Mock Draft Central
-
I don't know about #1 but there are four QBs I'd be happy with at say #33 (or trading up into the back end of the first to get that sweet, sweet fifth year option) and Mahomes is one. I'd rather take him at #33 than any QB at #12.
-
Haha #2 for Romo I don't think the Cowboys could get on the phone to NFL HQ quick enough if that offer came in
Haha #2 for Romo I don't think the Cowboys could get on the phone to NFL HQ quick enough if that offer came in
No, No, No.....by #2 they don't mean they would trade the #2 overall pick for Romo.....what that means is that they are willing to trade and old Johnny Manziel #2 jersey for Romo.
Now, that might be a fair trade.
(Jmz might actually be a better qb pickup than Romo)
-
Matt Miller, Bleacher Report
Browns - Myles Garrett DE
49ers - Mitch Tribusky QB
Bears - Josh Allen QB
Jaguars - Jonathan Allen DL
Titans - Mike Williams WR
Jets - Tim Williams EDGE
Chargers - Ryan Ramczyk OT
Panthers - Leonard Fournette RB
Bengals - Reuben Foster LB
Bills - DeShaun Watson QB
Saints - Derek Barnett DE
Browns - Deshone Kizer QB
Matt Miller, Bleacher Report
Browns - Myles Garrett DE
49ers - Mitch Tribusky QB
Bears - Josh Allen QB
Jaguars - Jonathan Allen DL
Titans - Mike Williams WR
Jets - Tim Williams EDGE
Chargers - Ryan Ramczyk OT
Panthers - Leonard Fournette RB
Bengals - Reuben Foster LB
Bills - DeShaun Watson QB
Saints - Derek Barnett DE
Browns - Deshone Kizer QB
Some changes in his post super bowl mock, notably Allen falling to #10 and Browns taking Deshaun Watson at #12
-
If Allen is there at 10 we are on the phone with the bills offering a lot to move up.
-
-
Might be of interest to some, a 25 min video discussing the latest mocks. One thing I picked up on was the comment if the Bears like the same QB as SF then one of those may trade with the Browns. That would be ideal for us if it was SF as we'd still get Garrett but if we have a similar grade on him AND someone like Allen then I could see us trading with the Bears too as you'd get either one. No idea what it would take for either team to move up to #1 I don't quite understand the charts as of yet
-
One thing we know about the draft is that we don't know everything that will happen. When you go back and look at virtually every mock draft, NOBODY comes close to getting them right (especially in February). One thing we can say with certainty is that SOMEONE will slide to us at #12, and we have to be ready for it. After his surgeries, could Malik Hooker slide a bit? Should we even contemplate taking him knowing that a shoulder injury is difficult to rehab and can be prone to re-injury? What about another defender like Reuben Foster? If Mitch or Watson is on the board, do we risk taking a QB?
I would almost bet that one of these guys projected to be gone will slide to us, and we'll be smack in the middle of a difficult decision.
-
One thing we know about the draft is that we don't know everything that will happen. When you go back and look at virtually every mock draft, NOBODY comes close to getting them right (especially in February). One thing we can say with certainty is that SOMEONE will slide to us at #12, and we have to be ready for it. After his surgeries, could Malik Hooker slide a bit? Should we even contemplate taking him knowing that a shoulder injury is difficult to rehab and can be prone to re-injury? What about another defender like Reuben Foster? If Mitch or Watson is on the board, do we risk taking a QB?
I would almost bet that one of these guys projected to be gone will slide to us, and we'll be smack in the middle of a difficult decision.
I would almost bet that one of these guys projected to be gone will slide to us, and we'll be smack in the middle of a difficult decision.
... a decision further complicated by the phone ringing.
But ultimately a decision which, if we have faith in our board... and we will, will sort itself out.
-
Charlie Cassely's 1.0 is out...
1. Myles Garrett
12. traded to NE for Jimmy G (Pats take Derrick Barnett OLB)
-
If we trade #12 for JG I will be...unimpressed. Particularly with guys like Humphrey and Thomas still on the board. But, I would give him the benefit of the doubt and hope for the best. It would be polarising, no doubt.
Garrett #1 seems more and more likely with every passing day.
-
Charlie Cassely's 1.0 is out...
1. Myles Garrett
12. traded to NE for Jimmy G (Pats take Derrick Barnett OLB)
Charlie Cassely's 1.0 is out...
1. Myles Garrett
12. traded to NE for Jimmy G (Pats take Derrick Barnett OLB)
Interesting, but does trading off #12 fit the analytics model?
-
One thing we know about the draft is that we don't know everything that will happen. When you go back and look at virtually every mock draft, NOBODY comes close to getting them right (especially in February). One thing we can say with certainty is that SOMEONE will slide to us at #12, and we have to be ready for it. After his surgeries, could Malik Hooker slide a bit? Should we even contemplate taking him knowing that a shoulder injury is difficult to rehab and can be prone to re-injury? What about another defender like Reuben Foster? If Mitch or Watson is on the board, do we risk taking a QB?
I would almost bet that one of these guys projected to be gone will slide to us, and we'll be smack in the middle of a difficult decision.
One thing we know about the draft is that we don't know everything that will happen. When you go back and look at virtually every mock draft, NOBODY comes close to getting them right (especially in February). One thing we can say with certainty is that SOMEONE will slide to us at #12, and we have to be ready for it. After his surgeries, could Malik Hooker slide a bit? Should we even contemplate taking him knowing that a shoulder injury is difficult to rehab and can be prone to re-injury? What about another defender like Reuben Foster? If Mitch or Watson is on the board, do we risk taking a QB?
