Dammit.

 

Lets see how Dion Sims does vs Boyce in their career. I say Sims even though we took Jenkins with 104, because if we took Boyce at 104, we would have took Jenkins at 106 and Sims would be the odd man out.

 

oh well. not a big deal unless he becomes a starter and excels

 

The Jets beat us to the punch on Ken O'Brien, too. :)

 

I liked the kid, shame we did not get him.

 

Not relevant.
We were never going to pick O'Brien.
Marino was the pick or they were going elsewhere.

 

I'd be willing to bet the Patsies picked our pocket more than once in this draft.

 

Yea well instead of trading up for a corner we could've grabbed in the 4th or 5th, we should've moved up for Boyce at the end of the 3rd, then he'd be a Dolphin, he's a great talent and probably would've upgraded the slot big time.

 

What's the difference? The odds are that Boyce becomes a whole lot worse a player than Ken O'Brien.

In what round do you stop feeling bad that other teams picked your pocket? The 7th? I'd say it's when players in general start to become very unlikely to become good, which is about midway through the 2nd.

Having my pocket picked in the 4th is meaningless, because neither the player you wanted nor the player you ended up taking is likely to be the diamond in the rough one would have to be to feel bad about it.

 

Actually what he'll "probably" do is never contribute significantly to an NFL team.

 

And I have to ask why you think hr would've been available in the 4th or 5th?

 

Meh

 

That should probably be the sentiment for any player picked beyond about 50.

 

How twoo, how twoo! LOL

 

I'm happy to be persuaded to the contrary by any objective evidence that picks beyond 50 are likely to be significant contributors in the NFL.

 

Tom Brady is a 1st ballot HOF candidate.

 

I wasn't arguing Boyce.
I simply stated the lack of relevance to the O'Brien/Marino reference since it was a different scenario.

 

And you think that's valid evidence that picks beyond 50 are likely to be significant contributors in the NFL? Surely you've heard of the phrase "exception to the rule."

 

12 out of our 21 Ring of Honor players were drafted beyond 50 or unsigned FA's.

This alone makes no pick in any round worthless folly like you are suggesting.
Obviously the chances go down for a Players to have success the farther you go in a draft but players are there to be had.

 

I would have preferred to get a WR or 2 in the draft, especially rds 3-4, plenty were available. We missed a shot at Keenan Allen by one pick (I have no idea, of course, if we would have taken him) and we'll see who has a better career, Allen or Dallas Thomas- or the 2 guys taken right after, Markus Wheaton and Marquise Goodwin.

The coverage LB is ok, Jelani Jenkins, but I would have preferred either of the 2 payers taken right before, Boyce or Alex Okafor.

 

I didn't say those picks are worthless. I said they're unlikely to be significant contributors in the NFL.

 

You certainly insinuated it sir.
What else would you call stating that the sentiment of "meh" should be the approach for any player picked past 50?

In addition I just showed you that the majority of our ring of honor players came from beyond pick 50.
You're a numbers guy chew on that.

 

Sure thing. Please, since you're providing numbers, tell me how likely a pick beyond 50 is to be a Ring of Honor player for any team in the league, or even a significant contributor to his team for that matter.

 

Better idea:

How about you start explaining how a bunch of "meh" players ended up as a majority of our best ever?

 

Im not gettinginto some mindless argument with you where you continually move the goal posts to keep the argument alive.

Here is a quick list of players that had or are having very good NFL careers that were choosen +51 in the draft:

Donald Driver
Terrel Owens
Johnny Unitas
Matt Haselback
Shannon Sharpe
Bo Jackson
Terrell Davis
Marques Colston
Cortland Finnegan
Joe Klecko
Bart Starr
Rodney Harrison
Richard Dent

Do you notice a few HOFers on that list?

 

No thanks. I'll just stick to the position that any player picked beyond about 50 is highly unlikely to be one of them. :)

 

And to know how likely a pick beyond 50 is to be one of them, you would have to know the percentage of them who have been drafted out of the total number of players taken. You can nominate the exceptions to the rule all day, and if they comprise only 5% of the players taken, you're 95% unlikely to land one.

 

Of course.... why would you want to interrupt your post draft chest thumping and attention campaign?

You asked for objective proof. You got it and in typical shrink fashion you change the parameters to fit what you want.

 

"If you can't attack the evidence, attack the witness; if you can't attack the witness, bang on the table."

 

Like I said Im not getting sucked into your ridiclious baiting tactics. You asked for evidence and I provided you with some examples of very good players that were drafted beyond #50. There are plenty more current starters out there that were picked later then your parameter not to mention UDFAs that were passed in the draft and became starters too.

If you want to say that the 1st 50 players in a draft are more likely to become starters...... My response to that is " NO CRAP, Thats why they were choosen first." Saying late round picks do not significantly contribute to the game is rubbish. By all means though believe what you choose too. I'm not buying it and if you want to buy into it then stop being lazy and comprise a list of all the active players and what spot they were picked. Then break it into % by round and show us how 90% of the players were choosen 1-50. Otherwise your just blowing a bunch of hot air and wasting everyones time.

 

No, you said "any".

 

Do they ever contribute significantly to the game? Sure.

Is any single pick more likely than not to? No.

 

Just another reason to hate Rick Speilman and his penchant of trading to the Pats.

 

Don't you guys just love how Shouright carefully chooses and contorts his wording in order to contrive all these silly straw arguments!

 

Like I said, if you can't attack the evidence, attack the witness. :)

 

Shou how many of the 1700 (aprox) active players last season were choosen before 50 and how many of them are 1st string/starters?

 

"Love" would not be a word that comes to mind in any way.