2022 Comprehensive Draft Thread

[Koolblue13]

1 hour ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

Shoved stuff up some teammates’ butts.

Rubbed his doodle on their noodle.

[Going Commando]

11 hours ago, The Consigliere said:

Beyond that, everything else is window dressing, yes its true, WR's and RB's are necessary, a TE too etc, but none of it is gonna kill you so long as you've got stability and talent at coaching, and an OL. If you've got that, you've got what you need for your new QB, if you don't, you still have to take the QB, but understand that you probably want to let a stop gap get battered until you have a better OL, or better coach so the player doesn't get Carr'd or Tannehilled. 

 

Weapons aren't just a luxury.  They are necessary to the successful development of the QB prospect, particularly in today's game where receivers have such a huge impact.  You absolutely have to move Heaven and Earth to stack the deck for your prospect and give him a panoply of guys who will consistently win all over the field for him.  The Cowboys, Chiefs, Bills, Chargers, and Cardinals all provided that for their prospects and it's not a coincidence that they've got some of the most explosive and cutting edge passing games in the league now.  Having multiple potent weapons is great for any QB, young or old, but it's a necessary part of the process of transitioning a prospect into a confident, fully grown star.

 

Our weapons still absolutely suck.  McLaurin is the only truly good skill player on our offense, and he's not the kind of dominant one man show that can carry a good passing game on his own.  We've got Dyami Brown and Adam Humphries as our #2 and #3, and a group of converted college receivers (and quarterback) and a Chilean basketball player trying to play running back and tight end for us.  Plus a UDFA and a fourth round rookie.  It's an awful group that is arguably the worst and least pedigreed set of skill players in the NFL.  Led by a coordinator of no achievement or special ability, and quarterbacked by an undrafted journeyman with a marginal NFL body.  I agree with you that we need to get a QB and that it's a necessary step for building the foundation upon.  But we have to thread a ton of needles  at the same time for that prospect to have a chance.  We need better coaching and drastically improved weaponry.

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[clskinsfan]

Man. That Jaylen Warren run was about as close to Barry Sanders as I have ever seen. Crazy. 

[method man]

14 hours ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

Weapons aren't just a luxury.  They are necessary to the successful development of the QB prospect, particularly in today's game where receivers have such a huge impact.  You absolutely have to move Heaven and Earth to stack the deck for your prospect and give him a panoply of guys who will consistently win all over the field for him.  The Cowboys, Chiefs, Bills, Chargers, and Cardinals all provided that for their prospects and it's not a coincidence that they've got some of the most explosive and cutting edge passing games in the league now.  Having multiple potent weapons is great for any QB, young or old, but it's a necessary part of the process of transitioning a prospect into a confident, fully grown star.

 

Our weapons still absolutely suck.  McLaurin is the only truly good skill player on our offense, and he's not the kind of dominant one man show that can carry a good passing game on his own.  We've got Dyami Brown and Adam Humphries as our #2 and #3, and a group of converted college receivers (and quarterback) and a Chilean basketball player trying to play running back and tight end for us.  Plus a UDFA and a fourth round rookie.  It's an awful group that is arguably the worst and least pedigreed set of skill players in the NFL.  Led by a coordinator of no achievement or special ability, and quarterbacked by an undrafted journeyman with a marginal NFL body.  I agree with you that we need to get a QB and that it's a necessary step for building the foundation upon.  But we have to thread a ton of needles  at the same time for that prospect to have a chance.  We need better coaching and drastically improved weaponry.

This is hyperbole on skill talent. This team has better skill talent than the Lions, Bears, Eagles, Patriots, Dolphins and a number of other teams. Our skill talent is about league average in my opinion. We have Pro Bowl caliber talent at WR, TE and RB but could use better high end complementary pieces.

 

Bottom line is that Scott needs to be doing more esp because he has a top 10 OL he can better take advantage of

[mistertim]

43 minutes ago, method man said:

 

Bottom line is that Scott needs to be doing more esp because he has a top 10 OL he can better take advantage of

 

So far I don't think Scott is amazing, but I also don't think he's the biggest problem. We've seen multiple examples over the weeks of guys getting wide open but not getting the ball. Scott can't make his QB find the open guy and get the ball there.

Edited October 19, 2021 by mistertim

[method man]

1 hour ago, mistertim said:

 

So far I don't think Scott is amazing, but I also don't think he's the biggest problem. We've seen multiple examples over the weeks of guys getting wide open but not getting the ball. Scott can't make his QB find the open guy and get the ball there.

