2018 Comprehensive NFL Draft Thread

[wilco_holland]

I have been quite because of our mock draft. Can't show my hand to much, but now back on track with draft almost complete. 

 

About Josh Allen. I now understands what the reason is for his hype. He just has this crazy physical skill set. His arm, throwing motion etc is one of the better to come out in recent years. People just see potential in that. My take: it's not important. We have enough ''noodle arm'' QB's beeing succesfull in the NFL. They start to overvalue the wrong part of the QB. Beeing accurate and the mental part is way more important. 

 

About Guice at 13. I'm totally fine with that. I did some big boards and Guice pretty much falls in the second tire. You got the really great prospects, the superstars. I got 8 of does. The group after that is very close. That second tire is around 15 players big. After that you have a huge third tire that stretches from late first round to end of the second. This year the talent that you grab at end of the first, is not hole lot better then the guy you grab at middle to late second. 

 

Right now I would even say that if we really like Guice and non of the first tire guys (Barkley, Chubb, Fitzpatrick, Nelson, Ward, Darnold, Edmunds and Smith) fall to 13...I would not even consider trading down.  I understand that he could fall into the 20's but it wouldn't suprice me if he goes around 15 to 18. You are then just beeing greedy and gambling on him falling. No need to do that if you like him. 

 

Payne for me would be a reach. I have him in that second tire but really at the end of that. I just don't see it right now. He is one of does potential guys. You draft the player he can be instead of the player he currently is. Not a fan of does players high in first round. 

[Est.1974]

Agreed, one of the handful of first tier guys you named drops and you pick him, or go Guice at 13

[Skinsinparadise]

G.Carmi21‏ @Gcarmi21

FollowingFollowing @Gcarmi21

More

"Eight days out I contend that the Redskins pick Tremaine Edmunds, Roquan Smith, Derwin James or Minkah Fitzpatrick if they are available at 13. And I believe one of them will be there" -- JP Finlay

[DWinzit]

At least one of the top defenders should fall to 13. If it somehow is Smith and they take him, I hope the aren't a lot of negative nellies because he doesn't feel a real need at ILB. Not only would he be BPA but wow what he would bring to the team!

 

[Koolblue13]

Hell yeah. What a great pick we can get. Edmunds if coachable can be our next Lavar, Smith our Lee or Fitz our Thomas or Reed. I haven't paid enough attention to James, because of his position. 

[OVCChairman]

23 minutes ago, DWinzit said:

At least one of the top defenders should fall to 13. If it somehow is Smith and they take him, I hope the aren't a lot of negative nellies because he doesn't feel a real need at ILB. Not only would he be BPA but wow what he would bring to the team!

 

 

 

Well it would mean that Foster is on his last deal as a Redskin.  He would know that the 2 year deal he signed is just a grooming period for Smith to take over as the ILB opposite Brown.  We'd have to be in the conversation for best LB group in the NFL at that point, but I'd hope we go hard and fast at Hankins if things shake down the line that way.  Adding Hankins and Smith would then put our front 7 into the conversation for best in the league, still needing to look at secondary.  I would hope that the talent up front would bail out A LOT of the problems the secondary  might be exposed to. 

[Koolblue13]

Last couple years there was a guy doing some really great youtube breakdowns of players. Anyone know who I'm talking about? I haven't seen them.

[Skinsinparadise]

2 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

Last couple years there was a guy doing some really great youtube breakdowns of players. Anyone know who I'm talking about? I haven't seen them.

 

Voch Lombardi?

1 hour ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said:

Agreed, one of the handful of first tier guys you named drops and you pick him, or go Guice at 13

 

For me I am still a Fitzpatrick or D. James guy over Guice.  But love all three guys, be jazzed if they come out of the draft with one of them.

 

I am listening to Cooley's film review right now about Guice.  He has no idea that he was banged up in 2017 so he isn't doing the 2016 tape but going purely on 2017.  He goes cat like balance, punishing runner, good speed, can break tackles with the best of them -- but because his burst-speed is good but nothing great, you don't take him at 13.  I complete agree with him running on 2017 tape.  But if he's back to 2016, I got no problem taking him at 13 but still thinking you can trade down a little and still get him. 

[Idaho fan]

Edmunds, Smith, James or Fitzpatrick in the first and the best RB available or if a quality player falls in the 2nd.  

YES!

[JamesMadisonSkins]

1 hour ago, Koolblue13 said:

Last couple years there was a guy doing some really great youtube breakdowns of players. Anyone know who I'm talking about? I haven't seen them.

Mark Bullock? He's been doing them on twitter all off-season, if that's who you're talking about

1 hour ago, OVCChairman said:

 

 

Well it would mean that Foster is on his last deal as a Redskin.  He would know that the 2 year deal he signed is just a grooming period for Smith to take over as the ILB opposite Brown.  We'd have to be in the conversation for best LB group in the NFL at that point, but I'd hope we go hard and fast at Hankins if things shake down the line that way.  Adding Hankins and Smith would then put our front 7 into the conversation for best in the league, still needing to look at secondary.  I would hope that the talent up front would bail out A LOT of the problems the secondary  might be exposed to. 

Not necessarily, the deal Zach Brown signed is easy to get out of after 1 year. Drafting Smith, who is similar to ZBB, would likely mean he's a more expensive stop-gap. Unless, of course, the two of them absolutely ball out at ILB together, then we may keep Brown around, since he's not that expensive in the grand scheme of things.

 

I've got a buddy who's a Bears fan, he's convinced the Bears will be all over Edmunds if he gets to them at #8. If he falls past 8, I have a hard time seeing the 49ers, Raiders and Dolphins, all with those needs, passing on him.

[PortisBetts]

1 hour ago, DWinzit said:

At least one of the top defenders should fall to 13. If it somehow is Smith and they take him, I hope the aren't a lot of negative nellies because he doesn't feel a real need at ILB. Not only would he be BPA but wow what he would bring to the team!

 

 

I would be negative on it because i dont like him. He is going to be a tremendous negative against the run.He was getting washed out by college level guards on the reg 

[HTTRDynasty]

1 hour ago, Koolblue13 said:

Last couple years there was a guy doing some really great youtube breakdowns of players. Anyone know who I'm talking about? I haven't seen them.

 

I think you're talking about Brett Kollman.  He usually does a breakdown every week leading up to the draft, but his last one was 3 weeks ago.  I saw him post somewhere that he had a health issue and hasn't been able to do much recently, but he should have his annual mock draft out shortly (maybe today, since he usually posts on Thursdays).  Here's his last video from 3 weeks ago.

 

 

[JamesMadisonSkins]

There's almost a 100% chance a blue-chip defender falls to #13.

Bradley Chubb, Derwin James, Minkah Fitzpatrick, Roquan Smith, Tremaine Edmunds, Denzel Ward = 6 blue-chip defenders

Quenton Nelson, Saquan Barkley = 2 offensive blue-chippers

Sam Darnold, Josh Allen, Baker Mayfield, Josh Rosen = 4 QBs

 

Do the math there ... 6 + 2 + 4 = 12

 

1. Browns - Darnold

2. Bills - Allen

3. Jets - Mayfield

4. Browns - Chubb

5. Broncos - Barkley/Nelson

6. Colts - Barkley/Nelson

7. Bucs - Barkley/Nelson/James

8. Bears - Edmunds/Ward

9. Patriots - Rosen

10. Raiders - Smith/Vea

11. Dolphins - Smith/Vea/Fitzpatrick

12. Giants - Edmunds/Landry/Davenport/Guice

 

[wilco_holland]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 I got no problem taking him at 13 but still thinking you can trade down a little and still get him. 

 

Question! I don't read a lot of other fan forums or blogs about certain teams...so I don't know if this is true. But I get the feeling that we are pretty heavy showing interested in Guice. Other teams will pick-up on that. (again maybe half the league has had multiply meeting with him). 

 

If we then trade down, wouldn't that trigger other teams? Lets say we drop down to 21 (just random number) and team at 26 (again random number) wants Guice. Wouldn't they just jump in front of us, pick 20? 

 

My point. At 13 you are pretty sure you can get him. Trading up to pick 10-11-12 will be to heavy for a lot of teams. If you trade down you will compete with other teams and then it will be able for teams to jump you. So I think you take a pretty big risk if you trade back. In that case I want a pretty damm good deal in return. I would not sell it for cheap. 

