andrews31cain21

Everyone talks about a player being "Over Drafted"

29 posts in this topic

Plain and simple... It takes two parties to dance.  If you really want a player.. ala McGary, and you think you can get him at 40, but there is no one willing to trade back with you, then what do you do?? Sit and hope for the best or do you go and get your boy.... We went and got our boy!... You can always speculate about someone being drafted "Too High".. but if thats who you want, and no one is willing to trade back with you (thats the key") then you just have to go and get him!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, andrews31cain21 said:

Plain and simple... It takes two parties to dance.  If you really want a player.. ala McGary, and you think you can get him at 40, but there is no one willing to trade back with you, then what do you do?? Sit and hope for the best or do you go and get your boy.... We went and got our boy!... You can always speculate about someone being drafted "Too High".. but if thats who you want, and no one is willing to trade back with you (thats the key") then you just have to go and get him!

McGary would not have been there at #45, nor would the Falcons 2nd/3rd choice at T. There was a run on Ts right after TD traded-up for McGary. The Falcon's Green Room got it right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's all speculation. I've know I've done it, but it's almost always impossible to call someone a 'reach' as no one has a complete picture. 2-3 years from now, it won't matter where someone was drafted. Take Debo for example, he's now a top 5 (arguably top 3) linebacker in the NFL - no one cares that he was a 2nd round pick. 

Flying Falcon and Dukeduke211 like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Cheap Talk said:

McGary would not have been there at #45, nor would the Falcons 2nd/3rd choice at T. There was a run on Ts right after TD traded-up for McGary. The Falcon's Green Room got it right.

McGary was gone by 35, Pats, Cardinals and Bills were high on him. TD got the intel and traded up. 

OP: There wasn’t over drafting before the draft became a ratings game. All these draft experts aren’t gonna admit they were wrong, just use the word “overdrafted”. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Smiler11 said:

It's all speculation. I've know I've done it, but it's almost always impossible to call someone a 'reach' as no one has a complete picture. 2-3 years from now, it won't matter where someone was drafted. Take Debo for example, he's now a top 5 (arguably top 3) linebacker in the NFL - no one cares that he was a 2nd round pick. 

Omg! Thank you.

Neal was a reach

We overpaid for Sanu

Before they had a chance to play...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, capologist said:

How many people wanted Cody Ford or Juwaan Taylor?  All the "experts" had them going top 15 or top 20 at least.  If the "experts" are off on those prospects then certainly they are off the opposite way as well...

This is something that is overlooked.  Evaluating prospects is in some ways completely subjective, but you can take a few things away from the process.

Imagine you're an NFL GM or talent scout.  You know your team needs, you know your scheme fits, and you know what kind of player you want.  You also have a reasonably good idea of what other teams are looking for in a player.  The way this board approaches things, you would think the Falcons front office is just way out to lunch on a lot of these players, and doesn't understand why someone else is better.  But if you're a Falcons FO executive or scout, then you know the work you've put in.  You know little details about a guy like his arm length, height, weight, explosiveness, strength, speed.  You also know other details like his history, his reputation with his team and teammates. You've watched film so you know how good (or bad) his technique is, how smart he is, what sort of judgment he uses during games.  And you can reasonably assume that other teams know these things too.

So when you hone in on a guy and you say "this is our guy," and you see other teams ahead of you who have similar needs and scheme fits, you go get that guy, because if you don't, they will.  Now, do you absolutely 100% know they want the same guy?  Of course not.  But you have to reasonably assume they see what you see.  That they've also done their homework.  That they understand the player the same way you do.

That works in reverse too.  You know when a team will never look at a guy.  Grady Jarrett is an example of that.  He's "too short" to play DT in the NFL, according to most talent evaluators, assuming most teams run a certain type of scheme.  But not in our scheme.  So really, at the time we drafted him, we had to worry about Seattle and Jacksonville, and probably no one else.  So we could let him slide and get tremendous value in the 5th round as a result.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was listening to Bill Polian on SiriusXM and he said the fan and journalists had access to about 30% of the information available on a given athlete. There is no way the fan or journalist can predict what a team is thinking and I can say that for certain that I can’t read minds so I leave it to the experts. 

capologist, JDaveG, Geneaut and 3 others like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

****, it's very possible our scouting and TD dropped the ball, however, there's not a single soul on this forum that is even close to being qualified at making that judgment at this point in time.

g-dawg and JDaveG like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, capologist said:

How many people wanted Cody Ford or Juwaan Taylor?  All the "experts" had them going top 15 or top 20 at least.  If the "experts" are off on those prospects then certainly they are off the opposite way as well...

Agreed. There was very little that separated picks 15-45. Any of those players could have been picked at any time depending on how much one team liked them. 

capologist likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, capologist said:

How many people wanted Cody Ford or Juwaan Taylor?  All the "experts" had them going top 15 or top 20 at least.  If the "experts" are off on those prospects then certainly they are off the opposite way as well...