Having a run game that doesn’t sync with the pass game doesn’t help. His playcalling is also ultra predictable. Pass on 1st, incompletiom, run for 3 yards, 3rd & 7

[Going Commando]

3 hours ago, method man said:

This is hyperbole on skill talent. This team has better skill talent than the Lions, Bears, Eagles, Patriots, Dolphins and a number of other teams. Our skill talent is about league average in my opinion. We have Pro Bowl caliber talent at WR, TE and RB but could use better high end complementary pieces.

 

Bottom line is that Scott needs to be doing more esp because he has a top 10 OL he can better take advantage of

 

It's not hyperbole at all.  Setting aside that not a single one of our receivers, backs, or tight ends has made a Pro-Bowl before, Terry is the only one who might be close to that level.  I don't agree that we have better skill talent than any of the teams you mention, in either prospects or established players.  I would trade Terry, Thomas, and Gibson for Robinson, Montgomery, and Kmet without hesitation.  The Patriots have weak receivers but far better backs and tight ends.  The Dolphin has Parker and Waddle and Geisecki and the Lions have Hockenson, Swift, and St Brown and Terry is the only guy in our skill group who is clearly better than what they've got.  I would trade Terry for Devonta Smith and we're basically hoping Gibson can produce like Miles Sanders has.

 

I agree with you that Scott Turner sucks, but I think you're overrating our players.  Gibson's 60 yards a game and 5 AV is nowhere close to being pro-bowl caliber.  Neither is Logan Thomas's 40 Y/G and 4 AV.  That's not average starter production and he's not a good blocker either.  Terry's production has come close to a Pro-Bowl level before but he hasn't made one yet and his production is more in a top 25 range than top ten.  We're hoping Samuel turns out well, but so far he's had no durability or production.  After them, we've got nothing but journeymen and low upside mid and late round prospects.  It's an awful group.

[mistertim]

1 hour ago, method man said:

Having a run game that doesn’t sync with the pass game doesn’t help. His playcalling is also ultra predictable. Pass on 1st, incompletiom, run for 3 yards, 3rd & 7

 

Yeah some of that may certainly be true, but that also doesn't change the fact that every week there seem to be multiple plays left on the field where guys were getting open but Heinicke either didn't see them or couldn't get the ball to them.

[The Rook]

16 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

Yeah some of that may certainly be true, but that also doesn't change the fact that every week there seem to be multiple plays left on the field where guys were getting open but Heinicke either didn't see them or couldn't get the ball to them.

Or the dang ball is dropped.  The "win" window is small for this team and any missed opportunity hurts.

 

 

 

 

 

The Rook

[method man]

15 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

It's not hyperbole at all.  Setting aside that not a single one of our receivers, backs, or tight ends has made a Pro-Bowl before, Terry is the only one who might be close to that level.  I don't agree that we have better skill talent than any of the teams you mention, in either prospects or established players.  I would trade Terry, Thomas, and Gibson for Robinson, Montgomery, and Kmet without hesitation.  The Patriots have weak receivers but far better backs and tight ends.  The Dolphin has Parker and Waddle and Geisecki and the Lions have Hockenson, Swift, and St Brown and Terry is the only guy in our skill group who is clearly better than what they've got.  I would trade Terry for Devonta Smith and we're basically hoping Gibson can produce like Miles Sanders has.

 

I agree with you that Scott Turner sucks, but I think you're overrating our players.  Gibson's 60 yards a game and 5 AV is nowhere close to being pro-bowl caliber.  Neither is Logan Thomas's 40 Y/G and 4 AV.  That's not average starter production and he's not a good blocker either.  Terry's production has come close to a Pro-Bowl level before but he hasn't made one yet and his production is more in a top 25 range than top ten.  We're hoping Samuel turns out well, but so far he's had no durability or production.  After them, we've got nothing but journeymen and low upside mid and late round prospects.  It's an awful group.

If 40 ypg isn’t average TE starter production, how did Evan Engram make a Pro Bowl with those numbers last year? Logan’s numbers were as good or better than Engram’s last year

On Terry, you have to keep in mind the context of those who have been throwing to him, a group of QBs who are either inaccurate, have poor air yards per attempt or both. What I’ve seen is a guy who can consistently win against #1 WRs (he was beating Lattimore but Heinicke was consistently late). To take Devonta Smith over him is a joke. He is already behind Terry’s rookie pace w better QB play

 

On Gibson, ok he may not be Pro Bowl caliber yet due to the health issues and fumbles but he is at least an average starting back and one who has outperformed Miles Sanders this season

[Skinsinparadise]

When Logan Thomas is healthy and Curtis Samuel is heallty sadly that's not been the case this season, our weapons IMO are above average.  

