Mayock Position Rankings

[manxman2601]

I was asking a legit question. 6 pounds is nothing for a 300 pounder. If it was an OLB going from 250 to 244 I might think ok maybe that gives him a bit of a jump in his step but for a 300 pounder I would have to hear he weighed 325 and got down to 310 to really think much of it.

I don't hate Tuitt. I just don't think he's a first rounder.

Nor a second rounder. You asked me to revisit Jernigan. I'll suggest the same including his junior tape.

 

[everlong]

He was playing at 320 plus earlier in the year.

If that's the case it's significant but I saw him list at 312

 

[everlong]

Nor a second rounder. You asked me to revisit Jernigan. I'll suggest the same including his junior tape.

I actually started to do just that and I admit he was more explosive his junior year but he also seemed to get stood up more his senior year and his hand work hasn't improved. Some of his sacks he was unblocked.

If his 10 yard split on the 40 and 3-cone come out good I'll upgrade his status. If I was a team I would ask about the weight and who's idea it was and perhaps build in some weight clauses.

 

[stelfans]

If that's the case it's significant but I saw him list at 312

He said he dropped about 20 pounds since started trainning this year.
Also said he wants to show how athletic he is.

If this is the case and he shows at the combine that he can return to his 2012 form im all for it. Tuitt is a perfect pats fit IMO.

Im probably the biggest Urban fan in here but i dont think he has the same ability to play DE that Tuitt has. He'd be perfect in a 3-4 but i dont think he can play 4-3 DE. Tuitt on the other hand..

 

[Merril Hoge's Tie Knot]

Nope. How I view him on tape and fit for the Patriots for me.

That's not what I meant. I watch his tape when he was heathy and he's a first rounder. When he plays hurt he doesn't look like a first rounder. I think depending on how you view that relates to if you like him or not.

 

[everlong]

Even after watching more of the 2012 stuff I just don't think he's as good as others seem to. We'll just agree to disagree.

 

[everlong]

Tuitt is down to 306lb. Same weight he was when he got 12 sacks. Some people going to be sorry.

I really don't think I'll be sorry if I'm wrong. I've been wrong about lots of prospects. We just disagree. I hardly doubt you'll be sorry if Jernigan turns out to be a stud. We all have opinions and need to keep it as civil as possible to keep the exchange of ideas flowing. We probably agree on 75% of the prospects. It's the 25% that are far more interesting.

 

[Off The Grid]

People keep saying Tuitt is Seymour, he's not. He's go the potential to be Ty Warren. In today's game Ty Warren just isn't the same value at 2003 when he was drafted. I think Hageman has the potential to be a Seymour type. I would take Hageman at 29 but Tuitt not before 62 and to be honest if there were prospects I like better on the board I'd still be disappointent then. I feel he's a middle of the 3rd value.

I think this is spot on. Tuitt got hyped as the "next Seymour" early on, and some people just keep repeating the hype. Again, I'd take Brent Urban over Tuitt.

Yeah, seriously. Beautifully put, Brother Long, about both Tuitt, his Value, and Hageman, and especially about the tremendous reduction in the value of the Ty Warren gig since 2003!! :rocker:

Strong Point about the parroting of the "Next Seymour" bit, as well, Brother Mayo, which obviously does not apply to Brother Manx, who does his own work. And of course he could prove to be correct, and us wrong. Then again: Final Analysis is still a few months away.

 

[manxman2601]

That's not what I meant. I watch his tape when he was heathy and he's a first rounder. When he plays hurt he doesn't look like a first rounder. I think depending on how you view that relates to if you like him or not.

If they ignored his good tape in favour of his bad tape, I'd suggest that there is an agenda at play. That does not mean that not liking Tuitt means you have an agenda, there are other reasons to not like him.

 

[manxman2601]

Yeah, seriously. Beautifully put, Brother Long, about both Tuitt, his Value, and Hageman, and especially about the tremendous reduction in the value of the Ty Warren gig since 2003!! :rocker:

Strong Point about the parroting of the "Next Seymour" bit, as well, Brother Mayo, which obviously does not apply to Brother Manx, who does his own work. And of course he could prove to be correct, and us wrong. Then again: Final Analysis is still a few months away.

