Did a First Pick mock

Howard at #25 and McCaffrey in Round 2.

Pipe dream draft.

would not get a 3rd and a 4th round pick. They would get just a 5th rounder or a 4th if they were very lucky.

Ugh, not one, but two mediocre tackles, and a RB that doesn't fit our team.

I would take Kamara over McCaffrey. A for effort.

And I doubt Howard will be there at 23 or 25.

Ryan Anderson, though. Not big enough to be a DE on our team, isn't athletic enough for WLB, and would likely be strictly a SAM, which is a low priority position on our team. In the third that's a good place to get an OT or OG if you haven't yet, or CB or RB. Anderson is a 3-4 rush OLB, also not a team fit at all.

In comment 13396116 allstarjim said:

Quote:

Ugh, not one, but two mediocre tackles, and a RB that doesn't fit our team. I would take Kamara over McCaffrey. A for effort.

Please list the guaranteed allstar tackles that WILL be available that far in the draft and I will be happy to take one next time.


I know this is a pipe dream draft.

Have no chance of being there where you picked them, in fact they will probably be gone before the 23rd pick, but good try.

Anything really at any point in the draft.

Dion Dawkins there? Great grade on him, and is a Giants-type of player, has the length to play RT, should slot in at OG early, though.

I would also take a chance on J'ulien Davenport. The physical measurables say he has a future at LT.

for moving down two slots, and still got out man, Howard, no less? Reese, get the flock out of here, we have a new shepard!

geez what a pipe dream

Howard in the 1st
Cook in the 2nd
Lamp in the 3rd
Mike Williams in the 4th

because that is just as likely as your draft

I'm not saying those guys will be available that far down in the draft.

But that's why I'd prefer to take an OL MUCH earlier, 3rd round at latest. LT is a big problem, it's more of a problem than getting the top TE in the draft, especially when this is the deepest draft for TEs I can ever remember.

And I like Howard. But we've seen top OTs get more and more scarce in the draft in recent years. So I'm saying instead of getting a RB that isn't a team fit at all, that's a good place to get OL help even of you went TE in the first.

Her 1st one had us getting Soloman Thomas in the 2nd round.

Thank you.

Anyway, the trade offers on first-pick.com tend to be far more generous than anything that happens in real life. Seattle keeps offering me their second-round pick to swap #23 and #26. Based on the standard trade-value chart, that's more than 5X the true value of those three spots.

Also, McCaffery often falls to #55 because first-pick doesn't rate RB a high need for many teams. For the same reason, it's not uncommon to see Cook or Fournette available at #23.

Don't get me wrong - the simulator is great fun, but that's all it is.

...is the apparent use of the same player grades for all 32 teams. While it's likely that some teams have a third- or fourth-round grade on McCaffery, other teams probably have him closer to the draftnik consensus: in the 20-30 range among first-round picks, and very close to Cook and Fournette. That leaves little chance of him remaining on the board at #55, despite the League-wide devaluation of RBs.

A better design would be to start from a standard list, then randomize each team's draft board within certain reasonable parameters. That way, the seemingly off-the-wall picks that happen in real life (Danny Watkins at #23?!! A.J. Jenkins at #30?!!) would actually pop up occasionally, and the inexplicable falls like McCaffery to #55 might be less likely.

In comment 13396150 jlukes said:

Quote:

Howard in the 1st Cook in the 2nd Lamp in the 3rd Mike Williams in the 4th because that is just as likely as your draft

+1

do not get this obsession with Christian McCaffrey. We have Perkins and Vereen with similar skill sets. I don't see the Giants drafting McCaffrey. The team needs a bigger back to pound between the tackles and shot yard duties and not another scat-back.

dk in TX said:

Quote:

do not get this obsession with Christian McCaffrey. We have Perkins and Vereen with similar skill sets. I don't see the Giants drafting McCaffrey. The team needs a bigger back to pound between the tackles and shot yard duties and not another scat-back.

I think there are several factors:
1) McCaffery often falls to #55 in simulations, at which point he becomes an almost irresistible value;
2) Vereen's future with NYG has been in doubt, at least until the team paid his roster bonus this week;
3) Vereen's injury history underscores the importance of RB depth;
4) Vereen will be a UFA in 2018, and McCaffery would be a worthy successor;
5) There's a family connection, although Dad achieved most of his success elsewhere;
6) Rightly or wrongly, Perkins and McCaffery are perceived as very different backs;
7) A multi-dimensional threat like McCaffery would be welcome in McAdoo's offense.

I don't think that's a big deal with McCaffery, though it's hard to escape it completely.

I see him more as a terrific athlete and productive player who also happens to be a "High Motor Smart Guy", a "High Motor Rich Guy" and a "High Motor NFL-Pedigree Guy" .

In comment 13396489 dk in TX said:

Quote:

do not get this obsession with Christian McCaffrey. We have Perkins and Vereen with similar skill sets. I don't see the Giants drafting McCaffrey. The team needs a bigger back to pound between the tackles and shot yard duties and not another scat-back.

me neither. especially in Rd 1. Rd2, maybe depending on who else is available

might be the most absurd thing ive ever read on this site. And thatś saying a lot