George Kittle was the 9th TE picked in the 2017 draft. Seemingly every scout missed his star potential. Kittle had an ideal pedigree (his dad was a captain at Iowa, a great TE school), he was 6’4 247lbs, he ran a 4.52 forty (#1 at combine) and had elite leaping ability. He was polished enough to be able to set the all-time NFL record for receiving yards by his 2nd season — more than Kelce, Gronk, Gonzales — and in his 3rd is the most dominant blocking TE we’ve seen since who ... Gronk? Bavaro?
Kittle also has an incredible fire for the game, toughness, charisma, you name it. But everybody missed it (our beloved Sy 56 had him as the 14th best TE — in a year that Sy 56 also ranked Trubisky, Kizer, and Peterman over Mahomes).
My point is, the NFL draft seems almost as random as the stock market. Every single year, there are dozens are crazy hits and misses. The teams that hit (say Seattle, when they hit on Chancellor and Sherman in the 5th rounds in consecutive years) are hailed as geniuses, when it seems really more a function of luck. This is not to say that there aren’t shades of expertise involved, but considering the low scouting accuracy rate seems to suggest that the best thing you can do is to accumulate as many picks as possible — enough with pinning your hopes on “blue gooses” etc — trade down for volume and hope you find a Kittle, Sherman, Tyreek Hill and so many others. In other words, maybe it’s smart to think twice before turning down nice pick packages for Chase Young.
The standard deviation between bust and pro bowler is lower, the higher you pick. You can always get lucky and find a gem later in the draft, but quantity does not always equal quality.
I mean, you could have drafted the entire 5th round in 2011 and the only other pro bowler you would have ended up with in addition to Sherman is Anthony Sherman, a fullback.
Maybe that’s just me. I’m also an index fund guy too and layup a lot on par 5s.
I agree the stats shower higher picks are more successful — but you also need to factor in opportunity. Teams have a vested interest in seeing higher picks succeed, and they get much more of the benefit of the doubt.
Not sure what a reasonable haul would be for the no. 2, but great teams are not built on the Miles Garretts of the world — and the Giants still have a million holes.
The GOAT QB was passed-on 198 times, 6 of those times by the Pats. Lamar Jackson wasn't anyone's top choice, including the Ravens who thought a so-far not very good TE was a better top pick. Kittle is another example.
It seems like a smart bet to cash in the top 5 pick for as many top 3-4 round guys as possible.
There’s a shit load of luck involved. Russell Wilson gets picked first overall not 3rd round in the redraft. Seattle liked him prior to the draft. Now they can’t live without him. Lucky. And good.
Teams draft a lot of players like Kittle in the middle rounds on potential, hoping they can put injuries behind them and become more productive as pros than they were in college. Success with those guys isn't exactly random, it's just fairly rare. The Giants have had a few over the years, though none as meteoric as Kittle. Justin Tuck comes to mind. Maybe Corey Webster? Victor Cruz, Rich Seubert, and Ahmad Bradshaw were finds too, for different reasons.
Teams draft a lot of players like Kittle in the middle rounds on potential, hoping they can put injuries behind them and become more productive as pros than they were in college. Success with those guys isn't exactly random, it's just fairly rare. The Giants have had a few over the years, though none as meteoric as Kittle. Justin Tuck comes to mind. Maybe Corey Webster? Victor Cruz, Rich Seubert, and Ahmad Bradshaw were finds too, for different reasons.
This. Injury concerns were a major reason he dropped. He would have likely been a second round pick without that injury issue (his lack of production would have kept him out of the first).
It seems like a smart bet to cash in the top 5 pick for as many top 3-4 round guys as possible.
don't know if i'd trade for 3-4 round picks, but certainly for 1st and 2nd rounders (given the higher hit rate on those picks). you can take the hit rate by round and calculate expected value and decide how many later round picks you need to give up the 1st overall in the draft. but of course, that's analytics.
Regardless of the value of our first pick, we could end up in a situation where we have the first pick and Cin wants Burroughs. Will we threaten to trade with another team and force them to trade with us? We could, in that way, get picks AND get our top target. Or will we dance around proclaiming that Young has been touched by the hand of god and then run to take him with almost all of our time left on the clock. That would be dumb.....but I have little confidence in this GM. And for that matter, perhaps the fancy folks that this GM has hired aren't that fancy and perhaps they have been told to focus on one attribute only....player weight.
...that's way too over simplified.
So many of the guys with all time great talent slip through the cracks — Travis Kelce, ZaDarius Smith, D Hunter, on and on. We have rarely if ever traded down .... we have been the Blue Goose franchise forever ... I think this is the year to do it.
Refusing to trade down is a MAJOR problem with the Giants' franchise. Every draft pick becomes do or die when you don't have many of them.
I am EXTREMELY high on Chase Young and think he's the best edge prospect in a very long time. With that said, trading down is probably still the right move if it can net another first and a second. I think the only time you don't trade down is if you need a QB and plan to take one (or if the offer isn't very good).