2017 Comprehensive NFL Draft Thread

[nemocystem]

Yeah...I've had nightmares all offseason that he will go to GB/NE/PHI/DEN...any of those would be scary.  Still...if he falls to us, i say it takes our offense close to GSoT status.  

 

Will say...if Philly drafts McCaffrey...would suck having to deal with that, but they would be missing a maddive opportunity to help their defense.

[Morneblade]

51 minutes ago, nemocystem said:

When i watch OSU film, 2 guys pop more than anyone else...Gareon Conley, & Raekwon McMillan.  Hooker has a few highlight plays, but he's not flying around making tackle after tackle like Adams is.  Lattimore gives you good film when the ball is going his way.  Conleu just keeps popping up like: "wait...who was...man..Conley again!"

 

Also....

 

So...let's assume Reddick is the pick...

 

Are we looking at trading Kerrigan (high contract, duplication rushing from the left), & moving back into the 2nd or 3rd?  Or are we going to play "Let's Change Your Position, Again!"

 

Reddick has a better shot at playing opposite Kerrigan, not replacing him. He'd be the speed rush guy, but I'm not sure he can even get up in weight to that. He was 237 at the combine, I would think he would need to be at LEAST 250 to have a chance against the run.

 

He would almost certainly need to move inside. I just don't see any other way around it.

[Tay]

When I listened to Cooley's first film breakdown on McCaffrey this morning and listened to him gush and say how he thought he was better than Cook, I knew I would disagree with him, but after listening to his assessment of both, I agree with his assessment, but disagree on who I would prefer for the skins.

 

I think it's fair to say that CM is the better offensive weapon, but I believe Cook is the better runner. I think DC compliments our offense better than any other back in this draft class.

 

On Mike and Mike, Louis Riddick says he'd rank the backs 1. McCaffrey 2. Cook 3. Fournette

 

Casserly says he asked 19 teams who the top RB was. 12 said LF and 7 said DC.

 

If DC is there at 17, I would take him over any other offensive player. My preference is for a stud on the defensive side, but if that player is unavailable, I'm hoping for DC in DC.

[Est.1974]

57 minutes ago, nemocystem said:

When i watch OSU film, 2 guys pop more than anyone else...Gareon Conley, & Raekwon McMillan.  Hooker has a few highlight plays, but he's not flying around making tackle after tackle like Adams is.  Lattimore gives you good film when the ball is going his way.  Conleu just keeps popping up like: "wait...who was...man..Conley again!"

 

Conley would be an excellent pick at 17. Looks the business.

[HTTRDynasty]

This may have been posted before, but it's a pretty interesting chart so thought I'd share:

 

 

[nemocystem]

16 minutes ago, Tay said:

When I listened to Cooley's first film breakdown on McCaffrey this morning and listened to him gush and say how he thought he was better than Cook, I knew I would disagree with him, but after listening to his assessment of both, I agree with his assessment, but disagree on who I would prefer for the skins.

 

I think it's fair to say that CM is the better offensive weapon, but I believe Cook is the better runner. I think DC compliments our offense better than any other back in this draft class.

 

On Mike and Mike, Louis Riddick says he'd rank the backs 1. McCaffrey 2. Cook 3. Fournette

 

Casserly says he asked 19 teams who the top RB was. 12 said LF and 7 said DC.

 

If DC is there at 17, I would take him over any other offensive player. My preference is for a stud on the defensive side, but if that player is unavailable, I'm hoping for DC in DC.

Fumbles man...he got the itis.

 

It just eats at me after Matt Jones.  Just like people are leary of athletic QBs after RG3, or try-hards because of Compton, or McDowell because if effort flags/Haynesworth.  DC is a 2nd rounder based on his red flags for me unless we can trade back.  I want no part of biting my nails for another 3 years...hoping our back doesn't just toss it on the turf en route to a game winning drive.  

 

I'm overblowing it a bit...but i just can't 

[SkinsTillIDie]

32 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

 

Reddick has a better shot at playing opposite Kerrigan, not replacing him. He'd be the speed rush guy, but I'm not sure he can even get up in weight to that. He was 237 at the combine, I would think he would need to be at LEAST 250 to have a chance against the run.

 

He would almost certainly need to move inside. I just don't see any other way around it.

 

Shane Ray entered the league 6'3, 245lb, with 33.125" arms and 9" hands.
Vic Beasley, 6'3, 246lbs, with 32.5" arms and 9.375" hands
Bruce Irvin, 6'3, 245lbs, with 33.375" arms and 9.625" hands

 

Haason Reddick's weight is fine for his 6'1 frame. His arm length is comparable (32.75" arms) and hand size larger than the aforementioned players (10.125"). And Von Miller, Junior Galette, as posted before.

 

Reddick's athletic numbers are in line with all of these edge rushers, but with the benefit of a lower center of gravity. If he had short arms or small hands, he'd have a problem. But he doesn't. And he benched more than Von Miller, Bruce Irvin, Shane Ray, for whatever that's worth.

 

He's strong and compact. The lower-weight edge rushers have a problem when they're tall beanpoles, like Randy Gregory (6'5, 235lbs), Dion Jordan (6'6, 245lbs), Barkevious Mingo (6'4, 240lbs).

 

Ultimately, I'm gonna side with Greg Cosell on this one when he says Reddick can play any of the linebacker positions. Maybe in Year 1, he's a 3rd down pass-rushing specialist, while he's being groomed over time to be a swiss army knife, jack of all trades, queen of the chess board weapon.

 

It's almost impossible to find elite pass-rushers. You really luck out as a franchise if you can get one outside the top 5 or 10. If Reddick had been a 4 year edge player, we probably wouldn't be in the position to add him. Quarterback play and pass rush win out in this league. And Reddick checks all of the athletic, mental, and character boxes.

[elkabong82]

The more I read on Foster, the more I'm starting to sour on him. He has the shoulder concern, then there ws the argument at the combine and him getting sent home, and now reports are coming out he didn't interview well, had difficulty doing Xs and Os on a board, etc. I still don't expect him to fall to us, but if he did I honestly wouldn't blame the team if we passed. Those concerns make me wary that he could bust. 

 

I like Cook a lot for this offense He's explosive. But, McCaffrey is starting to grow on me and that stat above showing him facing a lot of 8 man fronts and still doing well definitely improves his stock. 

 

Still my biggest preference is us trading back and taking a big DL because a QB falls to us and Houston, Jets, Browns, 49ers, Bears, Bills, whoever didn't take a QB is trying to jump ahead of the others. I can see SF not able to trade down and taking Trubisky because Bears and Jets are right there. I can maybe see Watson going top 10, but I don't see Kizer being taken before we pick. If all 3 QBs are gone when we pick, then a better D prospect likely falls to us.

[Morneblade]

1 minute ago, elkabong82 said:

The more I read on Foster, the more I'm starting to sour on him. He has the shoulder concern, then there ws the argument at the combine and him getting sent home, and now reports are coming out he didn't interview well, had difficulty doing Xs and Os on a board, etc. I still don't expect him to fall to us, but if he did I honestly wouldn't blame the team if we passed. Those concerns make me wary that he could bust. 

 

I like Cook a lot for this offense He's explosive. But, McCaffrey is starting to grow on me and that stat above showing him facing a lot of 8 man fronts and still doing well definitely improves his stock. 

 

Still my biggest preference is us trading back and taking a big DL because a QB falls to us and Houston, Jets, Browns, 49ers, Bears, Bills, whoever didn't take a QB is trying to jump ahead of the others. I can see SF not able to trade down and taking Trubisky because Bears and Jets are right there. I can maybe see Watson going top 10, but I don't see Kizer being taken before we pick. If all 3 QBs are gone when we pick, then a better D prospect likely falls to us.

 

Yeah, if we can trade back and get a couple big uglies out of it I'd be really happy.

 

But I want THIS GUY in the 3rd

 

[Warhead36]

22 minutes ago, elkabong82 said:

The more I read on Foster, the more I'm starting to sour on him. He has the shoulder concern, then there ws the argument at the combine and him getting sent home, and now reports are coming out he didn't interview well, had difficulty doing Xs and Os on a board, etc. I still don't expect him to fall to us, but if he did I honestly wouldn't blame the team if we passed. Those concerns make me wary that he could bust. 