 

Another example of what's going on here would be the NY Giants, they've lost their upgraded weapons a lot this off season, guys like Toney and Golladay showed big time flashes but have also been hurt.  They need a QB and upgrades on the O line.   I don't kill a FO for injuries unless they are chronic ones that plague a player like when they signed Richardson, he had a ton of injuries in Seattle and it followed him here.  But otherwise, that's just football. 

 

Unless Thomas and Samuel have turned into chronic injured players, to me its just bad luck at the moment.  I do think they likely need a Z receiver though.  Samuel playing slot.  Dyami has been slow to develop thus far, maybe he turns out to be the guy Z, he looked good in training camp but so far "meh".  I'd keep trotting him out there like they are doing.  Some WRs take time. 

 

The O line looks good.  I think you add another RB and another receiver and our offense weapons are really really good.  The dude we need obviously is a QB.  I know not all agree but Terry is IMO a bonafide star WR.  Its amazing he has put up numbers in his career with mostly garbage QB play. 

 

I somewhat agree with Martin C's post on twitter below except I don't think its coaching that's the main plot on defense as far as the back 7, I think it need some serious defensive upgrades especially MIke and FS.   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 20, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[KDawg]

I think people are giving up too quickly on Dyami as a weapon, too. Rookie receivers have traditionally not started quick as a whole.

 

Obviously there are exceptions to that rule every single year. But most receivers who aren’t in the elite category take some time. 
 

We need a QB. Very, very badly. 
 

EDIT: Apparently I didn’t finish my thought on rookie receivers. The ones who show zero flashes are generally a concern. But Dyami has shown some ability. He had some drop issues early and an injury but he has also had some decent catches and shown the ability to be able to be effective. Now, can he grow that? I think so. But that still has to be proven. But too early to give up on him.

Edited October 20, 2021 by KDawg

[Koolblue13]

https://www.profootballnetwork.com/2022-nfl-mock-draft-mds-october-2/

 

This has us taking the first QB. Willis at 13, which would be great. 

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

39 minutes ago, KDawg said:

I think people are giving up too quickly on Dyami as a weapon, too. Rookie receivers have traditionally not started quick as a whole.

 

Obviously there are exceptions to that rule every single year. But most receivers who aren’t in the elite category take some time. 
 

We need a QB. Very, very badly. 

 

 

Agree, let it play out with Dyami.   There are some spots that typically take time to develop in the NFL among others:  TE, OL, WR, LB. 

 

Sheehan on the radio saying the same thing just now, I have among others say on the FO thread, the only way you are going to win with Dan Snyder as the owner is a bonafide franchise QB.  That's it.  I've made similar points for years but I admit I was sort of a 95 out of 100 on intensity, now I am a full 100.  It's very difficult to win consistently period without a QB but that I think goes double in a dumpsterfire organization like this. 

 

Some say they don't trust Rivera to develop the QB.  Personally I think that's silly.  Ron's not the problem on that front IMO, he's developed a franchise QB before, adapted the offense to the player's skill, the whole ball of wax.    The issue is the culture is bad, our owner is the worst, Dan is the common denominator. When have we had a sliver of success?  When we've had good QB play.  2012.  First half of 2018.  2015-2016.  

 

If I am slamming Rivera for anything its not grabbing that guy last off season.  I get the logic though of trying to build up the roster without giving up too much draft capital.  But that move might end up a mistake.  Will see though, I'll give them this off season to get that guy. 

 

 

Edited October 20, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[mistertim]

12 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

https://www.profootballnetwork.com/2022-nfl-mock-draft-mds-october-2/

 

This has us taking the first QB. Willis at 13, which would be great. 

 

 

 

That's an interesting mock draft. A Safety at #2 overall? I'm a little dubious of that. I also doubt that no QB goes until 13.

 

Willis I'm intrigued by, but wary of too. He's with a small school so I'd imagine he would take time to develop. He also started the season really strong but has had 6 interceptions in his last 2 games.

[Skinsinparadise]

18 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

https://www.profootballnetwork.com/2022-nfl-mock-draft-mds-october-2/

 

This has us taking the first QB. Willis at 13, which would be great. 

