Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Packers sign Devin Funchess
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="HardRightEdge" data-source="post: 869613"><p>That wasn't intended to be a mock draft pick, as in "the Packers will (or should) take Van Jefferson in the 3rd round on a possible trade up". If you think hard about it, mock drafts are pretty dumb when you get down to this level. Analyst hit rates might be pretty good in the top 10 or so, hit and miss toward the bottom of the 1st. round, but approaching a zero hit rate by the 3rd. round.</p><p></p><p>As I said, I have no idea if Gutekunst likes this guy. I'm sure given the depth of the draft down to the 3rd. round he has several possible names on the board at that spot, or maybe higher in the round for a trade up or down. Shenault's another guy who could drop for the same reasons as V.J. who would add a different kind of skill set diversity. I'm sure he's prepared for the eventuality that outstanding values at other positions of need present themselves in the 1st. and 2nd. rounds that exceed the value of his preferred WR at that spot, with a bunch of guys he likes in the 3rd round.</p><p></p><p>I do not believe in "best player available". I do believe in"best player available at a position of need", and there are some definite needs outside WR in the one year perspetive and a whole bunch more in a two year perspective.</p><p></p><p>There's a question not begged to this point. Does the WR draft depth provide any special value proposition at #30? Perhaps not. For illustration purposes only, consider the first e WR picks in last year's so-called weak draft:</p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Brown at #25 with a 6.7 Zerlein grade</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Harry at #32 with a 6.3 Zerlein grade.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Samuel at #36 with a 6.4 grade.</li> </ul><p>Dante made of a list of this year's WR prospects in order of Zerlein grades over in the Draft Forum/Receivers thread on Feb 8. Some grades may have gone up or down by now but these should do for illustration purposes.</p><p></p><p>For the sake of argument, lets say the first 5 of those guys go off the board before #30 as a kind of rough concensus at this point. Note the grades of the next few:</p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">C. Lamb, Oklahoma (6.86)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">J. Jeudy, Alabama (6.86)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">L. Shenault, Colorado (6.50)*</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">H. Ruggs, Alabama (6.49)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">T. Higgins, Clemson (6.48)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">J. Jefferson, LSU (6.41)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">C. Claypool, Notre Dame (6.40)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">J. Reagor, TCU (6.39)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">M. Pittman, USC (6.38)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">K. Hamler, Penn State (6.37)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">B. Aiyuk, Arizona State (6.36)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">B. Edwards, South Carolina (6.29)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">A. Gandy-Golden, Liberty (6.27)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">V. Jefferson, Florida (6.27)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">D. Mims, Baylor (6.25)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">G. Davis, Central Florida (6.25)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Q. Cephus, Minnesota (6.19)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">I. Hogkins, Oregon State, (6.17)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">K. Hill, Ohio State (6.17)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">T. Johnson, Minnesota (6.16)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">K. Lipscomb, Vanderbilt (6.13)</li> </ul><p>You don't see the grades in the 6-10 cluster much different than the 2 guys taken last year right below #30 pick.</p><p></p><p>This suggests there may be no exceptional WR value proposition at #30. Instead, what it does says is there are a quite a few fair value players with relatively close grades with varying skill sets to meet various preferences. The depth there just maximizes the chance of filling a need without having to reach, not necessarily an exceptional value.</p><p></p><p>But if you look further down the list, what might the thinking be if a 6.7 grade guy at a different position of need is still on the board at #30? Look further down the board to Davis in the 15th. WR slot and the grades are not much differnent for players likely to slip into the upper 3rd. round or even below than those likely to be available at #30. In other words, the value proposition in the depth of prospects at #30 is selection rather than exceptional value in around half a dozen names or more. </p><p></p><p>So, will the Packers choose a receiver in the 1st. round? I don't think that's all that solid an assumption. It depends who else is on the board at #30. There are a whole lot of other needs where Gutekunst may find a different special love. 2nd. round appears to be the sweet spot for value and selection, though it might require a trade up if there is one special love--hard to tell until you get there.</p><p></p><p>But to say 1st. or 2nd. round is a categorical imperative is what I dispute. As the picks come down and the board falls out, there remains a possibility of getting a good value with desired characteristics in a trade up or down into the middle or upper 3rd.