First Mock try.

[Whatever]

(02-12-2025, 01:20 PM)ochocincos Wrote: Personally, I don't care for draft simulators, as you see some guys taken way earlier than they seem listed for in prospect rankings, but you aren't given the context for why.
Is it because the simulator is going off a list of positional needs for a given team and the sim just takes the highest guy at a position of need for said team?
Or if the sim supports trades, why is Team A trading up or down? I would assume it's going based off some trade value chart points value, but hard to tell without the transparency.

When I do my mocks, I prefer to just pick guys who are close prospect ranking number wise to the pick the Bengals make.

There's no real perfect way to predict.  

Generally speaking, for a sim, each team will be programmed with a priority list for needs.  There will be a certain range of "reach" assigned per round per priority.  And, so you don't get the same results over and over, there's likely a bit of a random element, like the reach potentially varying or a team taking a lower rated player at the same position (to simulate individual team big boards).  I would suggest looking at Drafttek, as it's an early sim that explains the methodology pretty well, but it's never been one where you can do your own mocks.

Players often slide due to depth of a class as relative to team needs.  For example, it's a loaded DT class, so you'll usually find value there late as teams address that need earlier.  That's something that a sim factors in relatively well, where a mock strictly based off prospect rankings won't.  Vice versa holds as well.  A prospect may be ranked lower, but gets reached for due to lack of talent at the position in front of them.

Trades are kinda meh, either way, and I don't typically like to use them for "serious" mocks.  A sim may offer a great trade seemingly randomly while a a mock not using a sim may find the user "rationalizing" a trade down that they really want regardless of how realistic it really is.

Both have merits.  Both have flaws.  You do you.