Best Value Picks & Biggest Reaches | Page 2 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Best Value Picks & Biggest Reaches

Outside of Long's off the field issues he tested out great, he would have been the fastest lineman at the combine if not for the two freaks.
 
Cool.

As far as calculating values, there should be mathematical adjustment for 1st round picks taken in the 4th and so on, 'cause that's a greater value than 3rd round pick selected in the 7th, even tho the spread maybe the same. Opposite goes for reaches. ( I did not see Frederick's name? odd.)
 
UFGators said:
Cool.

As far as calculating values, there should be mathematical adjustment for 1st round picks taken in the 4th and so on, 'cause that's a greater value than 3rd round pick selected in the 7th, even tho the spread maybe the same. Opposite goes for reaches. ( I did not see Frederick's name? odd.)
Click to expand...

Yep. I was going to mention the same thing. It's not purely linear. It looks like Shariff Floyd is actually the greatest theoretical value. If he's 22 spots low that means he was #1 on Slimm's board.
 
jim1 said:
According to your list you think that Menelik Watson should have been a late 7th round pick? Wow. I thought that he was easily one of the best OL I saw play in the entire draft. I can't even imagine a guy who played that well and with such upside lasting until the 7th round. He's a bit older, that's the one negative I see and imo he might turn out to be the best RT in the draft, maybe even a LT.
Click to expand...


I wouldn't necessarily say he should've been a 7th round pick, but that's where I had him graded in terms of my interest. In other words, that's where I would've taken him to play right tackle. I don't buy the hype with him. Furthermore, I don't grade offensive lineman high that lack experience. The majority of Watson's pre-draft hype was built upon what was supposed to be outstanding athletic ability before he went to the combine and tested at the bottom of virtually every category. I don't subscribe to the upside, and as I mentioned a long time ago, I didn't like his age.

The real talent to me is found in Cameron Erving and Josue Matias when I study FSU's offensive line.
 
UFGators said:
Cool.

As far as calculating values, there should be mathematical adjustment for 1st round picks taken in the 4th and so on, 'cause that's a greater value than 3rd round pick selected in the 7th, even tho the spread maybe the same. Opposite goes for reaches. ( I did not see Frederick's name? odd.)
Click to expand...


Despite the Cowboys reaching for Frederick, he wasn't one of the top 26 biggest reaches in my opinion. If I had kept going, Frederick's name would've been included along the way. Fact is, there were that many reaches that were bigger.

He was #99 on my big board and Dallas took him at #31 overall, or a score of -68.... which wouldn't make my top 26 reaches.


I grade these value picks and reaches linear because it provides an absolute reference for everyone to look at without me having to split hairs and go into lengthy explanations.

I'd also disagree that a 1st rounder taken in the 4th round is greater value than a 3rd rounder taken in the 7th if the spread is equal. I only had 25 players with 1st round grades to begin with. The talent pool was much more watered down in the 7th round where a kid who I felt had 3rd round talent (Chris Gragg for example) was taken. The talent pool was much closer together in the 4th round.
 
TedSlimmJr said:
I wouldn't necessarily say he should've been a 7th round pick, but that's where I had him graded in terms of my interest. In other words, that's where I would've taken him to play right tackle. I don't buy the hype with him. Furthermore, I don't grade offensive lineman high that lack experience. The majority of Watson's pre-draft hype was built upon what was supposed to be outstanding athletic ability before he went to the combine and tested at the bottom of virtually every category. I don't subscribe to the upside, and as I mentioned a long time ago, I didn't like his age.

The real talent to me is found in Cameron Erving and Josue Matias when I study FSU's offensive line.
Click to expand...

I love how effortlessly he moves at the 2nd level, in a scheme like ours he could even make a good guard as far as I'm concerned.
 
Barrett Jones was drafted just about where he should have in my opinion. I had him #109 overall and he came off the board at #113.

The Rams had a brilliant draft.
 
GoonBoss said:
I don't think it's going to be as big a reach as people think it is.......But I think Barrett Jones was a ****ing steal.
Click to expand...

Way too much hoopla about Dallas messing up the pick. They rated him as a high second rounder and they drafted him at end of 1st. Not every team grades a player the same. I think Frederick will be a fine player , yes they would have been better to trade down but it takes two to tango as Oakland found out
 
Love the list and I had most of those value picks very high too. The only one I had as a great value pick that I didn't see on your list was Kenny Stills. I think he has potential as a WR. I was a little shocked to see Michael Mauti as such a value pick though ... I thought I was the only person on this board that liked him. I think had he not had so many durability concerns he would have gone higher. Mauti is the type of player that may surprise people. Stash him on IR and let him get his body right and you have a good LB by year 2.
 
Ireland had a pretty mediocre draft, IMO. We passed up a lot of superior talent for the guys we took, thanks to his crazy horizontal draft strategy.

Agree with Slimm that the Rams killed it, one of the best drafts in recent years. Austin is probably my least favourite pick of the lot!

Zac Stacy is going to be one of the stars of this draft, in time. And he was a seventh rounder.
 
TedSlimmJr said:
Despite the Cowboys reaching for Frederick, he wasn't one of the top 26 biggest reaches in my opinion. If I had kept going, Frederick's name would've been included along the way. Fact is, there were that many reaches that were bigger.

He was #99 on my big board and Dallas took him at #31 overall, or a score of -68.... which wouldn't make my top 26 reaches.


I grade these value picks and reaches linear because it provides an absolute reference for everyone to look at without me having to split hairs and go into lengthy explanations.

I'd also disagree that a 1st rounder taken in the 4th round is greater value than a 3rd rounder taken in the 7th if the spread is equal. I only had 25 players with 1st round grades to begin with. The talent pool was much more watered down in the 7th round where a kid who I felt had 3rd round talent (Chris Gragg for example) was taken. The talent pool was much closer together in the 4th round.
Click to expand...

Let me step in here as we are dealing with mathematics which is my specialty.

We're talking about standard deviations and such when talking about this. For instance, a guy taken in round 3 who you had projected in round 6, would not be nearly as big of a reach as taking a guy in round 1 who you had projected to go in round 3. In other words, its not just about the number value of how far away a player was taken. There is much more of a difference in talent from round 1 to round 3 than from round 4 to round 6. So you have to be careful about using these numbers to say who was the biggest reach according to your own feelings on the player.

In other words, the difference in your 130th ranked player and your 170th ranked player is much less than the difference in your 10th ranked player and your 50th ranked player. The numerical difference is simply 40 in both cases, however I would say the 50th ranked player going 10th would be a much bigger reach than the 170th ranked player going 130th.

Based on your rankings and not my own, Id say Lemonier was a huge value, perhaps the best value considering where you had him ranked and where he was taken. I too was higher on Lemonier than most, but again that isnt a factor in what his value was....... were using your rankings.

The biggest reach using your rankings was likely still Frederick. I dont know where you had him slotted, you say 2nd round, but unless you had him early to mid 2nd, thats a huge reach at that point. Or no wait...... did Watson go really early? I noticed you had him ranked way down there. Watson is probably still the biggest reach using your rankings, but you see my point about weight of the numbers I hope.

If we went by my rankings, the biggest reach was clearly Geno's Myth, who I had ranked as undraftable.
 
WVDolphan said:
Let me step in here as we are dealing with mathematics which is my specialty.

We're talking about standard deviations and such when talking about this. For instance, a guy taken in round 3 who you had projected in round 6, would not be nearly as big of a reach as taking a guy in round 1 who you had projected to go in round 3. In other words, its not just about the number value of how far away a player was taken. There is much more of a difference in talent from round 1 to round 3 than from round 4 to round 6. So you have to be careful about using these numbers to say who was the biggest reach according to your own feelings on the player.

In other words, the difference in your 130th ranked player and your 170th ranked player is much less than the difference in your 10th ranked player and your 50th ranked player. The numerical difference is simply 40 in both cases, however I would say the 50th ranked player going 10th would be a much bigger reach than the 170th ranked player going 130th.

Based on your rankings and not my own, Id say Lemonier was a huge value, perhaps the best value considering where you had him ranked and where he was taken. I too was higher on Lemonier than most, but again that isnt a factor in what his value was....... were using your rankings.

The biggest reach using your rankings was likely still Frederick. I dont know where you had him slotted, you say 2nd round, but unless you had him early to mid 2nd, thats a huge reach at that point. Or no wait...... did Watson go really early? I noticed you had him ranked way down there. Watson is probably still the biggest reach using your rankings, but you see my point about weight of the numbers I hope.

If we went by my rankings, the biggest reach was clearly Geno's Myth, who I had ranked as undraftable.
Click to expand...



