PDA

View Full Version : From Schefter's Blog-I wish we had both 1st rounders in 2010


Denver724
11-17-2009, 07:54 AM
Q: I am really concerned about the state of the Chicago Bears not just now but also for the next several years. You win the game in trenches, yet their O- and D-lines are mediocre thanks to Jerry Angelo, who has neglected drafting O-line for years. Instead, he gives away draft picks for mediocre players and drafts players who can't even contribute and sit on the bench instead. I always felt that the way their ownership has done business is being reflected in the product on the field right now. Lovie Smith and Jerry Angelo are just average football people. Please give your honest assessment of this franchise good or bad.

--Steven (Yokosuka, Japan)

A: Here's what concerns me, Steven: No. 1, Jay Cutler looks as if he has any number of issues to work through, as a player and a person. He's good enough and young enough that he certainly can. But there's a lot of work to be done there. Also, not only did the Bears give up a first-round pick in the upcoming draft for Cutler, in what will be one of the best drafts in years, they also gave up their second-round pick for defensive end Gaines Adams. Now, in this great draft, the Bears are not scheduled to pick until Round 3. And when the offensive line is as weak as you and others say, and there is no big wide receiver to get the football to, there are some questions about how long it might take the Bears to improve.

Beantown Bronco
11-17-2009, 07:58 AM
I'll never understand how people can say things like this with a straight face. It's just as likely that next year's draft will suck as it will be great. Nobody really knows. Sure, there are lots of big names, but they could all easily bust.

Wait until at least 2 or 3 years AFTER the draft before telling me the draft was deep or shallow, etc.

Rulon Velvet Jones
11-17-2009, 07:59 AM
Beantown's right. There are few sure things in the draft.

TonyR
11-17-2009, 08:19 AM
I'll never understand how people can say things like this with a straight face.

Well, you're focusing on the smaller point and neglecting the larger one. Regardless of the quality of the 2010 draft the Bears don't have enough high picks to improve, and they have a lot of needs.

spdirty
11-17-2009, 08:22 AM
I hope Alphonso starts looking like a first rounder soon.

Traveler
11-17-2009, 08:23 AM
I hope Alphonso starts looking like a first rounder soon.

You mean 2nd rounder.

ohiobronco2
11-17-2009, 08:29 AM
You mean 2nd rounder.

Well, since we gave up a first for him, I'm guessing he means a first.

ColoradoDarin
11-17-2009, 08:30 AM
You mean 2nd rounder.

he also hopes that Brandon and DOOM start playing like a 4th rounders...

spdirty
11-17-2009, 08:35 AM
he also hopes that Brandon and DOOM start playing like a 4th rounders...

no I dont.

Beantown Bronco
11-17-2009, 09:04 AM
Well, you're focusing on the smaller point and neglecting the larger one. Regardless of the quality of the 2010 draft the Bears don't have enough high picks to improve, and they have a lot of needs.

I'm focusing on it because it was the part that was bolded and underlined. And it was the original poster's intent for us to focus on that part as well, hence his "I wish we (the Broncos) had both 1st rounders in 2010."

Though the larger point being made by the person who posted the question from Japan and Schefter in his response is true. There is never a good time to be missing both your first and second rounders, much less in a year where you have so many holes to fill.

TonyR
11-17-2009, 09:29 AM
I'm focusing on it because it was the part that was bolded and underlined.

You're right, I shouldn't have directed this comment at you. I should have said "the focus" is wrong, not "your focus" is wrong. The larger point here is that the Bears will have difficulty improving through the draft without a 1 or a 2.

BroncoMan4ever
11-17-2009, 02:01 PM
even if next season is a deep draft, which we won't know for sure for at least 3 years, the way Chicago is playing right now, we are going to get a pick around number 12, and more than likely McDaniels will trade back from that spot in order to pick up additional 2nd or 3rd round picks.

SportinOne
11-17-2009, 02:13 PM
Interesting that he said that. College football has been pretty mediocre this year. If that is due to parity, okay, maybe I buy that. Like someone above said, time will tell.

Two 1sts or 1 1st, we can still get a quarterback. Whether that's in the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd, we'll get one.

Hercules Rockefeller
11-17-2009, 02:25 PM
You don't look 3 years down the line to see whether or not it's a deep draft, you look at other years to see where comparable talent was drafted. 3 years is when you grade a team's draft.

Every junior that thinks they can sniff the 1st or 2nd round is going to declare this offseason. There's no rookie cap (there are going to be a lot of holdouts I'm sure) and as of now, there's a real possibility of either a lockout in 2011 or a having a rookie wage scale if there is a new CBA.

If Denver somehow ended up with a Top 10 pick, this would the year to try to move to the bottom half of the 1st and acquire some more picks.

Atwater His Ass
11-17-2009, 02:30 PM
The draft is a crapshoot. Anyone who tries to tell you otherwise is either a) getting paid lots of cash to do so or b) is and idiot. b does not mutually exclude a.

NFLBRONCO
11-17-2009, 02:30 PM
I still wished McD would have stockpiled more picks. I know that doesn't guarantee success it would just us ammo to get each player we really wanted. Esp with all the needs we have right now and FA is so expensive for a quality players.

Who knows maybe McD will shop some of our best players to aquire more picks as well.

ward63
11-17-2009, 02:34 PM
IF we get a top 10 through the bears, should we trade back?

Beantown Bronco
11-17-2009, 02:41 PM
You don't look 3 years down the line to see whether or not it's a deep draft, you look at other years to see where comparable talent was drafted. 3 years is when you grade a team's draft.

Just because 10 WRs get drafted in the first two rounds one year and only 5 gets drafted there the next year, it doesn't necessarily mean that it was a deep draft for WRs that first year. All it means is either more teams needed WRs that first year or more teams possibly incorrectly graded WRs with a first or second round grade that year.

What if three years later, you look back and grade the draft and realize that all 10 of those guys in that first draft busted and that the 5 that got taken the next year all became stars? Would the first be considered a "deep" draft for WRs? No way.

BroncoBuff
11-17-2009, 02:52 PM
no I dont.

You didn't have to actually say this.

Hercules Rockefeller
11-17-2009, 02:53 PM
Just because 10 WRs get drafted in the first two rounds one year and only 5 gets drafted there the next year, it doesn't necessarily mean that it was a deep draft for WRs that first year. All it means is either more teams needed WRs that first year or more teams possibly incorrectly graded WRs with a first or second round grade that year.

What if three years later, you look back and grade the draft and realize that all 10 of those guys in that first draft busted and that the 5 that got taken the next year all became stars? Would the first be considered a "deep" draft for WRs? No way.

You quote what I said, and then at no point address it. Schefter isn't saying it's a deep draft at a position or two. What he's saying is that overall, the talent level throughout is much deeper than previous seasons. The issue is equivalent talent and where it's drafted between the drafts you're comparing. Example, where would a Larry Fitzgerald-type prospect (drafted 3rd overall in '04) go in this draft?

We're not talking about bust rates either, we're talking about talent level at the time of the draft. There are phenomenally talented guys in every draft that are busts waiting to happen. That doesn't mean they aren't phenomenally talented guys. That's what Schefter is talking about when he says it's a deep draft, he's saying the talent level of the pool will be higher compared to other years.

And that's not something that just Schefter is saying, everyone has been saying this is going to be a deep draft since the owners opted out of the CBA.

jhns
11-17-2009, 03:13 PM
I wish we had both picks also. I have always been against trading future firsts though, especially in a draft we already had two firsts in. How can McDaniels really think Smith is a better prospect than all the prospects that will be there next draft at our first when he didn't even think he was the best at our first, two times, in this draft? Not that it matters if they scout drafted talent as well as they scout FA talent. they hit on almost every FA this offseason.

Atwater His Ass
11-17-2009, 03:21 PM
You quote what I said, and then at no point address it. Schefter isn't saying it's a deep draft at a position or two. What he's saying is that overall, the talent level throughout is much deeper than previous seasons. The issue is equivalent talent and where it's drafted between the drafts you're comparing. Example, where would a Larry Fitzgerald-type prospect (drafted 3rd overall in '04) go in this draft?

