Ask Jeff Risdon a question thread

[Icness]

Two question:

In your newest article you didn't list von miller as a top 7 pick. How far do you think he may fall?

and

What are the chances of cinci taking either gabbert or newton? If not will they go for green?

That was a mistake; Miller does not fall beyond #5, zero percent chance.

Cincy looks more and more like AJ Green every passing day. They are not Cam Newton fans. I could see them selling interest in Gabbert to trade back and take Julio Jones instead.

[Icness]

Do you think the Niners could trade down with Washington or Minnesota if Gabbert is there at #7? If so, what would the asking price be?

I don't think they'll get that chance, but forget the Skins--they are looking to move in the other direction. The Vikings would have very strong interest in moving up if Gabbert is there, but to move that far will cost them a lot and I'm not sure they are willing to part with multiple picks. I don't think the Niners would take "just" next year's 1st rounder because giving up a pick that high needs more immediate gratification.

SF's best trade bet is if Peterson is still on the board; Houston will be calling

[Icness]

Jeff, Why does everyone think the Ravens are taking a corner in one of the first two rounds? Peterson, Amukamara, and possibly Smith are the only guys I've seen rated as #1 corners. With a roster already full of #2 corners, it doesn't make sense to me that the Ravens would take a corner.

Because they're not expecting Josh Wilson to play that well again, and because Ozzie Newsome never drafts for just the now, he's always drafting for what he thinks the team will look like in 2-3 years. Their corners have to be better if they want to get over the hump.

I think they'll go DE with their first pick but take a corner in the 2nd/3rd. They have been beating the bushes on later-round wideouts so it appears they'll take care of that hole later.

[Icness]

Who's the most underrated QB in this draft??

I like Colin Kaepernick as my #3 QB, but I don't want him to play in 2011. Rush him and it's not going to work IMO, but give him a season to sit and learn and adjust to a more conventional offense and he's going to be very good in 2-3 years.

I think Tyrod Taylor has very intriguing potential, but it seems he's going to get drafted about where he belongs in the 5th round.

Of the real deep guys, I prefer Trevor Vittatoe the most. If the TJ Yates that finished 2010 can stick, he can start in the NFL but he was never close to that for most of his career.

[kdawg32086]

Jeff, Why does everyone think the Ravens are taking a corner in one of the first two rounds? Peterson, Amukamara, and possibly Smith are the only guys I've seen rated as #1 corners. With a roster already full of #2 corners, it doesn't make sense to me that the Ravens would take a corner.

Because they're not expecting Josh Wilson to play that well again, and because Ozzie Newsome never drafts for just the now, he's always drafting for what he thinks the team will look like in 2-3 years. Their corners have to be better if they want to get over the hump.

I think they'll go DE with their first pick but take a corner in the 2nd/3rd. They have been beating the bushes on later-round wideouts so it appears they'll take care of that hole later.

*cough* denarious moore *cough*... That's my pick. I've talked to some of my buddies on some of the Ravens forums about potential picks. One guy who has been pretty legit with his info in the past said that according to what he's heard, Baltimore has Moore rated at the same level as guys like Young and Smith. I guess we'll have to wait until draft day to see.

I find it interesting that Ozzie has done fairly well with drafting db's later in the draft (Ladarius Webb, pre-injury Dawan Landry, Haruki Nakamura) and I wouldn't be surprised if he's got someone lined up for rounds 4-7. He seems to like drafting all these secondary players that only the draft "experts" have ever really looked at.

Back to the drafting for the future topic...do you think it's time that Ozzie goes after an inside linebacker? Tavares Gooden was drafted to be the successor to Ray Lewis but he's been pretty awful so I think that experiment is over with for now.

[RIPskaterdude]

Do you think the Niners could trade down with Washington or Minnesota if Gabbert is there at #7? If so, what would the asking price be?

I don't think they'll get that chance, but forget the Skins--they are looking to move in the other direction. The Vikings would have very strong interest in moving up if Gabbert is there, but to move that far will cost them a lot and I'm not sure they are willing to part with multiple picks. I don't think the Niners would take "just" next year's 1st rounder because giving up a pick that high needs more immediate gratification.

SF's best trade bet is if Peterson is still on the board; Houston will be calling

If Peterson is still on the board, why would the Niners look to trade him? Other than Von Miller, isn't he near the top on their board?

[Justin33]

A New England ? there are rumors of the Patriots moving up 2 #10 any Idea as for who?
The speculation is for Fairley or a WR The rumor was from Tom Curran the thinking is that Willfork
played extremely well at end at the end of the year.

