2021 Draft Order / Tracker: Current Pick #19

[Skinsinparadise]

57 minutes ago, IrepDC said:

To be fair, this debate is about what a MLB vs QB would do on THIS team. So we are debating the upgrade in impact over Alex Smith vs our no name LB core. I think that closes the gap in the discussion since we do have serviceable QB play right now, but our LB play is holding our defense back from it's full potential.

 

OK but in that context my point still stands.  And I still don't believe its a close debate.   But that's my opinion.  I don't think this team is a threat in the playoffs with Alex Smith as the QB.  Simple as that.  I think you throw Russell Wilson on this team and we might be SB caliber after a strong off season.  In spite of our weakness at MLB, we are still a top 5 defense.  Seattle is close to bottom 5 using Football Outsiders metrics. 

 

I  think a MLB would certainly have our defense hitting its full potential so I agree with that part of your point.  But I think this team is no threat in the playoffs with a servicable QB.  We'd have to get really lucky in that case where we are one of those weird anamoly teams.  It's not impossible but i wouldn't bet on it working.   You give me Russell Wilson or Aaron Rodgers on this team with one more off season to make upgrades -- i think we can contend for a SB in 2021.    You give me Parsons and then we ride with Alex, I think we go 10-6 tops, likely first round exit.

 

If its purely about MLB or a Qb for this team -- I don't get the relevance considering that's not going to be how the FO deals with it.  It's not and either or situation.  You can find a MLB if you draft a QB for example.  It's not one versus the other.  We don't just have one draft pick and zero salary cap room.  it's miles harder though to find that Qb.  There is a reason why you rarely see MLBs go top 5.  MLB isn't a hard position to get in FA or for example in the 2nd round of the draft.   Finding that really good MLB isn't an elusive type of get.  The elusive get is the Aaron Rodgers type. 

[Est.1974]

Parson would be a great selection for us to start at MLB in 2021.

However, I would still take a QB prospect before him in the top 12 of the draft, even if that QB was to sit behind Smith for a portion of next season.

 

The longer term value of getting a starting QB on the books for 5 years outweighs the selection of a MLB.

 

Using the Cowboys as an example, they should be taking a QB if the are picking top 6. Even if they retain Dak, take that QB too.

 

How would you compare the value of a #2 QB on the depth chart to a starting LB ?

 

Quite a few teams have been screwed once that starting QB goes down. That’s like pissing a full season and 150mil down the toilet.

 

We do still need a LB though. In fact, we probably need two. 

[IrepDC]

46 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

OK but in that context my point still stands.  And I still don't believe its a close debate.   But that's my opinion.  I don't think this team is a threat in the playoffs with Alex Smith as the QB.  Simple as that.  I think you throw Russell Wilson on this team and we might be SB caliber after a strong off season.  In spite of our weakness at MLB, we are still a top 5 defense.  Seattle is close to bottom 5 using Football Outsiders metrics. 

 

I  think a MLB would certainly have our defense hitting its full potential so I agree with that part of your point.  But I think this team is no threat in the playoffs with a servicable QB.  We'd have to get really lucky in that case where we are one of those weird anamoly teams.  It's not impossible but i wouldn't bet on it working.   You give me Russell Wilson or Aaron Rodgers on this team with one more off season to make upgrades -- i think we can contend for a SB in 2021.    You give me Parsons and then we ride with Alex, I think we go 10-6 tops, likely first round exit.

 

If its purely about MLB or a Qb for this team -- I don't get the relevance considering that's not going to be how the FO deals with it.  It's not and either or situation.  You can find a MLB if you draft a QB for example.  It's not one versus the other.  We don't just have one draft pick and zero salary cap room.  it's miles harder though to find that Qb.  There is a reason why you rarely see MLBs go top 5.  MLB isn't a hard position to get in FA or for example in the 2nd round of the draft.   Finding that really good MLB isn't an elusive type of get.  The elusive get is the Aaron Rodgers type. 

The way this team is built currently, we absolutely can win with Alex Smith in the playoffs. I already mentioned the 49ers, who I think we are built most like, getting to the Super Bowl with Kaep and Garrapolo. If you raise the level of our defensive play to that next level, Alex Smith will get the job done just like those guys did. Nick Foles gets a ton of credit, but to me, it was that Eagles defense that won them a chip. Smith can play at Foles level. This defense with Parsons is much better against the run. We were already number 1 against the pass. We are a lot closer to contending off the strength of our defense than off the strength of our offense.

 

The either or was just a scenario posed by a poster that started this debate. It's for fun. Of course both can be addressed.

[IrepDC]

39 minutes ago, UK SKINS FAN 74 said:

 

Using the Cowboys as an example, they should be taking a QB if the are picking top 6. Even if they retain Dak, take that QB too.

 

I despise discussing that team, but I completely disagree with this. If they retain Dak and still use a top 10 pick on a QB, that would make zero sense. It reminds me of someone who said maybe we can trade Haskins to the Bengals. Or draft a QB every year.

 

A huge issue with developing QBs are reps. There are only so many reps in practice with the starters. Just stockpiling QBs makes no sense. 

[OVCChairman]

40 minutes ago, IrepDC said:

The way this team is built currently, we absolutely can win with Alex Smith in the playoffs. I already mentioned the 49ers, who I think we are built most like, getting to the Super Bowl with Kaep and Garrapolo. If you raise the level of our defensive play to that next level, Alex Smith will get the job done just like those guys did. Nick Foles gets a ton of credit, but to me, it was that Eagles defense that won them a chip. Smith can play at Foles level. This defense with Parsons is much better against the run. We were already number 1 against the pass. We are a lot closer to contending off the strength of our defense than off the strength of our offense.

 

The either or was just a scenario posed by a poster that started this debate. It's for fun. Of course both can be addressed.

 

 

I dont know about that... Philly gave up 600+ yards to New England... it was actually a SB record.  Foles threw for 370+ himself...  Foles executed that offense to the tune of 4-1 in the final 5 games to finish the season throwing for 1400+ yards in those 5 games... that's almost 300 YPG (282) to be exact.  They were 5 - 6 when Foles took over at QB, and Wentz was widely viewed as an MVP candidate when he went down... so offensively that team was getting really good QB play between both players.   Collectively Wentz / Foles accounted for 4500+ yards, 70% completion rate, and a 29/11 TD/INT ratio.  

 

 

Edit:  I'm an idiot, these are the stats for 2018... not 2017.. 

[BigHuv21]

18 minutes ago, OVCChairman said:

 

 

I dont know about that... Philly gave up 600+ yards to New England... it was actually a SB record.  Foles threw for 370+ himself...  Foles executed that offense to the tune of 4-1 in the final 5 games to finish the season throwing for 1400+ yards in those 5 games... that's almost 300 YPG (282) to be exact.  They were 5 - 6 when Foles took over at QB, and Wentz was widely viewed as an MVP candidate when he went down... so offensively that team was getting really good QB play between both players.   Collectively Wentz / Foles accounted for 4500+ yards, 70% completion rate, and a 29/11 TD/INT ratio.  

The Eagles were 12-2 when Foles took over. Wentz went down in Week 14 vs the Rams. Foles finished the season 2-1 and we all know how the playoffs went....

[OVCChairman]

2 minutes ago, BigHuv21 said:

The Eagles were 12-2 when Foles took over. Wentz went down in Week 14 vs the Rams. Foles finished the season 2-1 and we all know how the playoffs went....

 

 

OH crap you're 100% correct, I was looking at 2018!

 

 

[Est.1974]

36 minutes ago, IrepDC said:

Just stockpiling QBs makes no sense. 

Having 2 isn’t a stockpile. It’s a starter and a viable backup that you could realistically still win with.

[Skinsinparadise]

59 minutes ago, IrepDC said:

The way this team is built currently, we absolutely can win with Alex Smith in the playoffs. I already mentioned the 49ers, who I think we are built most like, getting to the Super Bowl with Kaep and Garrapolo. If you raise the level of our defensive play to that next level, Alex Smith will get the job done just like those guys did. Nick Foles gets a ton of credit, but to me, it was that Eagles defense that won them a chip. Smith can play at Foles level. This defense with Parsons is much better against the run. We were already number 1 against the pass. We are a lot closer to contending off the strength of our defense than off the strength of our offense.

