Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 31 to 38 of 38
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    14,361
    Quote Originally Posted by MHSalute View Post
    I think X WR are a premium, as they need to beat press. Z and Slot are much less so. Take JuJu Smith-Schuster, taking at the end of round 2, Cooper Kupp 3rd, Tyler Boyd, Jarvis Landry,... These are not 4.3 40 guys, most are 4.5 type guys with good feet and route ability.

    All the guys John highlighted are X WR and they do go for a premium especially when teams think they are year 1 ready. Ross. Coleman, Ginn,...these type of guys have high bust factors because they were drafted based on speed and not the big press beaters with contested catch ability.

    My 2 cents, but we need an improved slot guy more than anything, but no need to spend a 1st to get one.
    Very good point. We have our go to guy, and our Pro-Bowl receiver, we need compliments to that. If we refine the conversation even further into guys being luxury picks, taking prospects who are going to be our second option, maybe third with how Shurmur likes to use tight-ends, then we are talking about this pick becoming even more of a luxury if spent on a wide receiver.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,986
    Quote Originally Posted by johnlimburg View Post
    I believe it is, and for good reason, especially at the top of the draft. I also believe the idea and basis for what your saying with the franchise tag number for the position is quite silly. I see what your saying, but if that is the basis for the argument and how it relates to positional value and impact on the win loss column, digging deeper into who who are the highest paid guys should show that they are on more winning teams right ? I don't think that is fair, but if the monetary factor directly relates to value to the team, then it should be the case.

    2019: 3 of the top 10 highest paid guys played in January
    2018: 2 of the top 10 highest paid guys played in January
    2017: 4 of the top 10 highest paid guys played in January
    2016: 5 of the top 10 highest paid guys played in January
    2015: 3 of the top 10 highest paid guys played in January

    My response to point 2 was highlight above and I ask the question, if receivers are drafted high to help a young quarterback, or to help a team score points, the numerous examples of guys who failed to live up to the bill in recent years shows that hasn't exactly worked. Remember, I am not saying wide reciever isn't a smart selection, I am saying that in that top area of the draft, the top 12 or 15 picks, it isn't the sweet spot to go and grab that guy because it doesn't translate to anything really changing. Why ? Because the position doesn't change anything dramatically. It's like it helps when everything is going well, quarterback is in place, solid offensive line, but when it's bad, it doesn't become the reason to why things turn around, and that is the core of why pass catches are a luxury to have, see Denver with bad everything and good receivers, it didn't mean squat.



    They were all good from year one, they were guys at the top end of the draft who clearly worked out, the small portion as highlighted from that range of picks. And I know you didn't say every guy drafted, but I am wondering who started out in year one not making much impact from that top area of picks, and then turned the corner ? That is what I am wondering about that comment because it just doesn't ring true. Also yes, a valid point that many guys in that range also didn't work out, but when we are talking about the guys who turned into the most productive, they will usually come from that region I am talking about. If you go and look at the top 25 leaders in receptions over the last 20 years, that 20-50 area will dominate the lower round guys, and the earlier guys. Every guy should be taken on individual merit, but historically, and in recent history, that is the case.



    It is a banner year based on volume, that is it. It is not a banner year because their is a Julio Jones, AJ Green, or Calvin Johnson, that elite prospect who everyone knows is going to be a sure thing. And I don't see it as an opportunity from that perspective, supply and demand principles make it an opportunity for other reasons. I am hoping that the multiple great prospects at wide receiver call for teams above us to make them their picks, pushing down some other talented guys at other positions who might not normally be there. I also like the opportunity of having a shot at a good reciever a round later because there is so many options at the top. So the needy teams go and get their guy, and then the demand diminishes leaving that next tier of guys there to be had.

    I just think a position that is so dependent on how well the quarterback plays doesn't have as much value as you think. At the end of the day a reciever will catch passes, but if you have a dud at quarterback, he isn't going to be that guy that turns the fortunes of the team around. That is probably why teams picking guys high in the top 15 to go and play on bad teams with bad quarterbacks, don't usually end up having long successful careers. Receivers can't do it alone, and they are more dependent on having good teammates then any other positions.
    Clearly you have an opinion on this topic and we will have to agree to disagree because this is going nowhere. We are probably never going to agree on the importance of the position. Nothing you are going to write is going to take more value than the variety of experts I read on the topic and my personal experiences watching the changing NFL. Clearly nothing I am going to say it going to change your view. Which is perfectly fine.

