2018 Comprehensive NFL Draft Thread

[bh32]

1 minute ago, Renegade7 said:

Ugh, no no NO!  His best season was in a zone read option offense and now he's unemployed.  If he's so good, why haven't we called him yet?  Probably the same reason we let him go in the first place.

My point..it was the Dallas OL that made him look good..

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

1 minute ago, bh32 said:

That Dallas line gets so much push up the middle,Where as the Redskins get pushed back.

 

They won't as they'd have to be completely wiped out at 19 for the Jones' to even consider taking a guard, but the prospect of Wynn or Hernandez added to Frederick and Martin ..... Dak would have all day back there to make his wayward throws. Aside from Elliot continuing to run over everyone. 

 

Here's hoping they don't get wiped out and don't trade back to then pick up a top interior guy. 

 

Hail. 

[Renegade7]

2 minutes ago, bh32 said:

My point..it was the Dallas OL that made him look good..

Umm... so your point is that we need a dominant o-line?  They have Elliot for crying out loud, even they know you should put a dominant back behind a dominant oline.

[mhd24]

10 minutes ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

@mhd24 yeah, in theory. We’d be well positioned for our needs at 23 and 31 ... but that’s -280 points for us in trade value. Pick 2.31 for NE happens to be worth 276. So actually, 1.23, 1.31 and 2.31 for 1.13 and 2.12 would be more accurate 

 

I like your thinking

 

Best trade scenario for us is Cards wanting Lamar Jackson and trading us #15+#97 for #13.

 

Then, we trade #15+#44+#142 (a high 5th) to the Pats for #23+#31+#61.  Pats take Kolton Miller or McGlinchey.

 

We take Payne (if he falls) or Taven Bryan (if he falls) or a top rated guard like Daniels/Wynn/Hernandez/Rangow at #23 and the RB of our choice at #31.  If we took o-line at 23, then take best DT like Settle or Harrison Phillips at #61.

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

25 minutes ago, bh32 said:

I have seen way too many times the OL pushed back into the backfield on 3rd and 1 to agree with you that the OL is fine as is..they get no push at all on short yardage plays..

 

Which guy among Trent, Moses, Scherff, Roullier do you want to replace?  Jay supposedly loves all 4 of them. It's LT that's the remaining issue.  2 years ago I asked Scot about the O line directly (and he's a big guy about the trenches) and he said yeah just LG, he was very happy otherwise with the O line.  

 

If its purely about these short and goal situations as Cooley likes to say, get a TE who can block (versus what we have now) and a RB who can make people miss.  We got neither right now unless Sprinkle develops.

 

I was at the Saints game during the infamous 3rd and 1 that essentially derailed the season.  Perine was stopped because a player from their secondary blitzed in from the edge -- Niles Paul actually played FB on that play and was supposed to pick up that player and just whiffed on him and Perine had no wiggle to him and couldn't dodge the defender. 

 

Cooley knows a thing or two about the TE position and talked regularly about the problem with the running game - the running game is basically a power Duo based running scheme and it often requires the TEs to hold their ground at the point of attack.  But they are comically bad at doing so.  And their RBs sans Chris Thompson don't have the cutting ability or quickness to dodge the DEs who typically come crashing in on the play off the edges because of the poor TE blocking.  That's probably part of the reason why Cooley is a take Hurst guy if he falls to the 2nd since the dude can block, too.  

 

Take Derrius Guice.  As Portis likes to say, you need two guys to take him down -- one guy isn't enough.  He can make something out of nothing.  That's what the best backs do.  Perine seems like a great guy and I like him as a backup but he's not actually a make something out of nothing kind of guy.  

 

Moses -- stud.  Scherff -- pro bowler - stud.  Trent -- pro bowler stud.  Jay supposedly thinks Roullier is an up and comer and will be the center for years.  LG though is a hot mess.  So yeah don't get me wrong, I'd love to get a beast in that position.  Like I said, I'd actually rather go LG early than DT just based on where I think the BPA map is going to fall.    But O line isn't the position that's been ignored over the years in the higher rounds -- its been RB. 

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

2 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

Umm... so your point is that we need a dominant o-line?  They have Elliot for crying out loud, even they know you should put a dominant back behind a dominant oline.

 

I think the point is more a dominant back behind a poor O-line isn't that dominant. Unless it's a generational, real special one like a Sanders, Peterson or Elliott. There isn't that in this group. 

 

Hail. 

[JamesMadisonSkins]

@mhd24 honestly my best case scenario is 2.1, 2.3 and 2.21 from Cleveland for 1.13 IF they trade #4 to Buffalo for 12/22/51

 

Cleveland would then pick 1/12/13/22 and 64

[Renegade7]

2 minutes ago, Gibbs Hog Heaven said:

 

I think the point is more a dominant back behind a poor O-line isn't that dominant. Unless it's a generational, real special one like a Sanders, Peterson or Elliott. There isn't that in this group. 

 

Hail. 

So are we saying our O-line is poor now?

[mhd24]

1 minute ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

@mhd24 honestly my best case scenario is 2.1, 2.2 and 2.21 from Cleveland for 1.13 IF they trade #4 to Buffalo for 12/22/51 

Don't see Cleveland passing on elite talents like Barkley/Chubb (they'll get their pick of whomever the Giants don't pick).  Cleveland does need a tackle though.  They could be trading up potentially.

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

Just now, Renegade7 said:

So are we saying our O-line is poor now?

 

Never thought it was anything more than mediocre as a collective so it's not a new view from me. Shrugs. 

 

Hail. 

[skinny21]

1 minute ago, Renegade7 said:

Umm... so your point is that we need a dominant o-line?  They have Elliot for crying out loud, even they know you should put a dominant back behind a dominant oline.

Quoting you, but also @bh32...

His point was we should build the lines first, then find a (stud of a) back.  

 

My argument would be - the team seems sold on Roullier as a starter, and the other 3 are high end investments.  So, knowing LG is seen as the least important of the oline spots, which gets you further, a good back or good LG?

 

As for dline, we definitely need a rotational DT, preferably one that can play the 1 tech.  The draft seems littered with them though, and our dline is certainly better than it appeared last year.  

 

If you’re intent on filling the needs, trade back in the 1st (if we can), draft Guice, take Price or whoever in the 2nd, and then a DT with the added pick (2nd or 3rd rounder).  Or go G/C in the 1st (after a trade back), move up for a back in the 2nd (if necessary), and then DT.  

 

A sneaky move would be to trade back and receive a 1st rounder from next year’s draft - more ammo for a qb next year.  

[Snagletooth]

I would use premium resources on DL/OL until I could consistently control, if not dominate, the Line of scrimmage.  

[Skinsinparadise]

41 minutes ago, Gibbs Hog Heaven said:

 

You know he wouldn't take any RB outside of Barkley personally in the first if he had the ideal choice right? Having a grade against the class and what his views are on what he'd do are an interesting distinction. 

 

Side note- If he's not on an NFL teams scouting crew this time next year, the NFL have missed out massively. Again. 

 

Hail. 

 

Brugler is good.  Each year I purchase his draft guide and print it -- consumes a couple of printer cartridges.   But great analysis -- real organized too and user friendly.  

 

I am with you on most of your draft points especially the Fitzpatrick one.  Ironically Brugler had him going to the Redskins at 13 in his latest mock.  I know you think he's unlikely to drop to 13 -- Brugler was on 106.7 on Friday explaining why he sees it as possible.  Hope he's right.   

 

I get the whole O line makes the running game argument.  I agree with it to some extent.  But I do think a dynamic RB especially one who adds to the passing game is a game changer.   To me you need both. 

 

And don't get me wrong, I don't just like but love the idea of taking one of the stud O line guys especially in a trade down.   But I am not hung up on D line in the first or even the 2nd.  And that's not because I don't value the position -- i am screaming in the FA thread all off season to sign a D lineman.  It's because if they trade down and land a third or heck even wait until the 4th, I like the value in those rounds for the position.   To me the first-2nd round is a nice set up for LG-RB.  

 

Back to Brugler for example he's not big on Vea or Payne, I've heard him talk about both plenty.  He thinks they are good but nothing special.  On his board Vea is 27 and Payne is 33.  Not that my opinion on either player is formed by him but I agree with him, I am not sold on taking a D lineman in the first.

[Renegade7]

13 minutes ago, Gibbs Hog Heaven said:

 

Never thought it was anything more than mediocre as a collective so it's not a new view from me. Shrugs. 

 

Hail. 

I'd say slightly above mediocre when healthy, and that's because I don't trust what we're doing at LG and C yet.  In all, its not great, it doesn't suck, and its more then good enough that with a solid back that can make his own plays when things don't go according to plan, we'll be an above average running team.  We've been so pathetic at running the ball lately that I just can't support not making a drastic move to address this.  We can defiently be top 15 running the ball with a top 15 back.

[JamesMadisonSkins]

Did we play more than 3-4 games last year with at least 4 OL starters? Just curious. 

 

When healthy, our OL is excellent. Our OL was not healthy last year.

[Renegade7]

3 minutes ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

Did we play more than 3-4 games last year with at least 4 OL starters? Just curious. 

 

When healthy, our OL is excellent. Our OL was not healthy last year.

Feel you 110, just also agree with C and LG being suspect right now.  I don't agree that that should be a higher priority then getting a stud RB.  People want to point to what Dallas did, but they had Murray while they were doing it, tried the RBBC for one season after he left, then drafted Elliot.  They know what time it is, we need to, too.

[DeaconBlue]

As far as the offensive line is concerned I wouldn't trade Williams, Scherff or Moses for any other players in the league. Period. End of sentence. I am willing to ride with Roullier We could use an upgrade at left guard. That said if I had my d'ruthers I'd love it if we drafted Vea at 13. I'd be tickled pink with Ioannidas, vea, allen as our defensive front. If nelson fell to us or we drafted say hernandez I would not be mad either. Running back? Last year we had injuries on our O-line that were borderline biblical. I mean there were games last year that we played with a line that consisted of all second stringers , maybe even a couple 3rd stringers. Might point is that we need to see our current RBs behind a healthy O-line that we currently possess before deciding if we need new blood back there. These are my thoughts.

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

@Skinsinparadise Unless you want an under tackle. 3-tech is REAL thin on the ground. Have to take one of them early if that's your want. 

 

Hail. 

[JamesMadisonSkins]

Roullier was good at Center as a rook but can also supposedly play LG if we need him to. Which is great, because it allows us to draft any of the Guards but also any of the guys who are Centers but can also play LG and there are quite a few ... Price, Daniels, Ragnow in the 20-50 pick range and then Clapp from LSU and Bozeman from Bama in the 4th-6th range. Guys who can come in and allow the team to determine the best LG/C combo between Roullier and whoever we draft. That versatility is important 

[Renegade7]

16 minutes ago, DeaconBlue said:

 Might point is that we need to see our current RBs behind a healthy O-line that we currently possess before deciding if we need new blood back there. These are my thoughts.

 

My thing is didn't we see what you're asking for in 2016 and 2015 already?

[skinny21]

1. Sort of matches with what we’re hearing about the FO from Keim, but here’s my preference:
2. In the 1st -
3. Any of the blue chip guys that fall
4. Trade back for good value
5. Trade back for not so good value
6. If you essentially can’t trade back, draft your BPA at a position of need (basically whoever)

If we trade back, then draft your top rated among interior olineman, Dlineman or RB (lots of really good options at all three spots in the second half of the 1st).  

 

Take a back in the 2nd if we didn’t in the 1st.  Trade up if they start to fall.  If we took a back in the 1st, consider another trade back.    If there’s too much of a drop off, take the best D or O lineman (again, a nice intersection of need and straight BPA).  

