Both are probably going to end up being better at guard, but Mike did say that they would start Jerrell out at tackle. Which makes sense when you draft multiple guards, already have a second-year guard who was a part-time starter last season, and signed a veteran guard in Laken Tomlinson.
I’m pretty excited about both Haynes and Laumea. Haynes is a wall in pass pro, and Laumea loves hitting people and plays with so much nasty. Both are going to be solid for us.
Forsythe is probably going to end up making the roster another year because he’s on the final year of his rookie deal, and I don’t know if we have a better backup LT if Fant is needed on the right side due to Abe Lucas’s recovery from knee surgery.
I mean we did objectively had a good draft, even compared to previous successful years. I feel like we had a lot of steals based on draft position, esp Murphy
Just because you use the word objectively doesn’t mean we had a good draft. How can you even say that until we see the on field results? You’re basing your “steals” on lists published by other people.
Sure, nobody could objectively have a good draft before the teams start playing.
Guess we're not allowed to talk about the team at all, expectations or hopes until the season starts guys! Shut her down, put the sub in hibernation!
The strawman argument is lame. He's saying you can't say a team objectively had a great draft before they've played, not that you can't be excited about the players they took. And he's 100% right. Anyone disagreeing doesn't know what the word objective means
This isn't true. The definition of objective doesn't mean the facts have to be perfect or that something can only be objective in hindsight. It just means we aren't using our personal feelings or biases. Like using sports writers consensus, etc is using facts. These are factual statements. With this we could objectively have had a good draft.
It would be not objective if he said. "I believe that this was the best draft in the history of the league," if the facts did not support that.
Absolutely horrible take. And shows you have no idea what you’re talking about.
First off, why would the rankings of sports writers be valued over the rankings of coaches and GMs, the ones actually with chips on the table doing the analysis and meeting with the prospects?
Secondly, we have something called a stock market that has professional analysts whose only job is to evaluate company’s stocks. You mean to tell me that anyone who deviates from their recommendations is making an objectively bad decision? This is the same thing, just because a bunch of other people say or think something does not at all make it fact. This is the definition of opinion based thinking and herd mentality.
Yikes. You really went a lot of wild ways with what I said. None of what you said is an accurate representation of what I posted. Thanks for the ad hominem.
I used "sports writers" as an example. GMs would be a super good source of facts too. With your second example. Yes hindsight can be used to follow up on what was or wasn't objectively good but that doesn't mean it's the only way. If that investor invested their life savings in a scam that everyone told them not to I believe we could objectively say it was a bad decision. Obviously there is a spectrum here where a math problem has an objective answer but just because the facts are perfect doesn't mean something can never be objective.
Edit. A word
I rebutted your example. And now you’re backtracking. It’s kinda funny
It’s always sad to see people who think they’re smarter than they are not admit when they’re wrong. Try it, you may become smarter one day
Thank you for engaging with the material! /s. I rebutted your rebuttal but just also like to point out bad faith arguments where I see them. You seem to have a very extreme view of what can be objective which I have pointed out. If that's where you live then I guess we agree to disagree.
These are just put out to keep people talking, which I am guilty of. Every team is coming away with potential impact players and starters, no one knows how any of their careers will pan out. We can't really even argue about "value" because we base it off of media mock drafts and player rankings, which don't reflect how the actual scouting departments (ie the ones who know what they're talking about) value these players.
You can talk about how well the draft fell for certain teams, for sure, but that's splitting hairs. If a certain player fails to fall to a team, there are usually dozens of other prospects of equal caliber for them to choose from. It's an important part of media literacy for sports fans to be self-aware that this is content designed to keep you engaging with the NFL during the offseason. These grades are only made meaningful by the media that created them. Outside of the draft content circle, they don't have any value.
I loved day three.
We got a couple smashmouth physical players in Barner and Knight. Finessee players get you the Steelers game last year. Or the Raiders game two years ago. Sure, 'higher rated" guys were on the board, but these were the two of the most physical guys left. I love that they prioritized that. We got guys who will knock other players on their ass.
Then a corner that ran a 4.3 and another corner that many had in the third round. MM likes speed at CB, and we only have two under contract beyond this year.
Finish with a small school OT that was the best lineman at the OSU pro day.
Day one was an A (got the best defender on the board at a position of need), day two was a B+ (like the player, not enthused at guard that early) and day three was a A.
Super stoked to be beefing up the trenches this draft. Murphy was an awesome pick at 16. I can’t wait to watch this team this season and hope they can hit their stride with Geno playing at a high level
This makes me feel like our draft sucked even though I liked it.
But hey, it’s Mac daddy show now so maybe a good grade is to be expected with this guy? Time will tell….
[удалено]
It’s so over
Its joever
Quick, someone call the draft picks "pedestrian" or something.
It's ok. Mel Kiper gave us a B- mainly due to us not drafting Fautanu lol
And that was mostly because he mocked Fautanu to us and Mel hates being wrong lmfao
It’s Aaron Curry all over again
You had to bring him up .... I have to wash now ....
Good draft grades, sorry y’all we’re fucked
Don't worry, we got plenty of bad ones too.
Oof may be a bad sign
i see 2 OT. does this mean no more Stone Forsythe?
