2018 Comprehensive NFL Draft Thread

[HigSkin]

Does anybody else think Tim Settle projects to a "Hankins" type guy?

 

 

[JoggingGod]

Derwin James would immediately make up for the loss of Fuller imo.

[Going Commando]

8 hours ago, Warhead36 said:

Edmunds is an incredible physical prospect but someone that raw terrifies me. Remember Aaron Curry? Or Vernon Gholston?

 

Well Gholston was a passrusher, which is a very nuanced position compared to playing linebacker in the stack.  Edmunds reminds me of LaVar.  He's got the best body of any of the defensive players in the class IMO.  You see him do freakish things like LaVar did.  But he seems more disciplined than LaVar was.

[Warhead36]

10 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

Well Gholston was a passrusher, which is a very nuanced position compared to playing linebacker in the stack.  Edmunds reminds me of LaVar.  He's got the best body of any of the defensive players in the class IMO.  You see him do freakish things like LaVar did.  But he seems more disciplined than LaVar was.

Fair enough. But do you think we're the kind of organization that develops talent like that? We've taken on a lot of raw guys and they don't seem to grow here. I think if Edmunds is there at 13 you think about it, especially if he's far and away the best player on the board, but part of me hopes someone else takes him first so we don't have to risk that situation. I'd much prefer Roquon Smith who just screams 10 year perennial Pro Bowler to me.

[Going Commando]

8 hours ago, The Consigliere said:

I expect him to go between the 10th and 20th pick. He's not going in the 2nd round. 

 

He's Pierre Garcon.  He's not an elite athlete.  He's a tough running possession receiver and smooth runner but he only runs fast and jumps high on a track.  He gets pressed at the line constantly because he can't separate vertically against any kind of speed and he doesn't win jump balls.  His production is almost entirely digs, comebacks, and screens.  I think he's a second rounder and a team would be committing a significant reach if they took him 10-20.  It'd be an indictment of how bad the WR class is this year.

 

Ridley is a way better receiver than him.  He's the only first round worthy WR this year.

[Going Commando]

13 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

Fair enough. But do you think we're the kind of organization that develops talent like that? We've taken on a lot of raw guys and they don't seem to grow here. I think if Edmunds is there at 13 you think about it, especially if he's far and away the best player on the board, but part of me hopes someone else takes him first so we don't have to risk that situation. I'd much prefer Roquon Smith who just screams 10 year perennial Pro Bowler to me.

 

I would too.  Roquan is a better player and he's an elite athlete at the position in his own right.  We're not going to get to choose between them, Roquan is too transparently special to fall.

 

Actually I don't think we'll get to choose either of them.  Edmunds is so talented that I strongly suspect he'll get drafted before we pick.  He's in the top tier with Roquan, Derwin James, and Bradley Chubb among the defenders.  Full package guys who are ready to make an impact as rookies.  Those guys + Nelson, Barkley, and the QBs are the cream of the draft and should fly off the board early.

[Going Commando]

9 hours ago, HardcoreZorn said:

Question, can Roquan play alongside Brown?

 

Yes.  Roquan has All-Pro potential.  He can play next to any one in any scheme.

 

Every base defense plays two stack linebackers anyhow.

[JamesMadisonSkins]

I was just thinking the fact that Edmunds is an OLB micht dL well for us. He could play inside as a thumper but also like up to blitz when in certain formations. Strikes me as a guy who could provide depth at two positions, if that makes sense. In a similar way someone like Derwin James or Minkah Fitzpatrick could play CB or Safety

 

i still think a blue chip defender falls to us at 13. And I’m going to be annoyed if we pass them over to draft a NT. If we don’t sign Hankins or Logan I like the idea of drafting a Settle in the 2nd or a BJ Hill / Kendrick Norton type in the 4th or 5th where their value matches our usage. 

 

Best case scenario is signing Hankins and drafting James/Fitzpatrick/Smith/Edmunds at 13. 

 

Ideal draft IMO lays out: BPA defense, RB and then Guard/Nose/Edge with 4/5/6 and CB in 7

[JamesMadisonSkins]

If we start QB-QB-QB which I think is likely since NYG didn’t trade with the Jets and must be staying at 2 for a blue chip QB ... and assume at least 1 more QB goes before we pick (and likely 5 if Denver goes QB), I could see:

 

Darnold, Rosen, Allen, Barkley, Mayfield, Chubb, Nelson, Fitzpatrick, Smith, Edmunds, Williams, And L. Jackson

 

leaves us with Derwin James, Denzel Ward as 2 blue chip caliber players. And say SF/OAK go CB instead of ILB one of those stud ILB falls. 

