DawgTalkers.net Forums The Archives 2014 NFL Season NFL Draft 2014 CLWB419 Mock 1

Quote:

---

In theory, I love it.


Likely, what would happen is a team would trade up above out #19 spot knowing we were trying to get him. The phrases "Being too cute" and "Smartest guy in the room" come to mind.


If we play it too cute and mess it up, they're all getting fired again. just take Teddy at #4, don't be cute about it, we have too many picks to "be cute" with to mess up getting our QB.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

In theory, I love it.


Likely, what would happen is a team would trade up above out #19 spot knowing we were trying to get him. The phrases "Being too cute" and "Smartest guy in the room" come to mind.


If we play it too cute and mess it up, they're all getting fired again. just take Teddy at #4, don't be cute about it, we have too many picks to "be cute" with to mess up getting our QB.

---

Speaking of getting too cute...

What if a more realistic situation rears it's ugly head, the fact that teams value the QB position...

Every one is talking as if all of a sudden for the first time in history when there are top QB candidates, whether red flags or not, teams will be willing to just ignore them.

What is a more realistic expectation?

THREE QBs have been mentioned as a potential #1 overall, Bortles, Bridgewater and Manziel...

So, is it more realistic that teams just ignore them and one drops to the Browns at #26, or is THIS more realistic?

The Texans take the best QB on their board #1 overall...

THEN, someone like the Browns, Vikings or Raiders (or even the Jaguars when they hear about other teams moving up) move into the Rams spot to take the best of the other 2 remaining QBs based on their evaluations?

That leaves one QB left from that group and the Jags will be sitting there at #3 to take him...

I believe it is MUCH more realistic there are 3 QBs off the board in the first 3 picks, than ALL 3 QBs being available to the Browns at #4 and the Browns choosing to pass on all of them...

---

Quote:

---

I won't be upset to see us trade up.

---

Quote:

---

I disagree.

You don't take a QB just to take a QB that is what gets teams into trouble, Quinn and Weeden are prime examples, you take the best player unless the team needs a QB and has one closely rated to the best player available. We don't know where the experts have these QBs rated we just know where the "wannabe" experts have them rated. Maybe the team GM's have these guys all rated as middle of the 1st round prospects.

---

Quote:

---

If those QB's fo 1,2 3 as alluded to and

i have Clowney, Mack, Watkins and Robertson all on the board I open the floor for bidding and tyake the best deal I can find.

Or if no deal stikes my fancy I take Clowney and never look back.

---

Quote:

---

I don't disagree that we need a QB. I just disagree that you pass up talent that you have rated higher just to draft a QB who you aren't as sure on. I have no problem if the Browns take one of the QBs at 4 if they think that player is the best one available but I do have a problem if lets say they have Watkins rated as their number 2 best player and their top QB is rated 17th yet they take the QB. You stay true to your board the only time you "reach" is if the players are closely rated and the lower rated one fills a position of need.

---

Quote:

---

Need does play some role in your draft board and especially when it comes to the QB position.

---

Quote:

---

I believe the history of the draft dictates it's been done time and time again and will continue to do so.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Need does play some role in your draft board and especially when it comes to the QB position.

---

See that is where i disagree, I don't think it should have any bearing on your player rankings. You may move around in the draft to get a player who fills your need based on where he is ranked on your board but you never rank a player higher just because he plays a certain position.

---

Quote:

---

Your talking about drafting the player I am talking about rating the player. Yes a OG will probably never go before a OT in the draft but you can still have the OG rated higher on your board. If the OG is the player you are targeting you just move up our down in the draft to where you feel it is comfortable to take him. IE the New England Patriots.

Gotta go to work, I'll read your response later tonight.

---

Quote:

---

2014 NFL Draft: The Myth Of Best Player Available

The truth is no team drafts with a pure "BPA" philosophy.

It is a consistently popular dialogue this time of year in NFL circles, how are teams going to draft? Will they focus on their positions of need, taking a player at those positions, even if someone around them might be a "better" player, or will they set their board based only on each players talent and select the most talented player on their board when their pick comes up?

The latter option is referred to as taking the "Best Player Available" or "BPA" for short.

In a vacuum either option can make some sense. You don't want to field a team the next year without addressing some glaring position of weakness, but you also don't want to "reach" and take a lesser player that may not actually improve your team. However, in addition to this pure talent vs position argument, there is are discussions of scheme fit, injury concerns, off-field problems, positional depth (or lack thereof) in the draft, implied positional value, and more. When you understand this you understand that both the "BPA" and the "Need" theories are very limited in and of themselves.

There fore, let me introduce you to my new description of teams draft theory, that is, "Best Grade Available."