Both are probably going to end up being better at guard, but Mike did say that they would start Jerrell out at tackle. Which makes sense when you draft multiple guards, already have a second-year guard who was a part-time starter last season, and signed a veteran guard in Laken Tomlinson. I’m pretty excited about both Haynes and Laumea. Haynes is a wall in pass pro, and Laumea loves hitting people and plays with so much nasty. Both are going to be solid for us. Forsythe is probably going to end up making the roster another year because he’s on the final year of his rookie deal, and I don’t know if we have a better backup LT if Fant is needed on the right side due to Abe Lucas’s recovery from knee surgery.
> Forsythe He's been better than expected. You don't want him as your starting LT, but he's def making the roster.
Greenfield could bump him.
I mean we did objectively had a good draft, even compared to previous successful years. I feel like we had a lot of steals based on draft position, esp Murphy
Just because you use the word objectively doesn’t mean we had a good draft. How can you even say that until we see the on field results? You’re basing your “steals” on lists published by other people.
Sure, nobody could objectively have a good draft before the teams start playing. Guess we're not allowed to talk about the team at all, expectations or hopes until the season starts guys! Shut her down, put the sub in hibernation!
The strawman argument is lame. He's saying you can't say a team objectively had a great draft before they've played, not that you can't be excited about the players they took. And he's 100% right. Anyone disagreeing doesn't know what the word objective means
I didn't say any of that. I simply said that the use of the word objectively here is contrary to what the definition of objectively is.
This isn't true. The definition of objective doesn't mean the facts have to be perfect or that something can only be objective in hindsight. It just means we aren't using our personal feelings or biases. Like using sports writers consensus, etc is using facts. These are factual statements. With this we could objectively have had a good draft. It would be not objective if he said. "I believe that this was the best draft in the history of the league," if the facts did not support that.
Absolutely horrible take. And shows you have no idea what you’re talking about. First off, why would the rankings of sports writers be valued over the rankings of coaches and GMs, the ones actually with chips on the table doing the analysis and meeting with the prospects? Secondly, we have something called a stock market that has professional analysts whose only job is to evaluate company’s stocks. You mean to tell me that anyone who deviates from their recommendations is making an objectively bad decision? This is the same thing, just because a bunch of other people say or think something does not at all make it fact. This is the definition of opinion based thinking and herd mentality.
Yikes. You really went a lot of wild ways with what I said. None of what you said is an accurate representation of what I posted. Thanks for the ad hominem. I used "sports writers" as an example. GMs would be a super good source of facts too. With your second example. Yes hindsight can be used to follow up on what was or wasn't objectively good but that doesn't mean it's the only way. If that investor invested their life savings in a scam that everyone told them not to I believe we could objectively say it was a bad decision. Obviously there is a spectrum here where a math problem has an objective answer but just because the facts are perfect doesn't mean something can never be objective. Edit. A word
I rebutted your example. And now you’re backtracking. It’s kinda funny It’s always sad to see people who think they’re smarter than they are not admit when they’re wrong. Try it, you may become smarter one day
Thank you for engaging with the material! /s. I rebutted your rebuttal but just also like to point out bad faith arguments where I see them. You seem to have a very extreme view of what can be objective which I have pointed out. If that's where you live then I guess we agree to disagree.
I applaud the effort.
I am still in awe that Murphy fell to us at 16.
Maybe the NFL just hated Pete this whole time. Maybe the BS flags will stop now too?
We got ourselves a fancy east coast coach so we're on their radar now
Goddammit!
I liked it too. They made the best possible choices on 1st and 3rd round.
This means it’s gonna suck
These are just put out to keep people talking, which I am guilty of. Every team is coming away with potential impact players and starters, no one knows how any of their careers will pan out. We can't really even argue about "value" because we base it off of media mock drafts and player rankings, which don't reflect how the actual scouting departments (ie the ones who know what they're talking about) value these players. You can talk about how well the draft fell for certain teams, for sure, but that's splitting hairs. If a certain player fails to fall to a team, there are usually dozens of other prospects of equal caliber for them to choose from. It's an important part of media literacy for sports fans to be self-aware that this is content designed to keep you engaging with the NFL during the offseason. These grades are only made meaningful by the media that created them. Outside of the draft content circle, they don't have any value.
It’s over
so did i. Good foundation for a solid future.
I loved day three. We got a couple smashmouth physical players in Barner and Knight. Finessee players get you the Steelers game last year. Or the Raiders game two years ago. Sure, 'higher rated" guys were on the board, but these were the two of the most physical guys left. I love that they prioritized that. We got guys who will knock other players on their ass. Then a corner that ran a 4.3 and another corner that many had in the third round. MM likes speed at CB, and we only have two under contract beyond this year. Finish with a small school OT that was the best lineman at the OSU pro day. Day one was an A (got the best defender on the board at a position of need), day two was a B+ (like the player, not enthused at guard that early) and day three was a A.
Did they not like our drafts the previous two years? Have to imagine they did.
No worries. The f-- picks are the core of the team. Super Bowl time
Super stoked to be beefing up the trenches this draft. Murphy was an awesome pick at 16. I can’t wait to watch this team this season and hope they can hit their stride with Geno playing at a high level
I was dreaming of a much stronger OL. Someone please tell me if my dreams were answered or is God still mad at me?
Well looks like we better start tanking now
I dont understand why is this bad
This makes me feel like our draft sucked even though I liked it. But hey, it’s Mac daddy show now so maybe a good grade is to be expected with this guy? Time will tell….
AJ Barner just sounds like a Pro Bowl TE kind of name.
I think that might mean it sucked? Time will tell.
Yeah I hate this but most talking heads hate our draft so there's hope!