Draft thread

[The Consigliere]

Answering my own question, I see now that we've either had a T30 or multiple meetings with Ollie Gordon and Tuten too. They are definitely hunting for a zone back.

The most exciting names on our T30 visits for me other than Kaleb are Ezeiruaku and Tre Harris, but I also like that we met with Ashton Gilotte. Gilotte is a mid rounder, but a good player. Maybe coming off a bit of a down season compared to 2023, but I still really like him. Ezeiruaku I love. I think he's the best or second best pure rusher in the class. Way better than a lot of the guys being projected ahead of him. I saw that we traded down I Kipers mock draft and still got him. I don't think that's happening. If we pass on him at 29, I don't think the Chiefs or Eagles will too. As for Tre Harris, I think I posted a bunch about him on old ES before the site got taken down. Long story short, he was one of my favorite prospects heading into the season, and I think the value of his draft stock is really good if we can get him in the second.

I'm intrigued with the Conerly interest. His film is not very impressive, but I'm intrigued by his speed. I think he's quicker than Membou and I think he has a better NFL body than Membou does. I don't love the idea of drafting an OT that needs quite a bit of physical development and work before he can start at 29, especially when a stud like Ezeiruaku might be there. But after a trade down, that's a more palatable value for Conerly. Getting an OL with elite speed for the pipeline would be nice, and even though it kind of feels like we're well off on OL after the Tunsil trade, it's never a good idea to neglect this position. Philly wouldn't.

I'm not as intrigued by all of the Wyatt Milum meetings though. I'm going to watch him again and reassess, but my first impression of him was that he is a super slow and lumbering player who just didn't impress me with his range or accuracy as a run blocker.

I can cosign on Tre Harris. He's a beloved prospect in the Dynasty community. After the obvious first round guys, generally speed the analytics side, and the tape grinders both seem to like Tre Harris the most, and probably Jaylin Noel after him. The floor guy is Egbuka, some guys like Elic and Higgins, some don't. But Tre seems to have universal love. I wonder when he goes.

[The Consigliere]

@The Consigliere

Had the same issue. I wrote a long take on these RBs last week but got logged out and it went away so had to summarize it all.

As for Skattebo, if we are going to live and die with his 40, what about his explosion score? 39.5 was almost tops in his class. Is that meaningless? If he wasn't such a weapon out of the backfield, I'd be less interested. But yeah I do think that indeed a RB's will to break tackles accompanied by outstanding contact balance translates. He did it against Texas which arguably has the best defense in college last year, their defense was all about stopping him, yet they couldn't do it.

Have you watched Kaleb Johnson or are you just reading his combine numbers?

Kaleb was a much better back in college than Robinson was. Among other things, Robinson at Alabama with a pedestrian 5 YPC, and a below average 3.3 yards after contact. Kaleb 6.4 per carry, 4.42 yards after contact. And if you watch him, it looks it, when he breaks to that 2nd level, he's hard to catch.

RBs aren't all about of course who is the faster in the track meet. If it were Tuten and Jayden Blue would be going in the first round. Contact balance, vision, agility, stop and go. So many variables. I think it was Josh Norris who if I recall you follow who said that the RAS scores for RB is one of the most meaningless among the positions.

Even though he's a smaller dude than Robinson, Jordan James strikes me as a rich man's

Here are some scouts on him

https://www.golongtd.com/p/part-6-rb-ra ... eing-and-a
4. KALEB JOHNSON, Iowa (6-1, 234, 4.56, 2-3): Third-year junior. Set a freshman record at Iowa with 779 yards rushing. “Lot of explosive runs of 25-plus yards,” one scout said. “Had a few that were 50-plus. Has a burst to run stretch and get downhill. Is able to exploit inside run lanes. Shows good patience for (following) blockers. Capable of running behind his pads and showing leg drive and contact balance.

You are thinking all I care about is 40 score. That's not all I care about at all, I just need RB's to be within a threshold, if they are, it's good news, if they are higher to the top end, particularly 4.49 or below, its on average a lot better news. Its not everything, it's just that virtually all hits (and I mean virtually all) historically are 4.65 or below, and the closer you trend towards 4.65, especially 4.6's the worse it is. That's the degree I care about it. I don't really concern myself with it so long as they within that 4.2ish Chris Johnson area, and 4.65 uh oh, Samaje Perine type area. If they are, good, if they aren't, to hit they'll have to be an exceptional outlier.

On Skattebo, I actually did reference that in my original post, over at player profiler, his explosion score is 89th percentile, and is probably one of the weirdest discrepancies in any RB profile (typically you do see some swings at burst or agility, but swings from single digit scores, to nearly 90th percentile in another trait are rare, and Skattebo has a swing nearly that wild (its basically 70 percentile points or nearly so). That could explain how he is able to succeed even w/a more blah speed, could also suggest at either second gear in the open field, or explosive power to break through holes but simply later get caught. Definitely makes him interesting is part of the reason for my ajar door.

As for Kaleb, yeah, I've watched him, I tend to be a bit sketched out with regards to Wisconsin and Iowa RB's over the years in general, other than the TE factory angle with Iowa, I'm pretty skeptical. With Kaleb, he's adequate in his athletic profile, but I am concerned he didn't really impact things until he was 21. Otoh, Hampton did little, same with Jeanty (although Trey and Judkins were awesome as freshman) so I could be a bit unfair there. I can be talked into him a more, my analysis may be a bit too surface level with him. I'll dig deep more over the next 6 weeks with rookie drafts starting for me in June .

You've watched Kaleb yet your comp is Robinson? The only similarity is their size and their 40 time. Their styles are quite different including what they major in as runners. And even if that doesn't register with you while watching them -- their stats indicate those same major differences. That's why i asked if you are just looking at the 40 time. Because while watching them, Brian Robinson doesn't come to my mind. But if I was just looking at their size and 40 time, Brian would run naturally through my mind.

Among other things, Kalen was #1 in this class when going against light boxes, 10.2 YPC in that context, beating Henderson and Jeanty. Exploiting light boxes better than speedy backs, does that strike you very Brian Robinsonish? Give Robinson a light box and he will outdo Barkley or whomever in the NFL. That would be outright silly. Robinson is mostly a run between the tackles runner, gap, inside zone. Johnson is outsize zone. I can go on. Very different flavors of runners.

Robinson for a big dude had one of the worst break tackle numbers in college. Kaleb with one of the best. They are different players with different strenghts and weaknesses.

I don't use comps the way you do. When I comp guys, I'm not comping about style of play, I'm comping about expected end result production levels because that's what I care about in terms of investing in dynasty players. For this class, I tend to think Jeanty and Hampton are high end guys that will produce inside the top 10 and probably top 5 among RB's if they are utilized well. I think Judkins won't be an explosive mega producer, but will he produce #'s analogous to peak or average Mendenhall, Marshawn Lynch, Gore sorta deal. It sounds nebulous, but I basically am mixing an expectation of production with how I think they'll get it. I don't see Judkins as a gamebreaking Chris Johnson obviously, I see him as a tough as hell, physical guy who can get you bursts of explosive production like Lynch, Gore, peak Mendenall, maybe Bettis.

I'm trying to figure out Floors and Ceilings of what they can give me, and then I trend it out towards what I think they might do with us, I'm not looking really at how they go about doing it, beyond the basics. I don't do tape grinding for many reasons, not the least of which are:
1. I'm nowhere near as good as it as others.
2. I view it as incredibly biased, and often leading to utter bull----.

Recall that last year, Maye was bashed relentlessly for his throwing mechanics and footwork, to the extent that some said he was borderline unfixable.

What I argued: That's all largely bull---, and he'll be totally fine.

End result: It was total bull----, and he was totally fine, and indeed, excellent to superb and is now viewed as a stud in very much the same vein as CJ was in the '24 offseason, Daniels, Burrow, Herbert etc.

I will note, that I think it has value, especially for the most skilled at it, but I think generally, we, suck at it, and I don't trust largely any opinions on message boards, and even amongst the people I trust, i take it entirely with a grain of salt, as biased, as analytical #'s that can be massaged and reshaped depending upon how you filter them, I just think raw #'s, are raw #'s and at least you can trust that generally the #'s are true (exceptions abound like Keenan Allen testing when he was injured in the 40, etc) even if they can be manipulated out of contexts to the degree that they become less relevant or even totally irrelevant.

[skinsinparadise]

Skattebo = a more physical Austin Ekeler. He's got top notch quickness, creativity, balance, patience, and vision, but a much more rugged build than Ekeler. This dude is our juiciest mid round opportunity for a do it all workhorse stud back.

Anyone know which running backs we've actually met with? Just Kaleb Johnson?

We know we need a zone running back and that Robinson isn't it. The scheme narrows down the list and, IMO, Johnson and Skattebo are exactly the kind of zone runners we're shopping for. Skattebo will be there when our pick finally comes around in the middle of the draft, Johnson might not be there when we pick in the 60s.

Ekeler is orders of magnitude more athletic (4.48 40, 96th percentile explosion/burst score, 87th percentile agility). He was an athletic freak, who got lost because he went to a directional school nobody ever heard of. I can't even find stats.

One thing I always used to ask over at ES, and never really got an answer was how often we actually drafted guys we interviewed. I have no idea, but I never picked up on any idea that whatever players we did draft, typically were also interviewed (even if obviously, we cant draft everyone we interview). Never got the sense that it was inherently associated with interests in using draft capital. I wonder if its more associated with a mix of desired targets, and/or finding out if red flags on mental make up and other associated traits make sense or not).

Under Ron there didn't seem to be a big correlation with meetings and who they took. Sometimes ditto with Bruce. I never did a statisitcal assessment of it. But I can recall many stories of hey Washington was if anything the team that gave me the least attention in the draft process. I recall Ron talking about how they didn't need to interview Dotson for example that heavily because they already had sources telling them he's a good dude.

Keim mentioned yesterday that he's heard from teams how much more a presence this team now has at the prodays and league draft events compared to previous regimes -- both Bruce and Ron. Bruce as Keim referenced among others was super cheap and didn't like spending money so I gather they didn't like sending their scouts everywhere.

Last year every player they took except one was interviewed at the combine.

[skinsinparadise]

You are thinking all I care about is 40 score. That's not all I care about at all, I just need RB's to be within a threshold, if they are, it's good news, if they are higher to the top end, particularly 4.49 or below, its on average a lot better news. Its not everything, it's just that virtually all hits (and I mean virtually all) historically are 4.65 or below, and the closer you trend towards 4.65, especially 4.6's the worse it is. That's the degree I care about it. I don't really concern myself with it so long as they within that 4.2ish Chris Johnson area, and 4.65 uh oh, Samaje Perine type area. If they are, good, if they aren't, to hit they'll have to be an exceptional outlier.

On Skattebo, I actually did reference that in my original post, over at player profiler, his explosion score is 89th percentile, and is probably one of the weirdest discrepancies in any RB profile (typically you do see some swings at burst or agility, but swings from single digit scores, to nearly 90th percentile in another trait are rare, and Skattebo has a swing nearly that wild (its basically 70 percentile points or nearly so). That could explain how he is able to succeed even w/a more blah speed, could also suggest at either second gear in the open field, or explosive power to break through holes but simply later get caught. Definitely makes him interesting is part of the reason for my ajar door.

As for Kaleb, yeah, I've watched him, I tend to be a bit sketched out with regards to Wisconsin and Iowa RB's over the years in general, other than the TE factory angle with Iowa, I'm pretty skeptical. With Kaleb, he's adequate in his athletic profile, but I am concerned he didn't really impact things until he was 21. Otoh, Hampton did little, same with Jeanty (although Trey and Judkins were awesome as freshman) so I could be a bit unfair there. I can be talked into him a more, my analysis may be a bit too surface level with him. I'll dig deep more over the next 6 weeks with rookie drafts starting for me in June .

You've watched Kaleb yet your comp is Robinson? The only similarity is their size and their 40 time. Their styles are quite different including what they major in as runners. And even if that doesn't register with you while watching them -- their stats indicate those same major differences. That's why i asked if you are just looking at the 40 time. Because while watching them, Brian Robinson doesn't come to my mind. But if I was just looking at their size and 40 time, Brian would run naturally through my mind.

Among other things, Kalen was #1 in this class when going against light boxes, 10.2 YPC in that context, beating Henderson and Jeanty. Exploiting light boxes better than speedy backs, does that strike you very Brian Robinsonish? Give Robinson a light box and he will outdo Barkley or whomever in the NFL. That would be outright silly. Robinson is mostly a run between the tackles runner, gap, inside zone. Johnson is outsize zone. I can go on. Very different flavors of runners.

Robinson for a big dude had one of the worst break tackle numbers in college. Kaleb with one of the best. They are different players with different strenghts and weaknesses.

I don't use comps the way you do. When I comp guys, I'm not comping about style of play, I'm comping about expected end result production levels because that's what I care about in terms of investing in dynasty players. For this class, I tend to think Jeanty and Hampton are high end guys that will produce inside the top 10 and probably top 5 among RB's if they are utilized well. I think Judkins won't be an explosive mega producer, but will he produce #'s analogous to peak or average Mendenhall, Marshawn Lynch, Gore sorta deal. It sounds nebulous, but I basically am mixing an expectation of production with how I think they'll get it. I don't see Judkins as a gamebreaking Chris Johnson obviously, I see him as a tough as hell, physical guy who can get you bursts of explosive production like Lynch, Gore, peak Mendenall, maybe Bettis.

I'm trying to figure out Floors and Ceilings of what they can give me, and then I trend it out towards what I think they might do with us, I'm not looking really at how they go about doing it, beyond the basics. I don't do tape grinding for many reasons, not the least of which are:
1. I'm nowhere near as good as it as others.
2. I view it as incredibly biased, and often leading to utter bull----.

Recall that last year, Maye was bashed relentlessly for his throwing mechanics and footwork, to the extent that some said he was borderline unfixable.

What I argued: That's all largely bull---, and he'll be totally fine.

End result: It was total bull----, and he was totally fine, and indeed, excellent to superb and is now viewed as a stud in very much the same vein as CJ was in the '24 offseason, Daniels, Burrow, Herbert etc.

I will note, that I think it has value, especially for the most skilled at it, but I think generally, we, suck at it, and I don't trust largely any opinions on message boards, and even amongst the people I trust, i take it entirely with a grain of salt, as biased, as analytical #'s that can be massaged and reshaped depending upon how you filter them, I just think raw #'s, are raw #'s and at least you can trust that generally the #'s are true (exceptions abound like Keenan Allen testing when he was injured in the 40, etc) even if they can be manipulated out of contexts to the degree that they become less relevant or even totally irrelevant.

Coming from a dude who loved both Maye and Jayden. I don't think Maye was that hard of an assessment. I think its a product of how much you watch the player, how many games and which games? Maye had three games where his accuracy was a hot mess. And when his critics hit him, it was referencing those games. Ultimately they put all of his games on youtube where you could watch every game-every throw in sequence. And when you watch it, you could see how those three games were outliers, he was great otherwise. He was great the season before, too. Then you add his upside, tools, etc. He was an easy read IMO.

Jayden took a little more projection. But I was early on him during that college season. Then I became infatuated with Maye. And Jayden had that one fan NFLchick on the board who would go so over the top about Jayden and slammed Maye so much that lol it made me for a spell defend Maye and prop him over Jayden. But then NFLchick dissappeared and I found myself becoming Jayden's top defender on the board with some saying the more they watched the more concerned they were about him. I seriously doubt though those people watched all of Jayden's games. I watched them all twice. Ditto Maye. And I was reassured about Jayden the more i watched because you can see him throw at times with anticpation, throw on the move, throw in between the numbers. You had some sample of him doing well what his critics say he struggled with. So I was sold.

