2011 Oakland Raiders Draft: Reaching was Invented by the Media

by KA1Z3R on May 2, 2011 4:34 PM PDT

All of this talk around the interwebs and television and all I'm hearing on the Oakland Raiders 2011 draft is "they reached for this guy," "they reached for that guy," "he was a huge reach." Reaching might just be the most overused, overly annoying, and overall irrelevant term in the NFL Draft.

See what I mean after the jump.

Reach- in NFL Draft terms, it means to pick a guy ahead of where he is projected by the media and experts to be drafted or where his talent/potential projects him worthy of being picked.

And right there we have it: MEDIA AND DRAFT EXPERTS. Not once I have I ever heard the phrase reach be used by an NFL scout, GM, or coach. Who knows, maybe I missed it. However, it's wildly tossed around by the media and alleged experts.

However, these media members and draft "experts" pretty much only know the same as we do. Only thing different is they get the occasional bit of inside "information". Why the quotes around information? Because about 90-95% of this "information" is nothing but a smoke screen by teams to fool other teams.

These smoke screens can also be used to deceive the fanbase as well. Take for instance the Miami Dolphins. They came out and said they tried to trade up for Ryan Mallet but didn't get high enough to grab him. Instead they drafted a running back. The Dolphins have said multiple times that they wanted to restructure the running game and that they were confident in Chad Henne.

Now then, if you know anything about Chad Henne and how he's viewed by Dolphins fans, you know statements like that would greatly frustrate the fans. However, Miami stuck to their draft plan (I assume because I'm not an "expert") and took the running back Daniel Thomas. Yet, they came out and said that they originally were going for Mallet.

The fanbase is pleased their team really tried to fix the hated QB situation, and the Dolphins drafted their running back. However, the average fan might not look that deep into it and neither would the typical draft "expert" or media personnel.

Thus the alleged value of a player as perceived by teams around the league is very much skewed. One team might say they absolutely love Greg Salas and think he's a third round pick. This might frighten a team that really wants him , forcing them to use a high pick on a guy that the other GM's might place in the fourth or fifth. This could ruin one team's draft plans while making it easier for another to get the guy they really want.

The only opinion of a player's value that matters is that of the 32 GM's of the NFL and/or the head coaches. Their smoke screens can skew values of "experts"/media as does the personal opinions of the "experts"/media.

Thus we return the concept of reaching. Fact of the matter is, if there's a guy you really want who fits what you want to do and you have a good feeling about him, take him. And that's what teams do. They don't give a flying fazoodle about what the media says about the pick. You think Oakland cares that Todd McShay says they reached for Wisniewski? No.

They needed Wisnewski, they really liked him, so they drafted him. They needed Van Dyke, they thought he fit the scheme, they liked him, so they took him. "They reached for him." "They reached on Van Dyke, bad pick value." Since when is it bad value to go for the guy that fits what you want to and fits a need?

I don't even want to hear about trading down. Trade downs are never guarantees and aren't guaranteed to find. So many people seem to think that any team can trade down at any time and still get the guy they want. How do you know?

Maybe you trade down and the guy you wants gets drafted right after. Or maybe right before you pick. But yet if you don't trade down and pick him then....."REACHING, REACHING, WHAT A BAD PICK, HE WOULD HAVE BEEN THERE IN THE FOURTH OR FIFTH!"

It's not a reach if he's the right guy. Once again, the 32 NFL GM's opinions on player value/talent/ranking is all that matters. Just because Mel Kiper says it's a reach, or some draft site says it's a reach, doesn't mean it is. Reaching was invented by the media, for the media.

It's not reaching if the players is the right guy for your team.

Poll

Thoughts on "reaching"?

There's no such thing as a reach, it's a media sham.

313 votes

Not sure

61 votes

Reaching is a real thing and a very big deal.

133 votes

507 votes | Poll has closed

Tweet Comment 32 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Ultimately...

All that matters is how the guy plays in the NFL. If Wiz and Van Dyke make several Pro Bowls from here, no one will give a shit where they were drafted.

Someday you will find me, caught beneath the landslide, in a champagne supernova in the sky.
This day will be when the Raiders win a Super Bowl in my lifetime.

Follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/#!/_SLS_

by Screwfish on May 2, 2011 4:52 PM PDT reply actions

Reaching potentially exists when an organization / GM's choice to take a player dumfounds professional and avid football enthusiasts a like

Reaching actually exists when that same player confirms the doubts of the pros and avid fans. So it does occur but takes awhile for the full effect … not to mention the missed opportunity cost of failing to take a generally believed better player.

S-O-B: ITS HOW I ROLL, DEAL WITH IT.
"I did the (2010) draft. ... I made a trade for Seymour. Gave up the first-rounder this year. I could tell you why. You may not think it was a good trade. I thought it was a great trade. Still do. [Al Davis 1/1911]

by Sons-of-Blanda on May 2, 2011 4:54 PM PDT reply actions

I’m just saying though that if it’s the guy that GM or coach truly believes in or buys into, you know, feels the most confident in, then take him.

The Sunkist Kaiser, most epic thing since the Grizzly BLAAAAAAAIR! Relax, play, and drink Sunkist! Your Kaiser commands it.

by KA1Z3R on May 2, 2011 4:57 PM PDT up reply actions

As it is, it's mostly a sham, for several reasons:

Firstly, no one knows how he’ll actually turn out, for quite some time, except that we have values the so-called experts ultimately settle on, and even these have some room for movement, for the very same reason.

Second, we know where the team takes said pick in relation to where aforementioned projection is, and unless there is rock solid proof—and there never is; how can there be?—another team was going to take that kid before you realistically get another shot at the guy, thus making the selection something you had to do if you wanted the pick, correct?

Third but there are many more. With the exception of the top picks in the first round and very slightly into the second, there are not big immediate expectations on most of your picks, at least right now, before camp has even begun and the draftee even suits up—when the term gets mostly used—well before it’s truly fair to even mouth that word with even amateur, not ‘expert’ lips.

So, though I voted it’s real, in the way it is predominantly used in attempts to evaluate how guys’ games equate to the pro level, it’s completely bogus. It’s only apropos in retrospect, and being captain Hindsight journalist doesn’t pay like being a shock journalist talking out your ass.

"tough times call for perseverance and a tough mind. I have been told that I can't play football before. We all know what happened with that. #neverquit"--Mark Herzlich

""The massive Raider Nation is beyond doubt the sleaziest and rudest and most sinister mob of thugs and wackos ever assembled."--Hunter S. Thompson

by brhynno on May 2, 2011 5:55 PM PDT reply actions

I whole hardely believe the term reaching was invented by MEL KIPER JR.

to cover his ass from his bullshit mock drafts. Im sure most GMs dont care what the media thinks of their picks.

by RRRRRaMON on May 2, 2011 5:59 PM PDT reply actions

They are so deep in it they don't even know what's being said

"tough times call for perseverance and a tough mind. I have been told that I can't play football before. We all know what happened with that. #neverquit"--Mark Herzlich

""The massive Raider Nation is beyond doubt the sleaziest and rudest and most sinister mob of thugs and wackos ever assembled."--Hunter S. Thompson

by brhynno on May 2, 2011 6:15 PM PDT up reply actions

Far as this years draft !!!!!

No “REAL REACH” in the bunch, considering where they were drafted !!!! I truely see all these picks, with a damn good possibilty of making the team !!! Maybe 1, might go to the practice squad, because of the numbers game !!!!

by papabegood on May 2, 2011 6:20 PM PDT reply actions

The media can certainly build up a reach, but I think it is very real

Take the DHB pick. That was a reach. I don’t think there is any way he was going off the board, at the earliest, until late in the first-round. The Raiders could have made a trade similar to the one the Browns made this year with the Falcons, and still have taken their guy.

The point of the NFL Draft is to maximize your value. I believe in targeting your guys, but once you have them targeted you try to position yourself in the best possible spot to take them while not losing out on value. In that regard it is like playing poker.

That was one of the reasons last year’s draft was so successful. The Raiders traded down, and still got there guy. They completely maximized their value. This draft was screwy. There were so many teams looking to trade down that I am not sure the Raiders would have had the opportunity to.

I'm a freaky streaker like Winnie the Pooh—T-shirt, no pants and I dance the boog-a-loo

by Rich Langford on May 2, 2011 6:24 PM PDT reply actions

By my standards, "-" would still be a reach, even where projected

And into the later rounds, but it highlights an important question: would you want to see him on another team, and would he have made it? Would he be better? Worse?

