Cardinals are taking Murray. The 49ers are taking N Bosa. Now what will the Jets do -Take Q Williams , or Josh Allen ( better fit) . Or trade back to a team that might want Qb / one of those defensive players. Really can't see The Jets making that pick , and not picking till the third round. How far can you drop , and still get guy you want. More risky dropping back because greater chance you miss on a sure thing. ( why you can't say there is no way the Jets can lose- you know the history of this team). The Raiders aren't drafting a Qb this year.( they probably throwing that out there so team trades up with the Jets, and defensive player they want drops to them. Haskins on the board , the Raiders aren't taken him as they will take the best defense lineman, or trade back if the guy he wants isn't there.( that's assuming jets didn't trade back).
More likely the Cardinals trade the pick to the Raiders and since SF just signed ford they take Q. Taking Bosa puts a lot of money on the edge for SF. I wouldn't be surprised if both the Cardinals and SF trade out. This draft is deep with D in the first 2 rounds. I could see anything happening. I'm not sold that the GM of the Cardinals is willing to give KK his QB when he hand picked Rosen last year.
As someone pointed out in this or another thread, there is no such thing as a "sure thing" in the draft. High picks bust all the time. While the odds are more in one's favor drafting a player that is so highly rated, there is no guarantee of success, so things could easily go awry if Mac stays put and takes a player that busts, and then we have no second round pick to help compensate for the first round bust.
You nailed it Kurt! Without a blueprint to base your player acquisitions on, it's just throwing darts. For the life of me I don't see any method to Macc's madness, except BPA. That said, I have to believe that he isn't stupid, so he must have a plan that he's building towards, but I don't see it.
To some extent, yes, whereas if he has signed Morse and Houston, what he did in the draft wouldn't be nearly so critical.
Player rank is almost identical on ever draft board. If there is an exception it's usually within 1 or 2 slots in the same round into round 4. Who teams take based on need/value is a completely different story. The depth of the draft at any particular high value position impacts strategy. I would bet you if you looked at player ranking of all 32 teams in the first 3 rounds the differences are at best 2 spots. GM's who stick to BPA are going with their boards. GM's who have need and deviate deviate. Rankings are virtually identical. You don't think Blair Thomas was No. 2 on most NFL draft boards even though he busted? I guarantee you Jeff George was No. 1 on every draft board in terms of player rank. That doesn't mean teams that didn't need a QB would take him.
And you know the bold how? Have you seen every team's draft board? I disagree and don't think it makes sense on any level. In terms of pure talent level, more teams' boards may be more similar, but when you factor in what teams are looking for, their needs, how they view the Combine, how important collegiate production is to them, whether they are concerned with off field issues, whether a team is looking for a leader or a dynamic playmaker, and many other factors, I'm sure that the boards can and do vary widely. Some teams don't seem to care at all about off-field issues. Others, like the Jets, are much more concerned with that type of thing and either have a player with issues moved down their draft board or removed completely. We know that Al Davis used to value Combine results and speed more than anything else. I'm certain that there are GMs/teams who still may value Combine results much higher than other teams. I'm equally certain that some GMs/teams look for the best football players while others look for the best athletes. Some GMs/teams look for the BPA, while others look for the best scheme fit, or as a poster at Ganggreennation put it, "Best Player Available for Us." The systems they run will affect players' grades. A 3-4 team is going to rate and value front 7 defensive prospects differently than a 4-3 base team. A defense that uses zone coverage is going to rate DBs much differently than those that use a man coverage scheme. A team that employs a "read and react" type D is going to rate defensive prospects very differently from a team that employs an aggressive, attacking D. The same thing goes for a team whose OL employs a zone blocking scheme vs a team that employs a man or power-based blocking scheme. A GM/team is also going to rate QBs very differently depending upon their offensive scheme. Some teams employ a downfield passing attack, so they're not going to rate a QB very highly that cannot make all the throws, regardless of how accurate he may be on shorter passes, how mobile he is or how well he reads Ds. Similarly a WCO team is going to value a QB who gets the ball out quickly and is extremely accurate on slants and timing throws, who has good anticipation and can lead his receivers
Which QB was drafted at the top of the first round who was picked because he couldn't make every throw in the NFL route tree and wasn't projected based on the ability to make every NFL throw, his body, his release and the interview process just because they fit a scheme? Corner backs aren't picked at the top of the first round because they can't man cover and fit a zone. None of them. A LT isn't picked at the top of the first because they fit a zone or man to man blocking scheme. Edge rushers don't go at the top of the draft based on having a nose tackle that can eat up 2 blockers. You're talking about rating players further down the draft board that you can mold into your team that don't fully measure up to the top draft prospects. Skill position players are rated based on measurable analytics 99.9% of the time unless there is a personality flaw. There are variations. Look at mock drafts the difference on the draft board in terms of rating players is ridiculously close. The entire point of the combine is to create measurable points of difference.
Neither GMs, nor teams make mock drafts. They're made by fans and the media. Your straw man arguments don't hold water.
The NY Jets have 3 men on staff who's jobs is advanced analytics. Most NFL teams subscribe to independent companies that also provide these analytics, as do the top guys doing mock drafts. Ever NFL team uses analytics and uses a draft board. By mock draft I mean a draft board. Most of the top mock drafts are using the same analytics as the NFL and will predict the top few rounds of the NFL draft within a few spots because the evaluations are virtually identical. The Pats hired Eric Adams a former data-driven Wall Streat man the day BB was hired. Bob Kraft owns the Kraft analytics group. Even with data driven material that the Jets and every team use the Pats have been notoriously mediocre drafters. When you say Mac "can't draft" which you did it ignores the obvious. The draft is fluid and even with data some guys bust, some guys get hurt and more to the point College players aren't fully developed physically or mentally. It's a projection and some guys develop and some don't. The data and analysis of most of these players is identical and going forward will be more data dependent not less reducing the variables even further. In the not to distant future GM's are going to have to justify to ownership not following the computer models. You don't know what straw man means. You think Mac can't draft and we shouldn't trade down because of that. Pure stupidity that has zero to do with drafting. Drafting is one aspect of building a team as are UDFA and free agents signing. Every NFL GM can draft, that doesn't mean they can put together a 53 man roster and coaching staff to make it work.
Actually, teams do make mock drafts and use them to go over the most likely possible scenarios they may see when it’s their turn to pick. I’ve read it a few times from former gms talking about the pre draft prep.
I thought about my comment and did some research. They do and they often compare them with mock drafts from some of the services. It makes perfect sense. If players are graded and ranked by position and there's very little between them you need to know what other teams may be picking players on the same positional stacks that you're interested in. If you have a draft like this years that's heavy pass rush and you need pass rush you may well want to draft another position at the top because a slightly lower graded player will be available later who may well develop into a solid player. The variables are endless and they are all dependent on what teams do in front and behind you, what you need and the value depth of the draft in your needed positions. how-nfl-teams-utilize-mock-drafts-other-outside-influences
Well, that's a new one on me. I've never read or heard of any team creating mock drafts, but I'm sure that they try to figure out what other teams are going to do and how things might fall, so I'm not that surprised to learn that they make them.
I stand corrected on whether teams make mock drafts. As I told FJF, I have never seen or heard anything to that extent. That said, it really doesn't have much to do with your last post where you made ridiculous statements and tried to claim that I had made them, and I never did. I never said any of the bolded things below: Since you can't be civil and respectful, this discussion is over.
lol nothing being wiped clean here. i always wanted darnold the rest was what we had to "settle" for if darnodl went 1 and 2. that was the point there wasn't a situation here outside of darnold where everyone here would be happy. but this year anyone here would be more then happy with bosa or allen. I can't see anyone here complaining about either.
