Anyone else feel PP would be "safest" pick?

[Lords0fPain]

i'd be fine with drafting one. I just dont understand what you were bitching about. paying for two top end receivers would be stupid, that's why the FO wont do it.

You do have the point you just keep going around it, DRAFT ONE, that is about it...:chillpill:

Its not like I'll saying we to pay those examples to help Smitty, there are other good WR in the league we still won't pay for, so DRAFT one that has that type of potential. It opens up alot and Smitty will probably need to replaced (hope not for awhile, tho) sooner rather than later. In the meantime we have 2 top tier WRs (if Green is even close to what he could be).

[CatMan72]

Easy transition? Since when? :confused:

DT's often take a long time to transition to the NFL, the ones that do well in their rookie years are ones that are obviously smart, I'm not sure I'll put Fairley's intelligence up with Ngata for example. Honestly, I think people are just getting too excited over Suh's success. Recent history has shown that the opposite is true. DT's have to make very good quick decisions and rookies often get lost in the process.

I agree with the OP btw, I think PP is the safe pick, at least in terms of which player is the most likely to strive at their position. I really do think he's the next top flight corner in the draft - he has all the tools, physically and mentally to succeed. The only 'problem' that I've read is that he's a corner. Look guys, there;s a first time for everything. If a punter and a kicker can go in the first round, the best corner prospect in a decade can go 1st overall.

I didn't say it was an easy transition, I said it was easier to translate what a DT does in college to what a DT would be capable of in the NFL than many other positions including CB. College CB's are very seldom asked to press or play zone coverage and it's crucial for them to be able do these things at the NFL level. For a DT, a stunt is a stunt... a bull rush is a bull rush, etc. Whether or not they can do it at the NFL level is another question, but they have been using the same techniques in college that they will be using in the NFL.

Not taking anything away from PP, he's as good as his position as Fairley is at his, but if you're talking about the "safest" pick, then you're talking about Fairley at this point, simply because of the position he plays.

[Stumpy]

Easy transition? Since when? :confused:

DT's often take a long time to transition to the NFL, the ones that do well in their rookie years are ones that are obviously smart, I'm not sure I'll put Fairley's intelligence up with Ngata for example. Honestly, I think people are just getting too excited over Suh's success. Recent history has shown that the opposite is true. DT's have to make very good quick decisions and rookies often get lost in the process.

I agree with the OP btw, I think PP is the safe pick, at least in terms of which player is the most likely to strive at their position. I really do think he's the next top flight corner in the draft - he has all the tools, physically and mentally to succeed. The only 'problem' that I've read is that he's a corner. Look guys, there;s a first time for everything. If a punter and a kicker can go in the first round, the best corner prospect in a decade can go 1st overall.

Without commenting on either PP or Nick Flair...

As far as the first round goes, the positions that have the highest rate of success have consistently been OT, DT and RB in that order. Least successful have been WR, CB and QB in that order.

[SmokeScreen]

as of now pp would be my choice green is second and fairley third.

[DaveThePanther2008]

Peterson would be a good pick however, look at what we have at the 4 major needs of this team.

QB - No QB worth #1 pick. Trade down pick up a couple extra picks Maybe Gabbert in Mid to late 1st.

WR - Smitty, Gettis, LaFell and Edwards. A young group with a Super Star. I don't think Green would be a priority. LaFell and Gettis had good years for Rookies. No need to think that they won't continue to get better.

CB - Gamble, Munnerlyn and Marshall (if we resign him) Not overly talented but good enough to hold our own. Especially with this new scheme. Peterson would be my second best choice.

DT- Johnson, Landri, Nesbitt, Hayden, Irvin... Maybe Johnson and Landri make this new team. MAYBE.. Even if we sign a midrange FA we still need help here. BADLY. Fairley may have a questionable motor but I think he has an UPSIDE that this defense sorely needs. ATTITUDE. NASTY ATTITUDE. He is mean and he punishes. He will make whoever is next to him better. Both Johnson's, Brown, Hardy and Landri. Our new defensive scheme will require a solid front 4. Without pressure up the middle it will be a long season.

IMO if we don't trade down. Fairley is going to be our #1 pick. IMO

[nagai]

Without commenting on either PP or Nick Flair...

As far as the first round goes, the positions that have the highest rate of success have consistently been OT, DT and RB in that order. Least successful have been WR, CB and QB in that order.

