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

[Bearded14YourPleasure]

This is embarassingly bad. The entirety of TPB is turning short lived, meaningless performances during the opening days of OTAs into a moratorium on chainy.

If only PFF were around to grade it all.

Fine. You celebrate September's darlings, aka LAC. Slather all late Spring and Summer. Crush chainy for having the audacity to stick to the Trade Value Chart.

I will engage in tough love towards my Cousin JT. I will gladly be your Bud Grant.

At this point it’s just gotten to the point that CC doesn’t evaluate JT as a player, only as a prescribed numbered draft slot to determine his value. In return anything that JT does as a player (even meaningless OTA “production”) is overinflated into proof that the player is superior to the number given him. The reality that he’s going to look like a 7th round pick on some plays and like a 1st round pick on others is meaningless. Things will turn around once pads go on and we get word that he missed 3 tackles in a practice or something like that.

[sonorajim]

Wonder what the STATS are for rookie safeties snagging three INTs in one OTA?

LOL! A taller, faster Ed Reed for sure.

[dmac_bolt]

This is embarassingly bad. The entirety of TPB is turning short lived, meaningless performances during the opening days of OTAs into a moratorium on chainy.

If only PFF were around to grade it all.

Fine. You celebrate September's darlings, aka LAC. Slather all late Spring and Summer. Crush chainy for having the audacity to stick to the Trade Value Chart.

I will engage in tough love towards my Cousin JT. I will gladly be your Bud Grant.

Trade value chart? it was THE CONSENSUS BOARD

Chains wanted the DT from UConn despite TT signing two proven starters, because he thinks he will be better in year 3. Never mind most of us want to WIN NOW. He was butthurt about not trading up to get him so he trashed our draft pick for dozens and dozens of forum pages. The consensus is wrong over 50% of the time in Rd3 but that doesn’t matter - its THE BOARD.

Then he badgered and berated us endlessly with his legal strategy to grind us all down to submission. Its a tactic, a method, a tool of the legal system to grind down the common man under the heal of the system.

You can support him and his system all you want, of course. I’ll Fight The Man and stand for the little guy over here

[dmac_bolt]

At this point it’s just gotten to the point that CC doesn’t evaluate JT as a player, only as a prescribed numbered draft slot to determine his value. In return anything that JT does as a player (even meaningless OTA “production”) is overinflated into proof that the player is superior to the number given him. The reality that he’s going to look like a 7th round pick on some plays and like a 1st round pick on others is meaningless. Things will turn around once pads go on and we get word that he missed 3 tackles in a practice or something like that.

Or he got another 3 INTs

[wu-dai clan]

wu is getting TPB ready for "Two-A-Days."

Steel sharpens steel, dawg.

Summer of Love is over...before it began.

CHAMPIONSHIP.

[Guest]

How did the JT thread not bump up after THREE INTs in yesterday’s OTA?

Welcome to the Bolts, young man. We are glad to have you, and the brilliant coach that can see what crusher cannot.

I said that the player was a significant reach and that making significant reaches is bad draft strategy. That does not prove how the player will do in the NFL and I have never suggested that it did. Similarly, performance on one OTA day does not prove how a player will do in the NFL either.

I like some of Woods' traits. He is fast, closes well and has good length. He does a good job of reading plays in front of him and he has good hands.

But you might want to dust off Darryl Gamble's Hall of Fame bust before you post the nonsense that you have posted.

[dmac_bolt]

I said that the player was a significant reach and that making significant reaches is bad draft strategy. That does not prove how the player will do in the NFL and I have never suggested that it did. Similarly, performance on one OTA day does not prove how a player will do in the NFL either.

I like some of Woods' traits. He is fast, closes well and has good length. He does a good job of reading plays in front of him and he has good hands.

But you might want to dust off Darryl Gamble's Hall of Fame bust before you post the nonsense that you have posted.

