(04-05-2018, 08:42 AM)Cleatwood Wrote:

(04-05-2018, 08:38 AM)Bullseye Wrote: Earlier in the thread, you indicated that Moncrief was viewed as the better prospect, and you get at it here by citing these scouting reports.

But better by whom?

For our purposes, the one person whose opinion counted at the time was Caldwell.

In 2014, Caldwell traded back up into the bottom of the 2nd round, and when he did, both Allen Robinson and Dante Moncrief were on the board.

Caldwell chose Robinson over Moncrief.

Is it possible that Caldwell liked Moncrief at the time?  Absolutely. 

Is it possible that Caldwell would have made the same trade up for Moncrief had Robinson been off the board?  Maybe.

But despite the pre draft NFL.com scouting reports you cite, NFL teams are not bound by those reports.  During the 2014 draft, NFL teams spoke on who they perceived to be the better prospect at the time.  Caldwell had a choice to make when both were on the board when he traded up to the bottom of the second round that year.  Once again, he chose Allen Robinson at pick 61.

Moncrief was selected almost a full round later, at the 90th overall pick.  Three other WRs were taken over Moncrief after Allen Robinson was selected.

Did the teams who passed on Moncrief make the right decision?  Who knows?

Might Moncrief end up being a more productive WR here than Robinson was?  I sure as hell hope so.

But unless I've missed something in the debate (a distinct possibility since this morning I only focused on the last couple of pages in this thread) I'm not sure what
citing the NFL.com pre draft scouting reports does to advance your argument here.

It does absolutely nothing because pre draft scouting reports mean nothing when players have been in the league for almost 5 years.