The CardBoard
Pac-12 prospects for next year's draft - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Pac-12 prospects for next year's draft (/thread-9192.html)

Pages: 1 2

Pac-12 prospects for next year's draft - BostonCard - 05-07-2015

Wilner speculates...

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2015/05/06/pac-12-football-top-prospects-for-the-2016-nfl-draft/#more-39761

From a Stanford perspective, he offers a couple:

Quote:12. Stanford QB Kevin Hogan: Hasn’t exactly shredded Pac-12 defenses with short- and middle-distance passes, but he’s big, mobile, throws a nice deep ball, and wins. Don’t be surprised if he’s a Day 2 pick.
...
6. Stanford OT Kyle Murphy: Will move to left tackle (his natural position) in the fall, replacing Andrus Peat, but showed enough skill on the right side to be projected as a possible Day 1 selection in either ’16 or ’17.

Austin Hooper is in his "others considered" category.

BC

Re: Pac-12 prospects for next year's draft - CTcard - 05-07-2015

(05-07-2015, 06:48 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:Wilner speculates...

Quote:6. Stanford OT Kyle Murphy: Will move to left tackle (his natural position) in the fall, replacing Andrus Peat, but showed enough skill on the right side to be projected as a possible Day 1 selection in either ’16 or ’17.

If Kyle Murphy is a day 1 selection in '17 I will be VERY surprised.

Re: Pac-12 prospects for next year's draft - OutsiderFan - 05-07-2015

Garnett will be drafted.  Shittu could be as well. 

Re: Pac-12 prospects for next year's draft - BobK - 05-08-2015

Several have Whitfield very high.  Murphy will be first two rounds.  😄

Re: Pac-12 prospects for next year's draft - CTcard - 05-08-2015

(05-08-2015, 08:59 AM)BobK link Wrote:Several have Whitfield very high.

I suspect there is some unconscious name-substitution issue here?
[Though I certainly would be pleased if Kodi has a jaw-dropping breakout season and gets drafted high.]

Re: Pac-12 prospects for next year's draft - Farm93 - 05-08-2015

Nice for Wilner to try to project draft picks, but this is the same guy that was not sure Stanford Football would even get 4 players taken in the 2015 draft just a month ago.

It is nice that Wilner posts his predictions for all to see, but his predictions are generally not very good.

Re: Pac-12 prospects for next year's draft - BobK - 05-08-2015

An accurate Whitfield post CtCard.  We shall see

Wilner also wrote only 3 Stanford players would be in the recent draft draft.  He loves Stanford so much 😡



Re: Pac-12 prospects for next year's draft - CornFed - 05-08-2015

(05-08-2015, 09:29 AM)CTcard link Wrote:[quote author=BobK link=topic=12109.msg117928#msg117928 date=1431100760]
Several have Whitfield very high.

I suspect there is some unconscious name-substitution issue here?
[Though I certainly would be pleased if Kodi has a jaw-dropping breakout season and gets drafted high.]
[/quote]

He might be drafted highly for his receiving skills.  :)  Based on just the one SPECTACULAR catch against, was it UCLA?

<iframe width="640" height="390" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/82Be_-X_AIg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Re: Pac-12 prospects for next year's draft - donkey687 - 05-08-2015

My predictions.

Murphy 3rd round.
Hogan- late rounds
Garnett- late rounds
Cajuste- late rounds

Anderson, Martinez and possibly Shittu- sign as UDFA

Hooper and Peter K- flirt with going pro but return


Re: Pac-12 prospects for next year's draft - CTcard - 05-08-2015

(05-08-2015, 12:57 PM)BobK link Wrote:An accurate Whitfield post CtCard.  We shall see

Wilner also wrote only 3 Stanford players would be in the recent draft draft.  He loves Stanford so much 😡

Interesting.
Anything more you can share?
Which teams - what they like that overcomes him not having seen the field much?


And Wilner does have a case of familiarity breeding contempt. He doesn't seem to love da bares much either - though he did like Montgomery (as in Mike - not Ty).

Re: Pac-12 prospects for next year's draft - BostonCard - 05-08-2015

Here were Wilner's predictions:

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2015/04/30/nfl-draft-projections-for-cal-stanford-and-san-jose-state-prospects-2/

Quote:Henry Anderson DE – 6-6 – 294 – 4
One notch below the elite talents, he could sneak into the second day. Depends on where he projects (best bet: 3-4 end).

Alex Carter CB – 6-0 – 196 – 3
Subtract .1 from his 40-time (4.51) and he’d be a candidate for the first round. Could end up at safety.

Ty Montgomery WR – 6-0 – 221 – 6/7
Has trouble staying healthy and holding onto the ball. But he could be an elite kick returner.

David Parry DT – 6-1 – 308 – 7/FA
Former walk-on with the nasty streak. Don’t be surprised if he goes a few rounds earlier than projected.

Andrus Peat OT – 6-7 – 313 – 1
Amazing agility plus high-value position equals the first round — perhaps the first half of the first round.

Jordan Richards SS – 5-11 – 211 – 6
Smart and productive but lacks the elite athleticism to be high-round pick. Safeties not as valued as corners.

The last number is the draft round.  He missed Anderson by one round (but noted he could sneak into the second day, read, third round, with the 29th out of 32 picks).  He got Alex Carter dead on.  He whiffed on Montgomery, who was picked in the third round, but many of us were surprised he went that high.  He also missed Parry by a couple rounds (he went fifth), but his comment "Don't be surprised if he goes a few rounds earlier than projected" was prescient.  He got Peat right, but everyone thought Peat would be a first round pick.  He (like almost everyone else, including Richards himself) underestimated Richards, who went in the second round.

So, on the one hand, he underestimated half the picks by more than a round (Montgomery, Parry, and Richards), and didn't overestimate anybody.  On the other hand, he did predict that six would get drafted.  All in all, he more or less parroted the conventional wisdom, which was wrong in a bunch of cases.

BC

Re: Pac-12 prospects for next year's draft - washingtonismoney - 05-08-2015

Wouldn't be shocked if Kalambayi or Hooper or both go pro.

Re: Pac-12 prospects for next year's draft - terry - 05-08-2015

(05-08-2015, 03:33 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:Wouldn't be shocked if Kalambayi or Hooper or both go pro.

Based on what?

Re: Pac-12 prospects for next year's draft - BostonCard - 05-08-2015

The Pac-12 blog has its list of 10...

http://espn.go.com/blog/pac12/post/_/id/86566/looking-at-the-pac-12s-draft-prospects-in-2016

Only Murphy makes the list from Stanford.

Quote:OT Kyle Murphy, Stanford: Murphy was probably talented enough to start at left tackle for Stanford as a freshman, but because he arrived as part of the same recruiting class as Andrus Peat, he's had to wait his turn. If the trajectory of his first three seasons continues, Murphy should be among the top tackle prospects in the draft.

BC

Re: Pac-12 prospects for next year's draft - washingtonismoney - 05-08-2015

(05-08-2015, 04:03 PM)terry link Wrote:Based on what?

Hooper's probably a bit more obvious -- good production so far. Kalambayi perhaps less so. But he's an impressive athlete (http://espn.go.com/college-sports/football/recruiting/player/combine/_/id/140430/peter-kalambayi understates things; I think he ran in the 4.5s during the Opening) and a pass rusher. The NFL is consistent in its love of super-athletic pass rushers, even those with modest production. And if you're a candidate to be drafted in the first three rounds, players will think about leaving early -- even after three years.

Re: Pac-12 prospects for next year's draft - ThePassionOfTheChryst - 05-08-2015

(05-08-2015, 07:23 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:[quote author=terry link=topic=12109.msg117958#msg117958 date=1431126234]
Based on what?

Hooper's probably a bit more obvious -- good production so far. Kalambayi perhaps less so. But he's an impressive athlete (http://espn.go.com/college-sports/football/recruiting/player/combine/_/id/140430/peter-kalambayi understates things; I think he ran in the 4.5s during the Opening) and a pass rusher. The NFL is consistent in its love of super-athletic pass rushers, even those with modest production. And if you're a candidate to be drafted in the first three rounds, players will think about leaving early -- even after three years.
[/quote]
To add, big receiving tight ends are en vogue these days.  However, I believe they both have three years remaining as of right now, so I'd be shocked if either of them leaves after this season.

Re: Pac-12 prospects for next year's draft - terry - 05-08-2015

So the assumption is that if Hooper and Kalambayi have decent draft prospects after their junior year, they will forego their last two seasons of eligibility and leave? I am not so sure about that assumption. Historically, that has not been the case at Stanford. It could happen, of course. But in the absence of any information about what they actually are thinking, I would not assume that a Stanford player in that position would leave.

Re: Pac-12 prospects for next year's draft - washingtonismoney - 05-09-2015

(05-08-2015, 09:27 PM)terry link Wrote:So the assumption is that if Hooper and Kalambayi have decent draft prospects after their junior year, they will forego their last two seasons of eligibility and leave? I am not so sure about that assumption. Historically, that has not been the case at Stanford. It could happen, of course. But in the absence of any information about what they actually are thinking, I would not assume that a Stanford player in that position would leave.

Historically that hasn't been the case...but on the other hand we just lost two players last year. One of them, Alex Carter, was drafted in the third round -- around expectations. So I wouldn't be shocked. Am I assuming they would leave? No, that's putting words in my mouth. I am saying that it is a *possibility* which can't be dismissed.


Re: Pac-12 prospects for next year's draft - terry - 05-09-2015

So far as I can remember, Stanford has had five football players who left after three years to enter the NFL draft. Three of those players were certain to be first round draft picks -- Bob Whitfield, Kwame Harris, and Andrus Peat. Four of the five played three seasons before entering the draft, leaving only one year of eligibility on the table -- Whitfield, Harris, Peat, and Alex Carter. I believe the only Stanford player who entered the NFL draft with two years of eligibility remaining was Teyo Johnson.

Of course it's possible that Hooper and Kalambayi could forego two years of eligibility and enter the draft next year. But it would be a pretty unusual step for a Stanford player.

Re: Pac-12 prospects for next year's draft - Mick - 05-09-2015

(05-09-2015, 07:43 AM)terry link Wrote:So far as I can remember, Stanford has had five football players who left after three years to enter the NFL draft. Three of those players were certain to be first round draft picks -- Bob Whitfield, Kwame Harris, and Andrus Peat. Four of the five played three seasons before entering the draft, leaving only one year of eligibility on the table -- Whitfield, Harris, Peat, and Alex Carter. I believe the only Stanford player who entered the NFL draft with two years of eligibility remaining was Teyo Johnson. Of course it's possible that Hooper and Kalambayi could forego two years of eligibility and enter the draft next year. But it would be a pretty unusual step for a Stanford player.

I genuinely wonder how Teyo feels about leaving early.  He was a late 2nd round pick, played for three years, started six games, had 26 catches and 3 TDs in his NFL career.  He made a few camps after that, played for a few years in the CFL.  I may be misremembering, but I think he objected to playing tight end (he was a WR and had wanted to play QB) and so he left, but ended up playing tight end in the NFL.