2015 NFL Comprehensive Draft Database

[Going Commando]

Going back to yesterday's game, Jason Hatcher really demonstrated the power of what a disruptive interior lineman can do. There was a clear match up issue for Jacksonville with their RT on Kerrigan, as he eventually got subbed out. But aside from that, Jacksonville's protection issues weren't really about not being able to match up because they had pressure coming from multiple guys on almost every broken protection. They couldn't run the ball and became predictable allowing us to tee off with our blitzes. And Hatcher was busting the pocket from the inside freezing their QB from getting the ball out most plays.

Hatcher was a fantastic FA signing. It's amazing that we got him for what we did and the Cowboys were fools to let him walk. But being 32, we're only going to get so much football out of him. This is where it would be huge to get a little bit of luck in the draft and be picking in a spot where a guy like him is available. Having a guy like Hatcher is so important that I would strongly consider making my own luck in the draft and trading up to get an elite talent at interior DL.

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

Hatcher was a fantastic FA signing. It's amazing that we got him for what we did and the Cowboys were fools to let him walk. But being 32, we're only going to get so much football out of him. This is where it would be huge to get a little bit of luck in the draft and be picking in a spot where a guy like him is available. Having a guy like Hatcher is so important that I would strongly consider making my own luck in the draft and trading up to get an elite talent at interior DL.

 

One of the priorities should be to get developing youth on the d-line.  We don't have any anyone.

 

Cofield is 31 next year.  Bowen is 31 next year.  Hatcher is 33 next year.  Golston will be 32.  Next season, the youngest guys on our d-line will be Chris Baker (at 28).  Jarvis Jenkins will be a FA, and he'll be 27.

 

Our d-line is old now, and will be older next season.  We need to spend high picks on the d-line...or something, otherwise we'll find our future team, in a very bad situation.

[Going Commando]

One of the priorities should be to get developing youth on the d-line.  We don't have any anyone.

 

Cofield is 31 next year.  Bowen is 31 next year.  Hatcher is 33 next year.  Golston will be 32.  Next season, the youngest guys on our d-line will be Chris Baker (at 28).  Jarvis Jenkins will be a FA, and he'll be 27.

 

Our d-line is old now, and will be older next season.  We need to spend high picks on the d-line...or something, otherwise we'll find our future team, in a very bad situation.

Yeah, we're looking old. But I think all we need is to hit on one great pick IMO. This line came together pretty suddenly this season, built mostly through FA and successful in part because our LBers are so incredibly good.

So apparently we can get a DL together pretty quickly. But to get the really special DL's, and get them in such a way that they spend their careers with you, I agree with you: gotta happen through the draft. Or win the lottery in FA I suppose.

But keep in mind, you also have to get lucky with the draft. A DL worthy of the choice has to be there when you draft. I love the idea of drafting a dominant interior lineman with our first round pick this season but we can't conjure one out of nothing.

So I guess the first step is to start discussing who the good DL are this year? Looks like the 3-4 scheme is here to stay too, so my pipe dream of switching to the 4-3 and drafting an undersized/short disruptor-type DT like Aaron Donald or Will Sutton was never viable.

[Thekyle1591]

You can run a 3-4 and have small disruptive linemen if they are good enough. Guys like Mile Daniels and Jurell Casey have been awesome this season as 3-4 ends and are only 6"1-300

[Going Commando]

You can run a 3-4 and have small disruptive linemen if they are good enough. Guys like Mile Daniels and Jurell Casey have been awesome this season as 3-4 ends and are only 6"1-300

Those 3-4 schemes are more hybrid than ours IMO, I think our fronts are pretty different. I know Casey plays all over the line, and probably spends as many downs rushing in a 4 man front from a 3 technique as playing DE in a three man front like we run. I'm not sure there is really a role for a player like that in our D since it looks like we run three man fronts mostly. In our scheme, Casey probably gets moved to NT and plays 0 & 1 technique, and probably gets limited to passing down sets.

