2021 Comprehensive Draft Thread

[DWinzit]

3 minutes ago, KDawg said:

I’m almost totally on board with this except for Etienne (though... I wouldn’t mind him I just would go to other places before him despite the fact that I think he could be very Kamaraish).

 

I’d entertain corner, Moehrig at 19. But I think that’s accounted for in your blue chip comment. 
 

I’d be willing to make a small move forward if, say, Sewell or Slater falls. I can’t see a scenario that happens, though.

Are you considering Moehrig a blue chip faller or just the corners? I still see Moehrig in a group with Zaven, Jamin, Bateman, Jenkins, Cosmi, AVT as a great group of trade down options

[RWJ]

1 minute ago, DWinzit said:

Are you considering Moehrig a blue chip faller or just the corners? I still see Moehrig in a group with Zaven, Jamin, Bateman, Jenkins, Cosmi, AVT as a great group of trade down options

Agree DW but I only trade down if Darrisaw or JOK are not there at #19.  JMO. 

[mhd24]

I think Detroit wants to trade down, but will they if Sewell is on the board?  He fits exactly what they are looking for in terms of rebuilding their team.  

[Warhead36]

8 hours ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

I don't understand how Kyle Shanahan can be such a genius with his QBs and simultaneously also trade three first round picks to get Mac Jones and beg us to take the #2 overall pick for Kirk Cousins and pass over DeShaun Watson and Patrick Mahomes.

 

It's like he is so singular in how he views the position that he has no sense whatsoever of the market value of draft picks or these prospects.

 

The Hell of it is he's good enough at what he does to make himself look right no matter what.  I don't get his love for Jones at all, but I'm certainly not going to bet against Shanahan.  He got friggin Jimmy Garoppolo to take him to a SB.  It's situations like this that reinforce the truism that franchise QBs are made, not found.  And the one thing that matters most in the success of a QB prospect isn't the guy's skill set but the strength of his relationship with his coach.

He's great at coaching them up but he doesn't have that eye for personnel. Remember he wanted John Beck here back in 2011 as well.

 

I bet Lynch is pissed that Shanny is gonna take a prospect so "meh" as Jones at #3 overall. He'd probably prefer Lance or Fields, but we know Shanny has final say.

Just now, mhd24 said:

I think Detroit wants to trade down, but will they if Sewell is on the board?  He fits exactly what they are looking for in terms of rebuilding their team.  

I could see the Chargers moving up from 13 to 7 to get Sewell. The Lions need literally just about every position so they're gonna wanna just keep adding picks. The Chargers badly need to protect Herbert and Sewell played with him at Oregon.

[KDawg]

4 minutes ago, DWinzit said:

Are you considering Moehrig a blue chip faller or just the corners? I still see Moehrig in a group with Zaven, Jamin, Bateman, Jenkins, Cosmi, AVT as a great group of trade down options

I think Moehrig could be blue chip but isn’t necessarily in that group.

[Warhead36]

19 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

My flow chart for 19:

1 - trade up for Fields if the cost is low, especially if it were only a second and perhaps some change

2 - draft any blue chip faller other than Parsons.

3 - draft Darrisaw if he's there

4 - trade down if 1-3 don't happen

5 - pick Etienne or Najee if we're stuck at 19 or after a small trade down.

I'm mostly in agreement. I'd still take Parsons and would not take a RB at 19(I would be okay taking Harris after a trade down though).

 

To me regarding point 2 blue chip fallers the blue chips would be Smith, Waddle, Horn, Surtain, Sewell, or Slater(but I think the chance any of them drop to 19 is less than 1%).

[JamesMadisonSkins]

7 minutes ago, RWJ said:

Yep, #7 to me and starting to think definitely is the sweet spot for one of the two QB maybe both Lance and Fields being available for trade.  It's possible both are there we just don't know yet but Fields seems to be the one.

So if SF goes Jones and ATL is really enamored with Lance and takes him at 4 (probably just ATL trying to get people to reengage to trade to 4. Or if ATL trades out of 4 to Denver or NE ... 7 is the spot for me for the Fields pick (assuming 4 is Lance) 

 

if both Fields and Lance are there maybe you can wait and see if someone falls past 9 but we are pretty vulnerable in that teams 10-12 won’t trade with us. So I think we just bite the bullet and go to 7. 
 

Maybe instead of 1/3/1 if ends up being 1/2/2 next year. Either way, if Fields is the dude you go get him. Fields probably gets on the field this year. Lance probably predominantly sits. But at least we wouldn’t feel the need to rush Fields in. 

[Skinsinparadise]

This is what I mentioned last night

 

 

 

[Warhead36]

I just don't see the Falcons taking QB at 4. You don't spend a top 5 pick on a guy who's gonna sit on your bench for two years. They'll trade down or take Pitts.

 

Broncos are a wild card. Are they really sold on Lock? I don't think they'll mortgage the future to trade up, only if they get really good value.

[RWJ]

3 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

I just don't see the Falcons taking QB at 4. You don't spend a top 5 pick on a guy who's gonna sit on your bench for two years. They'll trade down or take Pitts.

 

Broncos are a wild card. Are they really sold on Lock? I don't think they'll mortgage the future to trade up, only if they get really good value.

I think Falcons go Pitts.  Just a guess.

[Going Commando]

6 minutes ago, KDawg said:

I’m almost totally on board with this except for Etienne (though... I wouldn’t mind him I just would go to other places before him despite the fact that I think he could be very Kamaraish).

 

I’d entertain corner, Moehrig at 19. But I think that’s accounted for in your blue chip comment. 
 

I’d be willing to make a small move forward if, say, Sewell or Slater falls. I can’t see a scenario that happens, though.

 

I think I would do Horn and Surtain > Najee and Etienne but I'm not sure about Newsome.  I might and it's close.  But I like a class where we get Etienne/Najee at 19 and Asante Samuel at 51 much better than taking Newsome at 19 and whoever at 51.

 

I really like Moehrig.  I do think he's a blue chipper but I also think Najee and Etienne are better than him while also playing a more valuable position.  Moehrig's draft value for me is really undercut by the belief that we can get good safety play from late round picks this year.  Especially if we get a beast corner like Newsome or Samuel early.  IMO a much cheaper prospect like Shawn Davis could really thrive in that environment.

 

Zaven would also be in play for me but he's just not quite as good as Najee and Etienne are. It becomes difficult for me to set aside BPA at that point.  Ideally guys like Moehrig and Zaven would be closer to the BPA point after a slight trade down.

 

I'd consider trading up for Sewell or Slater too, but I also expect them to go early.  OTs don't tend to drop in the first round.  At the end of the day though, I'm very cautious and uncomfortable about the value of trading up in the first for non QBs.  There is too much of a chance that you're paying opportunity cost that can never be recouped by that player, even if it's a second tier position like OT or edge.  For example, as good as Montez Sweat is, this team would be better with DK Metcalf and Jaylon Johnson/Jonathan Taylor than just Montez IMO.  It's a difference of potentially 31 AV (Metcalf/Taylor) or 27 AV (Metcalf/Johnson) vs the 16 we've gotten from Montez.  I didn't just pick those names out of a hat or use hindsight bias to choose them, those would be the guys I would have drafted at those picks at the time based on my big boards I made.

[DWinzit]

10 minutes ago, KDawg said:

I think Moehrig could be blue chip but isn’t necessarily in that group.

He is a good fit at a need position but I have a hard time pulling the trigger on him at 19. There should be a number of higher ranked players at need positions available and I know I grab another good FS in another round. No if it's at 23 lets say, I have less qualms and know I have another day 2 pick for one of those other holes

[Warhead36]

Yeah Moehrig at 19 would be a little underwhelming for me too. After a trade down though? Sure. But even then, I don't love the idea of taking a FS in round 1 unless its like an Ed Reed type star prospect. I mean we got solid FS play last year from an UDFA in Reaves.

[RWJ]

1 minute ago, DWinzit said:

He is a good fit at a need position but I have a hard time pulling the trigger on him at 19. There should be a number of higher ranked players at need positions available and I know I grab another good FS in another round. No if it's at 23 lets say, I have less qualms and know I have another day 2 pick for one of those other holes

I'd trade all day long.  I liked your post reply because we have a bigger hole than at FS and our DL and the addition of JOK with a FS pick later helps makes the FS we would take better.

[DWinzit]

2 minutes ago, RWJ said:

I'd trade all day long.  I liked your post reply because we have a bigger hole than at FS and our DL and the addition of JOK with a FS pick later helps makes the FS we would take better.

I must admit there is one place we differ, I am still on the fence with JOK at 19.  Other than that we seem to have close strategies lol

[RWJ]

Just now, DWinzit said:

I must admit there is one place we differ, I am still on the fence with JOK at 19.  Other than that we seem to have close strategies lol

Have you watch JOK's tape and a lot of it?  Dude jumps out.  Just saying. 

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

34 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

My flow chart for 19:

1 - trade up for Fields if the cost is low, especially if it were only a second and perhaps some change

2 - draft any blue chip faller other than Parsons.

3 - draft Darrisaw if he's there

4 - trade down if 1-3 don't happen

5 - pick Etienne or Najee if we're stuck at 19 or after a small trade down.

 

I'm close to this, but more picky.

 

1 - Trade up for a QB if the team really think he's the guy (also for a low cost)

2 - Draft any blue chip faller other than Parsons.  Horn, Smith, Slater, etc.  Group of blue chips is small.

3 - Trade down if 1-2 don't happen

4 - Take a future/current need pick like Darrisaw/Jenkins.

 

I think that Darrisaw/Jenkins are a tier above the next group of OT prospects, but I don't think the difference is as high.  Some of the guys in the tier below them have serious potential.

[Going Commando]

26 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I like this plan but I am assuming #5 isn't in play with them.  Will see.  Thursday can't get here soon enough.  

 

i also assume trading up for Fields won't come cheap but i might do it anyway.  I am thinking you got to go to #7 to pull it off or worse case #8. 

 

I don't think they'd do #5 either but not because I lack confidence in the value of #5, but because I don't have total confidence in the vision of this FO to see the value of doing it.  Najee and Etienne are kind of a yardstick for me to see how good this new FO is this year.  There are a lot of scenarios at 19 where they are the clear cut BPA and what we decide could reveal whether this is a BPA FO or not.

 

But you never know.  Marty Hurney is the guy who drafted Christian McCaffrey and Jonathan Stewart and Deangelo Williams in the first round right?

 

I think there is a chance Fields falls further than anyone expects.  DeShaun Watson went 12th and Lamar Jackson went 32nd and those are the two best case scenario comparisons floated most often with Fields.  I'm not necessarily expecting it, but I think there is at least a really good chance we can get Fields for a relative bargain and that he's our guy if we want him.

[DWinzit]

Just now, RWJ said:

Have you watch JOK's tape and a lot of it?  Dude jumps out.  Just saying. 

I sure have and he sure does. So does L Collins contract and they potentially would be playing similar roles. It is hard to tell because we can't be certain if their wish is to move back to more 4-3 or go more 4-2. 

[Warhead36]

My fear if we draft JOK is teams just run the ball out of 3 WR sets against us and pummel the undersized JOK into oblivion. He will not address our run D issues at all.

 

But it sure would be nice to be able to cover TEs for the first time in like 20 years.

[mhd24]

5 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

I don't think they'd do #5 either but not because I lack confidence in the value of #5, but because I don't have total confidence in the vision of this FO to see the value of doing it.  Najee and Etienne are kind of a yardstick for me to see how good this new FO is this year.  There are a lot of scenarios at 19 where they are the clear cut BPA and what we decide could reveal whether this is a BPA FO or not.

 

But you never know.  Marty Hurney is the guy who drafted Christian McCaffrey and Jonathan Stewart and Deangelo Williams in the first round right?

 

I think there is a chance Fields falls further than anyone expects.  DeShaun Watson went 12th and Lamar Jackson went 32nd and those are the two best case scenario comparisons floated most often with Fields.  I'm not necessarily expecting it, but I think there is at least a really good chance we can get Fields for a relative bargain and that he's our guy if we want him.

 

 

It all hinges on Denver and NE (our competition for QBs).  I'm thinking Denver might prefer Fields over Lance since Fields is more ready (and Lock has a tenuous hold as the QB anyways (according to Lombardi, he was almost traded to Carolina earlier in the off-season)).  I think I want Fields over Lance too.  Denver can trade up to 6-8 and pay a small price to get their QB while the team trading down can still get a blue-chip player (Sewell, Slater, Waddle, the CBs).  Trading down to 19 doesn't allow those teams to do so.  

 

NE can trade up to 10-12 much more easily than we can.  The NFC east isn't trading down with us.  I figure NYG is a strong trade down team (even though Gettleman doesn't trade down often).  They can still get their edge or Parsons at 15 while NE can get the last QB at 11.  They also prevent us from getting the QB.

 

I don't see a realistic path at trading up unless we offer a bounty of picks.  

[DWinzit]

1 minute ago, Warhead36 said:

My fear if we draft JOK is teams just run the ball out of 3 WR sets against us and pummel the undersized JOK into oblivion. He will not address our run D issues at all.

 

But it sure would be nice to be able to cover TEs for the first time in like 20 years.

And that's where a guy like Jamin is so intriguing...if he only had a little more experience and film

[RWJ]

8 minutes ago, DWinzit said:

I sure have and he sure does. So does L Collins contract and they potentially would be playing similar roles. It is hard to tell because we can't be certain if their wish is to move back to more 4-3 or go more 4-2. 

If they move to a 4-2 there is a perfect LB for that scheme:  Fields from WVU.  He can be had on the 3rd day of the draft 4th/5th round.  

3 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

My fear if we draft JOK is teams just run the ball out of 3 WR sets against us and pummel the undersized JOK into oblivion. He will not address our run D issues at all.

 

But it sure would be nice to be able to cover TEs for the first time in like 20 years.

WH, I really believe he can get to 230 and still cover LBs w/o any problems.  That's just me.  I think he's that special.  

[DWinzit]

4 minutes ago, RWJ said:

If they move to a 4-2 there is a perfect LB for that scheme:  Fields from WVU.  He can be had on the 3rd day of the draft 4th/5th round.  

Due to the number of wants and needs, I can't see two LB picks through the first 5 rounds unless they sign a FA before the draft.

LT, TE, RB, WR, LB, FS, plus QB, CB, Edge

[clskinsfan]

I have been pretty clear that I personally have no interest in trading future draft capital for Lance. But Fields is an entirely different animal. He played against the best college football had to offer and played incredibly well. Especially in the highest pressure situations. I would be fine with trading next years 1st to get into the top 10 for the guy. And I dont really hate Lance. We just dont know what he is yet. He is a long term project. And I am totally against trading future picks for a pure project. Now if he somehow falls to 15-18 and you can snag him for an extra 3rd this year than I am fine with it.