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

[powderblueboy]

I used to watch a lot more college football up until a few years ago. That's why I brought up how A.J. Smith took Marcus Gilchrist and Jonas Mouton over Justin Houston in the second round years ago. I watched a lot of Houston when he was at Georgia and couldn't understand how he was available for us in the second round. I thought he was going to be an outstanding pass-rusher, which we certainly needed at the time.I also watched a lot of Clemson and thought Gilchrist sucked. I watched a few Michigan games and didn't even know Jonas Mouton existed.

I don't really give much thought to the Consensus Big Board. I'd rather go by what I've seen in the games I've watched these players in.

So, I think this is a fair question: did you actually watch UConn and Baylor games and get a good look at Jones and Woods?

I think Justin Houston was caught in possession of marijuana.....and back then that was a bigger thing.
Everyone thought he was a 1rst round talent......KC characteristically picks those guys up.

[Guest]

But please include along side your positive descriptions of Jones/Lucas a vague and shadowy prediction that you think Woods will bomb

I do not have a positive description of Lucas and would not have considered trading up to get him. I think it is fair that we did not know that SEA would take Lucas after they took Cross.

Unless our front office wants to admit to knowing less than the people on our forum at the time, they get no credit for their failure of not getting Jones and then driving home the point that they needed the position they passed on by drafting a lesser of player of almost the exact same size as Jones and then emphasizing that player's size features during the post-draft press conference. It was an awesome display of turning gold into mud.

As for Woods, I think he makes the roster because he was a third round pick, but is not the immediate impact ball hawking player that Staley thinks he will be. I think it is easy for a player to lead the nation in INTs when almost every INT is gifted to the player.

[RTPbolt]

So Chain are you then saying the countless hours of scouts, and player personnel evaluators, staley and TT are exceeded by the amount of time you have spent watching tape of Woods and these other athletes you mention?

im sure the answer is No. stick to your day job brother and stop the insanity. Its fine to have opinion and state it thus but let the professionals do their job. They have been scouting all these men for years and have a very clear idea of what they value and have it documented and reviewed many times over to come up with these decisions. This isnt done by the seat of the pants. Im smart enough to know these guys wouldnt attempt to do my day job because they arent trained at it nor have decades of experience at it…and know way do I claim to know their job and know better than them. Nobody likes a know-it-all….because nobody does.

[DennisR91]

The guy can catch. Put him in our shotgun spread as wr and also keep mw in our super dime

[DerwinBosa]

The history you are reciting is exactly the problem a team can run into when its GM thinks he knows better than all of the pundits. I can believe that a GM may know better than one or two pundits. I am less convinced when we are talking about a radically different opinion versus many, many pundits. A number of these pundits actually have NFL experience. I think the notion that our GM knows and everyone else does not is a dangerous notion that leads to such things as a consensus round 5 player (if I recall correctly) in Mouton being taken over Houston. That is a perfect example.

In that scenario, my simple suggestion is this. In cases where there is substantial divergence between the GM's ranking and the consensus ranking, take the consensus round 5 player at or near his consensus ranked value. If he ends being what the GM thought he was, then the GM has produced great value for the pick. If everyone else was right and the player is not as good as believed by the GM, then the pick is either no loss or a minimal loss.

I want to be clear that that general concept, plus the missed opportunity to get Jones are my concerns about what we did/failed to do in round 3 of the draft. And then, the issue was absolutely highlighted when we deliberately drafted (reached for) a player virtually identical in size as Jones (size that Staley specifically emphasized), but less athletic in Ogbonnia (while simultaneously passing on a chance to select a much need punter).

In response to your "fair question", Jones was a top 50 prospect, so I studied him. I saw the UConn versus Clemson game and the Senior Bowl. His presence was very noticeable. I saw his Senior Bowl practice reps where he dominated against soon to be drafted NFL players. One of those players he did well against was some guy named Zion Johnson. I read about Jones and saw highlights as well.

I did not get a chance to study Woods as carefully. By coincidence, I did see a couple of Baylor games, but it was not for the purpose of studying Woods. And, honestly, Woods did not stand out or "catch my eye". I did read about Woods before the draft, but did not study him to the degree I studied Jones. He did not make much an impression on me before the draft.

Even after I saw his highlights, which I think I may have seen before the draft as well some time ago, what I saw was a lot of plays that were bad opponent plays, not great Woods plays. Just look at his highlight video and let me know what you think. He did not strike me as quite the ballhawk that Staley gives him credit for being. Another poster first raised the comparison, but it really was like Cromartie 2007 where opponents just happened to throw the ball right to him (save and except for one totally awesome one handed INT against the Colts by Cromartie). And the problem, of course, is that those kinds of results are generally not sustainable from season to season as Cromartie proved as after he had the 10 INTs in 2007, he never topped 4 in any other season.