I really liked Casey the year he came out, but I think we'd pass on him. The type of player we're looking for is going to be bigger and a more natural run down base set lineman. Being able to also pass rush--like Jason Hatcher--is the secondary (bonus) skill set for us. It looks like we're pretty content to try and scheme in the interior pressure by blitzing ILBs.

If we find ourselves getting attached to short college DTs, I think we're only going to end up disappointed again on draft day when our team passes on them.

[Thekyle1591]

You're right about Casey, they do move him around quite a bit. But I think a dude like him or Mike Daniels would thrive in any scheme. Height is just a number if you are explosive, strong and play with leverage. Small DTs that fall in the draft because of size concerns and turn out to be great players is becoming a lot more common, and I think our front office would be smart to take a chance on such a guy if the opportunity presents itself, although, like you said, the chance of that happening is small.

[darrelgreenie]

...So I guess the first step is to start discussing who the good DL are this year? Looks like the 3-4 scheme is here to stay too, so my pipe dream of switching to the 4-3 and drafting an undersized/short disruptor-type DT like Aaron Donald or Will Sutton was never viable.

For me there is always room for a disruptive DL in our scheme (or any scheme really).

The ability to penetrate and be disruptive is good against the run and the pass (tackle for loss or a pressure/sack)

I view players like Aaron Donald or Will Sutton as viable in a 34 the same as a Cullen Jenkins or Corey Liuget.

Even in a base 34 pass rush is important because more teams pass on 1st down with base personnel now more then ever and you gotta have pass rush threat on the field for all 3 downs.

But lets get crazy and say you have a disruptive DL that for whatever reason /undersized can't play in Okie/base 34. You still get value because passing league offense pass all the time now to the extent that we played a 4 man DL north of 60% of the time.

I would still argue that there is value

[Going Commando]

You're right about Casey, they do move him around quite a bit. But I think a dude like him or Mike Daniels would thrive in any scheme. Height is just a number if you are explosive, strong and play with leverage. Small DTs that fall in the draft because of size concerns and turn out to be great players is becoming a lot more common, and I think our front office would be smart to take a chance on such a guy if the opportunity presents itself, although, like you said, the chance of that happening is small.

I don't know, I'm not sure any player is immune from a bad scheme fit. Success comes when ability meets opportunity and a player's opportunity is going to be so limited when the staff isn't sold on his fit. The daily operation of such a complicated machine as an NFL football team being such as it is, are coaches really going to do extra work to shoe-horn a young player into a scheme where he's not a natural fit? More than likely, they're just going to move on.

As a drafter, you aren't doing a draftee any favors by picking him when he's not a natural fit. There will always be exceptions of guys who don't seem to have the body you need but somehow win over their staff and get the job done anyway. But big picture, your best bet at finding players that will stick is to identify types that have been successful in your system and look for players similar to those types--keeping in mind that no two players are ever the same of course.

[Going Commando]

For me there is always room for a disruptive DL in our scheme (or any scheme really).

The ability to penetrate and be disruptive is good against the run and the pass (tackle for loss or a pressure/sack)

I view players like Aaron Donald or Will Sutton as viable in a 34 the same as a Cullen Jenkins or Corey Liuget.

Even in a base 34 pass rush is important because more teams pass on 1st down with base personnel now more then ever and you gotta have pass rush threat on the field for all 3 downs.

But lets get crazy and say you have a disruptive DL that for whatever reason /undersized can't play in Okie/base 34. You still get value because passing league offense pass all the time now to the extent that we played a 4 man DL north of 60% of the time.

I would still argue that there is value

I agree that the ability to disrupt is always valuable--in theory. I'd draft a Will Sutton or Aaron Donald. But I'd also run a different scheme probably.

The question is more about will the coach commit to a young guy and really use him if he doesn't trust him for run packages? That's where the problem stems from. To get value from a player, the coaches have to use him. A player has to win the trust of his coach to win a role and you're putting a draftee at a serious disadvantage if he comes in with caveats in a coach's mind like, "can't play in X, Y, and Z packages." IMO that's why we're passing on Steven Paeas, Will Suttons, Timmy Jernigans, etc. Any disruptive interior DL we get is probably going to have to fit the mold. We're going to have to look for a Jason Hatcher type. It really limits our choices in the draft.