 

I like Cook a lot for this offense He's explosive. But, McCaffrey is starting to grow on me and that stat above showing him facing a lot of 8 man fronts and still doing well definitely improves his stock. 

 

Still my biggest preference is us trading back and taking a big DL because a QB falls to us and Houston, Jets, Browns, 49ers, Bears, Bills, whoever didn't take a QB is trying to jump ahead of the others. I can see SF not able to trade down and taking Trubisky because Bears and Jets are right there. I can maybe see Watson going top 10, but I don't see Kizer being taken before we pick. If all 3 QBs are gone when we pick, then a better D prospect likely falls to us.

I don't think understanding Xs and Os will be an issue for Foster. I can't imagine someone starting for and leading a Nick Saban D not knowing Xs and Os inside and out. The combine situation wasn't exactly his fault, someone in the hospital running the MRIs screwed the pooch and he got justifiably upset after waisting something like 4 hours waiting. I do agree on the shoulder issue though, that concerns me for sure.

 

Cook fits this offense but he had some really bad combine #s(I know that doesn't always mean anything but the drills he struggled with I read have a strong correlation to success in the NFL). He's also got character issues AND a fumbling problem.

[HTTRDynasty]

What would the reaction be if this were true?  I think the fan-base as a whole would be ecstatic with either Foster or Reddick, but I think we'd be left scratching our heads if it were Humphrey or Jackson.

 

Quote

Based off some information, I think Washington's pick could come down to Reuben Foster, Marlon Humphrey, Adoree' Jackson or Haason Reddick. If Foster gets to their pick, I think the Redskins would be thrilled. I think it could happen as some teams think Foster won't go in the top half of the first round because of medical and character concerns. Other teams disagree, so it is hard to peg in what range he will go. Zach Brown was signed to a 1-year deal, and Foster could form a dynamic tandem with him. Foster would help Washington to defend against Dak Prescott, Ezekiel Elliott and Jason Witten.

 

[elkabong82]

47 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

I don't think understanding Xs and Os will be an issue for Foster. I can't imagine someone starting for and leading a Nick Saban D not knowing Xs and Os inside and out. The combine situation wasn't exactly his fault, someone in the hospital running the MRIs screwed the pooch and he got justifiably upset after waisting something like 4 hours waiting. I do agree on the shoulder issue though, that concerns me for sure.

 

Cook fits this offense but he had some really bad combine #s(I know that doesn't always mean anything but the drills he struggled with I read have a strong correlation to success in the NFL). He's also got character issues AND a fumbling problem.

 

Saban did say Foster undestood plays and did well in film breakdown, but the Xs and Os stuff is coming from several teams reportedly. Apparently it's caused some to think that great DL masked that weakness. Saban could be correct and it could be Foster gets it, just has trouble explaining it from X and O perspective. Definitely possible. But also possible DL made life easy and Saban is just talking his boy up. It has me wary when combined with other issues. 

 

Cook there are concerns, sure, but he's one I've watched a lot and he is a terror on the field. Fumbling problem is overblown IMO. He's a homerun threat with good vision and would impact the team right away. 

[Skinsinparadise]

I am becoming the big cheerleader on this thread for Dalvin Cook.  Casserly is another guy who mentioned don't worry about the college fumbles, good running backs usually get that fixed in the NFL.  If I recall it was K. Dixon who had a big issue with it in college the season before and was fine in the NFL.  Cook lost 4 fumbles.  The previous year he lost 2 fumbles.  And he's aware of the issue and has talked about it.   If Matt Jones ran-caught for 2300 yards like Cook, I doubt we'd be crying about him losing 4 fumbles.   Don't get me wrong I don't like the fumbles but IMO its not a deal breaker and I do think it can be fixed.

 

I was just watching the Kiper-McShay draft special and they talked Cook up as having great football character.  The same thing they said about Reuben Foster.  The point was anything relating to football -- taking to coaching, being a good team mate, being a workaholic, etc -- this dude is off the charts.  He needs to dump some of his friends apparently, though. 

