Falcons: Team Captains....

[Beef]

I agree completely. If TD and our scouting dept. think Lamar Holmes is a bona fide LT who can come in year 1 and compete for the starting LT spot, then there's little doubt some other teams saw what they saw and were hoping nobody would take him so they could snag him in a later round, and we just happened to get him first.

It's just like Peters in 2010. He had a 5th round grade, yet we grabbed him with our 83rd pick in round 3. Come to find out the NYG's were about to grab him that same round.

Why did we and NYG have a 3rd round grade on him? Because our "professional" scoutting departments are better than Kiper, McShay, and all the hundreds of draftnik sites out there that just copy each other's limited research.

I'd be interested in knowing what round all the current starting LT's on each team were drafted. I BET there's more from rounds 3-7 than there are from rounds 1-2. Just guessing, but I wouldn't be surprised if that were the case.

[Dale4Saul2Red0]

Neither Wisconsin player was an Academic All American, but Academic All Big-10 honorees. Konz was only chosen as an honorary captain a few times. Just to clarify.

[Radical]

(04-30-2012 02:07 PM)Beef Wrote:  It's just like Peters in 2010. He had a 5th round grade, yet we grabbed him with our 83rd pick in round 3. Come to find out the NYG's were about to grab him that same round.

Why did we and NYG have a 3rd round grade on him? Because our "professional" scoutting departments are better than Kiper, McShay, and all the hundreds of draftnik sites out there that just copy each other's limited research.

I'm pretty sure that was Cleveland, but the Giants could have done the same.

[Beef]

(04-30-2012 06:32 PM)Radical Wrote:  I'm pretty sure that was Cleveland, but the Giants could have done the same.

I could have sworn Tom Caughlin said they had Peters targetted with their next pick before we grabbed him.

[Radical]

Never heard it, but here's this.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcsouth/post/_/...oice-on-qb

[takeitdown]

All of these responses is why drafting for need makes things so hard.

The most efficient (over time) way of drafting is to have several players you like at each spot in the draft and to know where other teams value guys. This way, if you like a Holmes, for instance, but you know most of the rest of the league values him as a 6th rounder, you don't take him in the 3rd. He may get taken again before your 5th, but since you trust your board, it's unlikely. It'd have to be a surprise. And if that surprise happens, that's ok, because you have 10 other guys you like at that 5th round spot.

This is how the Ravens consistently draft well. They have their scores, but they also have a good feel for where other people have the guys valued, so they get guys they like, but rarely draft them early. Hence, they'll end up with more talent over the course of time than will the team that "jumps on" a guy most have rated as a 5th rounder, in case one team might get him first. Most evaluators will say falling in love with a player will ruin a draft...and that's why...you get so targeted in to that guy, that you're willing to lose value to get him.

If you have several guys you like, you can get guys you like AND maximize value, and that's when things really take off. In this case, that would be taking Thompson or a TE/WR in the 3rd, and Holmes in the 5th. It doesn't matter for one draft, but it does over the course of time. It's basically one fewer 3rd rounder each offseason, and that adds up. Chris Owens is a good example...he was taken in the 3rd when most thought he was a 6th rounder. TD fell in love. The better thing would have been to take other guys (value appropriate) in the 3rd, and then take Owens in the 5th. There IS a chance he's gone, but if he is, you should have another highly rated guy you can take there.


I will say, after the 4th round it doesn't matter. The 5th/6th/7th round produce so few starters, that if you really like someone, you should just take them. But in those first 4 rounds, it's not just about getting ok players, it's about getting value. That gives you more bullets to fire, more shots at the target.

I'm OK with the draft...they did in the draft what I wanted them to do in FA, which is focus on the OL. I just do tire a bit of the reaches, because they affect a team over time more than people like to admit.

As a last analogy, it's like buying a car. Let's say we're all going to buy cars, and you guys are going to buy a loaded GM 35k car, and I actually know that Hyundai is starting to make better cars and they're undervalued, and really worth just as much as the GM. I'll go buy that Hyundai, but I'll buy it for 15k. I don't buy it for 35k just because I know it's worth as much as the GM. My knowledge lets me get a bargain. If I pay just as much for it, I've wasted that knowledge. And paying a higher pick for a draft choice is the same as spending extra on the car. Sure, you got the item you wanted, but at a price that was more than you had to pay...therefore, it may end up being a fine car, but it wasn't a good value.

[Beef]

There's a pretty good quote from TD on why they selected Holmes in the 3rd:

Quote:Holmes was not projected by many of the draft analysts to be selected in the third round, but the Falcons were comfortable with where they selected him.

“I can’t comment on why he was projected late,” Dimitroff said. “He had a really nice East-West game. Having been a junior-college transfer, I don’t know if people ... again, I can't comment on other teams. But what I do know is that sometimes when you have a JC-transfer type of player, the prognosticators are behind from a recognition standpoint.”

This clearly means that TD and his scouting department had him graded much higher than the lemming "prognosticators". Which makes me feel a lot better about the pick. I don't really consider it a reach at this point. I mean professionals who scout kids for a living first hand and do so much more research than TV analysts and website draftniks believe Holmes is a 3rd round grade and good enough already to compete for the starting LT job.

That means 100x more in my book than some grapevine 3rd-hand grade from a self-proclaimed guru who never saw the kid actually play, he just watched a couple video clips, reviewed stats, and regurgitated some other guy's analysis who did nothing but watch video clips and review stats.

[ATLBound]

(04-30-2012 07:16 PM)takeitdown Wrote:  All of these responses is why drafting for need makes things so hard.

The most efficient (over time) way of drafting is to have several players you like at each spot in the draft and to know where other teams value guys. This way, if you like a Holmes, for instance, but you know most of the rest of the league values him as a 6th rounder, you don't take him in the 3rd. He may get taken again before your 5th, but since you trust your board, it's unlikely. It'd have to be a surprise. And if that surprise happens, that's ok, because you have 10 other guys you like at that 5th round spot.

This is how the Ravens consistently draft well. They have their scores, but they also have a good feel for where other people have the guys valued, so they get guys they like, but rarely draft them early. Hence, they'll end up with more talent over the course of time than will the team that "jumps on" a guy most have rated as a 5th rounder, in case one team might get him first. Most evaluators will say falling in love with a player will ruin a draft...and that's why...you get so targeted in to that guy, that you're willing to lose value to get him.

If you have several guys you like, you can get guys you like AND maximize value, and that's when things really take off. In this case, that would be taking Thompson or a TE/WR in the 3rd, and Holmes in the 5th. It doesn't matter for one draft, but it does over the course of time. It's basically one fewer 3rd rounder each offseason, and that adds up. Chris Owens is a good example...he was taken in the 3rd when most thought he was a 6th rounder. TD fell in love. The better thing would have been to take other guys (value appropriate) in the 3rd, and then take Owens in the 5th. There IS a chance he's gone, but if he is, you should have another highly rated guy you can take there.


I will say, after the 4th round it doesn't matter. The 5th/6th/7th round produce so few starters, that if you really like someone, you should just take them. But in those first 4 rounds, it's not just about getting ok players, it's about getting value. That gives you more bullets to fire, more shots at the target.

I'm OK with the draft...they did in the draft what I wanted them to do in FA, which is focus on the OL. I just do tire a bit of the reaches, because they affect a team over time more than people like to admit.

As a last analogy, it's like buying a car. Let's say we're all going to buy cars, and you guys are going to buy a loaded GM 35k car, and I actually know that Hyundai is starting to make better cars and they're undervalued, and really worth just as much as the GM. I'll go buy that Hyundai, but I'll buy it for 15k. I don't buy it for 35k just because I know it's worth as much as the GM. My knowledge lets me get a bargain. If I pay just as much for it, I've wasted that knowledge. And paying a higher pick for a draft choice is the same as spending extra on the car. Sure, you got the item you wanted, but at a price that was more than you had to pay...therefore, it may end up being a fine care, but it wasn't a good value.

I applaud your response but I really don't think its this black and white. There are times that there is another choice and then there are moments when there isn't another choice.

These may be the times when we "reach"

[takeitdown]

(04-30-2012 08:08 PM)ATLBound Wrote:  I applaud your response but I really don't think its this black and white. There are times that there is another choice and then there are moments when there isn't another choice.

These may be the times when we "reach"

You're right...if you draft strictly on need. That's why I was saying that makes it hard. It is a tough balancing act. But I think not being so need oriented is critical.

If you divorce need from it to some extent, there WILL be another guy, because he doesn't have to play only LT...he could be a safety, or a CB, or a DE. When you go needs based, it's way easier to fall in love with a guy, because, as you rightly said, sometimes he'll be the last of a type (sure starter, able to compete year 1, eventual starter, whatever.)

All teams are somewhat needs based and somewhat BPA based, but these kinds of picks, and leaving value on the table are the dangers of being as need based as the Falcons are. Obviously no one's completely BPA, because they won't take a 1st round QB if they already have a young one. But being closer to it lets you avoid those "OMG this is the last guy" scenarios.

[ATLBound]

(04-30-2012 09:35 PM)takeitdown Wrote:  You're right...if you draft strictly on need. That's why I was saying that makes it hard. It is a tough balancing act. But I think not being so need oriented is critical.

If you divorce need from it to some extent, there WILL be another guy, because he doesn't have to play only LT...he could be a safety, or a CB, or a DE. When you go needs based, it's way easier to fall in love with a guy, because, as you rightly said, sometimes he'll be the last of a type (sure starter, able to compete year 1, eventual starter, whatever.)

All teams are somewhat needs based and somewhat BPA based, but these kinds of picks, and leaving value on the table are the dangers of being as need based as the Falcons are. Obviously no one's completely BPA, because they won't take a 1st round QB if they already have a young one. But being closer to it lets you avoid those "OMG this is the last guy" scenarios.

Makes plenty sense