 

 

 

Willis is going to be an interesting play in the draft if it stays the way it does now.  He looks like an elite level runner-mobility.  As a passer he looks a bit raw.  I just watched him one game so far.  So the sample size is too small.  My initial take is his accuracy is decent but he doesn't have that rocket arm that Lance, another raw QB had.

 

I watched Pickett yesterday, I recorded a game and finally got to it.  I got to watch more to land on an opinion.  My initial take is he has a good arm, nice touch, good mobility.  But there is something about him that makes me pause, he's not as fluid of a player as Corral as a passer or on the move.  His weapons aren't hot but his O line seemed to block well for him.  He held on to the ball a little too long for my taste.  I liked apsects of his game.  I got to really watch though 5 games to judge QBs.   My initial take is he's a poor man's Corral but I've seen enough where I am intrigued and look forward to watching more.   At a minimum, I trust his accuracy and ability to switch speeds on his throws over Ridder. 

 

 I haven't seen enough of Pickett to judge his accuracy.  For me at least, I need to see the gamut in multiple games -- in routes, out-routes, outside the hashes, in between the numbers, deep ball, intermediate, touch on screens-hitches, etc.  I have though seen enough of Corral where I am in.  I've watched more than 5 games of him now, counting last season too. 

[Koolblue13]

18 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

That's an interesting mock draft. A Safety at #2 overall? I'm a little dubious of that. I also doubt that no QB goes until 13.

 

Willis I'm intrigued by, but wary of too. He's with a small school so I'd imagine he would take time to develop. He also started the season really strong but has had 6 interceptions in his last 2 games.

Hamilton is definitely going top 5. He's incredible. 

10 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Willis is going to be an interesting play in the draft if it stays the way it does now.  He looks like an elite level runner-mobility.  As a passer he looks a bit raw.  I just watched him one game so far.  So the sample size is too small.  My initial take is his accuracy is decent but he doesn't have that rocket arm that Lance, another raw QB had.

 

I watched Pickett yesterday, I recorded a game and finally got to it.  I got to watch more to land on an opinion.  My initial take is he has a good arm, nice touch, good mobility.  But there is something about him that makes me pause, he's not as fluid of a player as Corral as a passer or on the move.  His weapons aren't hot but his O line seemed to block well for him.  He held on to the ball a little too long for my taste.  I liked apsects of his game.  I got to really watch though 5 games to judge QBs.   My initial take is he's a poor man's Corral but I've seen enough where I am intrigued and look forward to watching more.   At a minimum, I trust his accuracy and ability to switch speeds on his throws over Ridder. 

 

 I haven't seen enough of Pickett to judge his accuracy.  For me at least, I need to see the gamut in multiple games -- in routes, out-routes, outside the hashes, in between the numbers, deep ball, intermediate, touch on screens-hitches, etc.  I have though seen enough of Corral where I am in.  I've watched more than 5 games of him now, counting last season too. 

I think Corral will be out of reach for us. There's enough questions about the rest that they'll slide around, but I'd bet there's a handful that go in the top 15 again just based on need.

 

Outside of Corral and maybe even including him, I'm not sure there's a day 1 starter in this draft.

Edited October 20, 2021 by Koolblue13

[mistertim]

10 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

Hamilton is definitely going top 5. He's incredible. 

 

Oh yeah, don't get me wrong...Hamilton is a stud. I was mostly just thinking that from a positional value standpoint most organizations probably wouldn't spend a top 5 pick on a Safety. #2 overall would be the highest a Safety has ever been taken, I believe.

[Koolblue13]

1 minute ago, mistertim said:

 

Oh yeah, don't get me wrong...Hamilton is a stud. I was mostly just thinking that from a positional value standpoint most organizations probably wouldn't spend a top 5 pick on a Safety. #2 overall would be the highest a Safety has ever been taken, I believe.

Gotcha. Yeah that'll be a first. I guess it's like taking a TE and 4. Sometimes it makes sense, but dudes gotta be a unicorn. 

[Skinsinparadise]

25 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

Hamilton is definitely going top 5. He's incredible. 

I think Corral will be out of reach for us. There's enough questions about the rest that they'll slide around, but I'd bet there's a handful that go in the top 15 again just based on need.

 

Outside of Corral and maybe even including him, I'm not sure there's a day 1 starter in this draft.

 

That could be so.  I disagree with the maybe including Corral not being a first round talent part of your point.  I am sold on him.  It's not that i think he's the sun rises and falls with Aaron Rodgers kind of prospect but I've seen enough that I'd roll the dice on him.

 

I got to watch Willis more.   Some of his runs in the game I watched were video game insane level.  But I got to study him more as a passer.

 

I am somewhat in the same place as @stevemcqueen1 on Sam Howell, a poor man's Mayfield.  There is something about him that makes me pause.

 

Ridder I admit totally confounds me.  If you look at my posts about him starting from last year, I am all over the place on him.

 

Strong, I watched one game, liked aspects of his play, strong arm, nice touch on his throws, but don't love the fact that he's an old school-non mobile type

 

Pickett -- I am just starting to digest.   I talked about him in a post above.

 

As I've said a ton, I got to read a lot about these guys and their makeup.  I liked for example what I saw from Mac Jones, I posted a ton about him during his last college season and off season.  But I didn't love him to the degree that I would have traded up.  So in one sense, I thought I did good as for evaluating him and took some arrows on him from some who disagreed.   

 

But on another hand I should have been sold as loving the guy versus just liking him -- and the tipping point for me should have been when Nagy talked up what kind of dude Mac Jones was at the Senior Bowl, how hard he worked, he was the one dude he saw staying up past midnight to prepare for a basic Senior Bowl practice, how smart he was and how he picked up on everything.  I did write about that here at the time but that should have been enough to turn from liking Mac to loving him.  Nagy also said the same thing about Herbert.  That he can tell he was a special guy, super smart, worked hard.   

 

If Nagy sells name that QB who I like as having special intangibles, ditto anyone credible talking up a QB on that front, I am paying double attention to that this time.  

Edited October 20, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[Going Commando]

I like Curtis Samuel's raw talent but 1000 all purpose yards and 8 AV is the current high water mark for him and that is good but not particularly special.  And he's only managed it in one season.  You can justify his salary if you buy into him as an ascending talent, but not if 2020 stays his high water mark.  And at any rate, so far he has been a bust of a signing as he has barely been able to practice, much less play and produce.  Banking on him as part of a suitable skill group for a rookie QBs development would be a big roster building mistake.  You have to treat him like an unknown and go out and get a real second receiver of legit high quality if you want to build a stable of weapons like the explosive offenses have.

 

I think this board slightly overrates McLaurin, but it's a difference of thinking he's top ten vs top 25.  Either way, he's fine and deserves a long term commitment.  What I'm not sure about at all are Gibson and Thomas.  Thomas is passable now because he's cheap, but I don't see him as being a quality starter, nor a high upside prospect like a Kmet or Tremble.  I would absolutely be looking for an upgrade to our TE group.  And Gibson hasn't developed this season.  He actually looks like he's regressed as a runner, and he's been outplayed by McKissic.  He hasn't taken the big step forward into stardom that many were taking for granted.  I don't think we just need another RB, I think we need a high quality starter and that Gibson should be relegated to McKissic's change of pace role.  IMO a high powered offense would feature a better lead back than him.

 

And as far as our receiving and TE prospects go, the most charitable take on them so far is that they are mid and late round prospects who've provided minimal return on minimal investment.  It's starting to feel like we went through two historic receiver classes in a row and came away with nothing from them.

 

I just don't see how you all can look at the teams who have been the most successful at developing their young QB prospects: Arizona, Kansas City, Buffalo, Baltimore, San Diego, Cincinnati--or the teams who have loaded up on weapons for their vet QBs like Tampa, LA, Green Bay, Seattle, and Tennessee and think, "yeah we're close to that." We are not at all close to having that kind of quality, and we don't have any prospects with elite pedigree or upside either.  We're not even average, and again, average isn't the goal when you're developing a QB prospect. You have to stack the deck for them.

[Koolblue13]

43 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

That could be so.  I disagree with the maybe including Corral not being a first round talent part of your point.

I said I think that I think he'll be out of our reach and that all of the QBs may not be day 1 starters. Corral is definitely a first round talent and probably going top 3 as the only possible day one starter. Maybe Willis blows up the combine and becomes a big riser, but I don't know if you want to start him day 1. First rounder? Definitely. 

[SemperFi Skins]

It's not a good idea to look at a down season and think the talent is forgotten. I say this in regards to the QB position and specifically what teams did in regards to Justin Herbert. He was still the best QB on draft day. I think the same goes for Sam Howell. He's tops in this QB class IMO. 

 

1. Sam Howell

2. Matt Corral

3. Kenny Pickett

4. Carson Strong

5. Malik Willis