I like some of his traits too, and hope he can be a player. He will only be a significant reach if the consensus board is correct. If the board is wrong, then Staley is a genius. I’ll be posting nonsensical hopeful counterpoints to your nonsensical negative nattering until we know for sure one way or the other

you wanted them to deal a pick to move up and take a DT you yourself project could become their best DT in 3 years. It wouldn’t be a 7, it would be a 4 or 5. Probably 4. They already signed two quality DTs, he would be a backup in 2022. this was your expert play on draft day. your move results in not getting a safety Staley needs to implement his defensive vision AND not getting Spiller to upgrade RB2. Your plan freezes DJ in the secondary backfield for another season, leaves us empty behind Ekeler with shit JAG RBs, and prevents Staley from unleashing his creative dynamic attacking defense. You literally weaken the team with your strategy.

the criticism is ridiculous in that they are untrue or irrelevant to Staley’s vision of how he wants to use him:

- his picks were easy gifts. That is bullshit. No such thing. Good players get in the right spots and have the right read and athleticism to make it look easy. Bad players are not there. He led the nation. If its so easy, why was he the only one in the entire nation to do it? Because it is not.
- he can’t tackle. JT is not selected to tackle RBs in the box, the concern about his tackling is overstated
- he’s subject to a double move. He’s not going to play tight cover where double moves would be a big risk. He’s deep centerfield (LF? RF?), there are no double moves in centerfield.

He’s the deep hawk to read the field and swoop in and steal passes thrown over the top of the CBs. And in one OTA he stole 3, so maybe just maybe Staley is on to something here and your board is wrong.

Your strategy is the opposite of win now. Your sage wisdom in a nutshell is maybe improve DT in 3 years and just wait. No thanks, the time to win is now. In 3 years there will be a new different list of problems to address.

JT is an LA Charger now and I’m With JT and win now. If he flames out, I’ll admit it. But I won’t call for it in advance like you do.

[Guest]

Trade value chart? it was THE CONSENSUS BOARD

Chains wanted the DT from UConn despite TT signing two proven starters, because he thinks he will be better in year 3. Never mind most of us want to WIN NOW. He was butthurt about not trading up to get him so he trashed our draft pick for dozens and dozens of forum pages. The consensus is wrong over 50% of the time in Rd3 but that doesn’t matter - its THE BOARD.

Then he badgered and berated us endlessly with his legal strategy to grind us all down to submission. Its a tactic, a method, a tool of the legal system to grind down the common man under the heal of the system.

You can support him and his system all you want, of course. I’ll Fight The Man and stand for the little guy over here

Dozens and dozens of pages and yet, your failure to comprehend my position is duly noted.

I identified two separate and independent failures with respect to the use of our third round draft pick. One was a failure to take advantage of a trade up opportunity that was proven to be present. The other was that we engaged in a significant reach with respect to the player that we did select. Both errors are separately worthy of criticism. The first error did not cause the criticism for the second error. Making the second error did. I think several people on this forum fail to get that point and consider my reaction to be "because I was butthurt" for us not selecting Jones. That is completely false.

As for the rest of your post, I have yet to locate a big board that had Woods ranked above Travis Jones. So, pretty much everyone believes that Jones is better than Woods. And that is right now, not in three years. However, I did state that had we selected Travis Jones, he likely would have been our best interior DL player by year 2, which honestly is not saying all that much. You might want to examine some PFF numbers before placing too much emphasis on the "proven starters" as well as ask your yourself how many interior DL players start in a base 3-4 defense and whether or not interior DL players play every defensive snap of most games. :facepalm1:

People on this forum were discussing Travis Jones as a legitimate option for our #17 overall draft pick and nobody discussed Woods in that way or in any way as he was irrelevant, so regardless of what anyone might say now, you are talking out of your rear end if you are trying to say that Woods was viewed as the better player at the time of the draft--by anyone. The reality is that Jones was regarded as the much better player--by everyone. Maybe this whole draft thing is new to you, but getting the best available player at a position of need is kind of the main goal of the whole thing.

Also, to the extent that you are maintaining that our signing of two new DL players eliminated the need for additional DL players, that is, of course, belied by the fact that the team drafted a DL player and signed Morgan Fox after the draft.

Finally, I have suggested that teams should not engage in significant reaches versus the consensus big board because in that situation it is clear that many, many pundits disagree with the GM's take and it may be possible to draft the player later in the draft. This amounts to a very limited use of the consensus big board. It is not the kind of taking the consensus big board as gospel that you are attempting to attribute to me, further demonstrating your failure to comprehend the points that I have been making.

