2022 Comprehensive Draft Thread

[Riggo#44]

2 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

Antoine? Kenneth? Herschel?

 

All very, very wrong. They're swinging big...real big.

 

[Inigo Montoya]

Hamilton, London or a trade down… I don’t care. But I want to leave this draft with Walker or Hall. We need a game changing RB and I’m pretty over the converted WR as an every down back experiment. From the fumbles, to lack of vision- I want a 3 down back, that’s what we need the most this weekend for a big impact this season

[Skinsinparadise]

51 minutes ago, Going Commando said:

 

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/washington-commanders/chase-roullier-21941/

 

Roullier has an out in his contract after this season to where he'll be far cheaper to cut than keep on his current deal.  A 5.1 million dead cap hit vs 11.37 million.  With that contract structure, Roullier is going to either have to restructure or he'll probably get cut.

 

Thanks.  That changes the dead cap to 18 million over 2 years.  It's still steep.  There used to be a time, not long ago, when that would be an unheard amount of money to swallow in a cap hit especialy to replace a current viable player.  Granted that's changed.  But its really changed but its changed for QBs mostly.

 

Saying hey we will dump our above average center for a better center and take an 18 million cap hit to do it because that's basically what you'd be doing to put Rouillier on the bench -- that at a minimum I guess would set a new debate about the value of the position.  They would certainly be trend setters on that spot.  Dump an above average young player and swallow the 18 million cap hit for doing it.    

 

Your point seems to be center is as valuable as any other spot.  You need great players everywhere.  OK but if you factor all the facts -- the point in play here is center is more valuable than most other spots where its worth the opportunity cost to eschew a player who fills a major need and a major FA you could use that cap money on that you are blowing here.

 

55 minutes ago, Going Commando said:

 

So they can either be proactive this offseason and get into position to take the best center prospect to come along in years, or they can be reactive and wait until the need becomes dire next offseason.

 

 

I'd agree with the point in a vaccum but the opportunity cost to add another receiver or hybrid safety or LB or name that spot weighs in.  I don't think upgrading Rouillier makes a measurable difference for this team -- i actually think it would be minute at best.  And so you follow that point that's not because I don't think Linderbaum is a peg better than Rouillier.  Linderbaum is definitely a better player. 

 

But to basically trash 18 million over two years of cap dollars -- means that you think Linderbaum is not just better than Rouillier by a good margin but also better than a combination of that other player they can get in the draft and a major FA.  In a way we'd be saying Linderbaum > 3 players.

 

But i think we are spinning our wheels for no reason, I'd be stunned if they took Linderbaum. 

[Zim489]

Just now, Inigo Montoya said:

Hamilton, London or a trade down… I don’t care. But I want to leave this draft with Walker or Hall. We need a game changing RB and I’m pretty over the converted WR as an every down back experiment. From the fumbles, to lack of vision- I want a 3 down back, that’s what we need the most this weekend for a big impact this season

There’s about 2-4 4th round RBs I love when you consider value. Pierre Strong, Cooks little brother, and the ASU kid 

[Idaho fan]

2 minutes ago, Inigo Montoya said:

Hamilton, London or a trade down… 

This.

If the trade down isn't some sort of a reduced value because of this years lack of quality QBs.  Love the thought of Hamilton who seems to be can't miss.  London looks like a great fit for a lack luster passing game.

[Going Commando]

15 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

This isn't about need, though. It's about impact.

 

London/Wilson/Williams offer a higher impact than Linderbaum vs. A) what we have on the roster, B ) vs. what's available at the positions. 

 

I wanted Najee last year. Why? I thought his value was enough from where we were picking last season that it was justified. And that is about the place I'd begin to consider Linderbaum. 

 

Even then, I think Olave/Dotson offer better value than a backup center in a year that we have to find success.

 

But you don't truly appreciate BPA if you don't include punters.

