2021 Comprehensive Draft Thread

[mhd24]

Gil Brandt just updated his top 100:

 

https://www.nfl.com/news/gil-brandt-s-hot-100-2-0-top-prospects-in-2021-nfl-draft-class?campaign=Twitter_nfl_cfb

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[JoggingGod]

Trading up for a TE is so dumb when we don’t have a QB past this year. What good use is Pitts when Kyle Allen is throwing to him

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

 

[Chump Bailey]

4 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

 

That'd be fantastic. Pitts, Logan Thomas, Samuel, Terry = me likey a lot.

[Going Commando]

Offensive playmaking is the biggest need on the team outside a long term solution at QB.  Feels like we've lost sight of that.  Signing Reyes, Samuel, and Humphries didn't change that.  That said, the draft isn't best used for trying to plug needs.

 

Etienne is a BPA candidate at 19.  I'm not sure anyone other than me believes that in this thread, but IMO he does.  Getting him is one of our best and safest outcomes, and it's the first step in one of my favorite no-trade scenarios that I gamed out:

 

Rd 1: Etienne

Rd 2: Rondale Moore

Rd 3: Jackson Carman

Rd 3: Kyle Trask

Rd 4: Shaun Wade

Rd 5: Jaylen Twyman

Rd 7: Buddy Johnson

Rd 7: Shawn Davis

[Warhead36]

You can never have enough playmakers. Look at the Bucs last year. Worst case scenario we make ourselves very attractive to a vet QB who wants to leave(i.e. Rodgers or Wilson).

[mhd24]

16 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

Offensive playmaking is the biggest need on the team outside a long term solution at QB.  Feels like we've lost sight of that.  Signing Reyes, Samuel, and Humphries didn't change that.  That said, the draft isn't best used for trying to plug needs.

 

Etienne is a BPA candidate at 19.  I'm not sure anyone other than me believes that in this thread, but IMO he does.  Getting him is one of our best and safest outcomes, and it's the first step in one of my favorite no-trade scenarios that I gamed out:

 

Rd 1: Etienne

Rd 2: Rondale Moore

Rd 3: Jackson Carman

Rd 3: Kyle Trask

Rd 4: Shaun Wade

Rd 5: Jaylen Twyman

Rd 7: Buddy Johnson

Rd 7: Shawn Davis

 

 

Tackle is my #1 priority (assuming Fields/Lance are not there at 19).  If Darisow is gone, then I feel the depth of this draft at the position allows us to trade down.  I think we can trade down and still get a RB.  

 

Hypothetically, Buffalo's #1 need is either a CB to play opposite White or an edge rusher.  Newsome isn't going to make it to their 1st rounder.  He'd be an excellent CB to play opposite White.  I think the top edges will be there at 19 (unless NYG takes one at 11). If we don't love anyone at 19, we are in a position to trade down.  I can see Buffalo trading up for a CB or an edge.  

 

We could trade #19+#246 for #30+#93+#161 and take whomever is left at 30.    

[Skinsinparadise]

3 hours ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

 

Etienne is a BPA candidate at 19.  I'm not sure anyone other than me believes that in this thread, but IMO he does.  Getting him is one of our best and safest outcomes, and it's the first step in one of my favorite no-trade scenarios that I gamed out:

 

 

I've said multiple times I'd be cool with Etienne, he was one of my favorite backs to watch over the years.  I've posted articles about what type of dude Etienne is here among other things.  You've compared some of his game to Dalvin Cook.  I was a big Cook guy before that draft.   I just have Najee Harris a half a peg or so over Etienne so if I had to choose between the two, I'd choose Harris.  But I'd be cool with either. 

 

This whole thing from some about how RB isn't the top need, etc.  Think of this way.  If we had Dalvin Cook or Derrick Henry on this team wouldn't that be the featured dance if this team made it in the post season?  Last time we won a playoff game our team was about Clinton Portis.  He was the dude oppponent's had to stop.  If you play Tennessee you have to stop Henry.  Adding a player that would keep defensive coordinators up at night wouldn't be the worst thing in the world.  And for the obsession about Qb play, as Mike Shanahan and Joe Gibbs loved to say the best friend of a QB is a big time running game.  So if we want to make the most of not having a top flight QB at the moment wouldn't a crazy good running game help do that?

 

I liked Antonio Gibson a lot before he was even on this team.  I still like him a lot.  But is he an E. Elliot in his prime?  A Derrick Henry?  A Dalvin Cook?  IMO no.  

 

The NFL has changed where RBs aren't as central as the past.  But that position has also changed where some of the better running teams have two guys who can beat you at the running game and where the running game doesn't fall off a cliff when their lead dog RB gets hurt. 

 

I took plenty of shots to my Giant friends when they took Barkley.  I thought #2 was too rich for a RB.  So I am not on a different planet as to the value of the spot compared to others.  But when you are talking 19th in the draft, the back half of the first round, its not crazy IMO to take the top back in the draft.  And personally I think it would do more to help the QB than almost any other thing we could do. 

 

Is a RB my top want at 19?  Nope.   But i'd be more than cool with it.  Even though there has been no smoke about them taking a RB early, I am starting to think its not impossible either.  Rivera likes to stress wanting to be a physical team.  If you take Harris in the first, someone like Radunz in the 2nd, Tremble in the third -- you are talking some serious physicality.   

 

The fact that I've seen now multiple times they'd consider trading up for Pitts -- which is fun for me to read because it was something I've mentioned in the past multiple times -- gives the strong vibe that they want to add a big time playmaker. 

 

And I get some think whoever is cool with a RB at 19 is part of like the flat earth society.  But to me I am not obsessed with the first pick in the draft as if its the only pick we got, and if that specific piece of the puzzle fits our needs perfectly watch out!  To me maybe we are another off season away to be overly fixated on drafting to need.   I can see Tampa thinking we just have this weakness and if we fill that in the first, bam another SB.  That's not us though. 

[clskinsfan]

53 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

Offensive playmaking is the biggest need on the team outside a long term solution at QB.  Feels like we've lost sight of that.  Signing Reyes, Samuel, and Humphries didn't change that.  That said, the draft isn't best used for trying to plug needs.

 

Etienne is a BPA candidate at 19.  I'm not sure anyone other than me believes that in this thread, but IMO he does.  Getting him is one of our best and safest outcomes, and it's the first step in one of my favorite no-trade scenarios that I gamed out:

 

Rd 1: Etienne

Rd 2: Rondale Moore

Rd 3: Jackson Carman

Rd 3: Kyle Trask

Rd 4: Shaun Wade

Rd 5: Jaylen Twyman

Rd 7: Buddy Johnson

Rd 7: Shawn Davis

I dont disagree that Etienne, Harris and Williams are all 1st round talents. For me it is about the value of the position though. We have a RB that is a good candidate to break out this year in Gibson. Round one RB's are usually your bell cow. I cant see the team wanting to move on from Gibson after the season he had last year. Now if Turner is interested in running some kind of two back offense than by all means do it. But I just cant see us picking a RB in round one this year.  

33 minutes ago, mhd24 said:

 

 

Tackle is my #1 priority (assuming Fields/Lance are not there at 19).  If Darisow is gone, then I feel the depth of this draft at the position allows us to trade down.  I think we can trade down and still get a RB.  

 

Hypothetically, Buffalo's #1 need is either a CB to play opposite White or an edge rusher.  Newsome isn't going to make it to their 1st rounder.  He'd be an excellent CB to play opposite White.  I think the top edges will be there at 19 (unless NYG takes one at 11). If we don't love anyone at 19, we are in a position to trade down.  I can see Buffalo trading up for a CB or an edge.  

 

We could trade #19+#246 for #30+#93+#161 and take whomever is left at 30.    

I wouldnt hate this option either. This draft is so deep at just about every position except TE and DL. You do a trade like this and you have a legit chance of adding 3 or 4 starters to your team. 

[Burgold]

I'm a BPA guy first and foremost, but if I had my choice I'd best prefer a linebacker followed by a offensive lineman. I'm okay with receiver and think Gibson will be better with a year of experience under his belt. Running back, tight end, receiver, corner are all areas that could use depth/improvement, but the Team is not bad at that position. Linebacker and free safety are hurting. Tackle is iffy though I thought Lucas did okay and I still have hopes Charles can step up.

[mistertim]

1 hour ago, Warhead36 said:

You can never have enough playmakers. Look at the Bucs last year. Worst case scenario we make ourselves very attractive to a vet QB who wants to leave(i.e. Rodgers or Wilson).

 

If Rodgers gets traded he won't have any say in where he goes, as he doesn't have a no-trade clause. The highest bidder will get him. Probably 3 1st round picks I'd guess. Wilson will also probably cost the same but he does have a no-trade clause so if he demanded a trade he'd get veto power over where he goes.

 

Neither guy is going to hit FA any time soon, so it's totally different than the Bucs/Brady situation.

[Koolblue13]

1 hour ago, JoggingGod said:

Trading up for a TE is so dumb when we don’t have a QB past this year. What good use is Pitts when Kyle Allen is throwing to him

Stop pretending Allen is our only QB, just so you can get worked up and drive your point home. Right now it's Fitz, Heinicke, Montez and not Allen. He makes league minimum and can be cut whenever. 

[mistertim]

9 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

Stop pretending Allen is our only QB, just so you can get worked up and drive your point home. Right now it's Fitz, Heinicke, Montez and not Allen. He makes league minimum and can be cut whenever. 

 

Realistically any of them could probably be cut whenever, though Fitz would cost the most (and he's not going to get cut as he's our starting QB).

 

Cutting Heinicke would cost $1.5 million in dead cap. Not exactly a body blow to the team.

 

And the team seems to be pretty clear in their belief that Allen and Heinicke are probably not the future. They made a big push for Stafford and then brought in Fitz when that didn't work out.

[JoggingGod]

14 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

Stop pretending Allen is our only QB, just so you can get worked up and drive your point home. Right now it's Fitz, Heinicke, Montez and not Allen. He makes league minimum and can be cut whenever. 

Montez isn't an NFL QB and Heinicke is a backup. Fitz is 39 and likely to retire after this year. We need a long term QB.

[Koolblue13]

1 minute ago, mistertim said:

 

Realistically any of them could probably be cut whenever, though Fitz would cost the most (and he's not going to get cut as he's our starting QB).

 

Cutting Heinicke would cost $1.5 million in dead cap. Not exactly a body blow to the team.

 

And the team seems to be pretty clear in their belief that Allen and Heinicke are probably not the future. They made a big push for Stafford and then brought in Fitz when that didn't work out.

Not the point and I'm not saying any of them are the long term answer. My quote was replying to another poster who is acting like the guy it costs zero to cut is somehow the only player on the roster at QB.

Just now, JoggingGod said:

Montez isn't an NFL QB and Heinicke is a backup. Fitz is 39 and likely to retire after this year. We need a long term QB.

Correct. Nobody disagrees with that.

[Warhead36]

I think the only OT I'd want at 19 is Darrisaw(assuming Sewell or Slater don't inexplicably drop of course)and even he has flaws. I'd rather address OT in round 2 and/or 3.

 

Basically my prime choices would be:

 

1. Parsons(would be okay with a slight trade up to like 15 or so because the Raiders or Dolphins could take him)

2. Darrisaw

3. Trade up for QB(wouldn't give up more than a 1st and 3rd this year and 1st next year)

 

If those options aren't available I'm fine with trading down. I don't think there is much discernible difference between the other LBs, they're all talented but have things that need to be coached up and have specific strengths and weaknesses. There is so much OL depth that we could probably get a decent one later.