    My preference is to trade down, pick up another second, and draft 2 WRs a bit later in the draft. But if Elway is going to take one early I prefer Jeudy.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    14,361
    Quote Originally Posted by myoung View Post
    Clearly you have an opinion on this topic and we will have to agree to disagree because this is going nowhere. We are probably never going to agree on the importance of the position. Nothing you are going to write is going to take more value than the variety of experts I read on the topic and my personal experiences watching the changing NFL. Clearly nothing I am going to say it going to change your view. Which is perfectly fine.

    My preference is to trade down, pick up another second, and draft 2 WRs a bit later in the draft. But if Elway is going to take one early I prefer Jeudy.
    Fair enough, I just can't get behind valuing receiver as highly as you do when the success of the position is almost completely reliant on how the quarterback plays. But as a parting gift to me, what "experts" are writing what on this topic ? In terms of the sweet spot for picking receivers clearly being in that 20-50 range over the last 20 years (changing NFL) in terms of who are the most productive guys at the position? Because you don't need an "expert" to go and look to see that is the case.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,986
    Quote Originally Posted by johnlimburg View Post
    Fair enough, I just can't get behind valuing receiver as highly as you do when the success of the position is almost completely reliant on how the quarterback plays. But as a parting gift to me, what "experts" are writing what on this topic ? In terms of the sweet spot for picking receivers clearly being in that 20-50 range over the last 20 years (changing NFL) in terms of who are the most productive guys at the position? Because you don't need an "expert" to go and look to see that is the case.
    Wow!! Great night, IMO of course. Didnít get the trade down I hoped for but got the WR I was hoping for if we took one early.

    As far as experts, how about the Broncos, Raiders, and Cowboys GMs and coaches? They all picked receivers before the 20-50 range. But if you want a specific person go read what Todd McShay has said about Jeudy for over a year now. Or how about reading every draft experts pre draft rankings. Almost every single ranking out there disagrees with your view, but clearly you are going to find a way to argue and tell me how we are all wrong and no WR is worth going before pick 20. Literally every pre draft ranking I have read disagrees. You are trying to cherry pick history to justify your point but you are ignoring the ability of GMs to adjust and learn. You also ignore how the game has changed. Rankings and value for the pick are based on talent evaluation and importance of the position combine with needs. I think you are missing several key inputs and only using one.

    Not sure if you had a chance to listen to the guys talking about the WR class but it seems many of them feel it is a great draft class for more reasons than just depth.

    I am not sure how the expert opinions on the rankings and value of the WR could be any more apparent. Regardless I am sure you will disagree, which is fine

    Here is hoping for the strong start of the draft to carry forward!!

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    14,361
    Quote Originally Posted by myoung View Post
    Wow!! Great night, IMO of course. Didnít get the trade down I hoped for but got the WR I was hoping for if we took one early.

    As far as experts, how about the Broncos, Raiders, and Cowboys GMs and coaches? They all picked receivers before the 20-50 range. But if you want a specific person go read what Todd McShay has said about Jeudy for over a year now. Or how about reading every draft experts pre draft rankings. Almost every single ranking out there disagrees with your view, but clearly you are going to find a way to argue and tell me how we are all wrong and no WR is worth going before pick 20. Literally every pre draft ranking I have read disagrees. You are trying to cherry pick history to justify your point but you are ignoring the ability of GMs to adjust and learn. You also ignore how the game has changed. Rankings and value for the pick are based on talent evaluation and importance of the position combine with needs. I think you are missing several key inputs and only using one.

    Not sure if you had a chance to listen to the guys talking about the WR class but it seems many of them feel it is a great draft class for more reasons than just depth.

