Working the Draft: Value Picks vs Over-Drafted Reaches

I just dont understand why we just didnt blow one of our 7th rounders on La'el Collins smh..

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 24plus25er:
Great way to look at it. I think if AA and Belldozer even turn out to be halfway decent this was a masterful move to trade down.

Agreed!

"halfway decent" is not a "masterful move" for a high first round pick, you are looking for stars.

Originally posted by natrone06:
The thing that really changed my perspective on how I view the draft was the sneak peak of the 2010 cowboys big board where they had Bowman rated as a 1st round pick and Anthony Davis a third round pick. I realized then how spread opinions can be about certain prospects and how "value" is such a subjective thing.

Let's say 6 GMs have Tartt rated a 2nd rounder and 20 have him rated a 3rd rounder and 6 have him rated a 4th rounder. If the 49ers have him rated as a 2nd rounder what should they have done at the time of their pick?

Sounds like the Cowboys were right about Bowman and Davis.

Sometimes you have to take a risk that someone else will draft your player so that you don't 'over-draft' (ie; reach) for players. For example if they like Pinion the punter, why not wait until rd 6 knowing that it's extremely unlikely that he gets picked before you, and if he does get picked you still have Lee the all-pro. Drafting is an 'art', and part of the drafting artistry is knowing WHEN to pick the players, (not just WHO to pick). Time will tell.

Originally posted by Vito_Corleone:
Certainly you are right that drafting is unpredictable. But you act like it's a complete crap shoot. That is not the case, as good drafting and talent evaluation is by far the single most important factor determining which teams win. Teams that have won consistently like have been excellent at talent eval. Teams run by the likes of terry Donahue, Dwight Clark and Joe Thomas has been destroyed by bad drafting and bad talent evaluation.

"End thread, really." Why then do we post anything here? Since none of us really don't know what's behind the scenes we should just 'end thread'? Actually since drafting and talent eval is the most important part of building a good team, I think it's worthy of discussion.

Drafting is indeed an 'art', and part of the drafting artistry is knowing WHEN to pick the players, (not just WHO to pick). We will never know if these players would have lasted another round (ie. reaches picked too early) or if some other team would have picked them right afterwards. But time WILL tell if he picked the right players. It will be interesting to see.

My point is that Baalke took some risks and really put his neck on the line with this draft. He didn't go with the safe popular 'consensus' picks, he put his neck on the chopping block by drafting players higher than expected, which is a big risk to his reputation since if they bust people can say he 'reached' for these players and they busted and then blame Baalke (as they did with AJ Jenkins).

But it is your point of saying"Baalke picked players Higher then they should have been drafted" how do you know this and how do you know that Baalke did not draft them where He had no choice because there were other team ready to ponce,I have a problem with you saying that Baalke drafted the players out of ranking position based on what? safe picks? because some Talking Head said so? and How is He putting His neck on the line? well if you`re gonna say that about our GM,then you need to say that about All 31 other GMs otherwise it seems like you are hoping that Baalke fails

Originally posted by Vito_Corleone:
You are the one being "very superficial", try actually reading what I wrote. I specifically stated "per popular mock draft projections". It's not me that thinks it's a reach, it's per the popular mock drafts. I don't really know these players myself, I just read the mock drafts like I stated, and they had these players going later than where we picked them = they thought they were 'reaches'.

So Baalke is willing to go out on a limb and take a chance and not just take the 'safe, popular' pick. I think it's good that Baalke is willing to take a risk. But it's also imp to get good value and not select players higher than you need to. This draft will tell the Baalke story. If this draft does well we know Baalke is good. If it's a bad draft, I think Baalke will be blamed for reaching. Personally I think it will turn out well.

So some of us DO know these players by watching them for a couple of years playing college football on a weekly basis ,not one time ,but how can you say anything about this draft when you yourself said"I don`t really know these players myself" that tells all I need to know about you trying to criticize a GM who eat,sleep and live Football20 hours a day 365 days a year....I`m done commenting it`s a wasted conversation....Buh Bye

Originally posted by DeHubb:
I just dont understand why we just didnt blow one of our 7th rounders on La'el Collins smh..

The same reason no other team did. It would have guaranteed him being back in the draft in 2016. If you run the numbers, there was no reason for him to settle for a 7th round tender when he easily would have been a 2nd or 3rd rounder at worst if he sat out for a year. He'd make a lot more money that way.

Obviously, baalke sees things his way, and has a certain amount of hubris about it.

Game film doesnt justify arik at 15, but his okoye-like body feeds baalkes hubris. Major balmer factor with this pick. Its like 75% projection; thats so risky.

Using a weak safety class to show everyone that the bpa in the 2nd rd was indeed an unremarkable safety is an example of baalke hubris.

Random punter in 5th rd? No need to comment.

Is our fat running back draft pick going to change
His approach and become a gore-like stud? Another gamble on the part baalke hubris.

In a couple years, we'll find out if this hubris is founded on extraordinary evaluative skill or the same old hubris that got us aj jenkins.

Originally posted by Vito_Corleone:

Originally posted by GoForGold:
Just an observation here...
2011 DRAFT
Aldon Smith
Colin Kaeperkick
Chris Culliver
Kendall Hunter
Daniel Kilgore
Ronald Johnson
Colin Jones
Bruce Miller
Mike Person
Curtis Holcomb
Mel Kipers grade? C

NFL.com grade was A+ for the 49ers 2011 draft http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000356334/article/2011-draft-grades-49ers-bears-on-opposite-ends-of-grade-curve . . . their grade for the horrible 2012 draft (Jenkins, James, etc) was a C. So it's not like they are all idiots, they were correct in their evals of these drafts.

Seriously, you do realize the A+ grade is in retrospect. Anyone can evaluate a draft three years after and be correct.... Hell, I give it an A+ too. No one knows what this draft will bring. Each team picks players based on their own board for their scheme, with some knowledge through inner circles of where their are really slotted. If you don't like the picks, you don't like them, but that doesn't mean they were wrong or reaches. We will see, maybe in 3 years a Bucky Brooks will grade this draft, and you can provide me with a link so I can see how we did.

Guys - this is getting comical - but respect the debate. I have to admit, I was soundly disappointed in the players TB ended up taking as well.

The reality seems to be that the middle picks were in a horrible position this year for the way talent aligned in the rounds.

You have to look at more than who the media analysts had rated where, you have to look at how TB and his staff saw the board fall and their own assessment of BPA that offered value TO THE 9ers.

In hindsight, as I've posted elsewhere, I think a lot of the 9ers draft was shaped by the talent left to them on the board. I'll give you some examples:

Round 1 - trading back to 17 - I'm convinced the 9ers had an interest in Parker and were holding San Diego on the line for the pick before them - the moment they saw Parker off the board they made the SAFE trade to San Diego knowing they could take Arik at 17. The 9ers - San Diego trade happened seconds after the Parker trade was announced - not before. A lot of times you have a trade happen before the prior pick is even announced. Which means they likely had a VERY GOOD idea what was going to happen at pick 16 as well.

Round 2 - There was key talent at the top of the round, but a big drop off in top names in the second half of the round. This likely meant that no one above the 9ers wanted to make a reasonable trade for the 9ers to move up, and once those players were gone, no one wanted the 9ers spot so they could move back. So the 9ers took Tartt - the guy they needed ranked highest on their board. In other words, not only was there no trade back available, but when the 9ers had to select, there obviously wasn't anyone on their board they wanted more and ranked higher.

If you look at the 2nd round, is there anyone below Tartt you would argue is better than Tartt - MAYBE the ILB Perryman, MAYBE one of the fast small receivers. So taking Tarty is not necessarily a reach. Its not like there was a plethora of obvious talent below the 9ers pick in the 2nd.

Let's say that just maybe Harold was ranked on their board EQUALLY to Tartt. Then the two BPAs are a choice between greatest need. It doesn't matter that anyone else had Tartt in the 3rd. These boards are not constructed predicting which round the player goes in for value, they are simply ranked.

Let's not forget, Boards are not perfect hierarchies - there are often equal rankings for players at different positions. So YES, you take BPA of the player you need / want most.

One last thing, the Boards are also not necessarily smooth rankings of say receivers 1-20. The ranking refects the teams evaluation of talent, fit to their system, and belief the player will succeed in the NFL. Let's say the Board has 3 receivers rated as 1st round talent for a team, it then might be that their board has all kinds of other positions rated ahead of the next receiver such that they don't believe another receiver warrants a pick above the 4th round. Draft board rankings can be as much about NOT liking/believing in a player's potential as it is about liking a player.

To that end, you could almost take TB's picks as an indictment of the talent he saw at other positions, more so than a belief in the players that fell to the 9ers in this draft.

Originally posted by xcfan:
Obviously, baalke sees things his way, and has a certain amount of hubris about it.

Game film doesnt justify arik at 15, but his okoye-like body feeds baalkes hubris. Major balmer factor with this pick. Its like 75% projection; thats so risky.

Using a weak safety class to show everyone that the bpa in the 2nd rd was indeed an unremarkable safety is an example of baalke hubris.

Random punter in 5th rd? No need to comment.

Is our fat running back draft pick going to change
His approach and become a gore-like stud? Another gamble on the part baalke hubris.

In a couple years, we'll find out if this hubris is founded on extraordinary evaluative skill or the same old hubris that got us aj jenkins.

why do everyone who hates Baalke keep beating a dead horse on the Jenkins pick? why why why why why why,It was ONE FREAKING pick and you guys won`t let it go Baalke had a bad pick ,count them one bad pick in the first round and some how forget all the other Good to very good to great picks he has had.Yep focus on that ONE BAD PICK,that`s it you guys are on to something there keep focusing until it comes into veiw

Originally posted by HearstFan:
Guys - this is getting comical - but respect the debate. I have to admit, I was soundly disappointed in the players TB ended up taking as well.

The reality seems to be that the middle picks were in a horrible position this year for the way talent aligned in the rounds.

You have to look at more than who the media analysts had rated where, you have to look at how TB and his staff saw the board fall and their own assessment of BPA that offered value TO THE 9ers.

In hindsight, as I've posted elsewhere, I think a lot of the 9ers draft was shaped by the talent left to them on the board. I'll give you some examples:

Round 1 - trading back to 17 - I'm convinced the 9ers had an interest in Parker and were holding San Diego on the line for the pick before them - the moment they saw Parker off the board they made the SAFE trade to San Diego knowing they could take Arik at 17. The 9ers - San Diego trade happened seconds after the Parker trade was announced - not before. A lot of times you have a trade happen before the prior pick is even announced. Which means they likely had a VERY GOOD idea what was going to happen at pick 16 as well.

Round 2 - There was key talent at the top of the round, but a big drop off in top names in the second half of the round. This likely meant that no one above the 9ers wanted to make a reasonable trade for the 9ers to move up, and once those players were gone, no one wanted the 9ers spot so they could move back. So the 9ers took Tartt - the guy they needed ranked highest on their board. In other words, not only was there no trade back available, but when the 9ers had to select, there obviously wasn't anyone on their board they wanted more and ranked higher.

If you look at the 2nd round, is there anyone below Tartt you would argue is better than Tartt - MAYBE the ILB Perryman, MAYBE one of the fast small receivers. So taking Tarty is not necessarily a reach. Its not like there was a plethora of obvious talent below the 9ers pick in the 2nd.

Let's say that just maybe Harold was ranked on their board EQUALLY to Tartt. Then the two BPAs are a choice between greatest need. It doesn't matter that anyone else had Tartt in the 3rd. These boards are not constructed predicting which round the player goes in for value, they are simply ranked.

Let's not forget, Boards are not perfect hierarchies - there are often equal rankings for players at different positions. So YES, you take BPA of the player you need / want most.

One last thing, the Boards are also not necessarily smooth rankings of say receivers 1-20. The ranking refects the teams evaluation of talent, fit to their system, and belief the player will succeed in the NFL. Let's say the Board has 3 receivers rated as 1st round talent for a team, it then might be that their board has all kinds of other positions rated ahead of the next receiver such that they don't believe another receiver warrants a pick above the 4th round. Draft board rankings can be as much about NOT liking/believing in a player's potential as it is about liking a player.

To that end, you could almost take TB's picks as an indictment of the talent he saw at other positions, more so than a belief in the players that fell to the 9ers in this draft.

This is just wild speculation based on little to no actual evidence. You know the picks but filling in everything in-between is just make believe.

Originally posted by Vito_Corleone:

Sounds like the Cowboys were right about Bowman and Davis.

Sometimes you have to take a risk that someone else will draft your player so that you don't 'over-draft' (ie; reach) for players. For example if they like Pinion the punter, why not wait until rd 6 knowing that it's extremely unlikely that he gets picked before you, and if he does get picked you still have Lee the all-pro. Drafting is an 'art', and part of the drafting artistry is knowing WHEN to pick the players, (not just WHO to pick). Time will tell.

Either Dallas hated the OT class or they vastly underrated Anthony because he's been as good or better than every OT drafted after him.

Originally posted by jrouter4949:
But it is your point of saying"Baalke picked players Higher then they should have been drafted" how do you know this and how do you know that Baalke did not draft them where He had no choice because there were other team ready to ponce,I have a problem with you saying that Baalke drafted the players out of ranking position based on what? safe picks? because some Talking Head said so? and How is He putting His neck on the line? well if you`re gonna say that about our GM,then you need to say that about All 31 other GMs otherwise it seems like you are hoping that Baalke fails

Why do misquote me? I never said what you quoted me as saying: [But it is your point of saying"Baalke picked players Higher then they should have been drafted"]

Re: "you saying that Baalke drafted the players out of ranking position based on what?"
I clearly said multiple times based on popular mock drafts. It's a simple concept. Obviously Baalke probably knows much more than the popular mock drafts,

"How is He putting His neck on the line"
As I explained several times, because if he drafts players who are considered 'reaches' by the popular mock drafts, and the players turn into busts, then people will blame Baalke for reaching for players, like they did for AJ Jenkins, who was a reach (ie projected to go rd2-4).

"it seems like you are hoping that Baalke fails"
Does not compute. Makes no sense. I clearly said I like Baalke and I think he is right and think it will work out.

Originally posted by jrouter4949:
So some of us DO know these players by watching them for a couple of years playing college football on a weekly basis ,not one time ,but how can you say anything about this draft when you yourself said"I don`t really know these players myself" that tells all I need to know about you trying to criticize a GM who eat,sleep and live Football20 hours a day 365 days a year....I`m done commenting it`s a wasted conversation....Buh Bye

If you are such a draft expert where did you have the players Baalke drafted slotted?
Did you have Tartt going in Rd 2, Smelter and Bell rd 4, Pinion going in rd 5 and Silberman going in rd 6? If so you should work in the NFL.

You don't seem to comprehend the words that I wrote. I NEVER criticized Baalke, I specifically said I liked him and hope and believe that he will succeed. I just proffered an analysis of his draft in which he drafted players in a higher round than they were popularly projected to be drafted in, and what that means about Baalke.

Originally posted by xcfan:
Obviously, baalke sees things his way, and has a certain amount of hubris about it.
Game film doesnt justify arik at 15, but his okoye-like body feeds baalkes' hubris. Major balmer factor with this pick. Its like 75% projection; thats so risky.
Using a weak safety class to show everyone that the bpa in the 2nd rd was indeed an unremarkable safety is an example of baalke hubris.
Random punter in 5th rd? No need to comment.
Is our fat running back draft pick going to change his approach and become a gore-like stud? Another gamble on the part baalke hubris.

In a couple years, we'll find out if this hubris is founded on extraordinary evaluative skill or the same old hubris that got us aj jenkins.

Exactly my point, either Baalke is really good (my hope) or he's an arrogant gambler (my fear). We will know in ~1-2 years based on this draft