Let me start off by pointing out that the bolded part here is simply inaccurate, WV. The dropoff in talent is most drastic after the first 8-10 elite prospects are taken. The talent pool from from the 11th player or so on my board, all the way to the 50th best player on my board is typically very similar. The same applies to the next 40-50 players, and so on. There's a lot of hair splitting that goes on when distinguishing these prospects from one another.

By the same token, the talent level from round 4 to round 6 is also very similar. The first steep dropoff in talent in any draft is after the best 8-10 players come off the board, not necessarily the first 8-10 picks. The next steepest dropoff in talent is found after the first 150 or so players are taken. The talent pool for the final 100+ players selected extends all the way to the UDFA pool after the top 150, is just as closely together as the talent from 11-50, just less of it (talent). The talent begins to become extremely watered down in this range. You're hoping to find players that can simply make your roster and provide depth in this range.... which is a longshot.

This is why getting a player of 3rd round ability in the 7th round range is MORE valuable than getting a 1st round player in the 3rd round if the expected linear value is the same. A team got a potential starter here in the range where selecting a guy who can even make your roster is a longshot. That's value.

If you go back to Awsi Dooger's comment regarding how according to my board, Sharrif Floyd should be the best value pick simply because he was the #1 player on my board, the explanation I just gave you should answer his question as to why Floyd wasn't the best value pick of the entire draft. It's because the talent pool where Floyd came off was still populated with elite talent. However, Floyd was the best value pick of the 1st round in my opinion. Which is why there's only one player selected in the 1st round that made my top 64 value picks.... it was Sharrif Floyd.

The biggest reach using my rankings was not Travis Frederick. I had a 3rd round grade on Frederick (99th overall) on my board. Fact is, there were probably bigger reaches in the draft that didn't even make my top 26. The reason they didn't make my list is because I had not scouted those players, therefore I can't comment on how big of a reach that selection was. There were players taken that I had never even heard of.... and if you're taking players that I haven't scouted or heard of before, that's saying something. Trust me.


Selection value simply based how they were ranked according to my board is best explained using the absolute difference in a linear fashion that I provided. Asking me who I think are going to be the best pros regardless of where they were selected is an entirely different subject. Corey Lemonier is a fine example.
 
Ted,

I'm surprised you didn't have S Duron Harmon as one of the big reaches. Common belief was that he was a 7th rounder or even UFDA. I came to him late on and posted in the Draft Forum that I couldn't believe this kid wasn't higher on boards or asked to the Combine. I couldn't see the issue with the kid that would have him close to undrafted.

I think I said in the post that he looked at least a fourth rounder to me, but I didn't believe for a minute that any NFL team would take him there - let alone in the third.

I have to say I like him. I think it's awful value in Round 3 though, as nobody would have looked sideways at this kid until at least round 5, more likely 6 or 7. But, when it all shakes out, he could be one of the best safety prospects going into the NFL this year.
 
Fin Thirteen said:
Ted,

I'm surprised you didn't have S Duron Harmon as one of the big reaches. Common belief was that he was a 7th rounder or even UFDA. I came to him late on and posted in the Draft Forum that I couldn't believe this kid wasn't higher on boards or asked to the Combine. I couldn't see the issue with the kid that would have him close to undrafted.

I think I said in the post that he looked at least a fourth rounder to me, but I didn't believe for a minute that any NFL team would take him there - let alone in the third.

I have to say I like him. I think it's awful value in Round 3 though, as nobody would have looked sideways at this kid until at least round 5, more likely 6 or 7. But, when it all shakes out, he could be one of the best safety prospects going into the NFL this year.
Click to expand...


Well, I didn't find Harmon enough of a reach in the 3rd round to make the top 26 reaches. I supposed if I just kept going and listed every single reach in the draft, sure he would've made it at some point. The one's I listed here were what I felt to be the most significant in terms of how they were on my board. Keep in mind, that just because a player was a reach according to this thread, and has a negative number next to it, doesn't mean I necessarily dislike the pick that much. There are other factors to consider.

About a year ago in July, Harmon was actually the #16 safety on my board heading into the season last year, and it's probably safe to give Belichek the benefit of the doubt when it comes to safeties. I don't know of anybody that didn't piss all over his pick of Tavon Wilson last year in the 2nd round with safeties like Brandon Taylor and George Iloka still on the board. Wilson turned out to be a pretty good player.

I agree with you that if he wanted Harmon he could've gotten him later. But if you like the player, take him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom