GroupThink 3 - Kitty Hawk, 2022

[cuervo72]

Originally posted by QuikSand
On a metagame level... what do we make of WR Al Hartzell? This guys is clearly cut from a different cloth than most others in the draft-- has great ratings in a few areas, and dirt in the rest.

My money says that he gets a lot better over time... and possibly develops into a starting-level player.

Not lobbying for us to take him, just trying to notice some of the scenery along the way. He's an odd player... sort of liike our OT Grolsko was when we took him. Just doesn't look quite like the rest of them.

Is this the 6'5" guy out of Navy (I have the files at work but not at home)? If it is, he caught my eye too, very intruiguing. I thought of bringing him up but thought he might be a little TOO odd. But if we don't go WR with 2nd round, and he's still around later...

As for the GroupThink exercise...I'm enjoying this too, being involved but not having to concentrate on everything. Bouncing ideas off of others. It's also a good learning experience. Very different from doing my own dynasty, where I am talking to Buzzbee and the wall

edit: Just kidding, I know there are other strong supporters in that thread!

[Buzzbee]

Originally posted by cuervo72
Very different from doing my own dynasty, where I am talking to Buzzbee and the wall

You mean there is a difference?

[cuervo72]

Originally posted by Buzzbee
You mean there is a difference?

One is denser than the other

[Buzzbee]

Ok - I've reviewed the files. Man, this is no fun.

My heart says to take either C Kenneth Alston or C Glen Frederick. I think either one of these guys would be a solid addition to the team, and would probably be contributors by the end of the season.

However, if we sign Cicci, which is very possible, we'll have two serviceable centers, albeit not good enough to fill Winter's shoes. Thus drafting a center first isn't as much of a priority. Also, my heart says to go with Glen Frederick since he is a Tech grad.

My head says draft WR Daryl Anunson. We only have 3 WR's under contract, so this IS a need position. He is, based on our scouts view, a head above the other receivers. He also gives us a little depth at PR/KR since McNair and Duran are really the only ones we have.

My head also says that there is a little bit of depth a Center in the draft, and a run on Centers hasn't begun.

Damn my brain!! It tells me to do what I don't want to do. Agree with Fritz.

(There's some QOTM material!)

And to cloudy the waters a little more, I offer up OLB Rico "Suave" Sinclair as an alternative to NT Sam Upshaw. He doesn't give us the depth at DT, but DAMN I like all the red. His leadership is 68, which might put him in a leadership role (not sure with our free agent signings where we are on that). If we are drafting a "DE", then he is worth consideration.

[Buzzbee]

Originally posted by cuervo72
One is denser than the other

I've been called thick-headed before, but never brick-headed.

[Buzzbee]

So to summarize, I think it would probably be a smart play to draft the WR Anunson and hope a center falls to the second round.

If we trade up, then I can certainly live with WR Anunson first and either Alston or Frederick or Upshaw or Sinclair with the second pick.

[Buzzbee]

If I had to pick between C or "DE", I'd probably go with DE, since it IS a difficult position to fill.

Man, those Centers look so darn talented too.

[cuervo72]

Hmm, there are a lot of Sinclairs in this game!

[Buzzbee]

Originally posted by cuervo72
Hmm, there are a lot of Sinclairs in this game!

Yeah, it reminds me of an old Letterman top ten when Dennis Johnson, Magic Johnson, Larry Johnson, and several others named Johnson were playing. The top ten was something like Top Ten slogans refused by the NBA. My favorite was "NBA - Come see our Johnsons."

[QuikSand]

Trying the file update again... #1 of 2

[Fritz]

Looking at players

I like WR Anunson, and he would be of immediated use as a complement to Duran. If we want him, now is the time.

I like both the centers, and could build a line for many years around Alston.

Where we are, I would take C Alston now. If Frederick Dropped I would take him as well and play one or both out of position. This would give us the type of middle to deal with the best D-lines.

Of course our D might have other thoughts on player priority.

[QuikSand]

Looks like it's working now - sorry for the inconvenience before, I don't know why this wouldn't work for me yesterday...

