2017 Comprehensive NFL Draft Thread

[squatch66]

8 minutes ago, Rattlesnake88 said:

Take boulware and put him in foster's body. He out performed Foster as a football player in my opinion. 

 

You could just tell how much he wanted it. He could be our next London Fletcher. What he lacks physically, he makes up for with his intangibles. 

 

I think I posted it in here but I found an article about him and what a leader he is on that defense.

 

I think that @Rattlesnake88 and I are the first two on the bandwagon lol

[Rattlesnake88]

@squatch66 I watched the Louisville game earlier this season and I kept thinking "what a great football player this dude is". He is fantastic at blitzing too. He is 100 % tuned in every play trying to decipher exactly wtf is going on and when he thinks he knows, he gambles and usually is right. He misses tackles and occasionally gets trucked (like compton) but his heart and instincts are incredible and not talked about enough. 

 

[squatch66]

2 minutes ago, Rattlesnake88 said:

@squatch66 I watched the Louisville game earlier this season and I kept thinking "what a great football player this dude is". He is fantastic at blitzing too. He is 100 % tuned in every play trying to decipher exactly wtf is going on and when he thinks he knows, he gambles and usually is right. He misses tackles and occasionally gets trucked (like compton) but his heart and instincts are incredible and not talked about enough. 

 

 

Admittedly I don't watch college except for when Miami plays. I'm looking for him on draft breakdown. From what I've read and what I've seen tonight I'm sold.

 

Not sure if you saw this but it was awesome. He totally goes to bat for a teammate over a funny incident.

 

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/clemsons-ben-boulware-defends-christian-wilkins-inappropriate-grab-of-curtis-samuel-194524485.html

[RemoveSnyder]

22 minutes ago, squatch66 said:

I think that @Rattlesnake88 and I are the first two on the bandwagon lol

Page 1: 

 

 

[Rattlesnake88]

2 minutes ago, Monk4thaHALL said:

Page 1: 

 

 

You can be the conductor of our boulware to the skins train!

[squatch66]

10 minutes ago, Monk4thaHALL said:

Page 1: 

 

 

 

I stand corrected lol

[Going Commando]

My extended family are Clemson alums and I watch a ton of their games and so I've gotten to enjoy Boulware's career.  He's a special player and will go down as a program legend.  But I'm not sure how well he projects to the NFL.  He reminds me of a couple other tough, white ILBs like Tyler Matakevich and Scooby Wright.  He's short and squatty and stiff hipped.  All torso.  Not body beautiful.  He kind of wheels around to change directions and the backpedal is... not smooth.  He's basically got one direction--downhill.  And he's a wrecking ball when he gets to play that way.  He's strong and super physical and he has surprisingly good body control.  And he has a nose for coming away with the tough stop, similar to Reuben Foster in that way.  But that's pretty much where the comparison to Foster ends, Foster is a much, much, much better prospect.

 

I thought Scooby was maybe a 3rd or 4th rounder when he came out, and that Matakevich was a 4th or 5th rounder.  They both went in the 7th and I learned my lesson.  Boulware is a 7th rounder who maaaaaybe has a chance at going in the 6th if a team really loves his intangibles.  That said, I would be excited if we picked him in that range.  The guy is endlessly entertaining, he'd be fun to root for.  And sometimes those hardnosed seventh rounders and UDFAs pan out.

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

Didn't watch the game (don't have ESPN), but I'm excited about Watson going high.  That could push a good player down to us.

 

Who is Clemson's hyped DT, is that Carlos Watkins?  How did he play?

[bird_1972]

5 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

My extended family are Clemson alums and I watch a ton of their games and so I've gotten to enjoy Boulware's career.  He's a special player and will go down as a program legend.  But I'm not sure how well he projects to the NFL.  He reminds me of a couple other tough, white ILBs like Tyler Matakevich and Scooby Wright.  He's short and squatty and stiff hipped.  All torso.  Not body beautiful.  He kind of wheels around to change directions and the backpedal is... not smooth.  He's basically got one direction--downhill.  And he's a wrecking ball when he gets to play that way.  He's strong and super physical and he has surprisingly good body control.  And he has a nose for coming away with the tough stop, similar to Reuben Foster in that way.  But that's pretty much where the comparison to Foster ends, Foster is a much, much, much better prospect.

