Mayock

I get limited access to the guy.

here's his top 16:

1. Marcell Dareus
2. Von Miller
3. Patrick Peterson
4. A.J. Green
5. Blaine Gabbert
6. Robert Quinn
7. Julio Jones
8. Nick Fairley
9. Prince Amuakmara
10. Da'Quan Bowers
11. Anthony Castonzo
12. J.J. Watt
13. Tyron Smith
14. Aldon Smith
15. Cameron Jordan
16. Mark Ingram


no Newton

 

I respect the hell out of Mayock, but the Gabbert thing continues to infuriate me. It's just emblematic of everything that's wrong with how the NFL projects college QBs to the pros. As you've said many times yourself, the "top" QB somehow always finds his way into the top 5 just because there's an unwritten rule that the "top QB" always has to be there. Then Gabbert himself is the choice because of everything I've always bitched about, which is that teams focus completely on body dimensions and arm strength. Gabbert looks the part more than the others, so by default he must be the one. It just drives me nuts.

 

yeah, I don't get how I like Newton better than Gabbert but tape was just better.

 

Good list I trust Mayock much more than Kiper and that other fag form ESPN

 

Fairley is dropping like a rock all over the place

 

you're hitting on a more general issue I have had with football player ratings/recruit rankings: is it even reasonable to think you can accurately rank and/or grade players of all different positions together in one list?

It often bugs the hell outta me to see these lists people come up with where they have the #12 DT ranked ahead of the #16 RB and so forth.

What makes the most sense to me are positional lists. Even then, each and every team must be grading the prospects on a different set parameters that varies with scheme, organizational standards, etc. For instance, these parameters might include: (1) physical dimensions and ability (height/weight/speed), (2) mental capability (gameplan execution, in-game adjustments & trend recignition, and general football 'instincts') and (3) personality (attitude, leadership skills, work ethic, etc). How do you weight each parameter in order to correctly evaluate each prospects expectations for success at the next level?

 

Sure, at least in a general sense. It's possible to say that DT X is better than HB Y. Mocks get more complicated, though, as team needs factor into the equation. So in those cases you're asking of DT X - DT current is greater than HB Y - HB current.

Those are useful, but if you don't compare across positions then you're drafting entirely by positional need, which is really bad idea in most cases.


Also, does anyone know if Mayock was high on Gabbert 6 months ago? That's one of the things that bugs me most. If you were high on Gabbert all along, fine, at least you're consistent. For instance, others pointed out that McShay touted Locker as a potential #1 overall, so if he was still hyping him then you would at least respect that he's sticking to his opinion (dropping a player's grade is not worrisome, however, as you don't do that in response to hype but rather from coming to your senses). I don't spend too much time reading anyone else's draft analysis because I don't think there is anyone on the planet better at it than me, but I don't recall anyone touting Gabbert as a top 10 pick back then, and there's not really anything on the field that should have changed opinions since. The only thing that's changed is Luck staying in school.

 

it almost seems that quarterbacks do rate separately from other positions.

I don't think that many had Gabbert coming out, so hard to say whether or not there was much buzz on him. I doubt teams change rankings a quarter as much as pundits, partly because other pundits' thoughts are also available. That accessibility inevitably changes things for each other, as does an audience.

Anyway, teams don't likely change much on things this time of year. A lot of this should be tiebreakers, though lesser known players showing up as very athletic probably makes you take a longer look at tape for those players - an average looking end that runs a 4.6, you would go back and see how their first step is. I guess there'll always be anomalies, no way the Chargers had Rivers rated top 5 that whole time, for instance.
But again that's a QB, and those are just a different animal.

 

Well, we already know that most teams are morons when it comes to the draft. Plus, Kiper has pretty good sources with a lot of orgs, so his rankings tend to mirror what at least some of the teams are thinking. Then again, I guess he got hung out to dry on the Clausen thing last year.

The one thing I keep coming back to is just how awesome I am.