</p><p></p><p>Heck, that Jefferson grade in the T13 slot is somewhere in the top half of the 3rd. round to begin with before applying the injury and non-workout discounts. As the board starts to play out, you cannot rule out waiting if a 3rd. round solid cluster starts to develop.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="HardRightEdge, post: 869613"] That wasn't intended to be a mock draft pick, as in "the Packers will (or should) take Van Jefferson in the 3rd round on a possible trade up". If you think hard about it, mock drafts are pretty dumb when you get down to this level. Analyst hit rates might be pretty good in the top 10 or so, hit and miss toward the bottom of the 1st. round, but approaching a zero hit rate by the 3rd. round. As I said, I have no idea if Gutekunst likes this guy. I'm sure given the depth of the draft down to the 3rd. round he has several possible names on the board at that spot, or maybe higher in the round for a trade up or down. Shenault's another guy who could drop for the same reasons as V.J. who would add a different kind of skill set diversity. I'm sure he's prepared for the eventuality that outstanding values at other positions of need present themselves in the 1st. and 2nd. rounds that exceed the value of his preferred WR at that spot, with a bunch of guys he likes in the 3rd round. I do not believe in "best player available". I do believe in"best player available at a position of need", and there are some definite needs outside WR in the one year perspetive and a whole bunch more in a two year perspective. There's a question not begged to this point. Does the WR draft depth provide any special value proposition at #30? Perhaps not. For illustration purposes only, consider the first e WR picks in last year's so-called weak draft: [LIST] [*]Brown at #25 with a 6.7 Zerlein grade [*]Harry at #32 with a 6.3 Zerlein grade. [*]Samuel at #36 with a 6.4 grade. [/LIST] Dante made of a list of this year's WR prospects in order of Zerlein grades over in the Draft Forum/Receivers thread on Feb 8. Some grades may have gone up or down by now but these should do for illustration purposes. For the sake of argument, lets say the first 5 of those guys go off the board before #30 as a kind of rough concensus at this point. Note the grades of the next few: [LIST] [*]C. Lamb, Oklahoma (6.86) [*]J. Jeudy, Alabama (6.86) [*]L. Shenault, Colorado (6.50)* [*]H. Ruggs, Alabama (6.49) [*]T. Higgins, Clemson (6.48) [*]J. Jefferson, LSU (6.41) [*]C. Claypool, Notre Dame (6.40) [*]J. Reagor, TCU (6.39) [*]M. Pittman, USC (6.38) [*]K. Hamler, Penn State (6.37) [*]B. Aiyuk, Arizona State (6.36) [*]B. Edwards, South Carolina (6.29) [*]A. Gandy-Golden, Liberty (6.27) [*]V. Jefferson, Florida (6.27) [*]D. Mims, Baylor (6.25) [*]G. Davis, Central Florida (6.25) [*]Q. Cephus, Minnesota (6.19) [*]I. Hogkins, Oregon State, (6.17) [*]K. Hill, Ohio State (6.17) [*]T. Johnson, Minnesota (6.16) [*]K. Lipscomb, Vanderbilt (6.13) [/LIST] You don't see the grades in the 6-10 cluster much different than the 2 guys taken last year right below #30 pick. This suggests there may be no exceptional WR value proposition at #30. Instead, what it does says is there are a quite a few fair value players with relatively close grades with varying skill sets to meet various preferences. The depth there just maximizes the chance of filling a need without having to reach, not necessarily an exceptional value. But if you look further down the list, what might the thinking be if a 6.7 grade guy at a different position of need is still on the board at #30? Look further down the board to Davis in the 15th. WR slot and the grades are not much differnent for players likely to slip into the upper 3rd. round or even below than those likely to be available at #30. In other words, the value proposition in the depth of prospects at #30 is selection rather than exceptional value in around half a dozen names or more. So, will the Packers choose a receiver in the 1st. round? I don't think that's all that solid an assumption. It depends who else is on the board at #30. There are a whole lot of other needs where Gutekunst may find a different special love. 2nd. round appears to be the sweet spot for value and selection, though it might require a trade up if there is one special love--hard to tell until you get there. But to say 1st. or 2nd. round is a categorical imperative is what I dispute. As the picks come down and the board falls out, there remains a possibility of getting a good value with desired characteristics in a trade up or down into the middle or upper 3rd. Heck, that Jefferson grade in the T13 slot is somewhere in the top half of the 3rd. round to begin with before applying the injury and non-workout discounts. As the board starts to play out, you cannot rule out waiting if a 3rd. round solid cluster starts to develop. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Staff online
PikeBadger
Moderator
Members online
Green_Bay_Packers
kf323
Krabs
Firethorn1001
Schultz
mradtke66
PikeBadger
Latest posts
The 11th Annual Amish Draft Contest 2024
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
10 minutes ago
Draft Talk
2024 Packer UDFA Tracker....
Latest: PikeBadger
11 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Assessing the Draft Class (2024)
Latest: PikeBadger
14 minutes ago
Draft Talk
2024 draft discussion thread
Latest: PikeBadger
47 minutes ago
Draft Talk
H
2024 2nd Rd pick #58 Javon Bullard S
Latest: Heyjoe4
Today at 7:04 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Packers sign Devin Funchess
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top