2019 Comprehensive Draft Thread

[RWJ]

Skins built the DL year before last and this year they need to concentrate on building up the OL in 2019.

[Koolblue13]

Just now, RWJ said:

Skins built the DL year before last and this year they need to concentrate on building up the OL in 2019.

Do you think were a better team if we reached for Hernandez and passed on Payne?

 

I dont think settle is going to be anything, Brantley might.McGee is crap. Iaon is good in bursts. We have 2/3rds of the best Dline in ages, but it still needs another starter.

 

I'm not advocating ignoring the Oline. I'm advocating BPA and there's room for improvement on the Dline too.

[Long n Left]

On 10/22/2018 at 8:54 AM, stevemcqueen1 said:

Trevor Lawrence has a couple years to go though.  That's an eternity in the NFL.  The Cowboys went from having a dominant offensive line to an OL that looks like its aging and wearing down in the span of two years.

 

And it's also a long road for Trevor Lawrence himself.  Josh Rosen looked like the next Andrew Luck during his freshman season.  He was incredibly precocious and had advanced passing skills already.  But he went through the meat grinder for two more years and didn't show the level of growth that people expected and he came into the league as a lesser prospect who ended up being the fourth QB taken in his class.

 

Respectfully disagree. Rosen was a big HS prospect and became a good QB, but, as a freshman, and throughout his career to date would always have those WTF moments every couple games. He’s still having them in the NFL.

 

Lawrence has been as good, if not better, than advertised, and seems to be getting better every time out. He’s taller, and more athletic than Rosen, and can make throws now that Rosen will never be able to make. Many pundits said Lawrence was the best HS QB prospect since Peyton, and he’s proving them all right.

 

I think Lawrence playing at Clemson will be good for his development as they play enough pro style concepts, that his transition to the next level should be as smooth as Watson’s was. Rosen came from a predominantly pro style offense too, but he hasn't made that step up, and I’m not sure he ever will. To me, there always seems to be something lacking whenever I see him play. 

[RWJ]

1 hour ago, Koolblue13 said:

Do you think were a better team if we reached for Hernandez and passed on Payne?

 

I dont think settle is going to be anything, Brantley might.McGee is crap. Iaon is good in bursts. We have 2/3rds of the best Dline in ages, but it still needs another starter.

 

I'm not advocating ignoring the Oline. I'm advocating BPA and there's room for improvement on the Dline too.

JMO.  

[Koolblue13]

Just now, RWJ said:

JMO.  

Wut

[jbird2]

10 hours ago, Koolblue13 said:

.We have 2/3rds of the best Dline in ages, but it still needs another starter.

 

 

Are you forgetting Ionnidas?

 

He is right there with Allen and Payne, and may even be the most effective DL we have.

 

Too many riches on the DL and holes in the OL to ignore the OL next draft.

 

[bird_1972]

12 hours ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

I think going BPA is almost always the best choice.  If Quinnen Williams declares, he'll probably be one of the best defensive players in the class.  He'd have no trouble finding the field for us.  The kid can play the 1-5 techniques and we need three interior DL in our base defenses anyway.  And he's a three down guy who is a force on passing downs.

 

I don't think we're as flush in DL talent as most.  An injury to Allen or Payne would be a real hit.  I think we've got two big time talents and then a pretty good rotation guy and then a pair of low cost prospects with some upside.  It's a four man rotation though.

 

Good point. While I really would prefer an OT/ILB/EDGE with our first rounder, if we take a top 3 talent at his position regardless of where it is on the D, I think I could live with it. 

 

Caveat: We need to take a damn starting LG in the first 3 rounds!

26 minutes ago, jbird said:

 

Are you forgetting Ionnidas?

 

He is right there with Allen and Payne, and may even be the most effective DL we have.

 

Too many riches on the DL and holes in the OL to ignore the OL next draft.

 

 

We could do both - take DL in first round and OL in 2nd and/or 3rd. 

 

I hear you, though. I'd love to get a top 3 tackle in the first if one falls to us and he's at the top of our board.

[jbird2]

1 hour ago, bird_1972 said:

 

Good point. While I really would prefer an OT/ILB/EDGE with our first rounder, if we take a top 3 talent at his position regardless of where it is on the D, I think I could live with it. 

 

Caveat: We need to take a damn starting LG in the first 3 rounds!

 

We could do both - take DL in first round and OL in 2nd and/or 3rd. 

 

I hear you, though. I'd love to get a top 3 tackle in the first if one falls to us and he's at the top of our board.

 

 

When you say DL are you referring to ILB? I don't see us needing a starting DL needing to be drafted in the first 3 rounds.

