The late draft doesn't have the significance we give it

[oldunclemark]

I'm hearing cheering and moaning here there and everywhere over who drafted who where..

..and how everybody could have gotten their man higher or lower...and didnt address their needs

Are we all total .???

We are discussing players who have never taken an NFL snap like we know what they'll do.

And debating a fifth or 6th round pick when you can grab 20 undrafted free agents on offense and defense the second the draft ends is silly, isnt it???

Outside the first round or two, who cares where ANYONE was drafted..if they can play.?

and do we know enough to stress about until they play at least one pre-season game?

[Captain Americolt]

Yup. No ones saying these players arent talented, its just we hardly used any picks on a big area of need, defense.

[number28]

we better be drafting ALL Defense in 13. thats all I wanna see.

[oldunclemark]

Yup. No ones saying these players arent talented, its just we hardly used any picks on a big area of need, defense.

True ...but we sure signed some free agent defenders..

..and that's Chuck Pagano's area of expertise,......

Your concern could be right....and I could be a dumsky....

I'm just saying..we dont know until our coach gets his hands on them

[Horseshoe]

Yup. No ones saying these players arent talented, its just we hardly used any picks on a big area of need, defense.

The best way to draft is to take the best player available. Grigson quote " If you draft Need over the best football player available, its only good short term not long term" or something along those lines.

Also can you please tell me why people want to rebuild our defense before our offense? It doesn't make sense, most of our players that left were on offense..........

Also having a good defense and bad offense is a recipe for disaster. Just ask the Cleveland Browns......

[Captain Americolt]

I was just stating the main reason some fans didnt like this drat. I personally liked it.

[Luck2Fleener]

The best way to draft is to take the best player available. Grigson quote " If you draft Need over the best football player available, its only good short term not long term" or something along those lines.

Also can you please tell me why people want to rebuild our defense before our offense? It doesn't make sense, most of our players that left were on offense..........

Also having a good defense and bad offense is a recipe for disaster. Just ask the Cleveland Browns......

Also we don't know what we need on defense with the new scheme. Maybe our cornerbacks on our roster fit Pagano's defense well enough that we don't need to draft one...

Also offensive players, namely quarterbacks, receivers, and tight ends take the longer to develop than cornerbacks or linebackers...

[Jules]

Oldunclemark is rollin tonight.

I dig it.

[Nobody]

The best way to draft is to take the best player available. Grigson quote " If you draft Need over the best football player available, its only good short term not long term" or something along those lines.

Also can you please tell me why people want to rebuild our defense before our offense? It doesn't make sense, most of our players that left were on offense..........

Also having a good defense and bad offense is a recipe for disaster. Just ask the Cleveland Browns......

Or the poor Jags. Even their FO has given up on that terrible O, drafting a P in the 3rd.

[esmort]

I'm hearing cheering and moaning here there and everywhere over who drafted who where..

..and how everybody could have gotten their man higher or lower...and didnt address their needs

Are we all total .???

We are discussing players who have never taken an NFL snap like we know what they'll do.

And debating a fifth or 6th round pick when you can grab 20 undrafted free agents on offense and defense the second the draft ends is silly, isnt it???

Outside the first round or two, who cares where ANYONE was drafted..if they can play.?

and do we know enough to stress about until they play at least one pre-season game?

I care where where players outside the first 2 rounds are drafted. IMO you are way underrating the importance of later rounds ... Brady 6th, Colston 7th, Bethea 6th, McAfee 7th, Carl Nicks 5th, Garcon 6th, etc .... these are just a few late rounders, so where someone goes "outside round 1 or 2" plays a major role in building a team. And prior to 1992 the draft was 12 rounds; so if you look at it from that perspective the 5th or 6th round picks are not as insignificant as you believe.

If your theory was correct we may as well just trade off picks 3-7 every year, since we are going to get just as good of players by just picking up UDFAs.

[BrentMc11]

Also we don't know what we need on defense with the new scheme. Maybe our cornerbacks on our roster fit Pagano's defense well enough that we don't need to draft one...

Also offensive players, namely quarterbacks, receivers, and tight ends take the longer to develop than cornerbacks or linebackers...

Very similar to a point I made in another thread. Out of 'likes.' Good job!!

[BrentMc11]

Or the poor Jags. Even their FO has given up on that terrible O, drafting a P in the 3rd.

Funny! They go the best receiver for the WORST QB to attempt to throw to.

[BrentMc11]

I'm hearing cheering and moaning here there and everywhere over who drafted who where..

..and how everybody could have gotten their man higher or lower...and didnt address their needs

Are we all total .???

We are discussing players who have never taken an NFL snap like we know what they'll do.

And debating a fifth or 6th round pick when you can grab 20 undrafted free agents on offense and defense the second the draft ends is silly, isnt it???

Outside the first round or two, who cares where ANYONE was drafted..if they can play.?

and do we know enough to stress about until they play at least one pre-season game?

I agree, Sir! You are on a rll tonight. Good job!!

[ruksak]

I'm hearing cheering and moaning here there and everywhere over who drafted who where..

..and how everybody could have gotten their man higher or lower...and didnt address their needs

Are we all total .???

We are discussing players who have never taken an NFL snap like we know what they'll do.

And debating a fifth or 6th round pick when you can grab 20 undrafted free agents on offense and defense the second the draft ends is silly, isnt it???

Outside the first round or two, who cares where ANYONE was drafted..if they can play.?

and do we know enough to stress about until they play at least one pre-season game?

Well said, Mark. Though I think the quality doesn't take a nosedive until after the 4th round. The Jaguars (for example) using a premium 3rd round selection on a punter was asinine and an ill omen for things to come with that new regime.

To my estimation, the late draft rounds are simply an organized UDFA process. All the hype laden players have been swept up and it's time to lay claim to the 'Wes Welkers' that may be laying about.

Truth be told, the defenders we grabbed in UDFA would likely match-up with many of the defenders still available in the late 5th and onward.

[jskinnz]

I care where where players outside the first 2 rounds are drafted. IMO you are way underrating the importance of later rounds ... Brady 6th, Colston 7th, Bethea 6th, McAfee 7th, Carl Nicks 5th, Garcon 6th, etc .... these are just a few late rounders, so where someone goes "outside round 1 or 2" plays a major role in building a team. And prior to 1992 the draft was 12 rounds; so if you look at it from that perspective the 5th or 6th round picks are not as insignificant as you believe.

If your theory was correct we may as well just trade off picks 3-7 every year, since we are going to get just as good of players by just picking up UDFAs.

I feel 100% confident in saying you missed the point altogether.

[esmort]

I feel 100% confident in saying you missed the point altogether.

I am 100% sure I got the point. I am also sure regardless of whether the end conclusion is valid or not, and whether I agree or disagree with the conclusion does not change the fact that I disagree with the flawed logic/reasoning he used as the basis for this point.

[Dan]

The most confusing thing is people flipping their nut because of picking another QB at Mr Irrelevant... it's literally the last pick of the draft, everyone we didn't pick there we could try to sign in UDFA. Mr Irrelevant is called Mr Irrelevant for a reason. I'm not bothered in the slightest that it was a dodgy pick.

[bahhummbug]

I care where where players outside the first 2 rounds are drafted. IMO you are way underrating the importance of later rounds ... Brady 6th, Colston 7th, Bethea 6th, McAfee 7th, Carl Nicks 5th, Garcon 6th, etc .... these are just a few late rounders, so where someone goes "outside round 1 or 2" plays a major role in building a team. And prior to 1992 the draft was 12 rounds; so if you look at it from that perspective the 5th or 6th round picks are not as insignificant as you believe.

If your theory was correct we may as well just trade off picks 3-7 every year, since we are going to get just as good of players by just picking up UDFAs.

So very few are drafted in later rounds your talking about the 1 in several thousand.Not that there is not that diamond found in late rounds it is the rarity of the find.

[CopenhagenColt]

I care where where players outside the first 2 rounds are drafted. IMO you are way underrating the importance of later rounds ... Brady 6th, Colston 7th, Bethea 6th, McAfee 7th, Carl Nicks 5th, Garcon 6th, etc .... these are just a few late rounders, so where someone goes "outside round 1 or 2" plays a major role in building a team.

It's seems a little onedimensional, only to name a few players who was late round draft picks and have since turned out to be solid NFL players. You could easily find a ton of players drafted from round 4 and on that never turned out to be anything near NFL standard.

For every "Brady" and even "Garcon" there are tons af complete busts in those late rounds.

[esmort]

It's seems a little onedimensional, only to name a few players who was late round draft picks and have since turned out to be solid NFL players. You could easily find a ton of players drafted from round 4 and on that never turned out to be anything near NFL standard.

For every "Brady" and even "Garcon" there are tons af complete busts in those late rounds.

Those are just a few that immediately came to mind, yes they are exceptional, and yes there are tons of busts as well ... but there are also a significant amount who become solid starters or exceptional backups who are not household names like Brady or Nicks etc .... Just like there are plenty of busts in the 1st and 2nd rounds ... and of course the bust rate goes up as the rounds progress, but to put 4-6 round players in the same group as UDFAs is not a good comparison.

[FightLikeSin]

We ranked 25th in total defense last year. That's better than both Super Bowl teams. Offense is where it's at. We made moves in the offseason for D, we hired a D-coordinator as our Head Coach, and fired Coyer. I'd say it's a 100% improvement from last year already.

[esmort]

The most confusing thing is people flipping their nut because of picking another QB at Mr Irrelevant... it's literally the last pick of the draft, everyone we didn't pick there we could try to sign in UDFA. Mr Irrelevant is called Mr Irrelevant for a reason. I'm not bothered in the slightest that it was a dodgy pick.

The key is "try to sign", and that is what gives the pick value .... An UDFA can choose to go to whatever team they choose, and just because we want them doesn't mean they will choose us, but the draft pick is coming regardless. I am sure there are UDFAs we wanted tried sign that we did not get.

I think people are "flipping their nut" because they seen players they viewed as having much greater value than Harnish being signed by other teams ... I know there are a couple of UDFA NT's that got signed by the ravens I would have liked to have brought in and tried out rather than Harnish.

[jskinnz]

The key is "try to sign", and that is what gives the pick value .... An UDFA can choose to go to whatever team they choose, and just because we want them doesn't mean they will choose us, but the draft pick is coming regardless. I am sure there are UDFAs we wanted tried sign that we did not get.

I think people are "flipping their nut" because they seen players they viewed as having much greater value than Harnish being signed by other teams ... I know there are a couple of UDFA NT's that got signed by the ravens I would have liked to have brought in and tried out rather than Harnish.

And there could not be a more meaningless statement made.

[esmort]

And there could not be a more meaningless statement made.

You are correct in so much as nothing can be done about it now; but by that logic anyone's opinion about what could have, should have, or might have happened in any past event, be it a game, a trade, or the draft is meaningless ... so we are all just wasting our time posting about past events and should limit all discussions to future events.

[jskinnz]

You are correct in so much as nothing can be done about it now; but by that logic anyone's opinion about what could have, should have, or might have happened in any past event, be it a game, a trade, or the draft is meaningless ... so we are all just wasting our time posting about past events and should limit all discussions to future events.

I absolutely find it amazing that there are so many on here questioning the draft

1) in the hours after it was finished. May be good to see if these guys can actually play first

2) Have issues with specific players chosen when the team is remarkably full of holes.

3) Question the result without the slightest inclination of the process.

[Jason_]

The key is "try to sign", and that is what gives the pick value .... An UDFA can choose to go to whatever team they choose, and just because we want them doesn't mean they will choose us, but the draft pick is coming regardless. I am sure there are UDFAs we wanted tried sign that we did not get.

I think people are "flipping their nut" because they seen players they viewed as having much greater value than Harnish being signed by other teams ... I know there are a couple of UDFA NT's that got signed by the ravens I would have liked to have brought in and tried out rather than Harnish.

I 100% agree. There were several defensive players that slipped for whatever reason that would have been great value pickups in the 6th and 7th round. Maybe there's a reason they slipped that's related to that player (injury, poor interviews etc) or maybe the player slipped because of a run on players at another position. I would have much rather turned the Brazil, Anderson, Fugger and Harnish picks into Billy Winn (DE/DT from Boise St. rated as 2nd/3rd rd talent), Jerry Franklin (ILB for a very good Arkansas defense in the SEC), Chase Minnifield (why not spend the Mr. Irrelevant pick to and see if his injury fully heals) and either Nicolas Jean-Baptiste or Ishmaa'ily Kitchen to develop behind McKinney and Chapman.