My point is I am not draft guru. But if I had to think of what helps me provide my best takes and where am likely going to get it right is watching a lot of games. Not a game or two but at least 4. And in Jayden's-Maye's case I watched everything more than twice. It's powerful if you want to get a sense of a player. I think of anyone here just watched all the games they'd have good takes on any player, doesn't matter the player. Doesn't mean we'd get them all right. No one does. But we can talk in an educated way about any player we've watched extensively.

There is a dude for example on youtube who put up every rep of every game of many of these top RBs. I've watched most of them. Some twice, like I have with Judkins and Henderson. I've watched every Henderson game once. I'll probably hit it twice before draft day. I've watched every run of Skattebo, etc.

I love the anayltics and numbers and using that to do projection. I can't post what I got on that front here the way i could on the previous board. For some reason it comes off small and unreadable when I try to post it here. But in short I have every metric imaginable on all these players on most spots. I subscribed to Warren Sharp's draft numbers, too. i love looking at numbers. But I don't think that trumps actually watching these guys. It complements it.

But heck even if I did think numbers-anayltics are king, as you know you can use stats to fulfill biases. If you see Kaleb Johnson for example as a big powerful back and by extention all the stereotypes that come with that -- you'll find metrics to back up the predisposition. Hey he's not that fast. He's big. He had a late breakout year.

If its about production and fantasy #'s. And Hampton is the stud on that front and don't get me wrong i love Hampton and prefer him over Kaleb. Lets play with the numbers purely to make a point.

Kaleb 6.4 YPC. Hampton 5.9
That slowpoke Kaleb with 28 runs of 15 plus yards. Hampton with 26.
Kaleb 4.42 yards after contact. Hampton: 4.35
Kaleb: 81% miss tackle rate. Hampton: 72
Kaleb 21 Tds. Hampton 15 Tds.

As I mentioned Kaleb top in this class against light boxes. Kaleb had the most stacked boxes to deal with and yet he put up stats like that. Teams played Iowa to shut down the run. He accounted for over 40% of Iowa's offensive yards -- which is insane, only Jeanty among this class had more. He ran for over 1500 plus yards.

If we are running with the numbers, he can make quite a case for himself.

[The Consigliere]

Coming from a dude who loved both Maye and Jayden. I don't think Maye was that hard of an assessment. I think its a product of how much you watch the player, how many games and which games? Maye had three games where his accuracy was a hot mess. And when his critics hit him, it was referencing those games. Ultimately they put all of his games on youtube where you could watch every game-every throw in sequence. And when you watch it, you could see how those three games were outliers, he was great otherwise. He was great the season before, too. Then you add his upside, tools, etc. He was an easy read IMO.

Jayden took a little more projection. But I was early on him during that college season. Then I became infatuated with Maye. And Jayden had that one fan NFLchick on the board who would go so over the top about Jayden and slammed Maye so much that lol it made me for a spell defend Maye and prop him over Jayden. But then NFLchick dissappeared and I found myself becoming Jayden's top defender on the board with some saying the more they watched the more concerned they were about him. I seriously doubt though those people watched all of Jayden's games. I watched them all twice. Ditto Maye. And I was reassured about Jayden the more i watched because you can see him throw at times with anticpation, throw on the move, throw in between the numbers. You had some sample of him doing well what his critics say he struggled with. So I was sold.

My point is I am not draft guru. But if I had to think of what helps me provide my best takes and where am likely going to get it right is watching a lot of games. Not a game or two but at least 4. And in Jayden's-Maye's case I watched everything more than twice. It's powerful if you want to get a sense of a player. I think of anyone here just watched all the games they'd have good takes on any player, doesn't matter the player. Doesn't mean we'd get them all right. No one does. But we can talk in an educated way about any player we've watched extensively.

There is a dude for example on youtube who put up every rep of every game of many of these top RBs. I've watched most of them. Some twice, like I have with Judkins and Henderson. I've watched every Henderson game once. I'll probably hit it twice before draft day. I've watched every run of Skattebo, etc.

I love the anayltics and numbers and using that to do projection. I can't post what I got on that front here the way i could on the previous board. For some reason it comes off small and unreadable when I try to post it here. But in short I have every metric imaginable on all these players on most spots. I subscribed to Warren Sharp's draft numbers, too. i love looking at numbers. But I don't think that trumps actually watching these guys. It complements it.

But heck even if I did think numbers-anayltics are king, as you know you can use stats to fulfill biases. If you see Kaleb Johnson for example as a big powerful back and by extention all the stereotypes that come with that -- you'll find metrics to back up the predisposition. Hey he's not that fast. He's big. He had a late breakout year.

If its about production and fantasy #'s. And Hampton is the stud on that front and don't get me wrong i love Hampton and prefer him over Kaleb. Lets play with the numbers purely to make a point.

Kaleb 6.4 YPC. Hampton 5.9
That slowpoke Kaleb with 28 runs of 15 plus yards. Hampton with 26.
Kaleb 4.42 yards after contact. Hampton: 4.35
Kaleb: 81% miss tackle rate. Hampton: 72
Kaleb 21 Tds. Hampton 15 Tds.

