We`re gonna be "Chucking that potato"!

[throwing BBZ]

 I got a good laugh from a piece at CBSSports about the Dorsett pick.

 No doubt IMO, Chuck would have chosen a D player in the 1st if he picked.
 The next best thing arguably for a D is an offense that wins the ball control/time of possession game.
 So we`re gonna "lock our jaws" and take it to them.
 With a lot of Chucking that Potato.
 
 
 

[jameszeigler834]

 I got a good laugh from a piece at CBSSports about the Dorsett pick.

 No doubt IMO, Chuck would have chosen a D player in the 1st if he picked.

 The next best thing arguably for a D is an offense that wins the ball control/time of possession game.

 So we`re gonna "lock our jaws" and take it to them.

 With a lot of Chucking that Potato.

 

 

 

We will be just fine a C+ grade is meaningless its all about development nothing more Dorsett will be a good player in this league Smith the corner with is ability to also play safety will be  a very good asset to this team and Henry Anderson at DE now we have a very athletic DE on the one side of this defensive line that can rush the passer and defend the run.

[krunk]

Who gives a darn about somebodies draft grade who is not a coach, colts scout, owner, or GM of the Colts?

I don't care about Bucky Brooks, Zirlein, Mayock or whoevers draft grade.   

[jvan1973]

I got a good laugh from a piece at CBSSports about the Dorsett pick.

No doubt IMO, Chuck would have chosen a D player in the 1st if he picked.

The next best thing arguably for a D is an offense that wins the ball control/time of possession game.

So we`re gonna "lock our jaws" and take it to them.

With a lot of Chucking that Potato.

Link fail

[Superman]

Who gives a darn about somebodies draft grade who is not a coach, colts scout, owner, or GM of the Colts?

I don't care about Bucky Brooks, Zirlein, Mayock or whoevers draft grade.   

 

I posted this the other day, but it really sums it up well:

 

Funny when media people grade drafts based on how well a team filled needs. They don't know players well enough to base it on anything else

— Joe Banner (@JoeBanner13)

May 3, 2015

 

That doesn't really apply to guys like Mayock and Brooks and Kiper and so on, who watch and scout players, but the truth is that most media draft grades are based on perceived need more than the talent/quality of the players selected. Yet, everyone pays lip service to the idea that "best player available" is the best way to draft.

[PeterBowman]

I posted this the other day, but it really sums it up well:

 

Funny when media people grade drafts based on how well a team filled needs. They don't know players well enough to base it on anything else

— Joe Banner (@JoeBanner13)

May 3, 2015

 

That doesn't really apply to guys like Mayock and Brooks and Kiper and so on, who watch and scout players, but the truth is that most media draft grades are based on perceived need more than the talent/quality of the players selected. Yet, everyone pays lip service to the idea that "best player available" is the best way to draft.

Until the team actually drafts BPA and not for need.

[Smonroe]

Until the team actually drafts BPA and not for need.

 

Obviously, that's still in someone else's opinion.  Not the teams.

[SteelCityColt]

I posted this the other day, but it really sums it up well:

 

Funny when media people grade drafts based on how well a team filled needs. They don't know players well enough to base it on anything else

— Joe Banner (@JoeBanner13)

May 3, 2015

 

That doesn't really apply to guys like Mayock and Brooks and Kiper and so on, who watch and scout players, but the truth is that most media draft grades are based on perceived need more than the talent/quality of the players selected. Yet, everyone pays lip service to the idea that "best player available" is the best way to draft.

 

While it's kinda farcical to grade any draft on day 1, even after years 1/2 really, if push came to shove what should be the metrics used?

 

Overall estimate of the selected players' talent?

Value, that is to say drafting a player that dropped, penalties to be seen as reaching for a player?

Filling needs?

Scheme fits?

Coolness of each draftees' name? 

How much the "boo-o-meter" goes up when each selection is announced? (please note the sensitivity of the device has had to be turned waaaaay up since moving the draft from NY). 

[crazycolt1]

I posted this the other day, but it really sums it up well:

 

Funny when media people grade drafts based on how well a team filled needs. They don't know players well enough to base it on anything else

— Joe Banner (@JoeBanner13)

May 3, 2015

 

That doesn't really apply to guys like Mayock and Brooks and Kiper and so on, who watch and scout players, but the truth is that most media draft grades are based on perceived need more than the talent/quality of the players selected. Yet, everyone pays lip service to the idea that "best player available" is the best way to draft.

IMO draft grades are useless. No one really knows how good or poor a draft is till a couple of seasons has passed. Anyone can have an opinion but that is all it really is. Very few first year players have that big impact other than maybe a RB. Out of the over 220 players drafted just a small percentage of them even become starters.

[Superman]

While it's kinda farcical to grade any draft on day 1, even after years 1/2 really, if push came to shove what should be the metrics used?

 

Overall estimate of the selected players' talent?

Value, that is to say drafting a player that dropped, penalties to be seen as reaching for a player?

Filling needs?

Scheme fits?

Coolness of each draftees' name? 

How much the "boo-o-meter" goes up when each selection is announced? (please note the sensitivity of the device has had to be turned waaaaay up since moving the draft from NY). 

 

To me, the draft is primarily about adding talent. So I mostly agree with your order here (the first three or four, at least, lol). I think you have to adjust for QBs (Winston and Mariota probably weren't the two best players this year, but those are good picks nonetheless), adjust for taking non-premium positions with relatively premium picks (like a punter in the third round), etc. 

[Superman]

Until the team actually drafts BPA and not for need.

 

Yup. Fans are fickle.

[krunk]

I posted this the other day, but it really sums it up well:

 

Funny when media people grade drafts based on how well a team filled needs. They don't know players well enough to base it on anything else

— Joe Banner (@JoeBanner13)

May 3, 2015

 

That doesn't really apply to guys like Mayock and Brooks and Kiper and so on, who watch and scout players, but the truth is that most media draft grades are based on perceived need more than the talent/quality of the players selected. Yet, everyone pays lip service to the idea that "best player available" is the best way to draft.

 

 

I actually think some of the Media Scouts like Brooks and Mayock do BPA based on perceived need as well.  For example, the first mock I saw from Mayock I believe had us taking Eli Harold because he believed we needed a pass rusher.  Certainly Harold was not a 1st round best impact player available otherwise Grigson would have picked him over Dorsett.

[Superman]

I actually think some of the Media Scouts like Brooks and Mayock do BPA based on perceived need as well.  For example, the first mock I saw from Mayock I believe had us taking Eli Harold because he believed we needed a pass rusher.  Certainly Harold was not a 1st round best impact player available otherwise Grigson would have picked him over Dorsett.

 

Yeah, they revert to needs based analysis more often than not. I was just saying that I believe Brooks and Mayock and Kiper know the players. Why they focus on perceived need to the degree they do is beyond me. Chris Burke and Doug Farrar, they aren't really about scouting and watching film and attending pro days and whatnot. They might do some of each, but not to the extent that the other guys do.

 

When you look at draft grades, especially for the Colts, you'll notice that the pessimistic reviews focus on need, and the more positive reviews focus more on the quality of the players drafted. 

[NewColtsFan]

The Colts draft has gotten everything from a solid B to a C.

 

In the grand scheme of things,  I rarely care about the grade days after the draft -- it's just way too soon to know anything.

 

Last year,  Kiper gave our '14 draft a D+....   but, to his credit, a year later he comes back and gives it a B-.    He saw what Mewhort and Moncrief and Newsome did for the Colts and he does a re-grade for all 32 teams.    That's how it should be done.

 

It's always nice to get a good grade,  but in the grand scheme of things,  the initial grade rarely holds up.   The proof is on the field.

[CanuckColt]

'We`re gonna be "Chucking that potato"!'

 

Ha, ha, ha...when I first read the title, I thought it was a thread about getting rid of Pagano.