 

I thought Scooby was maybe a 3rd or 4th rounder when he came out, and that Matakevich was a 4th or 5th rounder.  They both went in the 7th and I learned my lesson.  Boulware is a 7th rounder who maaaaaybe has a chance at going in the 6th if a team really loves his intangibles.  That said, I would be excited if we picked him in that range.  The guy is endlessly entertaining, he'd be fun to root for.  And sometimes those hardnosed seventh rounders and UDFAs pan out.

If this is the case, I would definitely target Boulware later in the draft. My first time watching a Clemson game in full and he really stood out - I'm no talent evaluator (Steve's analysis is far better than what I could provide) but my gut tells me he would at least be a killer ST player.

[Going Commando]

4 minutes ago, Alcoholic Zebra said:

Who is Clemson's hyped DT, is that Carlos Watkins?  How did he play?

 

Carlos Watkins is the senior.  All of their other DLs are freshman and sophomores except for Pagano, who is a junior, and who just returned for the playoff (and played pretty well).

 

Watkins played very well.  He had a ton pressures and stuffs and I think he batted at least one or two passes.  He wasn't quite as dominant as he was against Ohio State, but it was close.

 

That dude is more than the sum of his parts.  He doesn't look special, but he plays special.  I think he's a solid second rounder and he is a hell of a lot better player than Jarvis Jenkins was.

[Momma There Goes That Man]

I'd pass on Boulware. I've had enough of the Charlie hustle try hards that don't bring the elite measurables. 

[Going Commando]

I realize my past few posts make it seem like I don't like Foster, but that's not what I wanted to convey.  I actually do like him and think he'd be an ideal fit at ILB in our defense. I think he'd help change the culture on our defense, and I would actually like to see us target him.  What I'm not sure about is his value at 17.  It's hard to justify him as the BPA if any of the three first round RBs are still on the table, or if Cam Robinson, McDowell, or one of the good corners are still there.

 

What I'd like to see is a trade down where we get into Foster's natural range and come away with a mid round pick in the process.

[bird_1972]

8 hours ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

You guys are overrating him because this ILB class is shaky and you're viewing him through the prism of the Redskins' roster needs.  But you don't generally take an undersized stack linebacker who isn't a playmaker in the first half of the first round.  He's going to be there at 17.  There is no question that he could help our soft ass run defense.  The question is does he offer good value at 17?  I think there are going to be better players available at that pick and that we need to trade down in order to get into Foster's natural range.

 

Steve - who are you thinking would be better picks for the Skins at position 17, assuming we don't trade out of the pick?

[Thinking Skins]

2 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

I realize my past few posts make it seem like I don't like Foster, but that's not what I wanted to convey.  I actually do like him and think he'd be an ideal fit at ILB in our defense. I think he'd help change the culture on our defense, and I would actually like to see us target him.  What I'm not sure about is his value at 17.  It's hard to justify him as the BPA if any of the three first round RBs are still on the table, or if Cam Robinson, McDowell, or one of the good corners are still there.

 

What I'd like to see is a trade down where we get into Foster's natural range and come away with a mid round pick in the process.

 

I think it depends. Some sites (walterfootball) are ranking him as the top ILB in the draft. If teams have him that way then its easy to see him go at 17 if not before. I can't say because I don't watch nearly as much film as half the people in this thread, and even the film I do watch I barely know what I'm looking at. I tried to watch him last night and thought he was awesome and then I came in here and read he had a bad game.

 

But from a novice, I just want some playmakers and I think Foster (along with Cunningham and some others) have that trait in them. I also want a guy who's got a history of staying healthy. One knock on Foster and some other high prospects I like is his size. Most of the guys I've seen who are rated as the top ILBs have around 4.7-4.75 speed, but Foster's 6-1 whereas Cunningham is 6-4 and Watt is 6-5. Its something noticeable.

[Going Commando]

37 minutes ago, bird_1972 said:

Steve - who are you thinking would be better picks for the Skins at position 17, assuming we don't trade out of the pick?