If you got any good articles on this, I would appreciate it very much. Honestly, my personal research and experiences have told me otherwise. OL and RB are definitely safe positions, I just don't know where this DT business is coming from. Here's one of the articles on this topic for reference (little old, but that doesn't matter here):

http://sportsfountainhead.blogspot.com/2009/02/top-5-pick-success-rate.html

[CatMan72]

If you got any good articles on this, I would appreciate it very much. Honestly, my personal research and experiences have told me otherwise. OL and RB are definitely safe positions, I just don't know where this DT business is coming from. Here's one of the articles on this topic for reference (little old, but that doesn't matter here):

http://sportsfountainhead.blogspot.com/2009/02/top-5-pick-success-rate.html

This article lumps all DB's together and it rates the success of DB's as 31% and DT's as 29%. 10 of the DB's have made at least one pro bowl while 9 of the DT's have, so how is CB that much safer of a draft pick again?

[nagai]

This article lumps all DB's together and it rates the success of DB's as 31% and DT's as 29%. 10 of the DB's have made at least one pro bowl while 9 of the DT's have, so how is CB that much safer of a draft pick again?

You're putting words in my mouth. My point is never that CB is super safe, simply that DT was not. Read my post again, I never made a point for the corner position, I simply argued against your point that DT is safe and agreed with the OP that PP (the specific player, outside of just position) is safe. There's a difference. You just straw-manned me :confused:

[Stumpy]

If you got any good articles on this, I would appreciate it very much. Honestly, my personal research and experiences have told me otherwise. OL and RB are definitely safe positions, I just don't know where this DT business is coming from. Here's one of the articles on this topic for reference (little old, but that doesn't matter here):

I couldn't find the article I was looking for, it was a somewhat older WSJ article. They did an in depth study on success rates by position. They rated players on a scale (bust-journeyman-starter-probowl) and calculated a weighted success rate. I wish I could find that article.

However, I will say, the one you posted is probably more relevant to our current situation. WSJ focused on rounds 1-2 IIRC, not to mention I don't think too many on here believe that PP/Fairley/Bowers/Green will be true busts.

[nagai]

You've peaked my interest. What's WSJ?

[CatMan72]

...I also think it's flawed to go all the way back to 1966 when evaluating the success rate of any given position, given how much the game has changed between then and now.

Here's an article that looks at '97 through 2006. It shows that 83% of DT's taken in the first round ended up as career starters while only 55% of CB's did. 90% of safeties ended up as career starters so it shows how much the success rate of safeties warps the numbers when you lump all DB's together.

http://www.scoresreport.com/2009/04/17/which-position-is-the-safest-bet-in-the-first-round/

[Stumpy]

You've peaked my interest. What's WSJ?

Wall Street Journal.

Not the biggest football experts, but they know their numbers.

[DaveThePanther2008]

...I also think it's flawed to go all the way back to 1966 when evaluating the success rate of any given position, given how much the game has changed between then and now.

Here's an article that looks at '97 through 2006. It shows that 83% of DT's taken in the first round ended up as career starters while only 55% of CB's did. 90% of safeties ended up as career starters so it shows how much the success rate of safeties warps the numbers when you lump all DB's together.

http://www.scoresreport.com/2009/04/17/which-position-is-the-safest-bet-in-the-first-round/

Ding Ding Ding... Round One goes the Catman...

Good Stuff

Regardless I think Fairley will be a better choice than Peterson. Our DTs are in such a shambles that Fairley is our "Safest Pick" Without Pressure up the middle Ryan, Brees and Freeman are going to pick us apart.

See Carolina Panthers 2010

[CatMan72]

You're putting words in my mouth. My point is never that CB is super safe, simply that DT was not. Read my post again, I never made a point for the corner position, I simply argued against your point that DT is safe and agreed with the OP that PP (the specific player, outside of just position) is safe. There's a difference. You just straw-manned me :confused:

Talk about putting words in someone's mouth, when did I say that you said CB's where "super safe"?

You suggested PP is a safer pick than Fairley, but looking at the first round of the draft from 1997 through 2006 shows that a DT has an 83% chance of being a career starter while a CB only has a 55% chance.

You argued that PP is safer than Fairley because Fairley is not that intelligent? What are you basing that on? Let's assume Fairley is dumb, I can tell you from experience that there isn't a whole hell of allot to think about when you're playing DT beyond remembering your assignment on any given play, it's the least complex position on the field.

You like PP, that's fine - but DT's in general are a safer pick (based on their success ratio as career starters) and Scouts Inc as well as many other reputable prospect evaluation sites have Fairley and Peterson graded the same at their respective positions... so if they are graded the same, then Fairley is the safer pick.