Well done nerd. I am amazed anyone would put in this much effort.

I wish someone would convince Teddy that you don't take flyers before the 3rd or 4th round. And the 3rd is kind of pushing it.

Originally Posted by: wpr 

we don't (apparently) WANT guys who fit our scheme. Dom loves those 4-3 guys.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 

You distinguish between a flyer (e.g. Khyri Thornton) and a reach, Wayne? I have a feeling that he may end up having to reach somewhat only because he can't get a trade partner that allows him to trade up/down for the right value. Especially if he has to stay put at #27 in the first.

To me an acceptable and often unavoidable reach is "up to half a round" for the top 50 picks, "up to 20-30 picks" for the top 100. Reaching more than that would fall into the "flyer" category. So, for example, I considered Mike Neal and Nick Perry reaches for where they were drafted, but'd have put Thornton, Jerel Worthy, Davante Adams all as flyers.

Originally Posted by: Wade 

You distinguish between a flyer (e.g. Khyri Thornton) and a reach, Wayne? I have a feeling that he may end up having to reach somewhat only because he can't get a trade partner that allows him to trade up/down for the right value. Especially if he has to stay put at #27 in the first.

To me an acceptable and often unavoidable reach is "up to half a round" for the top 50 picks, "up to 20-30 picks" for the top 100. Reaching more than that would fall into the "flyer" category. So, for example, I considered Mike Neal and Nick Perry reaches for where they were drafted, but'd have put Thornton, Jerel Worthy, Davante Adams all as flyers.

Originally Posted by: Wade 

You distinguish between a flyer (e.g. Khyri Thornton) and a reach, Wayne?

Originally Posted by: Wade 

No a flyer and a reach are the same thing to me

Originally Posted by: wpr 

I think often times flyer and reach are meant as the same thing, but I've also seen a few people use them differently.

The distinguish those people used was that a flyer is more of a term for a risky boom or bust type player with the player having a possibility of living up to or exceed where they were drafted but also could easily become a bust, and so it was more about taking a chance (or flyer) on their upside potential to possibly give you that return value. While reach was a term for a player you felt more certain about what they were going to deliver, and it might be good, but just not as good as one would normally expect with that level of a draft pick.

Originally Posted by: beast 

I understand what you are saying but why would anyone "reach" for a player unless they thought they could exceed their anticipated slot? Thus a "flyer" too. At least for me. I don't mind it if people want to distinguish between the two. They have that right.

Originally Posted by: wpr 

I'm always excited when we pick because I like being surprised about new players I've never heard of hopefully making a name for themselves in the NFL. Randall was amazing last year for a rookie. I was just in awe. He made mistakes here and there but you wouldn't see him make the same mistake twice.

Originally Posted by: DarkaneRules 

I remember being both shocked and disturbed by last years draft when Ted went back to back with the cornerback picks AND selected two guys that I either didn't know much about (Randall) or who I thought was more like a 3rd round pick (Rollins).

Now I sit back and enjoy both these players wearing the Packers uniform and the Rollins pick is much better to me because my brother (a Bears fan) wanted Chicago to take him badly. Anytime Rollins makes a play, I let him know.

Nerd- thanks for the big board. A lot of good players coming out of this draft. I wouldn't be upset at all if the Packers went with Jaylon at #27. Unless there is a player who magically dropped to 27, why not?

Exciting to think about him playing for the Packers.

Originally Posted by: Yerko