Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Sports Argument Stadium > The Football Funhouse > The 2024 NFL Draft Thread - Draft Good Players With High Picks
«‹›2 »
 
  • Post
  • Reply
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017

Diva Cupcake posted:

I think there's an assload of quality defensive linemen out there. Offensive linemen are far more rare.

The Puppy Bowl posted:

Strongly disagree. There are some quality edges but the interior D line is lacking. We get one maybe 2 1st round level DT/NT a year.

I wonder whether that's kind of related. The nose tackles and the OL are there to do the dirty work, close gaps, eat blockers. The edge rushers get all the star power and the attention.

* # ¿ Nov 20, 2023 21:54
  • Quote
Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 9, 2024 22:23
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017


 Other than McKinstry, which CBs are a candidate to convert to safety? And how does the safety class look in general?

Packers are in severe need of a ballhawking, field-roaming free safety.

* # ¿ Nov 22, 2023 19:07
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017

fsif posted:

(no idea why the Browns's Round 2 pick was included, too)

They're still missing their first pick from the Watson trade.

* # ¿ Nov 29, 2023 16:19
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017

fsif posted:

They're fun and a neat rubric for non-college watchers to familiarize themselves with prospects.

Sure, but IMO at least wait until the Senior Bowl.

For context, here's what Brugler posted for his 1.0 mock around this time last year for the '23 draft:

quote:

1. Houston Texans: Bryce Young, QB, Alabama*
2. Chicago Bears: Will Anderson Jr., Edge, Alabama*
3. Detroit Lions (from L.A. Rams): Jalen Carter, DT, Georgia*
4. Seattle Seahawks (from Denver): Myles Murphy, Edge, Clemson*
5. Carolina Panthers: C.J. Stroud, QB, Ohio State*
6. Philadelphia Eagles (from New Orleans): Bryan Bresee, DT, Clemson*
7. Arizona Cardinals: Paris Johnson Jr., OT, Ohio State*
8. Green Bay Packers: Tyree Wilson, DL, Texas Tech
9. Las Vegas Raiders: Christian Gonzalez, CB, Oregon*
10. Houston Texans (from Cleveland): Peter Skoronski, OT/G, Northwestern*
11. Jacksonville Jaguars: Quentin Johnston, WR, TCU*
12. Pittsburgh Steelers: Kelee Ringo, CB, Georgia*
13. Detroit Lions: Joey Porter Jr., CB, Penn State*
14. Indianapolis Colts: Will Levis, QB, Kentucky
15. Atlanta Falcons: Jared Verse, Edge, Florida State*
16. Seattle Seahawks: Brian Branch, DB, Alabama*
17. Los Angeles Chargers: Lukas Van Ness, DL, Iowa*
18. New England Patriots: Jordan Addison, WR, USC*
19. Tampa Bay Buccaneers: Cam Smith, CB, South Carolina*
20. Washington Commanders: Broderick Jones, OT, Georgia*
21. Baltimore Ravens: Bijan Robinson, RB, Texas*
22. New York Jets: Trenton Simpson, LB, Clemson*
23. Cincinnati Bengals: Michael Mayer, TE, Notre Dame*
24. New York Giants: Drew Sanders, LB, Arkansas*
25. Denver Broncos (from San Francisco): Nolan Smith, Edge, Georgia
26. Tennessee Titans: Darnell Washington, TE, Georgia*
27. Dallas Cowboys: Devon Witherspoon, CB, Illinois
28. Buffalo Bills: O’Cyrus Torrence, OG, Florida
29. Minnesota Vikings: Jaxon Smith-Njigba, WR, Ohio State*
30. Kansas City Chiefs: Jalin Hyatt, WR, Tennessee*
31. Philadelphia Eagles: Jahmyr Gibbs, RB, Alabama*

The first pick for the NFL teams that currently don’t have a Round 1 selection:
Second Round
Los Angeles Rams: BJ Ojulari, Edge, LSU*
New Orleans Saints: Mazi Smith, DT, Michigan*
Miami Dolphins: Devon Achane, RB, Texas A&M*

That's actually reasonably accurate (placement-wise, not team-wise) just quickly eyeballing it. I think about 2/3rds of these were actually drafted in the first.