Yes, I will fully admit that it feels and sounds strange to say that the 6th and 7th round picks blew our draft grade, but considering the defensive talent that was still there and the value we could have gotten for them, I do think the 3rd day picks (aside from Chapman) really dropped the grade that I personally would give to our draft. The first 2 days' picks were pretty easy, not-much-thinking-involved type picks. Luck was obvious and when Fleener was still there, well I'm sure not much thought went into that selection either. I initially didn't like the Allen pick at the top of rd 3 but at the same time, it does make sense to go ahead and stock up on TE early since the TE class was weak in this draft. However, if you're going to go that route then imo you need to look for great value later and that, imo, is what they did a very poor job of.

[esmort]

I absolutely find it amazing that there are so many on here questioning the draft

1) in the hours after it was finished. May be good to see if these guys can actually play first

2) Have issues with specific players chosen when the team is remarkably full of holes.

3) Question the result without the slightest inclination of the process.

I find it amazing there are people with no questions about the draft or the reasoning behind certain selections, even if it is just out of curiosity about what prompted a certain pick. Every sports journalist out there is analyzing, grading, and asking similar questions of coaches, GMs, and other analysts ... why is it any different for fans who in many circumstances have more insight into their team than many of the journalists.

1-2) I am sure everyone hopes the players we got turn out to be great; and yes we were full of holes, but some holes were much bigger than others and many would rather see if a DT or CB can actually play rather than a 3rd string QB(or some other questionable pick).

3) I think most people have a general idea about the draft process and how it is supposed to work. Of course we do not know what the Colts draft board looked like and even if we did it doesn't mean we would agree with all of it. That doesn't necessarily invalidate our opinion of a player or pick, because I am sure 31 other teams wouldn't agree with all the draft board either.

Until Grigson & Pagano develop a track record their decisions are going to be questioned; as they should be. I am sure if these draft picks turn out to be good picks, people will be much less critical next draft.

[Jason_]

One thing that I really liked that Grigson said in a press conference afterwards was that he was going to strive to improve with each draft that he runs. I know that sounds very simple and every GM should strive to improve each year...the point though is he didn't try to say that we had a perfect draft. He talked about missing out on a few guys and how things like that were a learning experience for him and will help him in future drafts. He talked about how much he liked each of the picks and I wouldn't expect him to do anything else. However, he could have brushed off the notion that they missed out on anyone they wanted or he could have said they had the exact type of draft that they wanted. I'm finding it hard to write down and explain what I mean. Basically, I was able to get the impression that they didn't get exactly what or who they wanted and that they would have liked to have gone with more defense, it was just circumstances regarding the way their board was setup and the way players came were being drafted that led to this being a very offense heavy draft.

I still don't like the last 5 picks and I personally would have made different selections. I realize they have far more information than I do but I'd be curious to know what their reasons were for passing on certain players or for not including certain players on their board.

[Corndog]

NFL teams are built on the draft, the days of building on FA are over, this isn't baseball, the NFL is very important to every team. But yeah 6-7 guys are typically just depth moves and rarely, but sometimes do, turn out to be valueable starters. The first two rounds are usually where you get your star players. The 3-4 rounds are for starting players although they aren't as polished as the first two rounds, and the 5th round can be starting players too that need some work(it's a wildcard round). Although you are right we don't know what we have until they start playing and probably not for a couple years of seeing them.

[jskinnz]

I find it amazing there are people with no questions about the draft or the reasoning behind certain selections, even if it is just out of curiosity about what prompted a certain pick. Every sports journalist out there is analyzing, grading, and asking similar questions of coaches, GMs, and other analysts ... why is it any different for fans who in many circumstances have more insight into their team than many of the journalists.

1-2) I am sure everyone hopes the players we got turn out to be great; and yes we were full of holes, but some holes were much bigger than others and many would rather see if a DT or CB can actually play rather than a 3rd string QB(or some other questionable pick).

3) I think most people have a general idea about the draft process and how it is supposed to work. Of course we do not know what the Colts draft board looked like and even if we did it doesn't mean we would agree with all of it. That doesn't necessarily invalidate our opinion of a player or pick, because I am sure 31 other teams wouldn't agree with all the draft board either.

