Matt Miller: Colts "in love" with Damarious Randall. Could be a late 1st round pick.

[jvan1973]

Given that this "study" only compared the two to what players did on the field, and did NOT compare them to anyone else, nor did they even compare them to where the players themselves were drafted.

In other words, were Kiper and McShay wrong about a bunch of guys each year? Sure. And they'd be the first two tell you that. But the study doesn't examine the fact that those guys were picked high and didn't pan out. In short, the mistakes that Kiper and McShay were making were often the same as the mistakes that actual GM's were making.

These two are the highest profile guys because they're on ESPN. Let's of people like taking shots at them and at ESPN.

Sorry, but I'm not impressed. I think the study is deeply flawed. It tells me what I know, and it doesn't tell me anything I want to know.... and I think it's done that way on purpose....

These guys have an impossible job. Correctly evaluating all available players is impossible. Guys they give a third round grade to go in the first round all the time. And some guys they give they give a first round grade to fall out of the first round every year. NFL teams have more information on these guys than these guys do on the players the team is targeting

[NewColtsFan]

These guys have an impossible job. Correctly evaluating all available players is impossible. Guys they give a third round grade to go in the first round all the time. And some guys they give they give a first round grade to fall out of the first round every year. NFL teams have more information on these guys than these guys do on the players the team is targeting

 

I'm not disputing anything you've said here....

 

Well...  maybe the expression "all time time"....   because that's open to interpretation?

 

What does that mean?    Every year?     Sure.     How many times a year?    More than once?    More than 3 times....?

 

You get the idea...   the comment is very broad...   but basically, I'm in agreement.

 

I've said it in another post in this thread, but perhaps it bears repeating....  COULD Randall go in the first round as a couple of surprises did last year?    Sure.    It's entirely possible.    But I don't think it's likely and I think it's a major reach if it happens.   And I'll say that even if it's the Colts who make that reach.

[Defjamz26]

I've heard the Eagles are also in love with him. I see him as a 2nd round pick. But his protection to the first is likely based off of what happened with Ward last year.

Everyone is looking for that Earl Thomas; a top notch FS who can play the box like a SS.

[krunk]

I actually kind of like Randall. He's not a thumper and is a little small, but he's no Holliman either. Pretty good in coverage, plays a lot of slot corner and some outside corner, and he's feisty. He's really good as a punt gunner.

 

He's not a first rounder, though. I see him as a top 75 guy. If we wanted him, we'd probably have to pull the trigger in the second round.

 

Thank you!  I like him too, high ceiling with a little coaching.  Yes first round is a stretch

[Dark Superman]

randall can be got in the third, why would we use a first round pick?

The third? He won't make it out of the second.

[Dark Superman]

I'll take him. Or go DT/DE and trade up for Randall in the second (but highly unlikely)

[MTC]

I like Randall, but not in the first round. Gross. 

[Kezzarino]

If they really want him i would be * if we take someone in the 1st who we could get mid 2nd round. Trade back and get him if they really want, i would prefer to wait for Campbell as a late 2nd

[loudnproudcolt]

Buchannon last year was rated as a late second pick. Nobody had him going in the first. Jujuan Jones for Miami was not considered a first rounder. I don't know if Russell Wilson or the Seahawks changed the equation, but if a team really wants someone and they have a second round grade on him, but afraid they will lose him, teams seem more willing to jump up in the last few years to take players no one had a first round grade on but the team who wanted them. It only takes one!

[aaron11]

not good enough for round one.  maybe he has potential but we cant afford a project this year

[Archer]

I would not be upset with this.  I think he could make an excellent long-term solution at FS.  People always shout down picks like this because the internet draftniks feel other players have more "value" and have reached a consensus.  But the GM is often proven right.  I remember a couple of years ago I felt strongly we needed to take Larry Warford in the 1st and was laughed at.  I think he's done pretty well vis-a-vis our actual pick, Bjoern Werner, who had much more "value".

[Superman]

I would not be upset with this.  I think he could make an excellent long-term solution at FS.  People always shout down picks like this because the internet draftniks feel other players have more "value" and have reached a consensus.  But the GM is often proven right.  I remember a couple of years ago I felt strongly we needed to take Larry Warford in the 1st and was laughed at.  I think he's done pretty well vis-a-vis our actual pick, Bjoern Werner, who had much more "value".

