Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Official Draft Day Thread- Day 2 - Rounds 2 and 3
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 41, 42, 43  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Oakland Raiders
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Pick at #42
Damontre Moore
21%
 21%  [ 7 ]
Tank Carradine
37%
 37%  [ 12 ]
Johnathan Hankins
15%
 15%  [ 5 ]
DJ Swearinger
3%
 3%  [ 1 ]
Larry Warford
9%
 9%  [ 3 ]
Zach Ertz
12%
 12%  [ 4 ]
Total Votes : 32

Author Message
Silver&Black88


Joined: 24 Feb 2009
Posts: 34045
Location: Boston, MA
PostPosted: Sat Apr 27, 2013 11:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

oakdb36 wrote:
Well, GB's draft were full of fail if you're holding teams to the standard every pick should be a hit. That's setting yourself up for disappointment. No matter who your GM is, some picks won't pan out. In the end, McKenzie's fate will be determined by his ability to find the QB. He might give one a shot today. Can't wait to find out who that is. My guess is Matt Scott.


Close, but no cigar. Wilson it is.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Silver&Black88


Joined: 24 Feb 2009
Posts: 34045
Location: Boston, MA
PostPosted: Sat Apr 27, 2013 12:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Also, did anyone else notice St Louis too both Tavon Austin and Stedman Bailey? Laughing


Not a bad idea though, I think they're both gonna be good players.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
socallbraider


Joined: 09 Apr 2013
Posts: 153
Location: US
PostPosted: Sat Apr 27, 2013 12:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I like Tyler wilson.
Hes got his head screwed on right.

This draft is really confusing me though...we are all over the place when we all pretty much fealt that fixing the trenches was the first priority(well mabe a majority).

can we cut flynn already?

cant believe Franklin is still on the board.
someoen is gonna get a steal, the last time teams were concerned about the size of a UCLA back it was MJD....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
socallbraider


Joined: 09 Apr 2013
Posts: 153
Location: US
PostPosted: Sat Apr 27, 2013 12:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

LOL,
Im in here ripping on GB and they take two of the players I had hoped wed take...
Jones and Franklin....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Dessie


Joined: 02 Feb 2006
Posts: 4797
PostPosted: Sat Apr 27, 2013 12:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

bitty wrote:
oakdb36 wrote:
http://www.draftmetrics.com/files/STUDYING%20THE%20DRAFT%20RECORD%20OF%20NFL%20TEAMS.pdf


Never saw that one.

This is from the same people
http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Whos-been-doing-the-best-job-of-drafting.html

Green Bay was 9th over the last 10 years and 14th of the last 5 years.

I'm not sure why they have 2 different ratings for Green Bay.
So I got a 50-50 shot at being right or apologizing.


So you think being 9th over the last 10 years shows the Packer suck at drafting? Laughing Laughing and I am the ignorant one....... As I said, clueless.
_________________
bitty wrote:
I don't understand why everybody thinks Green Bay is the pinnacle of NFL franchises?
In my opinion they are a joke. In the last ten years there drafts sucked.
#clueless
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
raidr4life


Joined: 10 Jan 2010
Posts: 4429
Location: Fresno, California
PostPosted: Sat Apr 27, 2013 12:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

socallbraider wrote:
Thank you to the people who actually do their homework.

GB has had a couple of GREAT drafts the last 5 years.Id have to gop look it up but the year they got Finley was Really good...and one good draft helps change your percentages immensley when your dealing in metrics under 10.That has really Raised their Hit/miss ratio ...But I was not going back 5 years as it seems some prpared article has done for lazy readers..I was going back to the begining of RMs tenure in GB.

And the point Really wasnt to put GB on Blast, it was to show that the idea that one GM or another was so INCREDIBLY better at the draft then others is a little skewed.

30%
Thats about the average.for all teams in a 10 year window.
Profootball focus "all time draft" by team gives a complete overview.

I dont get the whole Troll business.If someone is coming in saying
RAIDERS SUCK or some such nonsense then I guess that could be irritating, but divergent opinions is what This country was builty upon.People who insulate themselves only to like minded opinions like ONLY watching FoX, or Msnbc is what is creating so much dischord in society.If I dissagree with an approach ,casting disparaging remarks is about as childish as you can get.Most of the time The poster can elucidate why he doesnt agree...last time R4L big comeback was "you just dont get it"....YEAH...CLEARLY...The idea was you were going to explain it.
And you still don't get it. I don't waste my time explaining "it" when the previous 15 poster's tried to explain "it" to you. Your opinion is alway's right and everybody else is wrong, you have yet to concede anything, and when someone throws facts at you then you say you meant something else. Your the king of disparaging remarks go back and check all your post.
_________________
He hate me!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
oakdb36


Joined: 01 Mar 2006
Posts: 14407
PostPosted: Sat Apr 27, 2013 1:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

socallbraider wrote:

This draft is really confusing me though...we are all over the place when we all pretty much fealt that fixing the trenches was the first priority(well mabe a majority).


We also knew BPA was McKenzie prefered approach and when you have a roster where very few spots can be considered filled for the next few years, you can fully go BPA.
_________________
Plush wrote:
Papa was a trolling stone
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
socallbraider


Joined: 09 Apr 2013
Posts: 153
Location: US
PostPosted: Sat Apr 27, 2013 3:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

raidr4life wrote:
socallbraider wrote:
Thank you to the people who actually do their homework.

GB has had a couple of GREAT drafts the last 5 years.Id have to gop look it up but the year they got Finley was Really good...and one good draft helps change your percentages immensley when your dealing in metrics under 10.That has really Raised their Hit/miss ratio ...But I was not going back 5 years as it seems some prpared article has done for lazy readers..I was going back to the begining of RMs tenure in GB.

And the point Really wasnt to put GB on Blast, it was to show that the idea that one GM or another was so INCREDIBLY better at the draft then others is a little skewed.

30%
Thats about the average.for all teams in a 10 year window.
Profootball focus "all time draft" by team gives a complete overview.

I dont get the whole Troll business.If someone is coming in saying
RAIDERS SUCK or some such nonsense then I guess that could be irritating, but divergent opinions is what This country was builty upon.People who insulate themselves only to like minded opinions like ONLY watching FoX, or Msnbc is what is creating so much dischord in society.If I dissagree with an approach ,casting disparaging remarks is about as childish as you can get.Most of the time The poster can elucidate why he doesnt agree...last time R4L big comeback was "you just dont get it"....YEAH...CLEARLY...The idea was you were going to explain it.
And you still don't get it. I don't waste my time explaining "it" when the previous 15 poster's tried to explain "it" to you. Your opinion is alway's right and everybody else is wrong, you have yet to concede anything, and when someone throws facts at you then you say you meant something else. Your the king of disparaging remarks go back and check all your post.


I think I understand a little bit better.
opinions are never right or wrong...they are opinions. I defend mine fiecely as i would expect you to defend yours...its like placing a bet.

I see, often the conceding that you place such a high value in...but before the point of contention can be fairly evaluated, most of the conceding in here seems to be about soothing peoples egos.

For instance you fealt that B/u RB will not be a postion of relevance and could wait until the 6th round(apparently) and a player like Latavius Murray...I fealt it would be a better Idea to go sooner and get a Jonathan Franklin.

Now, how either does ,doesnt immediately make either opinion right or wrong...there are other factors, does, Dmac get Hurt? Do our Other backs have an Impact? Does Franklin get more then Third down reps?

so if your looking for an atta boy,I would suggest you dont need one.
I dont get upset that others see things a different way,sometimes they change my mind...

