Pete and John had this figured out

Rat":2lbz2bjj said:

They made the trade because an elite playmaker who is only 24 was available, which pretty much never happens. I doubt it had anything to do with the strength of the draft.
I disagree that this is a weak draft overall. It's only a weak draft for QB needy teams picking near the top.

Click to expand...

Actually it did Rat. JS has said that at #25 he didn't see a difference maker that could be had at that spot. That if Percy was in this draft, he'd be a top 10 pick. That's the justification for giving up the 3rd is that for JS to move up considerably in the draft it would cost him at least a 3rd next year- and possibly more. So he saw this and an opportunity to get an impact player he was unlikely to get in the draft this year. I think this year's draft was a factor in that decision based on the comments made by JS.

therealjohncarlson":1py0t8jz said:

dontbelikethat":1py0t8jz said:

I get what you're saying, but what I think the GM was trying to say was "based on talent, only 20-23 players deserved to be in the first round". There's always those players who get "reached" for that may not deserve to be in the first round.

Click to expand...

Actually, if you think about it further, his statement really doesn't make sense and is just based on some arbitrary grading system. If there are only 20-23 players who "deserve" to be in the first round, then what does that make the other 10 or so first round draft picks in the first round? Does that mean every pick in the lower part of the first round can only get you at best "second round value?"

But here we have a logical fallacy. If the term "first round value" is indeed only based on where certain players should be drafted, how can you not at least fill up the whole first round with players that should be drafted there? More simply, how can only 20-23 players be called first round value when there are 32 picks in that round?

Click to expand...

I think your argument is off-base. I think what was meant was that the concensus 1st round picks = 20-23 in a good year. This year there is alot more uncertainty because of the lack of clear-cut blue chip prospects. Not every GM and team are going to grade the same 32 players in the 1st round. Clearly Bruce Irvin was graded higher on Seattle's board. The WR the 49ers took was higher on their board. I think he's saying in a normal year there are 20-23 clear cut 1st rounders that most everyone would agree were 1st round talent. IMO this makes perfect sense.

two dog":20avwym6 said:

Pete and Jon's clairvoyance aside, the statement by the GM was absurd. He has no earthly way of knowing
how many of this draft class will excel. Some will certainly be players he does not deem first round worthy.

There will be players who were drafted in the lower rounds who will be starting this year, some may even
make a difference. There will be undrafted players playing as key backups and some as starters by the
2014 season. How do I know? I don't, same as him.

There are some brilliant General managers in the league. Ozzie Newsome, Mike Sherman, our own Jon
Schneider, others. There are also some who are..well, not so brilliant. Owners who run teams, whether
officially or not and I'll never understand how Mike Lombardi scored his gig in Cleveland.

Whatever happened to the mantra of judging a draft class three years out?

Click to expand...

I think your missing the point. The GM didn't say anything about how this class will actually turn out. He's commenting based on grades placed on these players. Every year there are sure-fire first round talents taken and a decent amount flame out in a few years.
Sure there's going to be some studs who come out of this class. But the fact is there are few blue-chip prospects. There is depth in the mid-rounds. In the end the GM will either be proved right or a fool, we'll have to wait and see. I like how JS is always positive, this GM sounds like he is one who say's "We'll he can't do this or that." From what JS has said it sounds like he's excited with what he can add to this team.

I take it as whomever the GM was is saying I will have to earn my money this year and actually evaluate versus having consensus good players at my position in the draft to pick from. This is the kind of draft that JS and PC will make bank on since they are fanatics about researching players for their system anyway.

Part of the negativity towards this draft is hangover, IMO, from all of last year's QB sexiness--which could end up edging out 1983's draft.

I actually prefer Travis Wilson, Geno Smith, and Matt Barkley over a number of first round Qb's over the last few years (Tannehill, Ponder, Weeden, Locker, Gabbert).

What makes this "weak" draft even greater is that the :49ersmall: are loaded with draft picks….I hope every pick goes to waste :thirishdrinkers:

Sounds like a GM of a bad team who's given into his inevitable firing at the end of the year. Or who's making excuses already.

"Don't blame me. The draft sucked."

"True" 1st-round picks refers to players that MUST be drafted in the first round, or they will be gone. If there is a significant chance that they fall through to the 2nd round, then they are in a different category of player than players who must be drafted in the 1st.

As many have said, this draft is not top-heavy, but is solid and deep. That is exactly the kind of draft where it is harder to say which players MUST be drafted by a team with their 1st pick if they want to get him.

Not a weak draft at all... this is an extremely deep draft in the non sexy positions. Great for secondary players, defensive and offensive lines and even sold receivers. There just aren't many super stars that are usually hyped up and taken in the first 10 picks.

Even if the 1st round does suck, if it's stacked in rounds 2-5, that's still going to make it a good draft, especially for teams that have a lot of holes like the Jets and the Raiders. Although, you have to be able to find that talent.

About the whole "1st round grade thing", I agree with the comment that there is a consensus 20-23 1st rounders in an average draft....think about it: how many times have teams reached for important positions like QB and LT ? Positions of high risk high reward are many times drafted above their prospect status due to the position they play and it's importance. So, while I don't agree with the entirety of that GM's statement, that part of it makes sense.

Rat":20qgkdeo said:

They made the trade because an elite playmaker who is only 24 was available, which pretty much never happens. I doubt it had anything to do with the strength of the draft.

Click to expand...

Schneider has alluded many times to the fact that the first round is pretty weak and that there really is no difference from the 1st round to the second round.

They are well aware of it, and I'm pretty sure that is part of the reason why they were so willing to part with the 1st rounder.

