It is currently Thu Aug 21, 2014 1:02 pm

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: C+ sounds about right to me...
PostPosted: Mon May 12, 2014 7:23 am 
Offline
Draught Guru
Draught Guru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 7:32 am
Posts: 4927
http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/nfl/4 ... rades?pg=1



Atlanta Falcons

6. Jake Matthews, tackle, Texas A&M.
37. Ra'Shede Hageman, defensive lineman, Minnesota.
68. Dezmen Southward, safety, Wisconsin.
103. Devonta Freeman, running back, Florida State.
139. Prince Shembo, outside linebacker, Notre Dame.
147. Ricardo Allen, cornerback, Purdue.
168. Marquis Spruill, linebacker, Syracuse.
253. Yawin Smallwood, linebacker, Connecticut.
255. Tyler Starr, outside linebacker, South Dakota.

Overview: Based on free agency and draft moves, it's pretty clear the Falcons will play base 3-4 defense under Mike Nolan in 2014. Rush 'backers Shembo and Starr fit the new-ish scheme, as do five-techniques Hageman and Tyson Jackson, and free-agent addition Paul Soliai. My favorite picks were plug-and-play tackle Matthews and fourth-rounder Freeman, a pass-game maven who fits perfectly into coordinator Dirk Koetter's pass-first attack. Southward is another intriguing pick with borderline-freak measurables and some potential to start at free safety right away, replacing Thomas DeCoud. Allen is a physical slot corner capable of pushing Robert McClain. Because Atlanta was exposed as one of football's most depth-deficient teams in 2013, I appreciated GM Thomas Dimitroff resisting the temptation to trade up for Jadeveon Clowney. I thought he brought in a solid class, but this team is still noticeably short on outside pass rush. The Falcons are also losing a major wrinkle from their offense as heavy-footed in-line blocker Levine Toilolo “replaces” Tony Gonzalez at tight end.

Grade: C+

_________________
"what if there were no hypothetical situations?"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: C+ sounds about right to me...
PostPosted: Mon May 12, 2014 8:17 am 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 5:31 pm
Posts: 3107
If C+ is the lowest grade you could find to be pessimistic, we'll take it.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/writer/pet ... d-analysis

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/2014-nfl-d ... --nfl.html

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2059 ... and-scores


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: C+ sounds about right to me...
PostPosted: Mon May 12, 2014 9:20 am 
Offline
Hall of Famer
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 7:12 pm
Posts: 6153
Location: Planet Claire
Don't see that as seeking out pessimism. The draft "grades" are generally as soft as ice cream. Why even use + and -? The gurus don't really want to stick their necks out too much. I think the teams that draft the more house hold "names" get better grades. TD's draft generally has a bit more pop with the trading up and so on but I for one was content to sit pat and let it come to us. Couple of athletes as opposed to football players. High risk/high reward, I guess. As they say about the weather....we'll see.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: C+ sounds about right to me...
PostPosted: Mon May 12, 2014 10:05 am 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 5:31 pm
Posts: 3107
Quote:
Don't see that as seeking out pessimism


Maybe. But sometimes you have to consider the source. I'm sure if you look hard enough you'll find some sight that gave the Falcons an A for their draft. But I don't see that posted. I only the lowest one I could find.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: C+ sounds about right to me...
PostPosted: Mon May 12, 2014 1:41 pm 
Offline
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 3:11 pm
Posts: 4467
Location: Vancouver, WA
No reason to grade a draft until 3 years after that said draft.

_________________
Fear the BEARD!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: C+ sounds about right to me...
PostPosted: Mon May 12, 2014 2:39 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 12:59 am
Posts: 2102
Location: Deepinthehearta
dirtybirdnw wrote:
No reason to grade a draft until 3 years after that said draft.



Amen. All a grade does is reflect the grader's bias.

To quote Mike Mayock, I would have like to have had you giving me grades in college. The disgusted look on his face as Rich Eisen was having the other two guys give draft grades was priceless.

_________________
Fantasy League Champion 2010
Pick Em Co-Champion 2011

We are building a fighting force of extraordinary magnitude. We forge our tradition in the spirit of our ancestors. You have our gratitude.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: C+ sounds about right to me...
PostPosted: Mon May 12, 2014 3:17 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 5:31 pm
Posts: 3107
Quote:
All a grade does is reflect the grader's bias


:clap:

My point exactly.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: C+ sounds about right to me...
PostPosted: Mon May 12, 2014 4:16 pm 
Offline
Hall of Famer
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 7:12 pm
Posts: 6153
Location: Planet Claire
Like how TD gave himself an A?

