ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Saccopoo Memorial Draft Forum (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=29)
-   -   I am not a fan of Veach's "tier" approach. (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=338150)

O.city 05-02-2021 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by staylor26 (Post 15658703)
Daniel Jeremiah had Bolton 30th. He feels the Chiefs got a 1st round player (in this draft) at 58.

BuT PoSiTiOnAl VaLuE!!

Value IS value.

Obviously the league had him a little different though.

In the end, it will all come down to him. If he shows he can run and play 3 downs, it was a great pick and it was wrong for him to fall. If he ends up a 2 down Reggie Ragland type guy, yeah he fell for a reason

staylor26 05-02-2021 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by O.city (Post 15658707)
Obviously the league had him a little different though.

In the end, it will all come down to him. If he shows he can run and play 3 downs, it was a great pick and it was wrong for him to fall. If he ends up a 2 down Reggie Ragland type guy, yeah he fell for a reason

Orrrr he fell because of positional value and/or needs.

We don’t know.

I do know that he was a consensus top 40-50 guy that some even had in the 1st.

That’s value at 58.

And LMAO he’s so much better than Ragland. He’s a 3 down player even if he’s not a stud in coverage. He’s capable.

O.city 05-02-2021 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by staylor26 (Post 15658727)
Orrrr he fell because of positional value and needs.

We don’t know.

I do know that he was a consensus top 40-50 guy that some even had in the 1st.

That’s value at 58.

And LMAO he’s so much better than Ragland :facepalm:

We know what Ragland was/is in the league. As prospects, they seem fairly similar.

Legit 3 down linebackers don’t tend to fall if that’s what the league thinks they are. I’m hoping he’s more devin bush jr than the league seems to think

staylor26 05-02-2021 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by O.city (Post 15658730)
We know what Ragland was/is in the league. As prospects, they seem fairly similar.

Legit 3 down linebackers don’t tend to fall if that’s what the league thinks they are. I’m hoping he’s more devin bush jr than the league seems to think

LMAO

You went form this:

Quote:

Originally Posted by O.city (Post 15429200)
If Bolton is there, I'd take him. He's a stud.

I really like Humphrey and Davis the more I've read about them.

To that. So ****ing dumb.

O.city 05-02-2021 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by staylor26 (Post 15658732)
LMAO

“He didn’t show it as much in college but he’s capable” seems pretty spot on for Ragland coming out no?

O.city 05-02-2021 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by staylor26 (Post 15658732)
LMAO

You went form this:



To that. So ****ing dumb.

Are we not allowed to change our minds as we go along with new information?

I have no clue when I said that, was probably after he had a million tackles in a mizzou game

O.city 05-02-2021 10:40 AM

I’m not disparaging him comparing him to Ragland as a prospect. I’m not saying that’s what he’ll become.

I’m saying they had similar issues coming out of college and things they needed to do at the next level.

Hopefully Bolton can do it.

staylor26 05-02-2021 10:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by O.city (Post 15658734)
“He didn’t show it as much in college but he’s capable” seems pretty spot on for Ragland coming out no?

That’s not what I said. At all. He did show that he’s capable in coverage. That doesn’t mean he can’t get/be better, but he’s not Reggie ****ing Ragland either.

There’s a lot more reason to believe Bolton can be a 3 down LB than Ragland. Anybody that thinks otherwise is clueless or hasn’t really watched Bolton’s tape.

Even PFF had a very good grade on Bolton in terms of coverage. He’s not great at it, but he’s absolutely capable. He also has ball skills and plays a lot faster/quicker than Ragland.

staylor26 05-02-2021 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by O.city (Post 15658736)
Are we not allowed to change our minds as we go along with new information?

I have no clue when I said that, was probably after he had a million tackles in a mizzou game

What exactly changed from then to now where you went from saying he was a stud that you would take in the 1st to him being a “meh” pick all the way down at 58?

I’m all ears...

O.city 05-02-2021 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by staylor26 (Post 15658738)
That’s not what I said. At all. He did show that he’s capable in coverage. That doesn’t mean he can’t get/be better, but he’s not Reggie ****ing Ragland either.

There’s a lot more reason to believe Bolton can be a 3 down LB than Ragland. Anybody that thinks otherwise is clueless or hasn’t really watched Bolton’s tape.

Even PFF had a very good grade on Bolton in terms of coverage. He’s not great at it, but he’s absolutely capable. He also has ball skills and plays a lot faster/quicker than Ragland.

I think you’re confusing what I’m saying here. As a prospect, that was what was said about Ragland. He ended up going in the first round.

Bolton has similar question marks and it likely pushed him down the board a little.

I’m not saying he can’t do it. Hopefully he can.

O.city 05-02-2021 10:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by staylor26 (Post 15658742)
What exactly changed from then to now where you went from saying he was a stud that you would take in the 1st to him being a “meh” pick all the way down at 58?

I’m all ears...

Didn’t test very well.

Based on what I’ve read atleast. I didn’t so much watching on this class either way, don’t really have time. So you’re probably right. You spend way more time on this than I do.

Have you not ever had a guy you liked a lot early that you eventually liked less? Maybe that’s just me

O.city 05-02-2021 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by staylor26 (Post 15658738)
That’s not what I said. At all. He did show that he’s capable in coverage. That doesn’t mean he can’t get/be better, but he’s not Reggie ****ing Ragland either.

There’s a lot more reason to believe Bolton can be a 3 down LB than Ragland. Anybody that thinks otherwise is clueless or hasn’t really watched Bolton’s tape.

Even PFF had a very good grade on Bolton in terms of coverage. He’s not great at it, but he’s absolutely capable. He also has ball skills and plays a lot faster/quicker than Ragland.

Hopefully it’s a case of “plays faster than he tests” maybe? He always seemed pretty good at mizzou

Bowser 05-02-2021 10:52 AM

We have more depth across the board right now at nearly every position than we have had in years, maybe excluding corner and receiver, and this team has been to three AFCCG's and two Super Bowls in a row. Not only do I trust in Veach and his guys to do their due diligence researching who to bring into the fold, I trust our positional coaches and coordinators to maximize these guys' abilities and when and where to use them.

Did we reach with a couple of picks when we should have taken someone else? Sure, quite probably. Am I concerned about it? Not in the least. I'm stoked about these picks, every one of them. Even Kaindoh who can start on special teams and learn from Okafor, Taco, Clark, and Danna.

staylor26 05-02-2021 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by O.city (Post 15658748)
Hopefully it’s a case of “plays faster than he tests” maybe? He always seemed pretty good at mizzou

That’s absolutely how I feel. I’m not as concerned with the testing (which wasn’t that bad if I’m being honest) because he plays much faster on tape. He’s instinctive and can run sideline to sideline when you watch him. Never mind Ragland, I think he has more upside as a 3 down LB than Hitchens too.

I’m just giving you a hard time though.

Chris Meck 05-02-2021 11:27 AM

Oh man. Where to start with this post?

Let's start here:

1)99% of the mock drafts and 'expert analysis' bullshit we see is based on rumors and guesses by people who are not and never have been NFL scouts. Most of them are no more qualified than you or I to run an NFL draft room; and you or I are absolutely NOT qualified just because we read what these guys say and watch some YouTube videos.

2) The concept of positional value above all else ignores CONTEXT. Judging an individual draft by that that concept ignores so many variables that are really important like:

A)team needs, which include cap situations regarding veterans going forward, the depth chart and whether this position is likely to see the field any time soon

B)Scheme fit- sure that player may be EDGE RUSHER #6, which is excellent value in the late 2nd round, but he's 245 lbs. and best suited as a 3-4 OLB, and is likely to ONLY be successful as a situational pass rusher in a 4-3 base/heavy nickel like we run here. So no, he's not as valuable as a guy who may play 60 snaps plus a game at a less 'premier' position of NEED.

3)Your premise assumes that there is a huge difference between, say, WR #8 and WR #16. The reality is, because of scheme fit, differences of opinion in scouts rankings, and such WE have no earthly idea who WR #8 even is to any specific team, and the difference between WR #8 and #16 may be a big difference or very little. A lot of times, guys are bunched in very similar talent groups and you don't know what variables make the fit a good one or not. Maybe WR #8 is faster, but he's dumb as a rock and unlikely to be able to digest an Andy Reid playbook. WR #16 is super smart and a better route runner which allows him to play 'quicker' than his 40 time but he played in a dumbed down offense in college so you and I don't know that, but the scouts do and he's a better fit actually than WR #8.

So do you reach for WR #16? You could, and then everybody talks about how stupid you are, because that guy has a fourth round grade, and this guy you passed over was a clear second round talent, yadda yadda yadda. So you wait and you take him where it makes sense to, and in the meantime-

4) KC is picking at the back end of every round. IF they stay with the so-called 'higher value, premier positions' they will forever be drafting lesser talent. This is a formula for a declining team. The system is literally set up that way-to encourage parity and discourage dynasties. If you keep your board open to any position that is a scheme and need fit you can get elite players albeit at 'less valued positions'. Having young, cost controlled elite talent is the key to keeping this SB train running as long as we can with Mahomes. You fill in what you need to in free agency, but the draft is still the foundation.

So, you take WR #8 in the second round, and end up with IOL #30 in round 6 and hope he can be a good starting Center in a couple of seasons because positional value! .This is how you end up with Reiter and Wylie.

But WR#16 was actually an equally good fit for the team and you could wait and grab him in the 4th because he's a really SPECIFIC good fit for this offense more so than some others and your scouts just love him. So you take the LB and the OC in the second because they fit perfect and you can greatly improve two separate position groupings from good to elite.

That's of more value than WR#8.

We need elite young cost controlled talent for now, and for the near future. You don't get that by drafting lower rated players at higher rated positions according to unqualified draftniks.

We got EXCELLENT value in round 2 with late first/early 2nd rated guys at positions of need; and the Offensive line has gone from our biggest weakness to an elite group for this season and seasons to come. The LB corps from our biggest defensive weakness to one with great promise for this season and the near future. We made our team weaknesses into strengths.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:04 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.