 

If it weren't for Tress Way we would have gotten throttled more than a few times. So you can't say you're a BPA guy and dismiss players in certain positions, imo. You are either a BPA guy or you aren't. Otherwise you absolutely ARE factoring in need/position value. 

 

The punter argument is the straw man argument @KDawg.  Do I really need to stipulate that a player who is on the field five snaps a game is less valuable than a full time player on offense or defense?  Yes, I can absolutely believe in BPA drafting while excluding kicking specialists and long snappers from consideration.  Those positions are never worth spending draft picks or expensive contracts on.

 

Second, I don't agree that Linderbaum would sit the bench as a rookie here.  That kind of prediction clearly underestimates how good Linderbaum is IMO.

 

Third, you're repackaging need into impact when you're talking about who we already have on the roster and who else is there in the class when you're trying to set the value of an individual prospect.  But it's the same dynamic.  I agree with you that some positions have a bigger impact on games than others when you have the choice between great players at either spot.  But you can't take advantage of that discrepancy if you don't actually get a great player from the draft pick or cap dollars you spent on the position.  For me, Linderbaum is a much better center prospect than London/Wilson/Williams are WR prospects.  London is the safest bet of the group but he still has flaws that call his NFL potential into question.  To me, Wilson and Williams are not safe bets at all.  To me, Linderbaum is super easy to see coming and I think he has a better chance of becoming a great player for whichever team ends up getting him.

 

Put it this way, if someone from the future told you that only one player on offense ends up making 5 All Pro teams in his career and you had to bet your house on which one it is, who would you pick?  I would pick Linderbaum for sure.

[SoCalSkins]

11 hours ago, Berggy9598 said:

I regrettably haven't really had time to follow this thread this year so I can only assume I've missed all the Drake London talk, but I've been reading a lot of kinda lazy takes that he's just a jump ball receiver that can't separate. There is so much more to his game that people are missing for some reason, and yeah he's not someone that's going to pop in and out of breaks like the OSU kids, but he can do a variety of things to mitigate. First and foremost, he's the best stacker in the class by a mile, and he can do it at the top of intermediate and deep routes, as well as right off the snap in bump and run because of his footwork. He's not really a speed variance guy, but he's fluid and can change direction in higher gears, which is another mitigating factor to "can't separate". He's also pretty crafty with his body language and again thanks to his footwork he can throw off coverage by how suddenly he can throttle and sink his hips. He's not elusive after the catch, but he runs with a purpose and has the wiry strength to be break tackles. (Watch his TD vs UCLA)

 

There was a 2-3 game stretch last season where we were strolling up and down the field but didn't put any points on the board because Thomas was out. London is a perfect remedy for those issues, and who I'm keeping my fingers crossed for. 

He is a slow receiver on a 4-8 team that got his coach fired. I don’t remember him playing in the 62-33 loss to UCLA at home in the colosseum. So not sure which Td you are talking about but they were mostly put up by UCLA and there was some trash time scoring by USC. 

[Inigo Montoya]

7 minutes ago, Zim489 said:

There’s about 2-4 4th round RBs I love when you consider value. Pierre Strong, Cooks little brother, and the ASU kid 

Pierce out of FL would be my 3rd choice, all the others have some big question marks 

a Gibson and Robinson combo would potentially be interesting. But I’m looking for a plug and play RB and repurposing Gibson for the remainder of his contract honestly 

[KDawg]

1 minute ago, Going Commando said:

 

The punter argument is the straw man argument @KDawg.  Do I really need to stipulate that a player who is on the field five snaps a game is less valuable than a full time player on offense or defense?  Yes, I can absolutely believe in BPA drafting while excluding kicking specialists and long snappers from consideration.  Those positions are never worth spending draft picks or expensive contracts on.

 

Second, I don't agree that Linderbaum would sit the bench as a rookie here.  That kind of prediction clearly underestimates how good Linderbaum is IMO.