* # ¿ Nov 29, 2023 17:20
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017

Doltos posted:

I personally think age doesn't matter at all since every position but kicker and QB has a short shelf life on average. People are too used to madden drafting where you take a 21 year old kid with A+ potential and he's a 99 overall by the time he's 22 while the stats never drop til he's 30. In real life even if that guy existed he'd probably leave in free agency from your small market team.

Maybe this will change with NIL, but it's seemed like if a player has "it" he goes to the NFL fairly quickly. If he doesn't have "it" he sits in college for a long time.

Your early 20s are also where you do your best and fastest learning, wouldn't it be better spent on learning against NFL talent instead of college talent?

* # ¿ Dec 1, 2023 21:02
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017


 Nate Wiggins being a late riser at CB is interesting. He have a good season or something like that?

I see he made the All-ACC team.

* # ¿ Dec 21, 2023 19:57
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017


 Someone to keep an eye on for 2025's draft:

https://twitter.com/BenFennell_NFL/status/1745143845967233175

* # ¿ Jan 10, 2024 19:51
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017

Kalli posted:

... no matter how hard you lol Bears, how are the Panthers the better scenario?

... Maybe the weather?

* # ¿ Jan 12, 2024 19:29
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017


 The first few millions matter a lot more than the 75th or 400th million. Can't blame him for trying to secure as much of that as possible.

* # ¿ Jan 15, 2024 21:43
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017


 It feels like every year writers go "I know the Packers don't draft {position} in the first round but I'm mocking {position} to them anyway..." and then the Packers continue to not draft that position in the first round.

Like, c'mon.

* # ¿ Jan 16, 2024 17:02
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017

A Sneaker Broker posted:

I think this is the year we actually go tackle in the first round assuming we trade Bakh to the Jets or Titans this offseason.

I just don't see the need. Zach Tom shut down Parsons two days ago. Rasheed Walker has been solid. Both are young and haven't shown any injury concerns. The Packers have a looong history of finding quality OL talent in the middle rounds and developing them.

If the plan was to like move Tom to center, then yeah, go ahead and draft OT.

* # ¿ Jan 16, 2024 17:17
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017

Ornery and Hornery posted:

Your post seems at odds with your preferred approach, to this humble poster. For most of your list, it’s still first round dudes on the team that drafted them: Texans, Ravens, Packers, Bills, Chiefs.
...
It seems pretty compelling that drafting a blue chip qb early when given the opportunity is the correct move.

There's a pretty big difference between drafting a QB in the top 10 (or 5) and drafting that QB at the back end of the first round. Teams picking early generally *need* QBs, teams picking late mostly don't. If that QB makes it through all the QB-needy teams then that speaks to either a misevaluation or a red flag.

Love was #26, Lamar was #32. That's the majority-to-entire league passing on them.

* # ¿ Jan 16, 2024 23:46
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017

The Puppy Bowl posted:

Something about getting selected in the first round mucks up the social cultivation of true TE brain. They need to be like a golden retriever that loves violence and Christmas movies.

I'll probably never forget this line:

https://twitter.com/JustinM_NFL/status/1733148454640046418

* # ¿ Jan 18, 2024 01:57
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017

A Sneaker Broker posted:

That said, I would not mind the Packers trading the farm for Joe Alt as Bakhtiari's replacement if we trade him this offseason.

I still don't understand this angle. Why would the Packers trade "the farm" for a rookie who has a shot at being slightly better than Rasheed Walker is playing *right now* as a 23-year-old? He didn't give up a sack or even a pressure against the Cowboys. Not sure what else you want to see.

* # ¿ Jan 19, 2024 20:34
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017

wandler20 posted:

[... smallest NFL draft class ...]