#2 of 2

[Fritz]

To be honest, in a solo game I would be all over

WILB Corwin Fincher

[QuikSand]

I can confirm that Niagara Falls is willing to move down in the trade I described earlier - we'd get pick #36 in the early 2nd round, in exchange for our picks at the end of rounds 2 and 3. With picks at #31 and #36, we'd almost certainly get two of our target players.


Does anyone thinkg that any of these guys would be there for us at #63? The DT and WR I sincerely douubt, but the centers? It's a weird position in FOF... I guess it's possible that one or both centers could slide to us there. But I'd hate to take the chance and then miss out, and end up with a reach pick at 2 and 3 rather than getting a potential impact player by trading up.

However, if we decided that (a) we wanted to trade to get a center and (b) we were flexible on which center to take, then perhaps we let the draft go, and only make the move when one of them goes off the board. If that's appreciably later than pick #36, the cost of trading up might decrease a bit - we might get to keep our 3rd round pick. (I could do the same thing with all three "target" players in mind... and once two are gone, we initiate the trade)

That seems like the best course of action to me - but we need to decide whether we want the WR (in which case we probably just trade up and take him, or even take him right now) or a C. If we have flexibility, we can probably get a better "price" on the trade.

[QuikSand]

Originally posted by cuervo72
Is this the 6'5" guy out of Navy (I have the files at work but not at home)? If it is, he caught my eye too, very intruiguing. I thought of bringing him up but thought he might be a little TOO odd. But if we don't go WR with 2nd round, and he's still around later...

Yes, Hartzell is a weird case. He is 6'5", 231 lbs - pretty huge for a receiver. And his ratings check in as follows:

AvDrops - 15/32
GetDF - 9/11
RteRun - 5/11
...nothing to see here so far...
3rdDown - 78/94
BigPlay - 100
...now we're talking...
Courage - 0
Adjust - 23/47
AvFumb - 48/96
PuntR - 13/16
KickR - 75/89
Endur - 74/89

Just what kind of player is this? It's a weird set of ratings, from a "real world" perspective... he can't get downfield, but he is a big pkay machine? Okay.

But from an in-game perspective, this guy just doesn't look like other players. He doesn't have the traditional mix of reds and greens in a fairly sensible order with one another. I'm thinking he's a special creation - very possibly created by the "masking" process that is hidden better than before, but definitely still exists. I say it's maybe 50/50 that some of those really lousy ratings will improve - maybe substantially - over time.

Just a thought... I'd be perfectly happy to just watch this kid from afar... but if he can get onto our roster with a 4th or 5th round pick, I'd be all over that, too.

[QuikSand]

Originally posted by Fritz
To be honest, in a solo game I would be all over

WILB Corwin Fincher

I think that we are finding with some alarming regularity that the "BPA" in a draft from TCY files is frequently a linebacker, at least from picks #20 to about #100. After that, maybe it's a RB - we've been seeing very usable backs sliding to the late rounds.

LB Fincher looks wonderful, but look at Otis Mitchell (a guy we got after last year's draft...) and the guy we took ini round three of last year's draft. They seem to be everywhere. Fincher doesn't have the size to switch to anywhere but LB... were we have plenty of guys. So, he could be one more player in our mix of bright young talent at LB... and theoretically he could slide to an OLB position and give us some time at DE... but in terms of "need" I'm starting to think that locating promising young LBs is never going to be a problem in a TCY-to-FOF4 career.

[QuikSand]

Originally posted by Fritz
Of course our D might have other thoughts on player priority.

Might, yes.

[QuikSand]

If I'm hearing the OC correctly, he's saying that C Alston is his top choice. I'm thinking that we swing a trade to move to #36, get Alston there to go with DL Upshaw at #31... and we fill in two critical spots on the team. Our plan at WR would then be to keep going with our current staff, look for one or two useful players in this draft (and afterwards), and be open to a "value" veteran WR addition as needed down the road as well.

[albionmoonlight]

Mazatlan is willing to trade us the 2(1) pick in exchange for our second, fourth, and sixth round picks. I say we do it to make sure we get our two guys. (It also makes me realize what a good deal we had to trade up in round one. However, having looked at the DE from Clemson (whose name escapes me), I don't think that he was really what I wanted because he had endurance in the 40s.

Anyway, I would say lets draft the player to convert to the DE here and then the WR at the 2(1) spot.

