2017 NFL draft thread

[Calichief 3,016]

I give you an F (unless there's a G) for grading a draft before anyone has hit the field yet.

Yep

[mex 65,581]

Watched him play a lot. I'm a huge Michigan guy. Disappeared a lot but it wasn't a great passing attack either.

Broncos did well with Jake Butt... surprised he fell to the 5th. 

[xen 1,010,219]

Looks like the bills lost the draft. GM fired this morning.

[oldtimer 8,684]

have to wonder if the deal with the Chiefs had much to do with this

[Calichief 3,016]

Sean McDermott was already running things. The GM was already phased out. Don't read into it

[DieHard 2,061]

Interesting. They probably could have used Mahomes themselves. I wonder if that had anything to do with it.

[Calichief 3,016]

Owners fired all the sabres people too

[oldtimer 8,684]

Sean McDermott was already running things. The GM was already phased out. Don't read into it

 

odd timing

[robgar 1,046]

Dorsey had this one figured correctly. And he still was able to swing a good deal. Masterful.

And we now find, out that the bills are much happier with next years first than if we had given them our entire draft this year, this is why it was so cheap. Because they wanted to get rid of everybody making decisions with the bills.

[xen 1,010,219]

odd timing

I read they were already looking to part ways. IF they made the decision close to the draft it makes sense to let the draft play out and then do it. I guess. I would have pulled the band aid earlier.

[Calichief 3,016]

I read they were already looking to part ways. IF they made the decision close to the draft it makes sense to let the draft play out and then do it. I guess. I would have pulled the band aid earlier.

It was done. Avoided pre draft controversy

[NChiefsCorner 496]

Looks like Buffalo is after Brett Veach a member of the Chiefs for their GM position.

[xen 1,010,219]

Looks like Buffalo is after Brett Veach a member of the Chiefs for their GM position.

I heard it was a member of the Panthers front office.

[NChiefsCorner 496]

Might be looking at more than one person.

[xen 1,010,219]

Might be looking at more than one person.

I'm sure they are. Anybody have faith they can get it right outside of buffalo?

[liquidfriend 1,151]

Who knows, but dumping Whaley was absolutely the right move.

 

Too many strikes with Marrone, EJ Manuel and Sammy Watkins not working out like they had hoped.

[liquidfriend 1,151]

As for the Mahomes trade value

 

here's the updated chart

 

http://www.patspulpit.com/2017/4/23/15398184/2017-nfl-draft-creating-a-brand-new-nfl-draft-value-trade-chart

 

259.77 is what the 91st and 27th pick is worth.  A future first hold the equivalent value of a current years 2nd,  so lets call it 90.84 in value.  So overall the Chiefs trade package was worth 350.61 and the #10 pick is worth 369.09.  They probably felt that future 1 holds more value than a late current 2nd, but it seems the value is about equal.

[dhitter 1,424]

As for the Mahomes trade value

 

here's the updated chart

 

http://www.patspulpit.com/2017/4/23/15398184/2017-nfl-draft-creating-a-brand-new-nfl-draft-value-trade-chart

 

259.77 is what the 91st and 27th pick is worth. A future first hold the equivalent value of a current years 2nd, so lets call it 90.84 in value. So overall the Chiefs trade package was worth 350.61 and the #10 pick is worth 369.09. They probably felt that future 1 holds more value than a late current 2nd, but it seems the value is about equal.

Assuming this is accurate/fair...so why are all the pundits referring to "the steep price" the Chiefs paid to move up and get Mahomes?

[KC Warpaint 3,234]

Assuming this is accurate/fair...so why are all the pundits referring to "the steep price" the Chiefs paid to move up and get Mahomes?

 

 i can only assume that they are referring to giving up a 1st next year (regardless of if it is a high or low pick) as being a steep price

[jetlord 10,207]

Assuming this is accurate/fair...so why are all the pundits referring to "the steep price" the Chiefs paid to move up and get Mahomes?

Not too steep for a starting QB.  They just don't see Mahomes as having that much upside.

[liquidfriend 1,151]

Assuming this is accurate/fair...so why are all the pundits referring to "the steep price" the Chiefs paid to move up and get Mahomes?

Because pundits are stupid and saying the logical, reasonable thing doesn't generate clicks and listens.

 

There's really no way to cut it. If you're going from near the end of the first round into the top 10, you have to part with a future 1. It's the going rate.

 

These are the same dolts that turned around and said wow what a good bold and value move the Texans made by parting with a future one for Watson.

[xen 1,010,219]

Because pundits are stupid and saying the logical, reasonable thing doesn't generate clicks and listens.

 

There's really no way to cut it. If you're going from near the end of the first round into the top 10, you have to part with a future 1. It's the going rate.

 

These are the same dolts that turned around and said wow what a good bold and value move the Texans made by parting with a future one for Watson.

Yep. But KC has a qb and Houston doesn't and any team that doesnt will be applauded for going to get one. I heard one pundit say the difference is that KC has a sensible QB plan in place and Houston doesn't. I'd agree.

 

Remember Chicago got destroyed even though they just signed a journeyman and pretty sure they have an out in his contract. And compared to what other teams have paid to move up 1 spot for a qb high in the draft it really wasn't a ton that Chicago paid. Per Peter king he was in the draft room and there was another team trying to trade up.

[jetlord 10,207]

 

 

Remember Chicago got destroyed even though they just signed a journeyman and pretty sure they have an out in his contract. And compared to what other teams have paid to move up 1 spot for a qb high in the draft it really wasn't a ton that Chicago paid. Per Peter king he was in the draft room and there was another team trying to trade up.

So how much did the Bears know about what other offers SFO had?  They may have been played by the 'niners.  SFO got the guy they would have taken anyway, so they traded away nothing to move back a spot.  I think the Bears got snookered.

[liquidfriend 1,151]

Yep. But KC has a qb and Houston doesn't and any team that doesnt will be applauded for going to get one. I heard one pundit say the difference is that KC has a sensible QB plan in place and Houston doesn't. I'd agree.

Remember Chicago got destroyed even though they just signed a journeyman and pretty sure they have an out in his contract. And compared to what other teams have paid to move up 1 spot for a qb high in the draft it really wasn't a ton that Chicago paid. Per Peter king he was in the draft room and there was another team trying to trade up.

I've heard people were looking to move up for Trubisky, but not that far.

 

The Bears got worked in that trade than followed it up by doing some massive reaching and bizarro drafting.

 

They just don't seem to know what they want to do with the QB position and I think you can tell a power struggle is going on.

[xen 1,010,219]

They probably got worked some. But not as bad as people are making it out to be.

 

Personally I was not that high on trubisky. But you know, one man's trash...