Acme had a decent write up on this: https://www.acmepackingcompany.com/2024/1/19/24044307/2024-nfl-draft-fewest-underclassmen-declare-in-over-a-decade Basically, the changes to rookie contracts are finally being offset by the changes to NIL, and we're returning to equilibrium.

The rookie wage scale, ironically, encouraged players to leave school as soon as possible to hit their 2nd contracts as early as possible (since, no matter how good you are in college, your earnings for your first few seasons would be limited by the NFL regardless). But now with NIL, there's not really as much of an incentive to do that anymore for anyone who isn't a top talent, so they're sticking around a little bit longer. Toss in some COVID eligibility expiration and now we have the smallest underclassman draft in a decade.



quote:

58 early entrants is the fewest number of underclass declarations since 2011, the first season in which the league implemented the rookie wage scale — which limited how much money top draft picks could ask for from franchises. From 2011 to 2021, the number of early entrants steadily rose to 130 in 2021. Then, the numbers came crashing down.

Why? First of all, there was a backlog of players who continued their eligibility in college football due to the NCAA’s ruling that the 2020 “Covid season” would not count against student-athletes’ career clocks. Secondly, name, imagine and likeness (NIL) was approved by the NCAA in July of 2021, allowing student-athletes to profit from their performance on the field — even if it’s vaguely masked as simply the ability to market themselves.

The bar chart above shows the year-by-year volume of early entrants into the NFL draft. As you can see, the numbers were fairly flat from 2004 to 2010 before a steady increase in declarations from 2011-2021. In the mind of athletes, and agents, what’s the point of staying in school if the NFL limits your earning opportunity over the first four years of your professional contract? The goal then changed to second contracts in the league.

There was a dramatic drop between 2021 (130 entrants) to 2022 (73), though, largely due to NIL. Ever since, that number has decreased to the 58-player pool that was announced today.

Out of the 58 players to declare “early”, 50 of them are ranked among the top 126 players on the consensus draft boards’ rankings. Long gone are the days when players were told to declare if they had any chance of being drafted by the NFL, simply for the sake of a signing bonus. Now, the vast majority of underclassmen to declare are expected to be drafted within the first four rounds of the draft — the same standard as it was around a decade ago.
* # ¿ Jan 21, 2024 17:48
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017

Scipiotik posted:

Sam laporta had some choice words about Jim nagy and the senior bowl.

What's the story here? Twitter/Google search isn't turning up anything concrete.

* # ¿ Jan 21, 2024 18:07
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017

Grozz Nuy posted:

Josh Allen was not good in college and played at loving Wyoming, he was drafted purely on tools and there are a million of those guys who bust in the NFL. It obviously worked out for Buffalo but let's not pretend that was some obvious slam dunk pick at the time.

Lamar though, that was just good ol' fashioned racism.

re: Josh Allen, I posted a thread a few years back about how the QB scarcity crisis was "solved" and that Allen's development process was a huge clue towards why/how. It wasn't received too well :v: but it ended on this fantastic/prescient post from TGG discussing game managers vs. "tools" QBs that I think should get eyeballs today, especially after the last few playoff games:

TheGreyGhost posted:

We haven't yelled enough about this thread yet. Allow me to stir the pot

Previously Stated Hypotheses:

- Scheme evolution and retrofitting to meet players has reduced scarcities
- Coaching tools have improved drastically to the point where identifying actual issues is easier
- Halo effect on different traits and elements has skewed the market too much when there are obvious counters readily in place.


I'm going to take a few of these in a different direction, because I just flatly don't think you can ever be rid of quarterback scarcity in the sense that there isn't going to be a bottomless hunger for quarterback talent. In reality, it's going to change the calculus for how teams approach drafting with an existing QB.

Scheme
I think this argument has legitimate merits on a macro level but can be overstated in how it individually suits just one guy. When you look at how Mahomes has developed, Reid effectively tinkered with the system from when he had Vick into something more modern that reflects an offense with the same ability to speed stretch deep and cut routes off over the middle in such a way that it becomes a professional attempt at the Briles Era Baylor system of pace and space with structural pressures. It's also a logical evolution of how Kliff changed the air raid call system to meet what he saw at the pro level. That said, you could drop him in the scheme Kyler's in, the scheme Baker's in, or even the McVay system and have similar per play results. He would run the short concepts Kyler specializes in better, the PA concepts Baker throws to the corner better, or whatever we call the strange west coast stuff that McVay likes. When you have a certain level of raw physical ability in conjunction with a level of accuracy, any scheme becomes an academic exercise in execution. Fit is one of those things that helps you hide weaknesses and occasionally harness strengths, but there's a level of QB where it quite honestly doesn't matter. That's also part of why GMs really like to chase "tools" guys, because they open a possibility for you to change coaches and not have to worry about the QB's fit, even though this backfires frequently. To really get into it though, let's talk offense 101.

When a coach is building an offense, the first question is what type of running they expect to do. That's not to say they don't care about the personnel, quite the opposite--coaches have been very comfortable changing their running schemes over the years far more easily than their passing schemes. Ultimately, the tendency to run a given power/counter/zone game on the ground is mainly a matter of what linemen and backs you can get ahold of, and you marry your play action game to those concepts. For years, that's a problem, because if you only view play action as a constraint play, you inject a bias in the system towards what makes your back's life easier, not necessarily an optimal play. In addition, the other founding question becomes "do we pass or run on x down in y situation?". Successful offenses, more than any other unifying trait, are willing to pass on first down. Why is this important? Think beyond stats for a minute to what the job of a defensive coordinator is first and foremost--coordinating in such a way that an offense becomes one-dimensional and consequently manageable. Saban's goal, explicitly for years, was to eliminate the ability of the other team to run so that they were trapped in the pass game and predictable. Belichick's infamous anti-K gun defense consisted of allowing Thurman Thomas to do whatever he wanted in favor of making Kelly's life terrible. When you preserve the option to pass early, you're injecting uncertainty into early downs the way that 2nd/3rd and short have. So what is play action? It's the same level of potential confounding variable if the defense considers both elements a credible threat. As such, PA is a balancing act for a playcaller between making sure it's an actual constraint against your running plays and also something a QB can consistently execute. When this goes bad, you get things like the Freddie Kitchens offense with the Browns where the inability to consistently pass block forces Mayfield to bail or force the ball out which forces picks or the current Cardinals offense where the running threat is only credible when it's Murray. From that standpoint, the adaptation is less about the need to coddle quarterbacks and more a need to disguise intents better, because defenses are athletic enough to solve pretty much anything that they know is coming.

So what does that lead to for quarterback development? Well, there's a couple elements. One is that "bringing a rookie along" is no longer as simple as "we're going to run 40 times a game" now. You can do it, if you have an insanely optimal line and backfield, but that's not going to be the vast majority of teams picking high. Giving a young QB simpler reads more or less requires them to do one of 3 things now 1. Play Action 2. Constrained reads 3. Isolation Concepts. We covered play action. Constrained reads are the other half of this--think about all those bootlegs you've seen Murray/Mayfield/Watson/Mahomes do over the last few years. Those aren't meant to be full-field plays. The instructions are to focus on essentially half the receiving targets based on when in the play you are and what the defense is showing. Because you change the launch point, you can clear a throwing lane more easily to a guy that might not explicitly be "open" from the pocket. Isolation concepts are a similar thing where you use the spacing of the formation and play to essentially force defenders to declare what they're doing at the snap in the hopes that your QB just gets a hot read and goes. Obviously, you have to mix some "regular" NFL passing plays in there, but simplifying things is less about using vanilla plays than it is about making things obvious, as opposed to 20 years ago when things like learning the initial WCO would mandate you essentially use none of the complexity that makes the offense work while building things out and maybe have a usable offense by year 3 in the system. All that said, those 3 elements are all things that offenses at every level like to focus on now, because easing guys into a new level of competition is a universally liked idea, as is the idea of a play that is hard to defend whether you have rookies or veterans.

