I find that probability flawed and unknown. Since the Seahawks have been a good team they have proven that every year. I think Russell Okung was the last time they didn't "reach" in the first round. Unless it is a position that is stupid like long snapper, if Miami picked Malcolm Perry in the first round and he turns out to be one of the best quarterbacks of all time, that is a great pick.
Like I said anyway, I dont consider anyone we took to be a reach. So whether or not we agree it exists, it isnt something our team did either way. Maybe I'm just more of a gambler with things or a perfectionist in some ways. Even if I end up with the best player, I'll still regret not getting the player in the most efficient way. In the end that means I'd probably lose more players I like than you (if we were playing GM in the draft) but also have a few gains you wouldnt at times to balance it out over the long haul.
I don't disagree...but if you're confident in your evaluation, you take him. To us it might seem a reach, but we don't know why they're taking players where there taking them. Know what I mean?
But it's not a reach if the guy turns out great. Then it's your evaluators saw what others didn't, and it's a great pick. YMMV
The other thing, as fans we always think, "They could have traded back and gotten him." But this isn't Madden where you can just trade with whoever whenever. Sometimes you take a guy "high" because you believe there's no way he lasts until your next pick...say you're picking 25th in the first, and your next pick is 63 in the second...and no one wants to trade picks with you.
Thanks for that! I have been wanting to watch or read what Dilfer had to say. That was high praise from Dilfer. I am as pumped as ever that we got Tua. I think what has me intrigued the most about Tua is his accuracy and what looked like to be a very catchable ball. I think that hitting a guy in stride can go a long way with YAC, and we have some guys who can take advantage of that. :-)
Like I said, a reach has nothing to do with how a player turns out. You can be an amazing reach. Like if Hurts went #1 and turned out great, it would be a great pick. That said, I'd still argue they were reaching by not trying to acquire the player at a suitable spot. Again, to me a reach is just taking a player earlier than its probable he will be around. Like I said to Dupree, this strategy of drafting will occasionally make you lose out on a player you like sometimes but you will also double up on quality players at others.
What pick do you consider a reach? ...if it is Jackson I can see it, but I can see taking him there also...what was slotted in the general area because of the way the board fell was LB's and WR's and Love the QB.....so trading back might have been the best option but then you do what if someone had come up and Jackson you are left with Cleveland/Wilson at say 21????? Ruiz was overdrafted for a specific need by a specific team so I don't think he was an option at 18. If Lamb fell one more spot that might have made things interesting. I think they had Noah Vowels targeted at 26 the whole time and got lucky someone wanted to move up. He m might have lasted to 39 but I think it is no better than 50-50, and three years from now I think we could very well look back and see him as being a guy that should have been picked top 12 or so.
It's a reach TO YOU because you don't know why that player was picked. The person picking identified things, and they picked them at that spot, when you wouldn't. If you are picking a player higher than others were, because you believe your evaluation is more accurate, then it's not a reach. It's only a reach to an independent observer at the time, or in retrospect, if the evaluation was wrong and the player isn't what they thought he would be. Again, I'm taLking in the context of pick a guy at 18, and someone saying he shouldn't have gone before 26. I'm not talking about say, Dion Jordan. I think someone like Dion Jordan was bad evaluation...or lack of necessary info.
Right, but that definition of "reach" can be applied only with hindsight, after the player has played a certain amount of time in the league. There is also a definition of "reach" that can be applied at the time of the draft, based on pre-draft projections. If for example the Dolphins would've drafted Malcolm Perry (the seventh-rounder from Navy) at #5 overall, would that have been a reach? How do we know? He could light the world on fire and make the Hall of Fame someday. We know because of pre-draft projections.
I don‘t feel like we won the draft nor did we lose, but time will tell. Right now I‘m hoping Rosen and Tua turn out to be really good NFL QB‘s, imagine that.
Yeah, when talking about whether or not a draft was successful you really can't tell until a couple of years down the road. However, if you look at potential, which a draft is mainly about, I think we "won" in that department. All the players the Dolphins chose fit a huge need and have really good potential.
The only pick that really disturbed me was the CB in the 1. round. Besides that all good but not great feeling wise. I think the Ravens did a great job this year like almost every other year.
the only pick that bothered me is Long Snapper. That is just a personal bias of mine. I understand how important that position is. Just can't get over using a pick on a player that if he does a good job, no one should know his name. And the fact that growing up, long snappers were people who failed at other positions. Like Ed Perry. IMO, the thing I like most about this draft is how in sync the Management and the Coaching staff. This draft had a theme and I can see how every player fits. Maybe not Curtis Weaver, however, I can see no reason not to take a flyer on a 6th round pick for a guy who might be a good pass rush type player.
Dude...you and me both.....find a LS you like and pay him a bonus to come to camp as an UDFA...I hate the idea of drafting a LS.....take QB4 to replace Ruddock......or my pick right there would have been Evan Weaver.
Again that is based on your projection, or someone else's projection. Let's say Grier thought he saw something that others didn't see, and projected him there? To you looking at it, it seems a reach, based on your evaluation, or the evaluations of the guys doing projection. Again though, we're not talking about taking a 7th rounder in the first. We are talking about using say 18 on a guy that people had projected to go say 25. That is very different, and reach becomes much more of a personal definition.
I couldn't even mange to bury this the thread about the ten 1 c tiedowns flipping starting QB at 1 am eastern time. But I refuse to surrender!
