2020 Comprehensive Draft Thread

[Skinsinparadise]

48 minutes ago, skinsmania123 said:

And the problem here is the Bengals take Burrow. Miami takes Tua, and then IF the Lions do not take Young, then we have the Giants who take him, and are stuck with a potential LT situation, certainly in that vicinity for years to come.  No thank you.  I think we have to take Young.  And then be patient. 

 

In theory, I agree.  I think I might have even been the first person on the board to specifically say I wouldn't trade down if we got an offer for Young if we had him at that pick -- if I recall I said that in the middle of the Wisconsin game.  Yet, I am not in the camp that there is no price that I wouldn't trade the pick for.    I got no itch to sell.  I've put as much pro Chase Young content here as anyone else.  But if I get offered something (emphasis on ridiculous) ridiculous, I'd at least consider it as long as I am still picking in the top 5.   For the survey below, I'd be in the 2nd category, I'd ask for the moon. 

 

 

[Skins199021]

On 1/26/2020 at 10:51 PM, Anselmheifer said:

 

Except for it literally isn’t true that Garett was as good a prospect. 
 

https://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/players/myles-garrett-1.html

 

https://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/players/chase-young-1.html

 

In his last year of college, Garrett posted 8.5 sacks. In his best year, he posted 11.5 sacks. Chase Young posted 16.5 sacks in one less game with more TFL.

 

Nobody was talking about Garrett as a hesitant candidate. And Chase Young grades out better than Myles Garrett not just amongst media talking heads and by stats, but also by PFF, who had Young as their top rated defensive player ever. 

You are having recency bias, how about Clowney, the Bosas. Extremely high end DEs come out all of the time, and if Young is better than Clowney coming out, you could barely make that argument at best. Again I won't be mad if we get him, but I am not blinded by him to the potential value of a trade back

[KDawg]

I hate the term generational. I don’t even know what it means. A generation is a lifetime, or 30 years. In football it could be any number of years based on the turnover. 
 

Given the criteria that I’ve seen to establish that, I would have labeled Mack as generational. I coached a kid that was his scout team tackle at UB, and he said Mack was unreal. This kid, the RT, was a great player. I mean he had everything you’d want in a lineman at the D3 level. He was a D1 kid that wanted to go somewhere for academics. 
 

He claims he only successfully blocked Mack 3 times his entire time as the scout tackle.

 

Young has better film. A better pedigree. He’s a prototype. He’s a technical machine. But how can I look at a guy coming out of college and compare him to Khalil Mack? Or Dwight Freeney?

 

How can you say Freeney isn’t generational? Just because of the fact he didn’t have the same hype coming out of college?

 

I think Chase Young will be a tremendous NFL player, but it’s so early to throw labels on guys. Especially such cliched labels.
 

I just don’t see how he’d bust, though. He has a high floor and a higher ceiling.

 

I said all of this to say: I don’t know how you pass on this guy. Generational or not this dude is going to be a top notch pro.

[Anselmheifer]

3 minutes ago, Skins199021 said:

You are having recency bias, how about Clowney, the Bosas. Extremely high end DEs come out all of the time, and if Young is better than Clowney coming out, you could barely make that argument at best. Again I won't be mad if we get him, but I am not blinded by him to the potential value of a trade back

 

That's not recency bias. Literally every talking head has Young being better than both Bosa's. He was graded significantly higher by PFF. He was more productive in terms of sacks and TFL's. He's more athletic. He's clearly a better prospect than the Bosa's. 

I can see your argument about Clowney, but that is mostly because of Clowney's hype. In Clowney's best year in college he posted 13 sacks. As a senior, he posted 3 sacks in 11 games. Clowney never had Chase Young's bend or hand use. I think Clowney will wind up having the better athletic testing, but he wasn't the better prospect and it's not hindsight. Imagine how everybody on this forum would view Chase Young if we were drafting him as a senior and he put up 3 sacks in 11 games. 

[Skins199021]

1 minute ago, Anselmheifer said:

 

That's not recency bias. Literally every talking head has Young being better than both Bosa's. He was graded significantly higher by PFF. He was more productive in terms of sacks and TFL's. He's more athletic. He's clearly a better prospect than the Bosa's. 

I can see your argument about Clowney, but that is mostly because of Clowney's hype. In Clowney's best year in college he posted 13 sacks. As a senior, he posted 3 sacks in 11 games. Clowney never had Chase Young's bend or hand use. I think Clowney will wind up having the better athletic testing, but he wasn't the better prospect and it's not hindsight. Imagine how everybody on this forum would view Chase Young if we were drafting him as a senior and he put up 3 sacks in 11 games. 

In the end though what do these numbers mean for the NFL? Clowney was getting triple teamed without a legit side kick on the other end his senior year, plus he was dealing with injuries.

 

JJ Watt didn't have the college numbers, this doesn't mean we project Young to be better than Watt. My overall point here is if we are being offered multiple top 50 picks between 2020 and 2021, you have to legitimately think about doing so. Especially a team in our position with multiple needs and no 2nd round pick.

 

The notion of you don't trade this pick for anything is actually quite ignorant and blind to value (not saying this is your view, just generally speaking).

[KDawg]

So is he a generational prospect or a generational player? Because the difference is significant. 
 

Saying the Bosa’s weren’t as highly regarded is accurate. 
 

But saying he is a better pro than the Bosas, before playing a down (which I’ve seen no one say) is Inappropriate on many levels.

 

If this generational non sense is as a graded prospect, sure. Fine.

 

But lets pump the brakes on the hall of fame for now (again, I lose a lot of people when this generational stuff comes up. I don’t know if they mean as a player, prospect, or that no one can even slightly compare.)

[Renegade7]

I have a question:

 

Why do folks keep calling Young the next LT?  Wasnt LT a linebacker?

 

Wouldnt the proper analogy be the next Reggie White? I mean, I get he may be a dominate pass rusher, but couldnt LT cover as well as part of his linebacker responsibilities?  Is that something we wouldnt ask Young to do?

[HTTRDynasty]

It’s amusing how hung up people are getting over the word “generational”. Who cares?

[skinny21]

My guy Chinn - seems to fit the versatility you’ve talked about on the back end @stevemcqueen1
 

Riser: Jeremy Chinn, Southern Illinois

Jeremy Chinn came into Mobile as one of my biggest sleepers in the 2020 draft, and sure enough, his name is now on everyone's radar. At 6-foot-3, 220 pounds, Chinn has played everything from cornerback to weakside linebacker. His position flexibility to do multiple things as a space defender in coverage is incredibly valuable. You just don't see physical marvels his size with that kind of fluidity and explosive movement skills. Chinn was the most impressive-looking player at the weigh-in Monday, and he followed that up with excellent performances at practice.

(per TDN)

[volsmet]

If we trade back to 5, Miami will be paying for the rights to Tua & a significant amount for us to miss on Young... more if we could sell the idea of the Giants possibly landing him at 4. Miami would pay for Tua, Young & asking us to move behind a divisional opponent. 
 

2 #1s & a #2 in 2020

A #1 in 2021

A #3 in 2022

Rosen

 

 

I’d love to have 2 young QBs on rookie contracts battling it out while we build our roster — before trading the guy who succeeds & cutting the other. To not take Rosen in a deal with Miami would be malpractice. 
 

2 hours ago, Renegade7 said:

I have a question:

 

Why do folks keep calling Young the next LT?  Wasnt LT a linebacker?

 

Wouldnt the proper analogy be the next Reggie White? I mean, I get he may be a dominate pass rusher, but couldnt LT cover as well as part of his linebacker responsibilities?  Is that something we wouldnt ask Young to do?

I call Young the next Renegade7.

[vegeta613]

All this talk about trade in this thread, lets be real,  no one has the ammo to jump MIA for Tua.   The only way I see a trade happening is if the Lions are hot after Tua hell if I was the lions GM I would bluff series interest in Tua to try to force a mega trade so Chase could fall to 3

[KDawg]

9 hours ago, HTTRDynasty said:

It’s amusing how hung up people are getting over the word “generational”. Who cares?

 

It's amusing how frivolously people use it.

 

And what the heck does it mean? Seriously. Prospect? Who cares if they are a generational prospect? There's been plenty of ridiculous prospects that have gone on to do very little. Maybe not ones that are hyped as this unicorn of generational, but good prospects bust and bad prospects flourish sometimes.

 

Why do we have to label these guys? Why can't we just say, "this guy can play"?

 

It's a forum man, we're talking. You like it. I don't. Others don't. Others do. No one is forcing anyone on how they should feel. Feel free to explain it if you wish or move on.

 

I genuinely come here to share knowledge, share and gain others perspectives, and pick other people's brains. I learn something every day... Even if its not direct from someone... The stuff people say here makes me think about things on different scales. 

 

Maybe that's why you come here. Maybe it's not. But it's not an attack on your views... People think differently. I'm cool with that. Makes things more interesting and gives more opportunity for knowledge growth.

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

 

 

[kingdaddy]

10 hours ago, Renegade7 said:

I have a question:

 

Why do folks keep calling Young the next LT?  Wasnt LT a linebacker?

 

Wouldnt the proper analogy be the next Reggie White? I mean, I get he may be a dominate pass rusher, but couldnt LT cover as well as part of his linebacker responsibilities?  Is that something we wouldnt ask Young to do?

I would refer to Young as the next LT because of his freakish athletic abilities and his combination of power and speed to rush the passer. LT lined up everywhere and, as Joe Gibbs said, the entire offensive game plan had to be made around LT. He was a game wrecker and that is what Young is being billed as. While LT could certainly cover, to me, the comparisons with LT are totally based on the pass rush and the way teams will have to account for him based on where he lines up.

[Skinsinparadise]

On the generational term, I got no problem with the term but I don't really care what label you put on a prospect one way or another.  But that's me. 😀

 

When you got someone like Peter King who if I recall has covered the NFL since the 80s call Young a generational player, among other long timers, I think it legitimizes the term for whomever wants to use it.   They've seen and covered guys like Lawrence Taylor, Peppers, etc.

 

The way I take the meaning of generational player is at some point we'd recall that player as a special player who was dominant during their generation when they played.  To say that Young has that kind of potential to me seems fine. For those who say you are putting the cart before the horse -- that's true too, clearly any player is all potential before they start playing in the NFL. 

 

On another note, Finlay was just on saying he gets the impression (he didn't elaborate as to how he knows) that if not Young he believes they love Okudah and really want a shut down corner.    He believes though they don't trade down, he says scouts (though he didn't say scouts for which team, I am presuming Redskins but he didn't specify) tell him Young is highest ranked player.   Finlay kept going, sounds like he wasn't referring to Redskins scouts there.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Renegade7]

21 minutes ago, kingdaddy said:

I would refer to Young as the next LT because of his freakish athletic abilities and his combination of power and speed to rush the passer. LT lined up everywhere and, as Joe Gibbs said, the entire offensive game plan had to be made around LT. He was a game wrecker and that is what Young is being billed as. While LT could certainly cover, to me, the comparisons with LT are totally based on the pass rush and the way teams will have to account for him based on where he lines up.

 

White has 198 sacks in 15 season, Taylor has 133 in 13 seasons.

 

: /

[KDawg]

1 minute ago, Renegade7 said:

 

White has 198 sacks in 15 season, Taylor has 133 in 13 seasons.

 

: /

I am so glad you posted this. Taylor was absolutely phenomenal... but Reggie White is so overlooked.

[kingdaddy]

9 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

White has 198 sacks in 15 season, Taylor has 133 in 13 seasons.

 

: /

White played all over the defensive line and was arguably the greatest defensive lineman, if not player, in NFL history. Is Young big enough to play defensive tackle? Reggie White was brute strength combined with good speed and just incredible upper body/hands power. He had every move known to man and probably invented some of them. 

[Renegade7]

3 minutes ago, kingdaddy said:

White played all over the defensive line and was arguably the greatest defensive lineman, if not player, in NFL history. Is Young big enough to play defensive tackle? Reggie White was brute strength combined with good speed and just incredible upper body/hands power. He had every move known to man and probably invented some of them. 

 

But Young doesnt play linebacker, so he should compared to White who plays in the line.  Fine with the generational thing, but it make more sense when compared to someone who played similar position to him.  Young really cant be moved around the way Taylor was, in fact he cant even be moved around the way White was.  That's fine. But jus wanted clarity on that, I'll look for if he can be better then White...can he? Is he?

[kingdaddy]

Just now, Renegade7 said:

 

But Young doesnt play linebacker, so he should compared to White who plays in the line.  Fine with the generational thing, but if make more sense when compared to someone who played similar position to him.  Young really cant be moved around the way Taylor was, in fact he cant even be moved around the way White was.  That's fine. But jus wanted clarity on that, I'll look for if he can be better then White...can he? Is he?

I'd have to say the chances of him being better than Reggie White are slim, especially if he can't be moved inside. When anyone uses the term "generational talent" Reggie White fits that description. 

You know, it's one of the biggest things that pisses me off about Joe Jacoby being a HOF snub. He competed against Reggie White, Randy White and L.T. and went to 4 Super Bowls....Reggie went to none with the Eagles. Even Taylor is on record as saying Jacoby should be in because of their great battles. 

[LD0506]

I like the context, taking Young @2 means he gets coached/used by Jack Del Rio & Co., the convergence there makes it more valuable than a trade. Playing along with Sweat in year 2 in a de-Manuskyfied defense? More advantage. And this is before we even see what happens @ LB, etc.

 

You take BPA  when the guy is so much B and craft a scheme to use him to greatest effect, and never look back.

 

Yeah, you answer the phone, we've all seen crazy things happen on draft day before, but I still believe we will be welcoming Chase to the team come April.

[JamesMadisonSkins]

8 hours ago, vegeta613 said:

All this talk about trade in this thread, lets be real,  no one has the ammo to jump MIA for Tua.   The only way I see a trade happening is if the Lions are hot after Tua hell if I was the lions GM I would bluff series interest in Tua to try to force a mega trade so Chase could fall to 3

I have been seeing some mock drafts having the Lions take Tua at #3.

 

I still think there could be fire behind that smoke. I could see Tua landing in Detroit with or without a Matt Stafford trade.

 

I would take the Lions 3rd and 4th to move down to #3. You draft Chase and add some valuable picks in the mid-rounds where I think there's some depth in this class.

 

I also saw a couple writers talking double-trade down and the value you could get from that. I don't think i love the idea necessarily. But the gist is trade #2 to Miami for #5 #18 and #37. Then turn around and trade #5 to Las Vegas for #12 #19 and a 3rd.

 

You come away with #12, #18, #19, #37 and an extra 3rd. But running some mocks on FanSpeak, I just don't love what that gets us. You can certainly get some quality starters, but with our current roster and what we might do in Free Agency, i don't know if I see the need for that many early picks. I could be crazy though. I'll run a couple comparative mocks to see what it could get us.

 

 

**By the way, does anyone have a preference between The Draft Network ($29.99) and FanSpeak ($11.99). I did FanSpeak and loved it for its multiple expert draft boards but I love the cleanliness of TheDraftNetwork.

[Skinsinparadise]

12 minutes ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

I have been seeing some mock drafts having the Lions take Tua at #3.

 

I still think there could be fire behind that smoke. I could see Tua landing in Detroit with or without a Matt Stafford trade.

 

I would take the Lions 3rd and 4th to move down to #3. You draft Chase and add some valuable picks in the mid-rounds where I think there's some depth in this class.

 

I also saw a couple writers talking double-trade down and the value you could get from that. I don't think i love the idea necessarily. But the gist is trade #2 to Miami for #5 #

 

i think most of us would love that, though almost seems too good to be true so I am skeptical it goes down. 

 

Another version of that is lets say there is a battle between SD, Miami, Carolina, Oakland for Tua and they make a deal with the Lions (assuming the Lions are willing) and then trade up one more spot with us.  Why would they bother with the Lions and not us initially?  Maybe the Lions say the are open to trading, the Redskins indicate otherwise because they want Young so that team trades with the Lions yet they don't feel 100% sure that the Redskins ultimately don't deal with another team to leapfrog over their #3 pick so they trade with the Redskins, too.  Do I think that happens?  no.  but it would be to me another best case scenario.  

[Fresh8686]

 

 

 

 

 

[JamesMadisonSkins]

This almost feels stupid to do.

*Trade 1.2 to Miami for 1.5, 1.18, 1.26

*Trade 1.5 to Las Vegas for 1.12, 1.19, 3.16

*Trade 1.19 to Indianapolis for 2.2, 2.12

 

1.12: CeeDee Lamb, WR Oklahoma

1.18: Andrew Thomas, OT Georgia

1.26: Kristian Fulton, CB LSU

2.2: Xavier McKinney, FS Alabama

2.12: Adam Trautman, TE Dayton

3.2: Curtis Weaver, Edge Boise State

3.16: Malik Harrison, LB Ohio State

4.2: K.J. Hill, WR Ohio State

4.38: Thaddeus Moss, TE LSU

5.2: Anthony McFarland, RB Maryland

7.2: Gage Cervenka, C Clemson

7.15: Steven Montez, QB Colorado

 

Kind of proves my point. This would be an amazing draft if we had no cap space and didn't go out and get any free agents and planned to take a longer rebuild. I just don't see it. Fun to do. But as you can see, I ran out of BPA options and the players I drafted often double-dipped (Lamb and Hill ... Trautman and Moss) ...

 

Of course this is the extreme version with 3 trade downs that net pick return. I could see us doing 1 ... maybe 2 ... depending on who is on the board when we pick. I still think Chase is the call.