This is one of the ways NFL set up their boards to see where the strength of positions are by round
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GKzielmWwAARHfA?format=jpg&name=large)
https://x.com/clt_ny/status/1778044971796299962
If you subscribe to the Athletic (I think it's worth the subscription)
https://x.com/dpbrugler/status/1778022764449808532
I really like Odunze and the Giants may need a true #1 WR as much as any team I can remember, but man is that position group deep.
Quote from: uconnjack8 on April 10, 2024, 09:22:52 AMI really like Odunze and the Giants may need a true #1 WR as much as any team I can remember, but man is that position group deep.
The way I look at the WR position. The top 3 are elite prospects with, say, a 75% chance of becoming a true number on WRs. Beyond them, you are looking at prospects that might prove to be good in the league but have maybe a 10% to 20% chance of becoming true number-one WRs.
Similar approach without the subscription
https://draftboardguru.com/documents/2024draftboardOff_Post.pdf
Some of the differences between Brugler's (with a r) and Martz's may not be great but can be worthy of note, not that it matters beyond whatever importance we impart to it.
Cheers!
Quote from: Rosehill Jimmy on April 10, 2024, 09:36:27 AMSimilar approach without the subscription
https://draftboardguru.com/documents/2024draftboardOff_Post.pdf
https://x.com/JimNagy_SB/status/1778092639176306823
Quote from: Painter on April 10, 2024, 11:10:34 AMSome of the differences between Brugler's (with a r) and Martz's may not be great but can be worthy of note, not that it matters beyond whatever importance we impart to it.
Larry: Thanks for pointing out that Dane is not a musician. LOL
Nabers is ranked as third overall prospect in the draft. I know some want a prototypical X (Odunze)--and there are some concerns with Nabers--but I'd be very happy with a Nabers pick at #6.