[Koolblue13]

6 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

I think the only OT I'd want at 19 is Darrisaw(assuming Sewell or Slater don't inexplicably drop of course)and even he has flaws. I'd rather address OT in round 2 and/or 3.

 

Basically my prime choices would be:

 

1. Parsons(would be okay with a slight trade up to like 15 or so because the Raiders or Dolphins could take him)

2. Darrisaw

3. Trade up for QB(wouldn't give up more than a 1st and 3rd this year and 1st next year)

 

If those options aren't available I'm fine with trading down. I don't think there is much discernible difference between the other LBs, they're all talented but have things that need to be coached up and have specific strengths and weaknesses. There is so much OL depth that we could probably get a decent one later.

My top 3 in order is Collins, Moehrig, Harris (and maybe Horn)

[kingdaddy]

4 hours ago, Anselmheifer said:

Nobody wants to trade for Scherff. 

 

SIP I was thinking about you saying that Fitz likes having a bigger receiver that he can throw 50-50 balls to. Tylan Wallace might not be big, but he's a contested catch freak. 

How bout the Gandy Man????

[Warhead36]

8 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

My top 3 in order is Collins, Moehrig, Harris (and maybe Horn)

I'd definitely take Horn at 19 but I doubt he drops that far.

 

Moehrig would be fine as a can't trade down consolation prize. I just don't see him being a star though and I'd hate to draft a Safety in round 1 that doesn't project to be a real game changer. At best he'll be a solid Lamarcus Joyner type.

[Koolblue13]

1 minute ago, Warhead36 said:

I'd definitely take Horn at 19 but I doubt he drops that far.

 

Moehrig would be fine as a can't trade down consolation prize. I just don't see him being a star though and I'd hate to draft a Safety in round 1 that doesn't project to be a real game changer. At best he'll be a solid Lamarcus Joyner type.

I think both Collins and Moehrig are similar in that they are very high floor players, who have a chance to be exceptional, which is what I think our team needs more than anything. I'm fine taking some swings for the fences later in the draft, but locking down a starter for the next decade at a position we don't have one, would be a huge win for us.

[redskinss]

39 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

Correct. Nobody disagrees with that.

I'm not sure I agree.

I've said all along that we don't know what we have in heinicke the sample size is too small but I'm not ready to say he's a backup quite yet.

If he plays a full season anywhere near what he's shown me so far I'd say we have our quarterback. 

That is certainly a big if between his lack of frame and the fact that he's bounced around around league a little but I don't think the coaches are as low on him as some others around here believe they are.

They had tag options for both heinicke and Allen, Kyle got the cheap tag and heinicke got a decent two year extension and I don't think it was a coin flip that Allen lost.

I think heinicke opened some eyes on the coaching staff too and they want to give him a chance but don't want to put all their eggs in that basket.

[HigSkin]

According to this data, 1st round OL has a pretty good hit rate.

 

 

[Burgundy Yoda]

I'm seeing a lot of mocks with Parsons being taken at 17 by the Raiders. I'm not the biggest Parsons fan, but if he falls that far we might have to give Arizona a call at 16. Moving up 3 spots shouldn't cost much and the player they are targeting probably has a good shot at being at 19. 

[kingdaddy]

5 minutes ago, HigSkin said:

According to this data, 1st round OL has a pretty good hit rate.

 

 

This is why you don't mortgage half your draft for 2-3 years and trade up to get the guy you HOPE will be your franchise...Plus, I'm hearing from GM's that guys will be drafted this year with limited personality and medical profiles making it even more of a crapshoot. I know some of you will disagree and say you gotts spend big to get the franchise guy but more often than not the guy doesn't turn out as hoped (see RGlll).