2023 Comprehensive Draft Thread

[Est.1974]

Hooker wont get past the Vikings at #23.

[kingdaddy]

8 hours ago, Going Commando said:

 

Richardson isn't the QB they would draft IMO.  I think they are looking at Hendon Hooker, and I don't think they will have to trade up to get him.

 

John Keim has been saying they won't take Hooker at 16, but then he says they'll take him if he's there in the second or third.  That feels a little incoherent to me.  That means they like Hooker, and when you like a QB that means you draft him when you can. You don't draft QBs only when they are BPA, you draft them on a yes/no evaluation and take them when they are a yes and you need one.

 

I think there is a chance they draft Hooker at 16, or maybe even after a small trade down.  There has been soooo much smoke coming off that fire that I don't think it's just a screen.  I think they actually like the guy, and this off-season has played out in such a bizarre way.

 

1 - I think that the FO has known for some time that the Harris group was going to be the next owner, and I think they've been in contact with them for a while.  I think they know where they stand with the new owners, and its why they went about aggressively hiring new coaching talent, spending to keep DaRon, and bringing in some FA talent.

 

2 - the Bienemy hire had a rapidity to it that made it clear his hiring had been in the works for a while.  This situation feels an awful lot like Rivera and Bienemy and Andy Reed all worked out during the season that Bienemy is going to be Rivera's heir as Head Coach of the Commanders.  I think Rivera is looking to step back from his HC duties and move into a front office role full or part time like Bruce Arians did.  He's built his football machine here and I can see him wanting a break.

 

3 - I think Bienemy has been picking his QB for when he moves into the HC job, and I think he's picking Hooker.  To me, his visit to the TN Pro day to see Hooker + Hooker's top 30 visit here were a bonfire level of smoke.

 

I have mixed feelings about all of this, mainly because I still like Sam Howell.  But Hooker could be something special, and a coach should bring in his preferred QB and form the essential QB/HC marriage to establish the leadership of the team.  If Bienemy is to be our next head coach, and he wants Hooker, then we should pick him.  No other choice at 16 could come even remotely close to being as impactful.

You've put the pieces together pretty good here...makes a lot of sense. I hope your wrong only because I want to believe Howell can be the man and I still think he can be. But, if Hooker is supposed to be that good and falls to us then I guess you take him?

[Warhead36]

No chance we take Hooker in the 1st. All the work we're doing on him is just due diligence. Now if he's available in the 2nd? Maybe we take a stab(still don't think we would though).

[Koolblue13]

Last year the thirstiest team in the league for a QB took the guy they wanted in the second, in the fifth.

[Est.1974]

2 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

Last year the thirstiest team in the league for a QB took the guy they wanted in the second, in the fifth.

They only wanted him in the second before they moved for Wentz.

[Going Commando]

13 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

No chance we take Hooker in the 1st. All the work we're doing on him is just due diligence. Now if he's available in the 2nd? Maybe we take a stab(still don't think we would though).

 

I just don't get this reasoning when it comes to QB.  If you like a QB enough to take him in the second, then you like him enough to take him in the first.

 

QB isn't a position that falls onto a normal draft board ranking like the rest of the regular 22.  They are a yes or no proposition where you are really only ranking them against other QB prospects.  When you draft one early, you are saying that you are picking this guy to be your franchise QB, and you are committing to him being your long term starter.  You're still doing that if you draft a QB in the second round.  You've essentially said yes to the question of "am I comfortable moving forward with this guy as my long term QB?"  The position is far too important to get cute and milk draft board value out of, so why would we be willing to make him the franchise with a second rounder but not a first?  What could possibly be more important than making a long term decision at QB?  Drafting a guard?

 

I think Keim's take that we like Hooker but will only draft him at 47 if he's still there is nonsense.  There are really only two plays that make sense here IMO.  1 - we're being slick and smoke screening in order to get a team that likes Hooker to move up.  Or 2 - we really do like Hooker, which puts him in play at 16.

 

I don't know which of the two is happening, but I think the second scenario is a very real possibility.  This has not been the most opaque front office when it comes to the draft.

[Warhead36]

13 minutes ago, Going Commando said:

 

I just don't get this reasoning when it comes to QB.  If you like a QB enough to take him in the second, then you like him enough to take him in the first.

Not necessarily. There is a pretty big gap between 1st rounders and 2nd rounders. And milking value is absolutely essential to building a championship roster. 

[Est.1974]

I could see Bieniemy being strongly drawn towards Jalin Hyatt.

 

I like both Samuel and Gibson, however I’m not sure either falls into the explosive/dynamic category.

Edited April 14, 2023 by Est.1974

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, Going Commando said:

 

 

I think Keim's take that we like Hooker but will only draft him at 47 if he's still there is nonsense.  There are really only two plays that make sense here IMO.  1 - we're being slick and smoke screening in order to get a team that likes Hooker to move up.  Or 2 - we really do like Hooker, which puts him in play at 16.

 

 

 

Keim of course is saying what he's told.  And he's generally not misled by his sources because he's usually spot on including about the draft intentions.  His take from what he's heard is no way in the first, probab;y not the 2nd but maybe, but if he falls to the third he'd be on the table. 

 

If all of that is a head fake, they are head faking Keim too which is possible but it rarely happens.  Having said that Hooker failling to the third looks to be very unlikely

 

I get the point if they really really like him, they'd just take him and not let him drop.  But I do think they believe they have to make some roster upgrades in a win now season.  A 3rd round pick is easier territory to make a luxury-non win now pick. 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 14, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[tmandoug1]

I said a couple weeks ago that I thought we were using Hooker as bait with Minnesota to trade back and get extra picks. Not sure Minny or Tampa will need to move up to get him so that could be a flaw in my plan. I would rather see us go Oline or CB if the right one is there in the 1st then pick the remaining of the two in the 2nd and LaPorta in the 3rd. I get the theory of picking Hooker if you like him in the 1st....but man that's a stretch.

[NFC Beast1987]

1 hour ago, Going Commando said:

 

I just don't get this reasoning when it comes to QB.  If you like a QB enough to take him in the second, then you like him enough to take him in the first.

 

QB isn't a position that falls onto a normal draft board ranking like the rest of the regular 22.  They are a yes or no proposition where you are really only ranking them against other QB prospects.  When you draft one early, you are saying that you are picking this guy to be your franchise QB, and you are committing to him being your long term starter.  You're still doing that if you draft a QB in the second round.  You've essentially said yes to the question of "am I comfortable moving forward with this guy as my long term QB?"  The position is far too important to get cute and milk draft board value out of, so why would we be willing to make him the franchise with a second rounder but not a first?  What could possibly be more important than making a long term decision at QB?  Drafting a guard?

 

I think Keim's take that we like Hooker but will only draft him at 47 if he's still there is nonsense.  There are really only two plays that make sense here IMO.  1 - we're being slick and smoke screening in order to get a team that likes Hooker to move up.  Or 2 - we really do like Hooker, which puts him in play at 16.

 

I don't know which of the two is happening, but I think the second scenario is a very real possibility.  This has not been the most opaque front office when it comes to the draft.

To me it means they probably have a 4th round grade on the QB but since QB is so important they would take him in the second round but can't justify reaching all the way to the first round

[Going Commando]

1 hour ago, Warhead36 said:

Not necessarily. There is a pretty big gap between 1st rounders and 2nd rounders. And milking value is absolutely essential to building a championship roster. 

 

You can milk draft board value at every other position, but not at QB.  As a coach, you're picking your leader and your partner when you pick your QB.  If you believe in a QB prospect, then you just bring him in when you can grab him.  Maybe you even trade up for him if doing so doesn't crush your draft pick stash.  But you don't try and see if you can get him in the next round and say Oh Well if he gets snapped up in between.  The position's importance necessitates making an active choice on the player.  You have to pick yes or no on whether you believe he can be your partner in leadership on the team.

 

I don't know whether it's a yes or a no on Hooker for them.  All I know is they've been looking at him aggressively.  The answer could be that they've decided no, and the benefit of doing all of this digging is that it dovetails with their preferred strategy of trading down by increasing the sense of demand for Hooker.  That strategy makes a lot of sense and I like how slick it would be for them, especially if it works and we're able to trade down.  But the Occam's razor explanation for why they've been digging into Hooker so much is that they like him.  Kind of hard to look past the fact that we don't have an established QB here, and the FO has been turning over every rock to find one the past four offseasons.

[Going Commando]

33 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Keim of course is saying what he's told.  And he's generally not misled by his sources because he's usually spot on including about the draft intentions.  His take from what he's heard is no way in the first, probab;y not the 2nd but maybe, but if he falls to the third he'd be on the table. 

 

If all of that is a head fake, they are head faking Keim too which is possible but it rarely happens.  Having said that Hooker failling to the third looks to be very unlikely

 

I get the point if they really really like him, they'd just take him and not let him drop.  But I do think they believe they have to make some roster upgrades in a win now season.  A 3rd round pick is easier territory to make a luxury-non win now pick. 

 

I don't think picking a QB is a luxury.  I also think there is a solid chance that Hooker will start as a rookie.

 

If I were in the FO, Keim would be the one I would lie to in order to hide my draft day intentions.  If I really liked Hooker, had met with him multiple times and decided this is my QB pick  and there is a good chance he'll be there at 16, then I would lie to John Keim and tell him "maybe if he's there in the third" to try and disguise my interest in the dude to make sure nobody trades up in front of me.

 

If I were headfaking on Hooker, I'd be telling John Keim "yes, he's in play at 16."

 

The fact that Keim has said he's in play on day 2 is the very thing that makes me nervous and suspicious.

 

I don't know how I feel about all of this TBH.  I do think Hooker is in play at 16, but I'm not sure if I want us to draft him.  I'm not sold on Hooker, and I wanted us to give Sam Howell a shot as the starter.  But there are three powerful factors that sway me into supporting the choice if they end up picking Hooker at 16.

 

1 - I do think Hooker is good.  I see DeShaun Watson when I watch his him.  And his intangibles must be through the roof, the way everyone gravitates around him and the way he was able to elevate a dead dog Tennessee program into an exciting CFP contender.  I also think his recovery must be going well if he's saying he'll be ready to go for training camp. 

 

2 - I think coaches should pick their QBs and marry their tenure to them, and it's the one thing this regime desperately needs to do in order to survive long term.  Picking Hooker would be them performing that choice to me.

 

3 - Ultimately I trust Bienemy's ability to develop a QB prospect into an outstanding NFL player.  If Bienemy wants the dude, let's get Hooker for him.

[BRAVEONAWARPATH]

16 minutes ago, Going Commando said:

 

I don't think picking a QB is a luxury.  I also think there is a solid chance that Hooker will start as a rookie.

 

If I were in the FO, Keim would be the one I would lie to in order to hide my draft day intentions.  If I really liked Hooker, had met with him multiple times and decided this is my QB pick  and there is a good chance he'll be there at 16, then I would lie to John Kei

 

3 - Ultimately I trust Bienemy's ability to develop a QB prospect into an outstanding NFL player.  If Bienemy wants the dude, let's get Hooker for him.

If Hooker is their guy, then fine.

 

But what I don't want to see is the "let's let Hooker and Howell battle it out" line from the coaching staff.

 

If Hooker is the guy you fully commit to him and trade Howell immediately.

[KDawg]

2 hours ago, Going Commando said:

 

I just don't get this reasoning when it comes to QB.  If you like a QB enough to take him in the second, then you like him enough to take him in the first.

 

QB isn't a position that falls onto a normal draft board ranking like the rest of the regular 22.  They are a yes or no proposition where you are really only ranking them against other QB prospects.  When you draft one early, you are saying that you are picking this guy to be your franchise QB, and you are committing to him being your long term starter.  You're still doing that if you draft a QB in the second round.  You've essentially said yes to the question of "am I comfortable moving forward with this guy as my long term QB?"  The position is far too important to get cute and milk draft board value out of, so why would we be willing to make him the franchise with a second rounder but not a first?  What could possibly be more important than making a long term decision at QB?  Drafting a guard?

 

I think Keim's take that we like Hooker but will only draft him at 47 if he's still there is nonsense.  There are really only two plays that make sense here IMO.  1 - we're being slick and smoke screening in order to get a team that likes Hooker to move up.  Or 2 - we really do like Hooker, which puts him in play at 16.

 

I don't know which of the two is happening, but I think the second scenario is a very real possibility.  This has not been the most opaque front office when it comes to the draft.

You’re looking at it differently than many.

 

You can like a guy but not love him. In that case, you draft a player you like more in the first. If the QB you like is there at 47, they are willing to take him. But not before.

 

This tells me that they are high on Sam Howell, don’t love Hendon Hooker as much as you seem to think they have to if they even like him, but they do see tremendous value if he falls to 47.

 

He won’t. But drafting a QB to a roster with a potential new regime next year in the first round who is coming off of an ACL injury is a waste.

[woodpecker]

Great posts @Going Commando

Some solid reasoning there why hooker may be the pick in the first round. I’d be all for it. Everybody seems to be stuck on O-line or corner. I’ve got no problem drafting for need, but to me franchise quarterback is by far the biggest need. Ideally, you find one in the draft, and that’s not going to happen if you don’t keep taking shots. A lot of Philly fans complained about the Jalen hurts pick, thought they should fill this hole or that and keep building around Wentz. 

[Est.1974]

Thoughts on the notion prospective new owners passing a message down to trade out from #16 to add 2024 draft capital ?

[woodpecker]

5 minutes ago, Est.1974 said:

Thoughts on the notion prospective new owners passing a message down to trade out from #16 to add 2024 draft capital ?

They may send word that it’s OK to consider that kind of offer, but I seriously doubt that they would direct them to seek it out.

[Est.1974]

7 minutes ago, woodpecker said:

They may send word that it’s OK to consider that kind of offer, but I seriously doubt that they would direct them to seek it out.

Could get very interesting. Time will tell.

[Going Commando]

Yeah I can't see this new ownership group having any hand in the way this regime conducts their draft.  If they did try and give them directives, before the sale has been completed, and with two weeks to go before draft day, then that would be an horrendous sign of things to come.

 

This draft is all on Rivera and his regime.  They have autonomy this off-season. 

 

If the new ownership group were to direct the FO to trade out of this draft to fill the cupboard for their replacements, that is tantamount to firing them.  Only it'd be doing it in the most dysfunctional and disreputable way you could do it.

[Skinsinparadise]

3 hours ago, Going Commando said:

 

I don't think picking a QB is a luxury.  I also think there is a solid chance that Hooker will start as a rookie.

 

 

I think the more likely scenario for this would be good chance he's not ready to play until the end of the season coming off the ACL. 

 

Lets see what Howell can do, and if he's the answer you got Hooker as backup or trade bait.  If Howell doesn't look good, then you got another lottery ticket to try.

 

3 hours ago, Going Commando said:

 

 

If I were in the FO, Keim would be the one I would lie to in order to hide my draft day intentions.  If I really liked Hooker, had met with him multiple times and decided this is my QB pick  and there is a good chance he'll be there at 16, then I would lie to John Keim and tell him "maybe if he's there in the third" to try and disguise my interest in the dude to make sure nobody trades up in front of me.

 

 

People have said that before, might have even been you.  But no one has pulled off a good lie on Keim that i can recall.  This would be the first.  He doesn't get everything right but I can't recall a case where he's hardcore on a point and ends up wrong.