Additionally, there's an element here that's made passing easier that has nothing to do with QBs but makes certain things more accessible ina scheme--PI, Defensive holding, and Illegal Hit penalties. Over-the-middle passes don't get guys killed the same way now, and the amount of contact defenders can make before a ball gets to a receiver is far lower which enables things like slant/curl/drag/mills combos far easier to read and utilize. As such, baseline success for everyone goes up, because penalties are always going to be worse odds than chancing whatever a rookie QB puts out on the field.

So, in summary on scheme: Schemes getting more QB friendly probably shouldn't be looked at as an optimizing force for the QB so much as an optimizing force for the rule set and offense as a whole that has good synergy crop of slightly better moving/spread QBs who can handle these plays more.


Coaching Tools

So, this part is half incredibly true and half debatable. The ability to have All-22 and do the Belichick play diagram live from every player's positions objectively does better spatial awareness training than traditional film. In addition, the ability to have more complete offensive information allows you to not only project defensive tendencies better but also self-scout and notice flaws in your own offense more quickly. That said, this is a universal thing for defenses and offenses now. Yes, your average viewer or QB prospect years away from the NFL can get the All-22 cuts now, but that's not going to mean much without play diagrams, rules, and coaching tweaks that go into actually running a play. It's one reason why tape junkies like myself still get things wrong all the time--we don't have the playbooks for these guys to know what's scheme and rule versus what was a coaching adjustment, and we certainly don't know what the offense a guy will be stepping into will do in relation to what's on those film. In the context of learning broadly about the game, this is objectively correct, but it's a bit of an oversimplification to think the democratization of All-22, film, or game footage is making QBs smarter earlier. Film helps show what guys can theoretically do, not always what they're supposed to do or need to do

Now, here's where I think the tools part is completely correct--the ability to go get coaching and coaching clinics from high-end coaches or from individual position gurus is objectively raising the level of coaching one can get at a young age. You can go watch the Sark install clinic on youtube right now, or you can watch Ryan Day's QB clinics, or you can watch Quincy Avery break down mechanics. All of these things teach initial rules, mechanics, and traits of the positions that used to be walled off to specific camps and academies for years. When you talk about programming QBs to execute, this is where there's a huge value add.

So in summary on tools: What we think of from a fan standpoint as a tool isn't always what prepares a guy to step into a system. Being mechanically sound and understanding your playbook matters more than being able to read a defense in terms of initially getting comfortable, because the modern playbook will tell you what to read once you know it.


Halo Effect/Trait Fishing

Scouts/draftniks/recruiting guys at every level love to obsess over marginal utilities because that's what dictates the parameters of what's possible. Herbert is a fascinating concept because I flatly don't know a lot of smart people that got it right with him. His tendencies under pressure at Oregon were a disaster, and the Chargers clearly established a fix to help with that. Whether it's a matter of mental clock, stepping in to throws, confidence, footwork, or a bit of all of them, they got a mechanical and mental set that allowed him to work closer to the potential dictated by his raw physical talents. It's hard to project a guy's ability to get better because the concept of what's a stubborn habit versus something that can be repped out is highly dependent on individual characteristics. Herbert was coming out of a similar situation to Josh Rosen in terms of physical ability, mediocre skill players, and a system that wasn't optimal for them, but Herbert made changes while Rosen didn't. What caused that? It's not apparent on film. The only thing that's apparent on film is the results.

Physical talent is a ceiling for QBs, and the arms race to come that will cause scarcity isn't one of executing a vanilla offense--it's one of constantly trying to raise the offense's theoretical capabilities if we are actually getting smarter/better at teaching. An average QB now may put up better numbers, but having a top 10% guy is still that much more impactful and not something that's going to be shelved. Mental execution can take you to a certain level of confidence, but there's a reason why, if you held all football knowledge, intelligence, and tendencies constant, coaches take the most physically talented guys they can right now, and it's just the fact that they could theoretically do 5% more concepts because of their arm talent. We don't scout mental ability well beyond second guessing passing plays and attempting to dissect if a guy made the right decision or not.


