Big Blue Huddle

Matt: All of this (including the technical work) is first-rate stuff.  Thanks very much for taking the time to do it. Bob

Joe:  To work from Rich's excellent example, at the start of the draft, the five players across the top row are all the "best player available" so if you pick first, you pick one of those. 

Technically, even the players on the top row have been ranked, and they have a number to show it (3,2,6,1 and 5, respectively).

USING the chart is easy.  Ranking the players is hard.

LOL

Quote from: londonblue on March 18, 2017, 08:22:34 AM
My cousin Danny is an ESPN analytics geek and he keeps saying Garcia or Lamp are the ones he'd take. When he first said this to me Garcia was R4 and Lamp R2 now they are projected to R2 and R1 respectively reflecting the NFL scout buzz. He likes Magnuson as a mid round T and Asiata and Siracusa as mid round guards. Of all the TEs he likes Engram best and Leggett in the mid rounds. Interesting to see how they stack up in Ceri's analysis when he does his review.

london: Tell your cousin that one guy here (me) really like his picks and thinks he knows his stuff.

I agree much more with his picks than with the picks of the so-called "experts" that have been flying around here this week.

Bob

Ramczyk is a decent player.

Could go either way in the pros.

IMO.

Bob

Quote from: MightyGiants on March 14, 2017, 05:12:25 PM
Good stuff Bob
For those not as well versed on the draft
I believe Bob is referring to
QB Deshaun Watson-  One of the top tier QB prospects in a class that has been described as weak (at least that is who I think Bob is talking about)
and
LB Jabrill Peppers- a slightly undersized but impressive LB prospect.

Rich: Yes and yes.  Sorry about that. Bob

Quote from: afan56 on March 14, 2017, 04:41:08 PM
Bob, you know I respect your opinion, so which one will be the star? 

a: If I had to pick one of those guys without reference to the needs or circumstances of the team I would choose Watson.

If it turns out as Rich suggests the Giants IMO would pick Ramczyk.  My list does not contain him.  No way he gets to 23, not because he's a sure thing, but because he can play tackle. Bob

Quote from: MightyGiants on March 14, 2017, 01:39:46 PM
I think they tend to be more accurate (in terms of roughly where players are taken).  Anyway what I have noticed is that players that seemed out of reach prior to the draft often seem to be mocked as available on 23.  Depending on the draft one of these three players are being projected as being available at 23

TE David Njoku
OT Garett Bolles
OT Ryan Ramczyk

Rich: I did the same exercise and came up four names: Njoku, Bolles, Peppers and Watson

I believe the probability that at least three of them will be there is about 90 percent.

Now for the difficult part: I also figure two of them are likely to be busts..... so......   LOL   Bob

Quote from: Vette on March 11, 2017, 10:51:47 AM
Unfortunately, the position the Giants are in is that they need O-Line help in my my opinion. If they agree and the rest of the teams in the draft believe so too then they tipped their hand. The first round pick really needs to be BPA. Not BPA at two positions. Two because if Hankins walks they need two. Before Newhouse was lost the #1 was DT. Now, it looks like a tie to me. 

Ed: Just guessing (from the circumstantial evidence) but I now believe the Giants intend to "compete" strongly to retain Big Hank.

If they felt he was a goner (due to other teams overpaying) they probably would have signed at least one free-agent OL they lost (to the Raiders/Broncos) or allowed to walk (Newhouse).

Bob

Quote from: Jolly Blue Giant on March 11, 2017, 10:22:49 AM

Bottom Line

Elflein is a smart, tireless worker with a winning background and experience at all three interior offensive line spots. While his feet are just average, his core strength and wrestling background could make him a favorite of teams looking for more strength at the center position. Elflein will have occasional issues in pass protection, but his strength as a run blocker and ability to play with excellent hands and plus body control should make him one of the first interior linemen to come off the draft board.

Jolly:  Great post.  You make an outstanding case for Elflein.  Now I'm going to feel bad if the Giants take McCaffrey. LOL

Before I got to your final paragraph (reproduced above), I did note your earlier remark about his wrestling experience and was already on-board. 

Wrestling experience is an outstanding quality to possess for good interior offensive line play, because the officials now uniformly allow holding by interior linemen.

Bob

Rich: Nice report; the ideal move would be trade down a few spots then take him, but we both know that's not likely to happen.

Nevertheless, the Giants should not pass up Christian McCaffrey if he is there at pick 23. 

I really don't care who else is available.

Passing on McCaffrey IMO would be equivalent to the teams who passed on Zeke Elliott last year.