As I mentioned Kaleb top in this class against light boxes. Kaleb had the most stacked boxes to deal with and yet he put up stats like that. Teams played Iowa to shut down the run. He accounted for over 40% of Iowa's offensive yards -- which is insane, only Jeanty among this class had more. He ran for over 1500 plus yards.

If we are running with the numbers, he can make quite a case for himself.

I think what it comes down to me with these various things is this:

Maye vs Daniels:
I was 1000% Maye, and I still am, to some extent with some Bayesian thoughts mixed in (Jayden is absolutely better now, period, but if you're asking me who I'm taking, I still want Maye because I no longer see any risk at all of him busting, there's nothing really missing in his game, nothing that critics can point to anymore, he's substantially younger than Daniels too, and I have no concerns about injury risk. With Daniels, my chief concerns were answering the question as to why it took him 5 seasons to produce a season as good as either of Maye's, injury risk, and some system concerns (can he make all the throws consistently and operate a bunch of different offensive approaches and schemes), at this point he's basically erased concerns I had about him hitting at all, but he still is an injury risk walking to me, I hate his frame, I hate his age, and I remain alarmed that critics remain about how he works as a thrower, and whether he's limited in terms of the type of schemes he could be effective in (I think they're wrong, but they know more than me in this area). So after season 1, Jayden obviously won the battle, but those of us who were Maye boosters were also proven right, and with a far worse train wreck of a team (i think both rosters were horrible going in, but the Patriots were worse in terms of weapons because of OL issues mixed with a total --- WR group front to back, at least Jayden had McLaurin (everyone else was like a 4th or 5th option on a good team though which made Daniels season even more impressive), on top of all that, the advantages in profile that made Maye more attractive to us, remain (age, size-health, ability to play in any system, ridiculous arm traits etc), and it feels to me like a situation where Jayden won the battle, but the war for best QB of the '24 class remains. We wont know who wins for decades, interestingly, all of the QB's who got a reasonable amount of snaps looked legit. Caleb figured it out as the season went on, and gave plenty of ammo to critics but also evidence that with better coaching, and OL, he could be fine, Daniels had perhaps the best rookie year ever (I'd still take Marino's '83 though), Maye was ridiculous in limited starts, the Denver dude hit his ceiling outcome (league average QB+), the Atlanta dude looked absolutely fine, the Michigan kid didn't hurt his stock missing the year. It looks pretty nuts.

W/regards to watching the RB's. I'll be straight, I could do the time to get better at evaluating what I see when I watch clips, not games, but I have people I trust who I 1000% know are better, so basically I watch simply as a cross checking feature to make sure I don't see anything I hate, or I'm not missing something I'd love, but I also fundamentally don't view myself as terribly effective watching tape, and there are few I trust to do so either. The hit rate for NFL experts is basically negligable. The evidence is that even the experts generally only hit more, the more picks they have, and the higher the pick is, suggesting that for all the work they do, they are basically getting the edges in a general sense down, and a reasonably vaguely solid understanding of talent down for tiering purposes (this is a first round graded guy, this is a fourth round graded guy).

I just think the jump from college to the pros, and the mental make up piece, along with projecting how a 21 year old will mature and what he can become 24-28 and beyond is simply monstrously difficult and nearly impossible to predict reliably. The best they can do, the experts of experts, is generally get about a 50+% hit rate on firsts, and sub 50% after the first round. They've gotten better as the old idiots were cleared out and math geeks brought in, and connections becoming less and less important over the past 30 years, but it's still hard as hell to do, and most of the pros are simply totally erratic, watching tape, and evaluting metrics. As such, I just don't see a lot of value in me looking beyond looking here and there at clips, and when i can see more, watching more, as a cross check against who the more talented guys have brought in front of me, as a finishing touch to make sure I'm not steered wrong by my own biases (I always like to note that we all have things that kind of attract us when watching prospects which can actually misdirect us: an attraction for tough physical players makes you potentially more attracted to a Henry or a Bettis, less attracted to a Kamara or an Achane).

So for me, I'm gonna find the guys with a track record going back a decade or a half decade, and then dig into the guys they like, which is why I will look closer at Giddens for instance.

When I come across as ripping on tape grinding, it's more that after 37 or 38 years of watching drafts and looking at prospects, I've come to view obsessive tape grinding as chairs on the titanic beyond the little bit you can do. I think you doing it, makes you more aware of the nuances on the edge, clearly than me, but I also tend to think that if I listen to some rotoviz guys, dig up Fusue Vue and his iconoclastic takes, Scott Barrett, the playerprofiler guys, even Matt Waldman, I'm just getting more value for my time than watching hours of tape, which is impossible anyway with an 8 year old and while teaching 4 different subjects and helping coach soccer. Only so much time in the day right?

So do I trust your opinion more than mine? To some extent, yeah, you put in a level of work I do not, but I also trust that I'm an obsessive aggregator of tested analysts and evaluators, and a podcast addict, so I can absorb an absolute ---- ton of opinions related to QB-RB-WR-TE, and then cross check myself as needed. Generally speaking it's worked for me. I still miss plenty, but when I do like with a McLaurin here, or a Brian Thomas there, I'm going to try to avoid take lock, and dig into the why of it, a superficial Bayesian I guess.

