2022 Comprehensive Draft Thread

[method man]

9 hours ago, mistertim said:

 

But he played really well at Tackle. I could see moving a guy who really struggled at Tackle over to Guard but it doesn't make sense to just throw him in at that position when he's looking good where he is. He needs to clean up his pass pro, but most rookies do. He was a dominant run blocker.

His bad technique from college such as waist bending kicked in at times this year although I expect him to get better at that. My point with him is that I think he will be a very good RT but has a shot to become one of the best guards in the game if he is moved there. Another point is that I bet they lose Lucas in FA this year and a great swing tackle is not easy to find as we saw when we had to start Donald Penn and Geron Christian. This would be a sneaky way to also build some depth at the spot because if Leno were to get hurt, you could move the rookie to left tackle and let Cosmi play right tackle.

 

Again, I don’t think it’s the highest and best use for #11 but I wouldn’t hate it

[mistertim]

1 hour ago, method man said:

His bad technique from college such as waist bending kicked in at times this year although I expect him to get better at that. My point with him is that I think he will be a very good RT but has a shot to become one of the best guards in the game if he is moved there. Another point is that I bet they lose Lucas in FA this year and a great swing tackle is not easy to find as we saw when we had to start Donald Penn and Geron Christian. This would be a sneaky way to also build some depth at the spot because if Leno were to get hurt, you could move the rookie to left tackle and let Cosmi play right tackle.

 

Again, I don’t think it’s the highest and best use for #11 but I wouldn’t hate it

 

Sure, I doubt there are any 2nd round Tackles who don't have some cleaning up to do, especially in pass pro. But IMO his athleticism is so insanely freaky that it's better to keep him at Tackle, where that athleticism is even more important, and let him develop instead of just plugging him in at Guard.

 

There's also no guarantee he'd be better at Guard. There seems to be this sort of odd belief that any Tackle would automatically make a better Guard. But he's never played Guard. He has never played another position. Putting him at guard before seeing how his technique improves in pass pro is a complete waste of such a crazy athletic specimen.

Edited January 28, 2022 by mistertim

[Warhead36]

Unless he sucks at Tackle like Flowers I wouldn't move him. He looks like he's gonna be a really good RT, possibly even LT in the future. 

[Koolblue13]

Cosmi is a tackle. And a very good one if he stays healthy. Moving him to guard makes no sense, especially since it would create a hole at tackle and there's no hole at guard.

[Going Commando]

Yeah moving positions is hard on linemen.  I'd only do it if the guy was drowning at his current position or if necessitated by injury and my player was really good and it's the only way for me to get five good linemen on the field.

 

If I'm drafting a rookie tackle early in this year's draft, then he's the one moving to guard, not my current OTs.

 

---------------

 

There is so much awesome in this video.  Watching a guy with God-given talent like this is a reminder that football is a fun game:

 

 

Give me this kid at 11 if he's there.  If he's not, then ****.  Give me Devin Lloyd.  If he's gone too, then give me Garrett Wilson.  If he's gone, then give me Derek Stingley Jr.  If they're all gone, then this draft really sucked for us. Tyler Linderbaum?  Jordan Davis?

Edited January 28, 2022 by stevemcqueen1

[mhd24]

40 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

Yeah moving positions is hard on linemen.  I'd only do it if the guy was drowning at his current position or if necessitated by injury and my player was really good and it's the only way for me to get five good linemen on the field.

 

If I'm drafting a rookie tackle early in this year's draft, then he's the one moving to guard, not my current OTs.

 

---------------

 

There is so much awesome in this video.  Watching a guy with God-given talent like this is a reminder that football is a fun game:

 

 

Give me this kid at 11 if he's there.  If he's not, then ****.  Give me Devin Lloyd.  If he's gone too, then give me Garrett Wilson.  If he's gone, then give me Derek Stingley Jr.  If they're all gone, then this draft really sucked for us. Tyler Linderbaum?  Jordan Davis?

 

I'd go Pickett just because of our gaping need.  If we are not taking QB, than Hamilton, Gardner, or London make sense from a needs perspective.

[Going Commando]

3 minutes ago, mhd24 said:

I'd go Pickett just because of our gaping need.  If we are not taking QB, than Hamilton, Gardner, or London make sense from a needs perspective.

 

I like Pickett and love all three of those other players.  Be fine with any of them at 11 but, I feel like Gardner and London are more of late teens type picks (splitting hairs at that point).

 

I'm a definite fan of Gardner, but I feel like a 100% healthy Stingley's upside > Gardner's.  I think Stingley has the type of playmaking potential where he could lead the NFL in INTs for a season.  I want some playmaking pizzazz on our defense--an alpha-type player that makes the rest of the guys feel badass and confident.  So if I get a choice between Stingley and Gardner, I think I go Stingley. 

 

Gardner's teammate Coby Bryant #7 is pretty badass too, and he feels like a day two pick.  If we miss out on corner in the first, I'd be interested in him.

 

I'm kind of hoping Hamilton gets picked before 11 so we don't have to pass on him.  He's an incredible player and a true blue chipper, pretty much has it all: size, speed, intelligence and instincts.  But I just don't love the combination of position value and injury history that he brings.  I'm pretty down on picking safeties early in the draft, which is similar to why I'm not pouring over Tyler Linderbaum highlights and falling in love with him as a potential pick at 11.  They're pretty much blue-moon prospects at their positions, and I will never complain about picking a future All Pro in the first round.  But kind of hoping for more position value.  There are scenarios where they are the best pick at 11 though.

 

London vs Wilson is a tough one, but I've started leaning back towards Wilson.  London is a high level basketball athlete at the position and it'd be nice to have all of which that brings to an offense.  Pretty much a TE with the speed of a WR in terms of the receiving game.  But I think Wilson might be a transcendent player.  I watch him and see prime Odell Beckham Jr.  If I had to bet on any receiver from this class becoming a household name superstar, I'd pick him.

 

For Pickett, I'd take him if Willis is gone.  I like him but don't really love him.  Something about him I just find irritating and even though I recognize the tremendous value his position holds, it would still be a little hard for me to pick him over prospects I absolutely love and who I think can be future All Pros like Lloyd/Wilson/Stingley/Gardner/London/Linderbaum/Hamilton, etc.  I'm to the point where I just want to swing for elite talent at 11.  Get a monster and see who drops into range in the second round.  There is going to be someone interesting still on the board at that point.  Ridder and Strong are interesting.  And I think one of Corral or Howell will drop into the second or be on the board at the end of the first and make for an easy trade-up.

 

If Willis is there at 11, I'm picking him and hoping that someone like Nakobe Dean or Jordan Davis or Kenneth Walker are still there in the second so I can still get my blue chipper in addition to the big talent at QB.

[Chump Bailey]

4 hours ago, method man said:

Again, I don’t think it’s the highest and best use for #11 but I wouldn’t hate it

 

There's elite Edge and potential IDL talent available and I would not pass on any for an OT outside the top 3 except for Greene and Linderbaum. I was not looking that closely at it considering our defense currently but someone could be moved. It just depends on how it shakes out. I'm confident that if we stay at 11 we are going to get a plug-n-play great player. You'd really have to screw up to whiff badly because there is talent galore especially on defense.

Edited January 28, 2022 by Chump Bailey

[mistertim]

1 hour ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

There is so much awesome in this video.  Watching a guy with God-given talent like this is a reminder that football is a fun game:

 

To be fair, there's a bunch of awesome in pretty much every highlight video. That's why they're highlight videos.

 

I think Willis has a ton of upside but after watching several of his games I have serious concerns about his decision making and on and off accuracy, especially when pressured. I think his transition to the NFL will take some time, and there's no way to know if it will actually happen or we'd have to redesign our offense for a permanent running QB, which I think is a fail.

 

That being said, I wouldn't blow a gasket or anything if we picked him at 11 because I'd assume it means Ron, Turner, and the FO have a plan for him.. I think he'll definitely be there unless he absolutely blows up the Senior Bowl.

Edited January 28, 2022 by mistertim

[757SeanTaylor21]

I'm tired of drafting guys and trying to fit them in the mold of what we do instead of drafting guys and molding the scheme to what THEY do. When ravens took lamar they re did their whole entire offensive identity. We need to do the same. Let them be great in what they are great at. They will learn everything else in due time but in the mean time let them do what they do. We somewhat did it with rg3 (we know rg3 didn't want to do it anymore) and it shaped out well. Or kapernick with 49ers. Or lamar and ravens. Hurts with eagles leading them to playoffs.  Etc etc. 

[mistertim]

17 minutes ago, 757SeanTaylor21 said:

I'm tired of drafting guys and trying to fit them in the mold of what we do instead of drafting guys and molding the scheme to what THEY do. When ravens took lamar they re did their whole entire offensive identity. We need to do the same. Let them be great in what they are great at. They will learn everything else in due time but in the mean time let them do what they do. We somewhat did it with rg3 (we know rg3 didn't want to do it anymore) and it shaped out well. Or kapernick with 49ers. Or lamar and ravens. Hurts with eagles leading them to playoffs.  Etc etc. 

