The Best Player Taken In Each Draft
-
Interesting topic there Gip... I'll whip up my list later... but no way do I go back to '36...
One general thought... I think it's too soon to judge "greatest" for the past four to eight drafts.
You forgot me...
Hutchinson and Munchek are two of the Greatest Guards to ever play the game. They were generational talents and were easily all-time, top fivers at their position..
Are Tomlinson and Allen both top five RB's on your list?
There is an argument to be had...
The question was "Greatest", not "most valuable".
Great is a reflection of skill and physical prowess at the position played.
Value is as you say production.
Right argument, but wrong topic there Z...
Here's a couple you did not seem to have a problem with, defying your own "logic"...
Care to comment? Fouts over Hannah ought to be easy... How 'bout Monk over Munoz?
By your criteria you have to also make the case for Stenerud over Tom Mack...
I didn't look them all over, but yes Fouts over Hannah.
By my criteria there is no way in hell you make a case of Stenerud over Mack, Kickers don't belong in this discussion.
There is no way in fucking hell you score the third most TDs in NFL history but you're not the the best player in your own draft class because a guard made All-Pro every year.
I'm not talking just "most valuable" I am talking "Best".
The origninal poster cried that the Browns never draft the best player and that was what inspired this thread. Gipper put up a list of who he feels was the best player in each draft.
The best player in 2001 was Tomlinson. If they did it over Tomlinson and Drew Brees would go before Hutchinson, you know it, I know it, gipper knows it, and Hutchinson's mom knows it.
The guardiest guard of all guards will never ever be a better player than LaDainian Tomlinson. He was the best player in the league for a stretch of time, a league that included Brady and Manning. Hutchinson is an elite guard. Tomlinson is among the most eite football players ever to play the game.
Zombo
Zombo said:
I didn't look them all over, but yes Fouts over Hannah.
By my criteria there is no way in hell you make a case of Stenerud over Mack, Kickers don't belong in this discussion.
There is no way in fucking hell you score the third most TDs in NFL history but you're not the the best player in your own draft class because a guard made All-Pro every year.
I'm not talking just "most valuable" I am talking "Best".
The origninal poster cried that the Browns never draft the best player and that was what inspired this thread. Gipper put up a list of who he feels was the best player in each draft.
The best player in 2001 was Tomlinson. If they did it over Tomlinson and Drew Brees would go before Hutchinson, you know it, I know it, gipper knows it, and Hutchinson's mom knows it.
The guardiest guard of all guards will never ever be a better player than LaDainian Tomlinson. He was the best player in the league for a stretch of time, a league that included Brady and Manning. Hutchinson is an elite guard. Tomlinson is among the most eite football players ever to play the game.
Zombo
Trust me, I stuggled with that choice for the very reasons you quote. Your argument is convincing and I would have no problem going either way.
Maybe I will give that one to you....but like I said above, I had hard choices to make in other years.
In 1995 I chose the RB over the defensive linemen when I took Martin over Sapp. And I went the other direction in 1982 with Munchak over Allen....but the opposite choice there is also supportable.
As I asked before, how far do you take this agrument? Should the skill player be taken over the lineman?
Would you say that Monk should have been chosen over Munoz?
The two biggest stuggles I had were in choosing Forrest Gregg over Bart Starr, and Joe Greene over OJ Simpson. And next was Dan Dierdorf over John Riggins.
I actually may have made some of these choices because I didn't want it to seem that I was just always going to choose the "glamorous" offensive skill player, though I was tempted to do so.
One thing I did do is that I only chose between players that were in the HOF. I figured I would rely on the HOF voters to at least whittle down the options for me.
-
OK Z, what about my choice of Champ Bailey over Donovan McNabb?
I think Bailey is an elite defensive player, a sure fire HOFer. Not so McNabb. He will be given consideration, but would anyone be surprised if he didn't make it?
-
Zombo said:
I didn't look them all over, but yes Fouts over Hannah.
By my criteria there is no way in hell you make a case of Stenerud over Mack, Kickers don't belong in this discussion.
There is no way in fucking hell you score the third most TDs in NFL history but you're not the the best player in your own draft class because a guard made All-Pro every year.
I'm not talking just "most valuable" I am talking "Best".
The origninal poster cried that the Browns never draft the best player and that was what inspired this thread. Gipper put up a list of who he feels was the best player in each draft.
The best player in 2001 was Tomlinson. If they did it over Tomlinson and Drew Brees would go before Hutchinson, you know it, I know it, gipper knows it, and Hutchinson's mom knows it.
The guardiest guard of all guards will never ever be a better player than LaDainian Tomlinson. He was the best player in the league for a stretch of time, a league that included Brady and Manning. Hutchinson is an elite guard. Tomlinson is among the most eite football players ever to play the game.
Zombo
Trust me, I stuggled with that choice for the very reasons you quote. Your argument is convincing and I would have no problem going either way.
Maybe I will give that one to you....but like I said above, I had hard choices to make in other years.