We're not talking about bust rates either, we're talking about talent level at the time of the draft. There are phenomenally talented guys in every draft that are busts waiting to happen. That doesn't mean they aren't phenomenally talented guys. That's what Schefter is talking about when he says it's a deep draft, he's saying the talent level of the pool will be higher compared to other years.

And that's not something that just Schefter is saying, everyone has been saying this is going to be a deep draft since the owners opted out of the CBA.

All of this nice, but if it doesn't equate to performance on the football field, it doesn't mean squadoosh.

Hence why the draft in general and draft picks in particular are so over-rated and over-valued.

Beantown Bronco
11-17-2009, 03:22 PM
You quote what I said, and then at no point address it. Schefter isn't saying it's a deep draft at a position or two. What he's saying is that overall, the talent level throughout is much deeper than previous seasons. The issue is equivalent talent and where it's drafted between the drafts you're comparing. Example, where would a Larry Fitzgerald-type prospect (drafted 3rd overall in '04) go in this draft?

We're not talking about bust rates either, we're talking about talent level at the time of the draft. There are phenomenally talented guys in every draft that are busts waiting to happen. That doesn't mean they aren't phenomenally talented guys. That's what Schefter is talking about when he says it's a deep draft, he's saying the talent level of the pool will be higher compared to other years.

And that's not something that just Schefter is saying, everyone has been saying this is going to be a deep draft since the owners opted out of the CBA.

I don't care if a million experts say it, it doesn't make it true. It just means it's the popular thing to say (just ask the Broncos this year). And, when you have teams like Oakland making ridiculous first round picks every year, it's flat out impossible to predict from year to year where guys might get drafted if they came out one year earlier or later.

eddie mac
11-17-2009, 03:23 PM
The thing is that given what happened in the offseason with Cutler and everything else McDaniels most likely thought he needed to win now so he got as many of his draft board on board when he had the opportunity, regardless of the utilisation of 2010 draft picks, because lets be honest a lot of us had him out the door in his first season cos the majority didn't see more than 5 or 6 wins this year and no-one knows for sure where Bowlen would've stood with that.

Coaches in the NFL dont get time to gel teams/players nowadays and you're only ever as good as your last game. We are actually now at a point in the season where heads are going to roll. Regardless of how this season now pans out for us, at least McDaniels has proven there's something there to work with after the excellent start and his job is safe.

Atwater His Ass
11-17-2009, 03:25 PM
Nobody in their right mind had McD out of Denver after one year. You don't make changes that Pat has made and then go yet again in a different after a single year and do it all over again.

A lot of us thought McD may be gone in 3-4 years and that is still on the table.

This entire 1 year talk was more a result of McD digging his own grave with the Cutler fiasco and putting even more pressure on himself to win now by shortening the amount of slack / grace period people were willing to cut him being a first time head coach.

Hercules Rockefeller
11-17-2009, 03:32 PM
I don't care if a million experts say it, it doesn't make it true. It just means it's the popular thing to say (just ask the Broncos this year). And, when you have teams like Oakland making ridiculous first round picks every year, it's flat out impossible to predict from year to year where guys might get drafted if they came out one year earlier or later.

There ya go, because Oakland reaches with their picks, we cannot adequately judge a draft's talent level.

bowtown
11-17-2009, 03:38 PM
There ya go, because Oakland reaches with their picks, we cannot adequately judge a draft's talent level.

Congrats on your ability to read a post and misunderstand everything it's trying to say.

~Crash~
11-17-2009, 08:51 PM
Beantown's right. There are few sure things in the draft.

Not completely right there is going to be a huge amount of under class men this year declare so..

RhymesayersDU
11-17-2009, 09:10 PM
You anti-draft people are retarded.


Look, I agree that there is some luck involved. Maybe a ton of luck. But it's not a crapshoot, it's not drawing names out of a hat, etc. There are ways to evaluate talent, make educated decisions, etc. This idea that you don't know anything about players is beyond moronic.

Herc knows the deal.

NFLBRONCO
11-17-2009, 09:18 PM
I'd rather have tons of draft picks and gamble results then sign a top FA for 100 millions dollars that could help or flop that cripples your cap alot longer then draft picks would. Esp with a team like Denver that has so many needs to fill.

watermock
11-17-2009, 09:20 PM
I wish we still had 2 1sts in '10 too.

watermock
11-17-2009, 09:22 PM
You anti-draft people are retarded.


