PDA

View Full Version : 2009 NFL Draft Reviews


Scott Wright
05-13-2009, 01:28 AM
Hey,

Just wanted to let everyone know that I'll be kicking off the in-depth team-by-team reviews Monday, May 18. There will be a new one every week day.

Matthew Jones
05-13-2009, 01:29 AM
Right on. Is there gonna be an order? Draft order? Alphabetical? None?

Scott Wright
05-13-2009, 01:33 AM
Right on. Is there gonna be an order? Draft order? Alphabetical? None?

No order as usual, just whatever team I feel like doing on any given day.

Gotta keep everyone in suspense and coming back!!! :)

Sveen
05-13-2009, 03:31 AM
Looking forward to it Scott. Enjoy the rest of your time off :)

OneToughGame
05-13-2009, 03:41 AM
After that then you can change this to the "2010 NFL Draft Forum" ;)

Lol. :P

I'm actually really looking forward to your full opinion on Seattle's draft though. Should be a great read.

Yatta!
05-13-2009, 05:42 AM
Good job Scott, I'm really looking forward to these.

hagy34
05-13-2009, 01:42 PM
Can't wait, these are always really good reads.

jkpigskin
05-13-2009, 01:46 PM
Can't wait. Thanks for keeping this site moving!

Manic Depressant
05-13-2009, 02:09 PM
Woohoo, been waiting for these for awhile.

BeerBaron
05-13-2009, 02:17 PM
I was wondering when they were going to come out. Sounds awesome!

Remember, you have to factor in the Jay Cutler trade or else the Bears draft does look a little weak, lol.....

marshallb
05-13-2009, 03:37 PM
I've been looking forward to these and was wondering when they'd be coming out. Should be a good read as always.

Scott Wright
05-17-2009, 11:28 PM
Just made the first one live, you can check it out via the main page.

diabsoule
05-17-2009, 11:31 PM
Can't wait for the C grade going to the Saints, esp. now that Stanley Arnoux is out for the season. Glad the Saints front office did their homework and drafted him over Marcus Freeman.

TitanHope
05-17-2009, 11:42 PM
Hooray! Lookin' forward to the Titans one!

the decider13
05-17-2009, 11:46 PM
Not looking forward to the Broncos one...C at best :(

Strongside
05-18-2009, 12:24 AM
http://img188.imageshack.us/img188/6261/sssssss.png

Front page is totally broken for me Scott. Is this just me?

Edit: works in IE, just not Firefox

Scott Wright
05-18-2009, 01:17 AM
http://img188.imageshack.us/img188/6261/sssssss.png

Front page is totally broken for me Scott. Is this just me?

Edit: works in IE, just not Firefox

Works fine for me and I use FireFox...

OneToughGame
05-18-2009, 01:48 AM
Works fine for me and I use FireFox...

Works for me just fine also.

lionsfan81
05-18-2009, 11:34 AM
Scott, what about releasing 2 a day pleaseeeee. I can't deal with only 1 a day. I've been waiting to read these for weeks!!!

Scott Wright
05-20-2009, 05:08 AM
Put the Buccaneers up on Tuesday and the Jets up Wednesday.

Who's next?

You'll have to stop back to find out! :)

Scott Wright
05-20-2009, 11:37 PM
Oakland is up!

josh07039
05-20-2009, 11:58 PM
Oakland is up!
Guarantee you put more thought into the review than the raiders did in their draft picks.

OneToughGame
05-20-2009, 11:58 PM
Oakland is up!

You know you want to do Seattle next ;)

The Dynasty
05-22-2009, 11:52 PM
Nice write up on the Vikings draft.

49ersfan_87
05-26-2009, 12:56 PM
Fair grade for the 49ers Scott. I think McKillop will become a starter, supposedly the FO really liked this pick. I think he'll be the heir apparent to Spikes. Pascoe could also get some catches in the red zone.

Larry
05-26-2009, 02:21 PM
Solid grade for the Niners. If you told me a few weeks before the draft the Niners would end up with Crabtree and an extra first round pick for next year. I would've thought you were crazy.

Coffee is my sleeper pick, I think he will have an immediate impact.

marshallb
05-26-2009, 04:13 PM
Good review of the Vikings draft, and I agree with the grade, in fact that is the same exact grade I gave them.

HEISMANHERSCHEL
05-29-2009, 04:27 AM
Solid grade for the Niners. If you told me a few weeks before the draft the Niners would end up with Crabtree and an extra first round pick for next year. I would've thought you were crazy.

Coffee is my sleeper pick, I think he will have an immediate impact.

What a good point.


I was not real high on Crabtree, but getting him and another 1st pick is pretty amazing

PossibleCabbage
06-01-2009, 08:44 PM
There will be a new one every week day.

Haven't seen a new one of these posted in a while, is Scott on vacation or something? I mean, I'm not complaining since this is free content (of the highest quality), I'm just interested in reading the rest of these and am wondering when the updates are going to start again.

bam bam
06-02-2009, 01:43 AM
Who do I have to blow to get a draft review around here?

:D

Halsey
06-02-2009, 08:55 AM
I just got an email from Scott. He told me he's abandoning his website, and his duties as king of internet draftaholics, to pursue his dreams of being a premier women's shoe designer. I will be taking over the site following a quick turnover process. Expect to see changes, including premium membership content and funny cat videos.

Scott Wright
06-02-2009, 02:40 PM
Sorry for the lack of new reviews, I had some technical difficulties.

I am back up and running now though and they'll start again on Wednesday.

vinivedivichi
06-04-2009, 04:52 PM
Scott - you put a lot of work into this website, and it's a great resource for all draft related information. However, for the life of me I cannot comprehend why you stretch your draft reviews over months. It really doesn't make any sense to me to stretch the process out, as by the time most of your team draft reviews come out there is little interest in whatever perspective you may have.

For a website that is 100% devoted to the NFL draft, it's a little disappointing that it takes months to come out with team-by-team draft reviews.

As for the Dolphins draft grade, I'll defer to the Dolphins' front office. You reference their strong draft in 2008 as building a foundation, yet I believe you gave that draft a C also.

Scott Wright
06-07-2009, 07:12 PM
Scott - you put a lot of work into this website, and it's a great resource for all draft related information. However, for the life of me I cannot comprehend why you stretch your draft reviews over months. It really doesn't make any sense to me to stretch the process out, as by the time most of your team draft reviews come out there is little interest in whatever perspective you may have.

For a website that is 100% devoted to the NFL draft, it's a little disappointing that it takes months to come out with team-by-team draft reviews.

As for the Dolphins draft grade, I'll defer to the Dolphins' front office. You reference their strong draft in 2008 as building a foundation, yet I believe you gave that draft a C also.

Honestly, I am just trying to draw out interest in the site during the slow months.

As for the Dolphins, I have them a "B" for their effort a year ago.

Scott Wright
06-08-2009, 12:42 AM
Denver Broncos are now up.