In total? All of this equates to, if anything, just a change in the valuation. Game managers/physically limited/older guys get devalued; tools guys go higher, especially if they're young and/or smart. It's like how RBs only get high draft grades if they're transcendent/capable of doing anything at any time. It won't be that extreme, but that's the concept to follow here.

Bolding on final paragraph from me, for emphasis.

* # ¿ Jan 22, 2024 04:52
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017

The Puppy Bowl posted:

Is there any Deeboo lite guy in the league who has been a major positive for their team? Seems like a few have been drafted the past few years, and none of them have taken off.

Watch this space for Jayden Reed next season. The Packers keep giving him end-arounds and he's already scored a few times. Hopefully he won't have a sophomore slump.

He has a similar frame but needs to put on about 5-10 more pounds. Knack for getting open. Has studied Deebo film for years.

Aside from my team I think Rondale Moore has been doing pretty decent in that role, but he doesn't get much attention because Arizona etc.

* # ¿ Jan 29, 2024 21:15
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017


 Absolute unit
* # ¿ Jan 29, 2024 23:21
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017

Grozz Nuy posted:

If you sit him for two years you're wasting two seasons of his rookie deal. Anybody who needs to sit for that long just isn't that good of a prospect.

Oh, is that so?

* # ¿ Feb 11, 2024 15:50
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017

A Sneaker Broker posted:

The Packers need to draft Isaiah Davis.

I'm a little concerned about how much use he got in college. On the running back front, someone I've been looking at is Marshawn Lloyd from USC, I think he could be picked up in the 4th or 5th.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vr94sngSmkc

He slips through contact in a way that reminds me of Aaron Jones. Obviously much less graceful than AJ. Decent enough catcher too.

* # ¿ Feb 11, 2024 19:18
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017

YOLOsubmarine posted:

Love sat because they wanted to change his mechanics (and also because Rodgers started playing really well again). If there’s some specific mechanical thing that you want to fix then letting a guy sit makes sense because you just can’t do that when a guy is playing every week, they’re going to revert to old habits under pressure.

To that point, Love was noticeably playing very stiffly at the beginning of the season (and preseason) and loosened up a lot as the season went on as he got more accustomed to playing with his revamped mechanics at NFL speed.

* # ¿ Feb 11, 2024 20:26
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017

Forrest on Fire posted:

So this is more a "how do GMs think" question: will GMs take the wrong lesson from the Mahomes super bowls and devalue the WR position in favor of defense and TE?

As I understand it the TE prospects aren't good this year anyway outside Bowers. Last year was the time to draft a TE (or two, if you're the Packers).

* # ¿ Feb 12, 2024 16:45
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017

A Sneaker Broker posted:

Jeremiah Trotter Jr

Jesus how many sons of former NFL stars are in this draft? There's like at least four or five.

* # ¿ Feb 12, 2024 23:11
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017

YOLOsubmarine posted:

They drafted him because they thought Rodgers was toast. I think the Packers were as surprised as anyone when he rebounded to MVP form for the next two years. They weren’t planning on sitting Jordan that long.

The plan was probably to roll through the final years of Rodgers's contract and then start Love in 2022, maybe even 2021 if Rodgers declined faster than expected. The double MVP forced the Packers to give him a contract extension, and then, oops, he came back to earth in 2022.

* # ¿ Feb 15, 2024 21:07
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017


 It's also, uhh, universally acknowledged that the Packers urgently need to draft a left tackle in April.

* # ¿ Feb 15, 2024 22:35
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017

Doltos posted:

So no offensive positions besides QB matter in the first round. Alright everyone shape your drafts again we've cut out OL and WRs to go with TEs and RBs.

This is how the Packers have operated since like 2011 and everyone gets mad at them for it.

Even going back to 2005 the only non-QB offensive players to be drafted in the first were offensive tackles Bryan Bulaga and Derek Sherrod. One was pretty decent for a long while, the other sucked and was out of the league before his rookie contract was even up.

* # ¿ Feb 21, 2024 01:20
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017


 Dude I follow on Packers twitter is talking up Johnny Wilson. Anyone here watched more of him?

quote:

https://twitter.com/RossUglem/status/1763223656199586052
* # ¿ Feb 29, 2024 19:02
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017


 Kam Kinchens tested terribly. Probably cost him a round or two in the draft unless he was testing while injured or something like that.

Ben Sinnott had incredible numbers.

* # ¿ Mar 2, 2024 15:11
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017

A Sneaker Broker posted:


Top 15 pick. Holy poo poo.

Mitchell is a loving freak. Put in 20x225 on the bench this morning. Only 14 other players have ran a sub-4.4 and gotten 20+ reps in last 20 years.

* # ¿ Mar 2, 2024 16:54
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017

Benne posted:

What is the point of RAS and why do people think it matters

A big part of it is Green Bay famously sticks to athletic standards for drafting players and only occasionally breaks these requirements to reach for a player -- and when they do it often doesn't work out anyway. I think it was about ~7-8 years ago that people started catching onto Green Bay's tendencies and then RAS comparisons became fairly ubiquitous throughout draft discourse over the next several years.

This chart goes back to Gutekunst's first draft in 2018:


Of all the players drafted below 6 RAS only Karl Brooks (6th round 2023) has looked decent. Everyone else has been an outright bust.

* # ¿ Mar 2, 2024 22:28
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017

Mega64 posted:

It'd be neat to see the NFL careers of the players who are like Top 10 or so in RAS in each position. Probably wouldn't be many big names.

https://ras.football/

First number is what they scored when they tested, second number is their scores against all-time. This will favor newer players since they're generally better trained, better diet, etc. Not going to do all positions, just a few that caught my eye -- you can see for yourself pretty easily anyway just by filtering to position on the website.

quote:

QB
  1. Anthony Richardson 10.00/10.00
  2. Cam Newton 10.00/9.99
  3. Daunte Culpepper 10.00/9.98
  4. Marcus Mariota 9.94/9.97
  5. Josh McCown (?!) 9.96/9.96
  6. Tyree Jackson 9.95/9.95
  7. Zach Conque 9.92/9.93
  8. Blaine Gabbert 9.92/9.92
  9. Brett Hundley :lol: 9.90/9.91
  10. Robert Griffin III 9.88/9.90

RB
  1. Justin Fargas 10.00/10.00
  2. Jackie Battle 9.98/9.99
  3. Isaac Guerendo 9.99/9.99
  4. James Stewart 10.00/9.98
  5. Edgerrin James 10.00/9.98
  6. Deuce McAllister 9.97/9.97
  7. Saquon Barkley 9.97/9.97
  8. Breece Hall 9.96/9.96
  9. Ryan McCants 9.90/9.95
  10. Michael Cox 9.92/9.95

WR
  1. Calvin Johnson 10.00/10.00
  2. Joe Webb (unfreed) 9.99/10.00
  3. Andre Johnson 9.98/9.99
  4. Matt Jones 10.00/9.99
  5. Moritz Boehringer 9.98/9.99
  6. Javon Walker 10.00/9.98
  7. Chase Claypool 9.98/9.98
  8. Adonia Mitchell 9.98/9.98
  9. Vincent Jackson 9.97/9.97
  10. Julio Jones 9.92/9.97

DE/EDGE
  1. Brian Johnston 10.00/10.00
  2. Myles Garrett 9.99/9.99
  3. Travon Walker 9.99/9.99
  4. Kyle Vanden Bosch 10.00/9.98
  5. Mario Williams 10.00/9.98
  6. Jevon Kearse 10.00/9.97
  7. Bryan Thomas 9.91/9.96
  8. Myles Cole 9.96/9.96
  9. Shawne Merriman 9.90/9.96
  10. Odafe Oweh 9.92/9.95