I appreciate you making that distinction Grid.

 

[Wilfork#75]

To me Tuitt is an enigma. I really want to like him but he makes it so hard. He's got the measurables, the athleticism and the look but when I watch him he always leaves me wanting to see him do more. On his 2012 tape he flashed the brilliance and the dominance but he also showed inconsistency. I was expecting him to come out in 2013 and put it all together and dominate, but instead he took a step back and really disappointed me. The big question is can he finally put it all together?

On tape I think he is a 3rd round pick, but I'm sure in workouts he is going to shine and show his upside. The question is which player do you draft? Do you grade him as a 3rd rounder based on tape or a 1st rounder based on potential? He is the type of guy that if you take him high he can make you look silly. On the other hand he can make you look just as silly if you pass on him. I really like taking guys in the middle rounds that have the size and athleticism but haven't yet been able to translate it onto the field (Michael Johnson, Greg Hardy) but the question is how high? I personally wouldn't take him until #62, but at the same time I can see myself getting excited very easily if we do take him at #29.

 

[mayoclinic]

Strong Point about the parroting of the "Next Seymour" bit, as well, Brother Mayo, which obviously does not apply to Brother Manx, who does his own work. And of course he could prove to be correct, and us wrong. Then again: Final Analysis is still a few months away.

I appreciate you making that distinction Grid.

Manx, if I haven't said it before, I respect you tremendously for doing your own work and having the conviction to trust your own eyes and judgment. It's so easy to get influenced by the hype train, and so much of what draftniks say and professional teams do in the draft is driven by the herd mentality. I generally put much more stock in the evaluations of those who I know do their own film review, have good eyes and evaluation skills, and are willing to go against the grain than I do many of the more well-known draftniks. None of us is perfect, so I find it very useful to "cross check" my own assessments with those of others whim I respect. Your integrity and skills have caused me to re-appraise many, many prospects, and I lay a lot of credence into your evaluations because you have demonstrated over and over again that you have an exceptional eye for evaluating talent. So if we disagree on a prospect - such as Tuitt - you can be sure that I for one will be re-checking film and asking myself if I missed something.

And if a guy like Tuitt falls, then I could see a fast reverse of direction into a "pick Tuitt" mode. It's all about value.

 

[everlong]

Manx, if I haven't said it before, I respect you tremendously for doing your own work and having the conviction to trust your own eyes and judgment.

Honestly that's the thing I like best about all the frequent posters in this forum including Manx. They're not afraid to go against the grain even, or especially, versus the "experts" ranging from Mayock to Goslin.

I think the problem is we all get binkitis from time to time. Having one's binky insulted is like kicking the persons dog or in extreme cases having an affair with their wife. We're all guilty of it. If people rank Amaro ahead of ASJ you can probably feel the vibrations across the internet from the eye-roll's velocity.

 

[everlong]

To me Tuitt is an enigma. I really want to like him but he makes it so hard. He's got the measurables, the athleticism and the look but when I watch him he always leaves me wanting to see him do more. On his 2012 tape he flashed the brilliance and the dominance but he also showed inconsistency. I was expecting him to come out in 2013 and put it all together and dominate, but instead he took a step back and really disappointed me. The big question is can he finally put it all together?

On tape I think he is a 3rd round pick, but I'm sure in workouts he is going to shine and show his upside. The question is which player do you draft? Do you grade him as a 3rd rounder based on tape or a 1st rounder based on potential? He is the type of guy that if you take him high he can make you look silly. On the other hand he can make you look just as silly if you pass on him. I really like taking guys in the middle rounds that have the size and athleticism but haven't yet been able to translate it onto the field (Michael Johnson, Greg Hardy) but the question is how high? I personally wouldn't take him until #62, but at the same time I can see myself getting excited very easily if we do take him at #29.