[Icness]

5 quick Tuesday notes:
1. Normally I have a pretty strong rapport with the Texans but they have quite suddenly turned very cold. I'm not quite sure what to make of that, but I know they have been working the phones to try to move up to get Patrick Peterson and I've made that knowledge public. Maybe they found a taker, or maybe they want me to piss off?

2. Here's the deal with Buffalo and Arizona: they have pretty much the exact same needs. Both need long-term QBs, pass rushers, and offensive line bolstering, with corner and TE also in the mix. They both really like Von Miller and both really like Patrick Peterson. more than either team likes any of the QBs. Buffalo prefers Cam Newton, Arizona perfers Gabbert. The question is, can one of them successfully sell enough interest in the "other" QB to move back? If Arizona really wants Von Miller, they have to deal with Buffalo also wanting him, which means Denver's pick at #2 is attractive and the Broncos would love to move backwards. I can see Arizona moving up to take Miller, Buffalo taking Peterson, and Denver sliding back to (still) take Dareus.

3. Heard a crazy rumor, but it came from a source that I trust pretty well: New England moving way up. Julio Jones and Marcel Dareus are the presumed targets. I get the sense from the way he told me that this could very well be Belichick building more value for #17, trying to send the signal that he isn't afraid to use it to move up. I wish I could make more concrete sense of it, but I'm not in The Hoodie's inner circle...which is exactly three people.

4. Two dark-horse scenarios that you have to consider: Cleveland taking Nick Fairley, and San Francisco taking Jake Locker. Both would surprise me but they are not inconceivable.

5. Someone asked about a surprise draft riser, here's two guys that are moving up quickly: Muhammad Wilkerson and Marvin Austin. Both are strong candidates to get picked about 10 slots earlier than most prominent mocks currently have them. Wilkerson might not get past #14, and Austin to Chicago has real legs according to someone who would know.

[Rafael122]

So for the last few days I've been reading up on how the Skins want to trade back, what would the odds of that actually coming true do you think? 50/50?

[Icness]

So for the last few days I've been reading up on how the Skins want to trade back, what would the odds of that actually coming true do you think? 50/50?

I think it's higher than that. Maybe 70/30. They're sitting right at the spot where the top tier of talent ends, and there will be teams looking to tap that. The best thing that could happen for them is Julio Jones and Nick Fairley to fall, if they want to fall back.

[Smooth32]

Icness, I was just about to ask you about Fairley going to the Browns. They seem to really like him.

Heckert was asked a question in his press conference Thursday about why Quinn is publicly perceived to be a better prospect than Fairley and he responded with "that's not everybody's perception." So...yeah, I think they like Fairley. Heckert also constantly defended Fairley whenever he was asked a question about his character, one-year wonder status, etc. I really think they like him a lot. If Dareus, Peterson or Green aren't there, I fully expect them to take Fairley.

[Icness]

I was in Cleveland and Detroit over the long weekend and the biggest thing I got from Cleveland was that they like their current receivers a lot more than people think they do. I caught Heckert's comments on Fairley and I don't think he was blowing smoke either. Also, I don't think Robert Quinn is in play at #6 anymore. Too many people with good knowledge are saying he's in the 11-15 range and I'm not going to fight that anymore.

[Rafael122]

I keep forgetting to ask you this question but do NFL teams use the draft pick value chart at all? As in, they have it in handy just in case?

[Icness]

I keep forgetting to ask you this question but do NFL teams use the draft pick value chart at all? As in, they have it in handy just in case?

The team I was with had their own chart that was very different from the generically accepted one. I can't remember the exact values but the picks from 15-32 were much more valuable than they are in the generic one, as were the bottom 5 picks of every round down to the 5th. IIRC the #1 overall pick was worth 1000, #2 was 995, #10 was 925, #20 was like 885, #32 was around 800. I know the dropoff from the top of the first to the top of the second was only 20% of value, not sure about all the numbers in between. And they didn't hold strictly to it either.

Everyone knows Belichick has his own value chart. Ron Borgess had a good feature on it a couple of years ago, where BB actually has the #5 pick assigned a higher value than the #1 pick because of the ancillary costs, both monetary and stigmatic.

[TSE]

I keep forgetting to ask you this question but do NFL teams use the draft pick value chart at all? As in, they have it in handy just in case?

Of course they use it, cause they don't know how to come up with proper and precise evaluations of what draft picks are worth. You can tell these guys have no clue, as they often reference trade charts and pick charts in conversation, but the whole concept of a pick chart is illogical, because every year the nature of the players in the draft has changes in along with monetary changes. The only logical way to do is to custom create a draft chart for every year and every team should have a slightly different variation if they are doing it correctly. You guys get very analytical with some of these questions, and sure there is a lot of time and effort going into draft plans, but nonetheless the sport as a whole is not run by strategists and thinkers. The analogy I would give is it's like picking teams in elementary school. They don't ask the nerds to intelligently plan on the best way to assemble the best team, rather the most popular kids are chosen and they subsequently make choices for their team that are biased on popularity as opposed to overall value to the team. NFL strategists are like those guys, they have a rather unsophisticated and rudimentary way of trying to understand the game and the team that they are involved in, and so I find it quite amusing that so many of these guys use or reference the so-called "trade chart".

Just as Icness mentioned, some idiot actually believes the 5 pick is worth more but what that moron doesn't realize is that part of the value is determined by how other teams value picks, and you can still market and sell that 1 pick better than 5 if you get stuck with it, there's plenty of margin to compensate for to prove that you can sell that pick for more, cause you could find teams that somehow value the 4th pick as more than a 1 and still do better than having a 5. He's on an extreme end of the spectrum while everybody else tends to value a 1 pick as a you know, 1 pick. And because of that, his logic on his draft chart is screwed and probably in multiple rounds for other reasons based on poor logic on not full criteria of what determines a pick.

[cochiseuofm]

some idiot actually believes the 5 pick is worth more

Some idiot as in Bill Belichick? You mean the guy with three Super Bowl rings, widely considered to be one of the best drafters in the league? I think he is doing OK with his strategy as is...

they have a rather unsophisticated and rudimentary way of trying to understand the game

This is you dude. You see everything as black and white. I have the 1st pick and 1st pick is higher than the 5th pick, so there is absolutely no way that the 5th pick can be worth more. Never mind that 1st picks get paid like Pro Bowlers before they ever see a snap, that to trade for a first pick requires teams to surrender multiple top picks (which no one wants to do unless there is a can't miss player available, in which case why would the team trade the pick in the first place.)

It is hard for me to believe that on the MLB forum, you are blasting the Tigers GM because his cost per win stat is too high, but here you fail to realize that the cost per value of first overall picks, or high first-round picks in general, is terrible.

[TSE]

No I hate the cost of high picks, that's why I aggressively promote to trade them. You're misinterpreting my philosophy and viewpoints.

[cochiseuofm]

No I hate the cost of high picks, that's why I aggressively promote to trade them. You're misinterpreting my philosophy and viewpoints.

No I'm not, I understand you want to trade high picks. I'm saying you don't understand that the value of those high picks are diminished because of the cost of high picks. What makes you think that other teams don't feel just as leary as you do about high picks?

In 2004, the last time the #1 pick overall got traded, the Giants had to give up a 3rd round pick, a future 1st, and a future 5th just to move up from the 4th pick to the 1st pick. That trade ended up being Eli Manning for Philip Rivers, Shawne Merriman, Nate Kaeding, and a fifth round pick which was traded for Roman Oben (not really an important player but part of the deal.)

Now that deal works out for NY because of the Super Bowl win, but I think most people acknowledge that Rivers is the better, or at worst an equal, quartberback than Manning is. Add in two other Pro Bowl calibar players, even with Merriman flaming out, and the Giants paid a high cost to move up three spots. Plus they had to pay Manning more than what Rivers got made. How many teams want to give up multiple valuable picks and pay more money for that?

You're basically mortgaging your short-term future and banking on one player, who already is highly paid and doesn't have to earn a big contract, on working out. I don't see that as good strategy, and I think most teams agree. I think even you agree, you just seem to think you'll be able to find one sucker to take a deal.

[lpsevier]

So what do the Falcons have to give up to ensure the ability to draft AJ Green or Julio Jones?

Matt Ryan? lol

[Icness]

So what do the Falcons have to give up to ensure the ability to draft AJ Green or Julio Jones?

Matt Ryan? lol

I saw those rumors about them moving up and just laughed. Tom Dimitroff is not going to give up #27 and next year's #1 to get into the top 10, just not his style. He's a Belichick disciple. Now moving up in a deal with Belichick...that could happen for the right pass rusher. On a related note, I strongly believe JJ Watt's draft floor is #17