 

Running QBs aren't really sustainable. The best running QB so far has been Jackson and his production has steadily declined since his one dominant year. The Ravens made a ballsy move to completely retool their offense around a running QB and it seemed to have been a good play at first, but I think ultimately it's going to prove to do nothing for them because at the end of the day the NFL is league dominated by passing and Jackson simply isn't that good of a passer. It was the same deal with Cam.

 

And there's a huge difference between running QBs and QBs who can run but are top passers first. Jackson and Cam fit into the former, Mahomes, Allen, Watson, Wilson and Murray fit into the latter. Which one of those groups do you see as more successful, especially in the long term?

 

Turner seems to agree with this. In an interview he talked about how important it is nowadays for QBs to have athleticism to be able to make plays, but he also stressed that being a top passer is the most important thing. And it is.

[757SeanTaylor21]

23 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

Running QBs aren't really sustainable. The best running QB so far has been Jackson and his production has steadily declined since his one dominant year. The Ravens made a ballsy move to completely retool their offense around a running QB and it seemed to have been a good play at first, but I think ultimately it's going to prove to do nothing for them because at the end of the day the NFL is league dominated by passing and Jackson simply isn't that good of a passer. It was the same deal with Cam.

 

And there's a huge difference between running QBs and QBs who can run but are top passers first. Jackson and Cam fit into the former, Mahomes, Allen, Watson, Wilson and Murray fit into the latter. Which one of those groups do you see as more successful, especially in the long term?

 

Turner seems to agree with this. In an interview he talked about how important it is nowadays for QBs to have athleticism to be able to make plays, but he also stressed that being a top passer is the most important thing. And it is.

 

 

What do you define as a top passer and separate yourself from where they are now vs when they came into the league. Josh Allen was not a top passer when he came in. It's universally known. Mahomes took a year behind Alex smith and who knows how he would of looked like as a rookie. But there were major questions about him as a passer when he was drafted. Kyler was probably out that list the cleanest prospect as a passer coming into the league. Wilson? Are we kidding ourselves in what rookie russ accomplished behind that great defense and Marshawn? Or rookie  dak behind zeke and that o line. And lamar definitely can throw the ball. But he's used as a running threat so much for their offense.  What I think we agree at is they need to hVe an NFL arm that can make the throws we need him to. Willis is an elite runner who has an extreme arm. He would probably need to sit and learn but the talent is there. That's what you take and then you let him learn but do what he does best in the mean time. Who knows. Actually playing behind an o line who can actually give him time may just be what he needs. (Willis)

[mistertim]

9 minutes ago, 757SeanTaylor21 said:

 

 

What do you define as a top passer and separate yourself from where they are now vs when they came into the league. Josh Allen was not a top passer when he came in. It's universally known. Mahomes took a year behind Alex smith and who knows how he would of looked like as a rookie. But there were major questions about him as a passer when he was drafted. Kyler was probably out that list the cleanest prospect as a passer coming into the league. Wilson? Are we kidding ourselves in what rookie russ accomplished behind that great defense and Marshawn? Or rookie  dak behind zeke and that o line. And lamar definitely can throw the ball. But he's used as a running threat so much for their offense.  What I think we agree at is they need to hVe an NFL arm that can make the throws we need him to. Willis is an elite runner who has an extreme arm. He would probably need to sit and learn but the talent is there. That's what you take and then you let him learn but do what he does best in the mean time. Who knows. Actually playing behind an o line who can actually give him time may just be what he needs. (Willis)

 

I would be fine with Willis if the WFT coaches and FO believe they can morph him into a true top tier passer in the NFL. What I don't want is for them to retool their offense around having a permanent running QB ala Jackson. It's not sustainable.

[D’Pablo]

Willis looks like a less talented Vick. He’s playing against serious scrubs in all his highlights. There’s no way I’d take him.

[Skinsinparadise]

On 1/26/2022 at 3:52 PM, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

 

I 100% agree with you about this.  They put way too much on his plate.  TBH, this regime has been bad at developing their young talent at pretty much every position except for OL and TE.  That doesn't make me feel good about their chances of successfully developing a QB prospect from the draft.  But I'm also skeptical that the stars will align for a major vet acquisition this offseason too.

 

TBH, that's part of why I like Ridder in the second.  He can run, he's got tons of experience, and he's got stunning confidence that seems tough to break.  And he's also cheap, and I feel like this regime can survive drafting him in the second and not having him pan out.  Or if we pick him in the second and someone like Wilson or Rodgers or Ryan become truly and cheaply available in '23, then you can switch gears or even cut bait on a second rounder if need be.  That's also why I begin liking Corral and Howell in that range.  The expectations for a QB taken there are so different.  I used to not think this way, I was like the rest of you in wanting the FO to get married to a prospect, and I also saw the way that might happen as being via a first round pick.  But the way this regime operates, I think they either need a really strong bet or an escape route at QB.  They're not that innovative or visionary as team builders or quarterback whisperers, they need chances to follow a trail that has already been blazed for them.

 

If we pick another first round bust, this regime is not going to survive that.  And it's just going to be so bad if Rivera gets himself fired.  I have a hard time seeing any light at the end of that tunnel, and I know you feel that way too.  It's easy for some to say "Oh well, on to the next one."  But we're talking about an absolutely wrenching set of consequences that would come about as a result of that failure at QB where most of the good people we've hired get fired or move on and we move into an era of complete uncertainty, during a difficult rebrand, with all of our steady football people gone, and with an owner who has never been weaker or more desperate.  We need Rivera and the Martins to make this work.

 

And on top of that, I think we can rescue some of the value of our investment in Jamin if we can pick a Mike like Devin Lloyd.  Or William Jackson if we pick Stingley.  Or Curtis Samuel if we pick Garrett Wilson.  Reducing the burdens of guys who aren't good/durable enough to fulfill the roles we drafted/signed them for by drafting a stud who is.  I view picking Willis or Pickett as the safe options for the first round QBs, but if we don't go that route, then picking a stud and targeting Ridder (or a faller) in the second/using 42 to move up a bit feels like the right move to me.

 

Forgot to respond to this part.  I agree we got to keep Rivera.

 

As for grooming talent.  I am actually impressed with what they did with an undrafted FA off the streets at QB.  Zampese had a big reputation as a QB coach before he got here. 

 

Matsko and Hoener are considered among the best in the league at what they do. 

 

Chris Harris is apparently about to get another interview for a D coordinator job, some see him as an up and comer. 

 

But yeah I do think Jamin was misplayed.  I don't think because of bad coaching so much but more as to arrogance on Rivera's front in thinking that he can turn a natural weakside LB into a Mike MLB.  i do think though Rivera is the type to learn lessons from mistakes but will see.

 

I get your point about Ridder.  I think I like Carson Strong in the 2nd, if his knee checks out, over Ridder but I wouldn't hate Ridder in the 2nd.  As I said, in 2020 when I thought he was coming out in that draft I was pinning for Ridder in the 2nd.

 

Yeah agree Lloyd looks like a natural Mike LB.  From what I've seen I'd love to have him.   I've watched Garrett Wilson plenty in real time but haven't spent time yet studying him but I will, ditto Stingley.

 

Edited January 29, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[Chump Bailey]

Texas Tech WR Erik Ezukanma is interesting. So is Boise State WR Khalil Shakir. WR is deep this year.

[Thinking Skins]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

But yeah I do think Jamin was misplayed.  I don't think because of bad coaching so much but more as to arrogance on Rivera's front in thinking that he can turn a natural weakside LB into a Mike MLB.  i do think though Rivera is the type to learn lessons from mistakes but will see

Is it wrong to still want Davis or Holcomb to grow into a MLB role? I don't want to force it but I think he was too new to too much this year (Davis). I get that it can take them away from going downhill but playmakers make plays. 

[Skinsinparadise]

4 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

Is it wrong to still want Davis or Holcomb to grow into a MLB role? I don't want to force it but I think he was too new to too much this year (Davis). I get that it can take them away from going downhill but playmakers make plays. 

 

Keim has said the staff sees Holcomb's best spot at strong side linebacker, and Davis at outside, assuming weakside.  So while its not wrong to want either to play Mike, I think you will be dissappointed if that's your hope because outside of QB, Rivera has made it clear that the other code red spot is Mike MLB. 

[Koolblue13]

9 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

Is it wrong to still want Davis or Holcomb to grow into a MLB role? I don't want to force it but I think he was too new to too much this year (Davis). I get that it can take them away from going downhill but playmakers make plays. 

I think Holcomb can do it.

[Thinking Skins]

Just now, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Keim has said the staff sees Holcomb's best spot at strong side linebacker, and Davis at outside, assuming weakside.  So while its not wrong to want either to play Mike, I think you will be dissappointed if that's your hope because outside of QB, Rivera has made it clear that the other code red spot is Mike MLB. 

