THE KIPER-MCSHAY DEBATES

KIPER & MCSHAY - SO HAPPY TOGETHER???


As a rule, I don't like to get in the middle of lovers quarrels--but for these two guys--I will make an exception. And in this case I will say both are wrong, but one is less wrong than the other.

In the NFL draft aftermath, it is part of the process to grade each teams performance in drafting potential future players. In the ESPN battle of the talking heads/draft gurus McShay took a stab or two at Kiper for giving teams ANY grade at all. He feels like you can't grade the draft until a few years out. DUH!!! But the whole reason these two grace our screens for this event is to give an "educated guess" on the "presently unknown - future prospects" of these collegians.

It's the whole purpose of ranking guys and having a draft list!!! And you can't venture an educated guess on which team did a better job of it than another.

C'mon McShay get a clue. You have your list of players ranked with razor sharp precision--somebody is ranked #1, #2, etc. And the teams are conveniently drafting in an eerily similar fashion--numerical order #1, #2, etc.

So can you not back into a reasonable grade, based on your list going into the draft and comparing it versus each team? Let's say we have Team A who drafts in the 1st, 33rd, 65th, 97th and 129th spot and gets the #1, #33, #65, #97 and #129 ranked prospect--then that team did about as well as expected--BASED ON YOUR MAGIC LIST.

And could you not conclude that if they get lower ranked players based on their draft slot CONSISTENTLY, then they received good value? And the opposite would be true as well.

It seems like this was the nexus of a lot of the debate about GOOD CHOICE/BAD CHOICE
that filled time between choices.

So you are either telling us that this ranking of players--your area of expertise--is just so much show-filler or you don't have the confidence or expertise to translate it into a team grade, which seems to be a relatively simple exercise.

Why were eyebrows raised when the Raiders took Heyward-Bey? Because he wasn't the highest ranked receiver, and his ranking on both of your lists was higher than the slot he was selected at--i.e. BAD PICK or a reach. Too many of those and a team could find itself rebuilding for a decade.

OK, enough for pounding the McShay position. Now on to Kiper. I cannot for the life of me understand how Mel can continually give the Jets and the Bucs almost anyone who trades up to get "their" guy solid grades.

MEL'S GRADES LISTED HERE:
http://www.faniq.com/article/Mel-Kiper-Jr-2009-NFL-Draft-Team-Grades-1561200

Part of it could be I'm not real sold on Sanchez. He was over-hyped by the USC hype machine. If you watch most of the highlights, his receivers were so wide open, I could have drop-kicked passes to them and completed a good number. We'll see how good he is when he has to throw into tight windows after getting smacked in the mouth a time or two--something else he has limited experience with.

How do the Bucs get a good grade for mismanaging their roster so much that they NEED to trade up to get a project QB, who may not help them for years? That is almost beyond belief.

At least you give out grades, Mel. BRAVO. But having the cajones to trade up does not always make a good draft. The Eagle made a good "trade-up" to get Maclin who was a great value at the spot due to the domino effect of the Raiders reaching for DHB earlier. There was not another impact WR that they could have sat in their spot and waited for--they spotted an opportunity and pounced on it. The Bucs likely could have had Freeman later and Sanchez at minimum has to bring the Jets a playoff victory very soon to justify the hype and the cost to obtain him.

But, I was wrong about Eli, so who knows.