Bob

Now that the combines are over, here are the players some "experts" are projecting to the Giants, either at pick 23 or (in the case of Casserly) after a trade up to pick 18:

Charley Casserly, NFL.com - Ryan Ramczyk, OT, Wisconsin (Projected trade up with Titans to No. 18 pick)
Dane Brugler, NFLDraftScout.com - Garett Bolles, OT, Utah
Rob Rang, The Sports Xchange - Christian McCaffrey, RB, Stanford
Emily Kaplan, MMQB - O.J. Howard, TE, Alabama
Peter Prisco, CBS Sports - Haason Reddick, OLB, Temple
Will Brinson, CBS Sports - Malik McDowell, DT, Michigan State
Bucky Brooks, NFL.com - Deshaun Watson, QB, Clemson

(1) Assuming all of the above players are available at pick 23, who is your first choice?
(2) Assuming the Giants don't trade up and Ramczyk is gone, now who is your first choice?
(3) Which player do you think THE GIANTS will actually take? (could be anyone one, whether or not he's on the list)
(4) Which player, if taken by the Giants, would cause you to throw the remote at your TV set?

Bob

PS. My answers: (1) Ramczyk; (2) McCaffrey (sorry, he's too perfect a fit to pass up); (3) McCaffrey (the Giants love "legacy" picks; his dad was a Giant); (4) none would bother me, assuming they can't re-sign Hankins.

It would be an easy choice for me; IMO, Howard is more ready to contribute now and solid in more areas.

He blocks for the run better than about half of all current NFL offensive linemen (and about three-fourths of all NFL tight ends).

Bob

Quote from: todge on February 26, 2017, 10:33:55 PM
Great article Rich. In looking at the numbers - it looks like the 10% success rate is probably more from the 5th to 7th Rounds.

Irrespective of the numbers - I don't think we as fans should criticize the Giants for their 3rd day picks not making it. There is plenty of valid criticism to be levied to Ross and his Scouts for their first and second day selections!

Ted: Sad, but true. Bob

Quote from: Vette on February 26, 2017, 10:36:03 AM
In that group, what would be bad luck, Bob?

Ed: I'm referring to the fact that the draft is a crap-shoot to start with, so long runs of bad results in the later rounds are not a great surprise to me.

MOST draft picks after round three are already more likely than not to fail, so there are bound to be runs of what I term "bad luck" (meaning that the long-shots just never seem to come in).

I wonder how the data you cited compares to the first six years under George Young or Ernie Accorsi - or - how it compares to the same sixyear period for the Patriots (for example), but I'm too lazy to do the work, so I'm just going to go and look it up, hopefully for my own edification.  For the record, I believe I will find that they fared no better.

Bob

PS. A comparison to the Seahawks' past six drafts might be even more interesting.

PPS. I was too lazy to look up anything except the Seahawks, and I discovered an almost unheard-of run of great drafts, BUT all or virtually all of the successful picks were above round 4.  In fact, IMO, they picked more crap in rounds 4-7 during the past six years than the Giants.  Of course, my knowledge of their roster is a lot less "in-depth" than my knowledge of the Giants' roster.

Quote from: Shoelessjoe on February 26, 2017, 11:35:43 AM
You have to let the draft come to you especially if you are picking at 23.

Quote from: Philosophers on February 26, 2017, 12:11:41 PM
Shoeless - that is 100% correct.  All the "I want this player" means little when the draft moves away from you.  A team has to have a diverse strategy that encompasses various draft scenarios.  One thing we forget is that they are on the clock and when all of a sudden something that seems unfathomable happens such as the 1996 draft when they thought they thought with the 5th pick, they'd get either Simeon Rice or Jonathan Ogden as they thought for sure Lawrence Phillips would be drafted before their pick.  Well, that didn't happen and they had to adjust on the fly and took Cedric Jones.  They didn't have a plan.

Phil and Joe:  I think you just line up the players on your paper and cross off the players picked, then when it's your turn you evaluate the POSITIONS that have been taken with an eye toward what is likely to be left on your NEXT pick, then you make your CURRENT pick.  This system allows you to adjust in two ways: first, if the top remaining player on your list plays a position that has already been "popular" in the picks before you, you can just take that player; second, if the position of the next player has so far been ignored, you also have the option of skipping over that guy if, for example, the next guy below him on your list plays a position where the draft is weak or where there's greater need.

I believe this is what the Giants already do.

IMO, the problem for us "observers" is not the systematic approach the Giants use, but rather that we often disagree with the order in which they've placed the players on their list.  Since they spend more time assembling their list than I do, I usually tend to give them the benefit of the doubt, figuring they know a whole lot more than I do.

Bob