Yes,  I always say the NFL Drafboards look a lot different than the Sports media ones.

As to Taylor, he could have an arthritic knee - which - long term is worse than an ACL because it’s chronic and only gets worse.  I have arthritic knees- it sucks.  Of course I am 53.

Sounded like Cody Ford was cocky and out of shape.  How the h3LL are you out of shape and fat between February to end of April? Also hints of cockiness/attitude perhaps.

It doesn’t take much to drop out of the first round.   NFL Teams invest millions of dollars in scouting and if you have some warts, the NFL GM simply says “Next” - especially in the 1st round.

Look at Raiders draft and the video of that phone call between Raiders GM Mike Mayock and Clelin Ferrell.  Leadership matters. Character matters.   Should Raiders have traded down if Ferrell was their guy?  Probably.  I have no problem with the player and you can see that he was clean off the field and brings leadership.

Mayock/Raiders drafted three really good players.  Could they maybe have drafted some guys with more upside? Maybe but as long as players have really good talent and fit your culture, then a good chance it works out.

Most of Falcons misses in first round lacked something.   As supremely talented as Mike Vick was - he lacked work ethic, discipline and judgement.

Lindstrom displays leadership and toughness.   Christian Wilkins Had intangibles in spades.  

Rashan Gary has some red flags. Ed Oliver(even though I love his game) had some red flags.

We wouldn’t have gone wrong had we drafted Christian Wilkins.  We won’t go wrong with Chris Lindstrom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's stupid. Because frankly, the information we have is SEVERELY limited in comparison to the NFL teams. We can watch all the film we want, but if we don't know the schemes, techniques, or assignments being taught/played, we have no clue how to fully assess it. HeIl, most fans don't even understand the scheme their team runs to project a potential scheme fit. So saying "We reached and could have gotten him later!" ignores that you have no clue if that's a fact, you're just assuming based on the media consensus of a player. Remember when we "stole" Peter Konz, only for him to go and bust big time. The league saw him as a flawed player and it panned out exactly that way. 

These guys sole job is to study and analyze players. They have the time and funds to travel to Boston College, meet with Lindstrom, go over film and ask why a certain play happened, talked to the coach and ask how he took to coaching and how he developed and pry deeper into the player. Our crusty arses sit around reading scouting reports and looking and YouTube videos hoping to get an understanding of said player. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, vel said:

HeIl, most fans don't even understand the scheme their team runs to project a potential scheme fit.

I won't name names but I remember in 2015 or so when someone here said Kyle Shanahan's scheme was the reason we were struggling because "pass routes take too long to develop" (a canard that has been a favorite here since the Reeves days).  Then he said we should go to a system more like what Denver uses if we won't use Koetter's system.

When Gary Effing Kubiak was the coach at Denver.  And Koetter is the king of long-developing pass plays and leaving 5 in for protection.

It is a gross understatement that most fans don't understand their team's scheme.  Because this is an otherwise outstanding poster here that said this.

vel likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JDaveG said:

I won't name names but I remember in 2015 or so when someone here said Kyle Shanahan's scheme was the reason we were struggling because "pass routes take too long to develop" (a canard that has been a favorite here since the Reeves days).  Then he said we should go to a system more like what Denver uses if we won't use Koetter's system.

When Gary Effing Kubiak was the coach at Denver.  And Koetter is the king of long-developing pass plays and leaving 5 in for protection.

It is a gross understatement that most fans don't understand their team's scheme.  Because this is an otherwise outstanding poster here that said this.

Yea it's tough and we will admittedly miss cuz we're fans, not on the team or in the building. Even with DQ, it's easy to try and compare him to Carroll or Bradley or even Richards and Manuel, cuz it's the same tree, but then you see the difference tweaks. Gus Bradley went to San Diego/Los Angeles and turned that Chargers defense into a tough unit using safeties as linebackers. That's not 4-3 Under Cover 3 Seattle defense. Kris Richards in Dallas went high pressure, man blitz crazy, which we saw peak on primetime vs New Orleans. We know that isn't 4-3 Under Cover Seattle defense neither. Yet, if you would have just looked at the names and trees before the season, you would have expected the same kind of defense. 

Sometimes you just gotta trust the coach and accept your limitation in terms of knowledge or the information you're working with. 

JDaveG likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, g-dawg said:

As to Taylor, he could have an arthritic knee - which - long term is worse than an ACL because it’s chronic and only gets worse.  I have arthritic knees- it sucks.  Of course I am 53.

Sounded like Cody Ford was cocky and out of shape.  How the h3LL are you out of shape and fat between February to end of April? Also hints of cockiness/attitude perhaps.