 

I'm going to try and make a board now that the season is over, but I'm pretty sure I'd rank these guys ahead of him:

 

- Myles Garrett

- Malik McDowell

- Jamal Adams

- Leonard Fournette

- Christian McCaffrey

- Dalvin Cook

- Mike Williams

- Deshaun Watson

- Marlon Humphrey

- Jonathan Allen

- Cam Robinson

- Tim Williams

- Teez Tabor

 - Derek Barnett

- Jabril Peppers

- Cordrea Tankersley

 

And maybe John Ross and Carl Lawson too.  And that's without having taken a real look at Deshone Kizer and Mitch Trubisky to figure out where they rank.  Also need to look at Solomon Thomas and Ryam Ramczyk, who will probably go before Foster too.  Also need to consider a few more of the DBs from Michigan, Ohio State, and Washignton who are in that early range.

 

I think Foster is going to go somewhere in the 20s and that's the range we need to be trying to get into in order to target him.

[clskinsfan]

9 hours ago, squatch66 said:

 

Not sure what his timed speed is but he looks like a faster Compton out there. You know he's giving you everything and he is a leader in that defense.

 

That screen play he blew up at the end was a thing of beauty from pre snap read to tackle.

 

I'd love if we snag him. Guarantee you he's on McC's radar.

 

You have to remember the competition he was playing against last night. While most of Clemson's skill players are going to get drafted. I dont see a lot of their OL and TE's as pro material. You gotta remember EVERY NFL player is big and fast. And we already have Compton who gives you everything, is smart...Blah, Blah, Blah... Will Compton should not be starting in the NFL. Period. And most likely neither should/will Boulware. Comptons lack of athleticism killed us this year. It is time to get some athletes on the defensive side of the field.

[RonArtest15]

56 minutes ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

I'd pass on Boulware. I've had enough of the Charlie hustle try hards that don't bring the elite measurables. 

 

We currently have one wearing #51 on the roster.  Easy pass on Boulware.

[bird_1972]

5 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

I think Foster is going to go somewhere in the 20s and that's the range we need to be trying to get into in order to target him.

 

Thanks for the list. I'm sure you created that fully knowing that most of those players won't be avail at #17 but it is exhaustive.

 

Per this comment - I always worry that a given FO will get too cute and trade down expecting a player to be there at his "natural range". But as we all know, surprises always happen in the draft and there is a substantial risk if Foster is there at #17 and we decide to trade down into the 20s expecting him to still be there. When the spread between where a player is picked and where he is "supposed" to go isn't that great (in this case, less than 5-10 picks), I don't think anyone would fault Scot for a slight reach here. In the end, we will remember the impact player we got, not where we got him.

Just now, RonArtest15 said:

 

We currently have one wearing #51 on the roster.  Easy pass on Boulware.

I dunno.

Boulware >> Compton.

That said, I would not depend on Boulware as a starter. But as a late round flier who can play special teams ... why wouldn't you?

[HTTRDynasty]

PFF's top 32 prospects:

 

1. Myles Garrett, Edge, Texas A&M

2. Jonathan Allen, DI, Alabama

3. Derek Barnett, Edge, Tennesssee

4. Cordrea Tankersley, CB, Clemson

5. Mike Williams, WR, Clemson

 

The rest at link.

 

 

[Going Commando]

11 minutes ago, bird_1972 said:

Per this comment - I always worry that a given FO will get too cute and trade down expecting a player to be there at his "natural range". But as we all know, surprises always happen in the draft and there is a substantial risk if Foster is there at #17 and we decide to trade down into the 20s expecting him to still be there. When the spread between where a player is picked and where he is "supposed" to go isn't that great (in this case, less than 5-10 picks), I don't think anyone would fault Scot for a slight reach here. In the end, we will remember the impact player we got, not where we got him.

That's why you can't get married to one prospect though, or hone in on drafting a position of need.  If your goal is to get one particular player, then reaching for him won't be the issue.

