2022 Draft Discussion

[Yoop]

I still don’t see where you are getting that, but this is the list I am referring to.

https://www.pewterreport.com/bucs-brief ... gs-grades/

re read it this morning, still think he's overly harsh, was wondering what his grade would have been on Jefferson and others two years ago, what his track record is with prior predictions, because guys like Dan Jeremiah, PFF, CBS have 5 WR in there top 25 on there big boards, Sporting news has 6 in the first round, CBS has your guy Skylar slot 18, Dotson slot 28 with sporting news.
and this class is loaded with high graded edge rushers, if these receivers are so mediocre why are they ranked so high on these established draft sites, these aren't mock drafts, there big boards where position lean is less a factor.

my fault I clicked his twitter site instead of just clicking the picture, sorry.

Here it is for 2020.

https://www.pewterreport.com/ledyards-2 ... -rankings/

Samual his #1 did much better year two, ranked 25th as a rook, Jefferson who he ranked 4th and with a 2nd round grade end up as the #4 receiver in yards for the whole league, his #2 and 3 where well down the list, so he went 50% on those 4, I have to go now, but will read more later

[BF004]

I will say there is a big difference between a draft value grade and a just a big board ranking.

It’s definitely possibly to just have like 18-22 players with a ‘first round grade’. Or to the contrary have 40 first round grades. That can be more a value that spans years and is irrelevant to specific class.

Obviously 32 players are going to go in the first round but doesn’t mean they all deserve in a generic class.

So maybe there are the opportunities to trade back, trade up. Or even just try to trade for future picks as opposed to taking a guy you have a 2nd round grade on at like pick 25.

[Yoop]

I will say there is a big difference between a draft value grade and a just a big board ranking.

It’s definitely possibly to just have like 18-22 players with a ‘first round grade’. Or to the contrary have 40 first round grades. That can be more a value that spans years and is irrelevant to specific class.

Obviously 32 players are going to go in the first round but doesn’t mean they all deserve in a generic class.

So maybe there are the opportunities to trade back, trade up. Or even just try to trade for future picks as opposed to taking a guy you have a 2nd round grade on at like pick 25.

last cup of joe before running out the door, seriously not sure why you would consider a guys big board to sway to positional leanings, Jeremiah specially states this player say #10 on his board has more talent for his position then #11 has for his and so on, so when he says Wilson is # whatever it is, thats his value, same as the guy he ranks 25th, other wise none of any of this stuff makes sense, a consensus of big boards is a very accurate way to get a idea where players will be drafted, and imho projecting future success is, well known to be wrong a lot, look at the hit rate of draft picks, atrocious. I'am going to be fashionally late, again.

[salmar80]

I will say there is a big difference between a draft value grade and a just a big board ranking.

It’s definitely possibly to just have like 18-22 players with a ‘first round grade’. Or to the contrary have 40 first round grades. That can be more a value that spans years and is irrelevant to specific class.

Obviously 32 players are going to go in the first round but doesn’t mean they all deserve in a generic class.

So maybe there are the opportunities to trade back, trade up. Or even just try to trade for future picks as opposed to taking a guy you have a 2nd round grade on at like pick 25.

last cup of joe before running out the door, seriously not sure why you would consider a guys big board to sway to positional leanings, Jeremiah specially states this player say #10 on his board has more talent for his position then #11 has for his and so on, so when he says Wilson is # whatever it is, thats his value, same as the guy he ranks 25th, other wise none of any of this stuff makes sense, a consensus of big boards is a very accurate way to get a idea where players will be drafted, and imho projecting future success is, well known to be wrong a lot, look at the hit rate of draft picks, atrocious. I'am going to be fashionally late, again.

I knew this would confuse yoop...

Sometimes there can be less than 32 players worthy of your 1st round pick. The Cowboys have had a couple of draft board leaks. In 2010, they had 23 players with a 1st round grade, in 2013 just 18.

You may end up with less than 32 players with a 1st round grade for many reasons. It may simply not be a great draft at the top. It happens. Your team may want impact now, so your GM may erase all injured players and raw-technique athletic freaks off the board, while other GMs keep them on it. You may take terrible scheme fits off your board, but GMs of teams with different schemes may love them.

---

IF draft picks couldn't be traded at all, and all teams were stuck in their spots, then it would make sense to just grade players 1-256.

As it is, picks have a value. That value can be used to trade up, down, into the future, for players, etc. You want to get maximum value out of a pick.

It's like having a bike shop gift card that's worth, say, up to $1000 (= Your 1st rounder). Ideally you'd like to buy a bike worth $1000 (or more), right?