In 1995 I chose the RB over the defensive linemen when I took Martin over Sapp. And I went the other direction in 1982 with Munchak over Allen....but the opposite choice there is also supportable.
As I asked before, how far do you take this agrument? Should the skill player be taken over the lineman?
Would you say that Monk should have been chosen over Munoz?
The two biggest stuggles I had were in choosing Forrest Gregg over Bart Starr, and Joe Greene over OJ Simpson. And next was Dan Dierdorf over John Riggins.
I actually may have made some of these choices because I didn't want it to seem that I was just always going to choose the "glamorous" offensive skill player, though I was tempted to do so.
One thing I did do is that I only chose between players that were in the HOF. I figured I would rely on the HOF voters to at least whittle down the options for me.
Trust me, I stuggled with that choice for the very reasons you quote. Your argument is convincing and I would have no problem going either way.
Maybe I will give that one to you....but like I said above, I had hard choices to make in other years.
In 1995 I chose the RB over the defensive linemen when I took Martin over Sapp. And I went the other direction in 1982 with Munchak over Allen....but the opposite choice there is also supportable.
As I asked before, how far do you take this agrument? Should the skill player be taken over the lineman?
Would you say that Monk should have been chosen over Munoz?
The two biggest stuggles I had were in choosing Forrest Gregg over Bart Starr, and Joe Greene over OJ Simpson. And next was Dan Dierdorf over John Riggins.
I actually may have made some of these choices because I didn't want it to seem that I was just always going to choose the "glamorous" offensive skill player, though I was tempted to do so.
One thing I did do is that I only chose between players that were in the HOF. I figured I would rely on the HOF voters to at least whittle down the options for me.
I understand, you actually did a great job, I just think Tomlinson's greatness gets overlooked sometimes. All I know is that I worried to death when we had to face Tomilinson but never feared having to go up against Hutchinson.
In reality, maybe a sliding scale needs to be developed. Whereas most positions are graded on a "10", guards can only get a 9, tackles can go to 9.5. running backs can go to 10.5, QBs to 11.
So, on my scale, Sapp is a 10 out of 10 and Martin is a 10 out of 10.5
Forrest Gregg gets a 9.5, the best score he can get, but Bart Starr gets a 10 out of 11 and trumps him
Joe Greene gets a 10 out of 10, but O.J. gets a 10.5 out of 10.5
Dierdorf gets the highest score a guard can get (although he played some tackle too) at 9, while I'll give Riggins a 9.5 out of 10.5 on the RB scale
And Hutchinson gets a full 9 on the guard scale, but Tomlinson gets a 10.5 on the RB scale.
Just playing around ... it's all relative.
Zombo
-
OK Z, what about my choice of Champ Bailey over Donovan McNabb?
I think Bailey is an elite defensive player, a sure fire HOFer. Not so McNabb. He will be given consideration, but would anyone be surprised if he didn't make it?
OK Z, what about my choice of Champ Bailey over Donovan McNabb?
I think Bailey is an elite defensive player, a sure fire HOFer. Not so McNabb. He will be given consideration, but would anyone be surprised if he didn't make it?
I will give Bailey 10 of 10 as a Corner and McNabb a 9 out off 11 as a QB. Maybe a 8.5
Zombo
-
I think Tourma is making some good counter arguments.
Perhaps if they counted "Pancake Blocks" the way they do yards and TDs etc. there could be some comparison.
Your points are well taken....but when you begin to sound like Ghoolie...well, there is a natural resistance to your position, even if I would be otherwise inclined to agree.
Third Most Touchdowns Ever
vs.
Guard
Zombo
--pffffft.
-
Derrick Brooks was the best player in his draft.
-
I think Tourma is making some good counter arguments.
Perhaps if they counted "Pancake Blocks" the way they do yards and TDs etc. there could be some comparison.
Your points are well taken....but when you begin to sound like Ghoolie...well, there is a natural resistance to your position, even if I would be otherwise inclined to agree.
Third Most Touchdowns Ever
vs.
Guard
Zombo
--pffffft.
Zombo said:
Third Most Touchdowns Ever
vs.
Guard
Zombo
--pffffft.
Jan Stenerud 1699 points
VS.
LT 972 points
It's Gip's greatest team argument all over again... except this time I agree with him or at least I did until...
But in trying to define greatness I think this question can be asked, and perhaps answered:
Who was better at doing what his position called for...the running back or the offensive lineman?
Hutchinson HAS been selected more time for being the best at what he does than Tomlinson has.
Yes, it is a big apples and oranges question.
It is like Tourma who argues that because the '78 Steelers OL and DL weighed more than the OL and DL of the '48 Browns that that automatically makes them the better team.
(and I countered with: if that is the criteria then the 2011 Browns would blow away the '78 Steelers because they average 50 more pounds across the board.)
Apples and oranges: Which team dominated its competition more....which player dominated his competition more?
Thats'a great point about the All-Pro selection, but for bringing up the '78 Steelers debate, which you are wrong about
, I'm going to start agreeing with Zombo now... 
