Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

The Official 2017 Draft Day 1 - First Round - Discussion Thread

Coolio47

By Coolio47
in The Stadium

Recommended Posts

Skinsinparadise

Skinsinparadise

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, clskinsfan said:

 

I like Takk. You know my thoughts on the other guy. :)

 

It's time for us to flood this thread like the others about the many reasons why we don't need Malik McDowell. :) I am actually now not too worried about it, I don't recall a single rumor of them liking him.  So if they take him -- they really did a good job of keeping that one under the radar.  At the moment really the only two guys I am rooting against is Peppers and McDowell and for entirely different reasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Consigliere

The Consigliere

Posted
Posted

There's very little evidence other than film geeks obsessing with him hitting people that suggest's Fournette is going to make a tangibly better pro than Cook, Mixon, or McCaffrey, and it's certainly possible backs like McNichols and Perine and Foreman and more could end up better. I have zero faith in FO's ability to make quality judgments on these players at this point. I think they're clueless to be honest. Over the past half decade dynasty metrics fantasy geeks have continually bested the ADP of RB, and WR prospects drafted with their own rankings. These amateurs shouldn't be able to do that, but they are able to do so because they are minimizing concerns w/things like the press, over dependence on film and interviews, and are instead focusing their analysis on what players actually produced in college, and at the combine in terms of college production, and athletic profile.

 

When it comes to judging what RB's or WR's will be successful, I'll go with groups like Rotoviz and matt kelley every day of the week over NFL front offices. No such luck, so far, with non-offensive playmaking positions, but I eagerly await the day when IDP analysis also catches up.

 

The fact that teams want to trade up to, and/or draft Fournette in the top 5 just so's how extraordinarily stupid these guys are. Do they even realize that when Fournette wasn't rushing in the I formation (a formation that today is nearly non-existent in modern NFL offenses), his production dropped from 8.73 yards per carry to 5.42 when not in the I. His production dips to sub 5 yards per carry when running against teams in the top 25. Now I have my issues with Cook, but compare the too, and it's no contest, Cook blew past opposition no matter what the quality, Fournette? Not so much. Fournette is a very limited prospect who may be able to thrive in an offense like Tennessee's, but they already have Henry, so he's going to have to land in the perspect spot to live up to his bell cow potential, and we can't even be sure what that is considering his issues w/top defenses and when not rushing in the I. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
clskinsfan

clskinsfan

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Love the dude's personality and he's one heck of a dynamic kick-punt returner but otherwise I am having a hard time getting into this one. 

 

Well I have a 3rd round grade on him....So yeah. Not that it means anything. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Skinsinparadise

Skinsinparadise

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, clskinsfan said:

 

Well  have a 3rd round grade on him....So yeah. Not that it means anything. 

 

If we didn't have Su'a Cravens I'd get it some.  I am trying to think of the logic of it.  Main thing that hits me is maybe they think he can play nickel corner.  But part of the hit on him is his coverage ability.  

1 minute ago, mistertim said:

So the Skins brought Cook in but aren't interested in him? Either it is a BS smokescreen or they really weren't impressed with him in interviews.

 

All of it could be smokescreen - actually I'd bet some of it is purposeful smokescreen -- right now there is no way to figure out what is true and what isn't.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
clskinsfan

clskinsfan

Posted
Posted
Just now, Skinsinparadise said:

 

If we didn't have Su'a Cravens I'd get it some.  I am trying to think of the logic of it.  Main thing that hits me is maybe they think he can play nickel corner.  But part of the hit on him is his coverage ability.  

 

I have a hard time using a first round pick on a DB that had ONE int in his college career. What I saw on tape was a guy with NO ball skills on defense at all. Now as a KR and PR he is a monster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Skinsinparadise

Skinsinparadise

Posted
Posted

This to me is the operative point, i am usually a trade down and not a trade up guy type but if you can trade up without giving up much, I'd entertain it for the right guy:  Allen or Hooker.  Or heck if all these rumors about Fournette are true and they love the guy then go get him but only if the price is right.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sebestian

sebestian

Posted
Posted

Ok seriously.  I just saw ESPNs mock.  Hooker from Ohio St.  I like it, however, Foster is going 22 to whoever.  Presuming we keep the pick, who would you draft between Foster and Hooker if based on the mock, both would be available at 17.  Most know my preference.  Foster all day long.

 

Discuss

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Skinsinparadise

Skinsinparadise

Posted
Posted
Just now, sebestian said:

Ok seriously.  I just saw ESPNs mock.  Hooker from Ohio St.  I like it, however, Foster is going 22 to whoever.  Presuming we keep the pick, who would you draft between Foster and Hooker if based on the mock, both would be available at 17.  Most know my preference.  Foster all day long.

 

Discusss

 

Earlier I picked Foster as the guy I want at #17 who I think is most likely to drop to #17.  Cook was the next guy if I recall. But if its between him (considering his baggage) and Hooker, its an easy decision, Hooker.  I'd be beyond thrilled if Hooker falls to #17, but I'd be stunned if he gets past San Diego at #7.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sebestian

sebestian

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Earlier I picked Foster as the guy I want at #17 who I think is most likely to drop to #17.  Cook was the next guy if I recall. But if its between him (considering his baggage) and Hooker, its an easy decision, Hooker.  I'd be beyond thrilled if Hooker falls to #17, but I'd be stunned if he gets past San Diego at #7.

 

I would be good with both.  I was curious what do we do with Cravens, or it does not matter, pure BPA.  I am just thinking what happens to safety.  I am on information overload.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Skinsinparadise

Skinsinparadise

Posted
Posted
Just now, sebestian said:

 

I would be good with both.  I was curious what do we do with Cravens, or it does not matter, pure BPA.  I am just thinking what happens to safety.  I am on information overload.

 

I'd keep Cravens in the joker role or rotate him in at safety.  I like Swearinger but not sure he's a pure free safety.  Malik Hooker is a pure free safety.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Master Blaster

Master Blaster

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, sebestian said:

 

I would be good with both.  I was curious what do we do with Cravens, or it does not matter, pure BPA.  I am just thinking what happens to safety.  I am on information overload.

 

 

The Redskins haven't had one quality safety in ten years, so I'll be OK if the issue is trying to figure out how to use three quality safeties. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PCS

PCS

Posted
Posted
40 minutes ago, thesubmittedone said:

 

Same goes for the other way around. :) 

Way too organized here. Clearly too much blood in our alcohol streams,(which could change in a few hours depending.... ). ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Skinsinparadise

Skinsinparadise

Posted
Posted
Just now, SkinsPassion4Life said:

 

I'd rather have Davis over

 

Davis would be the next guy for me.  And then Barnett whom I recall you wouldn't want.  But we agree on most guys in this draft from what I remember. 

1 minute ago, SkinsPassion4Life said:

 

I'd rather have Davis over Hooker

 

Ball hawking free safety -- been a long time since we had someone like that.  Some compare him to Earl Thomas. But I doubt he escapes the top 10.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SkinsPassion4Life

SkinsPassion4Life

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Davis would be the next guy for me.  And then Barnett whom I recall you wouldn't want.  But we agree on most guys in this draft from what I remember. 

 

I would take Davis over Hooker  because of his leadership skills....plus I'd rather draft a FS/Slot corner later in the draft.

 

I don't want any of the pass rushers in the 1st round...except for Watt...maybe Willis in the late 1st....and obviously Reddick

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Skinsinparadise

Skinsinparadise

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, SkinsPassion4Life said:

 

I would take Davis over Hooker  because of his leadership skills....plus I'd rather draft a FS/Slot corner later in the draft.

 

I don't want any of the pass rushers in the 1st round...except for Watt...maybe Willis in the late 1st....and obviously Reddick

 

I like Watt and Willis if they trade down. I am a big Davis guy so I'd dig the pick too.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...