The 2018 NFL Discussion Thread

[moecurlythanu]

Yes you mentioned it, but you downplayed it somewhat. His pass catching ability, and the mismatch he poses for opposing defenses, is probably, other than he is a physical freak of nature, the leading reason that he is coveted so high.

I think you're seeing what you want to see.

[gryphs also]

I'd still take Barkley at 1 and a QB at 4. Unless you think one of the QBs is the next coming of (fill in the blank based upon which prospect you think is the best), then you are just as likely to get a future star at 4 as you are at 1, and with NOBODY agreeing on who the best one is, you might actually get yoyrv#1 guy at 4.

[moecurlythanu]

I'm amazed at he consensus on this board. SMH.

[Vic2012]

You don't think this is a good move? He's a sure handed slot receiver who has excellent route running skills. I wanted him in the draft the year he came out. Josh Gordon will be the No. 1, possibly Terrell Pryor the 2, and Landry in the slot. Have Corey Coleman and Rashard Higgins as backups and all of a sudden your weak receiving corps is looking pretty good. They've got tons of cap space to sign him to a long term deal, so I don't get how this could be a bad move?

They franchised him. He got his money. And they get rid of him. The Dolphins are a hot mess.

[Magic Mountain]

"Barkley's advantage is that he's a 3 down back, but his production may not be much different than those who will still be available at 33 or 35."

What you failed to bold in your response was the latter part of the sentence above. I was addressing two things in your original response: the statistics that you stated, and the fact that you state that "his production may be no different than those who still will be available at 33 or 35." I gave some color around the statistics that you stated as to why there may have been some distortions and may not be representative of his potential as a running back.

For the latter part of the sentence above, while you can say that about any draftee (i.e. how many late draftees and undrafted players are stars of the league over sure 1st round can't misses), I think you are doing a disservice to Barkley. You draft on potential, and I am saying that the stats you mention do not do him justice as to the high upside that he has. His pass catching ability alone differentiates him from someone at 33 or 35. However, I also agreed with you in that he is probably overvalued somewhat due to NFL clubs being followers and that pass catching running backs are the flavor of the day. I also agree with you that the Browns FO gets paid big bucks to evaluate and have a strong opinion on a quarterback and that should be their first pick, not Barkley.

[NogbadTheBad]

It's going to suck watching Richard Sherman playing for the 'Niners.

That's going to be tough.

[Facelift]

I wouldn't have them compete. Kizer would be my insurance policy, as long as he was on his rookie contract. The Golden Boy would be the heir apparent, and Taylor would be my starter. No conflict, no problem. Kizer was not a flyer. He was drafted by the previous regime (note key phrase) to be the Browns future QB. That guy isn't here anymore. I wasn't in favor of drafting Kizer, because I saw a scenario like this unfolding, meaning that a 2nd round pick was wasted by a team with plenty of needs. The fact that you invested that high of a pick necessitated that that guy would be given every opportunity to grow into what you hoped he could become. As we all know, new regimes don't give a boink about guys put in place by previous regimes. While true, it's a bad strategy from the long view. Btw, if you think Kizer's talent level equates to Geno Smith (I know you didn't say that,) then we have a very different evaluation of Kizer.



Yeah, your so-called Dilbertian absurdity is considered normal operating procedure by the NFL. Each team, in it's draft "war room" will have what they call their "board." It's a ranking of the prospects from 1 to whatever. (I presume 7 rounds worth.) This is then their template for the draft. The GM will compile it in consultation with scouts, assistants, etc, but ultimately it will have his name on it and he will be responsible. He'll get the credit and the blame. The board is precise. It's not a nebulous grouping. This takes place in every team's draft evaluation. I'm shocked that you don't know this, apparently.

Of course I know this. I also know the fundamental goal for every draft is finding value. You phrased your above response as if the difference between every position on a draft board is the same. It isn't. All front offices have tiers of players. *If* (I'm not at all suggesting that this must be the case) the Browns place a roughly equivalent value on the three QBs, then it doesn't matter which one they get, if great perceived value is to be gained by selecting a different player at No. 1. All I did was respond to the (rather ridiculous) point you made about the GM's job is to accurately diagnose meaningful differences between three players that may very well check out closely to the same by their scouts. If the QBs are graded out as nearly the same, the more astute GM will take the non-QB first pick in the draft that gives his team the most value with whatever QBs are left at 4, than take the highest-rated QB at 1.

But this all speculative. Maybe the Browns do see meaningful differences between the QBs. Or, maybe, they don't plan on picking any of them.

[moecurlythanu]

And surely you aren't comparing Kizer with two #1 overall pick, Hall of Fame QBs to make your point are you?