44stick
06-08-2009, 04:48 AM
Scott - you put a lot of work into this website, and it's a great resource for all draft related information. However, for the life of me I cannot comprehend why you stretch your draft reviews over months. It really doesn't make any sense to me to stretch the process out, as by the time most of your team draft reviews come out there is little interest in whatever perspective you may have.

For a website that is 100% devoted to the NFL draft, it's a little disappointing that it takes months to come out with team-by-team draft reviews.

As for the Dolphins draft grade, I'll defer to the Dolphins' front office. You reference their strong draft in 2008 as building a foundation, yet I believe you gave that draft a C also.

Pretty much have to agree. Not real interesting reading an analysis 3-4 months after the draft.

BuddyCHRIST
06-08-2009, 04:48 AM
I'm surprised you rated the Broncos that well, considering you didn't seem to be a big fan of any of their picks. Especially considering they essentially spent 3 first rounders.

Yatta!
06-08-2009, 05:04 AM
I think the grade was very kind to the Broncos, especially considering some of the comments.

Cicero
06-08-2009, 06:40 AM
I'm surprised you rated the Broncos that well, considering you didn't seem to be a big fan of any of their picks. Especially considering they essentially spent 3 first rounders.

I think the grade was very kind to the Broncos, especially considering some of the comments.

Agreed.

There is no way I would give the Broncos anything higher than a D, although I can't complain about stealing a top 10 pick from them.

Addict
06-08-2009, 07:51 AM
I think the grade was very kind to the Broncos, especially considering some of the comments.

yeah exactly, I read the entire thing thinking they'd get a C or a D, considering he did like the players, just not the values maybe even a C+, but the B- really baffled me.

He disagreed with every pick, genuinely disliked the trade involving the future first giveaway and still gives the team a passing grade all-round. I just don't get it.

Scott Wright
06-09-2009, 02:22 AM
Honestly, before I started the review I thought I'd be giving Denver a worse grade as well. However, while I was writing I realized that they got a lot of good players, I just don't necessarily agree with their approach. It's not like they were Raider-esque though.

Addict
06-09-2009, 07:05 AM
Honestly, before I started the review I thought I'd be giving Denver a worse grade as well. However, while I was writing I realized that they got a lot of good players, I just don't necessarily agree with their approach. It's not like they were Raider-esque though.

yes but by that definition isn't the grading a bit silly to begin with. It's how you, scott wright the draftnik, feel a certain team has done in the draft as compared to how they could have done. I've always felt like you handed out too many A's and B's, those should be reserved for the teams you feel really went above and beyond in the draft. A draft like the Broncos, which you obviously feel was lackluster, shouldn't receive a passing grade purely based on the fact that they did in fact draft players.

The grade given should be a reflection of how you felt they performed, as compared to how they could have performed.

What you're doing now is what my English teacher back in HS did: give me an assignment that ment writing an essay on any given subject and giving me a list of words that HAVE to be in the essay. Then, if I wrote an essay that had nothing to do with the assignment subject, but still managed to cram the mandatory words in there, he'd still give me a B+ for effort and using the words, even though I completely messed up the assignment.

Getting decent players isn't the point, any team with a scouting departement can do that, it's getting players that can really help you improve, fix glaring holes or solidify a part of your team. I really feel like you should be a little tougher judging these teams.

Shane P. Hallam
06-09-2009, 08:40 AM
yes but by that definition isn't the grading a bit silly to begin with. It's how you, scott wright the draftnik, feel a certain team has done in the draft as compared to how they could have done. I've always felt like you handed out too many A's and B's, those should be reserved for the teams you feel really went above and beyond in the draft. A draft like the Broncos, which you obviously feel was lackluster, shouldn't receive a passing grade purely based on the fact that they did in fact draft players.

The grade given should be a reflection of how you felt they performed, as compared to how they could have performed.

What you're doing now is what my English teacher back in HS did: give me an assignment that ment writing an essay on any given subject and giving me a list of words that HAVE to be in the essay. Then, if I wrote an essay that had nothing to do with the assignment subject, but still managed to cram the mandatory words in there, he'd still give me a B+ for effort and using the words, even though I completely messed up the assignment.

Getting decent players isn't the point, any team with a scouting departement can do that, it's getting players that can really help you improve, fix glaring holes or solidify a part of your team. I really feel like you should be a little tougher judging these teams.

See, I disagree. Every team does add talent through the draft. No team "failed" the draft. Like Denver, they added a lot of talented players. Though they didn't necessarily address the specific needs or approach the draft in the right way, they may have done fairly well. I think a B- is about adequate.

Addict
06-09-2009, 10:08 AM
See, I disagree. Every team does add talent through the draft. No team "failed" the draft. Like Denver, they added a lot of talented players. Though they didn't necessarily address the specific needs or approach the draft in the right way, they may have done fairly well. I think a B- is about adequate.

yes, but adding talent by selecting players is doing the bare basics of drafting. It's like with a test, they don't give you any points for answering every question, they give you points for answering questions correctly. Of course they add talent, every team does, since that's what the draft will always do. There's really no way to get worse by drafting, at worst you don't improve.

If you are to grade this, then by the logic of "they selected players, so they did ok" every team should get an A by default, since every team is bound to select at least one guy, right? The whole point of Scott grading the draft class is that he shares with us how he thinks a team has done with the materials (draft picks in this case) at their disposal. Did they fix holes, get the best player at the best position, did they do what they have to do to maximize the results of the draft?

For instance, a team that did that well enough gets a B, passing grade, nothing spectacular but an overall good effort. An A should be reserved fot the teams that went above and beyond. That's how I feel. A team that neglects needs, reaches for players while better options remain doesn't deserve a B, but should be given a C or less, depending on how bad their choices were and how much they screwed up.

Scott Wright
06-09-2009, 01:47 PM
With my grades I am factoring in a lot of things: Talent, Need, Value, Fit etc.

Also, you have to remember that C = Average, B = Above Average, A = Excellent

I think by almost any standard the Broncos did better than "average", although with that many premium picks the potential was certainly there for them to do much, much better.

the decider13
06-09-2009, 01:50 PM
woo hoo...people startin to come around to my way of thinkin!

Nice review of the Broncos, very fair

Scott Wright
06-10-2009, 03:51 AM
Arizona Cardinals are now live.

fenikz
06-10-2009, 04:06 AM
Arizona Cardinals are now live.
yay, i <3 you

Addict
06-10-2009, 04:13 AM
With my grades I am factoring in a lot of things: Talent, Need, Value, Fit etc.

Also, you have to remember that C = Average, B = Above Average, A = Excellent

I think by almost any standard the Broncos did better than "average", although with that many premium picks the potential was certainly there for them to do much, much better.

exactly my point. They could have done much, much better. They had plenty of high picks and didn't make the most of it, in fact, what they did was the bare minimum; selecting players. Did their team improve so much that you can say "yeah, that draft really helped them forward"? It didn't. That's quite a feat to accomplish with five first-day selections!

Also, the definition of a C being average would indicate that most teams will be given a C grade, as that's what 'average' means. If your most commonly given grade is a B (being 'above average') then that makes no sense what so ever. I just think it's unrealistic to see so many A's and B's flying around. You have to agree with me giving the Broncos a B- after that writeup is strange, unfitting and quite frankly just plain wrong.

Like you said: they could have done so much better. In fact, given their picks I wouldn't even call their draft an average effort, I'd say sub-par: D, maybe a D+. To give them a B based on the fact that that managed to get off their collective asses to select a player (wow) just seems off.

Strawdog
06-10-2009, 03:22 PM
Also, the definition of a C being average would indicate that most teams will be given a C grade, as that's what 'average' means.

Hate to be picky, but that's not what 'average' means. What you described is the mode, which can be considered an average but not always. The mean - also an average - using Scott's current ratings is a high C.

I do agree with you, though that teams should be rated compared to how they could have done because who you don't draft is an important aspect as well.

BuddyCHRIST
06-10-2009, 07:58 PM
I liked the Cardinals draft as well, and got the perfect fit of need and value with Beanie Wells. Teams in the cellar only need to look at the Cards and Chargers of late to see how to turn terrible franchises around.

Wavy77
06-18-2009, 03:22 AM
This is like...one review per week. Still about 20 weeks to go then which sends us all the way to november.

wicket
06-18-2009, 04:40 AM
I liked the Cardinals draft as well, and got the perfect fit of need and value with Beanie Wells. Teams in the cellar only need to look at the Cards and Chargers of late to see how to turn terrible franchises around.

jeah but it feels wrong to give them much credit for that, it was not much of a choice, just luck that he fell that far down the draft. If they did anything else but pick beanie with that pick it would just be an instant d-f grade.
Is it just me or seems grading teams high on obvious picks seem wrong. not saying they dont deserve an a for the individual pick but it shouldnt weigh in that much in the total grade

Geo
06-19-2009, 12:17 PM
The Bengals had a good draft. The end.

Bengals78
06-19-2009, 01:58 PM
The Bengals had a good draft. The end.

You know how much that means to me? A lot. Why? The 05 draft still has a sour taste in my mouth.

Scott Wright
06-23-2009, 12:05 AM
Hey all, I do apologize for how slow the reviews are coming along.

Honestly, I've just been slacking the past week. I really hadn't had an extended break since the draft wrapped up because afterwards I had a freelance writing project for a Dallas Cowboys publication (http://www.maplestreetpress.com/index.cfm?book_id=56). Basically it got to the point where I didn't even want to think about football, let alone write about it...

Thus the week-long vacation that consisted of golf, Tiger Woods 10 on the XBox360 and "The Wire" Season 4. ! :) Oh, I also got my hands on the National Scouting spring report, which I've been getting into. Still no BLESTO yet. Those things are notoriously off-base but it's still useful if for nothing else other than the list of names It's like 14 pages of 40-50 prospects each.

Anyway, I am going to get back in the swing of things and knock out those final reports in the near future so look for new ones soon.

Oh yea, as of now I am tentatively planning to re-launch for 2010 in mid-August.

eaglesalltheway
06-23-2009, 06:22 AM
Hey all, I do apologize for how slow the reviews are coming along.

Honestly, I've just been slacking the past week. I really hadn't had an extended break since the draft wrapped up because afterwards I had a freelance writing project for a Dallas Cowboys publication (http://www.maplestreetpress.com/index.cfm?book_id=56). Basically it got to the point where I didn't even want to think about football, let alone write about it...

Thus the week-long vacation that consisted of golf, Tiger Woods 10 on the XBox360 and "The Wire" Season 4. ! :) Oh, I also got my hands on the National Scouting spring report, which I've been getting into. Still no BLESTO yet. Those things are notoriously off-base but it's still useful if for nothing else other than the list of names It's like 14 pages of 40-50 prospects each.

Anyway, I am going to get back in the swing of things and knock out those final reports in the near future so look for new ones soon.

Oh yea, as of now I am tentatively planning to re-launch for 2010 in mid-August.

Cool and cool. Thanks a bunch Scott! Everyone deserves a break once in a while, and as most of us on here know, it is a year round job. I must say that sounds like a pretty sweet vacation...

DT35
06-25-2009, 04:23 PM
The Wire is sn amazing show. Just sayin'

Go_Eagles77
07-01-2009, 02:54 PM
There's a new review up.

Bob Sanders Dreadlock
07-01-2009, 05:56 PM
How do the Jets get a better grade than Detroit?

Prowler
07-02-2009, 05:25 AM
i like the detroit review. its perfectly in tune with knowledgeable local attitudes.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
07-03-2009, 11:22 AM
Reviews are for entertainment purposes only. If Scott wants a break that should be fine with everyone. Its the dead part of the offseason. Who cares if he didn't review your team. Everyone knows what happened and has their own opinions on how their team did anyway.

I've seen previous earlier Millens draft get great reviews so in 3 years none of these opinions will matter. And nobody will care if you are right or wrong later. Its just a fun thing to discuss to kill time from a very knowledgable draft guru. No need to get upset.

Cigaro
07-12-2009, 10:15 AM
How exactly did the Panthers not live up to preseason expectations last year? I don't remember them as the favorites for the conference title. In my opinion, they easily surpassed expectations.

BlindSite
07-12-2009, 04:05 PM
I tend to agree, after typing arguments till my fingers bled in the NFL forum where we weren't expected to finish ahead of New Orleans and at times Tampa.

Scott Wright
07-13-2009, 09:58 PM
For those who missed it I posted my Carolina Panthers review the other day and I just made the Cleveland Browns and New Orleans Saints reviews live as well.

You can link to them all via the main page of the site.

SenorGato
07-13-2009, 10:48 PM
For those who missed it I posted my Carolina Panthers review the other day and I just made the Cleveland Browns and New Orleans Saints reviews live as well.

You can link to them all via the main page of the site.

Scott, I am not in the understanding of how Alex Mack didn't give the Browns long term benefits.

I guess it's because I rate him the best center to come out since Mangold, but the Browns have just potentially given themselves a dominant LT-LG-C trio with the oldest being the 29 year old LG. That improves pass protection, the running game, and the most important unit on the offense. How is that not building for the long term?

I can see them blowing it on not getting someone like Crabtree in the top 5, but honestly it wasn't THAT appetizing to be picking in the top 10 in this draft unless you caught a few breaks. They still have Edwards and Wimbley, and after Gholston I doubt Mangini was dying to have to go through sitting through the crap that comes with having to develop a top 5 pick at OLB instead of having him become an immediate star as all top 5 picks should be.

Even going with Raji...one of the like 4-5 guys I liked in the top 10...would have been bad because 1. they have Rogers and 2. there is no need to piss Rogers off by drafting his successor already.

Basically, I buy that the draft value chart got thrown out the door last year. It was too meh of a draft and theres just too much money given to these young guys.

In short:

1. They did alot by getting a top C prospect for their long term fortunes...IMHO.

2. Last years OK at best draft along with tons of money going to top picks forced the draft value chart to be thrown out.

I AM meh on their picks after the 2 WRs in round 2 and James Davis. Maiava and Veikune are OK, but not blow you away impressive.

Sveen
07-14-2009, 05:21 AM
After reading the review C- seems to be the correct grade. Good job on the Saints Scott.

wicket
07-14-2009, 05:32 AM
I think the saints grade is somewhat high but the review was pretty spot on

Sveen
07-14-2009, 06:32 AM
Compared to everyone else I also think it's a little bit high, but considering what we had going into draft weekend I think we did a good job. Too bad that Arnoux had to get injured on the first day of mini camp though.

quincyyyyy
07-14-2009, 01:59 PM
I would have to respectfully disagree with Scott about the Alex Mack trade. Why pay a crap load for a rookie in a draft with a lot of parity when you can get what will probably be a very good center for your franchise without paying through the nose. Just on those facts alone the trade was worth it.

However, the Browns got a second round pick and three veterans. I can't speak about Brett Ratliff, but as a Cowboys fan I have seen quite a bit from Kenyon Coleman and Abe Elam. Both are blue collar players and have great motors. They may never be stars but they'll make your team better. I think the Browns did very well for themselves with that trade

Anyhow, when is the Cowboys review going up?

wonderbredd24
07-14-2009, 03:11 PM
The Browns draft is an enormous wait and see, but consider the folllowing.

At the end of the day, the Browns got 7 players in exchange for 5th pick. You can certainly argue the value of the trade, but I think you were dead on in saying they took the best deal offered. Aaron Curry was off the board and at that point, the Browns did not think anyone was worth 5th pick. I can't really disagree with that aside from the possible exception of Michael Crabtree. Historically speaking, getting that many players for one almost always favors the team that took the huge package.

At the time of the pick, I was actually pulling for the Browns to take Michael Oher and have the best set of tackles in football, but I absolutely love the Alex Mack pick. Love it. The Browns are in a division with Kelly Gregg, Haloti Ngata, and Casey Hampton. Having a center that can anchor against those guys is absolutely essential and if Mack can do that and maybe make a Pro Bowl or few, 21st pick looks like a deal.

Brian Robiskie is exactly what you want in a #2 receiver and it was clear he would not be there at 50.

Mohammed Massaquoi was sort of an odd pick at the time, but if he can develop into a solid contributor, the Browns have an extremely talented trio of receivers and they really did need that much receiver help. I disagree with your assertion that he could fall that far in the depth chart. I think Robiskie and Massaquoi will end up as the #2 and #3 receiver short of an absolutely terrible camp by someone. The addition of David Patten could prove invaluable as he is a coach on the field and a great veteran presence who has embraced his role as being a guy who wants to teach them how to be pros.

David Veikune, at the time of the pick, was downright confusing. I agree that he was a reach. It was interesting to find out later that Bill Parcells was desperately hoping he would fall to the Dolphins and while his workout numbers seem average, consider his cone drill and 10-20 yard shuttle. He actually has a solid burst even if he can't run a good 40... when will he ever need to? On top of that, he is ridiculously strong and intelligent. It will be interesting to see how he works out, especially since Mangini is also considering using him as an ILB in certain situations. Obviously this would not be for passing situations.

The Maiava pick was flat out bewildering. I did not like it. I still do not really get it. I was hoping and praying for Chip Vaughn or David Bruton at the time. I hope this kid does become something worthwhile, but the fit is iffy at best here.

I loved round 6 and supposedly, the Browns are quietly very happy with James Davis already. Should be interesting to see what he can do. Francies and Carey are good fits for what Mangini wants to do... should be interesting to see where they fit, especially when you consider just how many corners the Browns currently have. In addition to Francies and Carey, they also have Eric Wright, Brandon McDonald, Corey Ivey, and Hank Poteat. Eric Wright should be the #1 corner, but after that it's up for grabs.

keylime_5
07-14-2009, 03:48 PM
The big thing about the NY/CLE trade wasn't just that we traded down and added two new starters and a backup QB....we happened to save millions of dollars and got perhaps a future pro bowl center in a draft where there probably wasn't much difference between the players taken in the top 5 and the players taken in the late first round. The money saved by moving down from 5 to 21 might mean the difference between being able to resign a stud player or signing a big name free agent in the future or not.

As of right now I think that was a very good trade for all parties involved and both Cleveland and NY fans should be really really excited about what their team did. Of course that will all change as the players excel, bust, or whatever down the line, but as of right now the value is right.

keylime_5
07-14-2009, 03:52 PM
...and as far as Veikune it looks like the Browns plan to use him eventually at LILB in the mold of Tedy Bruschi - but he will play a lot of OLB early in his career at the very least.

Scott Wright
07-16-2009, 06:16 PM
Just made the Philadelphia Eagles live.

bhyg
07-18-2009, 05:42 PM
I can't beileive that the nyj would get a draft rating like that with only three picks. It is a joke. Three draft picks? 1, 3, & 6? Come on, be real. I've lost a lot of respect for your analytical skills.

regoob2
07-18-2009, 05:57 PM
I can't beileive that the nyj would get a draft rating like that with only three picks. It is a joke. Three draft picks? 1, 3, & 6? Come on, be real. I've lost a lot of respect for your analytical skills.
No one cares.

bhyg
07-18-2009, 06:08 PM
No one cares.

Of course we do. ou do too. You are reading and commenting on this.

If we didn't care then no one would read this. Is it important...not in the grand scheme of things, but if Scott wants people to come to the site then, IMO, he has to do a better job than that review.

It's his site. People want to read his opinion. I want to read is opinion. If you don't then don't, that's o.k I personally don't think he put much thought into that review...so I commented about it. Read the beginning post to this thread and see how many people were excited about getting a football fix during the slow time...and about something they were interested in (namely Scott's opinion about the draft).

Scott Wright
07-18-2009, 11:34 PM
I can't beileive that the nyj would get a draft rating like that with only three picks. It is a joke. Three draft picks? 1, 3, & 6? Come on, be real. I've lost a lot of respect for your analytical skills.

The Raiders had seven picks, should they have gotten a better grade than the Jets?

New York didn't have a lot of picks but they made the ones they did have count in a big way.

In fact, I think the Jets landing Mark Sanchez might have been the best pick in the entire draft when you consider his talent, how little they had to give up in that trade, their desperate need for a quarterback and overall current situation. That is why the Jets got such a good grade despite only making three selections.

scottyboy
07-18-2009, 11:42 PM
Of course we do. ou do too. You are reading and commenting on this.

If we didn't care then no one would read this. Is it important...not in the grand scheme of things, but if Scott wants people to come to the site then, IMO, he has to do a better job than that review.

