KDF's POST DRAFT GRADES (2 Viewers)

[sfidc3]

Rankins isn’t on the team, because the Saints couldn’t afford him. Not because he was outperformed by a fourth round pick.

This is total BS. I'd say the main reason is because he couldn't stay healthy and his performance suffered for it.

I'd also say Onyemata is the better player now, I think that is rather obvious.

I would also say that if a team doesn't think a former high 1st round pick is worth the 2nd contract then that player went from early starter to "not the long term solution at that position"....which, unfortunately is what happened here....and I really liked the healthy version of Rankins...

 

[St. Widge]

Unless Rankins contributed early and was set back by the injury bug, while Onye panned

Unless Rankins contributed early and was set back bt the injury bug, while Onye took his time and finally panned out in the best possible way for a project player. See, this is exactly where you want to draft immediate starters and projects: 1st, and 4th

What difference would it make if Onyemata had been taken in the 1st and Rankins had been taken in the 4th? I mean other than having draft nicks talk about what great value you got.

 

[St. Widge]

Rankins isn’t on the team, because the Saints couldn’t afford him. Not because he was outperformed by a fourth round pick.

They clearly chose to spend the money to resign Onyemata and not Rankins. It's not like they didn't know that singing Onyemata meant that they would not have the money to sign Rankins. So, it pretty much so is the case that Onyemata beat out Rankins.

 

[ItFan]

What difference would it make if Onyemata had been taken in the 1st and Rankins had been taken in the 4th? I mean other than having draft nicks talk about what great value you got.

What I said: that Rankins contributed early.

 

[St. Widge]

What I said: that Rankins contributed early.

Okay. But the end result for the team on the field is the same regardless of when each player was taken. The only difference is the rhetoric around the picks.

 

[gregg2g]

Unless Rankins contributed early and was set back by the injury bug, while Onye panned

Unless Rankins contributed early and was set back bt the injury bug, while Onye took his time and finally panned out in the best possible way for a project player. See, this is exactly where you want to draft immediate starters and projects: 1st, and 4th

So, are you saying that Rankins was the better draft pick? Or are you saying that you draft 1st round traffic only for the following year and not long term overall success?

Teams have plans for players. Not all players drafted in the first round are penciled in as immediate starters. Personally, I think planing for the future is smart. Sometimes taking a player for immediate returns is smart. It all depends on what the plan is for the team, what's available in the draft, and many other factors. Again, when the Packers drafted Rodgers, it wasn't the plan for him to start immediately and that has worked out fairly well for them.

 

[St. Widge]

Again, when the Packers drafted Rodgers, it wasn't the plan for him to start immediately and that has worked out fairly well for them.

Yeah, right up until they drafted another young QB to groom behind a future Hall of Fame QB.

Seriously, I agree that not all picks are for the present and just because a first round pick takes awhile to develop it doesn't make it a bad pick. As long as they do develop, it's fine. And, you can't force a pick to be an immediate contributor if your scouting doesn't have a guy that can do that available and graded in the spot where you are picking. All a team can do is scout players, stack their board, and trust in their grading when they pick. A team is only reaching if they have a player rated as a later round player on THEIR board and they reach because it is a position of need. And that's a bad idea.

 

[gregg2g]

Yeah, right up until they drafted another young QB to groom behind a future Hall of Fame QB.

Seriously, I agree that not all picks are for the present and just because a first round pick takes awhile to develop it doesn't make it a bad pick. As long as they do develop, it's fine. And, you can't force a pick to be an immediate contributor if your scouting doesn't have a guy that can do that available and graded in the spot where you are picking. All a team can do is scout players, stack their board, and trust in their grading when they pick. A team is only reaching if they have a player rated as a later round player on THEIR board and they reach because it is a position of need. And that's a bad idea.

True, the fault in their plan was not drafting a wr in the second round or signing a good free agent wide out. I think if they would have, they would be in a different situation they are now. It's absolutely crazy to not work with your hall of fame qb who is capable of winning the MVP.

 

[St. Widge]

True, the fault in their plan was not drafting a wr in the second round or signing a good free agent wide out. I think if they would have, they would be in a different situation they are now. It's absolutely crazy to not work with your hall of fame qb who is capable of winning the MVP.

That didn't help, but I think the first mistake was not talking to Rodgers before they drafted Love. I think had they told him that the plan was to groom him until he was ready to retire and, if he decided to stay past Love's contract, to trade him to get picks to help the team, he would have been okay with the plan.

 

[kennydfresh]

So I watched NFL Live today and Mel Kiper was on to grade our draft and he gave us a C+ which is right where I have us. He and Marcus Spears mentioned the Peyton Turner pick and how there were better prospects on the board at the time of the pick. The way they sounded it was like how most of us felt, that the draft was lackluster.

 

[gregg2g]

Can someone please tell me what the record of the NFL team was when Mel Kiper worked for them?

 

[sfidc3]

So I watched NFL Live today and Mel Kiper was on to grade our draft and he gave us a C+ which is right where I have us. He and Marcus Spears mentioned the Peyton Turner pick and how there were better prospects on the board at the time of the pick. The way they sounded it was like how most of us felt, that the draft was lackluster.

I suddenly feel so much better about our draft now....Thanks

 

[ItFan]

Okay. But the end result for the team on the field is the same regardless of when each player was taken. The only difference is the rhetoric around the picks.

No. Because Onye sat for almost three years I believe. That’s three years of value wasted. If not for the injuries, Rankins’ value would have been head and shoulders above. Nothing to do with rethoric

 

[ItFan]

So, are you saying that Rankins was the better draft pick? Or are you saying that you draft 1st round traffic only for the following year and not long term overall success?

Teams have plans for players. Not all players drafted in the first round are penciled in as immediate starters. Personally, I think planing for the future is smart. Sometimes taking a player for immediate returns is smart. It all depends on what the plan is for the team, what's available in the draft, and many other factors. Again, when the Packers drafted Rodgers, it wasn't the plan for him to start immediately and that has worked out fairly well for them.

Rankins was the better draft pick. He had an outstanding 2018. His three injuries were not predictable. Now I guess that if Onyemata plays well another couple of years, he will become the best pick; but at the moment they drafted them, there’s no doubt that Rankins was a first, and Onyemata a fourth

 

[gregg2g]

Rankins was the better draft pick. He had an outstanding 2018. His three injuries were not predictable. Now I guess that if Onyemata plays well another couple of years, he will become the best pick; but at the moment they drafted them, there’s no doubt that Rankins was a first, and Onyemata a fourth

You might want to go look back at both of their career stats. Based on value and performance Onyemata was the better draft pick. Not saying that Rankins should not have been a first, he should have been. Not saying that Onyemata should not have been a 4th, he should have been. But so far, this 4th rounder was a better pick than the 1st rounder