None of the analyses offered by anyone on this forum has discussed GM success rate in significant reach scenarios versus the consensus big board. My belief is that that success rate is probably lower than the GM's regular success rate.

As for Woods, I hope he continues to practice well for the team, but that really proves nothing. He has some favorable traits and is actually the kind of player I like our GM to take with the appropriate draft pick as my bias always favors guys that have good measurables like Woods. Specifically, I like his speed, ability to close, length, and good hands.

[Lefty2SLO]

Dozens and dozens of pages and yet, your failure to comprehend my position is duly noted.

I identified two separate and independent failures with respect to the use of our third round draft pick. One was a failure to take advantage of a trade up opportunity that was proven to be present. The other was that we engaged in a significant reach with respect to the player that we did select. Both errors are separately worthy of criticism. The first error did not cause the criticism for the second error. Making the second error did. I think several people on this forum fail to get that point and consider my reaction to be "because I was butthurt" for us not selecting Jones. That is completely false.

As for the rest of your post, I have yet to locate a big board that had Woods ranked above Travis Jones. So, pretty much everyone believes that Jones is better than Woods. And that is right now, not in three years. However, I did state that had we selected Travis Jones, he likely would have been our best interior DL player by year 2, which honestly is not saying all that much. You might want to examine some PFF numbers before placing too much emphasis on the "proven starters" as well as ask your yourself how many interior DL players start in a base 3-4 defense and whether or not interior DL players play every defensive snap of most games. :facepalm1:

People on this forum were discussing Travis Jones as a legitimate option for our #17 overall draft pick and nobody discussed Woods in that way or in any way as he was irrelevant, so regardless of what anyone might say now, you are talking out of your rear end if you are trying to say that Woods was viewed as the better player at the time of the draft--by anyone. The reality is that Jones was regarded as the much better player--by everyone. Maybe this whole draft thing is new to you, but getting the best available player at a position of need is kind of the main goal of the whole thing.

Also, to the extent that you are maintaining that our signing of two new DL players eliminated the need for additional DL players, that is, of course, belied by the fact that the team drafted a DL player and signed Morgan Fox after the draft.

Finally, I have suggested that teams should not engage in significant reaches versus the consensus big board because in that situation it is clear that many, many pundits disagree with the GM's take and it may be possible to draft the player later in the draft. This amounts to a very limited use of the consensus big board. It is not the kind of taking the consensus big board as gospel that you are attempting to attribute to me, further demonstrating your failure to comprehend the points that I have been making.

None of the analyses offered by anyone on this forum has discussed GM success rate in significant reach scenarios versus the consensus big board. My belief is that that success rate is probably lower than the GM's regular success rate.

As for Woods, I hope he continues to practice well for the team, but that really proves nothing. He has some favorable traits and is actually the kind of player I like our GM to take with the appropriate draft pick as my bias always favors guys that have good measurables like Woods. Specifically, I like his speed, ability to close, length, and good hands.

Incredible ability to ignore the obvious (and repeatedly) pointed out fact that there can be no 'reach' assessed because the basis for the assessment (the consensus) is flawed beyond redemption.

Why don't we just wait and see how the kid does on the field?

[Bolt-O]

CC....just for the sake of keeping this thread open...lets try and move away from the reach discussion. We see your take. I get it.

This also goes for anyone else trying to engage CC regarding this. We have dead horse smileys for a reason here. lol

How about lets start to support the kid and see how it plays out.

Ill say this about TT and reaches. He doesnt believe in them. He doesnt believe in value either. So lets not be shocked when he does this sort of thing. Its not part of his philosophy. I know some think it should be....but its not. Didnt AJ Smith also due quite a bit of this?

Lets move on. I dont want this thread to get locked.

Repost....

[dmac_bolt]

Dozens and dozens of pages and yet, your failure to comprehend my position is duly noted.

I identified two separate and independent failures with respect to the use of our third round draft pick. One was a failure to take advantage of a trade up opportunity that was proven to be present. The other was that we engaged in a significant reach with respect to the player that we did select. Both errors are separately worthy of criticism. The first error did not cause the criticism for the second error. Making the second error did. I think several people on this forum fail to get that point and consider my reaction to be "because I was butthurt" for us not selecting Jones. That is completely false.