 

The issue is, when you reach, you've likely passed over impact talent to get your man.  People won't fault Scott for reaching for Reuben Foster, what they'd fault him for would be passing over All Pros like Malik McDowell or Christian McCaffrey in the process.  Those guys have a better shot of getting to that level than Foster does, hence why you need to either pick them or trade down to get Foster and add draft value in the process.

[SkinInsite]

I had enough of QBs running away from our LBs like they are stuck in mud, hard pass on Boulware.

[bird_1972]

7 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

That's why you can't get married to one prospect though, or hone in on drafting a position of need.  If your goal is to get one particular player, then reaching for him won't be the issue.

 

The issue is, when you reach, you've likely passed over impact talent to get your man.  People won't fault Scott for reaching for Reuben Foster, what they'd fault him for would be passing over All Pros like Malik McDowell or Christian McCaffrey in the process.  Those guys have a better shot of getting to that level than Foster does, hence why you need to either pick them or trade down to get Foster and add draft value in the process.

 

While I appreciate the spirit of BPA, I just would have a hard time accepting a McCaffrey pick at #17 given how bad our D has been. That said, I see your point.

 

Maybe he could implement a modified BPA approach? BPA but limited to defense?

[Going Commando]

16 minutes ago, bird_1972 said:

 

While I appreciate the spirit of BPA, I just would have a hard time accepting a McCaffrey pick at #17 given how bad our D has been. That said, I see your point.

 

Maybe he could implement a modified BPA approach? BPA but limited to defense?

 

#17 is not our only shot at improving the defense.  It's actually surprising how quickly positions of desperate need can turn to strengths when you follow the approach of drafting BPA and using free agency to fill in the missing pieces.

 

BPA is always the way to go.  The smart teams use a tiered BPA system where they don't pick players from lower tiers when ones from higher tiers are still available.  The only time position should be a deciding factor is in the case of quarterbacks, kicking specialists, and to break ties between closely ranked prospects within the same tier.

 

Reaching to fill needs in the draft is death by a thousand cuts.  The result is you begin a process of talent drain that becomes really noticeable within a couple of seasons and you never really find mainstays and are constantly looking for upgrades to the guys you acquired two or three years ago.  You'll also have no depth because so many more of your picks will not pan out--the NFL draft involves projecting so many unknowns that the single best way to make sure as many of your draft picks will be hits as possible is to stockpile picks and be disciplined with them by drafting BPA.  Meanwhile, if you reached to fill a position, you're going to be kicking yourself watching all of the blossoming All Pros you passed over because you were fine with a 29 year old Josh Norman or a 28 year old Trent Williams or a 30 year old DeSean Jackson at the time and you really needed an ILB that season.

An important draft mantra to always keep in mind is that the draft is not the tool to use for putting out today's roster fires.  It's for building tomorrow's foundation.  That has to be the mindset for every pick.

[Going Commando]

Another way of thinking of it: the draft is a competition with the other 32 teams for value.  The teams that regularly come away with a lot of value are usually the best ones on the field itself.  When you reach to fill specific positions and pass over value in the process, that means some other team is getting even more value and that they're either staying ahead of you or passing you by.

 

That said, there are intangible factors that absolutely matter for determining draft value that are hard to pin down.  Leadership and toughness are two of the biggest ones.  These guys are human beings and locker rooms are ecosystems with complex chemical balances.  Someone who has the kind of superb intangibles that you need in your locker room can be more valuable to your team than a guy who is more talented, but doesn't have the leadership qualities you're looking for--especially with very high draft picks.  IMO a great example of this is Brandon Scherff vs Leonard Williams.  We're better off having taken Scherff IMO, even though I ranked Williams ahead of him.

 

So determining a player's real value is extremely complicated, especially for us since we have only a tiny amount of information about a player's intangibles to work with.

[bird_1972]

22 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

BPA is always the way to go.  The smart teams use a tiered BPA system where they don't pick players from lower tiers when ones from higher tiers are still available.  The only time position should be a deciding factor is in the case of quarterbacks, kicking specialists, and to break ties between closely ranked prospects within the same tier.

 

So we (sort of) agree on my BPA on defense proposal in that it's possible that an O player and D player within same tier are avail and we go with D because of the need. Therefore, we are still adhering to a basic BPA construct but also recognizing need in addition.