_________________
Image


Last edited by backnblack on Mon May 12, 2014 7:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: C+ sounds about right to me...
PostPosted: Mon May 12, 2014 6:13 pm 
Offline
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 3:11 pm
Posts: 4467
Location: Vancouver, WA
backnblack wrote:
Like had TD gave himself an A?


Already trying to rewrite history. :ninja:

_________________
Fear the BEARD!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: C+ sounds about right to me...
PostPosted: Tue May 13, 2014 12:32 am 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:15 pm
Posts: 4212
Why I would tend to grade this draft as less than a B or A:
1. Did not get a stud pass rusher.
2. Did not add any depth to our passing game. With the loss of Gonzo, and the lack of any deep game beyond Julio, this seemed like a no-brainer to me.
3. We drafted FOUR linebackers. (Not one, or two, or three) This seems like overkill. Especially a year removed from finding two UDFA, "gems."
4. Did not add any depth to the lines. We have no depth at Guard. We have lots of depth, but seemingly little talent at DE. Also would have been nice to get a second "big DT," to groom for the future.
5. Big risk/reward for our 2nd and 3rd picks. Obviously, there's good and bad here, but I can't say, "great job." It's a big gamble. If we had made this gamble, and the above issues had been addressed, then I wouldn't be as worried.

The way I see it, we went into this draft with 9 picks. We had major needs for a pass rushing DE/OLB, FS, OT, and TE. We had depth needs at WR, CB, G, DE, QB, and OLB.

Our first pick obviously resolves OT. (A)
With our 2nd pick, we picked up a 3 technique DT. (possibly to replace Babs?) (Hard to gauge this one... He's a physical specimen, but seems to lack drive/desire. Rarely has that worked out.)
We drafted a long-shot free safety in the 3rd round. Has the physical tools, but seemingly doesn't have the recognition. Perhaps he can be taught... Still this was a reach. (D)
We drafted a RB in the 4th. (I really don't understand why we made this move here. We didn't really have RB problems last year. We had a line problem (and have had a line problem)) (D for need, B for talent)
We also took a decent OLB in the 4th who seems to be pretty versatile. (B)
We took a CB in the 5th. We certainly needed some more CB depth. (A)
We then traded to get another 5th round pick (giving up our 6th and 7th round picks) and picked up an ILB. If we had made this pick with our 6th rounder, or we had not used two more picks on linebackers in the 7th, I'd be cool with this pick. As it stands... (D)
With our two compensatory 7th rounders, we picked up a couple more OLB's. (F)

Why am I so freaked out about drafting four linebackers? Because it's a waste of draft picks. We had 3 guys on staff who had earned jobs last year. Assuming we go to a 3-4 and carry 6 linebackers instead of 5, we are going to cut at least one of those three guys from last year, or we are going to cut one of those draft picks. Do you see us keeping 7 linebackers? Which DE's/DT's do we let go of? We currently have 6 DT's and 6 DE's. That's 19 guys. Too many considering only 7 of them will be on the field at any given point.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: C+ sounds about right to me...
PostPosted: Tue May 13, 2014 7:11 am 
Offline
Draught Guru
Draught Guru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 7:32 am
Posts: 4927
RobertAP wrote:
Why I would tend to grade this draft as less than a B or A:
1. Did not get a stud pass rusher.2. Did not add any depth to our passing game. With the loss of Gonzo, and the lack of any deep game beyond Julio, this seemed like a no-brainer to me.
3. We drafted FOUR linebackers. (Not one, or two, or three) This seems like overkill. Especially a year removed from finding two UDFA, "gems."
4. Did not add any depth to the lines. We have no depth at Guard. We have lots of depth, but seemingly little talent at DE. Also would have been nice to get a second "big DT," to groom for the future.
5. Big risk/reward for our 2nd and 3rd picks. Obviously, there's good and bad here, but I can't say, "great job." It's a big gamble. If we had made this gamble, and the above issues had been addressed, then I wouldn't be as worried.

The way I see it, we went into this draft with 9 picks. We had major needs for a pass rushing DE/OLB, FS, OT, and TE. We had depth needs at WR, CB, G, DE, QB, and OLB.

Our first pick obviously resolves OT. (A)
With our 2nd pick, we picked up a 3 technique DT. (possibly to replace Babs?) (Hard to gauge this one... He's a physical specimen, but seems to lack drive/desire. Rarely has that worked out.)
We drafted a long-shot free safety in the 3rd round. Has the physical tools, but seemingly doesn't have the recognition. Perhaps he can be taught... Still this was a reach. (D)
We drafted a RB in the 4th. (I really don't understand why we made this move here. We didn't really have RB problems last year. We had a line problem (and have had a line problem)) (D for need, B for talent)
We also took a decent OLB in the 4th who seems to be pretty versatile. (B)
We took a CB in the 5th. We certainly needed some more CB depth. (A)
We then traded to get another 5th round pick (giving up our 6th and 7th round picks) and picked up an ILB. If we had made this pick with our 6th rounder, or we had not used two more picks on linebackers in the 7th, I'd be cool with this pick. As it stands... (D)
With our two compensatory 7th rounders, we picked up a couple more OLB's. (F)

Why am I so freaked out about drafting four linebackers? Because it's a waste of draft picks. We had 3 guys on staff who had earned jobs last year. Assuming we go to a 3-4 and carry 6 linebackers instead of 5, we are going to cut at least one of those three guys from last year, or we are going to cut one of those draft picks. Do you see us keeping 7 linebackers? Which DE's/DT's do we let go of? We currently have 6 DT's and 6 DE's. That's 19 guys. Too many considering only 7 of them will be on the field at any given point.



nailed. it.

I could see going as high as a 'B', but leaving the draft with no pass rush guarantees a C at least in my opinion.

of course, TD thinks he should get an A+ :roll:

_________________
"what if there were no hypothetical situations?"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: C+ sounds about right to me...
PostPosted: Tue May 13, 2014 10:04 am 
Offline
Draught Guru
Draught Guru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 7:32 am
Posts: 4927
AngryJohnny51 wrote:



Oh, I could find plenty more 'pessimistic' grades, but still 'C+' still sounds about right for me..

http://atlantafalcons.blog.ajc.com/2014 ... ft-c-plus/

Image

honestly, there really are for the most part only three 'grades', D,C and B because to actually get an A or an F you have to something spectacularly awesome or foolish...Not to say it cannot happen, but it's 'rare'.

"From MMQB...

I found it surprising that Caldwell and his former boss and mentor, Thomas Dimitroff, were discussing a trade of first-round picks. They had many discussions about swapping the third and sixth picks in the draft, with Atlanta handing Jacksonville a third-round pick to make the move. “I thoughtWednesday night we were going to get it done,” said Dimitroff. “But Thursday Dave called me and said, ‘We’re going to stay put and pick our guy.’” Whoever “our guy” was. Dimitroff never knew who Caldwell wanted until it was announced by Roger Goodell on stage at Radio City.

Ironically, Atlanta would have picked Jake Matthews at three; the Falcons got him at six. And Bortles would have been Jacksonville’s pick at three or six. "

:shock:

There are also reports we attempted to trade up for Dee Ford, but couldn't make that work.

This tells me that TD was geared up to get 'cute' and no one would cut a deal...Then when #6 came around and Matthews was left, Pioli steps in, ties up TD, and makes the safe pick.

But, wily man that he is, TD sneaks a Tofurkey Leg out of his blazer, manages to use it to free himself, then locks Pioli in the john when the second pick comes around...As Pioli is banging on the door screaming 'Don't do it, Thomas! Murphy! Truitt! Vaaaaaan Noooooy!', TD picks a fallen second round 'project' DT/DE. By the time Nolan gets the door open, it's too late.

At this point, I think Pioli throws up his hands and walks out of the War Room. Nolan glares heavily at TD, and says 'you got one more offensive pick, cute guy. I want the rest to be on defense, please'.

He looks over at Blank, who nods his head and says 'do what the man says, Thomas'...

which is why I would give it a 'C', because we still don't have a pass rush. :whistle:

_________________
"what if there were no hypothetical situations?"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: C+ sounds about right to me...
PostPosted: Tue May 13, 2014 10:34 pm 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 25831
Location: North Carolina
RobertAP wrote:
We have no depth at Guard.

Not true, not if the team does the right thing and moves Mike Johnson back to guard. Between him, Carimi, and Harland Gunn, I think our depth at OG is pretty solid. Not great, but solid.


The way I see it, we went into this draft with 9 picks. We had major needs for a pass rushing DE/OLB, FS, OT, and TE. We had depth needs at WR, CB, G, DE, QB, and OLB.

RobertAP wrote:
With our 2nd pick, we picked up a 3 technique DT. (possibly to replace Babs?) (Hard to gauge this one... He's a physical specimen, but seems to lack drive/desire. Rarely has that worked out.)

I wouldn't call Hageman a 3-tech DT. He is really a 5-tech DE just like Goodman, just like Tyson Jackson. We seem to have an abundance of those guys now and no real protege to Babineaux. Hageman at least from I've seen tended to be a far less effective player at Minnesota when he played inside. Particularly as a pass rusher, most of his standout plays in that realm came when he was playing the edge and could use his power against a OT on a bull rush. He doesn't get off blocks good enough to play inside thanks to his abundance of height and length, which in the phone booth of the interior line of scrimmage doesn't count for as much.

_________________
"Vincere scis, Hannibal, victoria uti nescis" -- Maharbal, 216 B.C.E.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  


cron