dave mcbride Posted April 15 Posted April 15 (edited) I thought this comment was interesting. The Bills have five picks before 150 and five after that threshold. ”After several classes overflowing with talented prospects (mainly due to the extra year of eligibility granted because of the pandemic), with as many as 350 names filling NFL teams’ draft boards, teams could struggle to get 150 names on their boards this year. This is dangerous for two reasons: The top players will disappear quickly, and teams will have to guard against the risk of overdrafting players in the later rounds. It might be a good opportunity for some teams to trade picks, maybe to move up into the first four rounds, or for a veteran player who brings more certainty. For that reason, there will be a lot of trade talk over the next couple of weeks.” https://theathletic.com/5412463/2024/04/15/nfl-draft-randy-mueller-top-10/ Edited April 15 by dave mcbride 1 1 Quote
Brandon Posted April 15 Posted April 15 (edited) I've heard that elsewhere in the last few weeks. If true, those later picks on day 3 are more worthless than usual for trade purposes. Edited April 15 by Brandon 5 2 Quote
ddaryl Posted April 15 Posted April 15 and we have a plethora of 3rd day picks.... we shall see. Quote
K D Posted April 15 Posted April 15 6 minutes ago, Brandon said: I've heard that elsewhere in the last few weeks. If true, those later picks on day 3 are more worthless than usual for trade purposes. Trade them for next year. This year is a bust anyways. No receivers, new OL, no pass rush, no safeties, and Josh is busy golfing 3 1 1 2 1 5 2 Quote
The 9 Isles Posted April 15 Posted April 15 1 minute ago, ddaryl said: and we have a plethora of 3rd day picks.... we shall see. how Billsy 1 1 1 Quote
GunnerBill Posted April 15 Posted April 15 I have said it about a couple of position groups.... this is a MUCH better draft class than last year through the first 120 or so players on the board. My top 100 finishes on the 3rd/4th borderline this year whereas it was late 4th last year. However, a lot of the guys after that are older prospects who have underachieved in college. I don't think 2023 was particularly strong late either tbh... but 2020-2022 were much deeper than this class. 6 Quote
Back2Buff Posted April 15 Posted April 15 No one knows, and anyone that claims is just a liar. 5 1 4 1 2 Quote
boyst Posted April 15 Posted April 15 It is amazing because it's a coin. On one side it is better for the team to draft players but this secures them to a contract. For the player this limits their earnings potential. On the other side it is better for the team to fill their roster with UDFA's because they can bring in talented individuals who do not need to be paid the minimums guaranteed in the NFL Draft rounds but for the players they can often exceed the NFL Draft amount with bonuses and such. 1 Quote
GunnerBill Posted April 15 Posted April 15 9 minutes ago, Back2Buff said: No one knows, and anyone that claims is just a liar. Nobody knows how they will turn out. People can know how talented a pool of prospects it is compared to other years. 3 2 Quote
The Jokeman Posted April 15 Posted April 15 19 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: I have said it about a couple of position groups.... this is a MUCH better draft class than last year through the first 120 or so players on the board. My top 100 finishes on the 3rd/4th borderline this year whereas it was late 4th last year. However, a lot of the guys after that are older prospects who have underachieved in college. I don't think 2023 was particularly strong late either tbh... but 2020-2022 were much deeper than this class. Covid am sure played a big part as caused many of these kids to lose a year or two for development. That or some ended staying in school longer than usual and now considered to be "over aged". 1 Quote
Logic Posted April 15 Posted April 15 Of course the natural response will be "use the late picks to trade up!" and "trade them for picks next year!", and both of those may sound logical on their face, but... The key thing to remember is that other teams are surely aware of the late talent drop-off, too, and that when it comes to draft day trades, it takes two to tango. 2 Quote
Brand J Posted April 15 Posted April 15 I feel like this is roughly the same number every year. It doesn’t really mean much in the grand scheme of things. There are UDFAs who go on to have a more meaningful career than a 1st rounder. 150 might have draftable grades, but of those some shouldn’t have even been drafted. 2 2 1 Quote
MJS Posted April 15 Posted April 15 6th and 7th round players are a crap shoot in any draft anyway. It's up to the scouts to find and identify those diamonds in the rough. And if they don't work out, nobody cares because they were 6th and 7th rounders. Quote
PromoTheRobot Posted April 15 Posted April 15 Are we finally seeing the result of parents not letting their kids play football in their youth? 1 2 Quote
Matt_In_NH Posted April 15 Posted April 15 I thought this was supposed to be the year with a heavy class due to the pandemic, people stayed in college longer and now they are done with their 5th year? I have also heard NIL is making it easier for people to stay in..... Quote
KingBoots8 Posted April 15 Posted April 15 3 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said: Are we finally seeing the result of parents not letting their kids play football in their youth? I think it’s more to do with the fact these kids were probably freshmen when COVID hit and it may have stunted their growth a bit, especially at some of the smaller schools Quote
BuffaloBillyG Posted April 15 Posted April 15 I think that 150 number is very fluid. Teams all grade different. There's a good chance the last 10-20 prospects are different from team to team. There will be guys on some boards that aren't on others due to difference of opinion, grading or scheme. While each team may struggle to get that 150, the pool of players viewed as draftable league wide is likely somewhat higher in total. 1 Quote
Brandon Posted April 15 Posted April 15 10 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said: Are we finally seeing the result of parents not letting their kids play football in their youth? Probably not. There have always been bad drafts...the 2000 draft being one of the worst ever. A few good players here and there, but for the most part, that thing was putrid. If we get three or four in a row, then you have to wonder. Quote
GunnerBill Posted April 15 Posted April 15 1 minute ago, Brand J said: I feel like this is roughly the same number every year. It doesn’t really mean much in the grand scheme of things. There are UDFAs who go on to have a more meaningful career than a 1st rounder. 150 might have draftable grades, but of those some shouldn’t have even been drafted. I think it varies a bit more than that. There are drafts that are great at the top, but not that deep. Drafts that are deep but lack elite talent and there are some drafts that are just strong or not strong throughout. It does vary. For example the class of 2009 produced six first team all pro selections and 56 pro bowl selections from the whole class. 2010 on the other hand produced 35 first team all pros and 133 pro bowl selections. 2 Quote
mannc Posted April 15 Posted April 15 This is utter nonsense. Draftniks say this kind of crap every year…they absolutely love to s**t on every draft class. It’s just like the people who have “only fifteen players with first-round grades” year after year, which just means their “scale” is broken… 3 2 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.