I guess it highlight a lot of questions!

"tough times call for perseverance and a tough mind. I have been told that I can't play football before. We all know what happened with that. #neverquit"--Mark Herzlich

""The massive Raider Nation is beyond doubt the sleaziest and rudest and most sinister mob of thugs and wackos ever assembled."--Hunter S. Thompson

by brhynno on May 2, 2011 6:53 PM PDT up reply actions

DHB wasn’t really a reach to me. Maybe Oakland couldn’t trade back, or trade up into the late first for him and were stuck having to take him where they did.

The Sunkist Kaiser, most epic thing since the Grizzly BLAAAAAAAIR! Relax, play, and drink Sunkist! Your Kaiser commands it.

by KA1Z3R on May 3, 2011 3:55 AM PDT up reply actions

KA1Z3R you are correct for the most part....

Especially as it pertains to Mel Kiper’s flawed logic of saying one team has reached while the other got good value.

To the extent that concepts of “value” and “reaching” come into play (or at least how they should come into play when an outside analyst is referring to them), is if the consensus among all teams is that player X is generally valued as, say the 50th ranked player, and he get’s drafted at, say, the 34th draft slot. But you cannot (as Kiper often does) say a team reached and did not get good value when you are going off your own subjective value board. A player’s value is what the ENTIRE market dictates his value is and so it is misguided for Kiper to say another team did not get good value just because it did not comport with his subjective impressions of who would have been a good value pick if he was the one picking at that slot.

Now, if he was stating value in terms of the consensus opinion among analysts, his labeling of value and reaching would be a little more proper. But it still is a bit disingenuous b/c it would be the consensus of people who are not in the market (they are not the ones drafting the players) and who have access to a very small fraction of information that teams (in the market) do.

The greatest example of this disconnect between the outsiders and insiders access to information (which substantially affects value) is Da’Quan Bowers case. Even though, the analysts had some sense that teams were backing off him due to health concerns (they still pretty much uniformly projected him to land somewhere in the 1st). Clearly, however, the consensus among NFL teams was that Bowers was not worth using their first round pick on- and maybe most (other than Tampa) even felt he was not worthy of 2nd round pick.

The “analysts” don’t have the best access to information (and are not even the best evaluators of a person’s on-field skillset even if they did) so you have to take there conception of perceived value with a massive grain of salt.

by infinitejest on May 2, 2011 6:38 PM PDT reply actions

Intelligent post, sir. You should comment here more often.

The Bowers thing is a perfect example. He highlights what medical questions and character concerns do to prospects well, too.

"tough times call for perseverance and a tough mind. I have been told that I can't play football before. We all know what happened with that. #neverquit"--Mark Herzlich

""The massive Raider Nation is beyond doubt the sleaziest and rudest and most sinister mob of thugs and wackos ever assembled."--Hunter S. Thompson

by brhynno on May 2, 2011 6:58 PM PDT up reply actions

The factor that's too often missing that causes overuse of "reach" is the failure to take into account the acquiring-teams agenda and circumstances

A particular player may be listed as 3rd on a player board but due to his uniqueness (tangible and intangible) be No. 1 for the acquiring team
Welcome, infinitejest. Good comment – except for wordiness and the ‘massive grain’ malapropism.

by Sons-of-Blanda on May 2, 2011 8:56 PM PDT up reply actions

I understand you're view on maximizing value,

But no one can say for sure someone will be there the next time its your turn to pick (I learned this lesson from playing many years of fantasy football). For all we know their might have been another team coveting DHB, but since we picked him that high we can never know for sure what would of happened.

by RRRRRaMON on May 2, 2011 6:38 PM PDT reply actions

Yeah, it's a gamble but that's what the draft is about...gambles.

You evaluate the risk compared to the value. Sure you never know for an absolute certainty, but you can know something with great probability. What percentage do you think DHB had of going off the board in the first 20 picks had the Raiders not taken him? I say less than 5 percent.

DHB was almost a certain lock to be around for another 15 selections. And very high percentage to be around another 20. I think the first team anyone projected him going to was the Giants at No. 27? I may have their draft slot wrong, but it’s close.

The Raiders next to nothing percentage of missing out on DHB for 15 whole picks would have made the gamble worth it for as low as just a fourth-round pick. And they could have gotten way more than that. They probably could have found a team that had the next three selections to offer at least a fourth to swap spots.

I'm a freaky streaker like Winnie the Pooh—T-shirt, no pants and I dance the boog-a-loo

by Rich Langford on May 3, 2011 1:25 PM PDT up reply actions

You really never know until that player is picked one spot before you

then your caught with your dick in your hand saying WTF. I really do hate that word “Reached” like stated already if you target a guy you really want who really reached? You got the player you wanted and thats all that matters. Al Davis wanted to get Marques Colston in the 3rd round but was told that he was “reaching” for him, now look at him Pro Bowl WR for the Saints Blah!!

by pbwulf on May 2, 2011 6:52 PM PDT reply actions

Yeah, and he wanted Jacoby Ford last year....

does that mean he should have taken him in the first? He wanted LaMarr Houston last year. Should he have not traded back in the second with the confidence he’d still be around?

You may miss out on a few picks, but you more than make up for it by maximizing value.

I'm a freaky streaker like Winnie the Pooh—T-shirt, no pants and I dance the boog-a-loo

by Rich Langford on May 3, 2011 1:28 PM PDT up reply actions

Reaching is real

Think about fantasy football. Let’s say you really like Calvin Johnson and would do inutterable things to have him on your team. However, we all know that Calvin Johnson is, at best, a third-round fantasy pick. There is NO reason to take him in the first, no matter how much you like him, because he will be available later and you can get a better player in that spot. Drafting in the first few rounds is all about FLOOR, not ceiling. How good can Wiz be? VERY good. How bad could be be, potentially? I think even if he completely flames, he will be servicable.

You can’t say that about DvD. At his best, he will be Chris McAlister. At his worst he will be Ahmad Carroll, that CB the Packers got from Arkansas several years ago. He would be a serious impediment to the team. He got benched in college so there’s no reason to expect him to suddenly figure out the intracacies of a professional defensive scheme.

Chekwa is a different matter, he played very well at a big-time university in tOSU and I think he has good instincts and is highly underrated. I feel his floor is much higher than Van Dyke.

These are my principles. If you don't like them, I have others. -Groucho Marx

by RDreamer on May 2, 2011 7:02 PM PDT reply actions

No offense man, but that Calvin Johnson thing really doesn't make sense.

The only way for sure you know that a guy will be there later on is if you have access to everyone else’s draft projections. Since you or other GMs don’t then you can never really say for sure when he will be taken. Everyone in the draft thought Blaine Gabbert would be the 2nd QB taken in the draft and then the titans take Jake Locker.

by RRRRRaMON on May 2, 2011 8:06 PM PDT up reply actions

If you watch the interviews on Raiders.com

you would know why he was not a starter.Its because it didnt matter,he was on the field 90% of the plays.If you ask Miami fans alot of them say DVD was their best corner, better than Harris who was taken before him.

by RyanTheRaider on May 2, 2011 8:24 PM PDT up reply actions

VD has a better upside and was only listed as 2nd on the depth chart b/c of the D Miami ran. For our needs, i.e. slot

nickle DB he is of greater value to us (unless Nnamdi leaves) and that’s why he was taken before Chekwad.

by Sons-of-Blanda on May 2, 2011 9:01 PM PDT up reply actions

First off, fantasy football is very different from an actual NFL Draft.

Second, DVD (as others commenting on this have stated) was put in the role the team needed him to play. No one could play in the slot against the speedier or bigger slot receivers. Miami played nickel or dime almost exclusively and his ability against slot receivers was great. He’ll be doing the exact same thing in Oakland.

As for Chekwa, I personally consider him a steal.

The Sunkist Kaiser, most epic thing since the Grizzly BLAAAAAAAIR! Relax, play, and drink Sunkist! Your Kaiser commands it.

by KA1Z3R on May 3, 2011 3:59 AM PDT up reply actions

I'm not suggesting the Raiders made a poor decision with DvD

I’m just suggesting it’s possible, if not probable, that he or someone of equal or greater ability would have been around a round or two later. The real draft is different from fantasy in many areas but it still revolves around two things: needs and value.

