jammerhawk
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2007
- Messages
- 10,239
- Reaction score
- 1,836
As the many who are interested in the draft find like sourced material about players. i.e.: seahawksdraftblog.com , CBSsports.com , their version of the reliable NFLdraftscout.com , and of course Walterfootball.com , for example here; there was a strong tendency this season for a lot of group thinking on our draft picks. As ever the FO surprised us some although a few got quite a few right many of us were surprised by some of the picks the team made. Many here, self included, developed group thinking and failed to read the tea leaves as accurately as we might have with more open mindedness.
Sadly if you are not regarded as a guru here, many take a point of pointing out how superior their knowledge is leading to a form of intimidation to the less obviously historically proven capable. It was demonstrably the case that, although there are several here where in some cases that may be true, in the end as a result conflicting views of needs and players are greeted with less than the welcoming discussion this board should try to engender. I'm not saying you can't be called out for patent nonsense but after all the time has passed since 2010 and this present capable in the FO and with our coaching even though a much stronger idea of what the team wants or needs should be. Trying to identify what PnJ's views of needs or wants is often intentionally obsfucated in order to create a false trail to prevent the predation of the guy or guys they actually want or wanted.
A few things have become clear, these guys value measureables (bigger, stronger, faster &/or SPARQ) and a sense of a chip on the shoulder or a deeply seated desire to be more than the publicly held perception of the player by an also like thinking media group who very early determine the value of a player and are hard to acknowledge they may have either overestimated that player's ability or equally that they have significantly underestimated the same. There also appears to be a factor of strong mindedness developing as the team's depth improves so a young player need to have that strong mindedness so he can be secure in his fight for roster slot despite significant competition for that spot. There are many unknown variables of unreported character issues and injuries both pro and con that can make or break a player's draft position leaving genuinely talented players undrafted and allowing less talented players to be be over selected.
Grading draft picks is a hugely subjective endeavour, height, weight, speed, strength, arm length, hand size all go into the hopper with the mostly unknown depth or strength of character or mental toughness (not necessarily the Ruskellesque goodie two shoes choir boy type assessments either). Many viewpoints as a result offer a broader perception to base those valuations.
This year's draft was notable for being a bit surprising to the few guru's here and those who are are known by us and respected. Let us hope going forward the board will be more inclusive to divergent thinking from those willing to discuss some rational bias for the upsides or downsides of prospects. I hope the group here does not think this is whining but several of us here were quite wrong for the Hawks this draft after being more right than wrong in the past and it is just that group thought that may be the basis. Interestingly as a positive many of the players we all identified by SPARQ or otherwise came to the team even though they may not have been drafted.
Let us hope this year we can be respectful of a broader viewpoint and and accept this is a very subjective endeavour.
Sadly if you are not regarded as a guru here, many take a point of pointing out how superior their knowledge is leading to a form of intimidation to the less obviously historically proven capable. It was demonstrably the case that, although there are several here where in some cases that may be true, in the end as a result conflicting views of needs and players are greeted with less than the welcoming discussion this board should try to engender. I'm not saying you can't be called out for patent nonsense but after all the time has passed since 2010 and this present capable in the FO and with our coaching even though a much stronger idea of what the team wants or needs should be. Trying to identify what PnJ's views of needs or wants is often intentionally obsfucated in order to create a false trail to prevent the predation of the guy or guys they actually want or wanted.
A few things have become clear, these guys value measureables (bigger, stronger, faster &/or SPARQ) and a sense of a chip on the shoulder or a deeply seated desire to be more than the publicly held perception of the player by an also like thinking media group who very early determine the value of a player and are hard to acknowledge they may have either overestimated that player's ability or equally that they have significantly underestimated the same. There also appears to be a factor of strong mindedness developing as the team's depth improves so a young player need to have that strong mindedness so he can be secure in his fight for roster slot despite significant competition for that spot. There are many unknown variables of unreported character issues and injuries both pro and con that can make or break a player's draft position leaving genuinely talented players undrafted and allowing less talented players to be be over selected.
Grading draft picks is a hugely subjective endeavour, height, weight, speed, strength, arm length, hand size all go into the hopper with the mostly unknown depth or strength of character or mental toughness (not necessarily the Ruskellesque goodie two shoes choir boy type assessments either). Many viewpoints as a result offer a broader perception to base those valuations.
This year's draft was notable for being a bit surprising to the few guru's here and those who are are known by us and respected. Let us hope going forward the board will be more inclusive to divergent thinking from those willing to discuss some rational bias for the upsides or downsides of prospects. I hope the group here does not think this is whining but several of us here were quite wrong for the Hawks this draft after being more right than wrong in the past and it is just that group thought that may be the basis. Interestingly as a positive many of the players we all identified by SPARQ or otherwise came to the team even though they may not have been drafted.
Let us hope this year we can be respectful of a broader viewpoint and and accept this is a very subjective endeavour.