Re: SNR & everybody who claims that the non-Geno talent atop this draft is "garbage."
I recently listed several players that I felt are superior to Geno Smith, all things being equal (including positional value):
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
At QB, who was a worse prospect than Geno of the above players? 1. Luck 2-tie. RG3/Stafford 3. Ryan 4-tie. Bradford/Sanchez 5. Newton 6. Gabbert 7. Smith 8. Tannehill 9. Locker At OT, who was a worse prospect than Joeckel, Fisher, or Lane Johnson? The way I would have ordered them as prospects: 1. Long 2. Okung 3. Williams 4-tie. Joeckel/Kalil 5. Fisher 6. Jason Smith 7-tie. Andre Smith/Monroe/Lane Johnson 8. Tyron Smith At passrusher, who was a worse prospect than Werner, Moore, or Jordan? 1. Miller 2. Chris Long 3. Aldon Smith 4-tie. Gholston/Werner 5. Moore 6. Harvey 7. Jordan At DT, who was a worse prospect than Richardson or Hankins? (Star is apparently out of commission as a top 10 pick now.) 1. Suh 2. McCoy 3. Dorsey 4. Dareus 5. Raji 6. Richardson 7-tie. Ellis/Hankins 8. Tyson Jackson 9. Alualu Now on to my broader point here: This is how I would rank them as prospects as of now. Of course you could adjust your rankings all over the place. But the myth that Geno Smith is on par with what we've seen in the past while the other three categories are horrendous nightmares compared to your "usual draft," is just that: a myth. |
suck my butt
|
You're missing out on a key point here.
Number one. Overall. Pick. |
Quote:
|
Let's say Kalil is a wash with Joeckel/Fisher.
The Vikings already had their QB. They weren't going to draft another one. |
Wait. What?
|
Quote:
They are legitimately on par with what we've had in drafts past in the top 10. |
Quote:
My point is that this year's talent doesn't stack up with the elites, but it's comfortable Top Ten material across the board everywhere but maybe passrusher. |
|
Matt Stafford had a lot of question marks coming out of college. But the Lions ignored that and chose to see him as a guy who would INSTANTLY dig them out of that shit hole if he turned out to be great.
Had they gone the safe route with Eugene Monroe, who knows how terrible they would be? It's possible we would have had problems with them in the race to the #1 overall pick this past season. |
I fail to see how a guy who basically started 1 year in college (Sanchez) was considered a better prospect than Geno Smith?
What are the scouts seeing in Geno that suggests he's not a top tier QB prospect? |
you've proved our point
none of the talent this year would be in the top 5 of the last 5 years...unless you give them 'ties' putting gabbert ahead of smith is pure nonsense and none of this changes the central vapidity of your argument...reaching for mythological value (just rhetorical cover for playing it 'safe')... but have fun passing on QBs for another decade, this value thing you've got going has served the chiefs well... |
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
"A lot of question marks." He would have been taken #1 overall by anybody. You're rewriting history. He was one of the best prospects we've seen. There was literally no question he was the best player in that year's draft. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:10 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.