AU-panther

I think there were 9, and since I haven't took time to watch each of them on each play individually Its impossible for me to say, which I doubt you have either. It's not a stat driven grading system; it's a per play grading system. Tommy Tremble making a great block to spring Rico for that 10-yard run might actually score higher on that play then Ricos run. The actual run might not be anything special; it might be a run that pretty much every back in the league would have made. Here again, I would guess, if you look at every RB in the league, he is towards the top in rushing grade for the year which is what most of us are seeing. Whether you call that a 90/80/70, 50/40/30, A/B/C, Gold/Green/Red star, it doesn't really matter it's how he ranks relative to everybody else at his position.

Here again people it getting caught up with labels like a high school math grade. Very few players every get 90s and the number of players that end the year above 90 is rare, but fans get their feelings hurt because their favorite player didn't get a "A" on the test. His actually rushing grade was an 82 I think? That is actually really good, and my guess is if you compare to every other running back that weekend he is probably one of the highest. I look at these grades and I see an RB who had a great day rushing, terrible day at blocking, and I think a couple of penalties, which is pretty much in line what I saw that day.

Say you don't understand PFF without saying you don't understand PFF... Every week seems like some of the same people are complaining about something they clearly don't understand. I'm not saying they are the end all resource out there but once you understand their methodology you can start to appreciate some of their work. For example, their grading system isn't a high school grading system, try to look at some of it in relative terms. Rico had an 82 rushing grade, that's pretty good. I would be curious to know how that compares to every other running back this past weekend. Also, I think he had a few penalties, which if I'm not mistaken are graded pretty harshly.

Who would you have preferred?

And where did they have Trevor ranked ?

Then why did they draft Trevor where they did?

Sorry, thought I was responding to someone else…

won't be that much. Huge difference between trading to 1 than 8. 21 to 8 is about 600 points. 9 to 1 is about 1650.

What happens if our defense is terrible again and we fire our DC and the next one runs a 4-3? Does he have the same value then? Would you still be happy with spending a top 10 pick on him? It's an odd draft, going defense seems logical. Walker makes sense from a value/grade perspective but there seems to be some interest in the bigger edges in the draft. Problem with the bigger edges is their tape/production might not be top-10 to some people. Really feels like we would like to trade down but doesn't really feel like a draft where a lot of teams want to trade up, unless one of the QBs spark some movement.

Does Walker's size scare anyone else?

by unproductive you mean "sack total", because by the tape he was disruptive and his pressures actually led the team, which was surprising by having limited pass rush sets.

yep, because one example proves a fact wrong.

"UDFA" is a bit of a stretch. I agree the sack numbers aren't what you would like but they don't tell the entire picture. His run defense was great. According to this article he actually led the team in pressures, which are actually sometimes a better indicator of future sacks than sacks are. The guy that gets the sack often isn't the guy that caused the sack. Thats the difference between scouting by watching film and box score scouting. Also, the fact he led the team in pressures is somewhat surprising because his true pass sets were actually limited. I'm not saying he is deserving of a top 10 pick but this idea that his tape is indictive of a UDFA or even 4th or 5th rounder is absurd.

curious to why you think he has a very low ceiling?

Because of positional value and/or need I think there is a good chance you can take DT, TE, OL, and RB off the table. My best guess at this point is one of the edges, maybe WR. If we trade down, I think it will be because we have several edges graded fairly close to each other.

That’s not how the minimum spending rule works. it’s a 4 year total, so they can in fact roll it over. https://www.profootballnetwork.com/how-does-nfl-salary-cap-work/

I never said anything about need or positional value, I was pointing out that comparing players based on their positional rank is pointless and that isn’t how teams look at it, they look at grade.

Teams don’t think in terms of positional rankings, they think in terms of grades. CB2 could have a higher grade than Edge2 or even WR1. Think in terms of tiers. Wouldn’t surprise me if a lot of teams end up with 1-2 players in their top tier, and 3-4 in the next. If any of those fall to 8 they have to be considered.

I hope we don't pass on a great player because of the "fit" of a coach and system that might not be here in the future.

I’ll be curious how he does when he starts to loose some of his assistant coaches. The “leader of men” deal doesn’t hit the same when you are losing.

Zero players in the top 10 at their respective positions. Only three top 20 players at their respective positions. This team needs to quit focusing on winning soon and instead focus on building a solid foundation that can last awhile.

We were 2-15 last year and 5-10 this year, let's not act like we turned into a super bowl contender overnight. Rookie QB improves a little in his second year (as expected) and we win a few more games. Overall though we are 7-25, the roster is bad, who is responsible for that?

Two totally different grading systems. One is stat driven and one is eye test. People want to call one right or wrong over the other, but you have to understand how they are determined and look at the results in that context.

This is why QBs, OTs, and I'm guessing edge (or DT's that can rush the QB) are valued so highly.

excellent point. If anything I would like to believe Morgan differed a good bit from Fitt on a majority of choices being made and hence the reason Tepper decided to promote Morgan. If Morgan and Fitt truly agreed on most, and then you still promote Morgan that doesn't look good.