We're also in a spot where all of our DLs actually playing right now are veterans. They're not going to give up snaps easily while their bodies can still handle NFL football. A young player would have to really hit the ground running and win the coaches over to displace anyone. If a guy doesn't even have the right body the coaches are looking for, that's going to make it really hard for him to win their trust.

This is Haslett's fifth year and the defense is finally starting to look good. I don't really see the scheme significantly changing any more. Feels like our system is pretty much entrenched moving forward. So I'm giving up hope of us ever drafting an Aaron Donald and am going to search for guys that remind me of Hatcher.

[Pedro]

Pressure from the QBs blind side is a health and safety issue hence the premium on LTs.  We've seen this last year how pressure from the middle is the quickest play killer and the final part we needed to add to our bookend OLBs.  That being said unless we're getting a beast OC then DL in the 1st round to add some youth to our awesome looking group will make me happy.

 

Looking forward to reading this thread as it grows, we've been drafting well for a few years and now we're coaching well team wide too.  Standards are being set

[darrelgreenie]

I agree that the ability to disrupt is always valuable--in theory. I'd draft a Will Sutton or Aaron Donald. But I'd also run a different scheme probably.

Then you're missing my point.

My first point is that players like Sutton/Donald have already proven to be productive in our 34 scheme.

Players like Cullen Jenkins who played in the Packers 34 which our defense is a carbon copy. Corey Liugit as a draft pick projected as 3-tech, I remember having arguments in this same thread (3 years ago) that Corey should be on our radar arguing against people saying he wasn't a fit in a 34.

(1) A player with skillset of Sutton/Donald CAN fit in a 34 base

Second, EVEN if a disruptive player doesn't play in your base package defenses have featured situational pass rushers for years. IF the only snaps this Sutton/Donladesque Dl played was in a 4 man DL there would still be the opportunity to play 60% of the snaps.

(2) IF a player with the skillset of Sutton/Donald can only contribute situationally that would still be 60% of the time.

 

IMO that's why we're passing on Steven Paeas, Will Suttons, Timmy Jernigans, etc. Any disruptive interior DL we get is probably going to have to fit the mold. We're going to have to look for a Jason Hatcher type. It really limits our choices in the draft.

I don't think you should take this franchises poor drafting as the basis for establishing which type of players they like. Timmy Jernigan was drafted by a team that runs our same defense. Not just the 34 but schematically they run the same 2-gap base 34.

 

We're also in a spot where all of our DLs actually playing right now are veterans. They're not going to give up snaps easily while their bodies can still handle NFL football. A young player would have to really hit the ground running and win the coaches over to displace anyone. If a guy doesn't even have the right body the coaches are looking for, that's going to make it really hard for him to win their trust.

Not sure what your point is here. Every young player needs to play well to earn snaps. If draft a DL that can "only" pass rush they would probably play next to Hatcher in our 4 man DL look which we play 60% of the time. Outside of Hatcher and Cofield the pass rush ability on our DL is lacking.

This is Haslett's fifth year and the defense is finally starting to look good. I don't really see the scheme significantly changing any more. Feels like our system is pretty much entrenched moving forward. So I'm giving up hope of us ever drafting an Aaron Donald and am going to search for guys that remind me of Hatcher.

We played a 4 man DL over 60% of the time. If a DL can play they can play. I wouldn't exclude a player like Sutton/Donald based on scheme because they fit in this scheme.

[Going Commando]

Then you're missing my point.

My first point is that players like Sutton/Donald have already proven to be productive in our 34 scheme.

Players like Cullen Jenkins who played in the Packers 34 which our defense is a carbon copy. Corey Liugit as a draft pick projected as 3-tech, I remember having arguments in this same thread (3 years ago) that Corey should be on our radar arguing against people saying he wasn't a fit in a 34.

I see your point but I'm still hesitant. You're right that Cullen Jenkins and Corey Liuget have different bodies than Jason Hatcher and they were/are successful in 34 fronts. But I think they themselves also have different bodies than Aaron Donald and Will Sutton. They're bigger bodied, taller and longer armed. Sutton to me looks very compact and short armed and it looks like his frame was maxed out, which makes him small for an NFL DT. And Donald is similar, and looks like he's got an even lighter frame. Because of that, I think you have to consider that difference in comparing Donald and Sutton to Jenkins/Liuget.

Also, ultimately I trust your read on the defensive scheme, but I want to make sure that you are sure about our D being so similar to Baltimore's and Green Bay's. That surprises me because the feel I had was that our D is basically like Pittsburgh's and we're doing mostly two gaps with an end in the base and zone blitzes to bring inside pressure on pass downs. I don't watch Green Bay or Baltimore enough to know what they're running, but it seemed like Baltimore in particular was practically running a one gap 4-3 and that both of those defenses were more one gap 4-3 with straight up inside rushing from the interior lineman than ours.

BTW I actually liked Liuget back in 2011. I thought he'd work in a 3-4. The only problem I had with Liuget was that I liked Nick Fairley, Marcell Dareus, J.J. Watt, Cameron Heyward, Cameron Jordan, Adrian Clayborn, and maybe even Muhammad Wilkerson more than him.

Second, EVEN if a disruptive player doesn't play in your base package defenses have featured situational pass rushers for years. IF the only snaps this Sutton/Donladesque Dl played was in a 4 man DL there would still be the opportunity to play 60% of the snaps.

A situational player can certainly still have good value. But as you know, the draft is a zero sum game where a yes to one player means a no to another. If you're coming up on a choice between a situational interior pass rusher and another defensive lineman who might be a lesser rusher but you think can be an every down player, then how do you choose? Or maybe not even just another defensive lineman, but an every down player at LB, DB, WR, or OL? That's a tough value judgement to make.

 

I don't think you should take this franchises poor drafting as the basis for establishing which type of players they like. Timmy Jernigan was drafted by a team that runs our same defense. Not just the 34 but schematically they run the same 2-gap base 34.

Maybe you're right that the FO is just flat out missing out on players by making draft mistakes. But it could be we've been picking what we think can be every down players instead of them and I think there could be some sense it that. And it could be that we truly didn't consider them a fit and were right. At the end of the day Sutton and Donald did get taken by teams where they are a much more natural fit, teams that run different defenses than we do.

When you look at the body types of all of our DLs, you see what our type is. All except Baker are 6'4+ and huge bodied with long limbs. Baker is 6'2 but still has a very big body, and he's basically settled into the pure NT role anyway. If Hatcher is our physical prototype, you're talking about a very different body than Donald/Sutton/Jernigan.

Not sure what your point is here. Every young player needs to play well to earn snaps. If draft a DL that can "only" pass rush they would probably play next to Hatcher in our 4 man DL look which we play 60% of the time. Outside of Hatcher and Cofield the pass rush ability on our DL is lacking.

My point is that if you've got a rookie coming in that the coaches don't really trust because they don't think he has the body to play in their scheme--something he can never change--then he's at an even bigger disadvantage than the average rookie. Yes all rookies need to play well to earn snaps and additionally, all rookies need teaching time. But an undersized player has to be better than the average rookie to earn the same amount of trust from his coach. IMO that's setting him up for failure.

We played a 4 man DL over 60% of the time. If a DL can play they can play. I wouldn't exclude a player like Sutton/Donald based on scheme because they fit in this scheme.

This just doesn't feel right to me. I'm not trying to be a dick, but where is that number from? If you're right, you're right and it establishes the situational value of an undersized player like Donald/Sutton. But a 4 man DL 60% of the time feels high to me.

[Burgold]

Possibly D line too.  We're pretty long in the tooth.

[KDawg]

I'm not opposed to interior OL starters being drafted in the first. But like Monk said, I think they need to be consensus day one starter type material. No more offensive line projects. We also need a little youth on the defensive front, as well as a few good safeties. 

[The Robert Griffin Experience]

I see your point but I'm still hesitant. You're right that Cullen Jenkins and Corey Liuget have different bodies than Jason Hatcher and they were/are successful in 34 fronts. But I think they themselves also have different bodies than Aaron Donald and Will Sutton. They're bigger bodied, taller and longer armed. Sutton to me looks very compact and short armed and it looks like his frame was maxed out, which makes him small for an NFL DT. And Donald is similar, and looks like he's got an even lighter frame. Because of that, I think you have to consider that difference in comparing Donald and Sutton to Jenkins/Liuget.

Also, ultimately I trust your read on the defensive scheme, but I want to make sure that you are sure about our D being so similar to Baltimore's and Green Bay's. That surprises me because the feel I had was that our D is basically like Pittsburgh's and we're doing mostly two gaps with an end in the base and zone blitzes to bring inside pressure on pass downs. I don't watch Green Bay or Baltimore enough to know what they're running, but it seemed like Baltimore in particular was practically running a one gap 4-3 and that both of those defenses were more one gap 4-3 with straight up inside rushing from the interior lineman than ours.

BTW I actually liked Liuget back in 2011. I thought he'd work in a 3-4. The only problem I had with Liuget was that I liked Nick Fairley, Marcell Dareus, J.J. Watt, Cameron Heyward, Cameron Jordan, Adrian Clayborn, and maybe even Muhammad Wilkerson more than him.

A situational player can certainly still have good value. But as you know, the draft is a zero sum game where a yes to one player means a no to another. If you're coming up on a choice between a situational interior pass rusher and another defensive lineman who might be a lesser rusher but you think can be an every down player, then how do you choose? Or maybe not even just another defensive lineman, but an every down player at LB, DB, WR, or OL? That's a tough value judgement to make.

 

Maybe you're right that the FO is just flat out missing out on players by making draft mistakes. But it could be we've been picking what we think can be every down players instead of them and I think there could be some sense it that. And it could be that we truly didn't consider them a fit and were right. At the end of the day Sutton and Donald did get taken by teams where they are a much more natural fit, teams that run different defenses than we do.

When you look at the body types of all of our DLs, you see what our type is. All except Baker are 6'4+ and huge bodied with long limbs. Baker is 6'2 but still has a very big body, and he's basically settled into the pure NT role anyway. If Hatcher is our physical prototype, you're talking about a very different body than Donald/Sutton/Jernigan.

My point is that if you've got a rookie coming in that the coaches don't really trust because they don't think he has the body to play in their scheme--something he can never change--then he's at an even bigger disadvantage than the average rookie. Yes all rookies need to play well to earn snaps and additionally, all rookies need teaching time. But an undersized player has to be better than the average rookie to earn the same amount of trust from his coach. IMO that's setting him up for failure.

This just doesn't feel right to me. I'm not trying to be a dick, but where is that number from? If you're right, you're right and it establishes the situational value of an undersized player like Donald/Sutton. But a 4 man DL 60% of the time feels high to me.

 

That's pretty much my understanding of our D. We play a LOT of Nickel formation actually, and while we sorta started off as a Pittsburgh like base defense, we've moved to a defense where we're effectively in a 4-3 front on nearly every passing down. Also we've talked about doing more 1-gap this year as well.

 

I think a Will Sutton would do just fine in our scheme, especially in our nickel looks. Though he definitely wouldn't fit our base unless we went to exclusively 1 gap rather than the 1-gap/2-gap hybrid we're running now. I'd actually be interested in using a Sutton as NT like Dallas used Jay Ratliff, but you'd need a...Jason Hatcher type next to him. IIRC Dallas tended to have really big ends in their 1-gap. Ironically, the makeup of our starting DL would seem to suggest a pure 1 gap scheme with Cofield being the smaller pass rusher and guys like Carriker/Jenkins/Bowen next to him who are bigger guys. But we've run mostly 2 gap.

 

Keep in mind that 60% nickel is actually not unusual around the NFL against the heavy pass emphasis of modern offenses.

[Diesel Hog]

I think this guy would be a good addition to the team and a nice pick-up in the 3rd or later rounds:

http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/dsprofile.php?pyid=91166&draftyear=2015&genpos=DT

 

http://ci-cms-s3-prod.campusinsiders.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/13

[darrelgreenie]

Also, ultimately I trust your read on the defensive scheme, but I want to make sure that you are sure about our D being so similar to Baltimore's and Green Bay's....This just doesn't feel right to me. I'm not trying to be a dick, but where is that number from? If you're right, you're right and it establishes the situational value of an undersized player like Donald/Sutton. But a 4 man DL 60% of the time feels high to me.

I got that information about the use of 4 man line and the roots of this his being Steelers/Ravens/49ers from Haslett himself. I know the Packers run the same scheme because of Capers stemming from the Steeler's coaching tree.

But I think your view of the defense is too static. Even the Steelers don't always play 2-gap across the front when they're in base.

Here's just one example from the Steeler's D that shows that its not just a static 2-gap defense:

 

Credit: NFL Game Rewind

http://www.espn980.com/audiovault/#

http://www.stationcaster.com/player_skinned.php?s=65&c=425&f=2433493

Another very good Haslett interview:

http://www.redskins.com/media-gallery/videos/Jim-Haslett-on-Redskins-Nation/d2b1aa1a-ef55-41fc-a47f-b7dde14c269f

Highlights: http://www.stationcaster.com/player_skinned.php?s=65&c=425&f=2433493

o Whatever we do we're gonna be good at it. 4 man line 3 man line (to Doc) it really doesn't make a difference we were in a 4 man line 62% of the time b/c of nickel anyways so it really doesn't matter. But we're gonna be good at it. We're gonna do it over and over til we get good at it.

...http://www.redskins.com/media-gallery/videos/Jim-Haslett-on-Redskins-Nation/d2b1aa1a-ef55-41fc-a47f-b7dde14c269f....Also like the reference to getting back to the roots of the defensive scheme i.e Steelers/Ravens/49ers. Which to me means more slanting and stunting upfront sprinkle in a some ILB blitz too.

 

A situational player can certainly still have good value. But as you know, the draft is a zero sum game where a yes to one player means a no to another. If you're coming up on a choice between a situational interior pass rusher and another defensive lineman who might be a lesser rusher but you think can be an every down player, then how do you choose? Or maybe not even just another defensive lineman, but an every down player at LB, DB, WR, or OL? That's a tough value judgement to make.

There are very few every down DL in a 34 scheme so it would bother me at all, especially if the DL in question is a situational pass rusher. I consider pass rushing thee premium skill in the NFL.

 

Maybe you're right that the FO is just flat out missing out on players by making draft mistakes. But it could be we've been picking what we think can be every down players instead of them and I think there could be some sense it that. And it could be that we truly didn't consider them a fit and were right.

Could be this, could be that, could be anything. All I'm saying is that just because a FO passes on player doesn't mean that player doesn't fit. It could be as simple as the FO made a mistake. e.g. Jernigan DL.

 

My point is that if you've got a rookie coming in that the coaches don't really trust because they don't think he has the body to play in their scheme--something he can never change--then he's at an even bigger disadvantage than the average rookie. Yes all rookies need to play well to earn snaps and additionally, all rookies need teaching time. But an undersized player has to be better than the average rookie to earn the same amount of trust from his coach. IMO that's setting him up for failure.

I don't share your assumptions above at all I don't view the players were discussing as undersized. And I don't agree that a coach doesn't trust a player because they're a situational player. The nature of DL is rotational to in the first place. Moreover teams have defined roles for 'pass rushers'. I'm sure the 49ers didn't look down on Aldon Smith because he only played on thee most important down in football, 3rd down. I don't think the Seahawks looked down on their situational pass rushers.

[Bottled Nevertamed]

Love this discussion and Mike Daniels from Green Bay is probably one of the more ambiguous examples I could think of and also a terrific player. I see some of that in VTs Luther Maddy.