Look, I agree that there is some luck involved. Maybe a ton of luck. But it's not a crapshoot, it's not drawing names out of a hat, etc. There are ways to evaluate talent, make educated decisions, etc. This idea that you don't know anything about players is beyond moronic.

Herc knows the deal.

Yeah, just do your homework. Make up a 100 name index card and work out ever player on it!

NFLBRONCO
11-17-2009, 09:24 PM
I wish we still had 2 1sts in '10 too.

We all do :(

UboBronco
11-17-2009, 10:14 PM
Not completely right there is going to be a huge amount of under class men this year declare so..

What scares me about this is... Underclassmen, (with the threat of a salary cap many players, some not ready yet coming out) though the talent may be there, are they really ready to play now? Many contribute years from now, so if you have a multitude of picks, you can gamble, the Broncos are a team in the "gray zone" almost to the area they can gamble some, but still need some help now. This offseason and draft will tell us all how Josh actually is trying to bulid the team, and not just a one year bandaid, or quick fix.

kappys
11-18-2009, 12:30 AM
You anti-draft people are retarded.


Look, I agree that there is some luck involved. Maybe a ton of luck. But it's not a crapshoot, it's not drawing names out of a hat, etc. There are ways to evaluate talent, make educated decisions, etc. This idea that you don't know anything about players is beyond moronic.

Herc knows the deal.

It might be this year. As far as I know the NFL hasn't settled its dispute with the company that digitizes college games for the NFL scouts. So most scouting departments are basically blind excluding those players they've observed in person.

BroncoMan4ever
11-18-2009, 12:31 AM
You anti-draft people are retarded.


Look, I agree that there is some luck involved. Maybe a ton of luck. But it's not a crapshoot, it's not drawing names out of a hat, etc. There are ways to evaluate talent, make educated decisions, etc. This idea that you don't know anything about players is beyond moronic.

Herc knows the deal.

i agree. a lot of times talent doesn't pan out for any number of reasons, but as much work as goes into evaluating 1000s of players every year, teams know everything about who they are picking and have a great amount of evidence on the type of player they are getting.

luck plays a big factor in whether or not the guys you evaluated take that next step to becoming NFL calibur players, but it is far more advanced than just picking random players because they play a specific position

DBroncos4life
11-18-2009, 12:55 AM
If you have the right people in place it doesn't matter. The Colts are a perfect example.
Jeff George, Quentin Coryatt, Steve Emtman, Sean Dawkins even though his career was OK. Pretty much all first round busts.

Then you have Marvin Harrison, Tarik Glenn, Manning, James, Rob Morris, Reggie Wayne, Dwight Freeney, Dallas Clark, Bob Sanders, Marlin Jackson. That is 10 straight hits on first round picks. Addai and Anthony Gonzalez could make in 12

Atwater His Ass
11-18-2009, 01:24 AM
You anti-draft people are retarded.


Look, I agree that there is some luck involved. Maybe a ton of luck. But it's not a crapshoot, it's not drawing names out of a hat, etc. There are ways to evaluate talent, make educated decisions, etc. This idea that you don't know anything about players is beyond moronic.

Herc knows the deal.

lol

do people really need to come in here and list draft bust after draft bust after draft bust? let's make it easy and limit it to the 1st round only, you know, where the most time, money, and effort is spent to select top prospects.

it's a crap shoot no matter how much espn has brainwashed you into thinking otherwise.

DBroncos4life
11-18-2009, 01:32 AM
lol

do people really need to come in here and list draft bust after draft bust after draft bust? let's make it easy and limit it to the 1st round only, you know, where the most time, money, and effort is spent to select top prospects.

it's a crap shoot no matter how much espn has brainwashed you into thinking otherwise.

Well you know there are so many drafts where every first round pick busts so I guess you are right. It was just a few years ago where every team picked a bust in the first round wasn't it or has that never happened before? The draft might be hard for crap ass teams like the Raiders, but as I just pointed out the Colts have got some damn good production out of their last 12 first round picks.

Beantown Bronco
11-18-2009, 07:24 AM
There's literally thousands of people employed by teams, networks, websites, etc whose sole full time, year round job is to evaluate players and grade them. More than half the first rounders bust, most of the players drafted never amount to anything, and more undrafted guys are successful in the league than second day draft picks.

While I don't believe it's a complete crapshoot, it's certainly not too far away.

Pick Six
11-18-2009, 09:53 AM
There's literally thousands of people employed by teams, networks, websites, etc whose sole full time, year round job is to evaluate players and grade them. More than half the first rounders bust, most of the players drafted never amount to anything, and more undrafted guys are successful in the league than second day draft picks.

While I don't believe it's a complete crapshoot, it's certainly not too far away.

JaMarcus Russell was the first pick overall in the draft. Enough said...

Or, maybe we can discuss the fact that Tom Brady was a 6th round pick. I should also mention Terrell Davis and an undrafted Rod Smith...

Hercules Rockefeller
11-18-2009, 10:31 AM
JaMarcus Russell was the first pick overall in the draft. Enough said...

Or, maybe we can discuss the fact that Tom Brady was a 6th round pick. I should also mention Terrell Davis and an undrafted Rod Smith...

2009 AP All-Pro Team (No kickers or ST)

Peyton Manning- 1st round pick
Adrian Peterson- 1st round pick
Michael Turner- 5th round pick
LeRon McClain- 4th round pick
Tony Gonzalez- 1st round pick
Andre Johnson- 1st round pick
Larry Fitzgerald- 1st round pick
Jordan Gross- 1st round pick
Michael Roos- 2nd round pick
Steve Hutchinson- 1st round pick
Chris Snee- 2nd round pick
Kevin Mawae- 7th round or undrafted IIRC


Justin Tuck- 3rd round pick
Jared Allen- 4th round pick
Albert Haynesworth- 1st round pick
Kevin Williams- 1st round pick
Demarcus Ware- 1st round pick
James Harrison- UDFA
Ray Lewis- 1st round pick
John Beason- 1st round pick
Nnamdi Asomugha- 1st round pick
Cortland Finnegan- 7th round pick
Ed Reed- 1st round pick
Troy Polamalu- 1st round pick

Breakdown:
15 1st round picks
2 2nd round picks (both Top 10 in the 2nd)
1 3rd round pick
2 4th round picks
1 5th
1 7th
1 UDFA
1 who was either a 7th or a UDFA

The 2nd team isn't as 1st round pick heavy, but there's at least 11 1sts on the 2nd team too.

Let's do MVPs this decade
Faulk- 1st round pick
Warner- undrafted
Gannon- not a 1st round pick
Manning/McNair- both 1st round picks
Manning- 1st
Shaun Alexander- 1st
LT- 1st
Brady- 6th
Manning- 1st

6 of the 9 years, a 1st round pick won it.

Defensive MVP
Ray Ray -1st
Strahan- high 2nd
Derrick Brooks- 1st
Ray Ray-1st
Ed Reed- 1st
Urlacher- 1st
Jason Taylor- 4th
Bob Sanders- 2nd
James Harrison- UDFA

5 of the 9 are 1sts and 7 of the 9 are 1st and 2nds.

I realize you guys love to use extreme examples as your "proof" that the draft is a crapshoot, but the stars in this league are predominantly 1st and 2nd round picks. Just because TD (6th), Shannon (7th), and Rod (UDFA) had great careers while being overlooked, that team was still led by a 1st overall draft pick.

RhymesayersDU
11-18-2009, 10:55 AM
It should also be noted that big money free agents become busts on their new teams all the time.

Also it should be noted that the only place to realistically obtain a franchise QB is through the draft. The top-tier QBs never change teams in their prime.

Beantown Bronco
11-18-2009, 11:00 AM
Looking at all pros and MVPs COMPLETELY ignores the other side of the equation, though. The scrubs.

For every All Pro that came out of the first and second round of the [pick your season] draft, I can probably name 5 or more busts or guys that only stuck in the league for more than one year because of their contracts.

Hercules Rockefeller
11-18-2009, 11:20 AM
Looking at all pros and MVPs COMPLETELY ignores the other side of the equation, though. The scrubs.

For every All Pro that came out of the first and second round of the [pick your season] draft, I can probably name 5 or more busts or guys that only stuck in the league for more than one year because of their contracts.

Ok, and? Still doesn't change the fact that the vast majority of the best players are found in the 1st and 2nd. There are busts in every round, doesn't mean you tuck it back and are afraid to make the pick because someone might bust or be just a scrub.

Oh noes!!! Someone might bust if the Broncos draft them!!! Maybe they should just trade all their picks so we don't take that risk!!!

Why don't we do a scrub list for the 3rd through 7th? Then we can point out the 1 or 2 guys who might become stars out of those 5 rounds, the guys who are solid at best, the guys who get cut in camp, and the ones who are out of the league in a couple years. There were almost twice as many (15 of 24) 1st round All-Pros last year than every other round combined.

I'll take the bust risk of a 1st and 2nd round pick any day over that crap.

Beantown Bronco
11-18-2009, 11:22 AM
A little extreme and not at all what even the most staunch believer in the "crap shoot" theory would advocate, but whatever.

Hercules Rockefeller
11-18-2009, 11:24 AM
A little extreme and not at all what even the most staunch believer in the "crap shoot" theory would advocate, but whatever.

Yeah, because that was the main point of my post.

Try again.

Beantown Bronco
11-18-2009, 11:26 AM
Yeah, because that was the main point of my post.

Try again.

3 out of the 4 paragraphs you wrote....but it wasn't the main point of your post? You need a better editor.

Hercules Rockefeller
11-18-2009, 11:37 AM
3 out of the 4 paragraphs you wrote....but it wasn't the main point of your post? You need a better editor.

You need to improve your reading comprehension skills a little bit then.

Of course, you don't quote anything, just say it's a little extreme and then fall back and claim it's in 3 of the 4 paragraphs. Of course you don't even state what's extreme, because one more time, you don't have **** for a response to the facts. The only hyperbole in there was trading all picks because you "crap shoot" guys are petrified of busts, hence your over reliance on guys like Shannon, Rod, TD (extreme exceptions to the rule) and focus on 1st round busts.

You attempted to make a point that there are scrubs in the 1st round, and again, I pointed out that the best players in the league generally are found at the top of the draft.

One more time, try again. Try to spin the All-Pro and MVP lists in some way that shows the draft is a crap shoot. Try again to try to claim that because scrubs are found in the 1st round, the draft is a crap shoot.

HEAV
11-18-2009, 11:59 AM
Cutler wanted to go there...he's there. Going into the franchise anyone could see the talent was lacking. Without draft selections the BEARS are going to have to spend free agent dollars to get better.

Beantown Bronco
11-18-2009, 12:27 PM
You need to improve your reading comprehension skills a little bit then.

Of course, you don't quote anything, just say it's a little extreme and then fall back and claim it's in 3 of the 4 paragraphs. Of course you don't even state what's extreme, because one more time, you don't have **** for a response to the facts.

Here's your 3 paragraphs:

Ok, and? Still doesn't change the fact that the vast majority of the best players are found in the 1st and 2nd. There are busts in every round, doesn't mean you tuck it back and are afraid to make the pick because someone might bust or be just a scrub.

Oh noes!!! Someone might bust if the Broncos draft them!!! Maybe they should just trade all their picks so we don't take that risk!!!

I'll take the bust risk of a 1st and 2nd round pick any day over that crap.

You don't think claiming that everyone who believes the draft is a bit of a crap shoot wants us to essentially forfeit the draft every year is an extreme position? If that's your true feeling, then you need more help than I thought.

Beantown Bronco
11-18-2009, 12:30 PM
One more time, try again. Try to spin the All-Pro and MVP lists in some way that shows the draft is a crap shoot. Try again to try to claim that because scrubs are found in the 1st round, the draft is a crap shoot.

Here's the problem. You are taking the chart and you are misapplying it to something it doesn't prove.

Here's what it proves: that stars in this league get drafted high.
Here's what it doesn't prove: that more early picks become stars than duds.

Do you see the difference?

TonyR
11-18-2009, 12:35 PM
I think you're both "right". The draft is a "crapshoot" in that it's risky and inexact. It's not a "crapshoot" in that there is a lot of preparation and the higher you pick the better your odds. Semantics.