But what if you go in the store, and they've ran out of the $1000 bikes (= 1st round graded players)? You could still use the gift card on a $750 bike (= Draft a 2nd round -graded player in 1st round), but it would feel bad since you're losing $250 of value.

It would be wiser to trade it for $750 and $250 gift cards, if you can find a trade partner. You can then buy the $750 bike with one card and a good lock with the other (= Trading down to match value with pick. Trading up is similar.).

Reaching in draft is like using that $1000 card to intentionally buy a $750 bike, even if there are $1000 bikes available, just because you have a need for a racing bike (= WR), and the only bikes left worth $1000 were fatbikes (= OL). You still lose $250 in value, but may enjoy that racing bike more in the short term. But if you make reaching a habit, then you're constantly losing value vs your competitors, and it'll eventually show in the quality of your bike collection...

[paco]

1st return is more impressive than the 2nd. But still, impressive for a guy his size.

[Yoop]

I knew this would confuse yoop..

I'am not the guy who's confused, a big board is not the same as a GM's draft board, I didn't just fall off some turnup truck last night as you seem to think, I've known for many years that there most often are NOT 32 players with first round grades, and actually most big boards reflect that, and those guys don't tier prospects as a GM would.
or do you think GM's number players 1 through a 100 like these guys that do the player evaluation big boards? they don't, why? because grades over lap, a GM might have 4 or 5 players worthy of the slot he is picking at, and he takes the best team value player of that group, so who's confused here Salmar.......

[Yoop]

1st return is more impressive than the 2nd. But still, impressive for a guy his size.

this is the guy we'll probably have to trade up to get, in the 2nd round that is.

[YoHoChecko]

1st return is more impressive than the 2nd. But still, impressive for a guy his size.

I knew! Haha

His ST acumen is one of his main selling points given that he will need development as a fulltime WR.

Part MVS, part Cordarelle Patterson.

I'm obsessed.

I think his small school background, limited displayed route tree and production (due to being in a run-first offense and being the team's primary deep threat and not asked to do more), I think he's more of a mid-second rounder by pure value but I want him so badly I could take him at 28, especially with the Chiefs at 29 and 30.

But I'd MUCH prefer him at 53 or, like Yoop mentioned, trading up a bit in the second (or trading back from 28 a bit) to maximize value.

But if our first round is Burks at 22 and Watson at 28 and we worry about the rest of the necessary depth pieces the rest of the draft, I'd be fine with it. Not ideal, but fine with it.

IDEAL is Burks and a defensive front 7 stud in round one, Watson and a nickel safety or ILB in round 2. But it's a risk to wait on a talent like Watson after the surpriingly adept route running and cutting dipay he put on at the Senior Bowl. Like AJ Dillon's pass catching ability, just because it wasn't put on tape by his college, doesn't mean the ability isn't there. And Watson's senior bowl performance opened a lot of eyes.

Unlike my comments elsewhere that Burks doesn't seem the type the Chiefs would target, Watson sure the heck does. Watson could be anywhere from Denzel Mims (flameout with rare athletic gifts who hasn't found a role in the league to utilize them) to multi-year All Pro. The risk knocks his draft stock. But the ceiling is unreal. He's absolutely my biggest draft crush this year, even though back in October I was basically on the Trey Burks or bust train. Now that Adams is gone, I want them both.

[salmar80]

I knew this would confuse yoop..

I'am not the guy who's confused, a big board is not the same as a GM's draft board, I didn't just fall off some turnup truck last night as you seem to think, I've known for many years that there most often are NOT 32 players with first round grades, and actually most big boards reflect that, and those guys don't tier prospects as a GM would.
or do you think GM's number players 1 through a 100 like these guys that do the player evaluation big boards? they don't, why? because grades over lap, a GM might have 4 or 5 players worthy of the slot he is picking at, and he takes the best team value player of that group, so who's confused here Salmar.......

I actually forgot Best Available Player vs Need drafting from the rather convenient example I invented. I didn't write it only for you, I may copy and paste it if new fans are confused about draft concepts.

Drafting BAP is when you need a racing bike, but there are only racing bikes worth $750 left. There's a $1000 fatbike available, but you've already got a few.

If you draft BAP, you still take the $1000 fatbike or try to trade down. If you draft for need, you take the $750 racing bike, and let someone else take the more expensive fatbike.

Yes, the racing bike can be more valuable to your franchise in the short term, since it fills a need. But you still get a lesser quality bike.