As for the rest of your post, I have yet to locate a big board that had Woods ranked above Travis Jones. So, pretty much everyone believes that Jones is better than Woods. And that is right now, not in three years. However, I did state that had we selected Travis Jones, he likely would have been our best interior DL player by year 2, which honestly is not saying all that much. You might want to examine some PFF numbers before placing too much emphasis on the "proven starters" as well as ask your yourself how many interior DL players start in a base 3-4 defense and whether or not interior DL players play every defensive snap of most games. :facepalm1:

People on this forum were discussing Travis Jones as a legitimate option for our #17 overall draft pick and nobody discussed Woods in that way or in any way as he was irrelevant, so regardless of what anyone might say now, you are talking out of your rear end if you are trying to say that Woods was viewed as the better player at the time of the draft--by anyone. The reality is that Jones was regarded as the much better player--by everyone. Maybe this whole draft thing is new to you, but getting the best available player at a position of need is kind of the main goal of the whole thing.

Also, to the extent that you are maintaining that our signing of two new DL players eliminated the need for additional DL players, that is, of course, belied by the fact that the team drafted a DL player and signed Morgan Fox after the draft.

Finally, I have suggested that teams should not engage in significant reaches versus the consensus big board because in that situation it is clear that many, many pundits disagree with the GM's take and it may be possible to draft the player later in the draft. This amounts to a very limited use of the consensus big board. It is not the kind of taking the consensus big board as gospel that you are attempting to attribute to me, further demonstrating your failure to comprehend the points that I have been making.

None of the analyses offered by anyone on this forum has discussed GM success rate in significant reach scenarios versus the consensus big board. My belief is that that success rate is probably lower than the GM's regular success rate.

As for Woods, I hope he continues to practice well for the team, but that really proves nothing. He has some favorable traits and is actually the kind of player I like our GM to take with the appropriate draft pick as my bias always favors guys that have good measurables like Woods. Specifically, I like his speed, ability to close, length, and good hands.

There was discussion of Travis but mostly as a Rd2 pick, not so much as #17. He was one of many IDL options discussed - BEFORE they traded for Khalil with their 2nd and signed 2 starting IDL FA’s. Are they the greatest IDL in the history of sport - no. Are they competent professional IDL that get the job done - yes. Utilize date stamps, they can help you.

I don’t disagree Travis Jones looks like a solid NFL prospect, i like him. I disagree they should have traded their 4th to move up to get him in the 3rd after we had signed two IDL just prior to the draft. That would be two mid picks for a guy that probably won’t play much at all this year. this is a go for it year, its not a foundation roster building for tomorrow year. They are looking to win NOW.

I understand your allegiance to the big board, I understand their assessment of JTW. If they are right, it was a bad pick. They are not right all of the time, in fact by the 3rd round and later they are more wrong than right. You assume he would still be there in Rd4, that is simply a guess - it is factually unknowable. Its a bet. You want to make a bet - that is fine, call it a bet and stop saying your bets are facts and any disagreement is wrong. You completely miss the pieces that Staley envisions he needed, instead wanting to overload on IDL. He wants to move his best defender not on the line, Derwin, out of a traditional cover-2 safety role, he needs a back end ball hawk to do that. He didnt want another CB, he signed the top CB FA on the market. He wants a blazing fast sure handed deep FS. So other consensus board eaters value athletic strong safety Derwin-light types who can play up in the box and do multiple things, and they value JT less. Thats fine for a team has no SS, but we already have Derwin. I trust Staley sees the full picture. The more I have thought about it, the more I’ve learned to see his brilliance. Time will tell, you are not “right” - your guess may become correct someday. I tend to doubt it but no 3rd round pick is a lock for anything.

I was strongly in favor of drafting Herbert when Pick6 was called at the podium. You moaned what a horrible pick it was. You missed on the best pick since LT, if not the best pick in franchise history, try to embrace a modicum of humility.

[powderblueboy]

I was strongly in favor of drafting Herbert when Pick6 was called at the podium. You moaned what a horrible pick it was. You missed on the best pick since LT, if not the best pick in franchise history, try to embrace a modicum of humility.

Tua would have been great value at pick #6.

God i missed this!
This thread is rapidly closing in on the Herbert thread for over all volume, thanks to one man.veryourhead: