How can u be a great pick @15 and a bad pick at....

[Q_the_man]

#1........

I mean how can a scout say u are drafted to high.

I.E. Merriman, some scouts say he is a great pass rusher and great against the run, so how could he be a great pick at #15 and a bad pick at #1, considering he is a top 3 Defensive player, same goes for Rolle....

[flashback]

Did you eat a lot of paint chips when you were a kid?

[Crown Royal]

Difference in pay, #1 should (ideally) be the best pick in the draft, not just a good one, different expectations, etc.

[jksmith269]

I think it all depends on a teams needs if a team had two good DE's and sorry receivers but drafted Merriman over Edwards I could see it being a bad pick but that would count wether you were at 1 or 32.

[ABQCOWBOY]

#1........

I mean how can a scout say u are drafted to high.

I.E. Merriman, some scouts say he is a great pass rusher and great against the run, so how could he be a great pick at #15 and a bad pick at #1, considering he is a top 3 Defensive player, same goes for Rolle....

Well, what if your the best punter to come out in the last 10 years? How bout the best FG kicker? Would you take either #1 overall? I mean, there the best at there position, right?

[Q_the_man]

I think it all depends on a teams needs if a team had two good DE's and sorry receivers but drafted Merriman over Edwards I could see it being a bad pick but that would count wether you were at 1 or 32.
But Merriman is suppose to give u 12 sacks or even Rolle....

I'll even say Derrick Johnson, best college LB, how can he fall to #11 in be a star but at #1 he is a reach.....

I 'm just saying scouts say oh this guy will be a star or this guy will be a stud, but if u draft him high they say he is a reach. Is that not contradiction...

[flashback]

Which would you rather have:

Derrick Johnson, or

Derrick Johnson, an extra #3 and an extra #1 in next years draft?

[Q_the_man]

Well, what if your the best punter to come out in the last 10 years? How bout the best FG kicker? Would you take either #1 overall? I mean, there the best at there position, right?
Because 9 out of 10 times u can get him later, but if someone told me I can have the next Morten Anderson at #11 I would grab him.....

But far as truly gifted players, how can u be a stud pick at 15 and a reach at #1 or 2. If ur a stud ur a stud right

[TheHustler]

Because 9 out of 10 times u can get him later, but if someone told me I can have the next Morten Anderson at #11 I would grab him.....

But far as truly gifted players, how can u be a stud pick at 15 and a reach at #1 or 2. If ur a stud ur a stud right

Lets say that there are 32 players, named 1-32. Each one of them has talent equal to their name, meaning player 1 is better than player 2 who is better than player 3, etc. Now lets say that ALL of these 32 players will be great, but player 1 will be better than 2 who will be better than 3, etc.

So player 15 will be great, but not as great as players 1-14, so at 15 he is a great pick, but not at picks 1-14 because there are 14 players better than him.

Of course it's not quite that simple in the NFL with needs, different ratings, different scouts, but the idea is the same.

[ABQCOWBOY]

Because 9 out of 10 times u can get him later, but if someone told me I can have the next Morten Anderson at #11 I would grab him.....

But far as truly gifted players, how can u be a stud pick at 15 and a reach at #1 or 2. If ur a stud ur a stud right

You answered your own question. 9 out of 10 times, you can get him later.

[jterrell]

Its really just basic math.
If you hit on players at every selection but never take advantage of a guys value then you will lose out on extra picks, salary cap money and total players.

Assume you know Clinton Portis was gonna be pretty good and you selected him at #5. Now you are paying him a ton already and he wants a fortune to resign so you trade him to Wash et al. Well now you have no 1st rounder. Portis fell to 2 largely because his ego was larger than his skillset. He was always going to want mega bucks.

In the top of a draft this becomes a huge problem that is hard to deal with. Dallas handled it best with RW. They fell to 8 by simply not selecting and it cost them less money to get the guy they wanted and would have taken at 6.

It would not suprise me to see someone do the same thing this year. I would be very tempted if I drafted top 5.

A stud at 15 can be alot of positions such as a FG kicker. Would you pay 3 million a year and 10 mil up front for a kicker? If so you will have to trim your cap somewhere else. Thats why they dont go high 1st. Not even to the Raiders.

[ghettogandhi]

#1........

I mean how can a scout say u are drafted to high.

I.E. Merriman, some scouts say he is a great pass rusher and great against the run, so how could he be a great pick at #15 and a bad pick at #1, considering he is a top 3 Defensive player, same goes for Rolle....

the best way I can explain this is- is the player the best player available when you pick- if you can honestly say yes than it is a no brainer- if on the other hand he is not the best player and you are drafting for a position of need- so if terrell owens is on the board and you say cb is your biggest need and you draft fred smoot than you drafted smoot too high- which can be another way of saying that was not the best player available when you drafted

[Derinyar]

First things first, there is no such thing as a guranteed stud.

Players get slotted into positions based on talent and position. Some consider Derrick Johnson the best LB in this years draft, others go as far as saying best defeinsive plyaer in the draft. So that means he should be drafted before any other defensive player right? Not so fast. Certain things are worth more than others. Sacks and Ints tend to help dictate where defensive players are drafted. Just like in round 1 you usually see mostly QB, WR, RB, and LT for offense; you mostly see DE, DT, CB in round 1 for defense. LB's tend to sneak into the middle/end of the round, unless they are an outstanding talent that can rush the passer, see Merriman.

But lets say someone drafts Derrick Johnson, to keep on this example, at #3. If no one else was thinking he was worth picking till the team with pick 16, then the team at 3 over drafted the player, making him a reach at that point in time. Now he might end up being a stud, many players have that possibiltiy, and its a different thing than saying this player should be in a given draft slot.

[johnnybluestar]

Think about in terms of money or merchandise. Let's say you're at Albertson's (or whatever grocery store you have where you live) and a 12 pack of Coke is $3.75, but you "think" you could get it cheaper at Tom Thumb. You think you could get the same Coke at Tom Thumb for $2.75. What are you going to do? You can get Coke at a better value later, you think. And remember we're talking about $20 million and $10 million, not $3.75 and $2.75.

I see where you're coming from though. The big difference between the draft and buying regular products is there is no guarentee of performance equal to the price paid. You buy Coke and you know exactly what you're getting. If its flat you can take it back. How can a scout, a so-called expert, say this is good at #11, but terrible at #1. Well, its his job. He is paid to speculate, just like there are geologists who get paid to speculate where oil is.

But speculators are wrong. A lot! Look at last year's draft. The #1 pick was not the most productive pick in the draft. The most productive pick in last year's draft was the #11 pick. I hope that happens this year too! I really hope that happens!

Over time though, the #1 pick may prove to be better than the #11. Or #7 or #14, or say #43 turns out to be the best player from that draft. But these guys' rookie contracts are based on where they get picked, not their performance. And that is where value comes in. Just think, Chris Perry gets paid more than Julius Jones.