As to who to draft for the DE spot, here are my thoughts:


Rico Sinclair is interesting. I like that his real weaknesses are in coverage because those will not apply once he is converted. I have two issues with him, though. First, his endurance is poor. Second, is 252 too light to convert to DE? We don't really need another OLB on the team, even if he is playing out of position.

Upshaw's run defense is poor--not something ideal in someone who should become our every down DE in the future. However, I cannot ignore his freak-like pass rush ability. And, though it probably does not matter in a meta sense, it makes sense to have a guy at 280 playing DE.

Even if Upshaw keeps the weak ratings at run defense, he will still be (at worse) a heck of a pass rusher from the DE spot. Since we seem to be a sack/turnover based defense, we need guys like him.

Therefore, I vote for drafting Upshaw with this pick, trading Mazlatan for the 2(1) pick, and drafting the WR (whose name escapes me) with the 2(1) pick.

[albionmoonlight]

I see that there was action while I was making my post.

If we get Upshaw here, then I am happy with however the O wants to get the C or WR.

And I would love to pick up Hartzell as a experiment late.

[QuikSand]

Originally posted by albionmoonlight
As to who to draft for the DE spot, here are my thoughts:


Rico Sinclair is interesting. I like that his real weaknesses are in coverage because those will not apply once he is converted. I have two issues with him, though. First, his endurance is poor. Second, is 252 too light to convert to DE? We don't really need another OLB on the team, even if he is playing out of position.

Upshaw's run defense is poor--not something ideal in someone who should become our every down DE in the future. However, I cannot ignore his freak-like pass rush ability. And, though it probably does not matter in a meta sense, it makes sense to have a guy at 280 playing DE.

There's one very large difference between these two guys. Sinclair at 252 lbs CANNOT move to DE - he can be slotted there, but we'd still have to carry a "body" at the DE position, and Sinclair wouuld have to remain a LB, period.

Upton is the perfect weight to actually switch to DE. I'm not promosing that we keep him at DT and use him at DE - I am proposinng that we draft him, fully intending him to actually switch positions and be forever listed as a DE. He is the ideal weight (around 280-285, i think) and I suspcet our scout will indicate that he would make a painless transition. That's what I like about Upton... we've already got plenty of solid OLB who can be slotted at DE if we really needed it... Upton is a guy who will become a DE, period.

[QuikSand]

Originally posted by albionmoonlight
I see that there was action while I was making my post.

No, just discussion... nothing's been done yet. But I am smelling an emergeing consensus.

[cuervo72]

I'm all for trading up, but agree that Fritz should have the say over if we pick a C/WR with the offense pick.

Just wondering - what is the conract difference between 1(31) and 2(1)? I'm assuming the 1st rounder would have an extra year, so we'd want to lock up the DE (which is what we're talking anyway, I'm just talking through the logic)?

[QuikSand]

Originally posted by albionmoonlight
Mazatlan is willing to trade us the 2(1) pick in exchange for our second, fourth, and sixth round picks.

I like that better than leaving things to chance. Sixth round picks are for pansies anyway.

[QuikSand]

Originally posted by cuervo72
Just wondering - what is the conract difference between 1(31) and 2(1)? I'm assuming the 1st rounder would have an extra year, so we'd want to lock up the DE (which is what we're talking anyway, I'm just talking through the logic)?

I have found this to be a gradual difference, not a stark and predictable one. I have taken late first rounders and seen them sign four year deals - much like we expect from 2nd rounders. I don't think there's a hard and fast rule in place.

[cuervo72]

Hmm, I wonder if the agent is a small factor in it then (they have to have some purpose, right? ).

[QuikSand]

2002 Draft, continued

After some helpful deliberation, the die is cast. We move up to grab two impact players here – both of whom fill important team needs:

31. Kitty Hawk - Upshaw, Sam, DT, Northwestern

32. Fort Knox - Troxler, Isaac, RB, Miami, Florida

33. Kitty Hawk - Alston, Kenneth, C, Boise State

34. Ocean City - Beeman, Chester, RB, Ohio State
35. Niagara Falls - Joyner, Scottie, DE, Louisville
36. Thunder Bay - Burns, Cornell, S, Ohio State
37. Fort Wayne - Anunson, Daryl, WR, Miami, Ohio
38. Wheeling - Sinclair, Rico, OLB, Syracuse
39. Champaign - Fincher, Corwin, ILB, Georgia
40. Little Rock - Covington, Derek, OLB, Rice
41. Ypsilanti - White, Barry, QB, Kansas
42. Providence - Chubick, Sean, G, North Texas
43. Norfolk - Darquea, Bernie, S, Colorado
44. Tijuana - Myers, Edward, T, Virginia
45. Sacramento - Galloway, Bucky, ILB, Georgia Tech
46. Bermuda - Smilanich, Jay, DT, Michigan
47. Athens - Garrett, Jeremy, QB, Louisiana - Monroe
48. Texarkana - Brooks, Geoff, QB, Miami, Ohio
49. Pensacola - Cook, Toby, QB, Texas
50. Napa Valley - Pape, Otis, WR, Tennessee
51. Key West - Frederick, Glen, C, Georgia Tech
52. Manhattan - Jarvis, Travis, TE, Georgia
53. Death Valley - Webster, Teddy, G, Maryland
54. Puget Sound - Trevino, Maurice, OLB, Ohio State
55. Louisville - Hoffman, Leland, CB, Northwestern
56. Little Rock - Lynn, Broderick, CB, Notre Dame
57. Hawk Mountain - McNeil, Lawrence, C, Kansas
58. Memphis - Montgomery, Jermaine, G, Notre Dame
59. Cheyenne - Bradley, Lionel, T, Georgia Tech
60. Lake Erie - Dawkins, Leland, DT, Virginia
61. Nashua - Jefferson, Brian, DE, Brigham Young
62. Sault Ste. Marie - Powell, Justin, S, Georgia Tech
63. Mazatlan - Delgado, Dusty, S, Florida
64. Fort Knox - Young, Les, DE, Rice
65. Mazatlan - Jennings, Luke, S, Texas A&M
66. Ocean City - Kournikova, Harris, OLB, New Mexico
68. Thunder Bay - Guliford, Trevor, RB, Syracuse
69. Fort Wayne - Chabala, Fred, DE, Boston College
70. Wheeling - Lindsay, Antoine, OLB, Georgia Tech
71. Champaign - Myers, Adrian, DE, Washington
72. Tulsa - Garner, Broderick, G, UCLA
73. Ypsilanti - Lehr, Phil, OLB, Miami, Ohio
74. Providence - Ward, Blake, CB, Auburn
75. Norfolk - Cole, Sherman, CB, Virginia Tech
76. Tijuana - Spears, Kelly, TE, Southern California
77. Sacramento - Zimmerman, Preston, CB, Kansas
78. Bermuda - Stone, Jon, DT, Washington State
79. Athens - Lane, Vernon, OLB, Penn State
80. Texarkana - Phillips, Darrell, T, Marshall
81. Pensacola - Ogden, Richie, WR, Buffalo
82. Napa Valley - Bushon, Jermaine, S, Tulane
83. Key West - Bello, Ethan, G, Florida
84. Manhattan - Rigby, Dana, WR, Notre Dame
85. Death Valley - Bocaling, Earl, ILB, South Carolina
86. Puget Sound - Bruce, Myron, CB, UCLA
87. Louisville - McCarthy, Al, S, Georgia
88. Little Rock - Hartzell, Al, WR, Navy
89. Hawk Mountain - Mueller, Myron, G, Pittsburgh
90. Memphis - Summers, Morris, S, Oklahoma
91. Cheyenne - Hancock, Nathan, G, Clemson
92. Lake Erie - Struble, Travis, DT, Texas Christian
93. Nashua - Norton, Jumbo, TE, Wake Forest
94. Sault Ste. Marie - Branch, Ernie, T, Miami, Florida

And this brings us to our selection at the end of round three…

[QuikSand]

Mid-draft file update #1

[QuikSand]

#2 of 2

[Fritz]

Originally posted by QuikSand
Yes, Hartzell is a weird case. He is 6'5", 231 lbs - pretty huge for a receiver. And his ratings check in as follows:

AvDrops - 15/32
GetDF - 9/11
RteRun - 5/11
...nothing to see here so far...
3rdDown - 78/94
BigPlay - 100
...now we're talking...
Courage - 0
Adjust - 23/47
AvFumb - 48/96
PuntR - 13/16
KickR - 75/89
Endur - 74/89

Just what kind of player is this? It's a weird set of ratings, from a "real world" perspective... he can't get downfield, but he is a big pkay machine? Okay.