 

Warford went #65. Just because he was better than Werner doesn't mean he was worthy of a first rounder. Is he better than Rhodes, Patterson, Hopkins, Frederick, Alonso, Bell, Lacy, Kelce, etc.? He would have been a good pick for us in the second round, not the first round. Not without the benefit of hindsight.

 

That's the issue with Randall. Taking him in the first round means passing up on better players. He won't be the best player at #29, and it's even arguable at #61 (IMO). If you take Randall in the first, instead of a handful of players that consensus says are better, you're doing it wrong. 

 

I have no problem believing the Colts really like him. I like him. But that doesn't mean he's a good first round pick, and it doesn't mean they'll take him in the first. They really liked Newsome, but passed on him in the third and took him two rounds later.

[Dustin]

http://www.rotoworld.com/headlines/cfb/41446/Report-S-Randall-could-slip-into-late-Rd.-1?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Another person saying he could go round 1.

[Archer]

Warford went #65. Just because he was better than Werner doesn't mean he was worthy of a first rounder. Is he better than Rhodes, Patterson, Hopkins, Frederick, Alonso, Bell, Lacy, Kelce, etc.? He would have been a good pick for us in the second round, not the first round. Not without the benefit of hindsight.

 

That's the issue with Randall. Taking him in the first round means passing up on better players. He won't be the best player at #29, and it's even arguable at #61 (IMO). If you take Randall in the first, instead of a handful of players that consensus says are better, you're doing it wrong. 

 

I have no problem believing the Colts really like him. I like him. But that doesn't mean he's a good first round pick, and it doesn't mean they'll take him in the first. They really liked Newsome, but passed on him in the third and took him two rounds later.

 

Just got on to paste that same link, Dustin.  (Super)Man, I'm trying unsuccessfully to say that there is a lot of false consensus among draftniks.  One person watches a couple of games, writes his opinion of a player, and it gets repeated thousands of times by 1di0ts like me.  If the first guy was wrong, or the player had an undisclosed injury at the time, or was being poorly coached, or improved greatly subsequently...these are things that the draftniks have no way of knowing, but actual NFL scouts become privy to through testing, interviews, and exhasustive (expert) tape review.  I would say that as often as not, when a player is taken ridiculously early according to draftnik standards, the GM who did it (unless he is Al Davis' ghost) is correct.  And if one GM nails it, he has no real idea whether other GMs see the same thing.  I don't buy the argument that the player's actual subsequent perfromance does not determine whether he was worthy of the pick.  I have a tough time saying players like Freeney were the wrong players, because internet draftniks thought other players had more "value" at the time...

[Gavin]

He is a day 3 pick...4th rounder from what I see, He don't understand proper pursuit angles to the ball, Is an atrocious tackler and when beat he don't have much recovery speed

[Archer]

He is a day 3 pick...4th rounder from what I see, He don't understand proper pursuit angles to the ball, Is an atrocious tackler and when beat he don't have much recovery speed

 

And yet he's reportedly getting 1st round consideration.  One of those opinions is very wrong!

[krunk]

And yet he's reportedly getting 1st round consideration.  One of those opinions is very wrong!

 

Yeah I don't buy the day 3 stuff or the atrocious tackling either.  He does need some tweeking in certain areas like all college players but I think his issues are fixable and I like his mojo. Randall is a 2nd rounder for sure, and yes maybe 1st round is a bit too much but there's not a whole lot of good safeties in this class so you've got more eyes on the ones that fit whatever criteria the team is looking for.  And when that happens you get situations like what happened last year with 2 or 3 safeties drafted in the 1st round.  I think sometimes scarcity also pushes peoples draft placement up as well.  

 

Grigs always tends to do a lot of the opposite of whatever it is we are thinking.  He may take a safety or a RB in the 1st and pick up other really good players in other rounds that we didn't have our eye on.  Also he may work up a deal to select a guy we didn't think we had a chance of getting, or find a guy that we didn't notice has slid a round or two.  I had no idea we would find a pass rusher as good as Newsome that late in the draft last year, and if Jackson wouldn't have gotten himself in trouble with the Alcohol last year we may or may not have had to bring Irving in. I don't get all worked up over Grigsons moves any more because I know he has a method to his madness. If he selects a running back or a safety in the first round I'm just going to watch the entire plan unfold before I comment.