 

Third, you're repackaging need into impact when you're talking about who we already have on the roster and who else is there in the class when you're trying to set the value of an individual prospect.  But it's the same dynamic.  I agree with you that some positions have a bigger impact on games than others when you have the choice between great players at either spot.  But you can't take advantage of that discrepancy if you don't actually get a great player from the draft pick or cap dollars you spent on the position.  For me, Linderbaum is a much better center prospect than London/Wilson/Williams are WR prospects.  London is the safest bet of the group but he still has flaws that call his NFL potential into question.  To me, Wilson and Williams are not safe bets at all.  To me, Linderbaum is super easy to see coming and I think he has a better chance of becoming a great player for whichever team ends up getting him.

 

Put it this way, if someone from the future told you that only one player on offense ends up making 5 All Pro teams in his career and you had to bet your house on which one it is, who would you pick?  I would pick Linderbaum for sure.

 

Yes, you do.

 

A punter can change the game. And it's not a strawman, for what it's worth. You don't view a punter as a position that is worthy of being considered as BPA. SO you are not a pure BPA guy. You weight positional value.

 

Which, for the record, I am in agreement with. But I am not a pure BPA guy.

 

As for the point you don't agree Linderbaum would sit the bench because I undervalue him... that's incorrect. I see how good he is. I also see Chase Roullier being here, being familiar and while I do think Linderbaum is an upgrade I don't think his immediate ability is the same as Roullier's due to being a rookie in a position with a above quality starter. It's a waste of a resource. Even if Linderbaum did start... we upgraded center marginally and left significant issues elsewhere.

 

I don't disagree with the premise you take the players that upgrade your team. But I, personally, don't think Linderbaum really upgrades the team. 

 

To your third point, yes I am. That's how I view the draft. So that is consistent with the way I operate.

 

I think you overestimate Linderbaum a bit. To that end, I do see his potential. But I also see a light in the ass zone center that has the technical ability to play in other schemes, especially a gap scheme, but I'm not sure he can dig out a big body NFL NT to replace the guard pull on a power or counter concept. He can put on size, of course. And likely will. He's going to be a good one I think, but he is nowhere near a sure thing.

 

And for what it's worth I don't think London, Wilson or Williams are sure things.

 

London does have to get by the "not fast" stigma. 

 

Williams has problems with the press.

 

Wilson needs to show that his style translates as he relies a lot on his snap athleticism and quick feet.

 

To your last question my answer would be Breece Hall or Kenneth Murray. 

[lavar1156]

Trade down and draft Dotson and Brisker. We Are! 

[actorguy1]

 

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[FLSkinz83]

If Cross is there at 11, I'd be shocked if we couldn't trade down with the Saints or Chargers.

 

my prediction is we stay at 11 and take Olave.  Hope I'm wrong.  I like Olave after a trade down, but not at 11.

[Going Commando]

7 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Thanks.  That changes the dead cap to 18 million over 2 years.  It's still steep.  There used to be a time, not long ago, when that would be an unheard amount of money to swallow in a cap hit especialy to replace a current viable player.  Granted that's changed.  But its really changed but its changed for QBs mostly.

 

Saying hey we will dump our above average center for a better center and take an 18 million cap hit to do it because that's basically what you'd be doing to put Rouillier on the bench -- that at a minimum I guess would set a new debate about the value of the position.  They would certainly be trend setters on that spot.  Dump an above average young player and swallow the 18 million cap hit for doing it.    

 

Your point seems to be center is as valuable as any other spot.  You need great players everywhere.  OK but if you factor all the facts -- the point in play here is center is more valuable than most other spots where its worth the opportunity cost to eschew a player who fills a major need and a major FA you could use that cap money on that you are blowing here.

 

I think you have my plan confused.  I wouldn't be advocating cutting Roullier this offseason, but next offseason when that out comes into play.  At that point, you're not spending 18 million on the position.  You're actually saving money because, instead of paying 11.3 million for Roullier, you're paying the 5.1 million in dead cap + Linderbaum's rookie slot contract, which would be like 2.7 million if we picked him after 20.