If the Raiders felt DvD was what they needed, there’s nothing wrong with that, but his value is maximized ine fourth round rather than the third, because his floor is so low when compared to other players acquired directly before and after him. His ceiling, however, may be substantially higher, so it’s a big risk/reward pick, much more so than Wiz.

Agreed on Chekwa. Dude is a straight baller and we got great value on him.

These are my principles. If you don't like them, I have others. -Groucho Marx

by RDreamer on May 3, 2011 9:37 AM PDT up reply actions

Van Dyke was one of the best players on that UM defense

He wasnt listed on the depth chart because “coach” shannon could not spell his name

Randy shannon was a horrible coach and semi literate

DVD was a fine pick and will be a good player here. I hope chekwa will too but to flat out day that he’ll be better than DVD based on your amorphous criteria, I don’t get.

by lchristmas on May 4, 2011 7:55 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions

Wait for the sale.

The “experts” think if you wait for the sale then you made a good deal.
Why stay in line for the Black Friday deals when you can wait for a similar item to go on sale without waiting in massive lines.
Well I say, if you buy what you want and negotiate the price you want it for and it suits your needs, then you made a good purchase. It doesn’t matter what anyone else paid, what they got a “deal” on, nor anything else.
If Wiz is the guy you want and he is available when you pick, take him. If you don’t, he might not be there when you think he will. Finding a guy that will fit your team and hopefully be a part of the franchise for many years is more important than the “best available”
The Steelers chose IronHead Jr for that reason. He was a projected 3rd round pick. They took him in the first.

by R8rnation on May 2, 2011 8:03 PM PDT reply actions

The bogus media

The only way the members of the media can keep their jobs is to make the public think they know what they’re talking about. If you don’t believe me take all the preseason picks and see how right they were at the end of the season. Look how they rank players in fantasy leagues. Their picks are as accurate as throwing at a dart board.

by John Will on May 2, 2011 8:06 PM PDT reply actions

Nay, not so, I strenuously disagree with the 'darts throwing' dismissal of player ratings. Performance history and metrics matter

by Sons-of-Blanda on May 2, 2011 9:04 PM PDT up reply actions

agreed. Though occasionally their are very off or injury years and guys from out of nowhere explode on the scene. Those things are very hard to predict, but guys who play consistently well are easy to project.

The Sunkist Kaiser, most epic thing since the Grizzly BLAAAAAAAIR! Relax, play, and drink Sunkist! Your Kaiser commands it.

by KA1Z3R on May 3, 2011 4:01 AM PDT up reply actions

20 of the top 100 in my fantasy baseball league are in the top 100, the rest have gone the way of a year older and a step slower.

Last year I had Matt Kemp and couldn’t dump him because he was an untouchable. He was dating Rhania(sp) and ended up hitting about 260 with a ton of strike outs. He ranked #6 at the beginning of the season. You can’t look into a man’s soul, so you might as well pull out the old dart board.

by John Will on May 2, 2011 10:42 PM PDT reply actions

That's one example. I could easily dismiss it as an anomaly. Somewhere a study must exist where a comparison was made

between all players taken in the 1st Round against all players taken in the 2nd round, etc. and looking at what percentages of those rounds yielded NFL starters. My assumption, which remains unchanged, is that a greater percentage of 1st round picks become starters than any other round and the 2nd rounders are in 2nd place. Do reaches exist? Yes. Are their 1st Round busts? Yes. But, on average, a player who performs exceedingly well in college has a better chance of making it the pros than one who didn’t.

by Sons-of-Blanda on May 2, 2011 10:54 PM PDT up reply actions

I saw an example of what you're talking about during the draft

Not sure if it was on ESPN or the NFL network, but 1st rounders had the most starters(obviously). Then second rounders, 3-7rds had really low numbers of starters, but the most interesting fact was that the undrafted players had the same amount of starters as the 2nd rounders. I’ll try to hunt it down for you.

by RRRRRaMON on May 3, 2011 12:35 AM PDT reply actions

Yep

About 95% of the guys in the draft are a crap shoot. It’s just as much about how well the guy’s team works on his development as it is about his raw talent, abilities. Obviously JaMarcus is an exception, as the league has probably never seen somebody so unmotivated before.

by rightnasty on May 3, 2011 9:18 PM PDT reply actions