BTW, you go look @ my posts, I know what Ive written, I respond to people in the way they present themselves, YOU especially behaved like a immature kid when you reponded to my posts,so dont play the victim now.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
bitty


Joined: 19 Jan 2005
Posts: 3751
PostPosted: Sat Apr 27, 2013 5:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dessie wrote:
bitty wrote:
oakdb36 wrote:
http://www.draftmetrics.com/files/STUDYING%20THE%20DRAFT%20RECORD%20OF%20NFL%20TEAMS.pdf


Never saw that one.

This is from the same people
http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Whos-been-doing-the-best-job-of-drafting.html

Green Bay was 9th over the last 10 years and 14th of the last 5 years.

I'm not sure why they have 2 different ratings for Green Bay.
So I got a 50-50 shot at being right or apologizing.


So you think being 9th over the last 10 years shows the Packer suck at drafting? Laughing Laughing and I am the ignorant one....... As I said, clueless.


They went from 9th for 10 years to 14 for five years. See a trend there. Why don't you try to explain that away since you're so smart.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dessie


Joined: 02 Feb 2006
Posts: 4797
PostPosted: Sun Apr 28, 2013 3:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

bitty wrote:
Dessie wrote:
bitty wrote:
oakdb36 wrote:
http://www.draftmetrics.com/files/STUDYING%20THE%20DRAFT%20RECORD%20OF%20NFL%20TEAMS.pdf


Never saw that one.

This is from the same people
http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Whos-been-doing-the-best-job-of-drafting.html

Green Bay was 9th over the last 10 years and 14th of the last 5 years.

I'm not sure why they have 2 different ratings for Green Bay.
So I got a 50-50 shot at being right or apologizing.


So you think being 9th over the last 10 years shows the Packer suck at drafting? Laughing Laughing and I am the ignorant one....... As I said, clueless.


They went from 9th for 10 years to 14 for five years. See a trend there. Why don't you try to explain that away since you're so smart.


And Oakdb36 link shows they have been the most efficient over the last 5 years. Obviously you didn't read that. Rolling Eyes
_________________
bitty wrote:
I don't understand why everybody thinks Green Bay is the pinnacle of NFL franchises?
In my opinion they are a joke. In the last ten years there drafts sucked.
#clueless
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
oakdb36


Joined: 01 Mar 2006
Posts: 14407
PostPosted: Sun Apr 28, 2013 5:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dessie wrote:
bitty wrote:
Dessie wrote:
bitty wrote:
oakdb36 wrote:
http://www.draftmetrics.com/files/STUDYING%20THE%20DRAFT%20RECORD%20OF%20NFL%20TEAMS.pdf


Never saw that one.

This is from the same people
http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Whos-been-doing-the-best-job-of-drafting.html

Green Bay was 9th over the last 10 years and 14th of the last 5 years.

I'm not sure why they have 2 different ratings for Green Bay.
So I got a 50-50 shot at being right or apologizing.


So you think being 9th over the last 10 years shows the Packer suck at drafting? Laughing Laughing and I am the ignorant one....... As I said, clueless.


They went from 9th for 10 years to 14 for five years. See a trend there. Why don't you try to explain that away since you're so smart.


And Oakdb36 link shows they have been the most efficient over the last 5 years. Obviously you didn't read that. Rolling Eyes


Actually, the link is a study over the 1999 to 2006 period.

In the other link, they have what they call the expected rank which takes into account the number of picks and the draft position. The packers are always ranked higher than they were expected. That's efficiency.
_________________
Plush wrote:
Papa was a trolling stone
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dessie


Joined: 02 Feb 2006
Posts: 4797
PostPosted: Sun Apr 28, 2013 6:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

oakdb36 wrote:
Dessie wrote:
bitty wrote:
Dessie wrote:
bitty wrote:
oakdb36 wrote:
http://www.draftmetrics.com/files/STUDYING%20THE%20DRAFT%20RECORD%20OF%20NFL%20TEAMS.pdf


Never saw that one.

This is from the same people
http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Whos-been-doing-the-best-job-of-drafting.html

Green Bay was 9th over the last 10 years and 14th of the last 5 years.

I'm not sure why they have 2 different ratings for Green Bay.
So I got a 50-50 shot at being right or apologizing.


So you think being 9th over the last 10 years shows the Packer suck at drafting? Laughing Laughing and I am the ignorant one....... As I said, clueless.


They went from 9th for 10 years to 14 for five years. See a trend there. Why don't you try to explain that away since you're so smart.


And Oakdb36 link shows they have been the most efficient over the last 5 years. Obviously you didn't read that. Rolling Eyes


Actually, the link is a study over the 1999 to 2006 period.

In the other link, they have what they call the expected rank which takes into account the number of picks and the draft position. The packers are always ranked higher than they were expected. That's efficiency.


Sorry that's what I was referring to. They certainly don't suck.
_________________
bitty wrote:
I don't understand why everybody thinks Green Bay is the pinnacle of NFL franchises?
In my opinion they are a joke. In the last ten years there drafts sucked.
#clueless
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bitty


Joined: 19 Jan 2005
Posts: 3751
PostPosted: Sun Apr 28, 2013 9:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dessie wrote:
oakdb36 wrote:
Dessie wrote:
bitty wrote:
Dessie wrote:
bitty wrote:
oakdb36 wrote:
http://www.draftmetrics.com/files/STUDYING%20THE%20DRAFT%20RECORD%20OF%20NFL%20TEAMS.pdf


Never saw that one.

This is from the same people
http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Whos-been-doing-the-best-job-of-drafting.html

Green Bay was 9th over the last 10 years and 14th of the last 5 years.

I'm not sure why they have 2 different ratings for Green Bay.
So I got a 50-50 shot at being right or apologizing.


So you think being 9th over the last 10 years shows the Packer suck at drafting? Laughing Laughing and I am the ignorant one....... As I said, clueless.


They went from 9th for 10 years to 14 for five years. See a trend there. Why don't you try to explain that away since you're so smart.


And Oakdb36 link shows they have been the most efficient over the last 5 years. Obviously you didn't read that. Rolling Eyes


Actually, the link is a study over the 1999 to 2006 period.

In the other link, they have what they call the expected rank which takes into account the number of picks and the draft position. The packers are always ranked higher than they were expected. That's efficiency.


Sorry that's what I was referring to. They certainly don't suck.



To have a 50% drop in the ratings is a huge deal. They are headed in the wrong direction fast. Aaron Rodgers lead the league in getting sacked last year with 51.They are 20th in the league in rushing and 17 in rush defense.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
oakdb36


Joined: 01 Mar 2006
Posts: 14407
PostPosted: Sun Apr 28, 2013 9:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

bitty wrote:

To have a 50% drop in the ratings is a huge deal. They are headed in the wrong direction fast. Aaron Rodgers lead the league in getting sacked last year with 51.They are 20th in the league in rushing and 17 in rush defense.


They drafted lower and had less picks in the top 3 rounds. Their roster is also better, leaving little room for new starters. It's not a huge deal at all. For the last 5 years, they're expected to be ranked 20th but are actually 14th. It means they've done a pretty good job with what they had to work with.
_________________
Plush wrote:
Papa was a trolling stone
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bitty


Joined: 19 Jan 2005
Posts: 3751
PostPosted: Sun Apr 28, 2013 10:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

oakdb36 wrote:
bitty wrote:

To have a 50% drop in the ratings is a huge deal. They are headed in the wrong direction fast. Aaron Rodgers lead the league in getting sacked last year with 51.They are 20th in the league in rushing and 17 in rush defense.


They drafted lower and had less picks in the top 3 rounds. Their roster is also better, leaving little room for new starters. It's not a huge deal at all. For the last 5 years, they're expected to be ranked 20th but are actually 14th. It means they've done a pretty good job with what they had to work with.



But the stats show they'er not that good on both lines. They drafted linemen in the first round the last 5 years and they are getting worse on both lines.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Oakland Raiders All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 41, 42, 43  Next
Page 42 of 43

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group