This year's cap allocation would be Roullier's + Linderbaum's which comes out to less than 13 million.  For one season of two good IOLs, that's not bad.  And if Roullier can't find a home on the depth chart heading into the '23 season, then I can cut him and probably get a season of elite center play for less than I would be paying for Roullier in '23.  If they shine together, then that's the best outcome of all.

 

I disagree that I'm coming out behind on opportunity cost.  I'm gaining value from my draft picks by trading down to get Linderbaum in the 20s.  To me, Linderbaum in the 20s is going to approach +20 in value since I think he's five or six in the class, solidly in the first tier.  Plus I gain draft picks in the trade down, which is more opportunity for value.  Trading down and still getting Linderbaum are some of the most maximally valuable scenarios I can come up with, not having the benefit of hindsight yet.  I would be super confident that our offense would be much better with Linderbaum and Kenneth Walker, for example, than Roullier and London.  Especially when you factor in that Roullier might not still be on this team after next season, whether we pick Linderbaum or not.

[Skinsinparadise]

6 minutes ago, FLSkinz83 said:

If Cross is there at 11, I'd be shocked if we couldn't trade down with the Saints or Chargers.

 

my prediction is we stay at 11 and take Olave.  Hope I'm wrong.  I like Olave after a trade down, but not at 11.

 

Olave at 11 wouldn't shock me either.  Hopefully all these stories of there being an early run on the WRs are predraft BS.  But if indeed happens.  I wonder if they panic a little if London, Williams are gone in the top 10.  If Hamilton is there in that case I think they take him.  But if all three of those players are gone.  And they buy all the talk about 7 WRs are going in the first round, it wouldn't shock me if they decide not to chance it.  I like Olave but if it were me, I'd trade down too in that case.

 

The one thing that makes me feel better about Olave is the more I digest about him the more I've learned that this team isn't on an off beat island about Olave, i've read/heard that there are some teams that have Olave really high on their board.  And this isn't the only team (even though I disagree personally on this) that likes Olave over Wilson. 

Edited April 27, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[HigSkin]

Speaking of punters Matt Araiza from SD State might be the highest punter ever taken, they are predicting 3rd round.  This guy is unbelieveable, I mean 84yd punts!

 

 

Edited April 27, 2022 by HigSkin

[Lovi]

5 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Olave at 11 wouldn't shock me either.  Hopefully all these stories of there being an early run on the WRs are predraft BS.  But if indeed happens.  I wonder if they panic a little if London, Williams are gone in the top 10.  If Hamilton is there in that case I think they take him.  But if all three of those players are gone.  And they buy all the talk about 7 WRs are going in the first round, it wouldn't shock me if they decide not to chance it.  I like Olave but if it were me, I'd trade down too in that case.

 

The one thing that makes me feel better about Olave is the more I digest about him the more I've learned that this team isn't on an off beat island about Olave, i've read/heard that there are some teams that have Olave really high on their board.  And this isn't the only team (even though I disagree personally on this) that likes Olave over Wilson. 

 

I've read somewhere that Wilson didn't interview well.  That could factor in to whether he's taken early or if he's off our board.

[Skinsinparadise]

13 minutes ago, Going Commando said:

 

I think you have my plan confused.  I wouldn't be advocating cutting Roullier this offseason, but next offseason when that out comes into play.  At that point, you're not spending 18 million on the position.  You're actually saving money because, instead of paying 11.3 million for Roullier, you're paying the 5.1 million in dead cap + Linderbaum's rookie slot contract, which would be like 2.7 million if we picked him after 20.

 

 

I think I've followed your point.  I'll clarify my point.  If you are sitting Chase Roullier on the bench, at what if I recall at about 10 million this year alone, I consider an expensive backup like that as dead cap.  you don't pay backup centers crazy money.   if we are paying a backup center even more than what the most expensive QBs get -- we are treading into new turf as the team that spends the most resources -- draft picks and salary combined in the league at center.  What other team would have a uber expensive backup center?