That's a great summation. The other interesting thing that Manx pointed out was the playing heavier in 2013. Watching that tape I really didn't see the athletic ability. Going back and watching 2012 I could see more of it and finally got why people thought he had a higher upside than I did. I still wouldn't grade him out based on that tape higher than a low second to high third but I would get the Pats taking him at 62 more than I did.

3-cone and 10 yard split on the 40 are going to tell us a lot along with the positional drills.

 

[mayoclinic]

Given the above discussion about some of the differing player evaluations on this board, there was an interesting read today from Jerry Angelo writing for the NFP, discussing some of the differing opinions on players within an organization and how to reconcile them:

The battle within | National Football Post

I found this particularly interesting:

My rule: If we can’t come to a consensus on a top player, we take him off the draft board. The worst thing you can do as an organization is draft a player high or sign one for big money during free agency and know that someone who is responsible for his success and development is vehemently against the final decision.

I remember one time in Chicago when two of our offensive coaches had a big disagreement regarding a veteran player, yet we went ahead and signed him, overriding one coach in the process. Unfortunately, that was the coach who was assigned to coach that player.

Needless to say, the situation resulted in a bad ending.

I’m not saying everybody has to be in love with the player, but there has to be a positive feeling amongst the entire staff. Drafting isn’t an extension of somebody’s ego. It’s about finding players who fit the coaches’ schemes and the philosophy of the organization.

What the consistently good teams do is identify the type of player they want at each position. They define the traits a player needs to possess as well as the deficiencies they are willing to live with. Ownership has a say in the process as well. They want to be represented by individuals who are not going to be an embarrassment to the club and the city it represents. Those are the major tenets.

Obviously, things work different in different organizations. BB reportedly overrode his personnel people in taking Jamie Collins last year, and the coaching staff was patient in working with him.

This was also interesting:

Scouts are looking for players whose strengths accentuate what the coaches are going to ask of him within their schemes. There are a handful of teams that do this well. They may not necessarily get the best player available, but they get the best player that fits them and that is what’s most important.

Some teams, I’ve found, draft players for one system while playing another. In this case, good players can flounder in some organizations and if they are cut, will go off and flourish in another system.

There's also some nice stuff on personnel development once a player is drafted:

Once a player is drafted, certain elements are understood. First, the evaluation process is over and it’s now time for our coaches to get him up to speed. The player is not perfect, so there is work to be done. The good organizations focus of what a player can do and what his role is going to be within the scheme based on his positive traits.

One of the integral aspects to a player’s development is the commitment the club is willing to make. It’s easy to get on the bandwagon when the player looks good right out of the box. But what happens when he doesn’t? An element of any great organization is the patience they demonstrate while developing their new and younger players.

The real test of an organization is how it handles talented players who aren’t ready to play. This can be the beginning of the end for some organizations, yet the secret code for the success of other organizations.

What happens to struggling organizations is that they tend to over-focus on the now. The reason: The season is ready to start and the franchise needs to win its first game. Once that mindset prevails, player development stops.

The alternate approach is to keep older veterans, who the team wanted to replace with the younger prospects. The vets still can play, but not at the level a team needs to win consistently. Why do they abort the development of the younger player in lieu of the vet? Because the coach trusts the vet. And the reason for that trust is because the vet knows the system.

What eventually happens is that you wind up with an old team that can’t win and costs you more money. The team hits the wall, coaches get fired and you start over. Teams that do this lost the war before the battle even started.

Interesting stuff.

 

[Off The Grid]

I should append for the Record: I always reserve the right, as do we all, to change my mind as The Picture comes into focus on any particular Prospect...But it's very infrequently that I make a point of mentioning that. Yet I did so in the case of Stephon Tuitt, specifically employing the term "burning off the 20 Pounds".

Needless to say, the news that he has in fact done precisely that is remarkable, to say the least.

Still haven't decided if I'm going to issue "Final Reports" or simply update the previous ones by adding Notes, but suffice to say for now: In the case of Stephon Tuitt, my questions about his Work Ethic have been laid to rest, so for the sake of this Discussion I should note that I've increased my Grade significantly, to the 2nd/3rd Round range, and have noted such in a Comment below my Report. Well Done, Mister Tuitt.

