Welcome JT Woods, DB, Baylor (R3, #79)

[Xenos]

It’s pretty bad when the actor you hire (talking about Brosnan) publicity admits he doesn’t know how to play the role. Didn’t help any he was a middling actor to begin with.

Very curious what direction they go post-Craig…

I actually liked Brosnan a lot. His first two movies were good, especially Goldeneye.

TYSEN ANDERSON SCOUTING REPORT: WEAKNESSES (from NFLDRAFTBUZZ.com)

• In coverage he rarely manages to get a good jam at the line and instead hangs back - surprisingly considering his frame
• Is not aggressive in coverage and rarely competes for the ball in contested catch situations - seems happier to break up the pass than make an interception
• Does not look confident in coverage and seems unsure leading him to become handsy and risk interference penalties
• Is not natural in coverage and struggles to display a inconsistent technique
• Looks too tight in coverage when attempting to cover the twitchier receivers. Has problems covering on intermediate and short routes
• NFL quarterbacks may take advantage of his aggressiveness in man and zone to eye up short routes and go over the top
• In his most recent playing season - he was a bit of liability in coverage demonstrated by a 114 QB rating when targeted
• Not fully consistent on making the interception in front of receivers. Best lined well off the line of scrimmage due to a high, stiff backpedal.
• Can be slow to react in coverage although has been masked by his catch up speed

SCOUTING REPORT: SUMMARY

Tycen Anderson is an elite athlete with perfect size, length, and speed for the position combined with strong tackling skills makes him seem on the surface like a quality prospect. However, Anderson really struggles in coverage, is very raw, and really needs to develop his skills if he ultimately wants a starting spot at the pro level. Currently, his skillset limits his NFL role to a short area box safety and we doubt he could hold up as a three-down player.

Anderson may be over-drafted due to his elite measurables by a team hoping to develop his raw talent into something a little more polished, but we can see his value as no higher than the fifth/sixth round of the 2022 NFL Draft.

I have already acknowledged that Anderson was consensus ranked at #159 (first half of the 5th round) versus Woods at #137 (late 4th round). For that value range in the draft, those players represent similar value in addition to being physically very similar (completely refuting the argument that Woods is unique because of his size and speed). Some sources had Anderson ranked higher than Woods, including Zierlein (nfl.com), who Critty cited.

Regarding the source you cited and the assertion that Anderson looked tight against twitchier receivers, that assertion is not supported by Anderson's elite (top 3 of all combine participants this year) 3-cone drill time of 6.64 seconds.

There is much more difference between Travis Jones and Otito Ogbonnia in terms of quality of player than there is between Woods and Anderson. Jones is ranked 143 slots higher than Ogbonnia versus the 22 slot difference between Woods and Anderson, though I think we could have walked away with Jones at #75 and Woods at #123. Outside of a couple of outliers and this forum, Woods is considered pretty much just a guy, whereas people are citing Jones as part of why BAL arguably had the best draft in the NFL this year.

[equivocation]

[powderblueboy]

I wonder how he would react if Woods, Palmer or McKitty becomes a solid contributor
Or if one of them make the play to win the SuperBowl.

happy - but realistic:
isser:

with Woods: ball overthrown, just happened to be in the spot

with Palmer: perfect throw by Herbert, anyone could have made that catch

with McKitty: does 'he' have an animus towards McKitty?

[powderblueboy]

Sounds awesome. Next!

My draft

1rst: Zion Johnson
3rd: JT Woods
4rth: Isaiah Spiller (no running back left that i preferred)
5th: Otito (no DT left who had the potential to plug up the middle as well)
6A: Jamaree Salyer
6B: Rasheed Walker
7A: Jasir Taylor (the needed a backup slot corner /with kickoff capabilities)
7B: Zavander Horvath

[Maniaque 6]

I wonder how he would react if Woods, Palmer or McKitty becomes a solid contributor
Or if one of them make the play to win the SuperBowl.

[blueman]

Chaincrusher's probable draft:

1. Trevor Penning
3. Travis Jones
4. ?Tycen Anderson
5. The punt God (possible reach in the 4rth)
6A. Given up in the move to acquire Jones
6B. ??? (the who cares position and beyond)

This will be duly noted from hereon, redounding in fame or shame.
No wiggle room provided here: no face saving discussion about fitting one team & not fitting the other.

Sounds awesome. Next!

[sonorajim]

This is the time period where we fantasize about how all the draft picks and free agents are a waste of time & money since TT did not draft, sign or trade for a new RT that has been universally approved.

[powderblueboy]

Chaincrusher's probable draft:

1. Trevor Penning
3. Travis Jones
4. ?Tycen Anderson
5. The punt God (possible reach in the 4rth)
6A. Given up in the move to acquire Jones
6B. ??? (the who cares position and beyond)

This will be duly noted from hereon, redounding in fame or shame.
No wiggle room provided here: no face saving discussion about fitting one team & not fitting the other.

[foreigner]

Is that time of year when we j** off fantasizing that all the drafted players are going to become pro bowlers?

Nothing really going on huh?

[powderblueboy]

I laughed at the Leatherwood pick because, having watched him, i thought he struggled with his feet in pass protection at OT.

I'm not laughing at the Strange pick because there were no obvious deficiencies watching him - which is all i can pick up:
and that it was Belichick.

