Big Board - Top 40 Spots - V1.2

[Coach Tuesday]

21 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I am gonna say this now on Johnston.... I have had enough conversations with enough people to really believe he is going to go later than a LOT of people think. I am increasingly of the view JSN will be the first receiver off the board. 

I agree.  JSN will go top-15 easy.

[JerseyBills]

Interesting 

Would you guys consider moving up if he slips ?

 

[GunnerBill]

12 minutes ago, JerseyBills said:

Interesting 

Would you guys consider moving up if he slips ?

 

 

I wouldn't move up. But if he is there at #27 I think he is worth the swing. You are getting one of 2 elite level talents in this draft when your other options might be mid to late day 2 level talents who are getting pushed up by a bad year. I still think he goes top 10 though. 

[Chaos]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I am gonna say this now on Johnston.... I have had enough conversations with enough people to really believe he is going to go later than a LOT of people think. I am increasingly of the view JSN will be the first receiver off the board. 

This highlights the biggest complexity in evaluating college talent.  Certainly for amateurs and I expect is a primary separator from the top scouts in the NFL and the other scouts in the NFL: the disparate talent levels at QB and Coaching in College.  JSN caught passes from a QB who is presumed to be one of the most NFL ready QBs in the NFL. Johnston caught passes from a QB who may very well not be drafted.   As an analogy most of us are quite sure Dawson Knox is held back by Ken Dorsey.  But we also judge Knox's underlying talent based on having one of the best QB in the NFL throwing too him. We don't know what Knox would like like with Reid Mahomes.  Nor do we know what he would look like with Derek Carr or Kenny Pickett throwing him passes.

Johnston's college production levels are pretty mediocre. One would really have to assume he was held back in college to take him with a top 10 or 15 pick, IMO.  We do know that in a good system JSN can generate a high level of production.  We also know that Garret Wilson who looked good with Zach Wilson/Mike White came from the same program.  Hard for me to imagine taking Johnston ahead of JSN. (Unless injury concerns for JSN are high)

[GunnerBill]

9 minutes ago, Chaos said:

This highlights the biggest complexity in evaluating college talent.  Certainly for amateurs and I expect is a primary separator from the top scouts in the NFL and the other scouts in the NFL: the disparate talent levels at QB and Coaching in College.  JSN caught passes from a QB who is presumed to be one of the most NFL ready QBs in the NFL. Johnston caught passes from a QB who may very well not be drafted.   As an analogy most of us are quite sure Dawson Knox is held back by Ken Dorsey.  But we also judge Knox's underlying talent based on having one of the best QB in the NFL throwing too him. We don't know what Knox would like like with Reid Mahomes.  Nor do we know what he would look like with Derek Carr or Kenny Pickett throwing him passes.

Johnston's college production levels are pretty mediocre. One would really have to assume he was held back in college to take him with a top 10 or 15 pick, IMO.  We do know that in a good system JSN can generate a high level of production.  We also know that Garret Wilson who looked good with Zach Wilson/Mike White came from the same program.  Hard for me to imagine taking Johnston ahead of JSN. (Unless injury concerns for JSN are high)

 

The concerns on Johnston are not raw production. They are about his skill set. Hands, route running and not playing to his size. 

[HappyDays]

57 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

The concerns on Johnston are not raw production. They are about his skill set. Hands, route running and not playing to his size. 

 

He's such a Brandon Beane player, though. If he makes it to 27 I think we sprint to the podium. Pure physical and athletic traits, a team captain, reportedly the hardest worker on the team. You bet on the traits and trust that the rest can be developed.

[GunnerBill]

16 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

He's such a Brandon Beane player, though. If he makes it to 27 I think we sprint to the podium. Pure physical and athletic traits, a team captain, reportedly the hardest worker on the team. You bet on the traits and trust that the rest can be developed.

 

A lot of people have him going in the first 15 picks or so and I don't think he goes that early. Second half of the first round somewhere. I would be fine if the Bills take him at #27. I have him graded similarly to Christian Watson who was the guy I wanted them to take last year for exactly the "bet on traits" reason. 

[Chaos]

2 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

The concerns on Johnston are not raw production. They are about his skill set. Hands, route running and not playing to his size. 

position coaching matters. See Josh Allen for a recent case study. 

[Robert Paulson]

why is Jack Campbell 30 picks higher than his ranking? wishful thinking?

 

[TheWeatherMan]

4 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I wouldn't move up. But if he is there at #27 I think he is worth the swing. You are getting one of 2 elite level talents in this draft when your other options might be mid to late day 2 level talents who are getting pushed up by a bad year. I still think he goes top 10 though. 

2 elite talents in this entire draft?  Id love to go back and see what you thought of the JA17 pick. 