I would almost bet that one of these guys projected to be gone will slide to us, and we'll be smack in the middle of a difficult decision.
if all the scouts/FOs in the top 11 watch film - I can't see Foster sliding to #12.
Very good point about Hooker's injury and being prone to re-injury considering how often Safeties involved with big collisions from being in space.
A guy who is returning to us from injury with fresh legs in 2017 is Des Bryant meaning we might not have to consider a guy like Thomas if we're already with Garrett first overall with young guys like Nassib, Ogbah, Orchard (also returning from injury). This reminds me we might be able to consider an offensive guy at #12 and get back to defense at #33 and via free agency. The draft seems deep in the secondary. Lorenzo Jerome had a great Senior Bowl (causing 3 turnovers) and I'm thinking a small school like St Francis puts him in a bargain round.
-
If we trade #12 for JG I will be...unimpressed. Particularly with guys like Humphrey and Thomas still on the board. But, I would give him the benefit of the doubt and hope for the best. It would be polarising, no doubt.
Garrett #1 seems more and more likely with every passing day.
If we trade #12 for JG I will be...unimpressed. Particularly with guys like Humphrey and Thomas still on the board. But, I would give him the benefit of the doubt and hope for the best. It would be polarising, no doubt.
Garrett #1 seems more and more likely with every passing day.
Not sure why....other than that we all talk about it. No one who counts is paying one moment of attention to what we say on here.
-
Charlie Cassely's 1.0 is out...
1. Myles Garrett
12. traded to NE for Jimmy G (Pats take Derrick Barnett OLB)
Interesting, but does trading off #12 fit the analytics model?
Interesting, but does trading off #12 fit the analytics model?
Funny you should ask...
A link to a PFF analysis was buried in the article, Why We won't trade for Jimmy, that I posted yesterday somewhere around here. The writer's analysis of our thought process in assessing value is about 1/4 of the way down the page.
https://www.profootballfocus.com/pro-3-possible-trade-destinations-for-patriots-qb-jimmy-garoppolo/
-
Interesting, but does trading off #12 fit the analytics model?
Funny you should ask...
A link to a PFF analysis was buried in the article, Why We won't trade for Jimmy, that I posted yesterday somewhere around here. The writer's analysis of our thought process in assessing value is about 1/4 of the way down the page.
https://www.profootballfocus.com/pro-3-possible-trade-destinations-for-patriots-qb-jimmy-garoppolo/
Funny you should ask...
A link to a PFF analysis was buried in the article, Why We won't trade for Jimmy, that I posted yesterday somewhere around here. The writer's analysis of our thought process in assessing value is about 1/4 of the way down the page.
https://www.profootballfocus.com/pro-3-possible-trade-destinations-for-patriots-qb-jimmy-garoppolo/
Good stuff Tour, was a good read as is the article linked in it by Kevin Meers on draft pick value. If you like that sort of thing.....
https://harvardsportsanalysis.wordpress.com/2011/11/30/how-to-value-nfl-draft-picks/
-
Funny you should ask...
A link to a PFF analysis was buried in the article, Why We won't trade for Jimmy, that I posted yesterday somewhere around here. The writer's analysis of our thought process in assessing value is about 1/4 of the way down the page.
https://www.profootballfocus.com/pro-3-possible-trade-destinations-for-patriots-qb-jimmy-garoppolo/
Good stuff Tour, was a good read as is the article linked in it by Kevin Meers on draft pick value. If you like that sort of thing.....
https://harvardsportsanalysis.wordpress.com/2011/11/30/how-to-value-nfl-draft-picks/
Good stuff Tour, was a good read as is the article linked in it by Kevin Meers on draft pick value. If you like that sort of thing.....
https://harvardsportsanalysis.wordpress.com/2011/11/30/how-to-value-nfl-draft-picks/
Yup... and I've read that as well by Kevin Meers, AKA our "Kevin Meers Director of Research and Strategy".
-
So in trade values we currently have in 2017:
#1-3000
#12-1200
#33-580
#52-380
#65-265 (top of the 3rd)
#128-44
#158-29.2
#159-28.8
So theoretically if we want to move up to say #8 (1400) to get Foster we could give up #12 (1200) plus a conditional 3rd rounder from 2018. Or overpay with #12 and #65 this year.
-
So in trade values we currently have in 2017:
#1-3000
#12-1200
#33-580
#52-380
#65-265 (top of the 3rd)
#128-44
#158-29.2
#159-28.8
So theoretically if we want to move up to say #8 (1400) to get Foster we could give up #12 (1200) plus a conditional 3rd rounder from 2018. Or overpay with #12 and #65 this year.
So in trade values we currently have in 2017:
#1-3000
#12-1200
#33-580
#52-380
#65-265 (top of the 3rd)
#128-44
#158-29.2
#159-28.8
So theoretically if we want to move up to say #8 (1400) to get Foster we could give up #12 (1200) plus a conditional 3rd rounder from 2018. Or overpay with #12 and #65 this year.
Per several references on here, the NFL basically no longer uses that Draft pick value system...which I believe was devised by Jimmy Johnson. They say the new Harvard draft value system is used. Others, like Tour who I think is more familiar with it can give you the scoop on that.
-
So is this the one in use now? Inquiring minds are too lazy to google it up.
Drafttek, Walterfootball and NBC still use the older one. http://www.drafttek.com/NFL-Trade-Value-Chart.asp
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