With your number 6 pick Daniel Jermiah mocks you...another corner

[AU-panther]

A CB sounds crazy but here is how it could happen.

Fans tend to think in terms of need and rank.  Basically, OT is our biggest need (non-QB) so we should take whatever OT is next on the list and available, in this case it would be OT3 on Daniel's list.

Teams tend to think in terms of grade.  Maybe we have a really high grade on OT1 and OT2 but a decent gap to OT3.  If OT1 and OT 2 go before us they might decide CB1 is a way better value.

In a perfect world you would trade down and line up value with need, but trading down isn't always easy.

I'm not saying its the right move, but i could see it happening. Same thing with the safety.  Any given year there is just really small group of players that teams consider elite prospects, its hard to pass on them.

Do you pass on a guy that you think can become the next Sean Taylor for an OT that think has a decent chance to be above average?  Here again, I'm not saying this is the correct way to draft, but its what happens.

 

 

 

[kungfoodude]

28 minutes ago, top dawg said:

In my opinion, Mariota brings something, and that's legit competition for Darnold and an overall upgrade to the room. 

Now, you may be right in your intimation; there's nothing to suggest that our coaches--damn the fans--would be open to a bridge guy based upon what happened with Teddy, but I'd like to think that they'd have learned by now that overpaying for mediocrity (or worse in Darnold's case) is not the way to go. Someone--Rhule, Fitterer, Tepper had to learn something. 

As for Walker, I'm hoping that once McAdoo comes in and views the tape, he'll convince Rhule of the error of his ways and make him realize that we can do better. Unlike Darnold, who will likely get the best paydays of his life next season, we're only on the hook for Walker to the tune of $150,000. 

Now I know this is a lot of hoping, and doesn't jibe with Rhule's history, but I choose to be optimistic. Within that same vein of optimism, I believe that the only way our O-line is worse is if Rhule is thickheaded enough not to listen to Fitterer, McAdoo and those with more professional experience on staff. I do acknowledge that it's a possibility however, but not likely as everyone wants to keep their job.

I am not very convinced that Fitt has much of an eye for OL talent either. His time with Seattle didn't much indicate it and his performance in the last draft(although MOSTLY Rhule's fault as the final say) and free agency doesn't inspire confidence in their abilities to evaluate those guys at all.

Mariota would be able to battle with Darnold but what is that saying, really? Shell of Cam was able to battle with Sam, but in the end Rhule simply played "his" guy.

That is likely what would happen if we end up with Mariota. If we go out and sign him, he'll be starting because they are convinced he is the guy and the performances won't matter in camp(see Grier, Will).

[kungfoodude]

6 minutes ago, AU-panther said:

A CB sounds crazy but here is how it could happen.

Fans tend to think in terms of need and rank.  Basically, OT is our biggest need (non-QB) so we should take whatever OT is next on the list and available, in this case it would be OT3 on Daniel's list.

Teams tend to think in terms of grade.  Maybe we have a really high grade on OT1 and OT2 but a decent gap to OT3.  If OT1 and OT 2 go before us they might decide CB1 is a way better value.

In a perfect world you would trade down and line up value with need, but trading down isn't always easy.

I'm not saying its the right move, but i could see it happening. Same thing with the safety.  Any given year there is just really small group of players that teams consider elite prospects, its hard to pass on them.

Do you pass on a guy that you think can become the next Sean Taylor for an OT that think has a decent chance to be above average?  Here again, I'm not saying this is the correct way to draft, but its what happens.

Under Rhule, we have not drafted based on BPA, we drafted based on need, as determined by Rhule.

He has basically said as much. We don't do BPA.

[top dawg]

19 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

I am not very convinced that Fitt has much of an eye for OL talent either. His time with Seattle didn't much indicate it...

I'm not saying that you should have faith in Fitt's ability to evaluate O-linemen, but I think that it's worth remembering that Fitt was not the one with final say-so in Seattle. I think that many people have forgotten that important fact. But I'm not one to totally absolve Fitterer and the mistakes made last off-season either, so you have a point. 

[AU-panther]

22 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Under Rhule, we have not drafted based on BPA, we drafted based on need, as determined by Rhule.

He has basically said as much. We don't do BPA.

People need to quit taking everything said by a coach so literal.  No team is pure BPA and no team is pure need.  If the top 3 OTs are off the board do you still think we pick OT?  I don't, and neither do you so they do look at value also.

More times than not there is a player close enough in grade to justify need.  

My point was teams often view a small group of players in each draft as elite.  Teams will sometimes ignore need somewhat to take one of those.  I'm not saying we will, just that is how it happens sometimes.

Also, fans think in terms of biggest need lining up with the 1st round pick.  Teams go into a draft looking to fill several needs and sometimes do so in a order depending on how the draft falls.

 

[kungfoodude]

3 minutes ago, top dawg said:

I'm not saying that you should have faith in Fitt's ability to evaluate O-linemen, but I think that it's worth remembering that Fitt was not the one with final say-so in Seattle. I think that many people have forgotten that important fact. But I'm not one to totally absolve Fitterer and the mistakes made last off-season either, so you have a point. 

Yeah, I am not blaming him for it. But it might not have been the best learning environment for evaluating those kind of players. Keep in mind his football background is limited so he's more likely to be a product of that.

I know people are jumping on Rhule, who does deserve the bulk of the blame as the final say, but I didn't think Fitt's first season was particularly exceptional. 

[kungfoodude]

6 minutes ago, AU-panther said:

People need to quit taking everything said by a coach so literal.  No team is pure BPA and no team is pure need.  If the top 3 OTs are off the board do you still think we pick OT?  I don't, and neither do you so they do look at value also.

More times than not there is a player close enough in grade to justify need.  

My point was teams often view a small group of players in each draft as elite.  Teams will sometimes ignore need somewhat to take one of those.  I'm not saying we will, just that is how it happens sometimes.

Also, fans think in terms of biggest need lining up with the 1st round pick.  Teams go into a draft looking to fill several needs and sometimes do so in a order depending on how the draft falls.

 

I am aware how the NFL draft functions.

Just don't be surprised to see us ignore obvious needs and better players because our evaluation ability is subpar.

[mrcompletely11]

1 minute ago, kungfoodude said:

Yeah, I am not blaming him for it. But it might not have been the best learning environment for evaluating those kind of players. Keep in mind his football background is limited so he's more likely to be a product of that.

I know people are jumping on Rhule, who does deserve the bulk of the blame as the final say, but I didn't think Fitt's first season was particularly exceptional. 

Well he fully (wrongfully) implemented the trade down strategy of the Hawks.  They have a franchise generational qb threatening to leave because they have not built even a remotely adequate line to protect him.

[Varking]

If we are thinking defense… trade down, get more picks and select Jordan Davis to clog the middle with Derrick Brown for the next few years. I’d really like an offensive lineman or two in this class though. 

[mrcompletely11]

1 minute ago, Varking said:

If we are thinking defense… trade down, get more picks and select Jordan Davis to clog the middle with Derrick Brown for the next few years. I’d really like an offensive lineman or two in this class though. 

Here is the thing about you folks simply saying trade down trade down.  #6 pick is incredibly valuable.  If we didnt get a good enough offer last season to move off then someone is going to have to blow our doors away to move up to 6.  I dont see a team getting that desperate.   I mean we are probably talking 2/3 picks this year and a first next year for a team to move from the teens up.  Even then I probably wouldnt do it.  This draft is crazy top heavy

[top dawg]

38 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Yeah, I am not blaming him for it. But it might not have been the best learning environment for evaluating those kind of players. Keep in mind his football background is limited so he's more likely to be a product of that.

I know people are jumping on Rhule, who does deserve the bulk of the blame as the final say, but I didn't think Fitt's first season was particularly exceptional. 

"Exceptional" is a matter of definition (and may have some layers).

Unlike many, I still believe that we had a pretty good draft. Do y'all remember all the positive feedback and draft grades from the pundits and analysts? Whether it was exceptional remains to be seen due to injury, roster (mis)management and or outright incompetence.  What I do believe was exceptional is the way that Fitterer multiplied our picks but was still able to get notable picks (notable at least on paper). And even if the picks weren't all hits (or his decisions to make), just the fact that he put us in a position--the opportunity to make the picks was exceptional in my opinion. Now where I think Fitterer absolutely failed, is overpaying for Darnold. And I realize that perhaps Rhule was perhaps the driving force, but in my opinion that still doesn't absolve Fitterer from rubber-stamping the deal. And as far as the Sammy extension, Fitterer may have been behind that just as much as Rhule, as it was a "joint decision." That was certainly the opposite of "exceptional" and just plain stupid. And it was stupid not after the fact, but before it was done. In my opinion, there was no reason for it. 

At the end of the day, because of Rhule's power, I can't totally rip Fitt for the awful personnel decisions along the O-line or the Darnold contractual fiasco, but I give him most of the credit for how he manipulated our draft position. I could be wrong, but I'd say that Fitterer is better at his job than Rhule is at his, and that gives me some hope.

 

Edited January 23, 2022 by top dawg

[AU-panther]

46 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

I am aware how the NFL draft functions.

Just don't be surprised to see us ignore obvious needs and better players because our evaluation ability is subpar.

Would we have drafted Sewell instead of Horn because he was available?  Most reports say we would have.

If that was because LT was bigger need, then under your logic and we draft for need, we would have took Slater, but we didn't.  We must have factored in grade.

 

[kungfoodude]

37 minutes ago, top dawg said:

"Exceptional" is a matter of definition (and may have some layers).

Unlike many, I still believe that we had a pretty good draft. Do y'all remember all the positive feedback and draft grades from the pundits and analysts? Whether it was exceptional remains to be seen due to injury, roster (mis)management and or outright incompetence.  What I do believe was exceptional is the way that Fitterer multiplied our picks but was still able to get notable picks (notable at least on paper). And even if the picks weren't all hits (or his decisions to make), just the fact that he put us in a position--the opportunity to make the picks was exceptional in my opinion. Now where I think Fitterer absolutely failed, is overpaying for Darnold. And I realize that perhaps Rhule was perhaps the driving force, but in my opinion that still doesn't absolve Fitterer from rubber-stamping the deal. And as far as the Sammy extension, Fitterer may have been behind that just as much as Rhule, as it was a "joint decision." That was certainly the opposite of "exceptional" and just plain stupid. And it was stupid not after the fact, but before it was done. In my opinion, there was no reason for it. 

At the end of the day, because of Rhule's power, I can't totally rip Fitt for the awful personnel decisions along the O-line or the Darnold contractual fiasco, but I give him most of the credit for how he manipulated our draft position. I could be wrong, but I'd say that Fitterer is better at his job than Rhule is at his, and that gives me some hope.

 

I am not as high on the draft as others were. We passed good, impact starters for guys that seem to be rotational with all the trading down.

It's hard to say with the level of roster mismanagement during the season, however. I don't think our top 3 guys are going to make a big impact outside of Horn, which is a problem.

I think ultimately we got too cute with all the trading down and trying to recoup the picks from a bad trade. Then we further gut this draft with "win now" moves.  

[kungfoodude]

29 minutes ago, AU-panther said:

Would we have drafted Sewell instead of Horn because he was available?  Most reports say we would have.

If that was because LT was bigger need, then under your logic and we draft for need, we would have took Slater, but we didn't.  We must have factored in grade.

 

Yes we would have drafted Sewell. The Slater pass is a prime example of the poor evaluation. Then Rhule doubled down afterwards.

Hence my point. We suck at evaluating players AND we suck at positional value.

Edited January 23, 2022 by kungfoodude