It occurs to me that you are asking about my comparison to the rookie seasons of Troy Aikman and Peyton Manning, to which I reply with an emphatic "yes." While overall number ones are going to get a longer leash, during the time of their rookie seasons no one knows if they'll meet expectations or be a bust. Plenty of first round QBs have gone tits up. Kizer wasn't a first rounder, but he went in the 2nd. Not some worthless asset to casually throw away. The example holds because in real time, no one knew that those players were HoF players. They sucked, just like Kizer. It wasn't a death sentence to their careers, and it needn't be for Kizer.

[Facelift]

It occurs to me that you are asking about my comparison to the rookie seasons of Troy Aikman and Peyton Manning, to which I reply with an emphatic "yes." While overall number ones are going to get a longer leash, during the time of their rookie seasons no one knows if they'll meet expectations or be a bust. Plenty of first round QBs have gone tits up. Kizer wasn't a first rounder, but he went in the 2nd. Not some worthless asset to casually throw away. The example holds because in real time, no one knew that those players were HoF players. They sucked, just like Kizer. It wasn't a death sentence to their careers, and it needn't be for Kizer.

This is really not a very good way of thinking about this. QBs drafted in the lower rounds also can stink up the joint in their rookie year. But that doesn't equate their likelihood of success to that of a first pick overall simply because nobody knows after one season if a QB is going to be great or not. this is pretty much the definition of a false equivalency. According to the draft value chart, the first pick in the draft is worth 3000 points. The player drafted 53 is worth 370 points.

In other words, the number 1 pick overall is 8X more valuable than the 53rd pick. In a hypothetical trade, to get the number 1 overall pick, a team would have to offer the next 8 years worth of pick number 53 to balance it out. A player with 1/8 the value of another can't be treated with anything close to an equivalence. And this whole Peyton Manning is crazy - Manning showed much more in his rookie season than DeShone Kizer did, regardless of the fact that it nevertheless was not a particularly good season. But, in any event, Manning was given a value of 3000 points. The league ultimately settled on Kizer being worth 370 points. That means that, even if their rookie seasons were equally bad, the league found the difference in potential between the two players to be quite large, at the draft. Manning was a near sure thing and Kizer was a guy with some tools who many NFL teams did not project as an NFL starter. The Browns may have thought that Kizer represented good value at 53, but good value at 53 and something 5, 6, or 7 times as much value is something else entirely.

[moecurlythanu]

"Barkley's advantage is that he's a 3 down back, but his production may not be much different than those who will still be available at 33 or 35."

What you failed to bold in your response was the latter part of the sentence above. I was addressing two things in your original response: the statistics that you stated, and the fact that you state that "his production may be no different than those who still will be available at 33 or 35." I gave some color around the statistics that you stated as to why there may have been some distortions and may not be representative of his potential as a running back.

But what I said was accurate. And I said "not much different," not "no different." At the end of the day, he's still a running back. One of the Cleveland radio hosts tried to draw Dorsey out by asking him what his view was of the top 5 positions on a football team. Running Back wasn't one of them. Can you name one Super Bowl champion in recent years who had the league's top running back? Or even an elite running back? The League's leading running back last year was a 3rd round pick! It's not a value position when drafting No. 1. The guy they get at the top of the 2nd will be almost as good as Barkley. The gap between the QB at 1 and the QB at 4 will be greater than the gap between the RB at 1 and the RB at 33. Or 4 and 33. And that doesn't even take into account the difference in the value of each position. This is NFL 101 in 2018.

[moecurlythanu]

This is really not a very good way of thinking about this. QBs drafted in the lower rounds also can stink up the joint in their rookie year. But that doesn't equate their likelihood of success to that of a first pick overall simply because nobody knows after one season if a QB is going to be great or not. this is pretty much the definition of a false equivalency. According to the draft value chart, the first pick in the draft is worth 3000 points. The player drafted 53 is worth 370 points.

In other words, the number 1 pick overall is 8X more valuable than the 53rd pick. In a hypothetical trade, to get the number 1 overall pick, a team would have to offer the next 8 years worth of pick number 53 to balance it out. A player with 1/8 the value of another can't be treated with anything close to an equivalence. And this whole Peyton Manning is crazy - Manning showed much more in his rookie season than DeShone Kizer did, regardless of the fact that it nevertheless was not a particularly good season. But, in any event, Manning was given a value of 3000 points. The league ultimately settled on Kizer being worth 370 points. That means that, even if their rookie seasons were equally bad, the league found the difference in potential between the two players to be quite large, at the draft. Manning was a near sure thing and Kizer was a guy with some tools who many NFL teams did not project as an NFL starter. The Browns may have thought that Kizer represented good value at 53, but good value at 53 and something 5, 6, or 7 times as much value is something else entirely.

Utter nonsense. All of those number values are gloss laid on waaay after the fact. BS data created to prove and back engineer a preconceived viewpoint. You way overvalue analytics and national media print. And you are the one not thinking good about this (sic.) If we were talking about Kessler, whom they drafted in the 3rd round, I'd be agreeing with you, because he has none of the physical tools that Kizer has. But we're not talking about Kessler, and Kizer is a player that has the tools to be that elite QB, just as Manning or Aikman had. The odds may not have been perceived as being as great, but we're still talking the same ballpark in terms of physical tools. Kizer's perceived lesser value was due to his inexperience (even his college coach said he should have stayed another year,) not his lack of talent.

[moecurlythanu]

Of course I know this. I also know the fundamental goal for every draft is finding value. You phrased your above response as if the difference between every position on a draft board is the same. It isn't. All front offices have tiers of players. *If* (I'm not at all suggesting that this must be the case) the Browns place a roughly equivalent value on the three QBs, then it doesn't matter which one they get, if great perceived value is to be gained by selecting a different player at No. 1. All I did was respond to the (rather ridiculous) point you made about the GM's job is to accurately diagnose meaningful differences between three players that may very well check out closely to the same by their scouts. If the QBs are graded out as nearly the same, the more astute GM will take the non-QB first pick in the draft that gives his team the most value with whatever QBs are left at 4, than take the highest-rated QB at 1.

But this all speculative. Maybe the Browns do see meaningful differences between the QBs. Or, maybe, they don't plan on picking any of them.

Well duh. Of course different teams boards are going to be weighted to what their teams particular needs are. I'd be pissed if they were doctrinaire purists. But your suggestion that the Browns are going to value 3 QBs roughly the same is laughable. You don't know what the fuck you're talking about, and your understanding of the GM's job is a joke. Educate yourself. You think the GM simply takes the advice of the scouts? Or that the scouts don't have firm views on the players they've scouted? That's a good way to lose the job. And you clearly don't understand which positions are the most important in the NFL in 2018. Or 1978 for that matter. You're not just wrong on this, you're spectacularly wrong. Won't be the first time.

[Facelift]

Well duh. Of course different teams boards are going to be weighted to what their teams particular needs are. I'd be pissed if they were doctrinaire purists. But your suggestion that the Browns are going to value 3 QBs roughly the same is laughable. You don't know what the fuck you're talking about, and your understanding of the GM's job is a joke. Educate yourself. You think the GM simply takes the advice of the scouts? Or that the scouts don't have firm views on the players they've scouted? That's a good way to lose the job. And you clearly don't understand which positions are the most important in the NFL in 2018. Or 1978 for that matter. You're not just wrong on this, you're spectacularly wrong. Won't be the first time.

I guess the F-bombs are the result of the sting of being shown up. It certainly doesn't make you any more right.

The concept is "laughable" to you that an NFL front office might grade out three players roughly the same? I mean, damn.

You don't deserve a better team than the Browns.

[Magic Mountain]

But what I said was accurate. And I said "not much different," not "no different." At the end of the day, he's still a running back. One of the Cleveland radio hosts tried to draw Dorsey out by asking him what his view was of the top 5 positions on a football team. Running Back wasn't one of them. Can you name one Super Bowl champion in recent years who had the league's top running back? Or even an elite running back? The League's leading running back last year was a 3rd round pick! It's not a value position when drafting No. 1. The guy they get at the top of the 2nd will be almost as good as Barkley. The gap between the QB at 1 and the QB at 4 will be greater than the gap between the RB at 1 and the RB at 33. Or 4 and 33. And that doesn't even take into account the difference in the value of each position. This is NFL 101 in 2018.

I think you are arguing against yourself. We are in agreement. I said the following:

However, I also agree with you in that he is probably overvalued somewhat due to NFL clubs being followers and that pass catching running backs are the flavor of the day. I also agree with you that the Browns FO gets paid big bucks to evaluate and have a strong opinion on a quarterback and that should be their first pick, not Barkley.

We all agree the Browns #1 priority is quarterback, NOT running back.

[gryphs also]

Moe, you undercut your own argument when you try to point out little difference between 3 and 33rd RB I the draft, and then point out that the leading rusher this year was a 3rd round pick. How does this hurt your argument?

Let's look at the winning quarterbacks of the last 10 Super Bowls:

2018-----88th pick, 7th QB taken
2017----199th pick, 7th QB taken
2016---1st pick, 1st QB taken
2015---199th pick, 7th QB taken
2014---75th pick, 6th QB taken
2013---18th pick, 2nd QB taken
2012---1st pick, 1st QB taken
2011----24th pick, 2nd QB taken
2010---32nd pick, 2nd QB taken
2009---11th pick, 3rd QB taken

Look like to me that taking the second or third QB wouldn't be a bad thing.

