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

[Guest]

You mentioning Jones in same sentence as Donald is absurd.
And saying you would take a previous #13 overall who is best defensive player in game and who played a god like amount of snaps of 90% last year. B.Willams who played the spot for Ravens that Jones will play at NT. He is the comparison...are you taking him over Adderley and Woods for the Chargers defensive scheme. And trading away a 4th to do it. Come on dude stay on track here......Aaron Donald is your way out of this failing argument .....Wow..... Ridiculous.

You are over the waterfall in your canoe when you are pulling in the best defensive player in game a future 1st ballot ball of famer to attempt an counter argument. Good luck with that.

I don't know who the better player will be yet. They were both 3rd rd picks. They both have to prove what the can do on the next level.

Woods maybe very we'll be the starter in 2023 as Adderley is in his final year of contract. And I specifically mentioned both players and snaps count as rookies and then in 2023 as starters. And saying your getting many more snaps out of Woods/Spiller vs Jones. Also mentioned that teams do indeed use their own boards and will indeed be on the high or low side vs consensus and use their own board. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder here. And for Stalesco they got a very valuable player and your take about consensus amounts to a hill of beans and nothing more in terms of LAC following their draft board and their plan. They don't draft per consensus board, they draft per their own board. Why in the heck would they do all this preparation to create their board and then use consensus to make decisions on who to draft. Only a fool would suggest such a thing.

Aaron Donald.
:LOL:

I raised Donald to demonstrate the absurdity of your snap count discussion, so please do not take that out of context. I also noted that your snap count argument as to snap percentages will, in fact, be wrong if we play anything close to the percentages in base, short yardage and certain 5 DB formations that we played last year. Your 90+% discussion of Woods' snap count percentage is ridiculous.

I am not discussing the Ravens. I am talking about our team. Jones is Ogbonnia only way, way better at everything--not really sure what you are missing about that. His ceiling is way higher than SJD's and Johnson's. Would you be having this same discussion about Jordan Davis? Jones is almost as good Davis and in one aspect (having a higher floor), he is better than Davis.

The trade value for the pick in question would have been our 3rd and 5th round picks, not our 4th round pick. Next year's 4th could have been used in lieu of a 5th under the theory that future picks reduce in value by one round for each year into the future they go.

The players were both third round picks because Jones fell just like Keenan Allen did and we stupidly reached for Woods. Jones is a second round value. Woods is a 4th round value. Please, find me a pundit anywhere that has Woods ranked over Jones. That notion is all kinds of bat poop crazy.

You mention that Woods may end up being a starter. Norton is a starter too. How is that working for us? This is the same crap people were talking last year about Palmer replacing Williams. Barring major development, these players will have solid careers as reserves, but they are likely of their depth as starters.

When a GM should have reason to know that his board may be questionable in its assessment of a player, the GM should use caution. Most folks panned our draft relative to other drafts. We will see.

[Guest]

Wait…does this mean that other teams didn’t draft exactly according to the consensus board rankings!?!? LOL

Nobody ever said they did. I have simply stated that it is a bad idea to reach significantly (more than one round) against consensus big boards.

The funny thing is that people are assuming that the NFL teams got it right when they are often dead wrong and often dead wring in part because they use poor draft strategies.

[Guest]

Player/Consensus/Actual

Malik Willis/14/86
Nakobe Dean/31/83
Matt Coral/39/94
Travis Jones/47/76
Sam Howell/48/144
Daniel Faalele/62/110
Isaiah Spiller/64/123
Darrian Kinnard/66/145
Jamaree Salyer/73/195
Carson Strong/91/Undrafted
Rasheed Walker/104/249
Mario Goodrich/130/Undrafted
Verone McKinley/132/Undrafted
Kellen Deitch/147/Undrafted
Haskell Garrett/164/Undrafted
***These guys were either steals or the consensus was way off on their evals.

Jonathan Ford/428/234
Teagan Quitoriano/389/170
Zander Horvath/366/260
Luke Wattenberg/314/171
Michael Woods/311/202
Damarion Williams/250/141
Jack Jones/247/121
Cordell Volson/204/136
Cordale Flott/194/81
Dane Belton/191/114
Erik Ezukanma/180/125
Neil Farrell/174/126
Logan Brus/169/104
Terrell Bernard/157/89
Velus Jones/152/71
JT Woods/137/79
Danny Gray/135/105
Bryan Cook/96/62
***These guys were either drafted 1 round too early (in some cases more than 200 spots before)... or the consensus was again way off their evals. 90% of these guys were on my radar as being much better than they were getting credit for... and I mocked almost every one of these guys numerous times.

I have never objected to teams getting greater value than their consensus range would suggest. In fact, getting value is what teams should be striving to do.

It is only making big reaches against consensus big boards that represents poor draft strategy. That is exactly why our Spiller and Salyer picks were so good and many of our other picks were poor.

[Guest]

So I guess we should have drafted Isaiah Spiller in the third, Jamaree Salyer in the fourth, and hoped J.T. Woods was there in the fifth. And we really blew it in the seventh round with that Zander Horvath pick.

No, we should have traded up in the 3rd and taken Travis Jones, who was ranked #44 overall. Had we used a next year's 4th to get that done, we could have considered Woods in round 4, but Spiller is the better player. If the team had that much of a desire to get Woods, we could have traded back into the 4th round, but I suspect that Woods is just a guy.

And Salyer also represented great value for us. Spiller and Spiller were the two best value picks we made versus the draft capital surrendered to select them.

Horvath was a clear reach. The saving grace is that except for Woods, our extremes reaches were late round 6 and round 7 reaches, so we pissed away value, but those picks did not have that much value in the first place.

[TexanBeerlover]

The point of the consensus board is that it assigns ranks to players based upon the views of many, many pundits, many of whom are very knowledgeable.

I am not "playing" anything. I am saying that reaching significantly (more than one round) against a consensus big board is bad draft strategy to adopt regularly as we did this year and it calls into question various picks that we made because lots of pundits have a lesser view of all of those players.

It is pretty much always a bad thing when a team selects a player in the player's early outlier range. Honestly, this is a really, really obvious concept. If a player might be a good player, average player or bad player, and we draft him with the draft capital of a good player, he has to be a good player or else the pick is a loser of draft value. So when the majority of pundits say that the player is no better than an average player, that is cause for concern.

If we rank a player #50 and 200 others ranks the player #150, that strongly suggests that we are wrong. Just because Telesco chooses a player where he thinks he is ranked does not make Telesco right. He has been wrong all over the place with draft picks.

I understand what NFL teams actually do and sometimes they make tactically inferior moves. That is what I am complaining about. A team should never be so wed to a player that they are sacrificing value just to get the player. A team should never be afraid to wait to take a player in his appropriate value range. A team should always assume that if their board as to a player represents an outlier, then their board may very well be wrong and they should weight for the player's consensus range to approach before taking the player eons early.

That’s kinda how I felt last year (2021) 3rd rd & later. However it’s also very, very obvious that Staley does not grade via consensus but his own vision of how he wants to use his players, players that don’t fit your consensus board. What is so difficult for you to accept about that? We all fully grasp draft grades, board in general or otherwise, but it’s a Staley product now not TT. He is only the facilitator who should be the one pointing out discrepancies, but then Staley would only come back with I need these specific skill sets to compliment my roster. So around and around we go. I can be a real stick in the mud too for draft value, but it’s all big picture shit now, details in the traits and how they compliment one another. Time to move on :wtfc:

[equivocation]

2012 Seahawks draft that brought in Russel Wilson, Bobby Wagner, Bruce Irvin.


Consensus grade: D-

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/1165320-2012-nfl-draft-grades-power-ranking-teams-that-failed-on-draft-day

https://seattle.sbnation.com/2012/4/29/2985799/nfl-draft-grades-2012-seahawks

https://www.mattmcgee.com/what-nfl-e...20and%20Wilson.