IF there are only $750 bikes left, and one is a need and one is not (= You have several similarly graded prospects at the top of your board), of course you can take the need without sacrificing value. That's not BAP nor needs drafting. It's just taking an advantage of a fortuitous situation.

[Yoop]

I knew this would confuse yoop..

I'am not the guy who's confused, a big board is not the same as a GM's draft board, I didn't just fall off some turnup truck last night as you seem to think, I've known for many years that there most often are NOT 32 players with first round grades, and actually most big boards reflect that, and those guys don't tier prospects as a GM would.
or do you think GM's number players 1 through a 100 like these guys that do the player evaluation big boards? they don't, why? because grades over lap, a GM might have 4 or 5 players worthy of the slot he is picking at, and he takes the best team value player of that group, so who's confused here Salmar.......

I actually forgot Best Available Player vs Need drafting from the rather convenient example I invented. I didn't write it only for you, I may copy and paste it if new fans are confused about draft concepts.

Drafting BAP is when you need a racing bike, but there are only racing bikes worth $750 left. There's a $1000 fatbike available, but you've already got a few.

If you draft BAP, you still take the $1000 fatbike or try to trade down. If you draft for need, you take the $750 racing bike, and let someone else take the more expensive fatbike.

Yes, the racing bike can be more valuable to your franchise in the short term, since it fills a need. But you still get a lesser quality bike.

IF there are only $750 bikes left, and one is a need and one is not, of course you can take the need without sacrificing value.

sorry if I responded harshly Salmar, but I been paying attention to the draft for over 60 years, I have watched intently how GM's do there picks, it's why I make comments that BPA while adheard to as close as possible, is not the most important factor for a team builder, A GM has to draft according to positional needs, specially so with CB's and pass rushers, two positions a defense can't live without, obviously as Ted had done, a GM hopes to be able to trade up or down a little so the player has draft value

Guys that do these Big boards have the luxury of listing these players in numerical order, GM's don't, for one reason as I said the grades over lap and are so close that a GM will just take the guy that fits positional need.

still big boards tend to be pretty accurate, obviously not perfect, nothing about this stuff is, but there close.

[YoHoChecko]

It's getting toward the time of year that I like to think about potential trade backs (others on the board have talked about potential trade ups, so I'll leave that to them).

For me personally, I'm looking to get Christian Watson at better value than 28, but such a trade could be useful for any purpose.

I also LOVE early round 4 picks. It's where you scoop up guys you had rated at Day 2 but who fell because of other teams' boards or various positional needs pushing other guys down. And in this class in particular, I see some strength in that 90 to 110 range.

So my go-to right now is the Houston Texans, likely looking to get their favorite developmental QB with a 5th-year option, jumping up from pick 37 to pick 28 at the cost of picks 107 and 108 at the top of the fourth round (2nd and 3rd picks of Day Three). The value tilts in our favor so we'd likely have to send back our 5th round pick (171).

By the traditional draft value chart (which I continue to assert is by far the closest to the one our team uses), that would be

Pick 28 - 660 points
Pick 171 - 21 points
681 points

For
Pick 37 - 530 points
Pick 107 - 80 points
Pick 108 - 78 points
688 points

That would give the Packers 9 picks in the top 150:
22, 37, 53, 59, 92, 107, 108, 132, and 140

then a break for rounds 5 and 6 before a trio of 7th rounders. Basically a full draft class in the first 4 rounds, then an early start on our priority UDFAs and STers. I'd like to see those first nine draft picks break down something like: 2 WRs, 1 EDGE, 1 DL, 1 ILB, 1 OL, 1 slot/safety, 2 best available (I'd prefer a 3rd WR and a second DL or Edge, but a case could be made for a second OL or a pure CB and pure safety as opposed to my slot safety mentality)

[BF004]

I was thinking more deeply about this draft for us, but where could a rookie realistically come in and start for us this year?

Pretty much got down to probably 1 WR, assuming we get a vet and Lazard and Cobb and even Rodgers, bit of a crowded room unless we are talking like 2 top 40 picks on WR or we just nail two guys. We have no top end talent, but bring in one vet even, that is 3 guys its gunna hard to pass up for reps.

Offensive line, I'd give you guard or RT, Jenkins moves to the other spot. Just have to make our offense better than JRJ or Newman. Wouldn't be unthinkable for a 1st or 2nd rounder.

ILB2 over Khrys Barnes? Not even really considered a starter.


This is just a really complete team outside of WR. I honestly can not envision a single rookie, even up to Aidan Hutchinson, who would come in and be penciled in as your day one starter on defense. Other than ILB2 which is less of a starter than is CB3.

