Lurker Posted April 30, 2006 Share Posted April 30, 2006 Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimBob2232 Posted April 30, 2006 Share Posted April 30, 2006 Well, in fairness if you are not high on Furgeson, which he apparently is not, then selecting him #4 is a bad bick in your mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrobot Posted April 30, 2006 Share Posted April 30, 2006 If we selected Leinart, whould WE have gotten the A+? No. Also, how can you grade a draft after Day 1, out of the context of the Day 2 picks, before they have tried to learn a playbook, before they have to interact with teammates in the locker room, and when none of them have put on an NFL uni? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajzepp Posted April 30, 2006 Share Posted April 30, 2006 If we selected Leinart, whould WE have gotten the A+? No. Also, how can you grade a draft after Day 1, out of the context of the Day 2 picks, before they have tried to learn a playbook, before they have to interact with teammates in the locker room, and when none of them have put on an NFL uni? 677489[/snapback] He didnt' grade it after day one.....the grades are for the first round picks, lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tortured Soul Posted April 30, 2006 Share Posted April 30, 2006 Only 3 C's, 1 D, and 1 F. Very generous grades. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted April 30, 2006 Author Share Posted April 30, 2006 Paul Attner's SportsBlog: Marv Levy's off to a bad start as a personnel guru April 29, 2006 Marv Levy's return to the NFL, this time as the Bills' personnel guru, got off to a very bad start today. Levy wound up with two first-round choices and neither one was very distinguished. Other NFL teams can only wonder, how could he? First, he selected Donte Whitner, the Ohio State safety, with the eighth pick in the draft. One team had him ranked in the third round; he certainly was not considered a top-10 player, nor a first-rounder. Then, the Bills gave up two choices to take John McCargo, a defensive tackle from N.C. State who was rated no better than a third-rounder at best. The Bills filled needs with both players. But it is a classic example of what leads to a bad draft, stretching for players whose talent doesn't merit where they are chosen. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The problem with blogs, IMO, is that they are just shoot-from-the-hip reactions with very little thought behind them. If the pundits were down on the pick, it's most likely because of their surprise the picks didn't follow the "group think" draft boards of every other publication. A year ago, the Pats selected Logan Mankins well above where the pundits graded him, just like Whitner. He stepped right into the starting lineup and is a very good player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UConn James Posted April 30, 2006 Share Posted April 30, 2006 A year ago, the Pats selected Logan Mankins well above where the pundits graded him, just like Whitner. He stepped right into the starting lineup and is a very good player. 677502[/snapback] Living in Patsie-land, I can say that Mankins did start right away, that was somewhat dictated by the situation (nevermind that the Pats seem to have a system where they could plug in my grandmother at Center and not skip a beat...). And I wouldn't say "very good"; more like "above average" at this point. He took quite a few holding and false start penalties last year, something Bellichick wasn't pleased with on his segment on the "Patriots: All Access" show the local affiliate has. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin Posted April 30, 2006 Share Posted April 30, 2006 i don't get these draft guys. sometimes they rate teams highly for filling in needs, but most of the time they just buy into hype. how does zona get such high grades for building on a strength (passing) and ignoring every other need on their team? A+ for a back up QB who might end up being very good (or a total bust, he slipped for a reason) a TE who will be a small addition to a stacked still position team, and a big fat slow short armed guard who doesn't fit their o which is full of big fat slow linemen. i'm not saying zona did bad, but these people seem to have no solid consistent way of marking, just throwing stuff against the wall, hoping some sticks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvermike Posted April 30, 2006 Share Posted April 30, 2006 I wonder what happens if you go back and review all the 'reaches' that a team makes, vs. the players that seem to have huge falls as compared to the pundits predictions. I mean, Jason Peters was, as I remember, projected to be a 4th round pick - I remember being disappointed when we picked Euhus over him. And that time, they were right - even given the time investment on making him a player, it'd be absurd to not take him on day one. But then, there's always Dwight Freeney and Levi Jones, Kiper's reaches, that turned into players. It's just nobody remembers the other reaches, I think. Except Janikowski and Nugent, but that's even more specialized. Artem Kryiukov? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts