putting us roughly top 6-8 selection. I don't think we'll have a chance to crack the top 5 unless the Raiders beat us.

[Kemp17]

Originally Posted by charger1_sj

Sorry Kemp, perhaps I haven't made myself clear in the past. I don't follow college football on a regular basis so I don't feel I have the ability to make a call on a guy unless I've throughly evaluated him. Not possible to do with so many colleges and college recruits.

I have not do date put Mouton down. This is more about the process, the draft and AJ Smith not Mouton. Being a reach is not a bad thing in fact it can be a very good thing if the GM making the selection is right. But it doesn't change the designation. My opinion of course.

That's cool. One other thing I will say on the topic is that it's difficult for me to treat the media opinion as a starndard because of how they change. For instance, when the Seahawks took Bruce Irvin, most talking heads hinted at or simply called it a reach right away. Post-draft when it came out that other teams had Irvin rated that high, they piped down.

[andocug]

Originally Posted by Kemp17

I know this isn't your main point, but by way of reference Minnesota traded down from pick 3 to 4 and got a 5th and a 7th. Tampa went from pick 5 to 7 and got a 4th. I kind of doubt we'd get a 2nd for moving down from 3 to 5.

MIN got an early 4th (3rd pick in that round), early 5th (3rd pick in that round) and early 7th. It's about 150 points, which equals a mid to late 3rd rounder. Going from 3 to 5 might fetch an early 3rd rounder. My 2nd round estimation was based on points (500, which equals an early to mid 2nd rounder) and may not be accurate...unless someone is trying to trade up for a QB and is willing to give up a little more.

A trade down may not be the way to go. I just hope whoever we draft lives up to the hype and stays healthy.

[andocug]

Originally Posted by AK46um

With the numerous injuries piling up and the fact our offense is so out of wack I see us losing at least 2 more games putting us roughly top 6-8 selection. I don't think we'll have a chance to crack the top 5 unless the Raiders beat us.

Correct. We'd have to lose all 4 games to crack the top 5. Right now we can't score points in the 2nd half...and that was with a healthier O line than what we'll field on Sunday and perhaps the rest of the way. I can definitely see Oakland (and everyone else) beating us.

[charger1_sj]

Originally Posted by Kemp17

That's cool. One other thing I will say on the topic is that it's difficult for me to treat the media opinion as a starndard because of how they change. For instance, when the Seahawks took Bruce Irvin, most talking heads hinted at or simply called it a reach right away. Post-draft when it came out that other teams had Irvin rated that high, they piped down.

FYI, I don't use the talking points on TV or internet.

I look at the player ratings from NFL Network, CBS and some others when they list the top 100. When a guy not listed anywhere there is taking very high then it's a reach. Also try to find the guy and see where he stands. Some years there is more overlap than others in the top 100 from the various sites. In the end I end up with a list of players somewhere in the 150 range. What I'm looking for is consensus. Overlap means consensus. When things diverge then I can't come to any consensus.

[charger1_sj]

Originally Posted by andocug

Correct. We'd have to lose all 4 games to crack the top 5. Right now we can't score points in the 2nd half...and that was with a healthier O line than what we'll field on Sunday and perhaps the rest of the way. I can definitely see Oakland (and everyone else) beating us.

We need a little help. If some of those teams win a few games we're golden. Assuming we lose out.

[flwelshman]

Originally Posted by Kemp17

That's cool. One other thing I will say on the topic is that it's difficult for me to treat the media opinion as a starndard because of how they change. For instance, when the Seahawks took Bruce Irvin, most talking heads hinted at or simply called it a reach right away. Post-draft when it came out that other teams had Irvin rated that high, they piped down.

Which is why I, like yourself form my own opinions, right or wrong in the long run.

With Mouton, I was very surprised too, but again, we don't know where other teams had him on their boards, similar to the Irvin situation as you suggested. I do know he was a tackling machine with great speed for a LB on a very bad defense, so he could well have been rated higher than the "experts" had him.

Mel Kiper is no Joel Bushbaum, the only "draftnik" I'm aware of where NFL GMs and HCs actually went to visit him or called him for advice. Unlike Mel, Bushbaum ate and slept football and studied game tape after game tape on players across the country. His ability to have contacts at even the smallest school to get these tapes was incredible.

The draft has become such a TV monster that suddenly networks and web sites have gone out and found "draftniks" and labeled them "experts," and too many people form their opinions based on what these so called "experts" say. The problem arises when 99.9% of these "experts" really have no clue about how a NFL scout actually breaks down and evaluates a player. It's comical in a lot of cases, because these "expert's" qualifications, for the most part, are no better than yours or mine, and in many cases, worse. Many times I've heard them say so and so was a terrible reach. Perhaps so for team A, but for team B, he perfectly fits their scheme and turns into a star. A lot of factors, but I don't put much stock in these "experts," like yourself.