Zombo said:
I didn't look them all over, but yes Fouts over Hannah.
I'm not talking just "most valuable" I am talking "Best".
Zombo
First, how 'bout Monk vs. Munoz? I really want to hear your opinion of that one...
Second, for a guy who not arguing "value", you used the word valuable in most of your arguments... even alluded to LT's MVP year...
-
Zombo said:
Third Most Touchdowns Ever
vs.
Guard
Zombo
--pffffft.
Jan Stenerud 1699 points
VS.
LT 972 points
It's Gip's greatest team argument all over again... except this time I agree with him or at least I did until...
But in trying to define greatness I think this question can be asked, and perhaps answered:
Who was better at doing what his position called for...the running back or the offensive lineman?
Hutchinson HAS been selected more time for being the best at what he does than Tomlinson has.
Yes, it is a big apples and oranges question.
It is like Tourma who argues that because the '78 Steelers OL and DL weighed more than the OL and DL of the '48 Browns that that automatically makes them the better team.
(and I countered with: if that is the criteria then the 2011 Browns would blow away the '78 Steelers because they average 50 more pounds across the board.)
Apples and oranges: Which team dominated its competition more....which player dominated his competition more?
Thats'a great point about the All-Pro selection, but for bringing up the '78 Steelers debate, which you are wrong about
, I'm going to start agreeing with Zombo now... Zombo said:
I didn't look them all over, but yes Fouts over Hannah.
I'm not talking just "most valuable" I am talking "Best".
Zombo
First, how 'bout Monk vs. Munoz? I really want to hear your opinion of that one...
Second, for a guy who not arguing "value", you used the word valuable in most of your arguments... even alluded to LT's MVP year...
Jan Stenerud 1699 points
VS.
LT 972 points
It's Gip's greatest team argument all over again... except this time I agree with him or at least I did until...
Thats'a great point about the All-Pro selection, but for bringing up the '78 Steelers debate, which you are wrong about
, I'm going to start agreeing with Zombo now... First, how 'bout Monk vs. Munoz? I really want to hear your opinion of that one...
Second, for a guy who not arguing "value", you used the word valuable in most of your arguments... even alluded to LT's MVP year...
1. Dude, Jan Stenerud is a kicker ... can you absorb that, or do I need to explain?
2. Munoz 9.5 out of 9.5 on the Tackle scale, Monk 9.0 out of 10.0 on the WR scale, Munoz trumps.
3. Is "value" bothering you that much? Tomlinson was the BEST player in the NFL circa 2006 ... does that help?
Z
-
Not picking on you, Z... just tryin' to keep you honest...
If Munoz (the NFL Top 100's highest rated OL at #12) is a 9.5, then I wanna know who your standard-bearing OT is...
And as you probably know LT was #61 on the list... and I don't think he's done anything since the list was set to increase his ranking.
-
Not picking on you, Z... just tryin' to keep you honest...
If Munoz (the NFL Top 100's highest rated OL at #12) is a 9.5, then I wanna know who your standard-bearing OT is...
And as you probably know LT was #61 on the list... and I don't think he's done anything since the list was set to increase his ranking.
Not picking on you, Z... just tryin' to keep you honest...
If Munoz (the NFL Top 100's highest rated OL at #12) is a 9.5, then I wanna know who your standard-bearing OT is...
And as you probably know LT was #61 on the list... and I don't think he's done anything since the list was set to increase his ranking.
Did you read the part where I said on my scale the highest a Tackle could score is a 9.5? I am saying Anthony Munoz is the greatest tackle ever. He has a perfect score on my tackle scale, but I rate tackles on a sightly different scale than skill positions and defenders.
You can't keep me honest if you don't read what I write.
Did they have Steve Hutchinson ranked higher than LT? Does anyone outside of you and Hutchinson's mom (Gipper has conceded that I am probably right) have him annointed the best player in the 2001 draft?
Best. You look back at the draft and you say we passed up on a guard that made all-pro every year and we passed up on a running back with 18,500 yards and 168 TDs (third all time). Which was the Best?
I would argue Brees over Hutchinson as well.
Not because Hutch wasn't the best of all the guards during his era ... but because he was a guard. His greatness is capped below the best of the best who are scoring TD's on Sundays. It just is. A guard that does his job better than anybody who has ever done his job still is not in the same air as Unitas, Rice, Payton, Peyton, etc... Tomlinson reached that rare air. He was, at one point, the best player in the league. Hutch never was.
Zombo
-
In a sense, Zombo's argument may be best illustrated by what team's do in a draft.
In some rating scales, the very best player in certain drafts may in fact be the guard or center. I hear glowing reports about David DeCastro in this year's draft...tht he may in fact be better than anyone at his position (except Andrew Luck).
But no way is an OG like him likely to be picked higher than the middle of the first round now matter how good he may be.
Like I said, I gave MY choices on this list, and they are certainly subject to second guessing....even by me. I tried not to always select the offensive skill player. I would have had many easier choices if I had.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login