[DocProgger]

Let's look at the winning quarterbacks of the last 10 Super Bowls:

2018-----88th pick, 7th QB taken
2017----199th pick, 7th QB taken
2016---1st pick, 1st QB taken
2015---199th pick, 7th QB taken
2014---75th pick, 6th QB taken
2013---18th pick, 2nd QB taken
2012---1st pick, 1st QB taken
2011----24th pick, 2nd QB taken
2010---32nd pick, 2nd QB taken
2009---11th pick, 3rd QB taken

Perfect example of the randomness and crapshoot nature of even drafting the most important position on the field.
Look at the 4 Conference championship game QBs this past year. Foles, Keenum, Bortles, Brady.
Granted, due to injuries a bit of an unusual year, but still....

[moecurlythanu]

I guess the F-bombs are the result of the sting of being shown up. It certainly doesn't make you any more right.

No, the F-Bombs are there for what they're usually for: Emphasis. And you haven't shown anybody up. You've done what you usually do: Make an assertion, however unsupportable, and then pretend that it's some sort of self-evident immutable truth. That might work with the neighborhood kids, but here...not so much.

The concept is "laughable" to you that an NFL front office might grade out three players roughly the same? I mean, damn.

Even if they arrive at the same number grade on multiple players, they will still order their board numerically in order of who they would take were he available. Some distinction will be drawn, usually position of need. They're on the clock for 15 minutes, and they want to use that time to entertain trade offers, etc, not try and figure out which of the 3 guys they have the same grade on that they're going to take. That will have been done ahead of time. This isn't deep, mysterious stuff. It's pretty basic, really.

You don't deserve a better team than the Browns.

Tell me that in 2 or 3 years.

[moecurlythanu]

Moe, you undercut your own argument when you try to point out little difference between 3 and 33rd RB I the draft, and then point out that the leading rusher this year was a 3rd round pick. How does this hurt your argument?

Let's look at the winning quarterbacks of the last 10 Super Bowls:

2018-----88th pick, 7th QB taken
2017----199th pick, 7th QB taken
2016---1st pick, 1st QB taken
2015---199th pick, 7th QB taken
2014---75th pick, 6th QB taken
2013---18th pick, 2nd QB taken
2012---1st pick, 1st QB taken
2011----24th pick, 2nd QB taken
2010---32nd pick, 2nd QB taken
2009---11th pick, 3rd QB taken

Look like to me that taking the second or third QB wouldn't be a bad thing.

If it was all about numbers and playing the law of averages, you could do that and you might get lucky. Our analytics GM did that and we got Cody Kessler and a pack of receivers who should have been UFAs. I'd rather they evaluate the players and make their choice on the evaluation. I already mentioned that there's a crap shoot element involved. Even the first pick can massively flame out. (Paging JaMarcus Russell, who had all the tools except heart and desire.)

[Facelift]

No, the F-Bombs are there for what they're usually for: Emphasis. And you haven't shown anybody up. You've done what you usually do: Make an assertion, however unsupportable, and then pretend that it's some sort of self-evident immutable truth. That might work with the neighborhood kids, but here...not so much.

Of course I showed you up. You made an assertion that was clownlike. I proved it wrong. Then you cried like child.

You don't know very much about football, it seems. Probably you should remove yourself from conversations about it, lest further embarrassment follow.\

As far as the Cleveland Browns, they are the greatest embarrassment of a sports franchise in the NFL, and Cleveland itself is one of America's worst cities with a sports franchise. The city and the team will be the butt of jokes for a very, very long time.

[MYSTERIOUS TRAVELLER]

I remember as a 9th grader, it was soooo important for me to "show others up"

but now I am an adult. Those days of childish idiocy are long gone

[Poisoned Youth]

I'm amazed at he consensus on this board. SMH.

This comment makes me want to exit this discussion.

I will only say one other comment on the matter which is not intended to convince you. Facelift said it the best for me. It's about value. They can get an awesome RB talent at number 1 and still get a highly touted QB at number 4 (maybe even their top personal choice) who they can ease into the game with Tyrod there.

Many here see that value as an opportunity. You do not. Simple as that. There is no need to comment dismissively about it.

[moecurlythanu]

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/2...ckham-jr-video

[Garion81]

Darnold has an Aaron Rodgers level ceiling. It may never get realized to that level, but that's not something that anybody knows at this point. Rosen has a lower ceiling, but could end up being the better player. He's seen by a lot of scouts as being the next Matt Ryan.

LOL Really? What NFL team do you work for? Rosen is the most polished QB right now. That is according to every scout I have heard talk. Not idiots like ESPN draft talking heads.
Let me help you out. This was his last game as a Bruin.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozcyFsHGcJ4

[Garion81]

If that isn't enough try this one

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9xDIb1N2LI

[3LockBox]

Miami to release Suh and take a cap hit.

He spreads sunshine wherever he goes.