PromoTheRobot Posted March 31, 2012 Posted March 31, 2012 Today's Buffalo News has an article about Todd McShay's opinion of the Bills pick at #10 lacking options with value. Every year we descend into the value/reach debate as if it means anything once OTAs begin. Reach and value are invented commodities used to add drama to draft day. It is something debated endlessly but means nothing once the draft is done. If you pick a player and he fills a need no one cares if he was a reach or a value pick. Have at it. PTR
jjmac Posted March 31, 2012 Posted March 31, 2012 Today's Buffalo News has an article about Todd McShay's opinion of the Bills pick at #10 lacking options with value. Every year we descend into the value/reach debate as if it means anything once OTAs begin. Reach and value are invented commodities used to add drama to draft day. It is something debated endlessly but means nothing once the draft is done. If you pick a player and he fills a need no one cares if he was a reach or a value pick. Have at it. PTR I think I agree. Somebody in this draft class is the 10th-best player, and, in theory, he will fill a need for us.
todd Posted March 31, 2012 Posted March 31, 2012 I wonder if McShay says that about the 10th spot because it is harder to grade players in that area. Realistically, there are probably 4 to 6 players every year that are the top of the draft class. After that, it gets muddy and more difficult to rank. Personally, I couldn't tell the difference between a #10 and a #15. For me it only becomes apparent 3 years after the draft. Today's Buffalo News has an article about Todd McShay's opinion of the Bills pick at #10 lacking options with value. Every year we descend into the value/reach debate as if it means anything once OTAs begin. Reach and value are invented commodities used to add drama to draft day. It is something debated endlessly but means nothing once the draft is done. If you pick a player and he fills a need no one cares if he was a reach or a value pick. Have at it. PTR
Bill from NYC Posted March 31, 2012 Posted March 31, 2012 Today's Buffalo News has an article about Todd McShay's opinion of the Bills pick at #10 lacking options with value. Every year we descend into the value/reach debate as if it means anything once OTAs begin. Reach and value are invented commodities used to add drama to draft day. It is something debated endlessly but means nothing once the draft is done. If you pick a player and he fills a need no one cares if he was a reach or a value pick. Have at it. PTR I couldn't agree more Promo. I see the term "draft value" often used by fans as an alibi of sorts to justify a dumb selection by a GM. Forget about Brady.....Bryce Paup was also a 6th round pick. He was the NFL Defensive Player of the Year. Would he have been a "reach" in the first round? No, because he played up to it. In essence, Paup was a "steal" in that draft. I'm with you on "value," but there are lots players who I would label a "steal."
DanInSouthBuffalo Posted March 31, 2012 Posted March 31, 2012 I wonder if McShay says that about the 10th spot because it is harder to grade players in that area. Realistically, there are probably 4 to 6 players every year that are the top of the draft class. After that, it gets muddy and more difficult to rank. Personally, I couldn't tell the difference between a #10 and a #15. For me it only becomes apparent 3 years after the draft. I think that's exactly it. There's usually 4 to 6 slam-dunk blue chip players in every draft you would be crazy not to pick. After that is the temptation to reach for need vs. best player/value on the draft board. I have a feeling the Bills will have a lot of DE's staring them in the face where they now already filled via free-agency.
Nanker Posted March 31, 2012 Posted March 31, 2012 "Top 10 selections should either score touchdowns or sack quarterbacks, unless they're a rare talent, e.g., LOT, CB," Various Pigskin Pundits. To me what it boils down to is the degree of probability of success at the NFL level. People like to think in nice round numbers like, "top 10". But like Todd said - there are typically only 4-6 "can't miss" (forget about Leaf, Russell et al for the moment) prospects each year - but it's still a crap shoot every year (see Leaf, Russell et al). One thing I'm very happy about this year is that The Bills have far fewer holes to fill than anytime in recent memory. The other thing that fans don't much concern themselves with is the extensive rankings of ALL draft eligible players that each team does in preparation for the Draft. They're all rated at their position and then those rankings are sorted as a collective group so the team has a clear view of who's available on their list in direct order of the value that their scouting team has them ranked. So when the team's on deck for their next draft selection, they refer to their board - see who's the highest ranked player left - and they know what to do. If two or three players are numerically ranked equally by the team, then it becomes an issue of need or perhaps the flexibility that a particular player might offer in terms of their diverse skills, e.g., proven ability to handle several positions Special Teams, KR, PR, CB/NB/S. Melvin Ingram, Cordy Glenn and DeCastro are examples from this year's crop of Draftees. Go Bills!