He looks like one of those tweener WR/TEs.

[QuikSand]

In the third round, we have some options. As usual, there’s a LB begging to be taken – Alvin Van Pelt of Syracuse looks good to me, but that’s no surprise at any level.

Weirdo WR Al Hartzell was snapped up just a few picks before us by Little Rock – but I want to try to watch him, as I’ve shared my predictions about his bright future. The remainders at WR don’t seem overwhelming – but perhaps our OC sees someone with an intriguing combination of middling ratings that suits his needs. (What do we make of Julio Curtis?)

There are a couple of fullbacks (as usual) who look good – but I’m not sure what we’d do with them.

RB Eric Mixon looks like he’d make a good utility back, in the mold of Rob Strong… but I don’t know that we need him. If he switched to WR, would he be better than the current crop of rookie receivers? (at 218 lbs, I think he’s a little to heavy for the switch) But when we are trawling the post-draft waters for a 5th or 6th WR, let’s not forget the RBs who are still hanging around – some of these guys have some receiving skills.

Safety Alex Hastings shows no proclivity to help in the running game, but has good coverage skills. How might we use a guy like him?

Some thoughts… I don’t see a slam dunk pick here.

[QuikSand]

Originally posted by Fritz
He looks like one of those tweener WR/TEs.

Maybe Mikhael Ricks
Hovers between tight and split
But he returns kicks

[cuervo72]

Well, he's off the board now anyway (Little Rock).

We should follow this guy:

41. Ypsilanti - White, Barry, QB, Kansas

[cuervo72]

Originally posted by QuikSand
Maybe Mikhael Ricks
Hovers between tight and split
But he returns kicks

Did you just finish reading TMQ??

[QuikSand]

Originally posted by cuervo72
Well, he's off the board now anyway (Little Rock).

We should follow this guy:

41. Ypsilanti - White, Barry, QB, Kansas

Any particular reason why? (Just asking) His curiously strong underneath game? His high "avoid int" rating?

[cuervo72]

Originally posted by QuikSand
Any particular reason why? (Just asking) His curiously strong underneath game? His high "avoid int" rating?

His bass, sultry tones and smoothness with the ladies.

BTW - you nailed it on UPshaw - a move to RDE upped him to 33/63, makes him 9/40 on the run, 24/100 on the pass and 86 for PR Strength.

[Fritz]

We could look at WR Lester Shores as a STer who may dev into something.

Stephen Ellis should become a good slot/3rd down type.

J.C. Moore could be a utility back in a season


ATTENTION

If we can take a scorpio, I want SE Chad Jefferson. He would be a reach with the current pick, but I promise he will be a decent stats guy and could have a decent impact as a career reserve. Trust me.

Otis Lewis and J.R. Leslie are STers who would fit in as a #4/5 type.

[Fritz]

talent wise, none of the QBs are a good enough fit to take this early. I have my eye on a couple for later, perhaps after the draft.

[Fritz]

COnsider the following O-Linemen

C Phillip Cote* - the best of the lot. Could play some mean LG for us.
C Frankie Thornton
LG Ryan Pritchett
LT Chuck Coates
LT Damon Sonntag

[cuervo72]

These names....I just spotted SS Roman Holliday.

Cote would be strong, but he conflicts with Tim Johns, so he's out.

[Fritz]

Originally posted by cuervo72
Cote would be strong, but he conflicts with Tim Johns, so he's out.

fuck'em then

[QuikSand]

Originally posted by Fritz
ATTENTION

If we can take a scorpio, I want SE Chad Jefferson. He would be a reach with the current pick, but I promise he will be a decent stats guy and could have a decent impact as a career reserve. Trust me.

Okay, I'll bite. We probably don't have to take him here - he's about 20th on the liist of remaining WRs.

But I'm intrigued... I assume you're attracted by is high ratings in 3rd down receiving and big play receiving. Both certainly are impressive, I'll agree.

But do you think this guy will get passes thrown his way? A zero in route running suggests (to me) otherwise. Do you have deeper insight?