It's his site. People want to read his opinion. I want to read is opinion. If you don't then don't, that's o.k I personally don't think he put much thought into that review...so I commented about it. Read the beginning post to this thread and see how many people were excited about getting a football fix during the slow time...and about something they were interested in (namely Scott's opinion about the draft).

have you ever heard the saying:

"quality over quantity"?

I'll take the possible franchise QB over a couple of special teamers thanks.

Scott Wright
07-19-2009, 12:06 AM
By the way, I posted the Baltimore Ravens and Chicago Bears reviews today.

BeerBaron
07-19-2009, 12:33 AM
No way the Bears would have approached that grade if they had kept that first rounder.....I don't think anyone they could have gotten with that pick or next years first will have the type of impact Cutler will.

For such a QB starved team over the past...i dunno....50+ years, this move is already such a great success.

gpngc
07-19-2009, 07:54 AM
The Raiders had seven picks, should they have gotten a better grade than the Jets?

New York didn't have a lot of picks but they made the ones they did have count in a big way.

In fact, I think the Jets landing Mark Sanchez might have been the best pick in the entire draft when you consider his talent, how little they had to give up in that trade, their desperate need for a quarterback and overall current situation. That is why the Jets got such a good grade despite only making three selections.

Really.

The Jets getting Sanchez WITHOUT giving up 2010 1 was the best move we've seen in years. Plus the entire world knows Shonn is gonna be good. All that team needs is a couple of receivers. You cannot say anything about moving up for a franchise QB which is exactly what MS is.

bored of education
07-19-2009, 10:17 AM
When can I expect the C grade the Chiefs will get ;)

regoob2
07-19-2009, 11:45 AM
No way the Bears would have approached that grade if they had kept that first rounder.....I don't think anyone they could have gotten with that pick or next years first will have the type of impact Cutler will.

For such a QB starved team over the past...i dunno....50+ years, this move is already such a great success.
We really did get great value from every pick.

cvv84
07-19-2009, 12:33 PM
I can't beileive that the nyj would get a draft rating like that with only three picks. It is a joke. Three draft picks? 1, 3, & 6? Come on, be real. I've lost a lot of respect for your analytical skills.

Normally I would agree with you on the only have 3 selections. I tend to lean towards more quanity because it gives you a greater chance on hitting on your prospects. But when you look at how little the Jets had to give up to move all the way up to the 5th overall pick and potentially land their franchise QB you have to take notice.

Not to mention that the Jets traded a 5th round pick and a 2010 conditional pick for Lito Sheppard.

keylime_5
07-19-2009, 01:12 PM
If Sanchez turns out to be a great perennial pro bowler that's one thing. Even if he is, I don't think the Jets have much of a chance at going down in history as having had the best draft of 2009 with only 3 picks. How many teams have had the most successful drafts of the year with that many picks? Likely zero. Shonn Greene will be good, but he's not a young back and his career won't last as long as an average RB's, which is very short in itself. So at most it looks like 2 starters, maybe 3, with one of those starters likely not having a very long career. I think a lot of teams will do better than that. I think the Jets will be hurting in the depth department in the long run...you build teams through the draft, not just add starters, and they missed in that area. Needless to say I think you should have at least 6 or 7 picks in any draft regardless.

Sniper
07-19-2009, 04:12 PM
Not to mention that the Jets traded a 5th round pick and a 2010 conditional pick for Lito Sheppard.

They drastically overpaid for a corner who lost his nickel job to Joselio Hanson and routinely got toasted? Well, if that doesn't make their ranking shoot up, I don't know what will.

cvv84
07-19-2009, 04:19 PM
They drastically overpaid for a corner who lost his nickel job to Joselio Hanson and routinely got toasted? Well, if that doesn't make their ranking shoot up, I don't know what will.

He's not really making top dollar and to get a guy who can give you 3 or 4 INTs a year as your second CB is pretty valuable. He was a 2 time pro bowler when healthy. Its the value at which they got him at.

Sniper
07-19-2009, 05:23 PM
He's not really making top dollar and to get a guy who can give you 3 or 4 INTs a year as your second CB is pretty valuable. He was a 2 time pro bowler when healthy. Its the value at which they got him at.

It's pretty horrid value considering the way he played last year. DBs are the stars of Jim Johnson's defense, and Lito was atrocious last year. He continually got torched, didn't wrap up well, and looked lost and confused. Sure, if he can regain his past form, it's a good deal. However, you're getting too caught up in the INT numbers and not looking at how shoddy his coverage was last year.

If you play the Cowboys, though, he's pretty much a lock for an INT.

NSxibO4YYhc&feature=related

Sex.

JT Jag
07-19-2009, 06:40 PM
When are you going to get around to the Jaguar review, Scott?

I honestly think it might go down as the team's best draft in franchise history.

bhyg
07-19-2009, 07:57 PM
The Raiders had seven picks, should they have gotten a better grade than the Jets?

New York didn't have a lot of picks but they made the ones they did have count in a big way.

In fact, I think the Jets landing Mark Sanchez might have been the best pick in the entire draft when you consider his talent, how little they had to give up in that trade, their desperate need for a quarterback and overall current situation. That is why the Jets got such a good grade despite only making three selections.

All I'm saying is that your grade of Excellent is a bit out of whack. I won't talk about the fact that the nyj had only a couple of picks a couple of years ago also...but you build a team through the draft. They needed more than just a QB.

Sanchez might have talent, but he isn't a "can't miss". He can't make all the throws. His arm strength is worse then most of the starting QB's in the NFL...so by that standard his arm strength is below average.

The nyj might have helped themselves but what I see at this time is a QB who will fight for a starting spot and a third string RB and a 6th rounder. That wouldn't get an "A" from me. JMO. Sorry if I've caused a bit of a stir. I didn't mean too. Let's move on.

quincyyyyy
07-21-2009, 09:48 AM
I think some people will be surprised how many of the Cowboys 12 draftees will make the team. Based on mini-camp performances and need all of our draftees from up to and including round 6 will probably make the team. It is only our two seventh rounders that are on the bubble.

scottyboy
07-21-2009, 10:28 AM
All I'm saying is that your grade of Excellent is a bit out of whack. I won't talk about the fact that the nyj had only a couple of picks a couple of years ago also...but you build a team through the draft. They needed more than just a QB.

Sanchez might have talent, but he isn't a "can't miss". He can't make all the throws. His arm strength is worse then most of the starting QB's in the NFL...so by that standard his arm strength is below average.