 

Sure if a gamechanging once in a franchise Khalil Mack type talent is there for the taking you pull the trigger, but short of that, the OL should be the focus or even a stud TE.

 

You can draft a DL in the 5-7th to develop, but honestly we need talent and have too many other holes to fill to take a DL in the first 5 rounds.

 

In order of priority we need:

OG Starter and depth

WR Stud #1 or backup

TE Stud #1 

CB Starter (#24 replacement??) and depth

OLB Starter/Backup

ILB Starter/Backup

RB Depth/Backup

QB Development Project (Our very own Mahomes)

OT depth

C depth

DE depth

DT depth

Kicker-Punter-LS Nahhhh

 

[bird_1972]

8 minutes ago, jbird said:

You can draft a DL in the 5-7th to develop, but honestly we need talent and have too many other holes to fill to take a DL in the first 5 rounds.

 

In order of priority we need:

OG Starter and depth YES!!! Would like us to take a top 3 interior OL in the first 2-3 rounds. We could also use another OG in the later rounds to develop as a backup

WR Stud #1 or backup Given our track record in drafting WRs and current QB play, this falls way down the list. We should instead address this in FA

TE Stud #1 If one falls to us in top 4 rounds, I'm OK with this plan as well. But would put other needs ahead of this.

CB Starter (#24 replacement??) and depth I have this as 5th/6th priority on the list. That said, we should draft at least one CB per year. And this is one position our FA has been very good at finding value later in the draft so may not need to spend a top pick unless a generational talent is there.

OLB Starter/Backup EDGE rusher is tied for what I want us to take with our first pick. That would make our D elite.

ILB Starter/Backup I have this as 4th on my list behind OG/EDGE/OT. We need to get faster and more athletic here.

RB Depth/Backup If we get rid of Perine, I'm ok going RB late in the draft.

QB Development Project (Our very own Mahomes) Good luck - I think we address this in 2020. I hear this year's class is horrible.

OT depth Tied with EDGE for #1 on my list. We need an elite OT to groom behind Williams before his play falls off a cliff. We can have him battle Moses (injury prone) out for RT in the meantime. Very important.

C depth I think OG depth should involve a guy who can play both OG/C. He should be taken in the later rounds.

DE depth See "EDGE" above

DT depth If a generational talent falls to us in the 1st, I could be OK with it. DTs are tough to come by and we won't be able to keep Allen/Ionnidis/Payne when their contracts expire

Kicker-Punter-LS Nahhhh [shrugs shoulders]

 

I guess it comes down to the old addage of whether or not you believe in taking BPA or drafting for need. I personally think those philosophies exist on a spectrum and there is a way to thread the needle between BPA and need so the two aren't mutually exclusive. That would be my preference. 

 

Otherwise, I've annotated the above with my thoughts in red.

[TheGreek1973]

On 10/16/2018 at 7:47 AM, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

Ioannidis wouldn't even factor into my thinking with the draft pick.  The only position I would abandon BPA for is QB.  Putting a stud on your defensive line is going to upgrade your roster more than putting a lesser player at another position--except at QB.  And again, if you want dominant DL play, you have to rotate the interior players.  Fatigue becomes an issue otherwise.  Multiplicity becomes an issue.  Sure we could rotate lesser players in, but if a stud is there at our pick, why settle for that?

 

And at the end of the day, we're talking about drafting another starter if we're talking about drafting another stud interior DL.  No matter what kind of base front you run, you need to play three interior linemen.

 

This is an important topic because The majority of the best players in this class are interior DLs.  It's absurdly top heavy this year.

I hear you but our needs right now are ILB and LG.  Now if a stud DT falls to us like Allen did then yea you need to make the move, but still LG is a must, you saw what happened the minute Lauvao went out.  The entire line had to be shuffled and I love Chase Roullier at C.  

[TheGreek1973]

15 hours ago, Koolblue13 said:

Do you think were a better team if we reached for Hernandez and passed on Payne?

 

I dont think settle is going to be anything, Brantley might.McGee is crap. Iaon is good in bursts. We have 2/3rds of the best Dline in ages, but it still needs another starter.

 

I'm not advocating ignoring the Oline. I'm advocating BPA and there's room for improvement on the Dline too.

Totally disagree that Ioannidis is good in bursts.  I believe he stays in a lane as does Payne to protect against the run while Kerrigan is free to try his one move up the field.  When its all and all out rush usually Ioannidis is right there.

 

We can't afford to go into next year without a stud G to replace Lauvao.  

[thamajinforte]

next year's draft is cool and all....

 

but im all in for 20-Tua.

 

 

[bird_1972]

2 hours ago, TheGreek1973 said:

Totally disagree that Ioannidis is good in bursts.  I believe he stays in a lane as does Payne to protect against the run while Kerrigan is free to try his one move up the field.  When its all and all out rush usually Ioannidis is right there.

 

We can't afford to go into next year without a stud G to replace Lauvao.  

 

We need more than just one OG in next years draft. But I agree that one of them has to be a top 3-5 guy. The other one can be a G/C taken in the later rounds to develop for depth.

[Koolblue13]

Just now, jbird said:

 

Are you forgetting Ionnidas?

 

He is right there with Allen and Payne, and may even be the most effective DL we have.

 

Too many riches on the DL and holes in the OL to ignore the OL next draft.

 

 

Just now, TheGreek1973 said:

Totally disagree that Ioannidis is good in bursts.  I believe he stays in a lane as does Payne to protect against the run while Kerrigan is free to try his one move up the field.  When its all and all out rush usually Ioannidis is right there.

 

We can't afford to go into next year without a stud G to replace Lauvao.  

I love Iaonidas. Temple boy. About as home town as it gets for me. I think there's a reason he doesn't get the snaps Payne and Allen get though and he definitely benefits for those two being on the field. 

 

I've said this before. Hes the guy who's gonna have great success, because of who's around him, hell put up gaudy numbers and be expensive to resign. We'll let him walk, fans will ****, but he'll make his career contract without the production and we wont understand. 

 

That's my take and while hes here, hes awesome, but hes an awesome 30 and under snap guy.

[Going Commando]

18 hours ago, TheGreek1973 said:

I hear you but our needs right now are ILB and LG.  Now if a stud DT falls to us like Allen did then yea you need to make the move, but still LG is a must, you saw what happened the minute Lauvao went out.  The entire line had to be shuffled and I love Chase Roullier at C.   

 

We spin our wheels throughout the season and offseason trying to rank positions based on need and then figure out what we should do in the draft from there.  That's not really the starting point for debate, it's the final consideration.  We need to be thinking in terms of players rather than positions.  If you argue that LG should be drafted over a DT like Quinnen Williams, then you first have to make the case that X player who plays that position is in the same or a better tier than Quinnen Williams.  That's the starting point.  Then you have the debate about need at the position and the position's value relative to the other player's position.

[Koolblue13]

If you go into the draft saying "were taking the best player at LG or bust in the first round", we've failed already.

[markmills67]

On 10/24/2018 at 4:01 AM, Koolblue13 said:

Do you think were a better team if we reached for Hernandez and passed on Payne?

 

I dont think settle is going to be anything, Brantley might.McGee is crap. Iaon is good in bursts. We have 2/3rds of the best Dline in ages, but it still needs another starter.

 

I'm not advocating ignoring the Oline. I'm advocating BPA and there's room for improvement on the Dline too.

Would you have given a 5th rounder for Snacks?. I disagree with you about Mcgee I think he had a good season last year, and given that he won't be a starter we could get good play from him in a limited role.

 

HTTR 

[Koolblue13]

Just now, markmills67 said:

Would you have given a 5th rounder for Snacks?. I disagree with you about Mcgee I think he had a good season last year, and given that he won't be a starter we could get good play from him in a limited role.

 

HTTR 

I would not have because of Brantley and Settle. I would have been fine if we did though, even if its pointless. 

[Going Commando]

Age is what would have given me pause with trading for Harrison.  He turns 30 in three weeks.  Two more years at a fairly high price on his deal too.  It doesn't really make sense for us to trade for older players because we're not in the hunt right now.  I think we should actually be trying to get younger on defense, starting this offseason.  Kerrigan and Norman are 30.  Brown and Foster are 29.  Hopefully we can get some replacements to groom through the draft but we're going to need to use free agency well to fill some of these spots.

[TheGreek1973]

3 hours ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

We spin our wheels throughout the season and offseason trying to rank positions based on need and then figure out what we should do in the draft from there.  That's not really the starting point for debate, it's the final consideration.  We need to be thinking in terms of players rather than positions.  If you argue that LG should be drafted over a DT like Quinnen Williams, then you first have to make the case that X player who plays that position is in the same or a better tier than Quinnen Williams.  That's the starting point.  Then you have the debate about need at the position and the position's value relative to the other player's position.

I get you brother.  No one is saying if we have a guy fall in our lap ranked much higher we shouldn't take him.  Look what happen with Allen for example and less with Payne.  But if say where we pick with our first (32nd ?) and its a DL player as BPA, but there is a G that should go 34-36, you need to pick the Guard.  We can't keep shuffling our OL when we have one injury because we don't have a viable alternative.

[bird_1972]

1 hour ago, TheGreek1973 said:

I get you brother.  No one is saying if we have a guy fall in our lap ranked much higher we shouldn't take him.  Look what happen with Allen for example and less with Payne.  But if say where we pick with our first (32nd ?) and its a DL player as BPA, but there is a G that should go 34-36, you need to pick the Guard.  We can't keep shuffling our OL when we have one injury because we don't have a viable alternative.

 

I agree and consider that a "blended approach" that strikes the balance between blindly just going BPA and just going based on need. Neither approach is wise in purest form but some kind of balance at least acknowledges need while ensuring we are drafting appropriate value based on the draft board.

[jbird2]

19 minutes ago, bird_1972 said:

 

I agree and consider that a "blended approach" that strikes the balance between blindly just going BPA and just going based on need. Neither approach is wise in purest form but some kind of balance at least acknowledges need while ensuring we are drafting appropriate value based on the draft board.

A reasonable, thoughtful approach.

Shouldn't you be posting in a different forum?

 

I agree that either end of the spectrum is unwise.

 

Should be BPA in the top 3-4 identified needs, or a clear game-changer where you don't have a game-changer already existing.

[Going Commando]

1 hour ago, TheGreek1973 said:

I get you brother.  No one is saying if we have a guy fall in our lap ranked much higher we shouldn't take him.  Look what happen with Allen for example and less with Payne.  But if say where we pick with our first (32nd ?) and its a DL player as BPA, but there is a G that should go 34-36, you need to pick the Guard.  We can't keep shuffling our OL when we have one injury because we don't have a viable alternative. 

 

I agree if the DT and the OG are in the same tier.  That's when position becomes a deciding factor. 

 

But it's worth noting that it's not as simple as looking just at roster need because you also have to weigh position value in a more abstract way: is OG a more valuable position than DT?  I think you could argue it either way.  Guards play every offensive down but tend to be more common to find in the middle rounds.  DTs play in a rotation and thus don't impact every snap like a guard does, but when they're really good they tend to have more of an individual impact on the game's outcome than a guard, and they are usually harder to find because the athletic demands are higher.

 

Also intangibles and position versatility are other key factors to weigh.  This came up in the Scherff vs Leonard Williams decision.  Williams was ranked higher but Scherff had better intangibles and he could play both tackle and guard.  If a guy has leadership potential, that argues for taking him over someone who doesn't even if the position value is lesser.  You always need leaders and culture builders.

[bird_1972]

3 minutes ago, jbird said:

A reasonable, thoughtful approach.

Shouldn't you be posting in a different forum?

 

I agree that either end of the spectrum is unwise.

 

Should be BPA in the top 3-4 identified needs, or a clear game-changer where you don't have a game-changer already existing.

 

Exactly, it almost is like BPA with a multiplier factor based on need. Weighted, if you will.

3 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

Also intangibles and position versatility are other key factors to weigh.  This came up in the Scherff vs Leonard Williams decision.  Williams was ranked higher but Scherff had better intangibles and he could play both tackle and guard.  If a guy has leadership potential, that argues for taking him over someone who doesn't even if the position value is lesser.  You always need leaders and culture builders.

 

Not a knock on Williams, but so glad we ended up taking Scherff despite the concerns I had when we converted what was supposed to be a OT into a RG. 

 

It worked out really well for us.

[Going Commando]

Here's another thing to consider in the position value debate that makes it even more complicated:  How does this guy fit next to my best players?  Can he make them better?

 

One of the things we've been talking about in these threads for a long time is if there is a positive cumulative effect from stacking a ton of talent in a position group.  For example: do you get more out of having a bunch of your best players concentrated in the secondary or the front seven?  Or do you get more out of having your best players scattered throughout the roster?

 

On the one hand, it's very helpful to have a dominant player at a position like outside cornerback even if the rest of your guys in the secondary are journeymen because he can kind of push everyone else down into roles that they can handle better.

 

On the other hand, there definitely seems to be some benefit to stacking up a bunch of talent on your DL and edge players because they feed off of each other's success.  DaRon Payne and Jonathan Allen make each other so much better by playing together.  They're both good enough to make offenses pay for scheming to stop one or the other.  And a pretty good situational player like Ioannidis becomes really productive because he gets to feast in their wake.

 

So how a player fits beside your best players in each position group is yet another factor to weigh in determining position value.

 

It's pretty complicated.