Yeah, but Holcomb wants to play Mike. And Ron wants Davis to play Mike. I don't think it's a far fetched dream. If nothing else it gives them some versatility. But I still don't think it was wrong to try them out there. I just hope Davis's confidence isn't broken. 

[Skinsinparadise]

12 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

Yeah, but Holcomb wants to play Mike. And Ron wants Davis to play Mike. I don't think it's a far fetched dream. If nothing else it gives them some versatility. But I still don't think it was wrong to try them out there. I just hope Davis's confidence isn't broken. 

 

It's IMO the defensive version of the QB thread with the stragglers left who still think Rivera might want Heinicke to be the guy so ignore all the other noise. 

 

Keim has said that they like Holcomb's progress but see him as a better outside LB than Mike and ditto Davis.  And Keim among other beat guys keep saying Mike MLB is likely the top off season pursuit aside from QB.  Now maybe Keim and others have it dead wrong but Rivera himself has strongly made similar points as for a search for a Mike.  He's polite about it and says nice things about Davis and Holcomb so if you want to hold on to that ok, but I think you will be as dissapointed as the Heinicke Hive will be when Taylor likely isn't QB 1 at the start of the season.

 

The kicker was Rivera highlighting how the LB play improved when Mayo played Mike so Holcomb could play OLB.    To me its billboard level intense that they are going to go get a Mike LB. 

 

But like Heinicke, I think there is always an outside chance and that is they strike out on all their targets whomever they end up being at Mike MLB.   So i guess you can root against Rivera and hope he doesn't get what he wants and that would be your best shot here if you want one of those 2 players to be the Mike.

Edited January 29, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[Thinking Skins]

14 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Keim has said that they like Holcomb's progress but see him as a better outside LB than Mike and ditto Davis.  And Keim among other beat guys keep saying Mike MLB is likely the top off season pursuit aside from QB.  Now maybe Keim and others have it dead wrong but Rivera himself has strongly made similar points as for a search for a Mike.  He's polite about it and says nice things about Davis and Holcomb so if you want to hold on to that ok, but I think you will be as dissapointed as the Heinicke Hive will be when Taylor likely isn't QB 1 at the start of the season.

This is less about what I think will happen and more about what I'd like. I honestly wouldn't mind spending pick 11 on a MLB, but I would still like a backup plan. And I like Holcomb / Davis there more than I like Bostic or Mayo there. 

 

Ron's getting a lot of heat from radio and fans for drafting an outside guy and trying to play him inside but I liked the idea then and I don't hate it now. What he saw in him in ability is something that could be valuable in the middle. If Davis could be more instinctive there and less reactionary then it can still work. But its not what I'd call for. Remember that we took Lemar Marshall from weakside and played him inside and Antonio Pierce from weakside and played him inside. Its not an out of nowhere idea. It didn't work this year but I wouldn't give up on it just yet. 

 

Honestly this isn't as big of a deal to me. I just want these two on the field more. If we sign or draft somebody who has speed and instincts then I'll probably care less about who's making the play but I don't want to invest in Mayo/Bostic as our starting MLBs. 

[BRAVEONAWARPATH]

 

[Silvernon]

You can see this D play so much better when they can get Holcomb outside. To me, he's one of the best coverage LBs in the league and has been given some impossible assignments. His athleticism is awesome and I love him in space. 

 

Holcomb at SLB is what the staff has said will happen. Probably play some MLB in two LB sets. 

 

As I wrote somewhere else, Jamin Davis has immense athleticism and getting him near the line of scrimmage to make those big stops on short-yardage runs is exciting. Ron has said it and I agree that there have been some moments when he's aware of his role on the play and reacts without overthinking and the results are impactful. He "Wow's" on plays. 

 

Jamin at WLB. Near the line. Physical and reactive.

 

The potential of Chase Young (as much as I have ragged on him) and Jamin Davis on that weak side is ridiculous. The potential is Simeon Rice/Derrick Brooks stuff. 

[Warhead36]

8 minutes ago, Silvernon said:

 

 

The potential of Chase Young (as much as I have ragged on him) and Jamin Davis on that weak side is ridiculous. The potential is Simeon Rice/Derrick Brooks stuff. 

Come on man that's crazy. Davis has shown next to nothing so far in the NFL and you're comparing him to a GOAT tier LB and Rice, while not a HOF-er, was an outstanding DE whom Young hasn't come close to approaching yet.

 

Young and Davis aren't even Phillip Daniels/Marcus Washington yet let alone two guys who were cornerstones to an all time great defense.