 

This is all if we really like Guice (as Redskins). Personally I think he is nice but not amazed by him. If we take him I'm fine, if we miss on him I'm fine to. I don't feel really strong about wanting him on this team. 

[JamesMadisonSkins]

@wilco_holland I don't think you trade down like that for "your guy" ... if he's your guy you take him where you pick and mitigate any risk of missing out. Now, if you really, really like Guice, but you also really, really like Chubb and Walton ... and you also really like Josh Jackson, Will Hernandez, Isaiah Wynn, etc. etc. and you trade down to 23 and Guice is gone because someone traded up for him ... then you just take the next guy on your list and put that extra pick in your pocket for later.

 

But if you're convinced Guice takes you to the prmised land and he's by far the guy who can make that happen, then you take him at 13.

 

Kind of like Scherff a few years back. People thought we could trade back and still get him. We took him before others "would have taken a guard or RT" ... but the Giants would have snagged him at #9 and instead took Flowers, and we see where he is right now.

 

We wanted a Guard/Tackle. We could have traded back to #10 and gotten a 2nd rounder, but if we got Flowers instead of Scherff, many of us would be talking about that as a major regret, unless that 2nd round pick got us Le'Veon Bell or something haha.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

I'm gonna guess that the Redskins will draft someone at #13 that nobody is really talking about lol...not sure who, but two things seem to always occur each draft: Skins draft someone in 1st round nobody had on their mock or discussed in their write-ups, and the Skins don't spread out their draft picks to cover as many perceived holes as possible which is what a lot of fans do in their mock drafts (DL in 1st, RB in 2nd, OG in 3rd, CB in 4th, Safety in 5th, etc...).

[Dark Acre]

16 hours ago, Alcoholic Zebra said:

 

His screw-ups in the 1st round were colossal.  He inherited a SB winning team and then failed to restock talent or build depth.  Once that roster aged out the wheels fell off the team.

 

His 4 years with the Houston Texans didn't go anywhere either.  First year as an expansion team, they won 4 games.  The last year he was their GM, they won 2 games.

 

That would be a phenomenal draft.  A good draft is considered to be one where you come away with 2 starters.  4 starters is nuts, but I'm with you in hoping.

Any DL or RB we sign in rds 1 &  2 would start, we have ammo to trade for a 3rd (starting LG) and with our remaining picks we can find a slot corner - which is not a starter.

[wilco_holland]

Thank you @JamesMadisonSkins , I agree with that 100%. I just saw people talk about trade down and stll get him. I don't see the upside in that. 

 

Basicallly you where able to say in 5 lines, what I tried to say...but then deleted my text and changed it because I had to use like 25 lines to say the same. Can be hard to have an short and firm opinion in a different languages. 

[PortisBetts]

6 minutes ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

@wilco_holland I don't think you trade down like that for "your guy" ... if he's your guy you take him where you pick and mitigate any risk of missing out. Now, if you really, really like Guice, but you also really, really like Chubb and Walton ... and you also really like Josh Jackson, Will Hernandez, Isaiah Wynn, etc. etc. and you trade down to 23 and Guice is gone because someone traded up for him ... then you just take the next guy on your list and put that extra pick in your pocket for later.

 

But if you're convinced Guice takes you to the prmised land and he's by far the guy who can make that happen, then you take him at 13.

 

Kind of like Scherff a few years back. People thought we could trade back and still get him. We took him before others "would have taken a guard or RT" ... but the Giants would have snagged him at #9 and instead took Flowers, and we see where he is right now.

 

We wanted a Guard/Tackle. We could have traded back to #10 and gotten a 2nd rounder, but if we got Flowers instead of Scherff, many of us would be talking about that as a major regret, unless that 2nd round pick got us Le'Veon Bell or something haha.

Firm believer in this. "Oh we can trade back instead of reaching at 13." 

 

Or, they can take the guy they like the most at 13 and be done with it. 

 

Not that I am against trading back and picking Guice up, but that means someone is A) Willing to trade and B- No one picks him before the new pick. None of which is guaranteed. I like guarantees. 

 

[Unbias]

Side bar - If I'm the Browns I'm taking a QB at #1 and #4. The position is too important to miss on and whomever doesn't win the job will be a valuable backup (which is pretty important) and eventually trade bait in 2-3 years. They have a bunch of picks and a roster that isn't horrible. They absolutely NEED to hit on a QB and a miss would make all the moneyball maneuvering somewhat feel empty.  

[Inigo Montoya]

1 hour ago, Califan007 said:

I'm gonna guess that the Redskins will draft someone at #13 that nobody is really talking about lol...not sure who, but two things seem to always occur each draft: Skins draft someone in 1st round nobody had on their mock or discussed in their write-ups, and the Skins don't spread out their draft picks to cover as many perceived holes as possible which is what a lot of fans do in their mock drafts (DL in 1st, RB in 2nd, OG in 3rd, CB in 4th, Safety in 5th, etc...).

always seems to be the case... like, "who the hell is Ryan Kerrigan" or "Josh Doctson?". last year was the first time in awhile I said, sweet I know that dude and he fell in our lap. 

[wilco_holland]

14 minutes ago, Unbias said:

Side bar - If I'm the Browns I'm taking a QB at #1 and #4. The position is too important to miss on and whomever doesn't win the job will be a valuable backup (which is pretty important) and eventually trade bait in 2-3 years. They have a bunch of picks and a roster that isn't horrible. They absolutely NEED to hit on a QB and a miss would make all the moneyball maneuvering somewhat feel empty.  

 

But are the QBs agreeing to that? If I would be the second guy picked...I would 100% hold out and tell the team what the ****?! 

 

The second guy can be on the bench for a couple of seasons. I don't want that as top QB prospect. 

 

The media hype would also be crazy for both guys. Daily coverage who is the leader in the club house. Locker room that is split. 

 

I.m.o. you put your trust in one guy and life with it. Taking two would seem weak. You don't even know which one you want. 

[skinny21]

1 hour ago, PortisBetts said:

Firm believer in this. "Oh we can trade back instead of reaching at 13." 

 

Or, they can take the guy they like the most at 13 and be done with it. 

 

Not that I am against trading back and picking Guice up, but that means someone is A) Willing to trade and B- No one picks him before the new pick. None of which is guaranteed. I like guarantees. 

 

Guarantees are nice.

I think the guarantee (depending on their board of course) would be that there will be a guy they really like at whatever spot they trade back to - Wynn, Hernandez, Payne, Phillips, Jackson, Guice, etc.  

 

I get what you’re saying though... if Guice is the clear favorite, don’t mess around with the chance of missing out... just pick him at 13.  

 

If they have a tier of guys (like Wilco Holland); then trade back, add a pick, and still get a guy in the same tier.  

7 minutes ago, Unbias said:

Side bar - If I'm the Browns I'm taking a QB at #1 and #4. The position is too important to miss on and whomever doesn't win the job will be a valuable backup (which is pretty important) and eventually trade bait in 2-3 years. They have a bunch of picks and a roster that isn't horrible. They absolutely NEED to hit on a QB and a miss would make all the moneyball maneuvering somewhat feel empty.  

It’s just an opinion, so that’s cool.  Personally, I’d be afraid 1) that I’d miss out on a legit impact player, 2) of fan reaction, 3) of showing a lack of trust in the scouts, and 4) of qb controversy.  

 

Now, if you were talking about using a 3rd/4th to draft Lualetta/White/whoever, that’s something I’d be all over.  

[SkinssRvA]

Considering the top three picks could all theoretically be QBs, why would the browns take another qb at 4?  Baker Mayfield at 4?  That's an incredible reach, especially when you've already drafted a player you valued as better.  The media circus would be full throttle and the second qb chosen would probably never get you your value back.  If I'm Cleveland it's my QB at #1 and pray Barkley is there at 4 so I can be set on offense.  

[Califan007 The Constipated]

20 minutes ago, Inigo Montoya said:

always seems to be the case... like, "who the hell is Ryan Kerrigan" or "Josh Doctson?". last year was the first time in awhile I said, sweet I know that dude and he fell in our lap. 

 

Writers at the time had us picking Gabbert in the 1st..."sources" were saying Shanny was hyped on Gabbert and was feeling out what it would take to move up and get him. Then Gabbert fell to us, and....we traded down lol. A ton of mocks had the Skins picking DL help in 2016. One had us picking Ross as the WR of choice. Not sure anyone paired up Doctson with the Skins, as you said.