Here's one quote I found alluding to it, but there are more:

Schneider has said on more than one occasion that he considers the not-yet 25-year-old Harvin the team’s first-round draft choice. And, even though Schneider won’t come right out and say it, the Seahawks were not going to get a player as good as Harvin if they had kept that 25th pick.

“When you look at this draft, it’s very unique,” Schneider said of a situation where it’s difficult to determine the Top 5 players in this draft class let alone who might be available at 25. “It’s the most unique draft, and I’m not just saying this because we don’t have a first-round draft choice this year.

“I felt that way a little bit when we made the deal with Percy. But now the closer we’ve gotten to this thing, it’s really kind of stood out that the first round is just a wide variety of players. It’s really going to be your favorite flavor of ice cream.”

Click to expand...

http://www.seahawks.com/news/articl...FL-Draft/48b390ed-a8f7-4a39-8a0d-04be27ca5035

Again, he's not flat-out saying that the draft is weak, but it's fairly obvious he thinks that if you've listened to his interviews over the last month or so.

He's saying if you have a first round pick that is 16-32 you should pass. :roll:

Bill Polian mentioned an even lower number on the radio today....

They roll the dice on the some 1st round players its a crap shoot anyway, over the years with all the busts

IMO, it's semantics ... the GM was using layman's terms to describe it but I think I understand the general sentiment he was getting at, and I tend to agree with it.

Say you're using a 9-point grading scale. Players graded in the 8.5-9 range are considered truly "elite", Guys 8.0 & up are solid first rounders, guys 7.0 & up are solid 2nd rounders, etc ... Now, obviously not all the guys are going to get the same grade from every team, either minor differences (7.2 vs 7.0) or a few wide variances (Take Bruce Irvin, because of scheme fit the 'Hawks were willing to rank him around an 8, whereas other teams that don't utilize a LEO probably had him in the 6.0 range because he din't project as well as a 3-down 4-3 DE) But even despite the individual differences between teams, there's usually a general consensus of the "range" most guys fall in.

In a typical draft year, you'll have 7-10 players that fall in the >8.5 range, the another 20 or so guys generally considered to grade out in the >8.0 range. These are the "1st round guys" Now, because each team has their own needs & preferences it means that certain guys will rise/fall. A team that's drafting towards the end of Round 1 still has a great shot to pick someone they've graded 8.0 because some other team had him graded slightly different and passed.

I think what the issue is this year is there are fewer guys graded >8.0 and/or widely varying opinions on certain players (i.e., a team like the Eagles that wants a mobile QB will likely have a much higher grade on Geno Smith than a team that wants a pocket passer) But there are a ton of players in the 6.0-7.0 range. These are all very good players - 2nd or 3rd round grade. They're the core of your team, are above-average starters, and a lot of them are going to turn into Pro-Bowlers. The problem is that it's a much wider group to chose from, more room for error, and they lack the "name recognition" that the typical 1st rounder gets.

The main reason it matters and makes for a "weak draft" is because of the opportunity costs, contracts and public expectations that accompany a 1st round pick. High 1st rounders still carry significant contracts - the types of money teams usually want to spend on and structure their cap around the skill positions. Teams don't want to spend high picks on undervalued positions like RB, S, LB, or OG because of the increased costs (is the difference between an OG that you've graded as a 7.5 worth the extra price over an OG you've graded a 7 that you're pretty sure you can get in the 3rd? Or would you rather gamble that pick on one of the WRs that has a ton of questions and may bust, but if they pan out you've hit on an 8.0 that justifies his contract?) Even a player picked towards the end of Round 1 has more expectations placed on him (perfect example is James Carpenter, how would fan perception of his career value change if he had been selected in Rd. 2 instead of the 1st?)

IMO, this draft is very similar to the '09 draft - and in 3 years will probably be viewed the same. There's going to be a lot of quality players, and a few guys that prove to be "steals" in late rounds, but the 1st round is going to be a mess. Without consensus elite names at the top, there's not going to be much of a trade market. Teams that want to drop back will be forced to pick and will probably take more gambles to hit a "home run" and justify the cost of the high pick. We'll see a lot of busts at the top. The end of first round will be a crap shoot, because there are fewer 8.0 guys who will slip through, so teams in the bottom of the 1st will also have problems trading back and have to take guys with 2nd round grades ... they'll still wind up being solid players, but will probably be labeled as "underachievers" because their careers won't match the expectations usually placed on 1st rounders.

Bottom line, I think JS/PC definitely read this perfectly. They had no problem sending away that 1st because they knew it guaranteed an impact player usually only available in the top-15 of a normal draft, and they figured that pick #25 in this draft would net the roughly the same grade-range player they could get with #56. And since this is a draft that is especially deep in the middle rounds, it's exactly the type where their due diligence is going to pay off and they'll still be able to grab quality guys deep into the 3rd day. :th2thumbs:

jlwaters1":2x678egg said:

Rat":2x678egg said:

They made the trade because an elite playmaker who is only 24 was available, which pretty much never happens. I doubt it had anything to do with the strength of the draft.
I disagree that this is a weak draft overall. It's only a weak draft for QB needy teams picking near the top.

Click to expand...

Actually it did Rat. JS has said that at #25 he didn't see a difference maker that could be had at that spot. That if Percy was in this draft, he'd be a top 10 pick. That's the justification for giving up the 3rd is that for JS to move up considerably in the draft it would cost him at least a 3rd next year- and possibly more. So he saw this and an opportunity to get an impact player he was unlikely to get in the draft this year. I think this year's draft was a factor in that decision based on the comments made by JS.

Click to expand...

The other thing is...elite college players play against college talent - how does that translate into the NFL? We DO know how well Percy did against NFL talent - he's elite at the NFL level! Had Percy spent the last 4 years in college - he would very likely have been the #1 overall pick!