Nos' 2nd Annual NFL Mock Draft : Chat

[Clayton]

Well yes and no as it shows if you took a player too high or had a steal compared to the actual draft. The bottom line is getting the best players plus your team needs so that would be a pretty good gauge no? Otherwise we're just going off of what we've seen of players ourselves or what we've read and its not like kiper is the supreme master or anything haha! Either way it would be interesting who met their team needs and found more steals on average...

I definitely would've taken Fowler instead of Beasley if that was the criteria, though. Also, how does Tampa Bay steal anyone with their first pick?

 

[MilkSpiller22]

You expressed similar issues with my picking Hundley for Chicago in the 3rd. I think you're looking at this the wrong way, I don't think that it'll take 61 picks (1.10 to 3.07) for the 3rd QB to come off the board. There have been 12 first round QBs since 2011 (1/4 of all selected), and over half of them have been busts (up to this point in their career). I'm not sure that Grayson makes it to the end of the fourth, fans tend to devalue QBs much more than NFL teams do, at least it seems that way in these mock drafts. I would say that after the bonefide top 2 or 3, every other QB drops in these mocks much farther than what really happens (example: in 2012 I had Seattle taking Russell Wilson in one of these mocks, in the 6th round, reports after the draft show that even if Seattle hadn't taken him, Wilson wouldn't have made it out of the third).



And the problem with experiments is that if they are not going to find immediate success there will likely be better options in future drafts...
As far as success, that's all relative, but here's something about the last 4 drafts (since drafting a QB, or any other position, got a lot cheaper). 11 of 12 first round QBs have started for their clubs for at least 1 season. 4 of 6 second rounders and 3 of 4 third rounders. That's 18 of 22 (Manziel, Osweiler, Garoppolo and Mallett are the 4 who haven't), and I just don't see only 3 QBs in the first 3 rounds. Tennessee needs a qb probably as bad as anyone, and in this draft they haven't sniffed one. Maybe the fans like Mettenberger, but I just don't think Tennessee goes into the 6th round without having selected a QB. I could be wrong, but it's unlikely. If Grayson is there at #133, it seems like a great value pick for a team like Denver that has the luxury to groom Garoppolo and Grayson to duke it out to take over for Peyton when he retires.

Great post... And I do agree with most of what you written, but there is a reason why fans believe it is too big of a gamble... It is because it is a huge gamble... Sometimes it pays off, but usually it doesn't... I would rather not pay for a QB until I know the rest of my offense is set... Placing a QB someplace that is not ready for a QB is the worst thing to happen to a QB... The only exception to this is when there is a clear cut Cant miss QB like Luck, Both Mannings(at least on draft day), and others...

 

[cdumler7]

At this point especially the 1st round will be hard to grade because it is pretty well known those are the players going in the 1st round. It is pretty well known unless something crazy happens that Winston is going to Tampa Bay. We pretty well know most of the guys who are going top-10. So hard to really grade those. I would say if you are looking at where a player is drafted in comparison to where they were taken in ours then you have to start 2nd round at the earliest.

I would say maybe the best way to do this is get a panel of 3-5 people who discuss each person's draft that actually knows needs and value. Now this won't be completely fair as everybody's opinion is subjective of course but I can't think of a better way.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

Marcus Peters--This is one I am torn on. The kid has all the talent in the world but obviously has a major attitude issue. He was suspended for a game because he couldn't control his anger and then was kicked off the team because he couldn't control his anger. I give this pick honestly a C as I just don't see him as a 1st round pick because of the issues. He doesn't handle coaching well so I don't see him lasting long in the league unless he has a coming to Jesus moment.

Clive Walford--Very good pick. Possibly the best all-around TE in this entire draft. Gives your offense a lot of versatility so overall good pick. B+

Danielle Hunter--This is a pretty darn impressive pick. The kid hasn't produced as much as you would like but all the physical tools are present he just needs somebody to actually teach him how to use those skills. He is as physically gifted as the guys going in the top-10 so if he gets some good coaching and takes well to it this could be the steal of the draft. A

Lorenzo Mauldin--high character guy who loves football. Always good to have a few of those guys on the team. Works hard and I think some of his best football is ahead of him since he started so much later than most in this draft. A

Jacoby Glenn--Again another guy that just loves football and plays with great passion. Lacks the top end speed so a bit limited but for the 5th round you are not finding perfect players so finding one that loves the game and will work his tail off to do well is always a good thing. B

Overall so far I would say a solid B for the draft. I definitely like you mid-round picks better and if Marcus Peters can ever get his head on straight he could end up being a huge steal as talent wise not sure there is any corner better but I just don't think he will.

I'd go B overall as well.

Dez Bryant among others had issues come out...character guys are a crap shoot, but the reality is there are just as many high character busts if not more. You do want to know what you're getting into with any player.

I think Peters will be fairly equal to Waynes in coverage...recognizing the risk I'd go B-.

Glenn...fills a need in terms of depth so I err on the high side here even though I don't expect him to play much on DEF this season...C+

Mauldin could surprise me...but I think B-.

 

[cdumler7]

Great post... And I do agree with most of what you written, but there is a reason why fans believe it is too big of a gamble... It is because it is a huge gamble... Sometimes it pays off, but usually it doesn't... I would rather not pay for a QB until I know the rest of my offense is set... Placing a QB someplace that is not ready for a QB is the worst thing to happen to a QB... The only exception to this is when there is a clear cut Cant miss QB like Luck, Both Mannings(at least on draft day), and others...

But here we are talking about 3rd and 4th round picks. These are not huge gambles for the team as there is a good chance that player is at best a role player on the team. So if they are lacking a quarterback as a team gambling that a guy can sit maybe for a year or two and then develop into a starter seems worth it at that point in the draft. Throw in as Clayton pointed out most of these guys are going much higher than what we have taken them here. There is a chance that one of Petty, Hundley, or Grayson actually even climb into the 1st round because of the league being so quarterback needy so getting them 2-3 rounds later is just down right good value. Teams have to invest in the QB position as it is the most important one on the team. If you can't get one of the guys going in the top-10 of the draft then taking a guy that needs time to develop but has high upside is worth it. IF they bust then you really haven't invested a ton in they didn't cost much and they were not a premium pick. If they work out though you are set for years.

 

[DJ Fieri]

I love my draft so far.

 

[FlyerFinFan]

I definitely would've taken Fowler instead of Beasley if that was the criteria, though. Also, how does Tampa Bay steal anyone with their first pick?

I think the key is that you filled a need so you'd get some bonus points for that in a tie breaker...if a team misses a need then they should lose a few points. Keep in mind that its not all about gaining points but not getting minuses most of the first round would be the case for this. Anyway just a thought it would be neat to see where everyone played out.

 

[Clayton]

We pretty well know most of the guys who are going top-10.

I'm actually not convinced we do. I think Mariota could drop. Like rd2 kind of drop. A lot of the defensive players don't seem to have much separation among each other. Its hard to tell if White will go before Cooper. I think this is a pretty unpredictable draft after Winston at 1 and probably Fowler at 3.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

But here we are talking about 3rd and 4th round picks. These are not huge gambles for the team as there is a good chance that player is at best a role player on the team. So if they are lacking a quarterback as a team gambling that a guy can sit maybe for a year or two and then develop into a starter seems worth it at that point in the draft. Throw in as Clayton pointed out most of these guys are going much higher than what we have taken them here. There is a chance that one of Petty, Hundley, or Grayson actually even climb into the 1st round because of the league being so quarterback needy so getting them 2-3 rounds later is just down right good value. Teams have to invest in the QB position as it is the most important one on the team. If you can't get one of the guys going in the top-10 of the draft then taking a guy that needs time to develop but has high upside is worth it. IF they bust then you really haven't invested a ton in they didn't cost much and they were not a premium pick. If they work out though you are set for years.

If now we are expecting some of those QBs to be taken anywhere before the 4th round, then you better be positive your offense THIS season doesn't need anything... other wise you haven't improved much for the coming season and then it would be likely that when the new QB comes in you have the same problems...

Sacrificing NOW for the future always scares me, especially if you are a WIN NOW team... And if you are a rebuilding team, then can you really afford giving up on the higher probability players for a gamble??

I just think things have to work out in a draft to even be willing to gamble on QB... But the thing in Real life that makes it more possible is the trades on draft day... We here can only trade draft picks, and are limited at that... In real life football it is easier to go away from needs because there is other ways to get them...

 

[ATL96Steeler]

1.28.28 : C - Denver: Cameron Erving - Florida St. - I have his draft range from 10 to 35 so getting him at 28 is pretty good. Its a bit odd to see a project C prospect but he has the build to make it at C or G. Ive seen only one piece of tape of him playing Center and it looks really good. I'd give it an A-

2.27.59 : OLB - Hau'oli Kikaha - Washington - Lots of consistency in college but lots of injury concerns, too. Hard to grade, to be honest. He'll either be a decent sack guy or a nobody.

3.28.92 : DT - Marcus Hardison - Arizona State - Under the radar player with one of the most sought after skillsets in a 4-3. Like Erving, a small sample size.

4.34.133 : QB - Garrett Grayson - Colorado St. - Good value. One par with Hundley and Petty, imo, though thats a bit like being the tallest midget.

5.7.143 : WR - Chris Conley - Georgia - Another good value

Its actually really hard to grade your draft. My guess is that 3 of your guys bust hard and 2 of them end up being really solid starters for a long time. I just cant tell you which ones because of small sample sizes, injury backgrounds, physical limitations or lack of production.

If that sounds harsh, id like to note that Im not very high on this draft as a whole. You did a good job with what you had with your draft position and team needs for sure

Overall, I think C, but picking too low to score really high imo. I think if 3 rookies get significant snaps on the OFC or DEF, B or higher.

Likes...Erving...word is he can play both G spots and C...likely a game 1 starter.

Kikaha...he's an intriguing player...reminds me of Jarvis Jones in terms of being a high productive guy...will it translate? On the Broncos, I think he's a ST player this season.

Conley...I know a little about him...good size, willing blocker, seems to play well in big games, but not a stud. Should be a good complementary WR and get some snaps this yr but mostly a ST player.

 

[Nosferatu]

Tampa and Carolina have both been text...

 

[Nosferatu]

5.26.162: Tampa Bay: OTC
5.27.163: Minnesota: Cody Riggs - CB/S - Notre Dame
5.28.164: Denver: Xavier Williams - DT - Northen Iowa
5.29.165: Indianapolis: Trey Flowers - DE - Arkansas
5.30.166: Green Bay: Jesse James - TE - Penn St.
5.31.167: Seattle: Jordan Hicks - OLB - Texas
5.32.168: Tampa Bay: OTC
5.33.169: Carolina: OTC
5.34.170: Seattle: Comp
5.35.171: Baltimore: Comp

 

[ATL96Steeler]

Great post... And I do agree with most of what you written, but there is a reason why fans believe it is too big of a gamble... It is because it is a huge gamble... Sometimes it pays off, but usually it doesn't... I would rather not pay for a QB until I know the rest of my offense is set... Placing a QB someplace that is not ready for a QB is the worst thing to happen to a QB... The only exception to this is when there is a clear cut Cant miss QB like Luck, Both Mannings(at least on draft day), and others...

I think Hundley was a great pick in the 3rd rd...doubtful he'll last that long in a few weeks.

In theory I agree you want to build up a team around a young QB first, but there are two ways of doing it...spend FA money on your OL to bolster (early Ryan NYJ teams)...or invest heavily in the draft (DAL under Jimmy Johnson and hope your QB and OL grows up quick. Have a good RB, and a solid DEF.

SEA was a QB away from being a playoff team, but I don't think they even knew they were a QB away from being SB team.

The rookie pay scale has taken away the contract concerns of taking a QB early...they've got to get to the 2nd contract to cash in as well now.

 

[Clayton]

The rookie pay scale has taken away the contract concerns of taking a QB early...they've got to get to the 2nd contract to cash in as well now.

Yup. In a weird way its flipped. Thats why I am somewhat excited about the Rams this year. All of the dead Bradford money is off the books and they've been able to sign defensive depth which was missing last year.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I think Hundley was a great pick in the 3rd rd...doubtful he'll last that long in a few weeks.

In theory I agree you want to build up a team around a young QB first, but there are two ways of doing it...spend FA money on your OL to bolster (early Ryan NYJ teams)...or invest heavily in the draft (DAL under Jimmy Johnson and hope your QB and OL grows up quick. Have a good RB, and a solid DEF.

SEA was a QB away from being a playoff team, but I don't think they even knew they were a QB away from being SB team.

The rookie pay scale has taken away the contract concerns of taking a QB early...they've got to get to the 2nd contract to cash in as well now.

But that is the problem with this mock... We are dealing in theory, we have no clue what free agent moves a team will make, nor any trades on draft day... That's the problem with these mocks, we can only do what we know, and we know very little... So I would rather draft my team making the assumption that the team stays the way it is now...

 

[pantherfanforever11]

my pick is in Lynden Trail DE Norfolk state

 

[ATL96Steeler]

But that is the problem with this mock... We are dealing in theory, we have no clue what free agent moves a team will make, nor any trades on draft day... That's the problem with these mocks, we can only do what we know, and we know very little... So I would rather draft my team making the assumption that the team stays the way it is now...

Theory...Well...the mock started after the brunt of FA was over so I think most mock GMs were working with a fairly fresh deck in terms of needs...anything that happens later in FA will most likely be minor.

I think what will be interesting is to rate this mock a yr later relative to what the teams actually draft.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Theory...Well...the mock started after the brunt of FA was over so I think most mock GMs were working with a fairly fresh deck in terms of needs...anything that happens later in FA will most likely be minor.

I think what will be interesting is to rate this mock a yr later relative to what the teams actually draft.

Theoretically I love comparing how good we did, but it just doesn't work... Players that go to the wrong system will just be busts... and that is not necessarily on them... Football in general, I have no clue how to actually rank players because everyones success is based on eachother more than it is on them... You can take the Best QB and put him on the worst offensive line, and he will have trouble... You can have the best offensive line and draft a low end Center, and that center could become a stud, just because he doesn't have to do much else besides his actual job...

Any time a player is a bust, I just assume it is the system...

 

[Gold Rush 86]

Does anyone want to grade my draft? I know I went high risk/high reward with DGB and Ifo but I feel both will be future pro bowl players.

 

[cdumler7]

If now we are expecting some of those QBs to be taken anywhere before the 4th round, then you better be positive your offense THIS season doesn't need anything... other wise you haven't improved much for the coming season and then it would be likely that when the new QB comes in you have the same problems...

Sacrificing NOW for the future always scares me, especially if you are a WIN NOW team... And if you are a rebuilding team, then can you really afford giving up on the higher probability players for a gamble??

I just think things have to work out in a draft to even be willing to gamble on QB... But the thing in Real life that makes it more possible is the trades on draft day... We here can only trade draft picks, and are limited at that... In real life football it is easier to go away from needs because there is other ways to get them...

In the NFL you have to draft for now and for the future. After the first 2-3 rounds honestly most of those players are going to be developmental players that you hope can turn into quality starters or role players. Year one usually the most you can hope for is them to help in special teams. I mean look at your draft. After the 1st 2 rounds with Coleman and Scherff the rest are developmental players. Rollins while showing promise only has 1 year or experience and needs at least a year to develop into a quality player and even then he is stuck behind Cro and Revis and possibly Dee Millner. So you just used a mid-round pick on a guy that most likely rides the bench most of the year. How is that different than me taking Grayson in the 4th or whoever took Hundley in the 3rd? Or Waller might be one of the biggest project players in this entire draft. Good chance you don't get much production out of him till year-3. Maybe a couple of red zone touchdowns a year but that is about it. For me I look at I addressed immediate need with Erving (Broncos don't have a ton of holes as they still have 10 Pro Bowl players on the roster from last year) some good role players year one in Kikaha and Hardison who are expected to start year 2, and 2 high risk high reward guys that could be big in year 3 with Grayson and Conley. You are not going to find immediate impact players very often other than maybe 1 or 2 guys. If you are depending on your rookies to be huge impact players right off the bat for the team then you are in trouble.

Now for the Broncos I do think they have built well to set up for a quarterback to come in eventually. Getting Erving fixes whatever the weakest spot on the OL is plus we already have 2 All-Pro players in Vasquez and Clady. Throw in we are not asking Grayson to start right off the bat so still another year to add to the OL if needed. The Broncos at this moment have probably the best 1-2 punch at WR with DT and Sanders with a 2nd round pick used on Latimer last year. They just signed 4 TE's this off season. Finally they have a Pro Bowl RB in Anderson. So this is an offense that will not ask Grayson to have to dominate for it to be successful. He can lean on the running game and trust that his receivers can bail him out every once in a while. He would also be learning under Peyton for a year. See I thought this all through when picking him that this is not in my view a wasted pick but taking a small risk that this guy could develop into a quality player surrounded by quality players. If nothing else every team needs a back up quarterback and with the rookie scale Grayson would be extremely cheap to have as a back up.