[Drj820]

I was thinking more deeply about this draft for us, but where could a rookie realistically come in and start for us this year?

Pretty much got down to probably 1 WR, assuming we get a vet and Lazard and Cobb and even Rodgers, bit of a crowded room unless we are talking like 2 top 40 picks on WR or we just nail two guys. We have no top end talent, but bring in one vet even, that is 3 guys its gunna hard to pass up for reps.

Offensive line, I'd give you guard or RT, Jenkins moves to the other spot. Just have to make our offense better than JRJ or Newman. Wouldn't be unthinkable for a 1st or 2nd rounder.

ILB2 over Khrys Barnes? Not even really considered a starter.


This is just a really complete team outside of WR. I honestly can not envision a single rookie, even up to Aidan Hutchinson, who would come in and be penciled in as your day one starter on defense. Other than ILB2 which is less of a starter than is CB3.

This is my rationale for not being afraid to move up to grab the WR we love if we are at risk of that player not making it to 22. For this window, WR is THE NEED. Use the abundance of assets we have to fill that need.

Unless of course the guy we love is there at 22. Then Great.

[Yoop]

I was thinking more deeply about this draft for us, but where could a rookie realistically come in and start for us this year?

Pretty much got down to probably 1 WR, assuming we get a vet and Lazard and Cobb and even Rodgers, bit of a crowded room unless we are talking like 2 top 40 picks on WR or we just nail two guys. We have no top end talent, but bring in one vet even, that is 3 guys its gunna hard to pass up for reps.

Offensive line, I'd give you guard or RT, Jenkins moves to the other spot. Just have to make our offense better than JRJ or Newman. Wouldn't be unthinkable for a 1st or 2nd rounder.

ILB2 over Khrys Barnes? Not even really considered a starter.


This is just a really complete team outside of WR. I honestly can not envision a single rookie, even up to Aidan Hutchinson, who would come in and be penciled in as your day one starter on defense. Other than ILB2 which is less of a starter than is CB3.

This is my rationale for not being afraid to move up to grab the WR we love if we are at risk of that player not making it to 22. For this window, WR is THE NEED. Use the abundance of assets we have to fill that need.

Unless of course the guy we love is there at 22. Then Great.

been my thinking from the start, use the compensation from Adams to best replace his 1400 yrds and TD's ? with a receiver or two. just seems logical

[YoHoChecko]

I've been really high on a kid for a minute but I'm not sure I've posted about him, so I wanted to do an appreciation post:

Eyioma Uwazurike

Let's look at the measurables:

profile

image.png (137.37 KiB) Viewed 174 times

And take a look at his statistical projection, with extra focus on his 2021 senior year.

stats

image.png (38.41 KiB) Viewed 174 times

Now look, we see redshirt senior in the first image. We see five years of stats in the second image. The guy is an older prospect for a rookie, which is not our style, typically. Though he is considered a 4th or 5th round value, so it's the time int he draft when you can make some exceptions.

He played all over the DLine. He's listed as a DE in most places, which has led some people to erroneously list him as an EDGE, but he's likely not even a 4-3 DE on a run downs, but the "DE" designation really only makes sense as a 3-4 DE. Let's see what he has to say about it:

I love (playing) the 3-technique. I feel like I thrive at that the most because my pass rush there works a lot. I also like being lined up wide, me being a 4i (technique) sometimes and getting to rush against a guard, I feel like it's a mismatch with a lot of people. I feel like I'm just scraping the surface with my potential there and I can't wait to see what that will look like in the future.

Now look, I had never heard of the 4i until we hired Joe Barry and started talking about his scheme. But dang, it's nice to have a draft prospect be like "I'm a 4i and like to play 3tech" because that is EXACTLY what we need.

Now look, he isn't the most nimble. His pass rush acumen that he showed off in his final college season doesn't come with the sort of twitch you typically think of. But he has such ideal size and such solid production and progression. It really seems like he's starting to put the pieces together and can continue that development in the NFL. It's almost as if he's... overcoming adversity??

We love an adversity story, don't we?

Eyioma Uwazurike wears his Detroit roots like a badge of honor and his heart on his sleeve. The former Iowa State defensive lineman has overcome personal adversity after personal adversity and now stands on the threshold of achieving his dream of playing in the NFL.

At the scouting combine on Friday, Uwazurike wore a necklace, a reminder of one of his greatest tribulations. The diamond-encrusted piece is a framed picture of his father, Roland, who passed away in 2019.

"That's not only my dad, (but) my best friend," Uwazurike said. "I wear this around because it's like everywhere I go, he's with me. I feel comfortable here, in this setting, because I know I'm being watched over."

Only 48 years old, Roland died in his sleep days before Iowa State's bowl game against Notre Dame. Uwazurike woke up in the morning to what he estimated was 30 missed phone calls from his younger brother. It was a devastating blow for the young lineman, but he leaned on his network of support at the school to get him through that difficult time.

This doesn't even include the part where his dad was arrested for smuggling heroin into the country hidden in textbook shipments....

But more about the kid.

In a show of loyalty, Uwazurike decided he would accept the first scholarship offered. That came from University of Toledo and coach Matt Campbell. And when Campbell took the Iowa State job the following year, Uwazurike followed.

There, academics remained a hurdle. Uwazurike had always struggled in school and didn't know how he'd make it through at Iowa State. And at first, he didn't, being ruled academically ineligible as a freshman.

But as impressive as any on-field accomplishment during his five years at the school, Uwazurike turned it around through sheer dedication. By his senior year in 2021, he was named to the academic all-conference team and became the first in his family to graduate college. He's since enrolled in a master's program at Iowa State.

"I had to re-learn how to love school," Uwazurike said. "In Detroit, it was hard to get through school because it was almost a free-for-all.

"I was in the (Iowa Sate) academic center late nights, every day. My first year, when I was academically ineligible, I had 18 credits. I had like nine classes and I was doing that and football at the same time, really learning how to love school and that part of it. They made it fun and it wasn't fun before. I feel like that's what really changed my whole opinion on school.

"It started off rough, but it's always about how you finish. I finished in the right way."

Sign. Me. Up.

[NCF]

Now look, we see redshirt senior in the first image. We see five years of stats in the second image. The guy is an older prospect for a rookie, which is not our style, typically. Though he is considered a 4th or 5th round value, so it's the time int he draft when you can make some exceptions.

Looking at this, I realized I don't really know how redshirt seasons work. Why did he get extra eligibility when he played an abundance his first four years?

To the larger point, yes, later in The Draft, all the age rules are out the book and this could be a guy to really help us for 4 years on a cheap rookie deal.

[Drj820]

Now look, we see redshirt senior in the first image. We see five years of stats in the second image. The guy is an older prospect for a rookie, which is not our style, typically. Though he is considered a 4th or 5th round value, so it's the time int he draft when you can make some exceptions.

Looking at this, I realized I don't really know how redshirt seasons work. Why did he get extra eligibility when he played an abundance his first four years?

To the larger point, yes, later in The Draft, all the age rules are out the book and this could be a guy to really help us for 4 years on a cheap rookie deal.

probably Covid

[paco]

Based on what Gutey has said and done the last year or 2 and who they are bringing in for visits; its time to stop mocking the ultra agile and fast sub 300lb to us. It was our mold for a long time, but Gutey's looking to get nastier. Like seeing some of these bigger guys that have been posted.

North of 310, and no shorter than 6'4, preferably 6'5". I've started highlighting guys around 320 on my board and flagging guy at or under 300.

[YoHoChecko]

Now look, we see redshirt senior in the first image. We see five years of stats in the second image. The guy is an older prospect for a rookie, which is not our style, typically. Though he is considered a 4th or 5th round value, so it's the time int he draft when you can make some exceptions.

Looking at this, I realized I don't really know how redshirt seasons work. Why did he get extra eligibility when he played an abundance his first four years?

To the larger point, yes, later in The Draft, all the age rules are out the book and this could be a guy to really help us for 4 years on a cheap rookie deal.

probably Covid

Both. He was academically inelligible in 2016 so he redshirted. Then he was granted an extra year of eligibility due to Covid. He spent 6 years in college.

[YoHoChecko]

Based on what Gutey has said and done the last year or 2 and who they are bringing in for visits; its time to stop mocking the ultra agile and fast sub 300lb to us. It was our mold for a long time, but Gutey's looking to get nastier. Like seeing some of these bigger guys that have been posted.

North of 310, and no shorter than 6'4, preferably 6'5". I've started highlighting guys around 320 on my board and flagging guy at or under 300.

This is a good post to monitor. I have been interested, as the sample size grows, to try to find our new normal on the OL (previously, the C, G, and OT positions had VERY clear measurable traits to the point that Bulaga and Bakhtiari had literally the same agility testing results)... Jenkins was a departure and it really hit. Then we had the years with pandemic limiting the testing so it was hard to really know.

But yes, there's definitely a shift toward bigger, but they still need enough athleticism to function in the zone blocking, even though we do more power than many think.