KOKBILLS Posted March 31, 2012 Posted March 31, 2012 Today's Buffalo News has an article about Todd McShay's opinion of the Bills pick at #10 lacking options with value. Every year we descend into the value/reach debate as if it means anything once OTAs begin. Reach and value are invented commodities used to add drama to draft day. It is something debated endlessly but means nothing once the draft is done. If you pick a player and he fills a need no one cares if he was a reach or a value pick. Have at it. PTR Agreed actually... All you have to do is listen to a couple Scouts back-to-back to realize reach and value are in the eyes of the beholder...A couple days ago I heard Mayock and Lombardi say Stephon Gilmore's value was between 10-20 in the 1st Round, and that he was clearly the 2nd best CB in the Draft...Yesterday Charlie Casserly says he does not value Gilmore that high, that he's definitely not a Top 10 talent, and that Kirkpatrick is the better CB prospect of the two...So...Come Draft day, if The Bills take Gilmore at #10, Mayock and Lombardi will say great Pick...Casserly will say reach...And then we'll all see the truth when he gets on the field...
peterpan Posted March 31, 2012 Posted March 31, 2012 (edited) What do you guys say about the Troup pick then? I think you guys are only looking at half the situation, ie you are assuming the player picked turns out to be good, but what if he turns out to be bad? Troupe was a huge reach to fill a need on draft day, Kiper had him as a 4th rounder I think, and I bet we would have been able to draft him in the 3rd round, 4th round, or maybe even 5th round. Troup has been a player much much worse than the other players drafted around him at other posititons, like B Spikes, Gronkowski, L Houston, etc etc etc. Even Cam Thomas who was drafted 2 rounds later at the same position has out performed Troup. SO what was thought to be a reach pick on draft day ended up being very true. We lost out on better players at different positions, which ironcially now we have needs at those positions. The difference in those players abilties and Troup's ability are very very real and not just 'invented commodities used to add drama to draft day' Edited March 31, 2012 by peterpan
26TrapDraw Posted March 31, 2012 Posted March 31, 2012 (edited) Today's Buffalo News has an article about Todd McShay's opinion of the Bills pick at #10 lacking options with value. Every year we descend into the value/reach debate as if it means anything once OTAs begin. Reach and value are invented commodities used to add drama to draft day. It is something debated endlessly but means nothing once the draft is done. If you pick a player and he fills a need no one cares if he was a reach or a value pick. Have at it. PTR I don't care if we pick a long snapper at 10 as long as whoever we pick comes in and STARTS and plays at a high level...my only concern Edited March 31, 2012 by LVBillsBackr
NoSaint Posted March 31, 2012 Posted March 31, 2012 Ideally you will be able to get your top guy 1 spot before anyone else would take them. Anything short of that is technically leaving something on the board. How big that is (ie how much it takes to move up, or what someone would offer you to trade back), and how confident you are that you will be able to gauge where that guy otherwise goes is all hazy but that's the skill out of maximizing value. There is worth in that, but it can't be your #1 as the goal is to get your guys - but to get them AND something, or to get them at lower cost is good. BPA is the other half of value - not reaching for need. Which I 100% agree with. Take the talent you trust - with injuries, contracts, etc.... You always need good players, even at strong positions.
Malazan Posted March 31, 2012 Posted March 31, 2012 What do you guys say about the Troup pick then? I think you guys are only looking at half the situation, ie you are assuming the player picked turns out to be good, but what if he turns out to be bad? Troupe was a huge reach to fill a need on draft day, Kiper had him as a 4th rounder I think, and I bet we would have been able to draft him in the 3rd round, 4th round, or maybe even 5th round. Troup has been a player much much worse than the other players drafted around him at other posititons, like B Spikes, Gronkowski, L Houston, etc etc etc. Even Cam Thomas who was drafted 2 rounds later at the same position has out performed Troup. SO what was thought to be a reach pick on draft day ended up being very true. We lost out on better players at different positions, which ironcially now we have needs at those positions. The difference in those players abilties and Troup's ability are very very real and not just 'invented commodities used to add drama to draft day' This is a typical 20/20 hindsight fallacy.
PromoTheRobot Posted March 31, 2012 Author Posted March 31, 2012 What do you guys say about the Troup pick then? I think you guys are only looking at half the situation, ie you are assuming the player picked turns out to be good, but what if he turns out to be bad? Troupe was a huge reach to fill a need on draft day, Kiper had him as a 4th rounder I think, and I bet we would have been able to draft him in the 3rd round, 4th round, or maybe even 5th round. Troup has been a player much much worse than the other players drafted around him at other posititons, like B Spikes, Gronkowski, L Houston, etc etc etc. Even Cam Thomas who was drafted 2 rounds later at the same position has out performed Troup. SO what was thought to be a reach pick on draft day ended up being very true. We lost out on better players at different positions, which ironcially now we have needs at those positions. The difference in those players abilties and Troup's ability are very very real and not just 'invented commodities used to add drama to draft day' If Kiper really knew who was worth drafting where he'd be an NFL GM. For every Troup he gets right, I can point to 3 Clausens, Leinerts, etc he totally whiffs on. Random chance will make you right once in a while. PTR
mEAz Posted March 31, 2012 Posted March 31, 2012 "Top 10 selections should either score touchdowns or sack quarterbacks, unless they're a rare talent, e.g., LOT, CB," Various Pigskin Pundits. To me what it boils down to is the degree of probability of success at the NFL level. People like to think in nice round numbers like, "top 10". But like Todd said - there are typically only 4-6 "can't miss" (forget about Leaf, Russell et al for the moment) prospects each year - but it's still a crap shoot every year (see Leaf, Russell et al). One thing I'm very happy about this year is that The Bills have far fewer holes to fill than anytime in recent memory. The other thing that fans don't much concern themselves with is the extensive rankings of ALL draft eligible players that each team does in preparation for the Draft. They're all rated at their position and then those rankings are sorted as a collective group so the team has a clear view of who's available on their list in direct order of the value that their scouting team has them ranked. So when the team's on deck for their next draft selection, they refer to their board - see who's the highest ranked player left - and they know what to do. If two or three players are numerically ranked equally by the team, then it becomes an issue of need or perhaps the flexibility that a particular player might offer in terms of their diverse skills, e.g., proven ability to handle several positions Special Teams, KR, PR, CB/NB/S. Melvin Ingram, Cordy Glenn and DeCastro are examples from this year's crop of Draftees. Go Bills! This is why when the so called experts cry out that a team reached for a player on draft day, we should all ignore them. We are not privy to each teams boards and because player evaluations are so subjective, who is to say one team (or one analyst) is right. It's only after a few years, in hindsight like PTR stated, that we can actually evaluate reach and value.
....lybob Posted March 31, 2012 Posted March 31, 2012 I think Todd McShay is pretty much right on which is why I've been wishing for a Richardson or Tannehill trade back scenario- It's not that there are six good players then the whole thing falls off a cliff but I really do see tiers of players Tier 1 Luck, RG3, Kali Tier 2 Claiborne, Blackmon, Richardson Tier 3 about 26-28 guys I think in this draft there is not a lot of consensus in the ratings within some positions- for example at DEs you have Coples, Ingram, Perry, Mercillus, Branch I've seen these guys in about every order possible. Similar with DTs Poe, Brockers, Cox, Still,- CBs Gilmore Kirkpatrick, Jenkins. As for me, Barring any freak drop of a player like Claiborne or a great trade back deal- I'd be looking at Brockers (reminds me of Marcus Stroud), or Gilmore
JPS Posted March 31, 2012 Posted March 31, 2012 Today's Buffalo News has an article about Todd McShay's opinion of the Bills pick at #10 lacking options with value. Every year we descend into the value/reach debate as if it means anything once OTAs begin. Reach and value are invented commodities used to add drama to draft day. It is something debated endlessly but means nothing once the draft is done. If you pick a player and he fills a need no one cares if he was a reach or a value pick. Have at it. PTR Never thought about it. Well put. Agreed x 10.
DC Tom Posted March 31, 2012 Posted March 31, 2012 Today's Buffalo News has an article about Todd McShay's opinion of the Bills pick at #10 lacking options with value. Every year we descend into the value/reach debate as if it means anything once OTAs begin. Reach and value are invented commodities used to add drama to draft day. It is something debated endlessly but means nothing once the draft is done. If you pick a player and he fills a need no one cares if he was a reach or a value pick. Have at it. PTR Donte Whitner.
PromoTheRobot Posted March 31, 2012 Author Posted March 31, 2012 (edited) Donte Whitner. Stevie Johnson, Kyle Williams, Fred Jackson, George Wilson. PTR Edited March 31, 2012 by PromoTheRobot
Lurker Posted March 31, 2012 Posted March 31, 2012 Stevie Johnson, Kyle Williams, Fred Jackson, George Wilson. PTR To be honest, nobody ever says "reach" in the 7th round. I agree with your basic premise in rounds 1-4, however...
White Linen Posted March 31, 2012 Posted March 31, 2012 If Kiper really knew who was worth drafting where he'd be an NFL GM. I'm not sure I agree with this. But I don't think Kiper's job at ESPN equates to what a GM does but more of the head of player personnel or head of scouting. The GM position is way more involved than just draft analysis. But as far as his accuracy and actual ability is concerned, I'd say it has to be on par with individual teams that miss and hit on picks.
atlbillsfan1975 Posted March 31, 2012 Posted March 31, 2012 Stevie Johnson, Kyle Williams, Fred Jackson, George Wilson. PTR a 'steal'. for sure. I think you got to look at the whole body of work. the player's measurables, his attitude his stat's, and where he achieved those stats. I mean Stevie is a classic example of a guy that had on eyear of production, but had it in the SEC. He had a great attitude, but had average speed and decent size. Thats why he was taken late in the draft. He was probably picked right where he should have been. If the Bills kept burying him on the depth chart then we may never had known. But the few oportunites he got in his second year, he started to show his potential.
Recommended Posts