 

[Patriot Missile]

If Donald is off the board at 29 I'd be all for a trade back and getting Easley or Caraun Reid (or possibly Will Sutton). Consider what we could do in this draft with the equivalent of our Minnesota trade from a year ago (29 for 52 + 83 + 104 + 229):

52. Dominique Easley, DT
62. Troy Niklas, TE
83. Weston Richburg, OC
93. Christian Jones, LB
104. Justin Ellis, DT
4b. Antone Exum, DB
5 (trade both 6ths). Richard Rodgers, TE
6 (comp). Dontae Johnson, DB
7a. Trey Bruton, H-back/WR
7b. Larry Webster, DE, Bloomsburg

I would be very happy with something like that.

This looks like something 1/2 the board would moan and groan about but it's actually really good. Easley is a wrecking machine when healthy and he probably would of been a top 10-15 pick minus the injury. I can see him being one of the steals of the draft. Pretty much every player here has some serious potential and I like what you did with the trade back. Looks good and didn't even use the unrealistic Mallett trade to spice it up.

 

[mayoclinic]

This looks like something 1/2 the board would moan and groan about but it's actually really good. Easley is a wrecking machine when healthy and he probably would of been a top 10-15 pick minus the injury. I can see him being one of the steals of the draft. Pretty much every player here has some serious potential and I like what you did with the trade back. Looks good and didn't even use the unrealistic Mallett trade to spice it up.

Thanks. It seemed very "Pats-like" to me. If the Pats had a draft like this and re-signed Talib, Blount, Edelman or a replacement and added a DE, they would be in very, very good shape. Consider:

Interior OL: Mankins, Richburg (or Marcus Martin), Cannon, Connolly
TE: Gronk, Niklas, Rodgers, Bruton (H-back)
WR: Amendola, Edelman/Replacement, Dobson, Thompkins, Boyce, Harrison
DE: Jones, Ninkovich, FA (Michael Johnson, for example), Buchanan, Webster
DT: Wilfork (if he can recover), Kelly, Easley, Siliga, Ellis, Jones, Armstead
LB: Mayo, Hightower, Collins, Jones, Fletcher
S: McCourty, Gregory, Exum, Harmon, Wilson/Ebner
CB: Talib, Dennard, Ryan, Arrington, Johnson

 

[Kontradiction]

This looks like something 1/2 the board would moan and groan about but it's actually really good. Easley is a wrecking machine when healthy and he probably would of been a top 10-15 pick minus the injury. I can see him being one of the steals of the draft. Pretty much every player here has some serious potential and I like what you did with the trade back. Looks good and didn't even use the unrealistic Mallett trade to spice it up.

Easley needs to wear braces on both knees now, and that's a good thing. He took a few shots last year to the knee that he had blown on previously but, because he was wearing a heavy brace, he ended up just fine. His other knee will require it now so, with the exception of a very heavy hit, I don't think his knees will be a problem in the future. He's a one gapping, 3 tech extraordinaire that would look AWESOME rocking a Flying Elvis.

 

[mayoclinic]

Easley needs to wear braces on both knees now, and that's a good thing. He took a few shots last year to the knee that he had blown on previously but, because he was wearing a heavy brace, he ended up just fine. His other knee will require it now so, with the exception of a very heavy hit, I don't think his knees will be a problem in the future. He's a one gapping, 3 tech extraordinaire that would look AWESOME rocking a Flying Elvis.

I really want either Aaron Donald or Dominique Easley. I think either would transform the Pats' interior defense. I'm not holding my breath, though.

Mike McCarty at the podium on NFL Network. Talks about the need for the Packers' D to get "more agile", "more athletic", "more versatile" and "attack the QB". All things I'd love to see as well, though we're obviously way ahead of GB on defense right now.

Imagine this defense with Michael Johnson/Michael Bennett in a DE rotation, Dominique Easley/Aaron Donald as a pass rushing DT, a hybrid pass rusher like Marcus Smith, and another speedy, rangy LB like Ryan Shazier or Christian Jones. You could have a hugely disruptive front 7 which could create pressure from all angles and confusion at the second level.