2023 Draft Big Boards, Position Rankings & Mocks

Status
Not open for further replies.
Cowboysrock55 said:
Dell is too small. I don't mind smaller receivers but 5'8" 165 pounds is too small for me. That's Turpin small.
Click to expand...
I hate it that we have physical thresholds for draft picks.

It costs us chances at guys like Dell and especially Deuce Vaughn.

It is going to break my heart when that little MFer goes and graces another franchise.

I am telling you, he has the talent.

He could be the modern day Muggsy Bogues of the NFL.
 
boozeman said:
I hate it that we have physical thresholds for draft picks.

It costs us chances at guys like Dell and especially Deuce Vaughn.

It is going to break my heart when that little MFer goes and graces another franchise.

I am telling you, he has the talent.

He could be the modern day Muggsy Bogues of the NFL.
Click to expand...

I agree. Although I generally push those guys down the list. You want a 5'8" or shorter receiver? Don't talk to me until day 3. You want a 5'5" 180 pound RB, cool, day 3.

I really like Flowers though who is 5'9" so maybe I'm just being arbitrary. I do like a WR to be 5'11" or taller in general though. Some height is helpful.

RBs, height means nothing. Hell short is an advantage in my opinion. Bothers me far less to draft a short RB. Even if 5'5" is freaky short. Ever meet a guy who is 5'5"? It's hard to imagine a guy that size as a professional athlete. But doesn't bother me.
 
boozeman said:
Click to expand...


I think it'd make a lot of sense, both from the perspective of managing rosters but also in terms of getting rookies up to speed and giving them more time to acclimate to the NFL.

For example, if Robinson fell to 26 we'd have much more clarity on what to do with Pollard and Elliott, but we can't rightly go into the draft with Malik Davis and nothing else, hoping Robinson falls to 26 and then feeling forced to take one in the 2nd/3rd if he doesn't.
 
Simpleton said:
I think it'd make a lot of sense, both from the perspective of managing rosters but also in terms of getting rookies up to speed and giving them more time to acclimate to the NFL.

For example, if Robinson fell to 26 we'd have much more clarity on what to do with Pollard and Elliott, but we can't rightly go into the draft with Malik Davis and nothing else, hoping Robinson falls to 26 and then feeling forced to take one in the 2nd/3rd if he doesn't.
Click to expand...

Yeah I mean it makes the most sense in terms of allowing teams to go into the draft and just pick the best players available. Then turn around in free agency and fill the holes you have. If you do it the other way around you pay certain players above an amount in free agency and it kind of crosses out the liklihood you would draft a player at that position high in the draft.

From the Cowboys perspective I would love to know if we were going to be able to draft an Addison or Smith-Njigba before free agency. If we drafted one of those two I wouldn't bother spending money or trading for a WR like Odell or Hopkins. But instead we are forced to make those decisions now while having no idea if one of the top receivers will fall anywhere close to our pick.

Of course that advantage goes to all NFL teams. And I'd rather for teams above us to be reaching for need as opposed to taking the best players available.
 
I doubt the union would like that. They still have a say, the future rookies don't.

And since when was this about building the best teams anyway.
 
Chocolate Lab said:
I doubt the union would like that. They still have a say, the future rookies don't.

And since when was this about building the best teams anyway.
Click to expand...

This is also true. Teams will spend more in free agency not knowing what they can get in the draft. You do it the other direction and suddenly the free agent market cools because teams already have 7-10 rookies filling various needs. Good point. The Union would hate it.
 


This is bullshit. The 49ers racked up on the picks, not because they drafted well but because people like Martin Mayhew, Ran Carthon and Mike McDaniel got hired as either coach or GM.

Personally, I don't think any team should get a comp pick unless they truly developed that minority candidate. In Mayhew and Carthon, both had developed careers elsewhere prior to SF.
 
boozeman said:


This is bullshit. The 49ers racked up on the picks, not because they drafted well but because people like Martin Mayhew, Ran Carthon and Mike McDaniel got hired as either coach or GM.

Personally, I don't think any team should get a comp pick unless they truly developed that minority candidate. In Mayhew and Carthon, both had developed careers elsewhere prior to SF.
Click to expand...


The league doesn't give a shit about what's right or fair, just optics. They literally only care about providing a carrot for teams to hire more minorities so that the public will get off their backs.

And I'm not gonna say it, but Mike McDaniel...please.
 
Simpleton said:
The league doesn't give a shit about what's right or fair, just optics. They literally only care about providing a carrot for teams to hire more minorities so that the public will get off their backs.

And I'm not gonna say it, but Mike McDaniel...please.
Click to expand...

I'll say it, Mike McDaniel is whiter than Boozeman. What's the line where we give a team comp picks for a minority? 1/16th black? 1/32 Cherokee? Like is there a definition? Because otherwise it feels like a bullshit competitive advantage you're giving the 49ers for doing nothing.

Maybe we should give teams who employ a minority head coach a 20% increase in salary cap? This stuff makes no sense and pisses me off to no end. It also flies in the face of competitive advantage. Good teams get more coaches and GMs hired away. So then turn around and give those teams more draft picks if those assistants "identify" as minority?

Can someone tell Quinn to identify as black before he leaves us?
 
Cowboysrock55 said:
I'll say it, Mike McDaniel is whiter than Boozeman. What's the line where we give a team comp picks for a minority? 1/16th black? 1/32 Cherokee? Like is there a definition?
Click to expand...
Elizabeth Warren is more Native American than McDaniel is black.
 
Cowboysrock55 said:
I'll say it, Mike McDaniel is whiter than Boozeman. What's the line where we give a team comp picks for a minority? 1/16th black? 1/32 Cherokee? Like is there a definition? Because otherwise it feels like a bullshit competitive advantage you're giving the 49ers for doing nothing.

Maybe we should give teams who employ a minority head coach a 20% increase in salary cap? This stuff makes no sense and pisses me off to no end. It also flies in the face of competitive advantage. Good teams get more coaches and GMs hired away. So then turn around and give those teams more draft picks if those assistants "identify" as minority?

Can someone tell Quinn to identify as black before he leaves us?
Click to expand...

What you're forgetting is that the NFL doesn't give the first single fuck about the integrity of the game or competitive fairness, the only extent to which they care about it is to ensure that the games/standings remain close, which thus drives up viewership and ad revenue.

But in terms of stuff like this I guarantee you it doesn't even cross their minds.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom