Is drafting a RT at 14 the right value? (2 Viewers)

[tonyarm99]

If Mimms can stay healthy he could be the best tackle from this draft class.

Hmmm. Where have i heard that before?

 

[livefromDC]

Taking OL in the first does yield results on a league-wide level. You've pointed out the same yourself. Case closed there.

'Failed' picks at OL (whether in the form of outright busts, injury retirement, or free agency departure, as you seem to include all of these) in previous drafts don't accurately predict future returns. You're a victim of sunk cost fallacy here. Did the Chargers stop drafting QBs in the first after Ryan Leaf? No.

And you can't use the coaches as a reason, they've been changed.

I don't want to speak for SweetT but I think you're misunderstanding his argument. He's not saying don't take OL in the first because we've done that before to mixed results. He's saying don't take OL in the first round just because you think you have to address the tackle position. Chasing that need to check this box is not good for the team. If you're doing it to the detriment of drafting a better player because you just feel this need to keep trying to land a good tackle, don't. If it's not there, it's just not there. Don't force it. I'm sure if the top OL in the draft somehow dropped to #14 there'd be no complaints. What he's worried about is the team just falling in love with the idea of taking OL no matter what.

I'm sorry. I'm not convinced that there's 5 OL in the top 15 players this year. With 3 almost certain to be drafted before the 14th pick, I have reservations about taking a tackle when the Saints are on the clock. Some have convinced themselves that there are 5 top 15 worthy tackles in this draft. I don't believe there's 5 tackles in the top 15 players in this draft.

...So, outside of the top 3 WRs and Bowers, who do you think would be there at #14 that would be better than one of the top 2 to 5 OTs? The only guys that I think may even be in the range of the top OTs at #14 are Brian Thomas, Jr. and Murphy. And, I'm not sure that either grade better than the top 2 to 5 OTs. So if you really want to take BPA at #14 that is highly likely to be an OT...

I think Widge means well. He may honestly believe there's 5 OTs in the top 15 players this year. I think it's more likely that he's grading these players higher to justify the perceived need. If he said 5 OTs in the first round with us trading down to 20 or 25, sure. But at #14? At 14, you're trying to justify taking the 4th rated OL in the top half of the draft. That's what I want the Saints to avoid doing.

 

[TribuneUK]

I don't want to speak for SweetT but I think you're misunderstanding his argument. He's not saying don't take OL in the first because we've done that before to mixed results. He's saying don't take OL in the first round just because you think you have to address the tackle position. Chasing that need to check this box is not good for the team. If you're doing it to the detriment of drafting a better player because you just feel this need to keep trying to land a good tackle, don't. If it's not there, it's just not there. Don't force it. I'm sure if the top OL in the draft somehow dropped to #14 there'd be no complaints. What he's worried about is the team just falling in love with the idea of taking OL no matter what.

I appreciate the intervention, but that's not been his argument to date. It's been rationalising not taking an OL in the first, because he doesn't like the results when we've done it in the past. Proven as fallacy at every turn.

And also because he never wants to take OL high, of course. It's the curse of the 'playmaker' fetish.

 

[TruSaint]

Hmmm. Where have i heard that before?

lol well he doesn’t have a gigantic injury history, we’ve done well before with injured players like Brees and Vilma. Mims could be the best tackle from this class

 

[TribuneUK]

I'm sorry. I'm not convinced that there's 5 OL in the top 15 players this year. With 3 almost certain to be drafted before the 14th pick, I have reservations about taking a tackle when the Saints are on the clock. Some have convinced themselves that there are 5 top 15 worthy tackles in this draft. I don't believe there's 5 tackles in the top 15 players in this draft.

Personally, I've never argued drafting for need or by position. It's not about positional value, it's about grade as I said early on:

'Value' is the term that draft analysts like Mayock (also a failed GM) use.

NFL teams use grades. Those grades don't care if someone is the third best at position X vs the sixth best at position Y.

 

[St. Widge]

I have a hard time believing that Fashanu will be there at 14... the second best pure LT of the class aviailable at 14? That´s kind of like thinking Bowers will be there... but stranger things have happened...

I would tend to agree on Fashanu, but I just looked at a compilation of national draft analyst mocks put together by one of the local reporters (can't recall who) and lots of them have Fashanu to the Saints at #14. Who knows if they know what they are talking about but when there is that much consensus, it makes me take notice.

FWIW, they almost all had Alt to Tennessee and many had the Jets tacking Bowers.