 

 

4 minutes ago, Lovi said:

 

I've read somewhere that Wilson didn't interview well.  That could factor in to whether he's taken early or if he's off our board.

 

Yeah I am the one who posted that, it was one scout who said that.  I've also heard some complement Wilson's personality so tough to know what to make of that.  But their hype around Olave seemed to precede that.  Supposedly they indeed like Wilson but they like Olave more.  Other teams seem to be mixed on that with some preferring Olave and some Wilson judging by different articles.

Edited April 27, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[seantaylor=god]

9 minutes ago, Going Commando said:

 

I think you have my plan confused.  I wouldn't be advocating cutting Roullier this offseason, but next offseason when that out comes into play.  At that point, you're not spending 18 million on the position.  You're actually saving money because, instead of paying 11.3 million for Roullier, you're paying the 5.1 million in dead cap + Linderbaum's rookie slot contract, which would be like 2.7 million if we picked him after 20.

This year's cap allocation would be Roullier's + Linderbaum's which comes out to less than 13 million.  For one season of two good IOLs, that's not bad.  And if Roullier can't find a home on the depth chart heading into the '23 season, then I can cut him and probably get a season of elite center play for less than I would be paying for Roullier in '23.  If they shine together, then that's the best outcome of all.

 

I disagree that I'm coming out behind on opportunity cost.  I'm gaining value from my draft picks by trading down to get Linderbaum in the 20s.  To me, Linderbaum in the 20s is going to approach +20 in value since I think he's five or six in the class, solidly in the first tier.  Plus I gain draft picks in the trade down, which is more opportunity for value.  Trading down and still getting Linderbaum are some of the most maximally valuable scenarios I can come up with, not having the benefit of hindsight yet.  I would be super confident that our offense would be much better with Linderbaum and Kenneth Walker, for example, than Roullier and London.  Especially when you factor in that Roullier might not still be on this team after next season, whether we pick Linderbaum or not.

I like your approach and I don’t disagree with you, because you are looking at the draft as a multi-year process.

 

I think it’s a completely moot point because we use the draft to fill needs and try and win games immediately under this  the Ron Rivera Regime™️ We have a coach as our GM. He’s not focused on anything beyond winning an extra game in our current season, in my opinion, which is a problem, but hopefully it works out!

[The Consigliere]

2 hours ago, Going Commando said:

London is a reach at 11 if Hamilton, Davis, Linderbaum, and Lloyd are still on the board.  Hindsight where those guys fail and London succeeds is the only things that could convince me otherwise.  But it's a reach of like -5 or less.  He's going to be in the early teens on my big board and he's the only WR I can live with at 11.

 

But we have got to stop reaching with our draft picks.  We desperately need a streak of getting tons of surplus value from our drafts and cap dollars.  We are bleeding out value with bad drafts, trades, and free agency classes.  We're playing catch up because the Cowboys and Packers and Rams and Niners and Bucs are well ahead of us and the Eagles are pulling away too.  This is the pivotal offseason for Rivera's regime to actually make the leap to contention.  I think he can survive a bad offseason and a disappointing season, but year four would almost certainly be his hotseat year if he fails in 2022.

I don’t know how you make this argument but then view Linderbaum, Hamilton and Lloyd as value. Linderbaum is a center And lacks positional flexibility, Hamilton’s 40 was a thousand red flags and he may be a positionally limited safety, Lloyd is a redshirt senior who plays one of the cheapest positions to address in free agency and in terms of draft capital. Hamilton, Linderbaum and Lloyd would all be massive reaches at 11 w/their flags. They all could be great pro’s too but value? Not really beyond landing a hit rather than a bust.

 

I’m not married to London either btw, I think it’s kind of nuts that we have Wilson behind London and Olave supposedly but it may be a lazy “fit” thing rather than a talent and value thing. Would be the 4th consecutive draft we steered wrong in that sense so no surprise there. This team doesn’t understand value at least in round 1 anyway. They seem to prefer fit and defensive need.

