this article every year. 100% nothing to do with race (because I know people will go there) but Bolles looks so goofy to be a guy who "ran with gangs".
very informative article. Has some player slotted differently that you see in mocks (e.g. Hooker and Reddick between 25-50), may be because the article is 3 weeks old. Nice to have real info from real scouts.
about Dalvin Tomlinson of Alabama. Great kid with a great story and not often you see a highly rated D Tackle with a degree in Finance. State Champion high school wrestler in Georgia. Lost his Dad early in life and his Mom several years later.
If you watched Alabama, you will see games in which he played all 4 D line positions in the same game. Some draft "experts" had him as a 4th rounder (crazy). He is going to be a steady solid reliable player for the team that drafts him. He lacks the explosiveness to be a first rounder, but he would be a great pick at #55.
bibblue12- thanks for posting. I look forward to McGinns article every year. Mcginn never postures himself as a draft expert. He always states that he has a great relationship with pro scouts and relies on combining their comments to draw his conclusions. It works, because on draft weekend, you will see a lot of truth in his annual article.
go through this every year but the Giants will roll the dice on guys with "pasts" if they deem him the right guy. In general they do a great job of assessing the risks.
Crowd a bit. I'm not crazy about him and much rather have Foster or Davis if they are there. To me it's a no brainer grabbing either one over him, and I'd pass on him if he's there and they're not.
go through this every year but the Giants will roll the dice on guys with "pasts" if they deem him the right guy. In general they do a great job of assessing the risks.
I agree. The Giants are good at doing due diligence on players who have questions like that.
Players are rentals - if anything, a guy coming in older would presumably be more mature and physically developed (relative to where he would be 2 years earlier).
The guy would be under contract for 4-5 years (depending on round, options, etc.). Even if drafted at 25, he'd still only be 30 when he hits FA, at which point you'd only really be interested in extending him for a few years anyway.
Where's the downside of drafting an older player?
RE: With free agency, why do people care about age?
Players are rentals - if anything, a guy coming in older would presumably be more mature and physically developed (relative to where he would be 2 years earlier).
The guy would be under contract for 4-5 years (depending on round, options, etc.). Even if drafted at 25, he'd still only be 30 when he hits FA, at which point you'd only really be interested in extending him for a few years anyway.
Where's the downside of drafting an older player?
The downside is he needs to get stronger, and there is going to be a learning curve from college to the NFL no matter how old you are.
Possibility by the time he adjusts to the NFL game he's pushing 30.
If it takes him 5 years to adjust, it's already a bad pick.
Players are rentals - if anything, a guy coming in older would presumably be more mature and physically developed (relative to where he would be 2 years earlier).
The guy would be under contract for 4-5 years (depending on round, options, etc.). Even if drafted at 25, he'd still only be 30 when he hits FA, at which point you'd only really be interested in extending him for a few years anyway.
Where's the downside of drafting an older player?
Theoretically, younger player represents a higher ceiling and longer return on investment.
Free agents are often stop gaps and quick fixes. The draft, in theory, is for building the nucleus.
No, didn't mean it like that - I meant that players become FAs
after 4-5 years anyway. You're still building your nucleus, just that the player has 2 years less of effective career (and even that's a guess purely based on age, since health is such a crapshoot).
Considering how likely it is a player will move on after a first or second contract, the maximum career length being shortened by age isn't really relevant.
RE: If it takes him 5 years to adjust, it's already a bad pick.
Because his older age could be an advantage for him at the collegiate level. And that could mean he's not going to be as good in the pros. It's one thing for 25 year old to dominate 19 year olds in college, quite another to play well against men in the pros.
The younger prospect will always carry more appeal.
Crowd a bit. I'm not crazy about him and much rather have Foster or Davis if they are there. To me it's a no brainer grabbing either one over him, and I'd pass on him if he's there and they're not.
Yeah, someone in the other thread made Cunningham sound like the next LT...not a good writeup for him.
Because his older age could be an advantage for him at the collegiate level. And that could mean he's not going to be as good in the pros. It's one thing for 25 year old to dominate 19 year olds in college, quite another to play well against men in the pros.
The younger prospect will always carry more appeal.
Really depends on how developed he is, which requires more consideration. An older player isn't an immediate disqualification to me if it means you're not waiting 1-2 years for him to grasp the pro level. I look at Tim Williams from Bama, he's 23, but he's an advanced pass rush OLB in addition to his physicals, which are very, very good. He already knows a variety of block-shedding moves and seems to demonstrate knowing how to set up his assignment.
What he has to learn is run support, but that is something that can be taught IMO.
I saw that it is an older article, but I have not seen it so I figured I might not be the only one.
McGinn has him in the group that will probably be available at the end of round 1.
If you watched Alabama, you will see games in which he played all 4 D line positions in the same game. Some draft "experts" had him as a 4th rounder (crazy). He is going to be a steady solid reliable player for the team that drafts him. He lacks the explosiveness to be a first rounder, but he would be a great pick at #55.
bibblue12- thanks for posting. I look forward to McGinns article every year. Mcginn never postures himself as a draft expert. He always states that he has a great relationship with pro scouts and relies on combining their comments to draw his conclusions. It works, because on draft weekend, you will see a lot of truth in his annual article.
Bolles age has to be a red flag (I'd argue far more than his "past'). 25 before the season ever begins?
Quote:
be ok with Bolles?
Bolles age has to be a red flag (I'd argue far more than his "past'). 25 before the season ever begins?
That's why I wouldn't draft him, by the time he fully adjusts to the NFL he'll be nearing 30.
There's been a lot of talk of Cook's issues when he was 14. This guy actually ran with gangs.
Quote:
be ok with Bolles?
Bolles age has to be a red flag (I'd argue far more than his "past'). 25 before the season ever begins?
Certainly something to consider but I dont think it should keep us from drafting him. Age is not a big deal for an OL.
That is a targeted position, conference and school for NYG in the Reese era.
I agree. The Giants are good at doing due diligence on players who have questions like that.
The guy would be under contract for 4-5 years (depending on round, options, etc.). Even if drafted at 25, he'd still only be 30 when he hits FA, at which point you'd only really be interested in extending him for a few years anyway.
Where's the downside of drafting an older player?
The guy would be under contract for 4-5 years (depending on round, options, etc.). Even if drafted at 25, he'd still only be 30 when he hits FA, at which point you'd only really be interested in extending him for a few years anyway.
Where's the downside of drafting an older player?
The downside is he needs to get stronger, and there is going to be a learning curve from college to the NFL no matter how old you are.
Possibility by the time he adjusts to the NFL game he's pushing 30.
As for getting stronger, that applies to all players coming in, wouldn't be any different if he were younger.
The guy would be under contract for 4-5 years (depending on round, options, etc.). Even if drafted at 25, he'd still only be 30 when he hits FA, at which point you'd only really be interested in extending him for a few years anyway.
Where's the downside of drafting an older player?
Theoretically, younger player represents a higher ceiling and longer return on investment.
Free agents are often stop gaps and quick fixes. The draft, in theory, is for building the nucleus.
Considering how likely it is a player will move on after a first or second contract, the maximum career length being shortened by age isn't really relevant.
As for getting stronger, that applies to all players coming in, wouldn't be any different if he were younger.
Pushing 30 doesn't mean 30. If it takes him two years he's already 27. At some point you stop improving from a physical standpoint.
As opposed to a guy would be 24.
Same reason why you don't see NBA teams take 4 year guys in the first round..
The younger prospect will always carry more appeal.
Yeah, someone in the other thread made Cunningham sound like the next LT...not a good writeup for him.
The younger prospect will always carry more appeal.
Really depends on how developed he is, which requires more consideration. An older player isn't an immediate disqualification to me if it means you're not waiting 1-2 years for him to grasp the pro level. I look at Tim Williams from Bama, he's 23, but he's an advanced pass rush OLB in addition to his physicals, which are very, very good. He already knows a variety of block-shedding moves and seems to demonstrate knowing how to set up his assignment.
What he has to learn is run support, but that is something that can be taught IMO.