2021 Comprehensive Draft Thread

[Riggo#44]

5 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

I doubt it would require just a slight trade up.  Too many QB needy teams picking ahead of us.  Especially with Hurts burning it up thus far -- I doubt a dude with potential elite mobility ends up a surprise faller.  Years back I could see it.  I'd be surprised if it happened in 2021.  So many teams ahead of us who could use a QB now or start grooming the QB of the future. 

 

The more I think about it, the more I think we're in the Mac Jones, Jamie Newman, Desmond Ridder discussions. I think I'd rather have Ridder or Newman in the 2nd or 3rd than Jones in the 1st...

[Skinsinparadise]

8 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said:

 

The more I think about it, the more I think we're in the Mac Jones, Jamie Newman, Desmond Ridder discussions. I think I'd rather have Ridder or Newman in the 2nd or 3rd than Jones in the 1st...

 

Close call for me on that but your logic makes sense.

 

The hard thing here is FA comes first.  So they somewhat have to anticipate the draft in advance.  That's hard.  I didn't listen to the podcast yet but saw someone post on twitter that Keim thought a veteran QB is more likely

[mistertim]

12 hours ago, lotty8321 said:

What would it take to move up to sayyyyyy #4 and grab Wilson?

 

In 2011 Atlanta swapped 1sts with Cleveland to move up from 27th to 6th, gave up their 2011 2nd and 4th round picks and their 2012 1st and 4th round picks.

 

Closest thing I can think of for going from down low to way up. IMO Atlanta got an absolute steal in that trade. I can't imagine us getting that sort of deal so my guess is it wouldn't cost us any less than swapping 1sts this year, giving up our 2nd and 3rd this year and giving up our 1st and 2nd next year to go from 19 to 4.

[KDawg]

3 hours ago, mistertim said:

 

In 2011 Atlanta swapped 1sts with Cleveland to move up from 27th to 6th, gave up their 2011 2nd and 4th round picks and their 2012 1st and 4th round picks.

 

Closest thing I can think of for going from down low to way up. IMO Atlanta got an absolute steal in that trade. I can't imagine us getting that sort of deal so my guess is it wouldn't cost us any less than swapping 1sts this year, giving up our 2nd and 3rd this year and giving up our 1st and 2nd next year to go from 19 to 4.

There’s a Spanish word that applies here. It’s one that has great meaning and expresses my feelings perfectly.

 

I don’t speak Spanish very well, but I really think the word fits my feelings on moving up that far in the draft.

 

It’s, “No”.

[WEARE1554]

4 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Close call for me on that but your logic makes sense.

 

The hard thing here is FA comes first.  So they somewhat have to anticipate the draft in advance.  That's hard.  I didn't listen to the podcast yet but saw someone post on twitter that Keim thought a veteran QB is more likely

Agree with both-Ridder, Newman are intriguing.  They may go into FA with a plan to over draft One of the second tier dudes. 49’s 3rd for Ridder?

[CommanderDOOM]

16 minutes ago, WEARE1554 said:

Agree with both-Ridder, Newman are intriguing.  They may go into FA with a plan to over draft One of the second tier dudes. 49’s 3rd for Ridder?

You dont think Mond will be there or U like those two better??

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[Rex Tomb]

3 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

Looks a little bit like a tweener... but he could probably bulk up on that frame.  Maybe a 2nd rounder?

[Malapropismic Depository]

I was kind of hoping that @bakedtater1would be able to give us some potato prospect insight on this game.

 

Famous Idaho Potato Bowl

 

https://sportsbookwire.usatoday.com/2020/12/21/famous-idaho-potato-bowl-tulane-vs-nevada-odds-picks-and-prediction/

 

 

 

[Anselmheifer]

3 hours ago, KDawg said:

There’s a Spanish word that applies here. It’s one that has great meaning and expresses my feelings perfectly.

 

I don’t speak Spanish very well, but I really think the word fits my feelings on moving up that far in the draft.

 

It’s, “No”.

 

I feel like I'm always plating contrarian with you, but your posts are interesting and informative. I'm not sure I agree here. 

 

 

I think Zach Wilson may be a star. What price would you pay for a rookie Deshaun Watson, if you already had a bunch of cap room, a WR1, a borderline star running back, a now solidified TE position, and a top 10 defense where all the best players were on rookie contracts? I'd pay two 1sts without even thinking about it and I'd probably pay 3. 