 

[St. Widge]

I think you've talked yourself into that.

How so? As I mentioned above, I looked at a large compilation of mock draft from national "experts" and lot of them had Bowers and the top 3 WRs gone in the top ten and/or before #14. Not to mention Turner and Latu gone as well. Many had Bowers going to the Jets which makes a lot of sense and others had him going to the Chargers which also makes a lot of sense. One did have him falling to K.C. at #32 but that seems highly unrealistic.

I think maybe you talked yourself into thinking Bowers or one of the top 3 WRs will be available at #14.

Like it or not, if this draft falls close to where most people think it will, it's highly likely that an OT will be BPA at #14. I mean if Fashanu is there, many have him listed in the top 10 overall, if not top 5 overall.

 

[St. Widge]

I think Widge means well. He may honestly believe there's 5 OTs in the top 15 players this year. I think it's more likely that he's grading these players higher to justify the perceived need. If he said 5 OTs in the first round with us trading down to 20 or 25, sure. But at #14? At 14, you're trying to justify taking the 4th rated OL in the top half of the draft. That's what I want the Saints to avoid doing.

That's pretty condescending. I'm not personally grading anything. It's a conclusion I have drawn from the things I have seen. I have no agenda one way or the other. I don't even really like drafting OL in the first because it's boring and this is all about entertainment for me. We certainly need to fix the OL, that has been obvious since Payton's last year, but I don't really care how they do it. But, in a year where everyone is talking about how good the OT class is, do you really find it that hard to believe that #2 to #5 or #3 to #5 of the OL class could be available at #14 or that 5 of those guys rank in the top 15 to 20, depending on individual team scheme and grade? The only reason they are falling is because 4, maybe 5, QBs are expected to go ahead of our pick at #14. Only maybe 3 of them are really top 10 picks, but QBs shoot up boards for obvious reasons and tend to defy BPA dreams. Then you have 3 Top 10 type WRs. and probably 2 top 15 Edges. And one top 5 type OT in Alt. Those guys will force the other OTs down. Will they go all the way to #14, I don't know, but it's quite possible.

I'm going by what people who do this for a living, admittedly not for NFL teams, think. These guys all have varying degrees of knowledge and inside sources, but many think that the #2 to #5 OT, all of which are seen as top 15 guys will likely be available at #14. Worst case scenario is likely Fuaga. Do you really think he isn't at top 15 player? Who do you think will be there that is better than him?

What are you basing this idea that there will be a better player available at #14 on? Who do you think that player will be?

Anyway, as I've said several times, if Bowers, Nabor, Rome, or MHJ are there sure, take him and them and get an OT at #45 while hoping that Penning can lock down LT or you can get a good vet after the draft. I just have serious doubts that any of them will be available at #14. Bowers probably has the best chance due to position, but he's really just a big WR so I see no reason he would fall that far with teams like the Jets and Chargers picking ahead of us.

Look, I could be wrong and the OTs won't be BPA at #14. And, I really hope that is true because I'd much rather add an exciting piece to the offense or a DL that can pressure the QB, but to me, it looks like OT is going to be BPA.

 

[TribuneUK]

I would tend to agree on Fashanu, but I just looked at a compilation of national draft analyst mocks put together by one of the local reporters (can't recall who) and lots of them have Fashanu to the Saints at #14. Who knows if they know what they are talking about but when there is that much consensus, it makes me take notice.

FWIW, they almost all had Alt to Tennessee and many had the Jets tacking Bowers.

Yeah, to be honest, I think the consensus of mocks is worth about as much as those draft analysts get paid by NFL teams. Not much.

A year or two back, almost every mock seemed to have the Saints taking a TE in round 1 and I think we took one in round... 7.

 

[Kegger]

That's pretty condescending. I'm not personally grading anything. It's a conclusion I have drawn from the things I have seen. I have no agenda one way or the other. I don't even really like drafting OL in the first because it's boring an this is all about entertainment for me. We certainly need to fix the OL, that has been obvious since Payton's last year, but I don't really care how they do it. But, in a year where everyone is talking about how good the OT class is, do you really find it that hard to believe that #2 to #5 or #3 to #5 of the OL class could be available at #14 or that 5 of those guys rank in the top 15 to 20, depending on individual team scheme and grade? The only reason they are falling is because 4, maybe 5, QBs are expected to go ahead of our pick at #14. Only maybe 3 of them are really top 10 picks, but QBs shoot up boards for obvious reasons and tend to defy BPA dreams. Then you have 3 Top 10 type WRs. and probably 2 top 15 Edges. And one top 5 type OT in Alt. Those guys will force the other OTs 2 to 5 down. Will they go all the way to #14, I don't know, but it's quite possible.