[Bottled Nevertamed]

If our kicker situation isn't sorted out in a couple of years how high a pick are we willing to spend on FSU's kicker?

[AlldaySkins]

My philosophy is to never draft a kicker. There are so many out there and look what happened to Hocker this year. If it's someone like a Janikowsi then maybe 6th or 7th round pick. If a team is going to draft a kicker higher than that, then they better have one of the most stacked teams offensively and defensively.

[RemoveSnyder]

Add Mississippi State's Dillion Day to the list for center. 

[RemoveSnyder]

From the other night, K-State's left tackle Cody Whitehair stood out. Size-wise he's a guard at the next level, maybe someone could coach him to be a center. He's basically 6'3" and 300/305 lbs. 

 

Despite his size, he's playing left tackle. And that's obviously because he's the most talented guy in that group. He's played right tackle and left guard in addition to LT. He started as a redshirt freshman in 2012. This is his 3rd year as a starter. 

 

Whitehair moves his feet very well. He was constantly readjusting, slide-stepping, moving with his target but never getting off balance. He kept his man at arms length. I never saw him look out of control. He was light on his feet and looked real smooth as an athlete. Got out of his stance well, too. 

 

He reminds me of the kind-of o-linemen that end up being drafted by the Packers. Size-wise he looks like Bakhtiarti and movement skills-wise he looks like a Packers o-lineman, underrated.

 

He gave me a Josh Sitton vibe. 

[PartyPosse]

Landon Collins or bust

[Bottled Nevertamed]

I'm on board with that devotion to Landon Collins.

 

I'm seeing something in this Vince Mayle, kid from Washington State. Has a very coordinated and smooth feel to his movement and has a monster catch radius.

[RemoveSnyder]

If our kicker situation isn't sorted out in a couple of years how high a pick are we willing to spend on FSU's kicker?

 

Well, Aguayo is draft eligible for 2015 as an rSoph, but, whatever records that Jano currently holds at FSU, I'm sure Agyo is going to stay until his name is etched above them. So, who knows if he would actually declare early, he might. 

 

If I had an additional disposable selection, say one of those first choice compensatory picks, I'd select him, for sure.

 

I wouldn't put it past someone to select him in the 3rd round, somewhere between #75 and #90, onto the compensatory range. Since the earliest compensatory picks are slotted for the tail-end of the 3rd round, that's kind-of like a freebie selection.

 

This is obviously all dependent on whether this guy continues to establish himself as an NFL leg.

 

Generally speaking, I'm more conservative when it comes to kickers and punters. I'd probably low-ball Agyo at the 4th round, right now. That makes him a priority Day 3 selection. But, with my luck, I'd have the same **** that happens each year, where a team in the 3rd round takes a guy I really like before he even makes it to the 4th. 

 

You probably already know the volatility of the kicker/punter market. I mean, you can just as easily fill those roster spots with guys who go undrafted and/or were just recently cut. Tress Way is an example. Even Forbath, another example. 

 

So, you really don't even need to use a selection on a k/p, unless he's rare. And so far, this Agyo kid has been dynamite. I understand why you brought him up.

 

I generally don't even consider drafting a kicker or punter, except for maybe at the end of the 6th or into the 7th, when you've got a couple of selections for each round. Anything above that has to be rarified air. 

 

So, if the Agyo kid stays at FSU, then you just revert back to bringing in someone for competition and you limit your invest cost by using the backend of the draft and/or the undrafted market.

 

That's where I've been looking at this kicker from USC, Andre Heidari. I mean, at times he flashes like he's got all the confidence in the world and literally, he can boom some kicks. If you schedule Stanford each year, he's good for a game winning dagger. Yet, his career had that bump in the road a few years back with a knee injury and then he struggled mightily before seemingly coming back strong this year.

 

All I know is that each time I see him hit the ball, it has pop. When he's on, I've been impressed.

 

So, he's someone whose stock is pretty low, he might raise himself up into a possible draft selection with a good year, get a 6th or 7th, but he could just as easily go undrafted. He's a name for 2015.