Originally posted by SWAGG-ER:
Originally posted by TexasNiner:
Originally posted by SWAGG-ER:
Originally posted by IdentityCrisis:
Originally posted by SWAGG-ER:
Originally posted by IdentityCrisis:
Originally posted by SWAGG-ER:
Originally posted by SonocoNinerFan:
Originally posted by SWAGG-ER:
Oh no you didn't.
Look, i can understand lowering Stanzi a tad bit because i rep him so highly and it's a way for you to take a shot at me personally.
But 126. Really MD?
ESPN's Mel Kiper believes that Iowa QB Ricky Stanzi "deserves to be a second-round pick."
Whereas Jake Locker completed 51.1 percent of his third-down passes, Stanzi's rate was 59.2. Stanzi went 26-9 as a starter and 3-0 in bowl games, compared to Locker's 15-25 career record. But Stanzi's forty time isn't as good as Locker's. And Stanzi wasn't "supposed" to be last year's No. 1 overall pick.
Also, i like Kaepernick but 20 something spots ahead of Dalton and Ponder? Again, i feel like you're doing this just to upset me.
It's working.
Maybe in my Big 150 board i won't even rank Gabbert at all. How do you like that?
Cheers!
As if MD is the only one . . .
NFLDraftScout: #105
The Huddle Report: #123
DraftTek: #121
New Era: #152
GBN: Unranked in their Top 150
The only exception putting him north of the 4th round that I could find is the National Football Post with him at #80
Is the personal angle a gag?
All suck. No better than a joe nobody
just like you when it comes to player evaluations
Um, considering none of these player have played a single nfl snap how can you judge my player evaluations? 
Because you don't write for a respectable source and no one knows who the hell you are.
hence, you = joe nobody
Mayock, Bunting, Kiper, and Wright are significantly more "respectable sources" than the sources you provided and MadDog. Mayock, Bunting, Kiper, and Wright all agree that 126th ranking is SIGNIFICANTLY too low for Ricky Stanzi. So while i may be a joe nobody, at least i'm of a similar opinion to the more "respectable sources".
You are so biased on your man-love for Stanzi that you blind yourself to the truth.
Right now, he has about a mid 4th round grade. Some have him as a 3-4th rounder, others as a 4th-5th.
If you take all the decent rankings currently available, the highest actually ranking I can find is Wright's 88. Others call him a solid 3rd, but usually 3rd-4th. So, if you give a scores of say, a 70, 90, and 100 to account for the descriptions (without rankings) that guys like Kiper, Bunting and Mayock have given him, and combine and average them with the rankings given earlier, he averages out to about a 115.
A mid 4th rounder. Which is the general consensus.
Could he shoot up into the 3rd with a great combine and workouts? Sure. Could he tumble into the late 5th or beyond with poor showings or interviews? Also a very real possibility.
To completely dismiss the idea that a 4th round selection could move up or down a round at this point in the process, and to simply dismiss anyone who disagrees with you shows YOUR bias, not anyone the bias of anyone else, nor the credibility (or lack thereof) of either set of sources.
What math world do you live in bro? I just told you Kiper, Bunting, Mayock, and Wright all gave Stanzi a 2nd round grade. No grey area there. They said 2nd round. Not 3rd. Not 4th. They said 2nd round. What don't you get about that?
I'm not completely dismissing the idea of a 4th round selection. NOBODY knows what GM's are thinking. BUT MD says he bases his rankings off of credible sources. So are you telling me that Kiper, Bunting, Mayock and Wright aren't some of the more credible sources that we have? If you say they are, then you'd have to DISAGREE w/ MD's ranking of 126 (almost 5th round) for Stanzi. If you say they aren't, then you don't follow the draft well enough over the past few years.
First off what YOU tell me and what I've read are not the same thing.
From Bunting's own
website:
Ricky Stanzi: Iowa
He’s an interesting guy to take a look at in
rounds 3-4 because he has some upside with his physical skill set and you know he’s going to do everything it takes Monday-Saturday in order to win for you on Sunday.
Wright's
rankings: Stanzi is 88, which in my math world is the bottom half of the 3rd round.
Scout's Inc has him graded as a "71", which makes him at the bottom level of a "good prospect" and a likely 3rd rounder.
I've yet to see Kiper or Mayock give him a specific ranking, but neither have him above top 5 (Kiper) or 6-7 (Mayock) on their position specific lists. So, that puts him MAYBE as a late 2nd, but probably a mid -3rd rounder at best.
So the "gray" area is that:
1. You don't have your fact straight. You take anything you can find and hear only what you want.
2. Even among your own sources he is NOT being given a clear 2nd round grade.
3. No one said the sources you like aren't credible, just that they aren't the ONLY credible sources out there. Being on TV doesn't make your more correct than other sources, just more famous. YOU are the one questioning sources.
4. MD does NOT base his rankings on "sources", he may use them for research, but the rankings are HIS. That's the point. Feel free to disagree, I disagree with him plenty. He's been wrong, he's been dead on when the "experts" all fell for the hype. But it's HIS opinion, not his opinion based on other people's rankings.
5. You are the one thinking his rankings are personal and dismissing any ideas other than your own and those that disagree with you because they must jabs at you or using sources that "suck" and aren't better than "joe nobody" because they disagree with you, the very definition of "joe nobody".
Get over it. Someone has a different opinion than you. Deal with it. Either defend your position or shut up. But claiming it is some kind of attack or that no other sources but yours are acceptable is NOT defending your position. It's hiding behind BS.
Especially when MD has built up WAY more credibility on this board than just about anyone else when it comes to draft rankings.
[ Edited by TexasNiner on Feb 26, 2011 at 10:37 AM ]