 

If we gain a pick in the 2nd or 3rd, take BPA at anything but the positions you’ve already drafted...and maybe tackle.  

 

4th-5th (3 picks, right?): TE and 2 from our remaining needs - every position minus what we’ve already drafted (including Qb).  

6th/7th:  whatever’s left that addresses our weakest areas of depth. 

[DeaconBlue]

41 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

My thing is didn't we see what you're asking for in 2016 and 2015 already?

 In 2016 Fat rob was in baby shoes and and Perrine wasn't even here yet. The Scherff , moses side was just coming into their own in 2016 anyways.2015 doesn't even count when it comes to our current backfield. For me it's simple troubleshooting. You can't test one part if another part it depends on was broken.People hate it but I still have to point out how bad our injury issues were last year, it really was an outlier. I really believe that our o-line is good when healthy. Could use a little love at LG but still very good. No one is gonna move me off of that opinion. Surprise me though if you can. Believe me if I thought we could draft the next AP I'm all over it but I just don't see it. Outside of Barkley it's a good not great RB draft as I see it. I don't know that any RB we draft this year(outside of Barkley) is THAT much better than what we already have.I believe that. 

[Renegade7]

28 minutes ago, DeaconBlue said:

 In 2016 Fat rob was in baby shoes and and Perrine wasn't even here yet. The Scherff , moses side was just coming into their own in 2016 anyways.2015 doesn't even count when it comes to our current backfield. For me it's simple troubleshooting. You can't test one part if another part it depends on was broken.People hate it but I still have to point out how bad our injury issues were last year, it really was an outlier. I really believe that our o-line is good when healthy. Could use a little love at LG but still very good. No one is gonna move me off of that opinion. Surprise me though if you can. Believe me if I thought we could draft the next AP I'm all over it but I just don't see it. Outside of Barkley it's a good not great RB draft as I see it. I don't know that any RB we draft this year(outside of Barkley) is THAT much better than what we already have.I believe that. 

 

Given I'm a System Administrator and troubleshoot for a living, I cannot understate the importance of seeing a working example to compare to.

 

I made a thread to make my point on why we need a better RB then what we have right now, so if that doesn't move your opinion, I don't know what will.  That doesn't make you right, you're making excuses because you don't want to be wrong.  

 

You can't say "Well, we have no shot at an AP anyway in this draft", when we don't even have a Kamara or Jay Ajay, that's what we're up against.  Delvin Cook, Le'Veon Bell, Todd Gurley, that's who we're going to see in the playoffs this year, not somebody else's Perine.

[bowhunter]

I'd love to pick up Guice, but RBs do have a short half life. Mean guards last a lot longer. We really haven't seen what fit Rob, Perine, and Bibbs can do behind an intact and competent O- line. Thursday night will be interesting. Top 5 Talent might slip to us, trade offers flying,  I need to keep an open mind because I'm sure my constantly changing mancrush won't be picked (or if he is, I'll have buyers remorse)

[mistertim]

2 minutes ago, bowhunter said:

I'd love to pick up Guice, but RBs do have a short half life. Mean guards last a lot longer. We really haven't seen what fit Rob, Perine, and Bibbs can do behind an intact and competent O- line. Thursday night will be interesting. Top 5 Talent might slip to us, trade offers flying,  I need to keep an open mind because I'm sure my constantly changing mancrush won't be picked (or if he is, I'll have buyers remorse)

 

IMO we do have a competent if not good OL overall. We have two pro bowlers, a very good RT, and a young center who's shown promise. Only major weakness is LG...but let's face it you can't have pro bowlers at every position. Now, we definitely had injury issues last year but I think what we need instead of spending another high pick on OL (though I haven no problem picking up a good prospect after the 1st round) and hoping that they can make huge holes for our JAGs is a real honest to god blue chip level RB who has speed, power, and moves and can make something out of nothing. I like Rob and Perine in their own way but neither of them are guys who will make people miss or make something out of nothing most of the time. IMO Guice is that kind of RB.