[skinsinparadise]

Coming from a dude who loved both Maye and Jayden. I don't think Maye was that hard of an assessment. I think its a product of how much you watch the player, how many games and which games? Maye had three games where his accuracy was a hot mess. And when his critics hit him, it was referencing those games. Ultimately they put all of his games on youtube where you could watch every game-every throw in sequence. And when you watch it, you could see how those three games were outliers, he was great otherwise. He was great the season before, too. Then you add his upside, tools, etc. He was an easy read IMO.

Jayden took a little more projection. But I was early on him during that college season. Then I became infatuated with Maye. And Jayden had that one fan NFLchick on the board who would go so over the top about Jayden and slammed Maye so much that lol it made me for a spell defend Maye and prop him over Jayden. But then NFLchick dissappeared and I found myself becoming Jayden's top defender on the board with some saying the more they watched the more concerned they were about him. I seriously doubt though those people watched all of Jayden's games. I watched them all twice. Ditto Maye. And I was reassured about Jayden the more i watched because you can see him throw at times with anticpation, throw on the move, throw in between the numbers. You had some sample of him doing well what his critics say he struggled with. So I was sold.

My point is I am not draft guru. But if I had to think of what helps me provide my best takes and where am likely going to get it right is watching a lot of games. Not a game or two but at least 4. And in Jayden's-Maye's case I watched everything more than twice. It's powerful if you want to get a sense of a player. I think of anyone here just watched all the games they'd have good takes on any player, doesn't matter the player. Doesn't mean we'd get them all right. No one does. But we can talk in an educated way about any player we've watched extensively.

There is a dude for example on youtube who put up every rep of every game of many of these top RBs. I've watched most of them. Some twice, like I have with Judkins and Henderson. I've watched every Henderson game once. I'll probably hit it twice before draft day. I've watched every run of Skattebo, etc.

I love the anayltics and numbers and using that to do projection. I can't post what I got on that front here the way i could on the previous board. For some reason it comes off small and unreadable when I try to post it here. But in short I have every metric imaginable on all these players on most spots. I subscribed to Warren Sharp's draft numbers, too. i love looking at numbers. But I don't think that trumps actually watching these guys. It complements it.

But heck even if I did think numbers-anayltics are king, as you know you can use stats to fulfill biases. If you see Kaleb Johnson for example as a big powerful back and by extention all the stereotypes that come with that -- you'll find metrics to back up the predisposition. Hey he's not that fast. He's big. He had a late breakout year.

If its about production and fantasy #'s. And Hampton is the stud on that front and don't get me wrong i love Hampton and prefer him over Kaleb. Lets play with the numbers purely to make a point.

Kaleb 6.4 YPC. Hampton 5.9
That slowpoke Kaleb with 28 runs of 15 plus yards. Hampton with 26.
Kaleb 4.42 yards after contact. Hampton: 4.35
Kaleb: 81% miss tackle rate. Hampton: 72
Kaleb 21 Tds. Hampton 15 Tds.

As I mentioned Kaleb top in this class against light boxes. Kaleb had the most stacked boxes to deal with and yet he put up stats like that. Teams played Iowa to shut down the run. He accounted for over 40% of Iowa's offensive yards -- which is insane, only Jeanty among this class had more. He ran for over 1500 plus yards.

If we are running with the numbers, he can make quite a case for himself.

I think what it comes down to me with these various things is this:

Maye vs Daniels:
I was 1000% Maye, and I still am, to some extent with some Bayesian thoughts mixed in (Jayden is absolutely better now, period, but if you're asking me who I'm taking, I still want Maye because I no longer see any risk at all of him busting, there's nothing really missing in his game, nothing that critics can point to anymore, he's substantially younger than Daniels too, and I have no concerns about injury risk. With Daniels, my chief concerns were answering the question as to why it took him 5 seasons to produce a season as good as either of Maye's, injury risk, and some system concerns (can he make all the throws consistently and operate a bunch of different offensive approaches and schemes), at this point he's basically erased concerns I had about him hitting at all, but he still is an injury risk walking to me, I hate his frame, I hate his age, and I remain alarmed that critics remain about how he works as a thrower, and whether he's limited in terms of the type of schemes he could be effective in (I think they're wrong, but they know more than me in this area). So after season 1, Jayden obviously won the battle, but those of us who were Maye boosters were also proven right, and with a far worse train wreck of a team (i think both rosters were horrible going in, but the Patriots were worse in terms of weapons because of OL issues mixed with a total --- WR group front to back, at least Jayden had McLaurin (everyone else was like a 4th or 5th option on a good team though which made Daniels season even more impressive), on top of all that, the advantages in profile that made Maye more attractive to us, remain (age, size-health, ability to play in any system, ridiculous arm traits etc), and it feels to me like a situation where Jayden won the battle, but the war for best QB of the '24 class remains. We wont know who wins for decades, interestingly, all of the QB's who got a reasonable amount of snaps looked legit. Caleb figured it out as the season went on, and gave plenty of ammo to critics but also evidence that with better coaching, and OL, he could be fine, Daniels had perhaps the best rookie year ever (I'd still take Marino's '83 though), Maye was ridiculous in limited starts, the Denver dude hit his ceiling outcome (league average QB+), the Atlanta dude looked absolutely fine, the Michigan kid didn't hurt his stock missing the year. It looks pretty nuts.

