DABEARSDABOMB Posted April 8, 2016 Report Share Posted April 8, 2016 Very informative read from Gabriel on setting a draft board. I always persumed teams evaluated player by round grade, but looks like it is more just lined up top to bottom and you pick whomever is on top regardless. I say that because I would have assumed someone may not have been on your board in the first but is on your board in the 3rd (say if a 1st round talent slipped). The way it looks, if someone isn't on your list, you stay away from them and I suppose it makes sense and that is why you might see a 1st round graded player fall and continue to fall (as plenty of teams just keep laser focus on who they scouted and evaluated and went with from the beginning). http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2016/04/07/gab...-a-draft-board/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradjock Posted April 8, 2016 Report Share Posted April 8, 2016 Very informative read from Gabriel on setting a draft board. I always persumed teams evaluated player by round grade, but looks like it is more just lined up top to bottom and you pick whomever is on top regardless. I say that because I would have assumed someone may not have been on your board in the first but is on your board in the 3rd (say if a 1st round talent slipped). The way it looks, if someone isn't on your list, you stay away from them and I suppose it makes sense and that is why you might see a 1st round graded player fall and continue to fall (as plenty of teams just keep laser focus on who they scouted and evaluated and went with from the beginning). http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2016/04/07/gab...-a-draft-board/ Good article! The only problem I have is, how do you completely ignore a guy who is plummeting? Say Robert NKemdeche is still there at round #3. We wouldn't even consider him? I find that hard to believe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam Posted April 8, 2016 Report Share Posted April 8, 2016 Very informative read from Gabriel on setting a draft board. I always persumed teams evaluated player by round grade, but looks like it is more just lined up top to bottom and you pick whomever is on top regardless. I say that because I would have assumed someone may not have been on your board in the first but is on your board in the 3rd (say if a 1st round talent slipped). The way it looks, if someone isn't on your list, you stay away from them and I suppose it makes sense and that is why you might see a 1st round graded player fall and continue to fall (as plenty of teams just keep laser focus on who they scouted and evaluated and went with from the beginning). http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2016/04/07/gab...-a-draft-board/ That's not true for every team. Remember the picture from the Dallas draft room? http://miamiherald.typepad.com/.a/6a00d834...ed728264970b-pi Dallas slotted by round, and actually made their picks off who was the best value at their pick. There top 10 ranked players were gone and Dez was 11th and was drafted 24th, Sean Lee was ranked 14th and their 2nd rounder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lemonej Posted April 8, 2016 Report Share Posted April 8, 2016 When Aaron Rodgers was on the board and the Packers had Brett Farve under center but Rodgers was the highest player on the board and they took him. We need to embrace this concept because that is what is being tried to do here! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradjock Posted April 9, 2016 Report Share Posted April 9, 2016 When Aaron Rodgers was on the board and the Packers had Brett Farve under center but Rodgers was the highest player on the board and they took him. We need to embrace this concept because that is what is being tried to do here! See, that's what I don't get. How the hell do the Packers even have Aaron Rogers on their board? He was possibly projected to go #1 or at worst top ten. (effing Cedric Benson draft) At the time, WR was the greatest need for the Pack. From a realistic standpoint, they should have drafted Roddy White who went to Atlanta 4 picks later. After drafting Rogers, Favre had 5 REALLY good NFL seasons. What I'm getting at is 21 other teams had Rodgers off their board, probably because they didn't feel like they needed a QB. I'm thinking Green Bay adjusted on the fly. FYI, as per the Mully & Hannelly show, supposedly in the 2001 draft, the Bears did no research on David Terrell because they thought he'd be gone by the time they drafted at #8. We were hoping to draft Deuce McCallister. Despite doing no research on DT, when he was available at #8, we drafted him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted April 9, 2016 Report Share Posted April 9, 2016 Good article! The only problem I have is, how do you completely ignore a guy who is plummeting? Say Robert NKemdeche is still there at round #3. We wouldn't even consider him? I find that hard to believe. I think when they make up a draft board, it has a lot to do with valve. Sure thing types carry a better valve than ones with risks. Drafting a player in the first round brings risk but in the third would be considered a great valve. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZ54 Posted April 9, 2016 Report Share Posted April 9, 2016 Good article! The only problem I have is, how do you completely ignore a guy who is plummeting? Say Robert NKemdeche is still there at round #3. We wouldn't even consider him? I find that hard to believe. You're assuming the team didn't give Nkemdiche a Rd 4 or lower grade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam Posted April 9, 2016 Report Share Posted April 9, 2016 See, that's what I don't get. How the hell do the Packers even have Aaron Rogers on their board? He was possibly projected to go #1 or at worst top ten. (effing Cedric Benson draft) At the time, WR was the greatest need for the Pack. From a realistic standpoint, they should have drafted Roddy White who went to Atlanta 4 picks later. After drafting Rogers, Favre had 5 REALLY good NFL seasons. What I'm getting at is 21 other teams had Rodgers off their board, probably because they didn't feel like they needed a QB. I'm thinking Green Bay adjusted on the fly. FYI, as per the Mully & Hannelly show, supposedly in the 2001 draft, the Bears did no research on David Terrell because they thought he'd be gone by the time they drafted at #8. We were hoping to draft Deuce McCallister. Despite doing no research on DT, when he was available at #8, we drafted him. I don't know if teams didn't have Rodgers on the board, but they felt the player they drafted was rated higher than him. Cleveland had Dilfer at QB and drafted Braylon Edwards, the Bears had Grossman and drafted Benson, TB had Griese and drafted Williams. Baltimore had Anthony Wright at QB and drafted Clayton. To me the craziest part of the draft was that Dallas and Minnesota both had 2x picks prior to GB's, and they passed on Rodgers twice! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted April 11, 2016 Report Share Posted April 11, 2016 See, that's what I don't get. How the hell do the Packers even have Aaron Rogers on their board? He was possibly projected to go #1 or at worst top ten. (effing Cedric Benson draft) At the time, WR was the greatest need for the Pack. From a realistic standpoint, they should have drafted Roddy White who went to Atlanta 4 picks later. After drafting Rogers, Favre had 5 REALLY good NFL seasons. What I'm getting at is 21 other teams had Rodgers off their board, probably because they didn't feel like they needed a QB. I'm thinking Green Bay adjusted on the fly. FYI, as per the Mully & Hannelly show, supposedly in the 2001 draft, the Bears did no research on David Terrell because they thought he'd be gone by the time they drafted at #8. We were hoping to draft Deuce McCallister. Despite doing no research on DT, when he was available at #8, we drafted him. Regarding the bolded, I don't believe any team is so stupid as to exclude any position if the value is so great as to override need. They probably had him on their big board rated pretty highly, and when he dropped as far as he did it was unexpected. So instead of the guy they were expecting, someone rated in the 20s (if they were lucky in the teens), there was a guy rated as a top 10, maybe even top 5 player. The ROI there is too great. The key here, however, is that only good teams can do this. Only good teams can take that chance. The previous season they were 10-6 and won the North. They had a top 5 offense and a subpar defense. The next two years Farv was crazy Farv, with tons of INTs. Otherwise they were the same team that felt they could compete as long as Farv didn't just throw the ball to the other team consistently. The Bears haven't been in such a position more than once in the last 20+ years, but they wasted that opportunity by creating a QB controversy, changing up 1/2 of the DL, ignorantly dropping Thomas Jones, wasting draft picks on Dan Bazuin and Michael Okwo, and generally not preparing for the future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradjock Posted April 12, 2016 Report Share Posted April 12, 2016 You're assuming the team didn't give Nkemdiche a Rd 4 or lower grade. But what this article is saying is that teams don't worry about the round. Teams stack their list of players. When it's time to draft, they take whoever is next in their stack. Round has nothing to do with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradjock Posted April 12, 2016 Report Share Posted April 12, 2016 Regarding the bolded, I don't believe any team is so stupid as to exclude any position if the value is so great as to override need. They probably had him on their big board rated pretty highly, and when he dropped as far as he did it was unexpected. So instead of the guy they were expecting, someone rated in the 20s (if they were lucky in the teens), there was a guy rated as a top 10, maybe even top 5 player. The ROI there is too great. The key here, however, is that only good teams can do this. Only good teams can take that chance. The previous season they were 10-6 and won the North. They had a top 5 offense and a subpar defense. The next two years Farv was crazy Farv, with tons of INTs. Otherwise they were the same team that felt they could compete as long as Farv didn't just throw the ball to the other team consistently. The Bears haven't been in such a position more than once in the last 20+ years, but they wasted that opportunity by creating a QB controversy, changing up 1/2 of the DL, ignorantly dropping Thomas Jones, wasting draft picks on Dan Bazuin and Michael Okwo, and generally not preparing for the future. I agree with the first part but disagree with the latter. In 2006 we traded down to draft Devin Hester and Dannieal Manning. Good players, but we had the luxury to wait. In 2007 we took Greg Olsen. Really nice player but also a luxury. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted April 12, 2016 Report Share Posted April 12, 2016 I agree with the first part but disagree with the latter. In 2006 we traded down to draft Devin Hester and Dannieal Manning. Good players, but we had the luxury to wait. In 2007 we took Greg Olsen. Really nice player but also a luxury. I don't agree with your disagreement. 2006 - Daniel Manning was drafted to be the team's FS because Chris Harris was not a FS (Harris was a SS who was NEVER going to take the job from Mike Brown). Manning had crazy athletic upside and it was a worthy gamble. Hester was another freak athlete who had crazy upside, so much so that nobody really knew what position he would play. Many thought he would play WR, especially since Justin freaking Gage was the #2 WR in 2005 with 31 catches. 31 CATCHES. And if you recall correctly, the year prior was when Bobby Wade's slow ass and questionable hands did almost nothing as the returner. The Bears needed WR, returner, and a maybe even a nickel CB. 2007 - Desmond Clark was a journeyman his entire career. In 2006 he was average at best. The Bears were absolutely average on offense, and probably worse if not for the defense and ridiculous field position Hester gave the team. They needed upgrades on offense, and Olsen was a definite upgrade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.