[QuikSand]

Regrettably, CB Kenyon Thurman is a chemistry mismatch... otherwise his combination of skills might have made him a future nickelback prospect.

[QuikSand]

As a refresher… since I keep looking back to this…

The four affinity groups are:
Aries, Gemini, Scorpio
Sagittarius, Leo, Virgo
Pisces, Taurus, Cancer
Aquarius, Libra, Capricorn
(affinity does not apply within the same sign)

And the six pairs of opposed signs are:
Aries - Aquarius
Taurus - Libra
Gemini - Virgo
Scorpio - Pisces
Capricorn - Leo
Cancer - Sagittarius

And our CURRENT position leaders are:

FB - Kowalski - Aquarius - Backfield Leader
TE - Diana - Taurus - Receivers Leader
LT - Johns - Aquarius - Offensive Line Leader
LDE - Littlejohn - Leo - Defensive Front Leader
SS - Hawkins - Cancer - Secondary Leader

[cuervo72]

Howabout SS Ernest Feusse? We need to fill at safety, and the guy could be a special teams demon. Might be too early for it, but there's not a whole lot else here. Hastings might fit the bill too, looks to be much stronger on coverage. Hmm, Feusse might be a washout in the other categories eventually, doesn't stand out anywhere else.

Can we trade down for a 4 and 5?

[albionmoonlight]

I think we are set with the front seven.

If we have any needs on D, it is secondary depth. We have been very lucky the last two years and have not had much injury back there. If we were to lose a front line guy to a major injury, it would be nice to have someone else to plug in for depth.

However, I feel that the D is pretty much set--depth is only a suggestion, not a priority.

Perhaps with these last few picks, we should be taking some chances. Picking guys (regardless of position) that Q thinks have some breakout potential?

Just a thought.

[Buzzbee]

WOW!! I missed quite a bit. Good job you guys. Looks like we have some real impact players and managed our draft well.

In general, I think we need at least one WR and probably two. Also I agree with Albion that secondary depth is important too. Hawkins and Reynolds are both near the end of contracts (and Hawkins may be near retirement). I don't think there is much talent left that can develop into a bona fide starter, but we could possibly develop a contributor like Duran or Perry.

{EDIT: Also, with these picks it might be a good idea to focus on chemistry guys, since there isn't a lot of dropoff in talent. Perhaps the chemistry will help the players develop faster, reach greater potential, and have better on field performance than they otherwise would.}

[Buzzbee]

Originally posted by cuervo72
These names....I just spotted SS Roman Holliday.

Cote would be strong, but he conflicts with Tim Johns, so he's out.

Damn. Cote woulda been a steal, too.

[Fritz]

Originally posted by QuikSand
Okay, I'll bite. We probably don't have to take him here - he's about 20th on the liist of remaining WRs.

But I'm intrigued... I assume you're attracted by is high ratings in 3rd down receiving and big play receiving. Both certainly are impressive, I'll agree.

But do you think this guy will get passes thrown his way? A zero in route running suggests (to me) otherwise. Do you have deeper insight?

In a home career I picked up a guy who was almost maxed in big play and almost nothing anywhere else. That player has been very effective in a reserve role and as a spot starter.

My hypothesis is that WR with a (near) maxed area can be useful, even when the rest of their skills are almost nil.

The place where we will need to draft makes my theory low risk.

[cuervo72]

Originally posted by Buzzbee

{EDIT: Also, with these picks it might be a good idea to focus on chemistry guys, since there isn't a lot of dropoff in talent. Perhaps the chemistry will help the players develop faster, reach greater potential, and have better on field performance than they otherwise would.}

I've been wondering about how strong the chemistry effect is. For my Tequilas career, which is still in it's first year, it looks to me (well, my scout) that overall in the draft I did much better than my counterparts, and the game previews always favor my matchups substantially (now, performance is another issue ). This despite only being able to draft 1/4 of the players. So if we can find an affinity, that would be a good tiebreaker.

edit: S Alex Hastings is a Taurus, and S Victor Long is a Pisces. Both should have an affinity with Ricky Hawkins.

double edit: S Bubba Berry is also a Pisces, and has decent hitter, INT, special teams ratings.