I'm going by what people who do this for a living, admittedly not for NFL teams, think. These guys all have varying degrees of knowledge and inside sources, but many think that the #2 to #5 OT, all of which are seen as top 15 guys will likely be available at #14. Worst case scenario is likely Fuaga. Do you really think he isn't at top 15 player? Who do you think will be there that is better than him?

What are you basing this idea that there will be a better player available at #14 on? Who do you think that player will be?

Anyway, as I've said several times, if Bowers, Nabor, Rome, or MHJ are there sure, take him and them and get an OT at #45 while hoping that Penning can lock down LT or you can get a good vet after the draft. I just have serious doubts that any of them will be available at #14. Bowers probably has the best chance due to position, but he's really just a big WR so I see no reason he would fall that far with teams like the Jets and Chargers picking ahead of us.

Look, I could be wrong and the OTs won't be BPA at #14. And, I really hope that is true because I'd much rather add an exciting piece to the offense or a DL that can pressure the QB, but to me, it looks like OT is going to be BPA.

I agree here, almost all the post-combine mock drafts I've seen have Alt, Fashanu, Fuaga, and Fautanu going in the top 20. All of them would be in consideration for BPA even without our gaping OT holes.

 

[St. Widge]

Yeah, to be honest, I think the consensus of mocks is worth about as much as those draft analysts get paid by NFL teams. Not much.

A year or two back, almost every mock seemed to have the Saints taking a TE in round 1 and I think we took one in round... 7.

I agree that they individually don't make a difference and they aren't always right, but as consensus builds they tend to be more right than not at least in terms of giving the general trend of availability at different spots. It's not perfect, but it's a guide.

And, I don't so much care who they have us picking, it's the tendency among all of them to have several highly rate OTs available at #14 that is very consistent. That and the top 3 WRs and Bowers being gone.

 

[St. Widge]

I agree here, almost all the post-combine mock drafts I've seen have Alt, Fashanu, Fuaga, and Fautanu going in the top 20. All of them would be in consideration for BPA even without our gaping OT holes.

Agreed, I'm not sure who is the #5 OT. It probably depends on scheme and if you are looking to wish on potential with a guy like Mims, but those 4 are consistently seen as top 20 guys and many have Latham in the mix in the top 20 too.

 

[TribuneUK]

I agree that they individually don't make a difference and they aren't always right, but as consensus builds they tend to be more right than not at least in terms of giving the general trend of availability at different spots. It's not perfect, but it's a guide.

And, I don't so much care who they have us picking, it's the tendency among all of them to have several highly rate OTs available at #14 that is very consistent. That and the top 3 WRs and Bowers being gone.

I think that there's a risk of seeing what we want to see and calling it 'consensus'. I think it's likely we will see 2 OTs drafted before 14, perhaps more. There will be many OTs available at that point, but what no amount of consensus tells us is how highly the Saints (or other teams) grade them. It's conjecture by definition, as every team's grades are their own and different.

I'm not coming after you on this thread at all, and I know you have plenty of dissenting opinion already, but I stand by my view that consensus among non-decision makers is not indicative of future decisions.

 

[Infoman]

I'll simplify... hypothetically...

If your available choices at #14 come down to...

#5 rated QB
#4 rated OT
#3 rated WR
#2 rated DE
#1 rated TE

And your overall best rated player falls into the WR, DE. and TE positions... you don't take the #4 rated OT... Just because of position.

QB on the other hand is different... If your #5 rated QB is your BPA because you consider him to have franchise QB potential... unless you have a franchise QB.... you always give the QB position much heavier weighted value than any other position for obvious reasons.

 

[Kegger]

I think that there's a risk of seeing what we want to see and calling it 'consensus'. I think it's likely we will see 2 OTs drafted before 14, perhaps more. There will be many OTs available at that point, but what no amount of consensus tells us is how highly the Saints (or other teams) grade them. It's conjecture by definition, as every team's grades are their own and different.

I'm not coming after you on this thread at all, and I know you have plenty of dissenting opinion already, but I stand by my view that consensus among non-decision makers is not indicative of future decisions.

You could say that about any position. We don't know what the Saints' draft board looks like, so we have to lean on analysts' opinions (unless you have enough time to review game film of every prospect + actually know what to look for).