PDA

View Full Version : For teams looking to draft a WR..


Joe Seahawk
04-26-2007, 10:29 PM
This table put together by Mike Sando of the TNT (http://blogs.thenewstribune.com/seahawks/) Just goes to show you you don't necessarily need to get them in the first round..

Personally I was suprised a little bit after seeing this..


http://blogmedia.thenewstribune.com/media/04_26_2007_WR_LEADERS_2006_01.jpg

keg in kc
04-26-2007, 10:34 PM
Hey Joe. Heard your boy Rob Rang on the radio here in KC this afternoon.

Not that surprising, the chart. What would be really interesting is to see if that's indicative of just the WR position, or of the league in general. Might be interesting to see a position-by-position breakdown of the top players.

Smed1065
04-26-2007, 10:39 PM
Is that like 11 of the top 30 taken in round one?

What does that mean when there is a strong WR class like this year?

OnTheWarpath58
04-26-2007, 10:50 PM
Is that like 11 of the top 30 taken in round one?

What does that mean when there is a strong WR class like this year?

2004 and 2005 were supposedly good WR classes too.

Out of the 13 WR picked in R1 those two years, 4 of them have been worthy of a R1 pick, IMO.

Braylon Edwards (3), Larry Fitzgerald (3), Roy Williams (7), and Lee Evans (13)

Mecca
04-26-2007, 10:52 PM
2004 and 2005 were supposedly good WR classes too.

Out of the 13 WR picked in R1 those two years, 4 of them have been worthy of a R1 pick, IMO.

Braylon Edwards (3), Larry Fitzgerald (3), Roy Williams (7), and Lee Evans (13)

But if you did this for every position, they'd all look that way there are busts and finds at every position. You just have to know what you are picking.

Joe Seahawk
04-26-2007, 10:56 PM
He's usually pretty accurate.. he actually nailed both of the seahawks first 2 picks last year..
:eek:



Click here for more analysis from Boomer (http://blogs.thenewstribune.com/seahawks/?cat=153)

OnTheWarpath58
04-26-2007, 11:01 PM
But if you did this for every position, they'd all look that way there are busts and finds at every position. You just have to know what you are picking.

I agree. I was just answering his question.

But, when personnel guys around the league talk about how hard it is for a college WR to adjust to the Pro game, it devalues the position a bit, IMO. Spending a R1 on a guy that may not be able to contribute for 3 years, if at all, is dicey.

Just looking at the past 3 years of First round DT's, most if not all of those guys are solid.

2004 was huge: Tommie Harris, Vince Wilfork and Tubbs (SEA)

Mecca
04-26-2007, 11:04 PM
I think DT is harder than WR, when trying to figure out who translates to the pro grame.

OnTheWarpath58
04-26-2007, 11:07 PM
I think DT is harder than WR, when trying to figure out who translates to the pro grame.

Your entitled to your opinion, but the scouts/personnel people seem to think otherwise.

I don't recall there being a full-fledged "miss" on a R1 DT in the past 3 years.

There were 9 out of 14 misses at the WR position in the past 3 years.

Maybe a coincidence, maybe not.

88TG88
04-26-2007, 11:16 PM
Thats not how it works around here. We've been drafting WRs in late rounds for years and they have been crap.

stlchiefs
04-26-2007, 11:23 PM
Thats not how it works around here. We've been drafting ____ in _____ rounds for years and they have been crap.

FYP

Mecca
04-26-2007, 11:27 PM
Your entitled to your opinion, but the scouts/personnel people seem to think otherwise.

I don't recall there being a full-fledged "miss" on a R1 DT in the past 3 years.

There were 9 out of 14 misses at the WR position in the past 3 years.

Maybe a coincidence, maybe not.

If you go back there are a ton though.......what about the year Sims went, Wendall Bryant went 11......where's he now?

Ari Chi3fs
04-26-2007, 11:43 PM
Remember all the shit that SolJah Kellen Winslow was talking about TG and Antonio Gates?

He finished behind both of them. heh.

OldTownChief
04-27-2007, 05:12 AM
I think DT is harder than WR, when trying to figure out who translates to the pro grame.

For the Chiefs scouts this is a true statement.

the Talking Can
04-27-2007, 05:49 AM
actually, that chart looks like most were taken in the first two rounds, with a handful of late round finds...

5 of the top 6 were picked at #36 or higher....the median is basically round 1