 

At the moment, if we get really lucky and Hooker or Adams or Foster drop to #17 -- any one of them would be my pick.  But I am doubting it happens -- I just notice as we get closer depending on the draft geek some suggest its possible one of them drop that far.    Otherwise right now I am in between Reddick and Cook.   And, there is a shot both of them are gone before #17.

 

I am hoping its not Peppers or McDowell.  If we trade down TJ Watt is growing on me.  Maybe Chris Wormley.  

 

Kiper and McShay were asked about McCaffrey to the Redskins and they both said no shot he falls to #17.  Cooley and Sheehan talked about trading up for McCaffrey.   Cooley was a bit all over the place on it saying maybe he'd do it, saying he'd like Reddick at #17 too (he also said in another segment he likes Foster too), then talked about Jonathan Allen falling closer to #17 and trading up for him -- saying he loves Allen.

 

Edit:  Catching up some on concerns here about Foster.  I've been watching him some of late.  The dude is a missile.  He's a fun watch.  He's all over the field and just flattens everyone he tackles.  He can cover, too.  My concerns are he throws his whole body into his tackles a lot -- he hits so violently that I wonder if that has something to do with his injuries.  Plus he's more of a Will MLB.  And we got Zach Brown.  So who plays the Mike role?   But when I think of the nightmare defense of 2016 where running backs were bouncing off tackle attempts like a pinball machine -- Foster would help turn that around, this dude just levels people.

[Skinsinparadise]

I haven't really paid too much attention to Foster early -- aside from noticing Monk's man crash on him -- mainly because I don't like to tease myself by watching prospects the Redskins have no shot at getting.  But now that the dude is falling in some mocks -- what the heck.    The dude reminds me a little of Sean in the style he hits.  He's a fun watch and I think he'd bring some attitude to the defense in the style of Sean.  He hits like a missile. He can blitz.  He can cover.  The whole package IMO.

 

 

 

[nemocystem]

I'll concede to you guys on Cook.  I'm resigned to that now being the most likely pick as it seems like someone is tipping their hat on inside circles regarfimg McCaffrey, so it appears he won't get past Philly...in the least.  

 

I'm not as high on Foster because of the things you mention, & i feel that all things being equal at 17...i would take Cunningham as soon as i was caught considering Foster.  It just matters to me that he can take over the MILB spot without concern, while Mason Foster, & Zach Brown battle it out :: smirk :: at WILB...as opposed to having 3 guys in which you hope you can turn 1 into an NFL above average MILB.

 

But that's just me.

[elkabong82]

33 minutes ago, nemocystem said:

I'll concede to you guys on Cook.  I'm resigned to that now being the most likely pick as it seems like someone is tipping their hat on inside circles regarfimg McCaffrey, so it appears he won't get past Philly...in the least.  

 

I'm not as high on Foster because of the things you mention, & i feel that all things being equal at 17...i would take Cunningham as soon as i was caught considering Foster.  It just matters to me that he can take over the MILB spot without concern, while Mason Foster, & Zach Brown battle it out :: smirk :: at WILB...as opposed to having 3 guys in which you hope you can turn 1 into an NFL above average MILB.

 

But that's just me.

 

Honestly just want us to trade back and take  Caleb Brantley.

 

 

[skins2victory]

I really like Foster. Some people have him falling to us at #17, but most mocks he is gone by then. I think he instantly makes our team better, and would love the tandem of Foster/Brown. My fear is I see a few mocks were he goes to the Eagles at pick 14. I would hate this because we would miss out on him, and a division rival would be getting a heck of an ILB. SO MY QUESTION IS.... IF WE WANTED TO ENSURE THAT WE GET FOSTER, AND THAT THE EAGLES DON'T, WHAT WOULD IT TAKE FOR US TO MOVE UP ONE SPOT IN FRONT OF PHILLY TO TAKE HIM AT PICK 13. The cards have pick 13. That would be us moving up 4 spots, again one pick ahead of Philly. We have two 4th round picks. if we trade the Cards a 4th rounder, would that be enough to move up and grab Foster AT PICK 13 if the FO believed he was worth it?

[HTTRDynasty]

6 minutes ago, skins2victory said:

I really like Foster. Some people have him falling to us at #17, but most mocks he is gone by then. I think he instantly makes our team better, and would love the tandem of Foster/Brown. My fear is I see a few mocks were he goes to the Eagles at pick 14. I would hate this because we would miss out on him, and a division rival would be getting a heck of an ILB. SO MY QUESTION IS.... IF WE WANTED TO ENSURE THAT WE GET FOSTER, AND THAT THE EAGLES DON'T, WHAT WOULD IT TAKE FOR US TO MOVE UP ONE SPOT IN FRONT OF PHILLY TO TAKE HIM AT PICK 13. The cards have pick 13. That would be us moving up 4 spots, again one pick ahead of Philly. We have two 4th round picks. if we trade the Cards a 4th rounder, would that be enough to move up and grab Foster AT PICK 13 if the FO believed he was worth it?

 

Moving from 17 to 13 is worth 200 points per the trade value chart, so we would have to give up our 3rd rounder plus something else to make up for the additional 15 points we'd need to give on top of our 3rd rounder.  Something like a 3rd and a 7th.

[Morneblade]

1 hour ago, elkabong82 said:

 

Honestly just want us to trade back and take  Caleb Brantley.

 

 

 

I just watched his Alabama game film. I've never seen such a lazy player as Brantley was there. He quit on almost every play. I was pretty high on him. Now, I'm not sure I would touch him.

[RWJ]

2 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

I haven't really paid too much attention to Foster early -- aside from noticing Monk's man crash on him -- mainly because I don't like to tease myself by watching prospects the Redskins have no shot at getting.  But now that the dude is falling in some mocks -- what the heck.    The dude reminds me a little of Sean in the style he hits.  He's a fun watch and I think he'd bring some attitude to the defense in the style of Sean.  He hits like a missile. He can blitz.  He can cover.  The whole package IMO.

 

 

 

Reddick or Foster would be great picks, IMO.  Only issue I have with Foster is that there is news that his shoulder may need another surgery.  If his shoulder injury is serious, that will be a big concern.  I still like Reddick as our choice at #17.  I've had him on my wish list for a long time now (about 2 months or so).

[elkabong82]

3 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

 

I just watched his Alabama game film. I've never seen such a lazy player as Brantley was there. He quit on almost every play. I was pretty high on him. Now, I'm not sure I would touch him.

 

The bulk of his resume outweighs one game. If every game was perfect he'd be projected higher. Plus I think Tomsula could coach him up. 

[Morneblade]

8 minutes ago, elkabong82 said:

 

The bulk of his resume outweighs one game. If every game was perfect he'd be projected higher. Plus I think Tomsula could coach him up. 

 

Well, if people are going to get down on McDowell for for being lazy, this was much worse than I saw from McDowell, and McDowell is a better player.

 

And that was a huge game for them. You don't get up for Alabama in the SEC, you don't need to be there. I'm serious, he stopped on almost ever play after 2 seconds.  Sometimes, after he beat his guy.

 

 

[skinny21]

Unless a (projected) top guy falls to us, I think we're likely looking at a wide range of choices at 17 that all have their warts - testing, interviewing, injuries, team fit, etc.  I'd happily trade back at that point and I'd be willing to do it (relatively) cheaply.  

 

Even an extra 4th gives us another chance in a deep draft, and ammo to trade back up later one.  

[elkabong82]

Just now, Morneblade said:

 

Well, if people are going to get down on McDowell for for being lazy, this was much worse than I saw from McDowell, and McDowell is a better player.

 

And that was a huge game for them. You don't get up for Alabama in the SEC, you don't need to be there. I'm serious, he stopped on almost ever play after 2 seconds.  Sometimes, after he beat his guy.

 

I like McDowell as well as Brantley because we have Tomsula so I'm not as wary over the effort concerns.

[Morneblade]

Just now, elkabong82 said:

 

I like McDowell as well as Brantley because we have Tomsula so I'm not as wary over the effort concerns.

 

If there is one guy that can, it's him.