NASHVILLE, Tenn. – As we head to Indianapolis, draft anticipation gets moved to DEFCON 4.
I’ve got a lot of good stories I will work to build on information I gather there. But it’s also a week during which the large issue of the Big Draft moves to flashing lights and horns.
Every draftnik’s board gets adjusted. The consensus big board tells us it aggregates nearly 100 big boards and hundreds of mock drafts into one master list.
We’ve already read and heard much about where guys fall on this board, and the amplitude only rises. There is real information in there from executives, scouts and coaches. But these people are guarded. Some of them don’t even come to the combine. The top, top draft guys are giving us a level of information that the bottom ones are not.
And as we create this list, we get to the end of April and we judge teams against it.
There are great front offices, bad ones and new ones. We all know drafting is an inexact art, or science. The media has created a year-round business out of draft profiling and prediction. We build a list, then judge teams by whether they followed it.
The Packers were panned for Jayden Reed in the second round in 2023 and he outperformed the reaction. Linebaker Devin Lloyd (Jaguars, No. 27, 2022) and guard Tyler Smith (Cowboys, No. 24, 2022) are other examples of players who have surpassed their post-draft reaction.
The list reaction is so extreme, The Athletic just immediately judged its own local team writers under the microscope in this fashion.
Mere days after the writers from around the country went a few rounds making projections for their teams, the aptly named Daniel Mock reviewed their picks. If you stuck to The Athletic’s consensus board, you were deemed a winner. And if you strayed from it, you were a draft loser.
Washington got Rueben Bain at seven when the board said he was sixth. Bravo!
But Dallas? What were the Cowboys thinking at No. 20, taking Georgia linebacker CJ Allen? He’s ranked 27, and there were several higher-ranked players available. The selector strayed from the list, therefore he did poorly.
Is this what we want?
A list put together by writers -- some well-sourced, none fully informed. Then instant judgments against anyone who strays from it. Meanwhile, teams pour enormous resources into the draft and at least deserve a chance to explain their thinking and get their choices on the field.
Love it all you like. I see the predictive appeal. I, too, am curious about how guys I’ve watched on Saturday will play on Sunday. I wonder about the luck of the draw for them – who lands in just the right place to be coached well in the right scheme and who winds up in a place lacking key elements and support.
But where does he measure up against the consensus board?
I’m sure there are plenty of examples that go both ways.
The consensus in 2023 said Jalin Hyatt was 11 spots better than Josh Downs. Hyatt has 36 catches, 470 yards and no touchdowns. Downs has 198 catches for 2,140 yards and 11 scores.
Draft coverage is valuable. Consensus boards are interesting. But grading writers and then teams against media consensus immediately after the draft is lazy.
And history shows that deviation can turn out fine.