When teams put their draft boards together, each player receives a grade, some teams use a pure numbers system from 1.0 to 9.0 with 9.0 being a transcendent talent and 1.0 being an undraftable guy with no future in the NFL. While others, (like your Dallas Cowboys) use a different system. A sample grade for a Cowboys prospect would be a 1.10. With this grade, the first number 1 is a constant and doesn't change, the second 1, immediately following the decimal point represents the round of the draft where they will fall, and the zero representing where in the round that player would fall. In this case the zero would indicate that this player is the very first player in the round. Therefore the 1.10 grade would be handed to the best player in the first round of the draft, which would of course be the best player in the entire draft.

However, this grade, regardless of grading system, will no doubt take into account each of the items we discussed before. How that player fills a need might bump a guy from a 1.15 (middle of first round), up to a 1.13 ( Top 1/3 of the first round) grade, where as failing to fit the scheme, or play a premium position might drop a guy from a 1.12 (Top 5 player in round 1) down to a 1.18 or 1.22 type grade (where Shariff Floyd likely should have fallen on the Cowboys board in 2013). So taking the player with the highest grade available means that before the draft, when you are not in the heat of the moment, you have taken things like your self evaluation of your team, your projection of the prospects' talent, their fit in your schemes, whether they are the RKG, their medical condition and any other information you obtain into account in your slotting of those players. Then when you get to your pick in the draft, you've already got guys in position where you feel comfortable taking them, and it's not based on some partial evaluation or short sighted criteria, like the best talent available or a pure team need.

---

Quote:

---

If those QB's fo 1,2 3 as alluded to and

i have Clowney, Mack, Watkins and Robertson all on the board I open the floor for bidding and tyake the best deal I can find.

Or if no deal stikes my fancy I take Clowney and never look back.

---

Quote:

---

You nor I know how Farmer has these QBs rated, all I am saying is that If we don't draft one at 4 it's not gonna be the end of the world. You don't take a QB just to take a QB, if that were the case you would draft one every round and hope that you hit on one. If Farmer passes on all the QBs and drafts Mack or Matthews or Watkins I have no problem with that if those players are rated higher then the QBs on his board.

---

Quote:

---

1. Manziel to the Texans
2. Bridgewater, whoever trades up to get him
3. Jaguars not being able to resist Watkins

---

Quote:

---

With all the bad press and a few front office people stating that Bridgewater has issues and is not top 10, he doesn't go number 2.

---

Quote:

---

Refs around here don't have much tolerance for masked profanity. I'd take that out of your post before they see it, or it's likely you won't be around here to 'debate the actual picks with us'

Just a heads up for you.

---

Quote:

---

“Let me be clear: This is the top-rated quarterback on my Big Board, a player I have rated higher than Bortles, Manziel or Carr,” Kiper wrote. “But my reading of the tea leaves in speaking with many evaluators around the league is that Bridgewater could drop if he slides past a couple of points early on.

---

Quote:

---

But according to one former NFL front office executive, ex-Tampa Bay Buccaneers general manager Mark Dominik, the former Louisville quarterback’s stock has been slipping since before his pro day one month ago.

“There were things you saw on tape when you watched him,” Dominik said on ESPN’s “NFL Insiders,” where he is now an analyst. “Something that scouts internally, we talked about it in Tampa with Teddy Bridgewater last year. Is he really the premier quarterback? I like the young man, I think he’s a quality individual, he’s got character and leadership and those things. But this is a quarterback, and you’re judged by what quarterback you draft, and I think Teddy Bridgewater might not have all the pieces you’re looking for.”

---

Quote:

---

Dominik’s comments are similar to those of another former GM, Phil Savage, who was with the Cleveland Browns from 2005-08.

“I think the media has Teddy Bridgewater in the top 10, but around league circles he’s more like a late first, early second-round pick,” Savage said Thursday on SiriusXM NFL Radio.

---

Quote:

---

"We had him at No. 1 during the season," said Walter Cherepinsky, founder of WalterFootball.com, but "we haven't spoken to a team that's been high on him. It's insane. Probably the most surprising thing is we talked to one NFC guy whose team doesn't need a quarterback. He has no reason to lie. And he has Bridgewater as a fourth-round prospect."

---

Quote:

---

Steve asked Phil about whether or not the Ravens would take a QB with their first round pick, because of the Ozzie loving Teddy Bridgewater rumors. Phil said he would be extremely shocked if the Ravens took a quarterback because the Ravens have many other issues and Flacco would be helped by fixing those issues. Phil said if you want to go that route you could probably trade Flacco but that won’t happen. . Phil believes all 3 underclassmen QBs will go in the top 5 picks of the draft

---

Quote:

---

In Dominik's tenure as GM, the Buccaneers went 28-52 with only one winning season and no playoff appearances. On December 30, 2013, Dominik was fired along with head coach Greg Schiano following a 4-12 season.[2]

---