[Critty]

Post draft 2018 1st Rd grades.

https://ftw.usatoday.com/2018/04/201...saquon-barkley

S.Darnold - A
J.Rosen - A+
J.Allen - F
B.Mayfield - C
L.Jackson - A+

I think this guy used the consensus board to grade the picks as J. Allen per consensus was the lowest ranked of these 5 QB with many sites ranking him outside Rd 1. And therefore a huge reach at #7. And per consensus value they should have traded down as the consensus board said Allen would still be available early Rd 2. Picking this guy a full Rd higher than consensus board was very poor draft strategy by Bills per consensus Chaincrusher analysis. And worthy of the F grade.

[Lefty2SLO]

No, we should have traded up in the 3rd and taken Travis Jones, who was ranked #44 overall. Had we used a next year's 4th to get that done, we could have considered Woods in round 4, but Spiller is the better player. If the team had that much of a desire to get Woods, we could have traded back into the 4th round, but I suspect that Woods is just a guy.

And Salyer also represented great value for us. Spiller and Spiller were the two best value picks we made versus the draft capital surrendered to select them.

Horvath was a clear reach. The saving grace is that except for Woods, our extremes reaches were late round 6 and round 7 reaches, so we pissed away value, but those picks did not have that much value in the first place.

[Lefty2SLO]

Entire page after page argument is based on smoke and shifting sand. As has been stated many times in this thread the 'consensus' is bullshit, and is not anywhere near reliable enough to be making definitive statements about which draft pick is a reach (or not), and which player is better than another.

CC - consensus said Rosen was FAR better than Allen based on their projected draft positions. Please stop using it as a basis for your position. You're defending an indefensible position (and doing one hell of a job at it), but can we let this go please . . . .

[Bolt-O]

I'm putting this thread on 'hold' until someone wishes to post something regarding JT Woods. PM me when you think of something.

[Fleet 1]

Entire page after page argument is based on smoke and shifting sand. As has been stated many times in this thread the 'consensus' is bullshit, and is not anywhere near reliable enough to be making definitive statements about which draft pick is a reach (or not), and which player is better than another.

CC - consensus said Rosen was FAR better than Allen based on their projected draft positions. Please stop using it as a basis for your position. You're defending an indefensible position (and doing one hell of a job at it), but can we let this go please . . . .

First of all welcome to the Blues.

I cant speak for the rest of the forum....but when we made this pick...i thought of around 5 failed 3rd rounders by TT. So i can only speak for myself in this regard. Its not about consensus rankings etc. Its about Teleco and his knack for throwing away 3rd round pics on guys that make little impact or even make the team.

That in a nutshell was what i thought about when we drafted this kid. But he led the country in picks. He has a knack for playing center field. And i think his speed makes his range and ball awareness something special to work with. I think this is sort of that type of player. Someone who can sit back and pick off passes after our pass rush proves to be the best in the league.

You put Mack and KVN on edge...Bosa inside and send 4 on obvious pass downs. This kid should be able to clean up. But 3rd rounders carry a hell of a lot of darkness when it comes to TT and the Chargers.

So my guess is that those here that are going with the reach angle....might actually just be dealing with some TT insanity. You know doing the same thing over and over. In the 3rd round.

I typically always come around on players. Lets see how he does. But again that 3rd round stigma is hard to take with our history. Justin Jones was ok.

Pipkins. Mager. Watt, Tuerk. McKitty maybe? Feeney? Nobody was worth that 3rd rounder.

[Fleet 1]

Ok lets see if we can discuss this without the need to lock it.

Lets not beat a dead horse. Hes a Bolt now. The draft is over. Maybe we can wait and see what happens with him. Maybe it makes a little sense to try and move this discussion to more about the players and what he can bring to this team...and less about being a reach or steal etc.

We get it. Some think it was a reach. I thought it could end up that way....but again its just my TT 3rd round history that is getting to me. When we were on the clock in the 3rd...i told myself this would be a player with a consensus 5th round grade. And it was. lol But Staley is likely picking these guys on D.

The pick is over. He is a Bolt. Lets support him until he gives us a reason to doubt and judge.