NoSaint

And that said - I really do believe getting a second tier guy on day two (not waiting til day 3) would be a great investment. Someone that can reliably spell shady would be huge. And lays the groundwork for when shady is gone or falls apart.

Jacksonville? Seattle? Vikings for like 5-10 years? Paired with an elite defense you can can do ok. A safe qb like taylor isn’t terrible for that. Won’t win the super bowl often though and is definitely the exception and not the rule

Late to the game but— zeke barkley gurley fournette And if not for the knee issue I’d have swapped the middle two. I like Fournette a lot but I don’t think his body will last as long and while he’s exciting - something about him just isn’t as “hold your breath every touch” like zeke or going back to Peterson (at least for me)

Depends on the position. Both what we have and what free agency offers. I suspect that last year was a much more reasonable year than this year to stockpile high value comps. We don’t have all that much walking out the door and should be anticipating bringing in some guys. Matthews, brown and Gaines are out - and we need to bring in quality players at all 3 of those spots (possibly multiple)— plus potentially RB2, QB, and both lines. ill be annoyed if we sign a boring player for RB2 that counts against it while otherwise playing cards well— but I expect to need more than 3 quality signings and don’t think they will all have a comparable option that works for us and wants to come here etc...

If you have two relatively equal options but one nets you a pick— I’d say that’s great team building to take the dude that gets you the pick. im not cutting a true contributor mid season but if we are deciding between two depth linebackers that are very similar cost but ones an expiring contract and the other was cut— get the guy that was cut

For the purpose of message board banter, it really is just about as easy as the thread portrays though. ID qualifying signings based on how they left their last team and when they signed. Slot up gains vs losses. Take the average value and compare it to last years guys. If you want to nail the exact round for all 32 picks handed out you might get very slight variations based the in depth process — but the bar napkin example provided will likely suffice in identifying the 31 of 32 recipients and get you 29 of them in the right round and the other 3 being guys on the edge bumping up or down a round or someone being right on the edge of qualifying Sometimes the incredibly simple and very good version is better for fan talk

I’ve always understood it to be average value, not first year salary (too much variation could occur based on structure for similar players getting similar contracts but teams signing having different cap needs skewing signing bonus vs salary) that said, it does seem much simpler than the vague and undefined “snap count, honors, compensation and more!” that is portrayed. Year to year sites do very well predicting with just taking the cutoff on rounds from the year prior, adding a minor escalator for inflation and tossing guys in based solely on compensation (typically average annual value) Yup. I think many get defensive that if you acknowledge luck it’s like saying we didn’t deserve it. Lucks a big part of the wild card. You get about half the conference in a 2 game window— and generally speaking someone gets a lucky bounce, stays a little healthy, and catches a good opponent on the right week and suddenly we talk about them as a deserving team and the teams on the outside as junk. Once you get in that 7 to 9 win dog pile everyone is pretty close and it’s amazing how unlucky we were for almost 20 years. Some of those teams were better than given credit for, and this ones probably not as good as many rolled into Jacksonville claiming. We’ve had a lot of .500 quality rosters but the outcomes of that can be a roller coaster

I don’t mean to be a jerk but if you need help with THIS ONE, I’m not sure the internets a place for you to hang

You really took this pretty personal, eh?

In a 43 system - expect to be dedicating a lot to the line. With only Kyle at DT it is likely wise to add both an impact free agent and an impact draft pick up front

A ticky tack point— but part of that 18 is signing bonus which wouldn’t go with him. I doubt it changes your take, but I think he’s in the territory where a few million might sway someone’s evaluation

Flip side is for a low pick you avoid a signing bonus, and multi year commitments— unless he ends up much cheaper as a free agent. I think that’s the true calculation at play, not the draft pick

Its like raaaaain on your wedding day, man.

I don’t see how playing vs not playing - or how well you played should equate to scouting ability? Having a bad 40 makes you a bad scout?

I suppose it depends on methodology- was pff separating qb play from offensive line play in this metric? I don’t love pff but they tend to be good about that type of distinction

I’m sure it’s just subconsciously formatting how they are used to seeing it in news headlines... but it really is amusing some days

It actually would help their cap but hurts the roster at least

24 hour bars have never done me wrong.

but I bet if you normalize it by removing the first year of gates career (learning the position) and last couple years (breaking down) the averages would be closer, right? I’m not doing the math now but I’d guess that it tightens up

I don’t disagree on blocking being part — but it’s secondary for me and im not arguing graham is the greatest- just an easy example as they have very similar stats and I watched him week in and week out (though graham had better pre Seattle). Would Gates 2005-2009 be a better 5 year example? Gonzalez 2004-2008 was also excellent though less touchdowns. Remember, this hypothetical is if gronk retires today— what order do all these guys all get in? Obviously tony g goes... then gates? Witten? To be fair gates came in a basketball player, and now is 37. Career averages should strongly favor the polished football player that’s playing in his prime.

Even his peak stats are a challenge though - as he’s had injuries. I showed jimmys 3 year upthread (3500 plus 36 tds) as better. I’d guess a 5 year run is pretty close between the two. Again, I think you have a strong case for him being the best —but I think it gets shaky if you start portraying it like he’s lapped the field. And I wasn’t arguing he’s 5th best but that it’s 5th (or 6th or possibly lower even...) statistically if he retires today.

Honestly, good for him if he’s serious about getting his head right. I suspect the comeback fails and hope he takes his mental health seriously even if he hits a point where he doesn’t think he has a shot at the Nfl

Im not largely disagreeing - but I don’t think it’s quite the landslide that was portrayed. I agree he’s likely the best blocker of the receiving stars (especially as a handful of them were basketball players) but I believe that’s deeper down the list when compiling a ranking of how tight ends impact a game. Not to be ignored but I think there are a few similarly impactful guys — which does leave things like blocking (pro for gronk), health (con) quality of qb play (all have good but gronk the best) as fodder for debate. Gronk provably wins but I don’t think it’s a “no one even a close second” type of conversation

Is he though? What about a guy like jimmy graham getting 3500 yards and 36 tds over a 3 year stretch? Or gates much of his career? gronk is a game changer no doubt— but I think you can make some interesting cases.

How did Hughes play? lawson? milano? how many wide receivers do we need? Thats all non-qb, non draft, lots of x and o talk