Welcome JT Woods, DB, Baylor (R3, #79)

[Guest]

LMAO! Was Riddick supposed to choose one of our 4 other and later reaches after round 1 in making one choice for every team?

[Guest]

I laughed at the Leatherwood pick because, having watched him, i thought he struggled with his feet in pass protection at OT.

I'm not laughing at the Strange pick because there were no obvious deficiencies watching him - which is all i can pick up:
and that it was Belichick.

The only consensus that matters is the collective consensus of the GMs, with the millions of dollars scouting budgets at their disposal.
They spend a lot of time, energy and expense in trying to figure how that consensus lines up.
So, to say that one knows absolutely who should be available in such and such a round is sheer nuts.

In addition, a big problem with the 'consensus' argument is that a Daniel Jeremiah and some noodle head at PFF are given equal weight.

One has already posted the stats concerning 'reaches' being most likely to earn 2nd contracts with the team that selected them;
that should pretty much obliterate anyone's confidence in the validity of the 'consensus' argument as to when a player should be selected.

Given how the 3rd and early 4rth round went, with the run on safeties and corners, in all likelihood, Woods would have been gone by the Charger's 4rth round pick,

The discussion about drafting to fit various NFL schemes, having already been discussed, I have nothing more to say on this argument.

Woods' limited fit (as discussed by Steve earlier in this thread) is part of why Woods likely would still have been on the board at #123. The other part, of course, is that he is simply a late 4th round player.

[sonorajim]

LMAO! Was Riddick supposed to choose one of our 4 other and later reaches after round 1 in making one choice for every team?

" Major impact player by year 3 or sooner" not rd 1 could be Woods, Spiller, Otito or Salyer. IMO. I liked our draft. No prob here with his choice.

[equivocation]

Of the 32 players listed, Riddick chose to make Woods one of his 5 notes.

[Guest]

There is no reason to believe that because a website processes 100 mock boards that spit out #137 for Woods, it should be considered best board to use for Chargers and Staley in drafting prospect to upgrade their roster. Or be used to gauge whether they should pick a player they really like and rated higher on their board or wait a round expecting the draft to play out per the supposed consensus board. They are drafting a person to compete for a role in their offense. And they have their own board.

You made your point about why you have these opinions and why you call it a reach. But that doesn't make it one for LAC.

The fact is JT was not a reach for B.Staley. if you paid attention to the facts, Staley specifically said he did not want to reach for a player when they drafted Johnson-OG in Rd1. So why would he then reach on the very next pick he has. He also told JT right after drafting him how he was an awesome fit. Woods was simply rated higher for them. Jeremiah ranked him #67.

I am not suggesting that the consensus big board is the best board for our team to use. I am suggesting that we should not engage in big reaches versus the consensus big board. If the consensus ranks a player at #137 and we have the player ranked #79 or better, that creates more than a small suggestion that we are an outlier when it comes to assessing the player's value.

In that case, our GM should consider the possibility that 1) he has the player significantly overvalued and 2) the player may go later than he thinks. To put it bluntly, nobody was coming to get Te'o; nobody was coming to get Gordon; nobody was coming to get Palmer or McKitty; and nobody was coming to get Woods. McKitty was considered one of the 10 biggest reaches of the entire draft last year.

Regarding Telesco's board, my assumption all along was that Telesco did not draft early versus his own board when he took Woods just as I do not think Mayock drafted early when he took Leatherwood at #17 overall. .

We reached versus consensus 5 times in 8 picks this year. As I said earlier, someone is going to end up being very wrong with these picks. Of course, I hope it is the consensus, but I think we need to stop these big reaches versus consensus either way.

[victoriaboltfan]

I am not suggesting that the consensus big board is the best board for our team to use. I am suggesting that we should not engage in big reaches versus the consensus big board. If the consensus ranks a player at #137 and we have the player ranked #79 or better, that creates more than a small suggestion that we are an outlier when it comes to assessing the player's value.

In that case, our GM should consider the possibility that 1) he has the player significantly overvalued and 2) the player may go later than he thinks. To put it bluntly, nobody was coming to get Te'o; nobody was coming to get Gordon; nobody was coming to get Palmer or McKitty; and nobody was coming to get Woods. McKitty was considered one of the 10 biggest reaches of the entire draft last year.

Regarding Telesco's board, my assumption all along was that Telesco did not draft early versus his own board when he took Woods just as I do not think Mayock drafted early when he took Leatherwood at #17 overall. .

We reached versus consensus 5 times in 8 picks this year. As I said earlier, someone is going to end up being very wrong with these picks. Of course, I hope it is the consensus, but I think we need to stop these big reaches versus consensus either way.

:sigh:

[Guest]

" Major impact player by year 3 or sooner" not rd 1 could be Woods, Spiller, Otito or Salyer. IMO. I liked our draft. No prob here with his choice.

Spiller and Salyer were the best values, but unless Feiler moves to RT, they and Otito will be low use reserves. So, of course, Riddick has to be the team's non-first round pick by default since he is projected to be a higher use reserve this year.

[Guest]

Of the 32 players listed, Riddick chose to make Woods one of his 5 notes.

His notes are pretty ridiculous.

[Boltnut]

In order to understand JT's value to the Chargers, you have to understand what the Chargers are trying to do on defense.

First and foremost, they are trying to move Derwin into the Star and Money position. In order to do that, they needed another split safety who is good in coverage... specifically on the back end. I suspect we'll see both Derwin and JT on the field at the same time around 80% of the time.

A number of the top safeties were players that don't fit that specific skillset. Daxton Hill, Lewis Cine, Jaquan Brisker, Kerby Joseph, and Tycen Anderson will be used by their teams (as they were in college) in roles that bring them closer to the L.O.S. (ala Derwin) and fill the Star and Money positions. In effect, they were players we weren't even targeting.

The backend defenders were: Bryan Cook, Nick Cross, and JT Woods. Cook was gone... and Staley chose Woods over Cross.
We won't have to tolerate Alohi Gilman on the backend anymore... rejoice!

[Grinners]

Yeah but what about the consensus?

[Boltnut]

In regards to trading up for DT Travis Jones... teams just don't value DT's anymore. Only 5 went in the first 3 rounds. And... we already have 2 that fit our scheme perfectly. We were looking for rotational depth only. Travis Jones would have been lucky to see the field 50% of the time in this scheme...with this roster.

[Boltnut]

Yeah but what about the consensus?

Is this the same consensus that had OT Kellen Deitch slotted to us in the 3rd round...?