W/regards to watching the RB's. I'll be straight, I could do the time to get better at evaluating what I see when I watch clips, not games, but I have people I trust who I 1000% know are better, so basically I watch simply as a cross checking feature to make sure I don't see anything I hate, or I'm not missing something I'd love, but I also fundamentally don't view myself as terribly effective watching tape, and there are few I trust to do so either. The hit rate for NFL experts is basically negligable. The evidence is that even the experts generally only hit more, the more picks they have, and the higher the pick is, suggesting that for all the work they do, they are basically getting the edges in a general sense down, and a reasonably vaguely solid understanding of talent down for tiering purposes (this is a first round graded guy, this is a fourth round graded guy).

I just think the jump from college to the pros, and the mental make up piece, along with projecting how a 21 year old will mature and what he can become 24-28 and beyond is simply monstrously difficult and nearly impossible to predict reliably. The best they can do, the experts of experts, is generally get about a 50+% hit rate on firsts, and sub 50% after the first round. They've gotten better as the old idiots were cleared out and math geeks brought in, and connections becoming less and less important over the past 30 years, but it's still hard as hell to do, and most of the pros are simply totally erratic, watching tape, and evaluting metrics. As such, I just don't see a lot of value in me looking beyond looking here and there at clips, and when i can see more, watching more, as a cross check against who the more talented guys have brought in front of me, as a finishing touch to make sure I'm not steered wrong by my own biases (I always like to note that we all have things that kind of attract us when watching prospects which can actually misdirect us: an attraction for tough physical players makes you potentially more attracted to a Henry or a Bettis, less attracted to a Kamara or an Achane).

So for me, I'm gonna find the guys with a track record going back a decade or a half decade, and then dig into the guys they like, which is why I will look closer at Giddens for instance.

When I come across as ripping on tape grinding, it's more that after 37 or 38 years of watching drafts and looking at prospects, I've come to view obsessive tape grinding as chairs on the titanic beyond the little bit you can do. I think you doing it, makes you more aware of the nuances on the edge, clearly than me, but I also tend to think that if I listen to some rotoviz guys, dig up Fusue Vue and his iconoclastic takes, Scott Barrett, the playerprofiler guys, even Matt Waldman, I'm just getting more value for my time than watching hours of tape, which is impossible anyway with an 8 year old and while teaching 4 different subjects and helping coach soccer. Only so much time in the day right?

So do I trust your opinion more than mine? To some extent, yeah, you put in a level of work I do not, but I also trust that I'm an obsessive aggregator of tested analysts and evaluators, and a podcast addict, so I can absorb an absolute ---- ton of opinions related to QB-RB-WR-TE, and then cross check myself as needed. Generally speaking it's worked for me. I still miss plenty, but when I do like with a McLaurin here, or a Brian Thomas there, I'm going to try to avoid take lock, and dig into the why of it, a superficial Bayesian I guess.

It's cool. I am not saying anyone should trust anyone's take over another. But I do think there is nothing that beats watching players. Also learning as much as you can about them as a person if its a player you like. I like to form my own opinions but am far from oblivious (quite the opposite) for what the outside world thinks of these guys.

Cool that you are a podcast addict, I'd still be surprised if you digest more draft info than i do. I am freakish with it. It's a bit unhealthy. I listen to everything I can. So I am perfectly aware of name that draft geek takes. Some anayltics in that mix of what I paid attention to. I have a grid that I create on most positions -- all full of numbers from multiple places. I subscribe to PFF, Sharp's site. And I'll watch pretty much every PFF podcast done by various anaylists especially Sikemma, and Monson, and Steve P. I listen to the old football outsider guys. I'll watch Josh Norris. I subscribe to the McGinn draft reports from scouts. I'll subscribe to basically almost anything draft related -- heck even Mcshay's new draft reports

Every night, I am watching some draft podcast before going to bed. When I take my dog for a walk, guess what am listening to? When I work out. Heck sometimes I'll listen to the same podcast twice. Back in the day, I would order the Kiper draft booklet when he used to do them. I ordered Brugler's "The Beast" every year he's done them, this year its free. But I'll read about every prospect that am intrigued by.

I am not saying this to brag. My interest in the draft is borderline unhealthy. My wife likes to joke that the draft is my real birthday. My point is i am VERY aware of plenty of other people's takes on the same player. Don't get me wrong, I bet you got a great handle on other people takes on these guys. But me, too. I am the same.

I gather you are more about the fantasy anayltic guys versus the straight anayltics guys. I'll read some takes mostly on twitter from the fantasy guys but nope I don't follow them religously the way I follow everyone else.

But just like our debate about Terry back in the day. I only bring it up because it helps illustrate a point whenever we delve into this. And I think you miss my point when i bring it up. I am not bringing it up because I was right and you were wrong. Everyone here will be right about someone and wrong about someone else, including of course me, so no big deal.

My point on it is that even if you want to say you are all about the numbers. You are unemotional and just working the odds. Versus people like me who are using more flawed-emotional based takes. So if we went to Vegas, you'd come out on top but I on occasion would defy the odds because heck outliers happen. You implied something like this in one of the debates we had years back. And while I get the point, I reject the premise of it. It's not like you are debating someone oblivious to anayltics or how to use stats. It's a factor in how i see things. But in my mind at least factoring in context along with the analytics and not being a slave to either one -- is sound decision making.

Coming from a dude who eons ago TA'd stats in college. My college professor often loved to say, that stats still require context. Because it's so easy in some cases to find numbers that help present your case but also can be misleading and or not present the full picture. It's hard to isolate variables as to this matters more than that without biases creeping in.

Bringing this back to Terry. He was everything the numbers indicate according to you back then as to being a bust -- late breakout season, dominator score was "meh", he was the third wheel in that offense, older prospect, on and on. But IMO that was a myopic view even looking at it from a pure numbers stand point.

It wasn't that there weren't any numbers to make the case for Terry. He had a sick 20 YPC. 700 plus yards as the third target is impressive. He ran a sub 4.4. Then how many narratives can you ignore? He was the best player at the Senior Bowl. Urban Myer said he was one of the most special players who ever played for him. Captain. Beloved on the team. The stories about how he improved as a WR by working Rocky like everyday with the jug machine. On and on and on.

So some of the numbers are intriguing in my book. But some of the numbers you hated in your book. Cool either way. But explaining my logic. The stories about Terry were epic level with multiple layers to it. And yes i liked what I saw when I watched him. That was the key. Those are way too many variables converging in Terry's favor. It didn't feel remotely like an outlier to me.

There were so many things in the soup where it shouldn't have been a shock. A dude who works like crazy, is beloved by his teammates, was the best player in the Senior Bowl, killed the combine as far as speed, was a proven deep threat with a sick 20 YPC -- was it really that much of a shock. Is the "breakout data" so strong that it overrides everything? It seems way over the top to be that level married to a data points like that where you ignore so many other variables that collide with it.

In my business, sometimes I do polls but its not what I major in. But its my job to often digest the poll for the client. if the pollster isn't giving their anaylsis, its up to me to provide my own to the client. If all I did was just go by the book and spout the numbers, i would suck at my job. I can't just regurgitate numbers. I have to see context and meaning and counter arguments as part of the process. To me its similar with the draft. I do think the numbers matter. But I do think context matters too. It's all part of the soup. Why is it so? Are their numbers that counter it? Narratives? I am not saying you aren't aware of this. I am just saying for me, i take the context part very seriouslty but it has nothing to do with not being aware of trends and numbers.

And bringing that same point to Jayden versus Maye. This is coming from a dude who loved them both but did prefer Maye. I was wrong. To me now its Jayden > Maye. Why? While I agree you are shooting in the dark some when you are guessing the personality of the player before they are drafted. Once they are in the house, you have a good sense.

Tom Brady wasn't special because the dude killed the combine and his college numbers were spectacular and was blessed with freakish talent. He was special for a number of reasons and among them was: work ethic, drive, ability to see the field, clutch gene, toughness, etc.

Both Joe Gibbs and Shanny in different ways have said they don't know if they have a special QB or not until they have them in the building and they can see their personality up close, and then they know. I liked everything I've read about Maye before the draft.

However, the narrative about Daniels was even easier to love with the stories about how they had to give him a key to get to the building early, he got the WRs to prepare with him, etc. Hearing all the stories about Daniels work ethic once he arrived here take that narrative up a few notches further -- which are Brady like levels.

Doing walk throughs at 5 am, on and on. The dude is driven in a way that's special. And its not something that the anayltics can quantify.

I just don't get the sense watching and reading about Maye -- and I digested a ton about him -- his intangibles match Daniels. And that includes clutch play. I don't think Maye is bad in the clutch but watching his college games, he was on and off in those big moments. We can see that Daniels is special on that front. Special in the 4th quarter. Special in big games.

As much as I loved Maye, it would be nauseating to me the thought of swapping Daniels for him. I think Maye has a good shot of being a top 7 type QB. I think Daniels has a good shot of supplanting Mahomes as the best QB in the league and am far from alone on that thought.

[skinsinparadise]

@The Consigliere

lol, to summarize that long post. the reason why I like to bring up Terry isn't to say you got that dude wrong. We all get it wrong. But its my favorite example to counter the idea that anayltics can purely drive the discussion. And the reason isn't as you like to say because outliers happen. It's not because emotion and amateur takes of mine override principles of draft success that you believe in. I have my limits too of what I'd accept out of a player. I am not taking a slow corner for example no matter how much i like their play among other things.

The reason I like to use that Terry example is because it wasn't an emotional based -outlier take. IMO you ignored too many variables on it. Ignored some impressive stats-numbers. And ignored the combine. And ignore some epic narratives. Ignored the significance of the combine. That's a lot to overlook to be strictly about this or that variable overrides it all. IMHO.

My point is stat based discussions can easily be biased. I can use stats and anaylitics to make Kaleb Johnson look like a rock star, and i actually did, I can go deeper on the point, too. There are a bunch of PFF numbers I held back. Do I swear by Kaleb being a successful RB? Nope. lol, part of it is i have some concerns about what I've read about his immaturity. And heck there is me going off the numbers but I indeed think the personality aspect of the player is critical albiet hard to quantify.

But if I am watching a player and I like him, and i got enough stats and analytics to see the same player, I'll ride with it.

[Brave]

[skinsinparadise]

[skinsinparadise]

Pauine is hit and miss. But on this one, I buy since Keim has been on Felton for awhile. I mentioned it the other day, too. Keim also doesn't think they are married to getting a WR per Pauline's point, but they wll do it if the board falls that way. He thinks especially for a WR, they'd want to add picks to make room because everything equal their top desires are: CB, D line, O line, RB. But sounds like Wr is next after those.