 

His off-schedule stuff is so good. UCF may not have a great defense, but Wilson didn't have an Ohio State quality pocket from which to throw. He moves within and outside the pocket so effortlessly. I think is arm is great. He throws a very catchable deep ball. He's my QB2. 

I also hated Josh Allen and thought Justin Herbert would stink. 

[bakedtater1]

40 minutes ago, Malapropismic Depository said:

I was kind of hoping that @bakedtater1would be able to give us some potato prospect insight on this game.

 

Famous Idaho Potato Bowl

 

https://sportsbookwire.usatoday.com/2020/12/21/famous-idaho-potato-bowl-tulane-vs-nevada-odds-picks-and-prediction/

 

 

 

Welp..I know theres a tater tossing contest..who ever can get the tater closest to the center of the ring at midfield wins a life time of taters..kinda where I got the idea when asking tk to throw a tater on the field for me

[Malapropismic Depository]

8 minutes ago, bakedtater1 said:

Welp..I know theres a tater tossing contest..who ever can get the tater closest to the center of the ring at midfield wins a life time of taters..kinda where I got the idea when asking tk to throw a tater on the field for me

 

Sounds like something they would require football prospects to perform at the NFL Scouting Combine...for players from Idaho

 

"Okay so Billy Tate ran 4.9 in the 40, and Whoa, he scored a 9.7 in the Tater Tossing Drill !"

[bakedtater1]

20 minutes ago, Malapropismic Depository said:

 

Sounds like something they would require football prospects to perform at the NFL Scouting Combine...for players from Idaho

 

"Okay so Billy Tate ran 4.9 in the 40, and Whoa, he scored a 9.7 in the Tater Tossing Drill !"

It's more of a thing they do for fans before the game...part of the festivities..but I think your on to something 

[seantaylor=god]

1 hour ago, Rex Tomb said:

Looks a little bit like a tweener... but he could probably bulk up on that frame.  Maybe a 2nd rounder?

I don’t think so. He’s extremely productive, has great size, excellent character, and super smart. I bet he runs well also, he looks fast. He’s the kind of guy that keeps rising and I bet he goes in the top half of round 1. The only way I think he would last until round 2 is if he tests really poorly. He’d be an awesome addition to the team; I hope he’s available when we pick in the first round.

[KDawg]

47 minutes ago, Anselmheifer said:

 

I feel like I'm always plating contrarian with you, but your posts are interesting and informative. I'm not sure I agree here. 

 

 

I think Zach Wilson may be a star. What price would you pay for a rookie Deshaun Watson, if you already had a bunch of cap room, a WR1, a borderline star running back, a now solidified TE position, and a top 10 defense where all the best players were on rookie contracts? I'd pay two 1sts without even thinking about it and I'd probably pay 3. 

 

His off-schedule stuff is so good. UCF may not have a great defense, but Wilson didn't have an Ohio State quality pocket from which to throw. He moves within and outside the pocket so effortlessly. I think is arm is great. He throws a very catchable deep ball. He's my QB2. 

I also hated Josh Allen and thought Justin Herbert would stink. 

I’m lower on Wilson but think he could have franchise potential.

 

I think he’s the least likely of the 4 top QBs to do it. Not just skills, but he’s had shoulder and I believe elbow surgery as well? Not sure on the elbow. Shoulder yes. Trading up for him could be a death sentence and you give yourself the gas.

 

Thats not to say I don’t like him. I do. I think he’s awesome and if he fell to us or close where the trade isn’t insane I’d do it. For sure. 
 

But multiple firsts, a second and a third? Not for me. 
 

Theres 2 QBs worth that in this draft I think... and I wouldn’t do it for them, either. 

[CapsSkins]

10 minutes ago, KDawg said:

I’m lower on Wilson but think he could have franchise potential.

 

I think he’s the least likely of the 4 top QBs to do it. Not just skills, but he’s had shoulder and I believe elbow surgery as well? Not sure on the elbow. Shoulder yes. Trading up for him could be a death sentence and you give yourself the gas.

 

Thats not to say I don’t like him. I do. I think he’s awesome and if he fell to us or close where the trade isn’t insane I’d do it. For sure. 
 

But multiple firsts, a second and a third? Not for me. 
 

Theres 2 QBs worth that in this draft I think... and I wouldn’t do it for them, either. 

 

Where you and I agree is that you don't make an expensive trade for a Rookie whom you then immediately rely on to start.

 

Where you and I disagree is that I think you DO make a splashy trade for a Veteran whom you know can perform at a high enough level to make a deep playoff run. Like a Carr or a Ryan or a Stafford.

 

Veteran starters are de-risked and thus worth a premium, because solidifying the QB position is paramount. Paying a premium for a Rook isn't worth it because it's too risky to be thought of as solidifying the position, it's more just taking a shot.

[seantaylor=god]

1 minute ago, CapsSkins said:

 

...Like a Carr or a Ryan or a Stafford.

 

Veteran starters are de-risked and thus worth a premium, because solidifying the QB position is paramount. Paying a premium for a Rook isn't worth it because it's too risky to be thought of as solidifying the position, it's more just taking a shot.

Any of the players you mentioned above would be an upgrade to Smith (who has done a good job but is limited) and would make us a legit playoff contender, if we shored up the secondary, ILB and added a veteran WR.

[KDawg]

10 minutes ago, CapsSkins said:

 

Where you and I agree is that you don't make an expensive trade for a Rookie whom you then immediately rely on to start.

 

Where you and I disagree is that I think you DO make a splashy trade for a Veteran whom you know can perform at a high enough level to make a deep playoff run. Like a Carr or a Ryan or a Stafford.

 

Veteran starters are de-risked and thus worth a premium, because solidifying the QB position is paramount. Paying a premium for a Rook isn't worth it because it's too risky to be thought of as solidifying the position, it's more just taking a shot.

I just don’t love the idea of giving up assets on this team at the moment - I don’t think we’re a QB away. I think we need a lot more and I think we’re going to lose some pieces that are key cogs in the offseason. 
 

For what it’s worth I’m not against trading for assets. I don’t think now is the time for a big splashy trade.

 

I don’t agree that vets are de-risked. There is a lot of risk even with them. 
 

I think there’s a handful I’d make a splashy trade for right now and they aren’t available: Mahomes, Rodgers, Allen, Murray.

 

Watson, Wilson and Jackson lesser than the above but still willing for a trade.

[COWBOY-KILLA-]

There is no getting around not having a decent QB in the NFL. It’s literally the one thing most winning teams have in common. The coach, system employed, and length of time together are others. For this reason I’d gladly trade what I needed to get the Qb Kyle and Ron believe in. Both in the draft or through trade for a veteran QB. There are too many ways to work within the cap, and still sign whomever you want. If you really want to make it happen you can. Imo it is a risk that is well worth taking. Both trading up for Fields or Wilson or trading for Stafford (if possible).  

[KDawg]

2 minutes ago, COWBOY-KILLA- said:

There is no getting around not having a decent QB in the NFL. It’s literally the one thing most winning teams have in common. The coach, system employed, and length of time together are others. For this reason I’d gladly trade what I needed to get the Qb Kyle and Ron believe in. Both in the draft or through trade for a veteran QB. There are too many ways to work within the cap, and still sign whomever you want. If you really want to make it happen you can. Imo it is a risk that is well worth taking. Both trading up for Fields or Wilson or trading for Stafford (if possible).  

There is also no getting around destroying your draft capital for a team that isn’t ready yet and being stuck in mediocrity for 5 years because you overplayed your hand. 

[COWBOY-KILLA-]

22 minutes ago, KDawg said:

There is also no getting around destroying your draft capital for a team that isn’t ready yet and being stuck in mediocrity for 5 years because you overplayed your hand. 

That assumed nightmare becomes pretty moot if you hit on the QB imo.  By paying 3 (2nd, 1st and 3rd) additional picks over two drafts I disagree your facing 5 years of hell if you get it wrong. Teams get draft picks wrong all the time.  We’ve missed on a first round qb already, without the trade loss and we’re in pretty decent shape for the future even with the swing and miss. We have to keep swinging until we get it right.  Fear of Cap Hell or being stuck in Mediocrity isn’t gonna get us the QB of our present/future.If you have a shot to get your Whale, you do it imo.
 

 

[KDawg]

4 minutes ago, COWBOY-KILLA- said:

That assumed nightmare becomes pretty moot if you hit on the QB imo.  By paying 3 (2nd, 1st and 3rd) additional picks over two drafts I disagree your facing 5 years of hell if you get it wrong. Teams get draft picks wrong all the time.  We’ve missed on a first round qb already, without the trade loss and we’re in pretty decent shape for the future even with the swing and miss. We have to keep swinging until we get it right.  Fear of Cap Hell or being stuck in Mediocrity isn’t gonna get us the QB of our present/future.If you have a shot to get your Whale, you do it imo.
 

 

None of the options are whales.

 

Stafford is the best of the bunch and I’d be excited to have him. But I’d also feel dirty in the sense that we mortgaged a future on the hopes that the torso injuries don’t continue to pile up.

 

I’ve never said that we don’t keep trying. I don’t believe in shooting to shoot, though. Quantity doesn’t help your shooting percentage. Take good shots in the ranges you are most capable in. 
 

I don’t think trading so much for any of the names thrown around is a good shot. It’s more like a shot 6 feet behind the 3-pt arc. It could fall, and that would be great. But percentages aren’t with you.

 

Now, if things change and deals look “better” as the days approach I will modify my stance. For now, all of the names thrown around would cost too much or are a general bad trade for us. 
 

Stafford the player is an exciting get. I just don’t like the cost and nor do I think, at this point, it’s even close to being realistic.

[CapsSkins]

56 minutes ago, KDawg said:

I just don’t love the idea of giving up assets on this team at the moment - I don’t think we’re a QB away. I think we need a lot more and I think we’re going to lose some pieces that are key cogs in the offseason. 
 

For what it’s worth I’m not against trading for assets. I don’t think now is the time for a big splashy trade.

 

I don’t agree that vets are de-risked. There is a lot of risk even with them. 
 

I think there’s a handful I’d make a splashy trade for right now and they aren’t available: Mahomes, Rodgers, Allen, Murray.

 

Watson, Wilson and Jackson lesser than the above but still willing for a trade.

 

It's funny bc I believe that you believe you're not against trading for assets. But then the only guys you say you'd make a splashy trade for are probable/guaranteed Hall of Famers (Rodgers, Mahomes) or bona fide young stars (Allen, Murray). It's like when investors say they're down to invest but want a surefire 20% return with no risk. Like you're basically saying you don't want to play at all

 

I know your point is that it's a timing thing, and you think we're far enough away from true contention that it doesn't make sense to overspend for assets. I would both disagree on timing & what constitutes "mortgaging the future". I don't know if you've seen my posts about competitive windows, which I believe come in 1-3 year intervals (and can stack one after another), but I believe we've basically opened one starting next year rolling through 2023 when the 2019 draft class finishes up their rookie deals.

 

I don't have any delusions that I'll persuade you to think differently. I was just stating where we align and where we don't on draft approach. But I will say this, I believe Ron will have a veteran starting week 1 of 2021 and I'd bet it's a guy not currently on our roster. 

 

[COWBOY-KILLA-]

42 minutes ago, KDawg said:

None of the options are whales.

 

Stafford is the best of the bunch and I’d be excited to have him. But I’d also feel dirty in the sense that we mortgaged a future on the hopes that the torso injuries don’t continue to pile up.

 

I’ve never said that we don’t keep trying. I don’t believe in shooting to shoot, though. Quantity doesn’t help your shooting percentage. Take good shots in the ranges you are most capable in. 
 

I don’t think trading so much for any of the names thrown around is a good shot. It’s more like a shot 6 feet behind the 3-pt arc. It could fall, and that would be great. But percentages aren’t with you.

 

Now, if things change and deals look “better” as the days approach I will modify my stance. For now, all of the names thrown around would cost too much or are a general bad trade for us. 
 

Stafford the player is an exciting get. I just don’t like the cost and nor do I think, at this point, it’s even close to being realistic.

We don’t disagree much overall, you want to take good shots. You mentioned the draft kids aren’t whales, and the fact is we dont know that today. That’s where you rely on your people’s evaluation, if there is consensus Or a strong case is made that either Fields or Wilson is legit then I don’t blink and I pull the trigger. If they feel strongly about either, we’ll know come the draft. I’d be fine with it and hope their right.

Deal with later, later, if we get it wrong.
 

With Stafford or Ryan Or someone else, we’d give up less capital, know exactly what we are getting, but would come with higher cap costs/effects and their known weaknesses. But it’s workable. This option provides a bit more clarity in the risk assessment, so maybe Ron likes this route better. Idk. 
 

Id just remind myself If I were the decision maker to not let the unknown or fear stop me from being Uber aggressive at solving the QB dilemma ASAP, but still take good shots.
 

 

[wilco_holland]

Personally I rather see WR or LB in the draft first round and if Smith is not a option sign a different veteran QB. Why? I think a good D with decent veteran QB will help us maximise that potential short term. Then in a couple of years year after year we need to sign D pieces to new contracts. That's when you want to have the rookie QB. To have the cap to keep the D together. 

 

Right now we have the room to overpay for a veteran QB.