2022 Draft Discussion

[Yoop]

Savage has the tools to not such. He needs to not suck next year.

I think scheme fit and play partners kept Savage at home more in center field, just my opinion, but when ya have basically two untested edge corners it will limit the freedom for a FS, even so at times he looked confused even doing some of that, so ya, he needs to play better, but we saw much better play from him prior, so to me it has to be scheme tasking.

[Pckfn23]

This was my first post:

he's snatched up far sooner then he should be

Not talking about any specific player here. What/who determines that a player is snatched up far sooner than they should be?

I even said it in the following post. I asked the questions because I didn't know what your thinking was on the subject. I even stated as much in my 2nd post in the discussion. I wanted to avoid your favorite, "that's not what I meant," refrain. I am glad I asked because what you have come out with now is not what I ever would have thought you were referring to. There is no twisting going on.

For the 3rd time, this isn't about a specific player. This isn't about Watson, never was. This was about labeling any player a reach and preaching that opinion as fact. The importance of the discussion is exemplified by your dragging Rashan Gary into the discussion.

Don't work so hard to be offended and you might find you aren't offended as often.

[Pckfn23]

Yoop is using a very generally accepted definition of the term reach. It exists within the media draft community and can reasonably be determined at the time a player is drafted and certainly applied as the results of that players career confirm or refute the reach label.

I don't agree with the bold. What a player does in their career can not and does not confirm or refute a reach label. As I said, a reach is still considered a reach if a player is a Hall of Famer. It has everything to do with slotting and where people/draftniks think a player should go. Now that is all opinion, but it can be applied as fact, we just won't know about it. For example, if 1 GM has Joe Blow as a mid-first round player, picks him at 12, but all over GMs have him as a late-second round player, then that would be a reach. It's still a reach if Joe Blow becomes a hall of famer because the GM could have gotten Joe Blow at 44 and picked up Jim Suck at 12, presumably a more talented player than who he ended up taking at 44.

The old adage, it only takes one... teams could not give a &%$@ less about this. It's a media and draft community thing that we talk about and discuss. It is 100% opinion and only in rare cases like the Collins example can you actually refute the opinion with concrete evidence.

100%

[Yoop]

This was my first post:

he's snatched up far sooner then he should be

Not talking about any specific player here. What/who determines that a player is snatched up far sooner than they should be?

I even said it in the following post. I asked the questions because I didn't know what your thinking was on the subject. I even stated as much in my 2nd post in the discussion. I wanted to avoid your favorite, "that's not what I meant," refrain. I am glad I asked because what you have come out with now is not what I ever would have thought you were referring to. There is no twisting going on.

For the 3rd time, this isn't about a specific player. This isn't about Watson, never was. This was about labeling any player a reach and preaching that opinion as fact. The importance of the discussion is exemplified by your dragging Rashan Gary into the discussion.

Don't work so hard to be offended and you might find you aren't offended as often.

no one ever said fact, and don't try and BS me, everyone in this forum new what I meant when I said consensus opinion because the conversation prior had been about draft grades, and how that related to Watkins, and the draftnik grades on him

I'am done with this convo, your a bush beater, ya bounce around twisting anything said to suit whatever BS your spouting, now it's you saying I said the draftnik opinions where FACTS, quit adding words that where not said.

[Yoop]

Yoop is using a very generally accepted definition of the term reach. It exists within the media draft community and can reasonably be determined at the time a player is drafted and certainly applied as the results of that players career confirm or refute the reach label.

I don't agree with the bold. What a player does in their career can not and does not confirm or refute a reach label. As I said, a reach is still considered a reach if a player is a Hall of Famer. It has everything to do with slotting and where people/draftniks think a player should go. Now that is all opinion, but it can be applied as fact, we just won't know about it. For example, if 1 GM has Joe Blow as a mid-first round player, picks him at 12, but all over GMs have him as a late-second round player, then that would be a reach. It's still a reach if Joe Blow becomes a hall of famer because the GM could have gotten Joe Blow at 44 and picked up Jim Suck at 12, presumably a more talented player than who he ended up taking at 44.

The old adage, it only takes one... teams could not give a &%$@ less about this. It's a media and draft community thing that we talk about and discuss. It is 100% opinion and only in rare cases like the Collins example can you actually refute the opinion with concrete evidence.

100%

stfu, here you are again turning something basic into another trip down your convoluted rabbit hole, every player that is drafted above consensus grades is a reach pick, for christ sakes obviously some reach picks pan out, everyone in this forum KNOWS THIS.

[Pckfn23]

no one ever said fact, and don't try and BS me, everyone in this forum new what I meant when I said consensus opinion because the conversation prior had been about draft grades, and how that related to Watkins, and the draftnik grades on him

Actually, fact was used by someone. Apparently not everyone did know, as we can see played out in the conversation. I specifically spelled out that it wasn't about Watson or any one player. I also spelled out that I was asking clarifying questions, nothing sinister.

I'am done with this convo, your a bush beater, ya bounce around twisting anything said to suit whatever BS your spouting, now it's you saying I said the draftnik opinions where FACTS, quit adding words that where not said.

Many people do take what the draftniks say as fact. It's why they get so upset over draft picks, because some draftniks said a player should go a round later or that another player would be a bust. You yourself are still upset about drafting Rashan Gary because of pre-draft scouting of him by draftniks.

[Yoop]

The old adage, it only takes one... teams could not give a &%$@ less about this. It's a media and draft community thing that we talk about and discuss. It is 100% opinion and only in rare cases like the Collins example can you actually refute the opinion with concrete evidence.
1

exactly, obviously on draft night the term REACH is only a opinion ( but obviously a educated opinion, these guys, well most of these draftniks work very hard at the craft, but like Collins we didn't know how valid those opinions where till several years later.

why anyone of us here would question another member here concerning these reality's is beyond my comprehension, so frustrating having these conversations.

[Pckfn23]

Yoop is using a very generally accepted definition of the term reach. It exists within the media draft community and can reasonably be determined at the time a player is drafted and certainly applied as the results of that players career confirm or refute the reach label.

I don't agree with the bold. What a player does in their career can not and does not confirm or refute a reach label. As I said, a reach is still considered a reach if a player is a Hall of Famer. It has everything to do with slotting and where people/draftniks think a player should go. Now that is all opinion, but it can be applied as fact, we just won't know about it. For example, if 1 GM has Joe Blow as a mid-first round player, picks him at 12, but all over GMs have him as a late-second round player, then that would be a reach. It's still a reach if Joe Blow becomes a hall of famer because the GM could have gotten Joe Blow at 44 and picked up Jim Suck at 12, presumably a more talented player than who he ended up taking at 44.

The old adage, it only takes one... teams could not give a &%$@ less about this. It's a media and draft community thing that we talk about and discuss. It is 100% opinion and only in rare cases like the Collins example can you actually refute the opinion with concrete evidence.

100%

stfu, here you are again turning something basic into another trip down your convoluted rabbit hole, every player that is drafted above consensus grades is a reach pick, for christ sakes obviously some reach picks pan out, everyone in this forum KNOWS THIS.

Now every pick drafted above the "consensus grades," is a reach? Automatically? So if we draft a player who's consensus is 23 at 22, that's a reach? What are we using to create this consensus grade? The 10 sites I used? More? Less? The point is there is no true consensus grade or draft board. As was said so often, have an opinion on the player and where they were drafted, but don't be so arrogant as to think your opinion matches what GMs think.

Obviously, some picks who are considered reaches by the media pan out, I didn't say otherwise.

[NCF]

I don't agree with the bold. What a player does in their career can not and does not confirm or refute a reach label.

No, it doesn't. What I mean is it gets lost with time. You think the draft community is diligent about owning up to their oversights? The players performance, IMO, muddles the initial analysis and the further you get away from the actual Draft, the muddier it becomes and the more and more everyone is an expert and never gets an eval wrong.

Some of this stuff is documented for all to see and that is great because then you have that initial analysis, but that is not always the case. That's when the draft community kind of leans on this reach consensus.

[Pckfn23]

I don't agree with the bold. What a player does in their career can not and does not confirm or refute a reach label.

What I mean is it gets lost with time. You think the draft community is diligent about owning up to their oversights? The players performance, IMO, muddles the initial analysis and the further you get away from the actual Draft, the muddier it becomes and the more and more everyone is an expert and never gets an eval wrong.

Gotcha, 100% agree.

[Yoop]

no one ever said fact, and don't try and BS me, everyone in this forum new what I meant when I said consensus opinion because the conversation prior had been about draft grades, and how that related to Watkins, and the draftnik grades on him

Actually, fact was used by someone. Apparently not everyone did know, as we can see played out in the conversation. I specifically spelled out that it wasn't about Watson or any one player. I also spelled out that I was asking clarifying questions, nothing sinister.

I'am done with this convo, your a bush beater, ya bounce around twisting anything said to suit whatever BS your spouting, now it's you saying I said the draftnik opinions where FACTS, quit adding words that where not said.

Many people do take what the draftniks say as fact. It's why they get so upset over draft picks, because some draftniks said a player should go a round later or that another player would be a bust. You yourself are still upset about drafting Rashan Gary because of pre-draft scouting of him by draftniks.

ahhhh, come on, you know very well why I didn't like using slot 12 on Gary, and I still stand by that opinion, I will always put readiness to play first of all over drafting a player I have to coach up, always, thats because I live for today, more so then tomorrow, if I want groomers I'll pick a guy like Watson in round two or later

I respect the job Draftniks do, there opinions matter, they put in just about as much effort to get this right as GM's and scouts do, so when a bunch of them say a kid has a certain grade I listen, and often when ya check back several years later, often they where right, and the rare Collins gem picks doesn't change that.

[Yoop]

I don't agree with the bold. What a player does in their career can not and does not confirm or refute a reach label. As I said, a reach is still considered a reach if a player is a Hall of Famer. It has everything to do with slotting and where people/draftniks think a player should go. Now that is all opinion, but it can be applied as fact, we just won't know about it. For example, if 1 GM has Joe Blow as a mid-first round player, picks him at 12, but all over GMs have him as a late-second round player, then that would be a reach. It's still a reach if Joe Blow becomes a hall of famer because the GM could have gotten Joe Blow at 44 and picked up Jim Suck at 12, presumably a more talented player than who he ended up taking at 44.



100%

stfu, here you are again turning something basic into another trip down your convoluted rabbit hole, every player that is drafted above consensus grades is a reach pick, for christ sakes obviously some reach picks pan out, everyone in this forum KNOWS THIS.

Now every pick drafted above the "consensus grades," is a reach? Automatically? So if we draft a player who's consensus is 23 at 22, that's a reach? What are we using to create this consensus grade? The 10 sites I used? More? Less? The point is there is no true consensus grade or draft board. As was said so often, have an opinion on the player and where they were drafted, but don't be so arrogant as to think your opinion matches what GMs think.

Obviously, some picks who are considered reaches by the media pan out, I didn't say otherwise.
[/quote/]

seriously now, take two aspirin, and call your family doctor

[Pckfn23]

no one ever said fact, and don't try and BS me, everyone in this forum new what I meant when I said consensus opinion because the conversation prior had been about draft grades, and how that related to Watkins, and the draftnik grades on him

Actually, fact was used by someone. Apparently not everyone did know, as we can see played out in the conversation. I specifically spelled out that it wasn't about Watson or any one player. I also spelled out that I was asking clarifying questions, nothing sinister.

I'am done with this convo, your a bush beater, ya bounce around twisting anything said to suit whatever BS your spouting, now it's you saying I said the draftnik opinions where FACTS, quit adding words that where not said.

Many people do take what the draftniks say as fact. It's why they get so upset over draft picks, because some draftniks said a player should go a round later or that another player would be a bust. You yourself are still upset about drafting Rashan Gary because of pre-draft scouting of him by draftniks.

I respect the job Draftniks do, there opinions matter, they put in just about as much effort to get this right as GM's and scouts do, so when a bunch of them say a kid has a certain grade I listen, and often when ya check back several years later, often they where right, and the rare Collins gem picks doesn't change that.

I respect the job Draftniks do as well. Without out them we would have no draft info. That's why we have to listen to them, we are forced to to get the information we covet.

We will almost never know if they are right when labeling a guy a reach, so you can not say that often they are right. It's an opinion.

[Yoop]

Actually, fact was used by someone. Apparently not everyone did know, as we can see played out in the conversation. I specifically spelled out that it wasn't about Watson or any one player. I also spelled out that I was asking clarifying questions, nothing sinister.


Many people do take what the draftniks say as fact. It's why they get so upset over draft picks, because some draftniks said a player should go a round later or that another player would be a bust. You yourself are still upset about drafting Rashan Gary because of pre-draft scouting of him by draftniks.

I respect the job Draftniks do, there opinions matter, they put in just about as much effort to get this right as GM's and scouts do, so when a bunch of them say a kid has a certain grade I listen, and often when ya check back several years later, often they where right, and the rare Collins gem picks doesn't change that.

I respect the job Draftniks do as well. Without out them we would have no draft info. That's why we have to listen to them, we are forced to to get the information we covet.

We will almost never know if they are right when labeling a guy a reach, so you can not say that often they are right. It's an opinion.

come on, quit acting so goofy, It is obviously not a opinion forever, we all tend to grade drafted players after several years, we all know or can easily look up draft profile, when they where taken, and how that player performed, and that goes for later round players just as it does for first rounders, and at that time we can determine if the player has performed up to the slot he was taken, real simple.

you seem intent on defending what GM's do, and they miss on just about as many picks as they do well at, do I need to bring up Detroit, Chi town, Jacksonvillie, Miami again

[BF004]

Locked On Draft is doing their mock draft tonight, live on their YouTube channel.

This was really cool last year, I just listened to the results via podcasts. But the local host or some beat writer makes each pick, they’ll do trades and what not. Live reactions, can get more informed insights for each time than their locked on host.

But I’ll planning on trying to tune in tonight. Think it starts at 6 cst, bukowski is hosting, so I’m not sure who is making the packers picks.

[Pckfn23]

I respect the job Draftniks do, there opinions matter, they put in just about as much effort to get this right as GM's and scouts do, so when a bunch of them say a kid has a certain grade I listen, and often when ya check back several years later, often they where right, and the rare Collins gem picks doesn't change that.

I respect the job Draftniks do as well. Without out them we would have no draft info. That's why we have to listen to them, we are forced to to get the information we covet.

We will almost never know if they are right when labeling a guy a reach, so you can not say that often they are right. It's an opinion.

come on, quit acting so goofy, It is obviously not a opinion forever, we all tend to grade drafted players after several years, we all know or can easily look up draft profile, when they where taken, and how that player performed, and that goes for later round players just as it does for first rounders, and at that time we can determine if the player has performed up to the slot he was taken, real simple.

you seem intent on defending what GM's do, and they miss on just about as many picks as they do well at, do I need to bring up Detroit, Chi town, Jacksonvillie, Miami again

It absolutely is an opinion forever as we can't confirm it is a reach due to not being able to see the draft boards of all NFL teams.

Go ahead and grade players after several years. Determine if they played up to their draft slot. Go right ahead. That does not mean that at the time of the draft the taking that player was a reach or not. The players performance on the NFL field does not come into play when draftniks determine if a player was a reach on draft day.

You are mixing up and combining 2 different things: Draft day determination of a reach and player evaluation compared to draft slot.

Answer me this. How can a draftnik say a player is a reach on April 30th when he has never set foot on the field?

Where did I defend any GM?

[Yoop]

It absolutely is an opinion forever as we can't confirm it is a reach due to not being able to see the draft boards of all NFL teams.

of course your defending GM's, IT DOESN'T MATTER WHERE A gm HAS SLOTTED THE PLAYER, WHAT MATTER"s IS THE SLOT HE TOOK THE PLAYER? WHAT ABOUT THAT CAN'T YOU UNDERSTAND, sorry to get loud, but I can't seem to get through to you any other way, the pick tells us where the GM had that player rated, we don't need to see his draft board, and if that is a round higher then draftniks had him rated, they will most often say the pick was to high or the GM reached for that player, if the pick pans out, the GM found a great player, if not it is a confirmed reach, that you don't seem to agree with this is fine, I'am OK knowing that most fans do.

[Pckfn23]

It absolutely is an opinion forever as we can't confirm it is a reach due to not being able to see the draft boards of all NFL teams.

of course your defending GM's, IT DOESN'T MATTER WHERE A gm HAS SLOTTED THE PLAYER, WHAT MATTER"s IS THE SLOT HE TOOK THE PLAYER? WHAT ABOUT THAT CAN'T YOU UNDERSTAND, sorry to get loud, but I can't seem to get through to you any other way, the pick tells us where the GM had that player rated, we don't need to see his draft board, and if that is a round higher then draftniks had him rated, they will most often say the pick was to high or the GM reached for that player, if the pick pans out, the GM found a great player, if not it is a confirmed reach, that you don't seem to agree with this is fine, I'am OK knowing that most fans do.

I'm not defending GMs, I am speaking to the truth of the situation.

It absolutely matters where GMs slot players just as much as it matters where a GM takes a player. In a true factual reach, a GM will take a player at say 25, when all other GMs have the player "slotted" at 55 or later. However, we will NEVER know if something like that happens because we are not privy to all those draft boards.

It also doesn't matter if the pick pans out in terms of the draftniks deeming the pick a reach or not. That does not come into play when calling it a reach. If a player pans out, he can still be a reach. Again, what a player does after he is drafted does not determine if he is a reach or not on draft day. Where the player is picked in relation to where draftniks think he should be picked determines what the media believes to be a reach. A draft day reach is a reach, no matter what that player does in their career. It makes the reach more understandable in the media's eyes, but it is still a reach.

[Realist]

It absolutely is an opinion forever as we can't confirm it is a reach due to not being able to see the draft boards of all NFL teams.

of course your defending GM's, IT DOESN'T MATTER WHERE A gm HAS SLOTTED THE PLAYER, WHAT MATTER"s IS THE SLOT HE TOOK THE PLAYER? WHAT ABOUT THAT CAN'T YOU UNDERSTAND, sorry to get loud, but I can't seem to get through to you any other way, the pick tells us where the GM had that player rated, we don't need to see his draft board, and if that is a round higher then draftniks had him rated, they will most often say the pick was to high or the GM reached for that player, if the pick pans out, the GM found a great player, if not it is a confirmed reach, that you don't seem to agree with this is fine, I'am OK knowing that most fans do.

I'm not defending GMs, I am speaking to the truth of the situation.

It absolutely matters where GMs slot players just as much as it matters where a GM takes a players. In a true factual reach, a GM will take a player at say 25, when all other GMs have a player "slotted" at 55 or later. However, we will NEVER know if something like that happens because we are not privy to all those draft boards.

It also doesn't matter if the pick pans out in terms of the draftniks deeming the pick a reach or not. That does not come into play when calling it a reach. If a player pans out, he can still be a reach. Again, what a player does after he is drafted does not determine if he is a reach or not on draft day. Where the player is pick in relation to where draftniks think he should be picked determines what the media believes to be a reach. A draft day reach is a reach, no matter what that player does in their career. It makes the reach more understandable in the media's eyes, but it is still a reach.

If anyone can read this back and forth you must be so bored that I can not imagine. I read about 2 percent of it so I apologize giving an opinion. No idea what is the point.

[NCF]

If anyone can read this back and forth you must be so bored that I can not imagine. I read about 2 percent of it so I apologize giving an opinion. No idea what is the point.

Oil and water...