Updated mock for NFL Draft

[BDawk4Prez]

I’m not a big “follow a guy through college” guy.

What I am is a guy that watched a lot of Pitts tape at Florida and there is no denying that he’s a beast. Could he bust, sure, but no more likely than others. I’ll gladly take the chance if he’s the bpa whenever Philly picks.

[koldjerky]

I don’t think WR has a higher bust rate rather the busts are higher profile compared to the TE.



And in each one of those the cases the highly taken TEs did fine, but it was a later one that ends up being better.

And I have a bit of a theory about this:
Look at Kelce and Kittle. Two traditionally run based schools. So they didn’t put up the gaudy stats that other higher taken guys did. But their tape showed what they could do in limited opportunities. And teams get too caught up in the did produce because there’s more tape of them doing it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Rate wouldn’t be the right word, more so you’re seeing a lot more WRs bust because you’re seeing a lot more WRs picked than TEs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[warfelg]

Rate wouldn’t be the right word, more so you’re seeing a lot more WRs bust because you’re seeing a lot more WRs picked than TEs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well yea. To me it’s like the stat of most stolen cars in the US is always topped by the F150. Well the most commonly owned car in America is the F150.

Bust rate is about the same. We perceive it as a WR issue because there are more of them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Andrei00]

Well yea. To me it’s like the stat of most stolen cars in the US is always topped by the F150. Well the most commonly owned car in America is the F150.

Bust rate is about the same. We perceive it as a WR issue because there are more of them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/...-the-nfl-draft

From 2015, but make of it what you will.

[warfelg]

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/...-the-nfl-draft

From 2015, but make of it what you will.

Not much since they don’t explain what they consider bust rate and their boom/bust metric is based on a popularity contest.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[QB_Eagles]

Well the most commonly owned car in America is the F150.

Seriously? That huge thing?

[Andrei00]

Not much since they don’t explain what they consider bust rate and their boom/bust metric is based on a popularity contest.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Non-Pro-Bowl/All-Pro players who have started less than 50 career games. It's explained.

[koldjerky]

I’d be more curious with just non all pro.

Also would be more curious with data showing the value received per round.

Like a TE may be all pro in round 1 but there are two more all pros in round 3 and 4 of that draft. I’d see more value in taking a different position in round 1.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[warfelg]

Seriously? That huge thing?

Yup


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[hugepatsfan]

I don't think historical data or anything like that can be a substitute for evaluation of each year's draft board.

You have to evaluate each player on his own merits, project what you think he can/will be in the NFL. Rank them accordingly on their ability. Then consider your roster and adjust players up or down for that (or off the board entirely if you just can't allocate more resources to that position, particularly higher picks).

Tom Brady is included in the historical data of 6th round picks for example. Is that realistic? HOFers drafted late are outliers, not something that should be factored into expectations for any given year's draft class.

And on positional value, the league changes. It's so much more nuanced now. Teams now have personnel to exploit non elite talents anywhere. Guard was historically devalued but teams didn't have the same level of athleticism on the defensive interior but we've seen Shereff and Nelson go extremely high in the draft. RT used to be a low value spot and now no one bats an eye if a team with a franchise LT takes an OT in the top 5. Things change over time as the game evolves.

On the TE position specifically, the players lining up there now are just a different breed of athlete. We've seen some of the greatest passing offenses of all time in NE (Gronkowski), KC (Kelce) and NO (Graham) build around TEs as the driving forces (even if those teams had WRs get more yards the TEs are the guys who defenses base coverages off of and the QB keys his reads around). SF got to a SB recently with Kittle as their focal point receiving threat.

It's a rare thing, don't get me wrong. There is a huge difference between being a good receiving option at TE and being a TE who dictates coverage. The former is a good player, but not worth drafting so highly, that I agree. But Pitts shows definitely potential to be the latter and that to me is worth a top pick if that's the type of ability you forecast.

We talk about "positional value" but to me, a guy who's a receiving threat at TE and a guy who dictates coverage from the TE position aren't even the same position. Maybe in name but there's just worlds of difference.

[koldjerky]

I don't think historical data or anything like that can be a substitute for evaluation of each year's draft board.

You have to evaluate each player on his own merits, project what you think he can/will be in the NFL. Rank them accordingly on their ability. Then consider your roster and adjust players up or down for that (or off the board entirely if you just can't allocate more resources to that position, particularly higher picks).

Tom Brady is included in the historical data of 6th round picks for example. Is that realistic? HOFers drafted late are outliers, not something that should be factored into expectations for any given year's draft class.

And on positional value, the league changes. It's so much more nuanced now. Teams now have personnel to exploit non elite talents anywhere. Guard was historically devalued but teams didn't have the same level of athleticism on the defensive interior but we've seen Shereff and Nelson go extremely high in the draft. RT used to be a low value spot and now no one bats an eye if a team with a franchise LT takes an OT in the top 5. Things change over time as the game evolves.

On the TE position specifically, the players lining up there now are just a different breed of athlete. We've seen some of the greatest passing offenses of all time in NE (Gronkowski), KC (Kelce) and NO (Graham) build around TEs as the driving forces (even if those teams had WRs get more yards the TEs are the guys who defenses base coverages off of and the QB keys his reads around). SF got to a SB recently with Kittle as their focal point receiving threat.

It's a rare thing, don't get me wrong. There is a huge difference between being a good receiving option at TE and being a TE who dictates coverage. The former is a good player, but not worth drafting so highly, that I agree. But Pitts shows definitely potential to be the latter and that to me is worth a top pick if that's the type of ability you forecast.

We talk about "positional value" but to me, a guy who's a receiving threat at TE and a guy who dictates coverage from the TE position aren't even the same position. Maybe in name but there's just worlds of difference.

I know it’s not the be all end all at all, but I want to go through the data 2000-2018 drafts with all rounds pulling where they were drafted and their PFR career value. The listing also shows all pros and pro bowls.

It’s going to take a little bit but I’m going to do it!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mr.B]

Jaycee Horn killing it at his workout today.

https://twitter.com/nfl/status/1374779292433928201?s=21


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tg11]

Updated mock that I just saw online this time off Pewter Report

1- Trevor Lawrence (QB) (Jaguars)
2- Zach Wilson (QB) (Jets)
3- Penei Sewell (OT) (Dolphins)

4- (TRADE)- Denver Broncos move up to #4 by trading the #9 pick, a 2nd round pick (40th), and 5th round pick (153rd) to the Atlanta Falcons- Denver with the 4th pick take Trey Lance (QB) (Broncos)

5- Kyle Pitts (TE) (Bengals)
6- (TRADE)- Panthers move up to #6 by trading the #8 pick and #73 pick (3rd rounder) to the Eagles; Carolina with the 6th pick take Justin Fields (QB) (Panthers)

7- Jaylen Waddle (WR) (Lions)
8- Patrick Surtain Jr (CB) (Eagles via trade w/Panthers)

9- Travis Etienne (RB) (Falcons via trade w/Broncos)
10- (TRADE)- Patriots move up to #10 by trading the #15 pick, #96 pick (3rd rounder) and CB Stephon Gilmore to the Cowboys...Patriots at #10 select Mac Jones (QB) (Patriots)


11- Micah Parsons (LB) (Giants)
12- Jaycee Horn (CB) (49ers)
13- Ja'Marr Chase (WR) (Chargers)
14- Rashawn Slater (OT) (Vikings)
15- Kwity Paye (EDGE) (Cowboys via trade w/Patriots)

16- (TRADE)- Dolphins move up to #16 by trading the #18 pick, #123 pick (4th rounder) and a 2022 4th round pick to the Cardinals...Dolphins take DeVonta Smith (WR) (Dolphins)

17- Teven Jenkins (OT) (Raiders)
18- Caleb Farley (CB) (Cardinals via trade w/MIA)
19- Alijah Vera-Tucker (OL) (Washington)
20- Kadarius Toney (WR) (Bears)
21- Christian Darrisaw (OT) (Colts)
22- Rashod Bateman (WR) (Titans)
23- Greg Newsome (CB) (Jets)
24- Najee Harris (RB) (Steelers)
25- Trevon Moehrig (S) (Jaguars)
26- Zaven Collins (LB) (Browns)
27- Rondale Moore (WR) (Ravens)
28- Christian Barmore (DT) (Saints)
29- Jeremiah Owusu-Koramoah (LB) (Packers)
30- Asante Samuel Jr (CB) (Bills)
31- Azeez Ojulari (EDGE) (Chiefs)
32- Javonte Williams (RB) (Buccaneers)

[koldjerky]

That’s a garbage mock


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[EAGLES3658]

That’s a garbage mock


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah, no way the Panthers move up 2 spots to take a QB and only have to give a 3rd.