Until Grigson & Pagano develop a track record their decisions are going to be questioned; as they should be. I am sure if these draft picks turn out to be good picks, people will be much less critical next draft.

I think as far as understanding the process, you give way too much credit to the populace.

Grigson was quoted in the paper saying that the maintained their discipline throughout the process. He also said he did not want to draft "just a guy" type of players to fill needs. Clearly they had some defensive players targeted but those guys were gone when the Colts turn came up. Maintaining discipline means that they recognized they had a need, say a CB, but the next one rated on their board was not a good enough value at that particular pick so they go with the BPA. In other words, they did not make a "just a guy" selection. That is how good teams approach the draft. And thank goodness that is how Grigson appears to do it as well.

[The Peytonator]

I absolutely find it amazing that there are so many on here questioning the draft

1) in the hours after it was finished. May be good to see if these guys can actually play first

2) Have issues with specific players chosen when the team is remarkably full of holes.

3) Question the result without the slightest inclination of the process.

I don't have too many issues with the draft. But that last pick, while it is the so-called irrelavent pick, should not have been spent on a back-up QB. With a team that is remarkably full of holes, the last pick should have been spent on getting a guy like Minnifield in here, at the very least as a camp body. See what his knee is like because when he was healthy he was a projected 2nd/3rd rounder. Spending a pick on a backup QB, when you already traded to the Jets for their backup QB, just seems like a pointless pick.

You say we should see if the guys can actually play first.....nobody is ever going to see this Harnish guy play, except in the last quarter of a few preseason games.

[jskinnz]

I don't have too many issues with the draft. But that last pick, while it is the so-called irrelavent pick, should not have been spent on a back-up QB. With a team that is remarkably full of holes, the last pick should have been spent on getting a guy like Minnifield in here, at the very least as a camp body. See what his knee is like because when he was healthy he was a projected 2nd/3rd rounder. Spending a pick on a backup QB, when you already traded to the Jets for their backup QB, just seems like a pointless pick.

You say we should see if the guys can actually play first.....nobody is ever going to see this Harnish guy play, except in the last quarter of a few preseason games.

Oh, I see. So you don't think there is any value in developing a back up QB.

[The Peytonator]

Oh, I see. So you don't think there is any value in developing a back up QB.

Not when you already traded a pick for a back up QB, and you could just go out and get any other scrub back up.....probably even the same one.

[jskinnz]

Not when you already traded a pick for a back up QB, and you could just go out and get any other scrub back up.....probably even the same one.

You say scrub backup but there is a difference between Stanton, who will most assuredly by the back up this year and developing a rookie. If they saw something they liked in the kid, I am sure the thought is to develop him in the hopes that maybe he can become the next Matt Flynn or Matt Cassell, a commodity they can get something back in return for a minimal investment. Please no one tell me that Flynn was a FA who was not traded. Or that he ultimately adds depth to the roster and becomes someone they are comfortable with taking snaps should Luck go down for any length of time.

Look all I am saying is there is a reason decisions were made and clearly they thought this guy had a better chance of helping the team than a guy like anyone else the MMQB's thought should have been taken.

[Jason_]

You say scrub backup but there is a difference between Stanton, who will most assuredly by the back up this year and developing a rookie. If they saw something they liked in the kid, I am sure the thought is to develop him in the hopes that maybe he can become the next Matt Flynn or Matt Cassell, a commodity they can get something back in return for a minimal investment. Please no one tell me that Flynn was a FA who was not traded. Or that he ultimately adds depth to the roster and becomes someone they are comfortable with taking snaps should Luck go down for any length of time.

Look all I am saying is there is a reason decisions were made and clearly they thought this guy had a better chance of helping the team than a guy like anyone else the MMQB's thought should have been taken.

Matt Flynn was a FA who was not traded.

Wow, you really can't have any kind of friendly debate or conversation without calling people names, talking down to people, just all around being rude, condescending and arrogant can you? Yes, I realize I was a bit repetitive. Either people agree with you or they're mindless, whiny * right?

[JCPatriot]

You say we should see if the guys can actually play first.....nobody is ever going to see this Harnish guy play, except in the last quarter of a few preseason games.

At least we hope not. It has most likely not been a pleasant season if we do.