    I am not sure how the expert opinions on the rankings and value of the WR could be any more apparent. Regardless I am sure you will disagree, which is fine

    Here is hoping for the strong start of the draft to carry forward!!
    What you just used as an example actually makes zero sense, your reasoning is beyond flawed. All those examples I highlighted throughout the thread, guys who were drafted in the 20-50 range where the sweet spot for where productive receivers were mostly drafted, they were also drafted by NFL teams, so by your thinking here I also have the opinion of experts on my side ? Weird logic you have come up with here. Also, yeah, teams drafted guys before 20, but teams also drafted guys after 20, and will tomorrow as well, so again, the experts also agree with me ? Your logic is extremely flawed here.

    Again, people don't read things properly and put words in your mouth. I never said that no receiver is ever worth it, I was just looking back throughout what history shows us and that can't be argued, it stacks up like I was saying. I also just pointed out the holes you had in your 2-10 year argument, and some other points regarding wide receivers who go high end up on bad teams, with bad quarterbacks, and that usually leads to poor production. That is what leads to my reasoning on why I think receiver is not as valuable as other positions as their impact is reliant on someone else performing, which I think is a reasonable argument.

    Leading into the draft I said this class was great due to the volume of depth that exists, no one has ever said otherwise because that would be idiotic. But, what I said was I believed that we would get a shot at one of the top 3 guys due to the overwhelming supply that existed. I thought it would slightly drop their value eliminating any need for a trade up, that happened. I also said this group was great based on depth, not because of a blue chip guy, well let me revisit this point using your weird logic you attempted to use earlier, no receiver went top 5, no receiver went top 10, it wasn't until 12. You can make smart comments about me saying what I think is right or wrong, but based on your reasoning here, 11 experts agreed with what I said right ?

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,986
    Quote Originally Posted by johnlimburg View Post
    What you just used as an example actually makes zero sense, your reasoning is beyond flawed. All those examples I highlighted throughout the thread, guys who were drafted in the 20-50 range where the sweet spot for where productive receivers were mostly drafted, they were also drafted by NFL teams, so by your thinking here I also have the opinion of experts on my side ? Weird logic you have come up with here. Also, yeah, teams drafted guys before 20, but teams also drafted guys after 20, and will tomorrow as well, so again, the experts also agree with me ? Your logic is extremely flawed here.

    Again, people don't read things properly and put words in your mouth. I never said that no receiver is ever worth it, I was just looking back throughout what history shows us and that can't be argued, it stacks up like I was saying. I also just pointed out the holes you had in your 2-10 year argument, and some other points regarding wide receivers who go high end up on bad teams, with bad quarterbacks, and that usually leads to poor production. That is what leads to my reasoning on why I think receiver is not as valuable as other positions as their impact is reliant on someone else performing, which I think is a reasonable argument.

    Leading into the draft I said this class was great due to the volume of depth that exists, no one has ever said otherwise because that would be idiotic. But, what I said was I believed that we would get a shot at one of the top 3 guys due to the overwhelming supply that existed. I thought it would slightly drop their value eliminating any need for a trade up, that happened. I also said this group was great based on depth, not because of a blue chip guy, well let me revisit this point using your weird logic you attempted to use earlier, no receiver went top 5, no receiver went top 10, it wasn't until 12. You can make smart comments about me saying what I think is right or wrong, but based on your reasoning here, 11 experts agreed with what I said right ?
    Did you read the 4 times I said I preferred to trade down and pickup 2 WRs later? Come on you need to be fair to the entire conversation and not the cherry picking part you want to read.

    You said 20-50 at least 5 times in these threads. Now since no receiver went top 5 you are right? None went top 10 so you are right. But 3 went before 20 and still you are right?

    Stop!!! Just stop!! It is ridiculous.

    We can agree to disagree and move on.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    14,361
    You brang the thread back up to try and say the "experts" agreed with you, while in the process contradicting yourself. And why do you keep agreeing to disagree and move on, them keep repeating yourself ? Make up your mind.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,986
    Quote Originally Posted by johnlimburg View Post
    You brang the thread back up to try and say the "experts" agreed with you, while in the process contradicting yourself. And why do you keep agreeing to disagree and move on, them keep repeating yourself ? Make up your mind.
    I am sorry this day is so difficult for you. I know this is not the draft you hoped for. I hope it gets better for you soon. Good luck!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •