Draft Grades

[Guest]

My feelings exactly, drafts can’t be graded yet. It’s amazing to here people calling TT stupid for not trading up for their guy. Maybe just maybe it wasn’t Staley/TT’s guy? Let’s see how it plays out and then evaluate. I will admit I wasn’t that high on Herbert and now I can’t imagine the team without him.

I agree that we never know for sure until much later how we did. However, this thread calls for a snap grade.

Also, Jones was not "my player", he was the consensus big board's player by a country mile and 93 slots better than Woods. It would difficult for me to try to get a difference that large in the middle of the third round with any sort of reasonable draft candidates.

The "not Staley's/TT's guy" argument fails as Jones is eerily similar to Ogbonnia in the traits specifically emphasized by Staley in his post-draft press conference only Jones is way, way better than Ogbonnia, so he was exactly the kind of player they wanted, which makes their failure to trade up from 79 to 75 even more subject to criticism.

I think a team does not deserve a favorable grade when it engages in a significant reach 5 times in 8 picks versus the consensus big board. Expressed differently, I have not confirmed this, but we may have selected the consensus lowest rated player of the round in 3 of the 7 rounds of the draft. I hope it works out for us, but that type of drafting does not warrant high initial marks.

[equivocation]

I think if Spiller shows NFL chops this turns into at least a decent draft. Of he's a slightly better version of Rountree, we let a lot of potential inpact players pass us by in r4 and r5.

He's supposed to be NFL ready with a lower ceiling so we'll find out if he can cut it soon.

[QSmokey]

There seems to be a prevailing thought amongst a few posters that draft day trades - either up or down - are a slam dunk. That is, if *we* needed to trade up or down, then of course there would be a willing trade partner, somewhere out there, willing to give us a fair deal and get us into position to land that extra 3rd- or 2nd-round pick(s). Or move up ahead of some team that is going to take that blue chip player who has managed, for some unknown reason, to tumble down the draft boards of all 32 teams.

First of all, we will never know if Telesco made any attempt(s) to do so. And I can't imagine any GM admitting, after failing to trade up (or down), that that was his intention. "Well, yeah, we really wanted [insert your favorite crush player(s) names here], and we did try to move up/down, but we had no takers. So we settled for [the guy(s) we picked]". Right.

Second, I'm sure all teams' GMs have an overall draft plan; guys they are targeting in a least a few of the rounds, based on need/scheme fit/potential/versatility, etc. If you make a trade, it has a cascading effect. The draft plan you started with has just been blown up. So we trade out of our #1 pick slot and lose Zion; well, now you have to settle (and it would be settling) for a lesser player at the same position or go a completely different direction with the pick(s) you just acquired, and address that need later - again, settling on a lesser talent. Same if you trade up; you land a player you covet, let's say, but that changes the draft strategy from that point forward. You *may* fill one need by trading up/down, but now have created a need somewhere else because of that trade.

So this idea that you can just trade, at will, wherever you are in the draft, is probably not as easy a thing to do as a few people are suggesting. If will probably never net you a "perfect" draft. And, again, we'll never know if Telesco might have attempted to do so.

[RTPbolt]

TT said there were no calls when #17 was on the clock if i recall correctly. Not much you can do if little interest unless uou want to give it away for less than fair value. I think staying put and seeing who is there is usually the better strategy. 13 llike last year would have had a few possible “surprise” drops of a top 10 rated guy but at 17 you are on the edge of the typical true first round grade guys. Zion aas arguably the best at his position and appears ready to drop in and learn and a high ceiling. I cant not give an A. After that starting in the 3rd its always subjective. I like some guys and think in general we filled needs with coachable high character talent. I will say B to B+ without seeing practices. We get 3 starters and depth that turns into an A.

[gzubeck]

TT said there were no calls when #17 was on the clock if i recall correctly. Not much you can do if little interest unless uou want to give it away for less than fair value. I think staying put and seeing who is there is usually the better strategy. 13 llike last year would have had a few possible “surprise” drops of a top 10 rated guy but at 17 you are on the edge of the typical true first round grade guys. Zion aas arguably the best at his position and appears ready to drop in and learn and a high ceiling. I cant not give an A. After that starting in the 3rd its always subjective. I like some guys and think in general we filled needs with coachable high character talent. I will say B to B+ without seeing practices. We get 3 starters and depth that turns into an A.

I was stunned when there was a huge run on receivers before us and zero interest in QBs!

:whistlin:

[ChargersPowderBlue]

Because I’m sick of seeing Bosa gassed in the 4th quarter when he’s needed the most because he can’t come off the field. If you think Bosa and Mack are going to play 90% of snaps then I guess you don’t care about depth, but that’s unrealistic. Go watch the Texans game from last year if you think EDGE depth isn’t important.

It would help if Staley manages the snaps better on the guys up front and not overwork the starters. He hasn't come around to this, realizing it. I hope he does. Staley should bring in someone who knows how to manage this.

We do have Rumph who was drafted last year, lets give him a chance and see what he can do with more time. While the backup edges are in need, the backup IDLs are just as much needed. Bosa and Mack will need more help in the middle as well. No, SJD and AJ are not who you want to rely on in passing situations, it's the same as relying on Justin Jones or the other guys who this team had who don't really provide spark as a pass rusher. We've been down this road before, when Bosa and Ingram had their troubles because of not having help on the interior. Teams in the past were able to neutralize Bosa and Ingram because there wasn't someone who was a threat that they had to account for. The same can happen with Bosa and Mack. Something that can't be overlooked.

I agree that we never know for sure until much later how we did. However, this thread calls for a snap grade.

Also, Jones was not "my player", he was the consensus big board's player by a country mile and 93 slots better than Woods. It would difficult for me to try to get a difference that large in the middle of the third round any sort of reasonable draft candidates.

The "not Staley's/TT's guy" argument fails as Jones is eerily similar to Ogbonnia in the traits specifically emphasized by Staley in his post-draft press conference only Jones is way, way better than Ogbonnia, so he was exactly the kind of player they wanted, which makes their failure to trade up from 79 to 75 even more subject to criticism.

I don't know what BS and TT could have done to trade up for him. They might of had to sacrifice something, which I did not want the team to do. Not picking in the second round was depressing. So I was glad they could get whatever they could get. You just have to let things come to you and pick the best player that is available. I wish we could of gotten Jones too. But I like the Otito pick, even though he isn't the prospect that Travis Jones is. We still acquired a player who fills a need of the team.

[Cdn Bolt]

Well we drafted the 3 strongest lineman in the draft by 225 bench press at the combine . Zion Johnson had 32 reps, Jamaree Salyer had 31 and Otito Ogbonnia had 29. You can't coach strength lol.

2022 NFL Combine Results - NFL.com

[Guest]

I don't know what BS and TT could have done to trade up for him. They might of had to sacrifice something, which I did not want the team to do. Not picking in the second round was depressing. So I was glad they could get whatever they could get. You just have to let things come to you and pick the best player that is available. I wish we could of gotten Jones too. But I like the Otito pick, even though he isn't the prospect that Travis Jones is. We still acquired a player who fills a need of the team.

What Telesco could have done was to offer either this year's 5th round draft pick or our next year's 4th round draft pick in addition to our third round pick to move up 4 spots into #75 and ahead of BAL. Houston actually did trade its 3rd and 5th to move into that sport during the middle of the third round. Our 3rd and 5th round picks were more valuable picks as they were earlier picks in both rounds.

Obviously, Jones was ranked 93 players better than Woods, which easily justifies the trade up. We would have received a round 1/2 faller at #76, which is exactly what happened in 2013 when we drafted Keenan Allen.

We simply need to be more aggressive in the war room and get high value players when they are there for the taking. Our failure to get full value for our picks is likely to hurt us because we will lose overall talent comparatively to other teams that do get full value for their picks. It is the kind of thing that prevents a good team from being great.

[Guest]

There seems to be a prevailing thought amongst a few posters that draft day trades - either up or down - are a slam dunk. That is, if *we* needed to trade up or down, then of course there would be a willing trade partner, somewhere out there, willing to give us a fair deal and get us into position to land that extra 3rd- or 2nd-round pick(s). Or move up ahead of some team that is going to take that blue chip player who has managed, for some unknown reason, to tumble down the draft boards of all 32 teams.

First of all, we will never know if Telesco made any attempt(s) to do so. And I can't imagine any GM admitting, after failing to trade up (or down), that that was his intention. "Well, yeah, we really wanted [insert your favorite crush player(s) names here], and we did try to move up/down, but we had no takers. So we settled for [the guy(s) we picked]". Right.

Second, I'm sure all teams' GMs have an overall draft plan; guys they are targeting in a least a few of the rounds, based on need/scheme fit/potential/versatility, etc. If you make a trade, it has a cascading effect. The draft plan you started with has just been blown up. So we trade out of our #1 pick slot and lose Zion; well, now you have to settle (and it would be settling) for a lesser player at the same position or go a completely different direction with the pick(s) you just acquired, and address that need later - again, settling on a lesser talent. Same if you trade up; you land a player you covet, let's say, but that changes the draft strategy from that point forward. You *may* fill one need by trading up/down, but now have created a need somewhere else because of that trade.

So this idea that you can just trade, at will, wherever you are in the draft, is probably not as easy a thing to do as a few people are suggesting. If will probably never net you a "perfect" draft. And, again, we'll never know if Telesco might have attempted to do so.

While these comments may be true at times, they are not true with respect to the Travis Jones situation.

The draft pick in question (#75) was actually traded to HOU during the middle of the third round using the very trade that I have suggested (our 3rd and 5th round picks for #75). And our 3rd and 5th round picks were more valuable than HOU's as they were earlier picks in both rounds. So, yes, that trade was there to be made because it actually was made by another team for less draft capital than what our offer would have been.

[QSmokey]

While these comments may be true at times, they are not true with respect to the Travis Jones situation.

The draft pick in question (#75) was actually traded to HOU during the middle of the third round using the very trade that I have suggested (our 3rd and 5th round picks for #75). And our 3rd and 5th round picks were more valuable than HOU's as they were earlier picks in both rounds. So, yes, that trade was there to be made because it actually was made by another team for less draft capital than what our offer would have been.

I mean, the bottom line is that time will tell if we blew it by not making the trade. And I'm going under the assumption that there was, indeed, an opportunity to do so. Telesco/Staley probably - most probably - had a plan that they intended to stick with, something they felt comfortable/confident with, the hell with want anybody else thinks. So either Telesco just stubbornly stuck with his plan, as you imply, or he tried and there were no takers, despite what appears to be our more attractive draft capital.

I still think we had an overall good draft - solid 'B' - from me. No draft is going to be perfect for all of us; there's always disappointment. Just gotta hope that, on balance, we came out ahead. Which I think we did.

[Ghost of Quacksaw]

Bolt-Dude’s draft score: B

Woulda been a B- but the Horvath pick tipped the scales.

Zion: A
This wasn’t just the most responsible pick, it was the right pick. I think we got a solid 10-year contributor. Somewhere Rivers is yelling an angry flurry of daggumits.

Woods: B
I’m interested to learn more about this kid because I’ll admit he wasn’t on my radar. Under Staley, if Woods adds a few pounds and improves his tackling technique, then watch out. He’s got a nose for the ball and he’s built like Cromartie. Looks extremely athletic, just needs to grow into himself. I know coach has a special plan for his skill-set. This was a Staley pick 1000% and he’ll make sure the world knows he was right.

*I would have liked TT to get creative. Missing a falling Travis Jones by 2 picks seems inexcusable.

Spiller: C-
Maybe I’m missing something, but this one’s got me confused. I know he had a lot of hype with pundits, but not me. I see shiftiness on tape, but if you don’t watch highlights only, he’s very easy to bottle up if the hole doesn’t majestically open. As much as I don’t see on tape, I see less in his athletic profile. Those testing numbers are atrocious. Hopefully the improved OL will do him favors.

Otito: B
Big-time traits pick here. He has the ideal build for a Staley NT, kinda like a bigger SJD. But I watched a lot of UCLA and when I focused on him, it wasn’t always good. In fact, a lot of his play was alarmingly bad. If he improves his technique, then he could be solid. But he’s not special. There were other, more interesting prospects available.

Jamaree Salyer: A-
Great value here, it seems. I heard there’s medical concerns, which makes it risky. So I won’t give it a solid A. I don’t think he’ll win a starting role at either guard or left tackle as a rookie, but he could be the future after Feiler. Possibly the future at RT if we don’t re-sign Pip… I think Pip gets the starting job, but we’ll just have to see how that goes. If he struggles, I think Feiler will fill, then Salyer gets his shot at LG.

Ja-Sir Taylor: B-
Has the traits to be good, but I don’t see a starting caliber player here. Solid backup might be his ceiling, but he could easily be a career PS guy. Obviously wasn’t a big college stand out. We’ll see how he develops.

Deanne Leonard: C+
Who? Uhh…I hear he runs good. Was really hoping for an edge l project here.

Zander Horvath: A
Love the pick for the special teams and H-back potential. Looks beastly, jumps high, runs fast…especially for his size. Might carve out a role as a reliable short yardage machine, which is huge for Staley’s 4th and 1s. I believe he can do everything Stephen Anderson did and possibly lots more. Gritty, loves contact, soft hands, nasty stiff arm, and a hurtle move. I like it.

You know what? I agree with you about 90%.

Staley gushes about what a great scheme fit J.T. Woods is, which helps me understand why Woods is the guy who was selected, when there were 4 or 5 safeties remaining on the board at the time J.T. was selected who had higher ratings. If Staley isn't simply 'making shit up', then this pick gets a B+. Staley's confidence in Woods suggests that Staley believes that Woods is highly coachable and receptive to do what's involved in becoming the best player he can be.

Spiller's selection checks most of the boxes that the Bolts needed for their RB2. Ideally, he'd be 10 pounds heavier, and a bit faster, but he appears to do well waiting for a crease to appear, and then exploding through it. He runs a bit high, like Eric Dickerson did, but the Bolts aren't going to need (hopefully) 25 carries per game from him. He can take those hits, if his load is in the 5-10 range. If we keep in mind that his most crucial carries will be of the 3rd & 1, 4th & 1 variety, then what's important is that Spiller MOVES THE CHAINS. Gaudy "per carry" average is unnecessary.

So, again-- if we give Staley a bit of pre-emptive credit for selecting shrewdly with scheme fit in mind, Spiller *should* be the answer the club is looking for at RB2. Perhaps not ideal, but absolutely possessing the traits/ability to get the job done. So personally? I give the pick of Spiller a solid 'B'.

Completely agree with you on Tito and Salyer. IMO, Ja-Sir Taylor's best chance to make the team and help is as a KR.

The pick of Leonard had to be a BPA thing. 'Cause if there were a better edge candidate at that point in the draft, it would have made sense to take him. At *this* point of the draft, I have to think Telesco is looking at thew combination of team need + raw ability + coachability.

You'd figure that between special teams and run blocking, Zander Horvath is likely to beat out his competition, or he wouldn't have been selected. His competition is primarily Gabe Nabors and Hunter Kampmoyer.

I read where someone compared Horvath with Mike Alstott. All I know is *this*: If I imagine a 4th and 1, and Horvath as the FB in front of Isaiah Spiller... I like the odds of either of them being able to get the needed yard, running behind the re-built Oline.

So personally? I give this draft a B+.

-

[gzubeck]

I think if Spiller shows NFL chops this turns into at least a decent draft. Of he's a slightly better version of Rountree, we let a lot of potential inpact players pass us by in r4 and r5.

He's supposed to be NFL ready with a lower ceiling so we'll find out if he can cut it soon.

Injury failure or fumbleruski failure. The other stuff on his tape says no.