Also, for anyone giving Woods a lot of credit for the long scoop and score fumble recovery TD, did you give Tevaughn Campbell that same level of credit when completed his scoop and score against the Bengals? With people having a generally poor view of Campbell on this forum, my recollection is that people downplayed that play as being more of a "Johnny on the spot" lucky play. However, one counts the Campbell play, I think the Woods play has to be counted the same way.

The one good INT I saw from Woods was when he anticipated the out route, undercut it, made a nice catch and ran it in for a pick 6. He deserves full credit for creating that turnover and producing the pick 6.

I have watched highlights of J.T. Woods. He doesn't excite me as a prospect, and I get what you say about his interceptions. But I haven't watched enough of him to say he wasn't worth the third-round pick. I doubt anyone on this forum has watched enough of Woods to say with any certainty what type of player he'll be.

I disagree about your view regarding general managers should pick based off of the consensus ranking. Mel Kiper and the rest who put these rankings together aren't good enough to be general managers. These pundits have several prospects going in the first round who fall much later and never amount to anything. The majority are laughing hysterically at Belichick's selection of Cole Strange in the first round. They did the same when Belichick took Logan Mankins in the first round and Sebastian Vollmer in the second. The mock drafts are entertaining and informative during the offseason, but those who put them together are not worth taking seriously on where a player should be picked.

[Budsman]

The history you are reciting is exactly the problem a team can run into when its GM thinks he knows better than all of the pundits. I can believe that a GM may know better than one or two pundits. I am less convinced when we are talking about a radically different opinion versus many, many pundits. A number of these pundits actually have NFL experience. I think the notion that our GM knows and everyone else does not is a dangerous notion that leads to such things as a consensus round 5 player (if I recall correctly) in Mouton being taken over Houston. That is a perfect example.

In that scenario, my simple suggestion is this. In cases where there is substantial divergence between the GM's ranking and the consensus ranking, take the consensus round 5 player at or near his consensus ranked value. If he ends being what the GM thought he was, then the GM has produced great value for the pick. If everyone else was right and the player is not as good as believed by the GM, then the pick is either no loss or a minimal loss.

I want to be clear that that general concept, plus the missed opportunity to get Jones are my concerns about what we did/failed to do in round 3 of the draft. And then, the issue was absolutely highlighted when we deliberately drafted (reached for) a player virtually identical in size as Jones (size that Staley specifically emphasized), but less athletic in Ogbonnia (while simultaneously passing on a chance to select a much need punter).

In response to your "fair question", Jones was a top 50 prospect, so I studied him. I saw the UConn versus Clemson game and the Senior Bowl. His presence was very noticeable. I saw his Senior Bowl practice reps where he dominated against soon to be drafted NFL players. One of those players he did well against was some guy named Zion Johnson. I read about Jones and saw highlights as well.

I did not get a chance to study Woods as carefully. By coincidence, I did see a couple of Baylor games, but it was not for the purpose of studying Woods. And, honestly, Woods did not stand out or "catch my eye". I did read about Woods before the draft, but did not study him to the degree I studied Jones. He did not make much an impression on me before the draft.

Even after I saw his highlights, which I think I may have seen before the draft as well some time ago, what I saw was a lot of plays that were bad opponent plays, not great Woods plays. Just look at his highlight video and let me know what you think. He did not strike me as quite the ballhawk that Staley gives him credit for being. Another poster first raised the comparison, but it really was like Cromartie 2007 where opponents just happened to throw the ball right to him (save and except for one totally awesome one handed INT against the Colts by Cromartie). And the problem, of course, is that those kinds of results are generally not sustainable from season to season as Cromartie proved as after he had the 10 INTs in 2007, he never topped 4 in any other season.

Also, for anyone giving Woods a lot of credit for the long scoop and score fumble recovery TD, did you give Tevaughn Campbell that same level of credit when completed his scoop and score against the Bengals? With people having a generally poor view of Campbell on this forum, my recollection is that people downplayed that play as being more of a "Johnny on the spot" lucky play. However, one counts the Campbell play, I think the Woods play has to be counted the same way.

The one good INT I saw from Woods was when he anticipated the out route, undercut it, made a nice catch and ran it in for a pick 6. He deserves full credit for creating that turnover and producing the pick 6.

[FoutsFan]

I do not have a positive description of Lucas and would not have considered trading up to get him. I think it is fair that we did not know that SEA would take Lucas after they took Cross.

Unless our front office wants to admit to knowing less than the people on our forum at the time, they get no credit for their failure of not getting Jones and then driving home the point that they needed the position they passed on by drafting a lesser of player of almost the exact same size as Jones and then emphasizing that player's size features during the post-draft press conference. It was an awesome display of turning gold into mud.

As for Woods, I think he makes the roster because he was a third round pick, but is not the immediate impact ball hawking player that Staley thinks he will be. I think it is easy for a player to lead the nation in INTs when almost every INT is gifted to the player.

Agree, our coach, GM, and scouts are idiots. They will rue the day they didn't listen to Chaincrusher!