 

 

 In 2019, Jimmy G had about a 70% completion rate, passed for just short of 4000 yards.   60.8 QBR.   Alex approached that yardage just once his long career.  That completion rate ditto.  His QBR rating is typically below 60.  Right now Alex's QBR rating is under 40.

 

Jimmy G isn't a great QB but had somewhat a career year for him in 2019.  So yeah if Alex throws for 4000 yards, 70% completion rating, and exceeds his typical QBR rating among other things -- sure we can do it.    That's why i said we'd have to get lucky. 

 

If its even remotely a run of the mill Alex season, nope I don't think we sniff a SB.  But if he has the season of his life or approaches his by a mile career best season from back in 2017, and peaks at the ripe age of 37 coming off of that injury then yes it could happen.  I would bet my mortgage though against it.   It would be wild and talk about adding to the Hollywood story to see a dude have a career peak with that injury.  But I don't think that it will happen. 

 

If Alex turns into one of those speedy read option QBs that caught the league off guard that season like Kaepernick did then and can sprint for 60 yard run or whatever that was against GB, then yep maybe he can pull it off, too.  But I'd bet my mortgage against it.

 

59 minutes ago, IrepDC said:

 

The either or was just a scenario posed by a poster that started this debate. It's for fun. Of course both can be addressed.

 

OK, cool, got it.  😀

[Stone Cold]

3 minutes ago, UK SKINS FAN 74 said:

Having 2 isn’t a stockpile. It’s a starter and a viable backup that you could realistically still win with.

If you have 2...you don’t have 1.  😕

[IrepDC]

10 minutes ago, UK SKINS FAN 74 said:

Having 2 isn’t a stockpile. It’s a starter and a viable backup that you could realistically still win with.

You're right. Two isn't stock piling, but using a top 10 pick when you have a QB who was leading the league in passing doesn't make sense to me. It's a missed opportunity to make the team around their QB better(which they obviously need).

[IrepDC]

11 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 In 2019, Jimmy G had about a 70% completion rate, passed for just short of 4000 yards.   60.8 QBR.   Alex approached that yardage just once his long career.  That completion rate ditto.  His QBR rating is typically below 60.  Right now Alex's QBR rating is under 40.

 

Jimmy G isn't a great QB but had somewhat a career year for him in 2019.  So yeah if Alex throws for 4000 yards, 70% completion rating, and exceeds his typical QBR rating among other things -- sure we can do it.    That's why i said we'd have to get lucky. 

 

If its even remotely a run of the mill Alex season, nope I don't think we sniff a SB.  But if he has the season of his life or approaches his by a mile career best season from back in 2017, and peaks at the ripe age of 37 coming off of that injury then yes it could happen.  I would bet my mortgage though against it.   It would be wild and talk about adding to the Hollywood story to see a dude have a career peak with that injury.  But I don't that it will happen. 

 

If Alex turns into one of those speedy read option QBs that caught the league off guard that season like Kaepernick did then and can sprint for 60 yard run or whatever that was against GB, then yep maybe he can pull it off, too.  But I'd bet my mortgage against it.

 

 

OK, cool, got it.  😀

I wasn't necessarily referring to Garrapolo's season stats, which still were not elite in my opinion. I was referring to how they beat teams in the playoffs. Without looking up specifics from last year, they were relying on their defense and run game to win playoff games. Playoff football is different than regular season football. Alex can play the style of football they needed Garrapolo to play. If you can shut down the run in the playoffs, which with Parsons I see us doing, while getting pressure on the QB, which we obviously can do, you have a chance. You only need Alex to play how he has played the past few games and a solid running game to compliment the defense in this scenario. Smith doesn't need to make the EXACT plays Kaep made, but he can sub those long runs for the occasional timely shot to McClaurin. That's all we need him to do if our defense is keeping us in games.

[philibusters]

In terms of stockpiling QB's its not a horrible idea but the nature of the NFL is that you always have immediate needs at other positions that need to be addressed and limited cap space.  Further it can only be done through the draft where you have the second QB on a rookie contract.  If you pay your starter 30 million, you simply cannot get another starter quality QB in free agency because they would cost 20 million a year and that 20 million a year would take up your crucial cap space.  Thus if you were going to stock pile a QB you need to do get the second QB from the draft.  But if you take a QB with a top 10 pick when you already have a good franchise QB, you lose the opportunity to get another player who will fill an immediate need at a bargain price. 

[Skinsinparadise]

11 minutes ago, IrepDC said:

I wasn't necessarily referring to Garrapolo's season stats, which still were not elite in my opinion. I was referring to how they beat teams in the playoffs. Without looking up specifics from last year, they were relying on their defense and run game to win playoff games. Playoff football is different than regular season football. Alex can play the style of football they needed Garrapolo to play. If you can shut down the run in the playoffs, which with Parsons I see us doing, while getting pressure on the QB, which we obviously can do, you have a chance. You only need Alex to play how he has played the past few games and a solid running game to compliment the defense in this scenario. Smith doesn't need to make the EXACT plays Kaep made, but he can sub those long runs for the occasional timely shot to McClaurin. That's all we need him to do if our defense is keeping us in games.

 

I get the formula for winning with Alex but there are limits to it.  If you recall when we went up against big boy offenses we were smoked in 2018.  Atlanta and New Orleans destoyed us.  Indy a playoff team beat us at home, too.    GB was the exception but Aaron was hobbled in that game.  The Alex style is very suitable to beat bad to mediocre teams but not set up well to beat the big teams in the playoffs.

 

Foles and I'll add Eli into the discussion too (for a couple of seasons in Eli's case) had a nice stretch in the playoffs where they got this reputation for being clutch in the post season.  Alex isn't known for the same thing.  He's not exactly a newbee where we don't have a sample size of him on that front.  He's gone 2-5 in the playoffs.   It was actually part of the narrative as for why the Chiefs wanted to move on from Alex as to wanting to make a dent in the playoffs.  So now all of a sudden it becomes Alex's thing at 37?   You never know but again i doubt it. 

 

For me to change my mind, I'd like to see them beat a team like Seattle and or Pittsburgh.  So it will be tested soon.  Pittsburgh is banged up and likely tired.  Seattle has a bad defense.    So these aren't mission impossible tasks.  I'll see how well the offense does in those games.   I gather your point is Alex would likely beat those teams if he had Parsons playing MLB?  Ok then lets just see Alex move the ball against Pittsburgh even in a loss if that's how it goes down. 

 

[TheShredder]

32 minutes ago, UK SKINS FAN 74 said:

Having 2 isn’t a stockpile. It’s a starter and a viable backup that you could realistically still win with.

They've got a vet QB under contract and executing the offense well and improving week on week.  Smith's contract is middle of the road.  They also have a 1st round draft pick on a rookie deal...so, unless they get something decent for that 1st round pick they could easily pick a future MLB before another QB in next years draft or even 2022.  There's more need to fix the OL and Tacle spots than adding another QB who would be unprotected.  $.02

[IrepDC]

19 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

For me to change my mind, I'd like to see them beat a team like Seattle and or Pittsburgh.  So it will be tested soon.  Pittsburgh is banged up and likely tired.  Seattle has a bad defense.    So these aren't mission impossible tasks.  I'll see how well the offense does in those games.   I gather your point is Alex would likely beat those teams if he had Parsons playing MLB?  Ok then lets just see Alex move the ball against Pittsburgh even in a loss if that's how it goes down. 

 

I can't argue against this. I'll just say that in my hypothetical, we wouldn't have been smoked by those high powered offenses, because we'd have a defense keeping us in games. We a very close to having a defense capable of doing that. A game changing MLB puts us on par with that 49ers defense from last year. I do agree that I'd like to see Alex play slightly better against better competition- even if it's in a losing effort. You got me there.

[cakmoney61]

There is one defensive player that I would consider over a HOF or HOF-caliber QB and that is Lawrence Taylor.  He literally destroyed offenses by himself.  And he was a turnover producing machine.  He, like great QBs, was a true game changer.  Otherwise, I'm going with the HOF QB every time.

[Est.1974]

18 minutes ago, TheShredder said:

There's more need to fix the OL and Tacle spots than adding another QB who would be unprotected. 

 I’m in favour of going QB followed by OT, first 2 picks.

 

LB and TE soon after.

[CurseReversed]

8 hours ago, OVCChairman said:

I'm sorry but if we're going to omit Pat Mahomes, you have to omit Ray Lewis too...  If the comp is going to be Russell Wilson, than the comp opposite him would be closer to Brian Urlacher or Junior Seau if we are looking historically.  In those comps, I take Russell Wilson if I am confident I'm actually getting Russell Wilson. 

Yea you have got a point there.  

[JoggingGod]

People here have astoundingly outdated views about the NFL. Not only is Parsons not Ray Lewis but there isn’t a single instance of a team building around a god damn LB today.

[CurseReversed]

Ray lewis isn't really a fair comparison, now that I think about it, because he was a transcendent type player.  He was blessed with amazing leadership and football abilities and built a near dynasty level culture around them.

 

Having an excellent GM and a ton of talent helped I am sure but its hard to project that in a MLB, no matter how good a prospect he is.

I cant really think of any other LB I would put on par with a franchise QB, over the long term,  except for Ray.

 

 

[CapsSkins]

4 hours ago, IrepDC said:

To be fair, this debate is about what a MLB vs QB would do on THIS team. So we are debating the upgrade in impact over Alex Smith vs our no name LB core. I think that closes the gap in the discussion since we do have serviceable QB play right now, but our LB play is holding our defense back from it's full potential.

 

If this were 2018 I'd be with you. Roll w/ Alex for 5 years, get an elite D and contend while finding a young guy to develop on the way.

 

But given we're looking at 2021 w/ a 37 year old cyborg version of Alex, I still think you gotta draft a QB whom you can hand they keys by 2022-2023. 

[IrepDC]

34 minutes ago, CapsSkins said:

 

If this were 2018 I'd be with you. Roll w/ Alex for 5 years, get an elite D and contend while finding a young guy to develop on the way.

 

But given we're looking at 2021 w/ a 37 year old cyborg version of Alex, I still think you gotta draft a QB whom you can hand they keys by 2022-2023. 

Yeah I'm only proposing this as a 1 year plan. Next year we'd be looking at QB in the draft, and that's where the second part of my prediction kicks in. With the many QB prospects in this draft, I see next year being a year like when Rodgers fell. There will be so many teams with young QB prospects after this draft, the following year, one or more of the top guys will fall in the mid to later 1st round. We then have a top flight defense to compliment our new QB in 2022 a la Big Ben or Brady their rookie years.

[CapsSkins]

3 minutes ago, IrepDC said:

Yeah I'm only proposing this as a 1 year plan. Next year we'd be looking at QB in the draft, and that's where the second part of my prediction kicks in. With the many QB prospects in this draft, I see next year being a year like when Rodgers fell. There will be so many teams with young QB prospects after this draft, the following year, one or more of the top guys will fall in the mid to later 1st round. We then have a top flight defense to compliment our new QB in 2022 a la Big Ben or Brady their rookie years.

 

I see your logic for sure. This is where I am out of my element as I don't watch CFB, so I got no clue who's good or who's coming out which year or anything like that. End of the day, it's all about who's on the board when we pick and how Kyle and Ron have these guys graded.

 

Broadly, I do agree that if the team isn't in love with a guy, they don't need to take him just because he's the top QB left on their board. That's the flexibility we get by having Alex and Kyle Allen, who between the two of them can drive the car while the FO builds out the roster. Finding a QB within the next two years is a must, but it doesn't have be in Round 1 or 2 of the 2021 draft if the board doesn't shake out that way.

[CommanderDOOM]

7 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

You give me Russell Wilson or Aaron Rodgers on this team with one more off season to make upgrades -- i think we can contend for a SB in 2021....

 

We'd be a contender now.