Heard the same things about both players - that teams were really concerned about Taylor's back and knees. And that Ford came to team interviews over 340 lbs and then interviewd horribly. Seeing that these are two players that the Falcons worked out and interviewed up close - they probably dropped lower on their boards after their workout/interviews with them or either eliminated altogether.

g-dawg likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, vel said:

It's stupid. Because frankly, the information we have is SEVERELY limited in comparison to the NFL teams. We can watch all the film we want, but if we don't know the schemes, techniques, or assignments being taught/played, we have no clue how to fully assess it. HeIl, most fans don't even understand the scheme their team runs to project a potential scheme fit. So saying "We reached and could have gotten him later!" ignores that you have no clue if that's a fact, you're just assuming based on the media consensus of a player. Remember when we "stole" Peter Konz, only for him to go and bust big time. The league saw him as a flawed player and it panned out exactly that way. 

These guys sole job is to study and analyze players. They have the time and funds to travel to Boston College, meet with Lindstrom, go over film and ask why a certain play happened, talked to the coach and ask how he took to coaching and how he developed and pry deeper into the player. Our crusty arses sit around reading scouting reports and looking and YouTube videos hoping to get an understanding of said player. 

Well said, Vel.

Also people tend to get too caught up in the Kiper and McShay's big boards of the world because they don't know most names after like round 1 (I myself am guilty of this if I am extra lazy that year).  The thing to remember is each team has a different board, and time and time again, they prove to look considerably different to not only other teams boards, but the boards being thrown at your face for hours on end during draft weekend.

The Falcons are a great example of this based on previous drafts, and the current one.  They don't follow Mel's rankings or McShay's rankings, they go off their own big board and draft off of it.  Lindstrom, McGary, Neal, Debo, it goes on and on where the tv analysts are all "Well this is a reach I don't get this" so the fans buy into it without fact checking, and that's when overreactions start.

TD/DQ/Pioli seem to have this draft thing down pretty well, at least comparatively to the rest of the league.  I trust their board and could not care less about "reaching" especially when it starts coming out that other teams were looking to take their players.

vel and JDaveG like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sometimes a lesser player(s) brings more value to your team than a guy that's straight up better overall. Half of the equation is about who you're replacing. A good WR & QB could not have improved our team as much as a competent RG and RT could. I made a long post on this in the Peter King thread.

TLDR: There was no better way to improve the team overall than fixing the OL, even if it meant sacrificing some value with our picks and spending.

JDaveG likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since Keanu Neal I've been stop caring about all that ... Most ppl thought Neal and deionized jobest were 2nd and 3rd round picks.... He'll Dallas had both as 3rd rounders... 

 

This was one of there "grades" on the Colts from last year

 

 

 

 

INDIANAPOLIS COLTS

Draft picks: Notre Dame OG Quenton Nelson (No. 6), South Carolina State LB Darius Leonard (No. 36), Auburn OG Braden Smith (No. 37), Rutgers DE Kemoko Turay (No. 52), Ohio State DE Tyquan Lewis (No. 64), N.C. State RB Nyheim Hines (No. 104), Northern Iowa WR Daurice Fountain (No. 159), Mississippi RB Jordan Wilkins (No. 169), Clemson WR Deon Cain (No. 185), Houston LB Matthew Adams (No. 221), Syracuse LB Zaire Franklin (No. 235).

 
It’s hard to fault a team for drafting offensive linemen when its superstar quarterback is trying to get healthy. And yes, some will argue that guard Quenton Nelson is a generational type talent worth taking regardless of need. But instead of tapping Nelson at No. 6 and Braden Smith in the second round, the Colts could have aided their existing O-line (which is not great, but not the dumpster fire people think) by installing a quicker-strike passing game—something Andrew Luck will ultimately need to stay healthy. Luck’s ability to extend plays within the pocket is special, but that can no longer be his foundation.

We only say this because the defense entered the draft three or four players away from even being in dire straits. Its only true three-down players were safety Malik Hooker and corner Quincy Wilson—and both have played just half a rookie season in the NFL. Every other player, save for maybe edge men Jabaal Sheard and John Simon if we’re being generous, was a situational piece. And with most of the lineup built for Chuck Pagano’s scheme, not new coordinator Matt Eberflus’s, it’s hard to envision many situations where those guys would work.

 
Ultimately, Colts GM Chris Ballard found three defenders in the first two rounds, but let’s be honest—it needed to be four, at the very least. As it stands, the Colts must score over 30 points each week to even have a chance. But maybe this is all part of what would have been an ugly rebuilding process anyway. Ballard’s argument is this: nothing we do matters if we can’t protect Luck. By drafting new guards, we also move Jack Mewhort, which potentially upgrades three positions up front.

Grade: C-

 

Ergo Proxy, vel and wuskillzz like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To keep things in perspective: Yahoo sports had the below breakdown of the Falcons 2016 draft.

 

Atlanta Falcons

Grade we gave then: C-

Funniest line in retrospect: “Deion Jones is a fast coverage linebacker, but neither [he nor Keanu Neal] are complete players yet.”

Welp, at least we got the “fast coverage linebacker” part right.

Best evaluation in retrospect: If you read what we said about most of the players, we had their evaluations pretty close. We just misjudged the value of those picks and felt most of them were overdrafted.

How we did: We bemoaned their not drafting a defensive lineman that year, which proved to be a little short-sighted considering they almost won the Super Bowl. This might not have been the most exciting draft class in history, but we should have liked it a lot more at the time, it turns out. Fouled out to the third baseman on this one.

JDaveG and Ergo Proxy like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

2 hours ago, vel said:

It's stupid. Because frankly, the information we have is SEVERELY limited in comparison to the NFL teams. 

Well said, but we also shouldn't go too far in the other direction either. 

The analysts may not have perfect information, but most consolidate information for team sources and are pretty close.  The guys that the analysts project in the first round usually go in first 40 picks or so.  

It's also exceptional for a projected 3rd rounder to go in the first round.  In the old days that wasn't unusual at all (Chuck Noll wanted John Stalworth in the first round), but not in the modern draft.

 

Edited by JeffAtl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, vel said:

It's stupid. Because frankly, the information we have is SEVERELY limited in comparison to the NFL teams. We can watch all the film we want, but if we don't know the schemes, techniques, or assignments being taught/played, we have no clue how to fully assess it. HeIl, most fans don't even understand the scheme their team runs to project a potential scheme fit. So saying "We reached and could have gotten him later!" ignores that you have no clue if that's a fact, you're just assuming based on the media consensus of a player. Remember when we "stole" Peter Konz, only for him to go and bust big time. The league saw him as a flawed player and it panned out exactly that way. 

These guys sole job is to study and analyze players. They have the time and funds to travel to Boston College, meet with Lindstrom, go over film and ask why a certain play happened, talked to the coach and ask how he took to coaching and how he developed and pry deeper into the player. Our crusty arses sit around reading scouting reports and looking and YouTube videos hoping to get an understanding of said player. 

Wow . Spit in my face why don’t ya ? The truth hurts but I needed that . I’m done “scouting” lol . 

vel, JDaveG and octoslash like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where overdrafted matters is relative to other NFL boards, not analysts.

Even if you get a good player in the 1st..if everyone else in the NFL would have taken him in the 3rd...then you could have gotten another 1st rounder and still taken your guy later.

In reality, the way it works is much more subtle.  You have a guy rated the 30th best player and you're picking at 15.  He won't be available for your next pick.  If you trade up, one more team might like him as much/more than you do and you miss out.  These are usually the "overdrafts" the Falcons commit.  They take a guy who would be taken sometime between their pick and their next pick.

Those are harder to get around.  The only way to do that is always have 4 or 5 guys you're fine taking, and trade back knowing one of them will likely be there.  If you're honed in on one player...you'll very rarely be able to get "value."

vel and JDaveG like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, JeffAtl said:

Well said, but we also shouldn't go too far in the other direction either.  The guys that the analysts project in the first round usually go in first 40 picks or so.  

It's also exceptional for a projected 3rd rounder to go in the first round.  In the old days that wasn't unusual at all (Chuck Noll wanted John Stalworth in the first round), but not in the modern draft.

The analysts may not have perfect information, but most consolidate information for team sources and are pretty close.

Yes, we can come to a general consensus on a "top 50", but even then, no order is the same. People though Taylor and Ford were top 5 OL in this class. They weren't wrong. That just didn't constitute a first round pick nor the end of the "top five" discussion. 

When the draft, as usually it does, goes in a direction opposite of what we expected to happen (Ferrell at #4, Lindstrom and McGary to ATL, Savage to GB, Gary top 12, Jones at #6, etc.), we need to look and see why instead of saying "You're an idiot we could have gotten him later! OVERDRAFT!". It's a brash reaction made on limited information. Not one single scouting report had a knee issue for Taylor. Nobody knew how Ford's weight was managed during the process or how his interviews went. Only the NFL knew that stuff.  

6 minutes ago, GeorgiaBoyz said:

Wow . Spit in my face why don’t ya ? The truth hurts but I needed that . I’m done “scouting” lol . 

Lol it's definitely not aimed at anybody. It's a fun hobby. I do it year round ****ear. But, particularly after I was very upset about the Neal pick, having a coach with a very clear understanding of his scheme and the players that fit it, I stop relying on other people's reports/opinions on a player and try to understand from the little bit of film I do have, what a player can do and what teams would value that ability. 

JDaveG and Ergo Proxy like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now