 

I think the lie is more likely what they are showing the league.  They'd pay more attention to the pro day, team visit, then a tidbit on a Keim podcast.   If teams think no shot they'd take him at 16 or 47, they'd more likely trade with them -- risk also is trade above them but the Commanders can always talk to teams on draft day and say look if you offer us this or that we will pass on Hooker. 

 

I do get the sense they'd be interested for real but that is if he's a surprise faller.  Listening to Keim its clear they want to do something different than Hooker with their first round pick.  this part is a guess from me but my guess is if they trade down and pick up another pick, they'd be more likely to do it in the 2nd or more inclined in the third.

 

 

Edited April 14, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[Est.1974]

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/2023-nfl-draft-why-quentin-johnston-isnt-on-attendees-list-where-league-indicated-hes-likely-to-be-picked/

 

A number of highly-touted NFL prospects who appeared to be early first-round locks throughout their pre-draft lead-ups -- notably quarterbacks Aaron Rodgers(the 24th overall pick in the 2005 NFL Draft) and Lamar Jackson (the 32nd overall pick in the 2018 NFL Draft -- fell to the back half of their draft's opening round. This also could be the case for TCU wide receiver Quentin Johnston, who wasn't invited to attend the 2023 NFL Draft in Kansas City on April 27, a source close to Johnston tells CBS Sports. The players at his position who are attending the draft are Ohio State's Jaxon Smith-Njigba, Boston College's Zay Flowers, and USC's Jordan Addison. 
 

The reason Johnston didn't get an invitation appears to be that the NFL is looking to spare him the Rodgers or Jackson treatment, where the television cameras continue cutting to Johnston and his table during a slide down as the first round gets underway. Johnston did receive feedback from the league that he is still projected to be a first-round pick, the source said. However, the range for his likely selection at this moment appears to be in the "20-28" pick range.

 

Many teams picking in that portion of the draft could be in the market for Johnston's services, including the Seattle Seahawks (20th overall pick), Los Angeles Chargers (21st overall pick), Baltimore Ravens (22nd overall pick), Minnesota Vikings (23rd overall pick), New York Giants (25th overall pick), Dallas Cowboys (26th overall pick), and the Buffalo Bills (27th overall pick).

 

The Bills are an interesting option given they're reportedly looking to trade down to add an offensive playmaker or lineman to help out Josh Allen and Stefon Diggs. The Cowboys being in that range could lead to Johnston playing his NFL games at AT&T Stadium in Arlington, Texas, just a 25-minute drive from TCU's Amon G. Carter Stadium in Fort Worth where he played his collegiate home games. 

 

Edited April 14, 2023 by Est.1974

[Skinsinparadise]

2 hours ago, KDawg said:

 

 

You can like a guy but not love him. In that case, you draft a player you like more in the first. If the QB you like is there at 47, they are willing to take him. But not before.

 

 

Exactly, like and not love.  they don't love him, do they wouldn't take at 16, but like enough that hey he's fallen so far in the draft that that this is a good spot to take him.

 

My thought now is its much ado about nothing.  And its a head fake to get teams to trade up with them.

[Est.1974]

1 minute ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Exactly, like and not love.  they don't love him, do they wouldn't take at 16, but like enough that hey he's fallen so far in the draft that that this is a good spot to take him.

 

My thought now is its much ado about nothing.  And its a head fake to get teams to trade up with them.

Could be.

Rivera’s drafting here is littered with picks taken ‘earlier’ than many would have predicted just to get ‘their’ guy.

[Skinsinparadise]

41 minutes ago, Est.1974 said:

Could be.

Rivera’s drafting here is littered with picks taken ‘earlier’ than many would have predicted just to get ‘their’ guy.

 

If Keim didn't say like 3 times they aren't taking Hooker in the first, i might humor the point.

 

Ironically Keim did indeed say before the draft among others look for Dotson in the first, he was a player he knew was on their radar then among others. 

Edited April 14, 2023 by Skinsinparadise