[Going Commando]

5 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

And this isn't the only team (even though I disagree personally on this) that likes Olave over Wilson.

 

I've got Olave over Wilson.  I think Wilson is actually a really risky player and I'm kind of surprised that there has been such a firm high grade consensus on him leading into the draft, but not for other guys like Hamilton and Davis and Dean and Lloyd who had much better college careers.  I heard Wilson was bad in his team meetings and I can't get past the fact that Wilson's release game sucks and he can't run routes.  Those are major flags.  Also, I can accept that Ohio State receivers pay a production tax, but even factoring that in, his college production was pretty meager by the standards of an early first round receiver.  And he hasn't seemed to be dinged by playing across from Olave and Smith-Njigba even though it means defenses were never able to collapse on him like they do for London or Dotson.

 

I get the initial excitement with him, I see the Odell-like playmaking gene too.  But not being a technician is a big limitation on his ceiling, and it's the kind of thing where I don't necessarily expect him to transform in the NFL.  Olave's got limitations too, some of the same ones as Wilson given they played in the same offense.  But the difference for me is that he's faster, he has better hands, and he knows how to run routes.

[KDawg]

 

1 minute ago, Going Commando said:

 

I've got Olave over Wilson.  I think Wilson is actually a really risky player and I'm kind of surprised that there has been such a firm high grade consensus on him leading into the draft, but not for other guys like Hamilton and Davis and Dean and Lloyd who had much better college careers.  I heard Wilson was bad in his team meetings and I can't get past the fact that Wilson's release game sucks and he can't run routes.  Those are major flags.  Also, I can accept that Ohio State receivers pay a production tax, but even factoring that in, his college production was pretty meager by the standards of an early first round receiver.  And he hasn't seemed to be dinged by playing across from Olave and Smith-Njigba even though it means defenses were never able to collapse on him like they do for London or Dotson.

 

I get the initial excitement with him, I see the Odell-like playmaking gene too.  But not being a technician is a big limitation on his ceiling, and it's the kind of thing where I don't necessarily expect him to transform in the NFL.  Olave's got limitations too, some of the same ones as Wilson given they played in the same offense.  But the difference for me is that he's faster, he has better hands, and he knows how to run routes.

 

Didn't Wilson run a 4.38 and Olave a 4.39?

5 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:

I don’t know how you make this argument but then view Linderbaum, Hamilton and Lloyd as value. Linderbaum is a center And lacks positional flexibility, Hamilton’s 40 was a thousand red flags and he may be a positionally limited safety, Lloyd is a redshirt senior who plays one of the cheapest positions to address in free agency and in terms of draft capital. Hamilton, Linderbaum and Lloyd would all be massive reaches at 11 w/their flags. They all could be great pro’s too but value? Not really beyond landing a hit rather than a bust.

 

I’m not married to London either btw, I think it’s kind of nuts that we have Wilson behind London and Olave supposedly but it may be a lazy “fit” thing rather than a talent and value thing. Would be the 4th consecutive draft we steered wrong in that sense so no surprise there. This team doesn’t understand value at least in round 1 anyway. They seem to prefer fit and defensive need.

Yeah I don’t agree with this whole take but this makes sense to me in the approach. You can’t argue against value of a receiver and then argue for value of a center. 

[Forever A Redskin]

Praying to the trade down gods all day today. At 11, not 47. If you trade from 11 you have a chance to pick up 3 immediate impact players. We must trade down.

 

The main reason I don't want to trade down in the 2nd is because Walker might be there...I also would love it Watson was there if we don't go WR at 11.

 

Gonna be such an interesting draft. Please don't botch this! This could be a franchise turning point type draft if we play our cards right.

 

[86 Snyder]

Let me help guys…

 

Drafting a center in the first round is ****ing dumb.

 

Not including *some* positional weight into BPA is ****ing dumb.

 

Carry on.

[RWJ]

1 hour ago, Zim489 said:

It’s Walker

One of the two.  Hutch or Walker.