The nyj might have helped themselves but what I see at this time is a QB who will fight for a starting spot and a third string RB and a 6th rounder. That wouldn't get an "A" from me. JMO. Sorry if I've caused a bit of a stir. I didn't mean too. Let's move on.

you do know that this is most likely Thomas Jones' last season as a jet. him or LWash. Greene will be the #2 back, if not starter on that team next year. The draft is hardly a "what's gonna help next year".

damn, look at me, a Giants fan arguing for the Jets. shoot me now

bhyg
07-21-2009, 01:58 PM
you do know that this is most likely Thomas Jones' last season as a jet. him or LWash. Greene will be the #2 back, if not starter on that team next year. The draft is hardly a "what's gonna help next year".

damn, look at me, a Giants fan arguing for the Jets. shoot me now

It's possible, but if they stay he would again be a #3. So the point is he isn't anything special. If he becomes a starter you can bet they will be looking to upgrade the position. I'm not saying he's bad but he's not an "A" draft pick. That is my point. Nothing more.

scottyboy
07-21-2009, 08:13 PM
It's possible, but if they stay he would again be a #3. So the point is he isn't anything special. If he becomes a starter you can bet they will be looking to upgrade the position. I'm not saying he's bad but he's not an "A" draft pick. That is my point. Nothing more.

wait, if he becomes a starter they'll look for an upgrade? how's that make sense? like he can't make it as a successful RB in the NFL? why? you gave no reasoning. I think Greene's a perfect replacement for the aging Thomas Jones.

MidwayMonster31
07-21-2009, 08:46 PM
Rex Ryan will probably want to run the ball on offense. There's nothing wrong with using different looks in the running game. Look at what teams like the Giants or the Titans did with using multiple running backs.
I always look at how teams use their picks in the draft (trades or RFA). Anytime, you could get 3 potential starters with those picks (Greene, Lito Sheppard and Matt Slauson) and a potential franchise quarterback, that's a successful draft in my book.

Scott Wright
07-25-2009, 09:09 PM
Jacksonville Jaguars are up.

JT Jag
07-25-2009, 11:25 PM
Interesting review, Scott. I understand your viewpoint about Cox, but I can't help but think that Gene Smith wouldn't have drafted him there if he didn't have proprietary information that other teams were looking into drafting him earlier than thought.

Theoretically speaking, what letter grade would you give to the Jaguars if all the other prospects project as you expect and Cox develops into a better than solid, 5+ year starter for the Jaguars?

Scott Wright
07-25-2009, 11:48 PM
Interesting review, Scott. I understand your viewpoint about Cox, but I can't help but think that Gene Smith wouldn't have drafted him there if he didn't have proprietary information that other teams were looking into drafting him earlier than thought.

Theoretically speaking, what letter grade would you give to the Jaguars if all the other prospects project as you expect and Cox develops into a better than solid, 5+ year starter for the Jaguars?

I struggled a bit with what grade to give the Jaguars and down the line I could see them moving up to a B+ / A- or down to a C. I think the Monroe and Britton picks will work out long-term but they need to hit on Knighton, Cox and at least one of those wide receivers.

The Jags class offers some potential but if I were a betting man I'd put my money on their grade going down as time passes.

Cicero
07-27-2009, 01:15 AM
With my grades I am factoring in a lot of things: Talent, Need, Value, Fit etc.

Also, you have to remember that C = Average, B = Above Average, A = Excellent

I think by almost any standard the Broncos did better than "average", although with that many premium picks the potential was certainly there for them to do much, much better.

Honestly, before I started the review I thought I'd be giving Denver a worse grade as well. However, while I was writing I realized that they got a lot of good players, I just don't necessarily agree with their approach. It's not like they were Raider-esque though.

The Raiders had seven picks, should they have gotten a better grade than the Jets?

New York didn't have a lot of picks but they made the ones they did have count in a big way.

In fact, I think the Jets landing Mark Sanchez might have been the best pick in the entire draft when you consider his talent, how little they had to give up in that trade, their desperate need for a quarterback and overall current situation. That is why the Jets got such a good grade despite only making three selections.

This seems to be kind of contradictory. You say the Broncos could have done "much much more" but "they got a lot of good players" even though you said you didn't agree with their approach so they get a B-. You can't turn around and throw the quantity factor out when you go to the Jets if that's one of your justifications for the Broncos getting a B-.

I didn't agree with your Broncos analysis and I thought you should have focused more on what they could/should have done and less on the quantity of players they got. I have no problem with your Jets grade, but quantity of players has to factor into your grade for either everyone or no one.

Scott Wright
07-28-2009, 04:47 AM
Just posted the New York Giants.

Big_Pete
07-28-2009, 03:26 PM
Just posted the New York Giants.

Hi Scott, good analysis.

I am curious on one thing. Purely from the point of view of the draft, what would the Giants have had to do in the draft to get an A or A+?

They didn't have many needs and got awesome value at mostly need positions (38, 35, 45, 67, 87, 71 and 89 on your final rankings in the first 5 rounds). The only thing they didn't do was trade for veteran WR. But that comes into grading the offseason as a whole, not grading the draft itself.

You mention the Giants got great value in the draft and isn't getting value for draft picks what it is all about?

I am not intending to be critical, I am more curious as to the thought processes behind your grade. Is an A like your elite grade, really tough to get?

quincyyyyy
07-29-2009, 11:05 PM
Been waiting 3 months for the Cowboys review...

Scott Wright
07-31-2009, 03:10 AM
Been waiting 3 months for the Cowboys review...

Dallas is coming soon...

I just posted the Green Bay Packers review.

D-Unit
07-31-2009, 03:47 AM
Dallas is coming soon...

I just posted the Green Bay Packers review.
Every day I look for it and every day it's not there. :(

I'll be very surprised if you give them anything above a C. I hope you consider the moves they made (or didn't make for that matter) and not just the picks they ended up with. I thought Jerry got too cute and missed out on choice opportunities.

Scott Wright
07-31-2009, 07:42 AM
Every day I look for it and every day it's not there. :(

In some ways that's the idea! :)

The San Diego Chargers review is now live as well.

quincyyyyy
07-31-2009, 09:04 AM
Dallas is coming soon...

I just posted the Green Bay Packers review.

yey! :D

.....

quincyyyyy
07-31-2009, 09:05 AM
Every day I look for it and every day it's not there. :(

I'll be very surprised if you give them anything above a C. I hope you consider the moves they made (or didn't make for that matter) and not just the picks they ended up with. I thought Jerry got too cute and missed out on choice opportunities.

What opportunities are you referring to?

I thought Jerry did a nice job filling some holes on defense and made some interesting picks in the process like Buehler. And if 3 days of training camp is any indication, ILB Jason Williams, SS Mike Hamlin, OLB Brandon Williams, and OLB Victor Butler were all great picks. ILB Stephen Hodge has been out with a minor injury, but according to OTA's he did very well when asked to cover. I think we'll end up getting a lot of good players from this draft.

D-Unit
07-31-2009, 12:53 PM
What opportunities are you referring to?

I thought Jerry did a nice job filling some holes on defense and made some interesting picks in the process like Buehler. And if 3 days of training camp is any indication, ILB Jason Williams, SS Mike Hamlin, OLB Brandon Williams, and OLB Victor Butler were all great picks. ILB Stephen Hodge has been out with a minor injury, but according to OTA's he did very well when asked to cover. I think we'll end up getting a lot of good players from this draft.
At this point, any suggestion I make would be based on hypothetical situations. We drafted 12 guys. Do we have room on our 53 man roster to add 12 guys? All while missing out on top OL and DL talent? In fact, outside of reaching on a guard in Round 3, who is out for the year, we failed to establish any kind of depth on the OL and DL. If Dallas sustains an injury anywhere along the OL and DL our depth is completely incapable. We saw how bad the OL was without Kosier. ...and Kosier was/is our worst OL starter. Imagine if that's Flozell, Gurode, Davis or Columbo... what do we have? It's ugly. Even if you move Davis to LT like they have him practicing in training camp (which scares the dickens outta me). Same can be said about the DL. It's ugly and we still don't have a true NT and Marcus Spears still sucks and is still our starting DE. The avoidance of a true 3-4 NT has hurt us in the past and it will hurt us again. Ratliff is better suited at DE. He gets pushed back against the run so badly, it's disgusting.

You mention Williams and Butler having good camps, but that's just not entirely true. BTB has been blogging the training camp really well and nothing really has stood out other than Butler looking more athletic and active than B.Williams.

...and remember how Bobby Carpenter tore up training camp last year? Gotta take what you read with a little grain of salt. Similar to Carp last year, I don't expect Butler and Williams will get a lot of playing time.

As for J.Williams.... they said this: It's early, but I'm still waiting on Jason Williams to make a few plays. I heard all about his athleticism but it hasn't shown up yet. But, give him some time, he's a rookie learning a new position and it's only been a few practices.

So before we go hyping up our rookies in training camp, let's hone our homerism aside and look at things realistically.

- We traded OUT of round 2, in order to gain 13(14?) picks on Day 2. We traded around some and ended up with just 12. Ha. "Just" 12. *doh*

- We used our best picks on Day 2 (Rounds 3/4) on minimal impact players. While we could have used picks to trade UP or even just stayed where we were in Round 2 and picked up much better talent at bigger key positions.

- We drafted a big reach on Robert Brewster with the 11th pick in Round 3. Most had him pegged at earliest as a 5th rounder. I'm really curious to see what Scott has to say about him as he listed him as a "Mid-rounder", #15 in his OT rankings. But suffice to say... he's already out for the season, so a replacement is already going to be needed. Which only points towards bust status.

- We drafted 2 Back up Linebackers in Round 4? Why? You find those in Undrafted FA... and we already might have in a guy (Steve Octavien) who showing better things than those 2 we drafted in Round 4.

- Oh yay! A kicker! Not like we already had a Pro Bowl kicker and punter on the roster. Let's see if we can get the triple whammy and try to draft a Pro Bowl Kicker Offer. gah. There goes another precious roster spot.

Can't really argue with the late round picks because you can never really expect much past Round 4. Anything after that is bonus. I think we might've hit on more than a couple... then again with 7 picks from Round 5 on, how can you NOT whiff on more than a couple. 7 picks! Most teams had that many picks in the entire draft. We had that many in the last 3 rounds. Hooray for training camp fodder. Stephen Hodge, John Phillips, Manuel Johnson... I'm talking to you.

Yeah, trading out of Round 2 and passing up on names like William Beatty, Jarron Gilbert, Andy Levitre, Phil Loadholt, Sean Smith, William Moore, Fili Moala, Paul Kruger, Sherrod Martin, Sen'Derrick Marks, Alex McGee, David Veikune might sound great to some Cowboys fans like you, but for this Cowboys fan, I have nothing but a sour, rancid taste in my mouth.

Missed opportunities you say? Nah... we didn't have any of those. :/

How about Rey Maualuga falling and falling and falling... We could've made a a better move than trading OUT of Round 2 and not even picking up a future pick in the process.

http://blogs.nfl.com/2009/04/25/cowboys-jones-moves-down-for-better-value-on-day-2/
"Sources inside the Cowboys organization tell me the reason Jerry Jones opted not to pick at 51 is because all of the players at the Cowboys’ positions of need were taken....

Well Jerry... not like you didn't have the ammo to make something happen. Pitiful execution of strategy. Pitiful draft. ...and most likely another disappointing season ahead. The competition around got a lot tougher while the Cowboys took a big step back. 6-8 win season ahead. Hope you likey. At least Wade will be out as HC.

princefielder28
07-31-2009, 01:09 PM
Dallas is coming soon...

I just posted the Green Bay Packers review.

Good work on the Packers' review. You're higher on day two than i am but hopefully you're right.

KCJ58
07-31-2009, 04:00 PM
how many teams are left?

Scott Wright
08-01-2009, 11:26 AM
The Cincinnati Bengals review is up.

Scott Wright
08-05-2009, 06:02 AM
I just posted by Dallas Cowboys review, which I know some of you have been waiting for. :)

quincyyyyy
08-05-2009, 09:35 AM
I just posted by Dallas Cowboys review, which I know some of you have been waiting for. :)

Haha thanks. I might have given us a B-. Yeah there probably aren't going to be a lot of starters, but I don't think there are going to be a lot of misses either if the first week of TC is any indication, although we won't know anything about Brewster for about a year.

You were right about Mike Hamlin, he has looked like arguably our best pick so far. With Sensebaugh and Ken Hamlin already on the team coaches will have to think of ways to get this kid on the field. For some reason we took a lot of criticism for taking Butler that early, but if there is one player who might prove to be a better pick than Hamlin it is him. Butler has been making plays on a consistent basis since he has gotten to training camp, and will be a great third down pass rusher this year or next.

quincyyyyy
08-05-2009, 10:05 AM
And one more thing I would like to add on to the post above. I think Jason Williams will be the wild card. If he develops a 2 or so years down the road, he could be a steal. If he doesn't a C+ might be a good grade. Right now he is still raw and needs to adjust to the mental aspect of the game.

Scott Wright
08-05-2009, 11:45 AM
Kansas City Chiefs are now live as well.

therock6000
08-05-2009, 01:33 PM
I think C+ is pretty generous for the 'boys...

And I agree with D-U...this will pretty much be a forgotten draft 4 or 5 years from now...

D-Unit
08-05-2009, 02:27 PM
I think C+ is pretty generous for the 'boys...

And I agree with D-U...this will pretty much be a forgotten draft 4 or 5 years from now...
But the first week of training camp is any indication.... haha.

Post more in our team forum, you bum. Not too many guys still rock join dates from 2004, you ole grizzly vet.

DoughBoy
08-05-2009, 11:40 PM
Scott if I dont get the Titans review soon I may **** bricks......



J/K great job thus far, I really appreciate the time you put into these.

scottyboy
08-05-2009, 11:54 PM
Scott if I dont get the Titans review soon I may **** bricks......



J/K great job thus far, I really appreciate the time you put into these.

You got Britt and McCourty.

grade: A+++++++++/win/epic real life win.

DoughBoy
08-05-2009, 11:58 PM
You got Britt and McCourty.

grade: A+++++++++/win/epic real life win.

This post gives me hope

scottyboy
08-06-2009, 12:00 AM
This post gives me hope

it also gave me an erection. if you didn't have Kerry Collins, I'd so root for the Titans

Scott Wright
08-06-2009, 03:54 AM
I think C+ is pretty generous for the 'boys...

It would have been considerably lower if not for the Williams trade but I really like that deal.

wicket
08-06-2009, 09:48 AM
I think C+ is pretty generous for the 'boys...


still dont get how my saints got a B+, B- was the absolute maximum that I expected but a C+ would be what i had in mind

diabsoule
08-06-2009, 09:52 AM
it also gave me an erection. if you didn't have Kerry Collins, I'd so root for the Titans

They have Vince Young too...

D-Unit
08-06-2009, 03:03 PM
It would have been considerably lower if not for the Williams trade but I really like that deal.
The grade was fair. I'm glad you considered Roy in your grade because many other places overlook that fact when grading the Cowobys' draft. I think there are pros and cons to the situation. He's talented, ready and proven. On the other side, he's expensive, prone to lapses in concentration, moody and has had his fair share of injuries in his young career. But if healthy and focused he helps the Cowboys "now". I'd be lying if I said I was pleased with his connection with Romo in training camp. So far they've failed to gel, but that's what TC is for... to work things out.

So much of this draft depends on the impact that these guys will provide off the depth chart and on special teams. I agree that there weren't many starting spots up for grabs, so the philosophy to build depth was sound. I just had hoped going in that they would've addressed the depth in the trenches with more focus. Do you agree or disagree?

I know they looked at guys like Max Unger, Louis Delmas, Patrick Chung and Jeremy Maclin (surprise surprise), but do you know if they looked at any other players with as much intent? Gosselin had them mocked taking Andy Levitre at 51, but he was on the board and in fact was the Bills pick at 51 after we traded it to them. So I don't know how much they really liked Levitre or just put out a smoke screen that Gosselin bit on.

I feel like they reached just a little bit with Jason Williams, but I know he was climbing draft boards. They brought in Jarron Gilbert and interviewed him several times throughout the process. I feel like they got burned when he was drafted right before our pick. But apparently there are reports that Williams was their target all along no matter what and actually considered taking him at 51. Do you buy that? Do you think Williams would've been there at the Brewster pick (11th pick in rnd 3)?

Speaking of Brewster, you mentioned that he would've been available in other rounds if they had waited. When you scouted him, did you project him as a better Guard or Tackle in the NFL?

Drafting 2 OLBs in Round 4... spending to just to spend? Or was that actually a wise calculated move?

quincyyyyy
08-06-2009, 11:06 PM
Speaking of Brewster, you mentioned that he would've been available in other rounds if they had waited. When you scouted him, did you project him as a better Guard or Tackle in the NFL?

Just like Sebastian Vollmer was going to be a undrafted free agent right Scott?;) Scott is great with the player evaluations, but his mocks are not entirely reliable. He may be right that Brewster should have gone in the middle rounds and Vollmer should have been undrafted instead of going in the second.

However, if you want to know where these players would have been available you should go read Gosselin's top 100 before the draft. Goose bases his player rankings on his discussions with pro GM's and scouts. Goose had Brewster going in the third round. So I would have to disagree strongly with Scott that Brewster would have been available a couple of rounds later.

Scott Wright
08-06-2009, 11:27 PM
Just made the Buffalo Bills review live.

Prowler
08-07-2009, 11:22 AM
let it go. agree to have your own opinions and stop making me read all this garbage.

D-Unit
08-07-2009, 11:51 AM
let it go. agree to have your own opinions and stop making me read all this garbage.
Sorry bout that. All cleaned up now.

quincy, go to the Cowboys forum to continue the discussion. It doesn't belong here. BTW, how could I delete my last message and still let you see my response? You're killin' me! :D

quincyyyyy
08-07-2009, 02:10 PM
Sorry bout that. All cleaned up now.

quincy, go to the Cowboys forum to continue the discussion. It doesn't belong here. BTW, how could I delete my last message and still let you see my response? You're killin' me! :D

I mean didn't. Whatev.:rolleyes:

Scott Wright
08-08-2009, 07:22 PM
St. Louis Rams are posted.

GB12
08-08-2009, 07:43 PM
Will you have them all done by the start of preseason?

Scott Wright
08-09-2009, 03:53 AM
Will you have them all done by the start of preseason?

There are only four left so they should be done by Monday or Tuesday.

Scott Wright
08-10-2009, 09:24 AM
Just made the Pittsburgh Steelers review live.

Scott Wright
08-11-2009, 12:57 AM
The Seattle Seahawks are now up.

TitanHope
08-13-2009, 08:52 PM
I just wanna say that we Titans fans appreciate you for saving the best for last, Scott. ;)

Scott Wright
08-13-2009, 10:22 PM
The New England Patriots and Tennessee Titans are now live. The reviews are now complete!

That also wraps up the Draft Countdown's 2009 NFL Draft coverage.

Time to start prepping files for the 2010 re-launch!!!

quincyyyyy
08-13-2009, 10:36 PM
With the last of those four second rounders New England reached for Houston OT Sebastian Vollmer, who most felt would come off the board a round or two later.

I'm pretty sure you said he would be undrafted. Backtracking are we?

soybean
08-13-2009, 11:05 PM
Is it me or does Patrick Chung look badass on the homepage?

Scott Wright
08-13-2009, 11:41 PM
I'm pretty sure you said he would be undrafted. Backtracking are we?

Absolutely not. I don't backtrack, that's why I archive all of my old rankings and mocks on the site for everyone to see. Right or wrong I stand by them.

I had Vollmer rated as a seventh round pick but I think the general consensus was that he would go earlier than that. Still, I didn't talk to anyone before the draft who felt he was a second.

Flyboy
08-14-2009, 01:05 AM
Is it me or does Patrick Chung look badass on the homepage?

Not just you. Dude looks straight BALLER.

49ersFan_vienna
08-14-2009, 06:09 AM
Hey Scott, at which time of the year is your first mock online, usually ?

quincyyyyy
08-14-2009, 11:50 AM
Absolutely not. I don't backtrack, that's why I archive all of my old rankings and mocks on the site for everyone to see. Right or wrong I stand by them.

I had Vollmer rated as a seventh round pick but I think the general consensus was that he would go earlier than that. Still, I didn't talk to anyone before the draft who felt he was a second.

http://draftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1588909&#post1588909

It seems like you went a little easy on the Pats for that one. ;)

CashmoneyDrew
08-14-2009, 07:07 PM
IDK about everyone else, but I'm very ready for the relaunch.

Prowler
08-14-2009, 08:18 PM
definately. madden is out so the season has officially begun.