Jump to content

After Listening to Analysts from Ohio and Southern California...


Recommended Posts

I've been listening to podcasts regarding the top receivers the last couple of days. Yesterday a guy that covers USC was talking about Drake London and now a guy that covers Ohio State football. Both of them think that #10 is too soon for Wilson, Olave and London. Late teens is where they think they should go - or low 20s. These are analysts that cover the teams. They think both guys are very good, just not #10 worthy. The only receiver they think is worth #10 is Jameson Williams. I'm sure our guys have delved into these receivers equally as much as the guys that know them really well. The issue is these guys probably don't make it to round 2 for us. I predict if our edge guys aren't on the board at 4 we go Icky and then JJ at 10 and pick a WR by moving back into round 1. The more I listen to people that cover these top players extensively, the more I think it's Edge or OT at 4, Edge at 10 if not at 4, and trade back into end of first round to grab a WR where they should be picked (Olave?). 

  • Upvote 4
  • Sympathy 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Greensleeves said:

I've been listening to podcasts regarding the top receivers the last couple of days. Yesterday a guy that covers USC was talking about Drake London and now a guy that covers Ohio State football. Both of them think that #10 is too soon for Wilson, Olave and London. Late teens is where they think they should go - or low 20s. These are analysts that cover the teams. They think both guys are very good, just not #10 worthy. The only receiver they think is worth #10 is Jameson Williams. I'm sure our guys have delved into these receivers equally as much as the guys that know them really well. The issue is these guys probably don't make it to round 2 for us. I predict if our edge guys aren't on the board at 4 we go Icky and then JJ at 10 and pick a WR by moving back into round 1. The more I listen to people that cover these top players extensively, the more I think it's Edge or OT at 4, Edge at 10 if not at 4, and trade back into end of first round to grab a WR where they should be picked (Olave?). 

I agree, but some team will jump on one of them earlier than they should be drafted for fear of losing "their" player later on. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, UntouchableCrew said:

I don't really get the "I'd take him at 17 but not 10" stuff. It's a weak draft at the top -- most of the guys in the top ten are probably "late first round" types in the average draft. So? Just take the WR you like the most.

Agreed. 

Especially since you never really know what other teams think about certain players. Take the guys you like when you can. 

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, jetsons said:

I agree, but some team will jump on one of them earlier than they should be drafted for fear of losing "their" player later on. 

And then another team panics that there'll be a run on WRs ... which in itself starts the run on WRs.

Positions often get picked higher than they "should" ... QBs always do because of the premium at that position. WR is potentially this year's "over drafted" position after the offseason moves and contracts that we've seen. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jamesr said:

And then another team panics that there'll be a run on WRs ... which in itself starts the run on WRs.

Positions often get picked higher than they "should" ... QBs always do because of the premium at that position. WR is potentially this year's "over drafted" position after the offseason moves and contracts that we've seen. 

Solid point.  There are 4 WRs considered 1st round picks.  London, Wilson, Williams, Olave.  Then a bunch more bottom-first/top-second guys like Burks, Moore, Watson, Dotson, Pickens.  But if you want one of those top 4, they will probably go in quick succession.  Say ATL takes on at 8.  Then the Jets take one at 10.  The other two will likely be gone by no later than 15.  So you could grade them however you want, but if you're sitting at 18 hoping to take one, you may be disappointed.

This has been said ad nauseum but here we go again.  In a draft where there are not really any sure-fire top-10 talents, it doesn't matter where you take a top-20 guy.  Draft the guy who will most help your team.

Let me put it one other way.  Mahomes was considered a bottom-half of the first round talent.  There was no way we were taking him at 6 because that would have been stupid.  

  • Upvote 1
  • Post of the Week 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, UntouchableCrew said:

I don't really get the "I'd take him at 17 but not 10" stuff. It's a weak draft at the top -- most of the guys in the top ten are probably "late first round" types in the average draft. So? Just take the WR you like the most.

Totally agree. The same argument applies to Linderbaum for those that are fans. 

The note behind the note here is -- maybe none of these guys are worth "wanting".... Late first it starts to make sense, but there will be better players in other areas. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A crude comparison of this year's talent vs. last year's.  Here are the nfl.com ratings for the top-10 players on their board:

image.png

Last year there were at least five guys rated over 7.0.  Lawrence, D. Smith, Chase, Pitts, Surtain.  Parsons and Waddle would have been #1 on this list.  That's 7 guys rated higher than the top guy on this year's list.  Oddly, there were no DEs rated highly last year but in any case, the usual rules about drafting a guy too high don't really make sense this year.  By historical standards, every single one of these guys is going to be 'overdrafted'.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, nycdan said:

A crude comparison of this year's talent vs. last year's.  Here are the nfl.com ratings for the top-10 players on their board:

image.png

Last year there were at least five guys rated over 7.0.  Lawrence, D. Smith, Chase, Pitts, Surtain.  Parsons and Waddle would have been #1 on this list.  That's 7 guys rated higher than the top guy on this year's list.  Oddly, there were no DEs rated highly last year but in any case, the usual rules about drafting a guy too high don't really make sense this year.  By historical standards, every single one of these guys is going to be 'overdrafted'.

Interesting how #4 and #10 are Ekwonu and Wilson ... two guys very commonly linked to us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, nycdan said:

I like Williams, but at 6'2" 190 lbs. comparing himself to 6'4" 210 lb. Randy Moss who was the most physically gifted WR of all time?  That's a stretch.

I don't think he was comparing himself to Moss but said he modeled his game after him.  Which is a reasonable thing to do.  

I can model my tennis after Rafael Nadal but that doesn't mean I'm comparing myself to him.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, nycdan said:

Solid point.  There are 4 WRs considered 1st round picks.  London, Wilson, Williams, Olave.  Then a bunch more bottom-first/top-second guys like Burks, Moore, Watson, Dotson, Pickens.  But if you want one of those top 4, they will probably go in quick succession.  Say ATL takes on at 8.  Then the Jets take one at 10.  The other two will likely be gone by no later than 15.  So you could grade them however you want, but if you're sitting at 18 hoping to take one, you may be disappointed.

This has been said ad nauseum but here we go again.  In a draft where there are not really any sure-fire top-10 talents, it doesn't matter where you take a top-20 guy.  Draft the guy who will most help your team.

Let me put it one other way.  Mahomes was considered a bottom-half of the first round talent.  There was no way we were taking him at 6 because that would have been stupid.  

Yes, I think these guys over think this.  They're so close to it and have been pitching BPA and "value" for so long that it's the only thing they can see.  

Passing on a guy at a position of need with a 9.2 rating, but taking a redundant player you don't really want because he has a 9.5 is, IMO, makes little sense.

They know this thing is a crap shoot - go get the guy you want...

Of course there's a place for value and ratings - but there's also a place to be logical and not dogmatic.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Beerfish said:

Do not draft:

Drake London

Travon Walker

Kyle Hamilton

I agree about the WR's but the issues is the most of the players in the draft are also 'do not draft until the teens'

I also rate Jameson williams as the top wr simply due to his game breaking speed.

I would still rather Hamilton over either corner - but otherwise I agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Greensleeves said:

I've been listening to podcasts regarding the top receivers the last couple of days. Yesterday a guy that covers USC was talking about Drake London and now a guy that covers Ohio State football. Both of them think that #10 is too soon for Wilson, Olave and London. Late teens is where they think they should go - or low 20s. These are analysts that cover the teams. They think both guys are very good, just not #10 worthy. The only receiver they think is worth #10 is Jameson Williams. I'm sure our guys have delved into these receivers equally as much as the guys that know them really well. The issue is these guys probably don't make it to round 2 for us. I predict if our edge guys aren't on the board at 4 we go Icky and then JJ at 10 and pick a WR by moving back into round 1. The more I listen to people that cover these top players extensively, the more I think it's Edge or OT at 4, Edge at 10 if not at 4, and trade back into end of first round to grab a WR where they should be picked (Olave?). 

Luke Grant said something similar in the Turn on the Jets podcast during a film review of guys like Wilson and Olave.

I've said this for a while now but I think a lot of us on this board are trying to force-feed a WR to the Jets at #10 when none of them are really quite worth it (my opinion).  It wouldn't be a dramatic reach to take a guy like London or Wilson at 10 if they're something like the #14 or #15 player overall, BUT it's important to recognize that you'd potentially be leaving about 4 or 5 better players available to do that.  It's essentially opportunity cost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, UntouchableCrew said:

I don't really get the "I'd take him at 17 but not 10" stuff. It's a weak draft at the top -- most of the guys in the top ten are probably "late first round" types in the average draft. So? Just take the WR you like the most.

I guess it’s based on the rationale of best player available. I think  they are saying there is a big enough gap between #10 talent and #17 talent level. But in general I agree with you particularly in late 1st round and beyond 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, nycdan said:

I don't want him but I'm pretty sure he's more tier 1 than tier 2 for most.  Fair question though.

Jahan Dotson is twice the WR that Olave is, and should be the one polluting these conversation.... This will reveal itself soon i think... if not in the draft, then in TC the way Justin Jefferson was a "duh" pick after the fact when guys like Ruggs when ahead of him inexplicably. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...