Sunday, April 25, 2010

Mighty NFL Draft Thoughts

The biggest objection I think I have to to the draft (outside of Jon Gruden talking...why?) is post draft grade. I'm not sure where the A-F grade for NFL drafts came from but it's generally... well unhelpful. Columnist never state what the grades mean, how they arrive at their conclusions, or what. 90% of the time I think it's just seeing the name of the team (oh it's the Ravens of course they did well). If the Browns had drafted an OLB with knee problems and a NT that could only be on the field for 20 snaps in college they'd have been panned. Not to say the Ravens had an awful draft (I have no idea) but Ozzie Newsom'e track record gives them the benefit of the doubt in the grade...which makes grading a silly proposition as then before the draft starts I can give the good team's As and the bad teams Fs. Or oomplas or whatever the grade is.

That said....

I liked Seattle's draft. They filled needs, got players that produced on the field, and even leveraged extra picks for veterans. Sure it helped that Seattle had a ton of extra picks which makes it pretty easy to do well but hey that's how it goes...

NY Jets.... The only move I noticed (and cared about) was the addition of Kyle Wilson. The Browns' considered talking him at 7 as he's one of the top CBs in the draft. Adding him to Revis and off-season pick up (Cromartie) makes the Jets secondary as good as it gets in the NFL. This should make their pass rush all the more fearsome.

The obvious team on the didn't like side is the Jags who reached in the first round. The other team I think might be in trouble was San Diego. They mortgaged a number of picks to take Ryan Mathews...a larger back to complement Sproles. However there's a number of doubts on Matthews and I'm always umm...skeptical about First Round running backs given their assumed short playing span.

So what's everyone else's take?


Gutsy Goldberg said...

I've hardly read anything... but I didn't like the Browns picks. I can kind of understand the CB pick at #7, but I felt like there were other greater needs. The 2nd day picks seemed questionable as they took a RB very high for some reason, and then a safety who had so much injury history that the GM said "this is why we have doctors." Um... yes. I also don't like Colt McCoy that much even though I know a 3rd round pick is suppposedly a steal for him.

I give the Denver broncos an F because they took Tebow in the 1st round. I find it funny how analysts pointed out that neither Orton, Quinn, nor Tebow are known for throwing long-balls... yet the WR they took in the 1st round is really good at the long-ball!

MJ said...

I generally understand the post-draft grades and the grading process. Teams are being graded more on how they addressed their needs and less about the overall quality of the players they selected. It's obviously too soon to grade the players selected because they haven't played in the NFL yet. As such, a team receiving an "A" is being rewarded first for getting players who are perceived to be good players and second for addressing needs which these players can potentially address.

For that reason, I would definitely give the Seahawks an A because they had needs at LT and FS and added arguably the two best players at those positions via the draft.