You leg pullers. I'm 99.99% sure that Geroy and Jones have made up their minds already. The only thing that could convince me otherwise would be a last second trade (say... two second rounders for the first overall).
Fully agree. With everyone agreeing it's a weak draft past, say, the 1st 2 rounds why would you trade #1 for 2 picks in round 2? Only the Argos have two 2nd round picks & giving up #1 for #10 & 15 doesn't sound great. Moving from 1, 19 & 20 to 4, 13, 19 & 20 might make sense if Als come calling & offer their 1st & 2nd rounder.. I can't see Ottawa or BC in spot 2 & 3 giving up that pick & a 2nd to go to #1. But who knows?
A little cynical I know but this is the same story for every team, only 1st pick makes it any different from the rest. I really don't pay much attention to unproven players, we've all seen high prospects that bombed big time (aren't there some horror stories there!). Most of our favouritest, bestest all time football heroes weren't #1s. I won't call down college ball but a man can't really prove himself still you start playing with the pros who do it for a living. You suddenly go from being a big fish in a small pond to fish bait in the ocean & a lot of players get eaten. If I was a prospect I would rather someone else gets that #1 anchor to hang around his neck.
That's all true. But two things - top picks are there because they probably have performed big in big moments. They are ranked #1 for a lot of reasons. The recent article on Geroy Simon & what goes into deciding on a #1 is probably true for all teams.
Secondly, name me a team who says they'd rather pick 9th or 5th or 2nd. Who wouldn't want a shot @ a Connor McDavid or a Nathan McKinnon or Austin Matthews. Sometimes you get one of those & sometimes you get a Nail Yakupov. Would you rather have McDavid or Eichel. Good players, both of them, but a wide gap between 1 & 2 IMO. Bottom line - give me #1 every year & the pressure they may face & I'll take it, thank you very much.
I agree with you that despite the lack of guarantees that come with picking a player, it is always better to pick #1 or as high as possible. The McDavids/Crosbies/Mackinnons are capable of changing a franchise. There are of course the Yakupovs/Daigles/Stefans/Wickenheisers that end up dearly costing a franchise.
I also agree with Porky Pine and in fact it is true that in most drafts the #1 pick does not end up being the best pick. Many gems such as the Malkins and Draisaitls and Savards and Francis’ are not picked #1 and turn out to arguably be the best of their draft year. Francis over Hawerchuk, Malkin over Ovechkin and Savard over Wickenheiser for example.
Although the highest pick is best, in my opinion, choosing 18 year olds will always require an element of luck and more often than not, it seems, the #1 pick is not the best player chosen when viewed with the luxury of hindsight.
That's all true as well, but it is a bit of a crapshoot. The leagues all time points leader, Lui Passaglia was a #5 pick. The #1 that year? Tim Berryman(who?). Just an example that shows only time will sort the wheat from the chaff. It all comes down your best guess at the time, based on what a very young player has shown you to date. It's all you really can do, short of having a time machine. So personally I tune out the combines & drafts & wait to see these guys on the field, & just be thankful I'm not the one that has to make these difficult choices. It's your problem, Geroy!
I'm not in disagreement with you or Jon. We can all name dozens of players in any league who are better than the #1 pick because you have, in the CFL draft this year 73 players, which means any one of 72 could be better than #1. Even more true in the NFL etc where they may be a couple of hundred to pick from. The fact that you have the #1 pick is still a big advantage whether or not it pans out & doesn't diminish the importance of getting good, or better, picks later. There is pressure on getting the pick right & on the pick for going #1. But how many players in any league say they don't want to go #1 or the pressure? It's a point of pride. In a separate article here on the Jones pick, Richards has stated as much. If I'm a GM or a player, do I want the #1 spot? Absolutely. Don't forget - unless you trade it away, the last place team not only gets the #1 pick in round 1 but in all successive rounds. Another benefit that goes with having the 1st pick.
It's kept me interested. If you have a look at the current roster and what the Elks need to add it seems very different from the top rated draft picks.
The Elks have some good up and coming Canadian linebacker talent and they picked up Konar in free agency.
I'm thinking they may be looking for a guy to replace Boateng who went to Ottawa as a free agent, and Sewell who they never really replaced last year. Yes we put some good players in those spots but there was never enough pressure on opposition with roughly 20 less sacks than the league leaders, 10 interceptions, and a total of 7 forced fumbles with 2 recovered fumbles last season.
As we all know, the draft is an imperfect science. GM’s and the like can only evaluate and number crunch to a certain extent – in the end, they still have to choose a player they believe will help their team the most (offensive and defensive scheme plays a large part in this decision).
We all have seen 1st round picks tank, and 7th round picks flourish when they get to the professional level. Some guys shine while others flop - you roll the dice and play – hopefully enough of your 1st, 2nd, and 3rd round picks help you achieve your team goal – win a Championship – win a Grey Cup.
Anyone know the percentage of 1st round picks that fail to live up to their draft status?
Oops, sent my reply elsewhere. Jones has stated he wants imports for the DE position & one DT spot is going to be CDN. Both Henry & Charles are older guys who are likely one year options. I'm guessing Cole Nelson, a big athletic 310 lb guy has a good shot @ being a starter down the road & Jones has 1st crack in the Supplemental Draft on May 3 @ 6'6", 320 lb J-Min Pelley, another athletic big DT. Jones likes size so he may pick him up - he was projected to be a top 3 guy if he was in the regular draft.
I don't disagree with you on LB. Konar & McDonald are top 9 in ST tackles & look pretty good. The only issue with Konar IMO is staying healthy. But I see value in taking Richards nonetheless because of his ability to play DE & LB & drop him back in coverage if necessary - think McCoil & Antigha who did just that for him before. Antigha is back again too. I think Richards fits the blueprint.
That is Jones style. I mean he had Odell Willis dropping back to play cover last time he was here. Guys who an play multiple positions means you have better injury coverage too.
It always seems teams run into injury in one position during season and with guys who can play multiple positions it sure helps.