 

I am encisioning scenarios where we have Vea, Payne + either Smith/Edmunds/James/Fitz there at 13. And is he really really bummed if we drafted Payne or Vea there rather than trade down 

[Rufus T Firefly]

1 hour ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

If we start QB-QB-QB which I think is likely since NYG didn’t trade with the Jets and must be staying at 2 for a blue chip QB ...

It could mean that. It could just as easily mean they want Barkley and don't want to chance him being there at 6.

[The Consigliere]

4 hours ago, Long n Left said:

Just got to watch some cut ups of the UGA pro day, and completely confirmed my belief that Chubb could be a monster. Much better lateral quickness, low center of gravity, and excellent long range speed than his running mate Michel. Michel looked like a 3rd down back to me. Good speed, catches well, but runs really tall, and needs holes. 

 

Chubb showed shake, burst, and good hands. Right now, I'm praying for Chubb to fall to us in the 2nd.

 

Oh, and Sam Darnold is Bret Favre, without the dickhead attitude.

 

Just watch some clips from 2014 and 2015. Good God, if he can rediscover that form (and his testing suggests it's still locked in there, if he can get the confidence in his knee back), he's as good as Barkley, maybe better. Guy nearly reached 10 yards a carry before his knee exploded, he was like Earl Campbell and Walter Payton had a love child: just unbelievably strong, fast, athletic and quick twitch. Then the injury, and he looked nothing like that at all in '16, though he looked closer to it in '17, but not all the way back, more like 85-90%. If he can get close to that form, he's a top 5 RB in the NFL. 

[The Consigliere]

3 hours ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

He's Pierre Garcon.  He's not an elite athlete.  He's a tough running possession receiver and smooth runner but he only runs fast and jumps high on a track.  He gets pressed at the line constantly because he can't separate vertically against any kind of speed and he doesn't win jump balls.  His production is almost entirely digs, comebacks, and screens.  I think he's a second rounder and a team would be committing a significant reach if they took him 10-20.  It'd be an indictment of how bad the WR class is this year.

 

Ridley is a way better receiver than him.  He's the only first round worthy WR this year.

 

Of Course Ridley's better, he's 23, Moore's 20. But Ridley has a low ceiling, significantly lower ceiling than Moore. If you want a reasonably high floor, a competent #2 option/slot etc, get Ridley, if you're trying to get someone who can be special, you get Moore or a Sutton and hope he figures it out. Moore's 20, and not surprisingly raw as a result. Kinda hard to compare a 23 year old to a 20 year old, especially one trained by Alabama coaches with NFL pedigree as compared to one trained by Maryland coaches. There's a reason players being overrage in their draft year worries people, its a problem. The best of the best come out early, they don't stay till they're 23. For the very same reason (and injuries) nobodies talking about Scarbrough, despite him being an athletic freak and a monster when healthy. Same thing, overage athlete, then add the element of injury, and nobodies thinking about him (maybe a mistake, we'll see). 

 

Five years from now the only guys who really have a chance to be special in this class are Moore, Chark, Sutton, St. Brown, Pettis, Callaway, maybe if everything breaks right, Washington, and then some dark horses like Gallup, Miller, Lazard (way faster than people expected, a size guy who was a top recruit and produced), and Burnett. That's a long list, but nearly all of those guys have issues: Moore is young and raw, Chark is another in a long line of LSU WR's with zero production, wasted talents in an offense that never seems to have a QB worth a damn, St. Brown was #2 or #3 to most people in the class at this time a year ago, then the roof caved in in terms of QB play at Notre Dame, Pettis is a roll of the dice, Callaway has a ton of character flags, and Washington is another WR w/huge Big-12 Production, but ho hum athleticism, Gallup is a super exciting prospect, really underrated prospect and a steal if you can get him outside the top 50, Miller could be the best WR in the class when all is said and done, Lazard is a big ? for a lot of people after his combine which was much better than expected. Again, Ridley's a safe bet on a solid contributor at the next level, a good #2 if everything breaks right, but he's not special and he's almost certainly never going to be special and he's not a first rounder in terms of upside (wouldn't shock me if he got drafted first round though, just don't see the talent/upside to justify it), especially when you add in the Alabama Pedigree bump up in value, the crappy combine, the alarming measurements, and the fact that he's overrage and didn't really produce great #'s (though this can be forgiven due to the god awful quarterback play). 

 

I don't want either of them. We have bigger fish to fry.

 

And hell yes Moore's an elite athlete. He's nearly top of the charts in every single metric there is by which we can measure athleticism, he's got the unteachable athleticism that Ridley totally lacks. If you're talking raw and unpolished? Sure, I could see that. But there's no way possible to indict his athleticism. Now if he can refine his game with coaching as Ridley did, then he can reach that ceiling that Ridley simply doesn't have the assets to likely ever reach. 

 

 

 

[The Consigliere]

1 hour ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

If we start QB-QB-QB which I think is likely since NYG didn’t trade with the Jets and must be staying at 2 for a blue chip QB ... and assume at least 1 more QB goes before we pick (and likely 5 if Denver goes QB), I could see:

 

Darnold, Rosen, Allen, Barkley, Mayfield, Chubb, Nelson, Fitzpatrick, Smith, Edmunds, Williams, And L. Jackson

 

leaves us with Derwin James, Denzel Ward as 2 blue chip caliber players. And say SF/OAK go CB instead of ILB one of those stud ILB falls. 

 

I am encisioning scenarios where we have Vea, Payne + either Smith/Edmunds/James/Fitz there at 13. And is he really really bummed if we drafted Payne or Vea there rather than trade down 

 

I think the Giants are waiting on Buffalo to up their bid. Buffalo just spent a ton of draft capital to move up and it's clearly not high enough unless they're in love with Lamar Jackson. Not sure who they can trade up with other than NYG here to insure they get the QB they want, Cleveland's pretty locked in at 1 and 4 and the Jets aren't moving down. 

[Anselmheifer]

4 hours ago, HigSkin said:

Does anybody else think Tim Settle projects to a "Hankins" type guy?

 

 

 

Those numbers are still really bad. I like him as a player though. Maybe he falls to us in the 4th?

[LaRonDontLikeUgly]

5 hours ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

He's Pierre Garcon.  He's not an elite athlete.  He's a tough running possession receiver and smooth runner but he only runs fast and jumps high on a track.  He gets pressed at the line constantly because he can't separate vertically against any kind of speed and he doesn't win jump balls.  His production is almost entirely digs, comebacks, and screens.  I think he's a second rounder and a team would be committing a significant reach if they took him 10-20.  It'd be an indictment of how bad the WR class is this year.

 

Ridley is a way better receiver than him.  He's the only first round worthy WR this year.

 

Man, I think you are one the best drafthead-scouts on this PLANET who doesn't make a living off of it (Skins might be better off if you did)- but I can't disagree with you more on your evaluations on DJ vs. Ridley.

First off, Garcon was absolutely an 'elite' athlete coming out of college (out-repped Ridley by 5 on bench, out-broad-jumped him by 15 inches, out vertical-jumped by 5 inches, faster shuttle, etc) and if you look at DJ Moore's measurables he out-ran and out-jumped both of them.

 

Aside from all of that, I had spent a couple of days watching game tape on the "top" WRs from this draft and ONLY came away impressed by Moore -- this is back when Mayock didn't have him in his Top 6.  (Now he's got him at 2.)  I agree 100% that the major flaws are jump-balls and 9 vertical routes.  However, the way he runs with the ball in his hands reminds me a bit of Corey Coleman (CC being more skilled in this area, but comparable) and I don't think it's fair to say he only excels at catches that are coming to back to the QB-- i think thats more of an indictment on UMD's offensive scheme.  He also just seems to play very 'smart' football from all angles.

 

Ridley on the other hand is pure trash to me.  The one positive thing that Chad Ochocino did for the NFL is that he forced defensive coordinators to start drafting bigger/meaner corners-- CJ's career floundered not because his legs gave out, but because teams stopped letting a little guy try to play like a big one.  I look at Ridley as a big fish in a small pond and could run down the entire list of the problems I have with this entire WR class as a whole. (Full disclosure, have not watched tape on guys like St. Brown, Pettis, Calloway)

 

In my heart of hearts, Moore and Chark are the only guys worthy of a 1st round pick and it shouldn't be until the 20's.

 

 

[HigSkin]

6 hours ago, Anselmheifer said:

 

Those numbers are still really bad. I like him as a player though. Maybe he falls to us in the 4th?

 

Reading up a bit on where draft pundits thinks he falls and the 4th is kind of the general agreement.  :-)

[Skinsinparadise]

Breakdown of big plays, and lost of yards

 

http://www.profootballweekly.com/lists/2018/03/18/8906f93b8cc0419ab8128df57dd1e0f2/index.xml?page=1

Sony Michel, Georgia

21 carries over 15 yards (13.5%)

14 carries over 20 yards (8.97%)

7 carries that lost yardage (4.49%)

If a team is looking for the next game-breaking running back in the mold of Alvin Kamara, look no further than Sony Michel from Georgia. No player in the class had a higher percentage of runs of at least 15 yards (13.5 percent) than Michel. Aside from his ridiculous efficiency, Michel also was able to limit his number of negative runs to just seven. In the Bulldogs' last seven games of the 2017 season, Michel had just one carry that lost yardage. In comparison, his running mate Nick Chubb had 13.

Michel doesn’t have elite speed or a ton of experience in the passing game, but his balance, vision and quickness allow him to break off big gains with ease. After the success of Kamara last season, don’t be surprised if Michel sneaks his way into the bottom of the first round. He is the best “satellite back” in the class and is exactly the type of player that NFL teams are going to love.

 

Ronald Jones, USC

24 carries over 15 yards (9.20%)

16 carries over 20 yards (6.13%)

18 carries that lost yardage (6.89%)

One player who will create a lot of discussion over the next several weeks is Ronald Jones of USC. At just 5-foot-11, 205 pounds, Jones doesn’t have the prototypical size to be an elite every-down back in the NFL. Instead, he will likely have to be a part of a committee in which he is expected to provide the speed and big plays rather consistently. However, that may be easier said than done.

Jones broke off a respectable amount of runs of over 15 yards (especially in the second half of the season when he had 19 runs of at least 15 yards in the team’s final eight games), but that doesn’t quite tell the whole story. Jones saw, on average, just 6.42 defenders in the box. The reason for the relatively low number is that quarterback Sam Darnold was so good that teams were forced to back off the run. Although Jones took advantage of light boxes, that may not be the case in the NFL. With Jones’ limited receiving ability and underwhelming size, there will likely be similar types of running backs available in later rounds.

 

Derrius Guice, LSU

13 carries of over 15 yards (5.49%)

9 carries of over 20 yards (3.80%)

12 carries that lost yardage (5.06%)

Not surprisingly, Derrius Guice struggled to create big plays in LSU’s archaic offense. Guice averaged 7.25 defenders in the box in 2017, more than any other running back in the class. With his team’s poor QB play and subpar offensive line, Guice rarely saw enough daylight to make defenses pay. Although it’s fair to be concerned about Guice’s limited big-play production, his ability to avoid negative plays was extremely impressive. Guice lost yardage on just 12 runs this year, most of which were just one-yard losses.

Fortunately for Guice, teams won’t be drafting him for his speed. Instead, they will be selecting him to the be their “hammer,” similarly to what the Dallas Cowboys did with Ezekiel Elliott and the Jacksonville Jaguars did with Leonard Fournette. Guice will do just fine in the NFL, even if he doesn't create big chunk plays.

[Est.1974]

Trade back slightly from 13 to get another 2nd rounder. Then combine that 2nd rounder with our original one to jump back up to the bottom of the first.

 

Having a couple of firsts between 20 and 32 would be ideal for us I think.

 

 

[wilco_holland]

6 minutes ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said:

Trade back slightly from 13 to get another 2nd rounder. Then combine that 2nd rounder with our original one to jump back up to the bottom of the first.

 

Having a couple of firsts between 20 and 32 would be ideal for us I think.

 

 

 

That end of first round picks are very expensive. Main reason for it are the 5th year options. First round players have that automatic 5th year option a team can use. It gives teams more control and you don't have to extent the player after four years. 

[Skinsinparadise]

6 minutes ago, wilco_holland said:

 

That end of first round picks are very expensive. Main reason for it are the 5th year options. First round players have that automatic 5th year option a team can use. It gives teams more control and you don't have to extent the player after four years. 

 

If mocks have any merit to them and that's questionable but typically they factor needs -- looks like the run for RBs might happen in the early 2nd factoring teams needs.

 

If that's so, then if you trade down in the first maybe you grab one early and take the one you want first versus who is left over.   Or trade up a little in the 2nd or clearly you can just see whose left in the 2nd.

 

If last year is prologue (and it might not be) you would have 4 or potentially 5 go before our 2nd round pick. 

[Est.1974]

I'd add it was our proposed strategy last year to jump back into the first for Foster, which clearly failed, but demonstrates we consider that an option.

 

our extra 3rd in 2019 also adds to the stock we hold when looking to trade up.

[JamesMadisonSkins]

8 hours ago, The Consigliere said:

 

I think the Giants are waiting on Buffalo to up their bid. Buffalo just spent a ton of draft capital to move up and it's clearly not high enough unless they're in love with Lamar Jackson. Not sure who they can trade up with other than NYG here to insure they get the QB they want, Cleveland's pretty locked in at 1 and 4 and the Jets aren't moving down. 

Not sure how buffalo can top what the Colts offered. The difference between pick 6 and 12 is pretty immense ... unless Buffalo did 12+22 +51+54. But even then, to not get back a guaranteed shot at an elite level talent is tough to swallow 

[Est.1974]

23 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

If last year is prologue (and it might not be) you would have 4 or potentially 5 go before our 2nd round pick. 

 

I don't think we can take that risk. Not sure I want to. We need to invest in a top back via the draft,

[Going Commando]

8 hours ago, The Consigliere said:

And hell yes Moore's an elite athlete. He's nearly top of the charts in every single metric there is by which we can measure athleticism, he's got the unteachable athleticism that Ridley totally lacks. If you're talking raw and unpolished? Sure, I could see that. But there's no way possible to indict his athleticism. Now if he can refine his game with coaching as Ridley did, then he can reach that ceiling that Ridley simply doesn't have the assets to likely ever reach. 

 

What?  Ridley ran just as fast at the combine as Moore did, and a critical difference between them is that Ridley's speed actually shows up on the field.  Moore's a great track athlete, but the athleticism doesn't show up in his tape.  He can jump out of the gym but he doesn't win jump balls.  He can burn up a track but can't separate at all on any vertical route.  Where is all of that track speed when he's coming out of his breaks?  It's an indictment of him how little teams respected his ability to hurt them deep that they played him straight up with no cushion so often.  He never made them pay.  All of his production against quality outside corner play comes from the short game in man and the intermediate game against zone because that's the only way he could get defenders off his back.

 

He's the same player as Pierre Garcon.  A runningback playing receiver who doesn't have a natural feel for the position and is very limited in the types of routes you can throw him.  And who will have trouble producing against NFL speed on the outside as anything more than a second option.  He's tough and I like the physicality and the motor he brings to the table, but he doesn't know how to play the position.  Ridley is a much better receiver.  His route running is instinctive and pristine.  He can gear up and down throughout the route to set up DBs, and he does a much better job of disguising the route through the stem.  He knows how to vary his depths to maintain separation throughout the route and he does this effortlessly throughout the whole game.  He finds seams during broken plays and turns negatives into positives.  The net effect is that he's always open.  He's a very good athlete too, not just a technician.  He makes people miss in the open field with subtle, efficient cuts and shoulder shakes and he can go up and get the ball in the air and dig out the tough catches.  He has a fantastic feel for playing WR that I'm not sure is teachable.  His only weaknesses are that he's skinny and lacks play strength and doesn't know how to use his hands to fight off the press.  He can work on his body and he can work on his hand technique.  All of that's true for Moore too, as he can't get a clean release off the line against the press either.  And that weaknesses gets compounded by the fact that he doesn't see many soft coverages because of the total lack of verticality in his game.

 

I think you're putting too much emphasis on age and stopwatch measurements and not enough emphasis on the tangible football skills demonstrated on the field.  Maybe you're right that his combine results and perceived upside will get him taken in the first round, but that doesn't mean it's not a reach and a bad decision.  He can be successful and productive in the NFL as possession receiver, like Garcon.  And so I see second round value.  But I don't see "special" with him at all.

 

I see this is a weak WR class and that Ridley is the only prospect with a first round grade.  It wouldn't surprise me if he was taken in the late teens or twenties and no other receiver went in the first.

[skinny21]

Speaking of receivers...

If we pulled off a trade down in the 1st, I  would be darn pretty happy to land Gallup in the late 2nd - 3rd range (if he lasts that long).  Really like St. Brown too, and I completely disagree with the mocks having him available late in the draft - just too much upside to fall that far, IMO.  

 

As as far as our roster goes, I see Richardson and Doctson as decent #2s and Crowder as a top 5 slot guy (just grading against pure slot guys, not the Jones’/Beckham’s that take some snaps there).  

 

I love the potential Davis brings, but that’s all it is right now.  I like Harris, he could be a solid chain mover that occasionally gets a deep shot (sort of a Garçon-lite without the same burst and anger), but I’m not sure we’ll see much from him.  Quick is decent insurance for the group and a vet presence.  

 

Point being, I think we could use another guy that can compete to start - perhaps after a year to adjust/develop.  Not a priority, but it could pay off 1 or 2 years down the road.