Rue.jpg

[Xenos]

Ted Nguyen thinks he’s the perfect fit for us.

https://theathletic.com/3282066/2022/05/02/nfl-draft-best-team-scheme-player-matches/

8. JT Woods, FS, Los Angeles Chargers


Play style: Rangy free safety with experience in two-high system
Scheme: Two-high

JT Woods is an athletic 6-foot-2 safety with 4.3 speed and it shows on film. He has experience playing in a system that heavily uses two-high coverages like Staley’s. He mostly played as a deep system and displayed the range to break up passes and come up in run support. The Chargers already have one of the better safety duos with Derwin James and Nasir Adderley but with Woods in the mix, James is free to move around the defense and disrupt offenses from the nickel position.

“When you play five- and six-DB groupings, if you do move Derwin closer to the line of scrimmage or in the slot somewhere, you don’t want to lose that playmaking ability in the deep part of the field,” Staley explained on Friday night. “What JT gives you is premium range back there, and now you have two guys back there with him and Nas.”

Baylor vs. Ole Miss, 5:20 remaining in the first quarter, first-and-10



On this play, Baylor was in Cover 4 with brackets on both slot receivers. Woods was lined up to the offensive right (top of the screen) and appeared to have the inside part of the bracket.

The offensive concept was designed to isolate the inside linebacker on the running back executing a “pop” route and conflict him with a quarterback draw. If he sat back to cover the running back, the quarterback would keep the ball on a draw. If he came up to defend the draw, the quarterback could throw the ball over his head.



Ole Miss tried to spread both safeties toward the sideline by running the slot receivers on slot fades. However, once Woods saw the slot outside release, his inside leverage was no longer threatened so he got his eyes in the backfield and saw the pop pass coming. The linebacker came up to defend the draw, so the running back looked to get wide open.



The ball was thrown to the running back but Woods closed the distance in a hurry and put a vicious hit on the running back, dislodging the ball and forcing an incomplete pass.

The Chargers’ overarching defensive philosophy is to limit explosive plays and force offenses to drive the length of the field to score. Theoretically, with Woods, they’ll still be able to do that while freeing up James to put his many talents to use — whether that is matching up on slot receivers and tight ends, blitzing or playing run support.

[powderblueboy]

I do not have a positive description of Lucas and would not have considered trading up to get him. I think it is fair that we did not know that SEA would take Lucas after they took Cross.

Unless our front office wants to admit to knowing less than the people on our forum at the time, they get no credit for their failure of not getting Jones and then driving home the point that they needed the position they passed on by drafting a lesser of player of almost the exact same size as Jones and then emphasizing that player's size features during the post-draft press conference. It was an awesome display of turning gold into mud.

As for Woods, I think he makes the roster because he was a third round pick, but is not the immediate impact ball hawking player that Staley thinks he will be. I think it is easy for a player to lead the nation in INTs when almost every INT is gifted to the player.

That post wasn't meant for you. I was encouraging Xenos to trash this pick and breathlessly tell us how we could have traded up for the superior Lucas.

Did i tell you how I wanted the Chargers to get Jeffrey Simmons and they ended up with Tillery!! Who wouldn't now exchange Tillery and a 2nd for Simmons.

I was right and the Chargers were wrong.isser:

[blueman]

I like how fast and how much ground he covers, any ball in the air with some loft to it, this guy has a chance to make a play on it lol.

[Guest]

I have watched highlights of J.T. Woods. He doesn't excite me as a prospect, and I get what you say about his interceptions. But I haven't watched enough of him to say he wasn't worth the third-round pick. I doubt anyone on this forum has watched enough of Woods to say with any certainty what type of player he'll be.

I disagree about your view regarding general managers should pick based off of the consensus ranking. Mel Kiper and the rest who put these rankings together aren't good enough to be general managers. These pundits have several prospects going in the first round who fall much later and never amount to anything. The majority are laughing hysterically at Belichick's selection of Cole Strange in the first round. They did the same when Belichick took Logan Mankins in the first round and Sebastian Vollmer in the second. The mock drafts are entertaining and informative during the offseason, but those who put them together are not worth taking seriously on where a player should be picked.

To clarify, I am not suggesting that a GM consider any one pundit's views. I have been referring to consensus mocks which are typically based on the boards and analyses of many, many sources. Consensus big boards represent the weight of opinion and tend to neutralize the influence of outlier opinions.

And even then, I am mainly only suggesting that we not engage in major reaches versus consensus opinions, especially when vastly higher ranked players can be had.

Regarding Woods, if a head coach is going to emphasize his ball hawking ways, then the fact that his INTs and fumble scoop and score were almost all gifts is particularly relevant.

Finally, nobody is saying that the pick cannot work out. However, I am saying that we are using poor draft strategy. Sometimes, a team takes a bad approach and gets lucky.

[chargeroo]

So a 4-6 rounder in the 3rd.Yeaaaahh!!!

So, could it be possible that the Chargers brain trust is right and the 4-6 guys are wrong?