CB
  1. Deonte Banks 10.00/10.00
  2. Zyon McCollum 10.00/10.00
  3. Byron Jones 10.00/9.99
  4. Julius Brents 9.99/9.99
  5. Marco Wilson 9.99/9.98
  6. Jaycee Horn 9.99/9.98
  7. Antwaun Molden 9.97/9.97
  8. Fabian Moreau 9.98/9.97
  9. Darrelle Revis 10.00/9.96
  10. Marshon Lattimore 9.99/9.96

Free Safety
  1. Jeremy Chinn 10.00/10.00
  2. Jason Thompson 9.98/9.99
  3. Tank Williams 10.00/9.98
  4. Bobby Price 9.96/9.97
  5. Jason Allen 9.86/9.96
  6. Pat Watkins 9.95/9.95
  7. Daniel Scott 9.94/9.94
  8. Troy Apke 9.94/9.93
  9. Taylor Mays 9.86/9.92
  10. Lewis Cine 9.92/9.91

At a glance it looks like RAS translates decently to performance if you're a RB, WR, or pass rusher. If you have to cover? Not so much.

* # ¿ Mar 3, 2024 05:12
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017

Asproigerosis posted:

The only stat that matters is winz, don't know why so many morons think they can conjugate the perfect stats formulas.

:razz:

* # ¿ Mar 3, 2024 05:46
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017


 https://twitter.com/RazorbackFB/status/1764676215657345062

* # ¿ Mar 4, 2024 17:09
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017


 I kind of want to see what he can do as a RB. Like Brandon Jacobs but bigger and apparently WAY more agile (compare the shuttle/3-cone).
* # ¿ Mar 21, 2024 20:24
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017


 Lots of Twitter buzz on Jayden Daniels this week lol

quote:

https://twitter.com/BRlANBRANCH/status/1773025047004762290

https://twitter.com/PFF_Sam/status/1773035480382091450
* # ¿ Mar 28, 2024 14:40
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017


 3 reps of 225 at 158 pounds is insane

* # ¿ Apr 3, 2024 00:06
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017


 The Packers don't really try to hide who they bring in for the top-30 visits. Like it came out a little bit ago that Amarius Mims is visiting the Packers today.

They're also pretty good, at least recently, about drafting from their pool of top 30 visits:

quote:

2023 draft visits:
  • Karl Brooks (6th)
  • Dontayvion Wicks (5th)
  • Sean Clifford (5th)
  • Lew Nichols (7th)
  • Kadeem Telfort (UDFA)
  • Camren McDonald (UDFA)
  • Ben Sims (UDFA)

2022 draft visits:
  • Tariq Carpenter (7th)
  • Samori Toure (7th)
  • Devonte Wyatt (1st)
  • Christian Watson (2nd)
  • Rasheed Walker (7th)
  • Romeo Doubs (4th)
https://www.acmepackingcompany.com/2023/4/3/23668161/nfl-draft-2023-tracking-the-green-bay-packers-top-30-prospect-visits
https://www.acmepackingcompany.com/...irtual-meetings

2024 tracker for the Packers: https://www.acmepackingcompany.com/...iting-green-bay

* # ¿ Apr 4, 2024 21:39
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017


 Draft the weed guy

* # ¿ Apr 8, 2024 17:50
  • Quote
Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 9, 2024 22:23
  • Quote
SKULL.GIF
Jan 20, 2017

A Sneaker Broker posted:


Packer Top 30 visits usually are for prospects we are gonna pick up so this is interesting.

specifically, top-30 visits are for prospects the Packers are interested in but have questions that they want to follow up on.

As for the assault, lol that when I went to find out more info on it, there's Christian Watson's dad of all people saying it's nbd:

quote:

https://twitter.com/NFLHitman33/status/1582813374500392961

(If you're not familiar with him he routinely goes after people for doubting Watson on twitter)

* # ¿ Apr 8, 2024 18:41
  • Quote
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply
The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Sports Argument Stadium > The Football Funhouse > The 2024 NFL Draft Thread - Draft Good Players With High Picks
«‹›2 »