The only consensus that matters is the collective consensus of the GMs, with the millions of dollars scouting budgets at their disposal.
They spend a lot of time, energy and expense in trying to figure how that consensus lines up.
So, to say that one knows absolutely who should be available in such and such a round is sheer nuts.

In addition, a big problem with the 'consensus' argument is that a Daniel Jeremiah and some noodle head at PFF are given equal weight.

One has already posted the stats concerning 'reaches' being most likely to earn 2nd contracts with the team that selected them;
that should pretty much obliterate anyone's confidence in the validity of the 'consensus' argument as to when a player should be selected.

Given how the 3rd and early 4rth round went, with the run on safeties and corners, in all likelihood, Woods would have been gone by the Charger's 4rth round pick,

The discussion about drafting to fit various NFL schemes, having already been discussed, I have nothing more to say on this argument.

[Critty]

Critty, I already posted that the consensus big boards that I have looked at are primarily NFL Mock Draft Database, but also The Athletic's consensus big board. NFL Mock Draft database discloses the number of big boards considered (102).

I have never discussed any big board that I personally have. You have 100% misunderstood my posts in this thread if you think that. My discussion has been about good and bad draft strategy, which applies regardless of the players involved.

I have stated that it is a bad idea to reach against the consensus big board when there is a large difference in ranking between the GM's big board and the consensus big board.

I have defined the word "reach" to mean taking a player significantly earlier than his consensus ranking. Whenever and wherever I have used that term, that is what I am saying. Again, I have been incredibly clear on this point.

I get that when Mike Mayock chose Alex Leatherwood with the #17 overall pick, that pick was not inconsistent with how Mayock ranked Leatherwood on his board just as the selection of Woods on the Stalesco board when he was selected was not inconsistent with how that board ranked him. I have never suggested any such inconsistency. The problem is that most other folks knew/know that those picks were reaches and they know that because of the consensus weight of publicly available assessments of the matter.

So, in an effort to be even a little bit objective and not a complete homer, I apply the same standard when considering whether a disgusting Raider player is a reach as I do in assessing whether one of our draft selections is a reach. But the truly hilarious thing is that many people on this forum rightly laughed at the Leatherwood pick because he was a clear reach based upon the publicly available consensus, but because their hearts are involved as Chargers fans here, they simply cannot employ the exact same analysis that was applied to Leatherwood to players like Palmer, McKitty and now Woods.

And, as I have stated multiple times, the fact that all of those players were defined reaches does not mean that they cannot have a solid career in the NFL. Numerous people have failed to appreciate that in calling a player a defined reach, I am not saying that the player is somehow not good. The concepts are completely different from one another.

Instead, I am suggesting that we are hemorrhaging draft pick value when we reach. I already went through the exercise of showing what it cost us when we simply did not take Palmer in round 4 last year and McKitty in round 5 because some people on this forum appear to think that just because we got a decent player, picking the player when we picked the player was somehow justified, which the exercise demonstrated is absurd because when a team pisses away draft pick value, the team is not as good as it could have been.

The standard that you have raised of not being taken early on the NFL GM's own board would validate just about every pick ever and would render any true discussion of draft pick value meaningless. So that can't be what we are talking about when we say player X was a reach or was not a reach. And, of course, nobody on this forum attempted to throw Leatherwood/Mayock any such lifeline.

I have explained many times why I think reaching against consensus big boards is a bad idea for an actual GM in cases where there is a big discrepancy between the GM's board and the consensus big board. In cases of significant discrepancies, a consensus big board is likely to be correct more often than any one individual's big board. So, the obviously better approach is to try to steal value (from the perspective of the GM) by taking the player in the consensus range.

Regarding Jones, players fall in every draft and those are the players that a GM should target. That's where a GM gains value versus other teams with a draft pick. That's why, when we were in a position potentially to get Travis Jones, we needed to get aggressive and trade up for him, assuming Telesco was clever enough to know what half of us knew on this forum at the time--that BAL would take Jones if given a chance because BAL knows what they are doing when it comes to drafts.

In the case of Keenan Allen, Telesco stated that he had Fluker, Te'o and Allen all rated as first round players. Allen fell because every time Telesco had a pick in the first two rounds, there was a first round rated player that covered Allen that he chose over Allen. That too is how a player like Travis Jones can fall.

The frustration is that in the case of Jones is that he was consensus ranked at #44 overall. We had a real chance to get him at #75 and he plays a PON for us, which is why we took the much lesser player (consensus rank of #187) in Ogbonnia later, citing his size as a major factor, size that, of course, is virtually identical to Jones' size (same height, Jones is 1 pound heavier). And then, after missing a chance to gain value, we threw away value by selecting Woods, the #137 ranked player, a player "only" ranked 93 slots lower than Jones.

There is no reason to believe that because a website processes 100 mock boards that spit out #137 for Woods, it should be considered best board to use for Chargers and Staley in drafting prospect to upgrade their roster. Or be used to gauge whether they should pick a player they really like and rated higher on their board or wait a round expecting the draft to play out per the supposed consensus board. They are drafting a person to compete for a role in their offense. And they have their own board.

You made your point about why you have these opinions and why you call it a reach. But that doesn't make it one for LAC.

The fact is JT was not a reach for B.Staley. if you paid attention to the facts, Staley specifically said he did not want to reach for a player when they drafted Johnson-OG in Rd1. So why would he then reach on the very next pick he has. He also told JT right after drafting him how he was an awesome fit. Woods was simply rated higher for them. Jeremiah ranked him #67.