59 minutes ago, Robert Paulson said:

why is Jack Campbell 30 picks higher than his ranking? wishful thinking?

 

100% this.  

[GunnerBill]

3 minutes ago, TheWeatherMan said:

2 elite talents in this entire draft?  Id love to go back and see what you thought of the JA17 pick. 

  

 

I didn't love the Josh pick. That is a matter of record. But my overall track record stands up to scrutiny and is there for people to see. 

 

And yes. I only have two elite level grades in the draft. It is the weakest draft I have evaluated and this is year 10 doing it for me.

[TheWeatherMan]

4 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I didn't love the Josh pick. That is a matter of record. But my overall track record stands up to scrutiny and is there for people to see. 

 

And yes. I only have two elite level grades in the draft. It is the weakest draft I have evaluated and this is year 10 doing it for me.

For credibility purposes, can you explain to the board your methodology for draft eligible player evaluations? 

Edited April 3, 2023 by TheWeatherMan

[Warriorspikes51]

5 hours ago, JerseyBills said:

Interesting 

Would you guys consider moving up if he slips ?

 

He might be off our board

[GunnerBill]

23 minutes ago, TheWeatherMan said:

Can you explain to the board your methodology for player evaluations? 

 

It is explained here multiple times, but sure. The basics are:

 

I watch college football during the season and keep a list of guys I see who make plays that impress. Then the first week of January I flesh out the list of guys to watch by position by comparing to some of the established draft nicks and by watching the all star games. But I don't do any grading up until that point. 

 

Once the list is fleshed out I work position by position down my list and I watch minimum 3 full games of every player I grade. Of I haven't seen at least 3 full games of you I don't grade you and you don't go on the board (I have cheated my own rule on that twice that I know of - with Kyle Dugger and small school IOL the Broncos took - I had to use the all start games as a 3rd exposure). 

 

My grading system is broadly reflective of all others:

 

Elite grade - immediate high level playmaker and all pro candidate. 

 

First round grade - either 10 year starter at a premium position, or elite potential within 2 years at a non-premium position. 

 

Second round grade - potential to be a starter but some development needed at a premium position; or 10 year starter at a non-premium position; or (and these are rare but you do get them) elite potential but a complete project. 

 

Third round grade - rotational player at a premium position; or potential to be a starter but some development needed at a non-premium position.

 

Fourth round grade - backup / developmental prospect at a premium position; or rotational player at a non-premium position. 

 

Firth round grade - special teamer who can provide limited cover at a premium spot; or backup / developmental prospect at a non-premium spot. 

 

Then I don't split 6th/7th and UDFAs. That is an entire category to me. Either a special teamer who gives cover at a non-premium position or someone I think is a practice squad player. The reason I don't split them is because in those rounds teams are generally not saying "who is the best guy?" But "who has the best chance of making our 53?" it becomes about the depth of existing roster as much as talent evaluation. 

 

On average I will grade between 125 and 150 players a year. I'd love to do more but it comes down to time and effort. It is a hobby not my job. 

 

There are always going to be guys who go as early as day 2 that I just haven't got around to. I also grade scheme agnostic which is not the same as the job individual teams are doing. There are times when I know a certain type of scheme will value a guy higher than another. 

Edited April 3, 2023 by GunnerBill

[TheWeatherMan]

19 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

It is explained here multiple times, but sure. The basics are:

 

I watch college football during the season and keep a list of guys I see who make plays that impress. Then the first week of January I flesh out the list of guys to watch by position by comparing to some of the established draft nicks and by watching the all star games. But I don't do any grading up until that point. 

 

Once the list is fleshed out I work position by position down my list and I watch minimum 3 full games of every player I grade. Of I haven't seen at least 3 full games of you I don't grade you and you don't go on the board (I have cheated my own rule on that twice that I know of - with Kyle Dugger and small school IOL the Broncos took - I had to use the all start games as a 3rd exposure). 

 

My grading system is broadly reflective of all others:

 

Elite grade - immediate high level playmaker and all pro candidate. 

 

First round grade - either 10 year starter at a premium position, or elite potential within 2 years at a non-premium position. 

 

Second round grade - potential to be a starter but some development needed at a premium position; or 10 year starter at a non-premium position; or (and these are rare but you do get them) elite potential but a complete project. 

 

Third round grade - rotational player at a premium position; or potential to be a starter but some development needed at a non-premium position.

 

Fourth round grade - backup / developmental prospect at a premium position; or rotational player at a non-premium position. 

 

Firth round grade - special teamer who can provide limited cover at a premium spot; or backup / developmental prospect at a non-premium spot. 

 

Then I don't split 6th/7th and UDFAs. That is an entire category to me. Either a special teamer who gives cover at a non-premium position or someone I think is a practice squad player. The reason I don't split them is because in those rounds teams are generally not saying "who is the best guy?" But "who has the best chance of making our 53?" it becomes about the depth of existing roster as much as talent evaluation. 

 

Thanks for the explanation.  Sounds like a better assessment than what most members like @NewEra perform (exclusively highlight videos) but still not nearly as comprehensive as the analysis by sports reporters who do this for a living.  So why should your assessment be regarded as reliable or in line with the professionals?  Where’s the added value? 

Edited April 3, 2023 by TheWeatherMan

[GunnerBill]

4 minutes ago, TheWeatherMan said:

Thanks for the explanation.  Sounds like a better assessment than what most members like @NewEra perform (exclusively highlight videos) but still not nearly as comprehensive as the analysis by sports reporters who do this for a living.  So why should your assessment be regarded as reliable or in line with the the professionals?  Where’s the added value? 

 

I am not trying to "add value" so much as give people another perspective. It is up to them what they make of it. You can all go and read what NFL.com thinks. You can all go and read what Mel Kiper thinks. 

 

I do it as a hobby. I share it on here because generally people are interested in it. You might not be, that's your prerogative. I feel confident enough that I know what I am talking about, but I don't pretend I am perfect or get everything right.

[NewEra]

42 minutes ago, TheWeatherMan said:

Thanks for the explanation.  Sounds like a better assessment than what most members like @NewEra perform (exclusively highlight videos) but still not nearly as comprehensive as the analysis by sports reporters who do this for a living.  So why should your assessment be regarded as reliable or in line with the professionals?  Where’s the added value? 

Lol.  I don’t claim to be any more knowledgeable than anyone.  I spend a lot of time researching scouting reports and i watch a lot of highlight tapes. Then I choose a few guys that I want to watch more in-depth and watch a game tape or two of them. I don’t watch game tape of everyone and I don’t claim to.  This year, I’ve watched game tape of the top 5 WRs, Dalton Kincaid, Anton harrison, Darnell Wright, Jack Campbell, Trenton Simpson.

 

going to watch Sanders vs LSU today if I have time.  
 

Living rent free ftw!   

43 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I am not trying to "add value" so much as give people another perspective. It is up to them what they make of it. You can all go and read what NFL.com thinks. You can all go and read what Mel Kiper thinks. 

 

I do it as a hobby. I share it on here because generally people are interested in it. You might not be, that's your prerogative. I feel confident enough that I know what I am talking about, but I don't pretend I am perfect or get everything right.

Dude is like my scorned ex.  It was love at first sight for him and he can’t let me go.  

[TheWeatherMan]

15 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I am not trying to "add value" so much as give people another perspective. It is up to them what they make of it. You can all go and read what NFL.com thinks. You can all go and read what Mel Kiper thinks. 

 

I do it as a hobby. I share it on here because generally people are interested in it. You might not be, that's your prerogative. I feel confident enough that I know what I am talking about, but I don't pretend I am perfect or get everything right.

But don’t you agree that your assessment is very short sighted?  You select players based on standout plays and then assess based on ~3 games?  
 

In my opinion, your plan of assessment to include the collection of data (plays/stats), analysis/processing of that data (stats/data), and the exploitation of the data is all a very flawed.  

[GunnerBill]

16 minutes ago, TheWeatherMan said:

But don’t you agree that your assessment is very short sighted?  You select players based on standout plays and then assess based on ~3 games?  
 

In my opinion, your plan of assessment to include the collection of data (plays/stats), analysis/processing of that data (stats/data), and the exploitation of the data is all a very flawed.  

 

I don't only select on standout plays, no. And no I don't agree it is very short sighted. 3 games is normally enough in my experience to get a feel for who a guy is and what his strengths and weaknesses are. If I haven't got a feel I watch more games. I have watched 7 full games of Quentin Johnston for example because I have found him a hard grading job. 

 

I am not saying my process would stand up against a full time NFL scout. It is definitely imperfect. But its results over 10 years suggest it stacks up enough to have a reasonably qualified view of NFL draft prospects. It isn't perfect. I miss plenty. So do the pros. If you are trying to turn NFL player evaluation into a perfect science you will likely fail. Or you will succeed and become a billionaire. 

 

 

Edited April 3, 2023 by GunnerBill

[Royale with Cheese]

8 hours ago, JerseyBills said:

Interesting 

Would you guys consider moving up if he slips ?

 

 

I would absolutely take this guy if he's as good as advertised.  We need some attitude on defense and he brings it.

Let this guy dominate, help win a Super Bowl, he becomes too much of an issue or headache a few years later, trade him for a 1st round pick to a team like the Cowboys.  Then we draft an offensive lineman to protect Allen with that pick.  Boom.

Edited April 3, 2023 by Royale with Cheese