2023 Comprehensive Draft Thread

[Skinsinparadise]

15 minutes ago, KDawg said:

I don’t understand the displeasure with drafting a defensive end in the first. You take the best player. And, in theory, I’d agree it’s a strange move given Sweat or Young. But I think it’s too early to form a take.

 

If we draft an end… then turn around and we find out Young or Sweat was traded for draft capital, is it still a mistake? Have to give it time to play out and not be reactionary.

 

It’s okay to say, “yeah, not sure I understand this. I feel *insert emotion* about the player, but why an end? Let’s see how it plays out.”

 

And Mathis is depth at one of the most heavily rotated positions in the NFL which we haven’t been rotating. And he’s fairly cheap. Why the disdain? 

 

 

 

I'd add the Eagles, arguably with the best roster in the NFL and the best pass rush -- seem obsessed with adding studs to their D line.  They are never satisfied. 

 

I doubt both Sweat and Young are here 2 seasons from now, but even if they were -- its not overkill to have strong rotational players.  it's a rotational spot.  And heck guys get hurt.  if you have three good pass rushers -- the odds that the third guy gets plenty of reps is pretty high.

 

When the Giants won their SBs they had three great pass rushers, not just two.  They'd move Tuck to the inside on key passing downs.  And they were a handful.  Both Murphy and Van Ness have the physicality to play inside. 

[KDawg]

1 minute ago, Warhead36 said:

Agreed 100%. You don't get better building this way. You're just fixing holes to stay afloat but essentially staying the same. Its awful usage of resources.

 

Ideally if you know you're gonna lose a guy you draft a potential replacement in the middle rounds who can sit and learn for a year and then potentially take over the next year. Not by burning 1st rounders.

 

Ultimately though I do not believe we'll be taking a DL in the 1st.

Disagree 100%.

 

You don't get better drafting the way you described.

 

You don't get better drafting for need or to replace a guy.

 

You get better by drafting the best players that don't bust. That may seem obvious... but is it?

 

If an EDGE is the best player on the board at 16, you take him. It works out due to the defensive ends being possible moves and there is a potential need there... But anyone opting to draft any ONE position in the draft when you don't know what's available isn't completely thinking it through.

 

You draft the best players, your team gets better. 

 

That is it. 

 

It's that simple. 

[Bifflog]

2 minutes ago, KDawg said:

If an EDGE is the best player on the board at 16, you take him.

 

Or at the very least, if you don't have any OT's still available graded out as a first rounder, but an EDGE is sitting there that you did have a R1 grade on, then you take him.

 

All things being equal, if you had similarly graded OT and DE both sitting there, take the OT because it's a convergence of need and positional value relative to the round in the draft.

 

Lest we forget,

 

 

Edited April 26, 2023 by Bifflog

[KDawg]

Just now, Bifflog said:

 

Or at the very least, if you don't have any OT's still available graded out as a first rounder, but and EDGE is sitting there that you did have a R1 grade on, then you take him.

 

All things being equal, if you had similarly graded OT and DE both sitting there, take the OT because it's a convergence of need and positional value relative to the round in the draft.

 

Lest we forget,

 

 

 

Yes. 

 

I get tired of repeating the same thing over and over so I don't, but to me "Best Player" is ALWAYS player grade + positional value + need weight + draft position value.

 

It's never just the best player.

 

If it were, there would be a lot of punters drafted really early. Maybe even some long snappers.

 

 

[JamesMadisonSkins]

I totally understand BPA. And with Edge rushers, you really can never have too many. I just think we've over-invested in the DL. We need more 3rd-5th rounders to round out the group, not more 1st rounders.

To me, you still have Sweat and Young for 1 more year. You likely have one of them for more long-term too. So to me, you're drafting a DE because he's the best player there, but that means you let one of the studs walk out the door, a stud you already have in-house. So you're tunrstiling the position. And ignoring others.

 

So in that scenario, I don't overdraft the OT. I trade back, so that I can draft an OT, and maybe with the extra pick draft a DE that is still pretty good, and may pan out to be better than who you were going to take in the 1st.

 

Blue chip is blue chip. But with Chase Young we;ve seen that nothing is a guarantee. We need more swings at the fence. Give me more picks in that scenario. Trade back and then BPA. But don't BPA with limited resources at a position you already have 4 1st rounders and 1 2nd rounder. 

 

 

My dream of 29 and 40 for 16 might come true!

 

[Bifflog]

3 minutes ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

I totally understand BPA. And with Edge rushers, you really can never have too many. I just think we've over-invested in the DL. We need more 3rd-5th rounders to round out the group, not more 1st rounders.

To me, you still have Sweat and Young for 1 more year. You likely have one of them for more long-term too. So to me, you're drafting a DE because he's the best player there, but that means you let one of the studs walk out the door, a stud you already have in-house. So you're tunrstiling the position. And ignoring others.

 

So in that scenario, I don't overdraft the OT. I trade back, so that I can draft an OT, and maybe with the extra pick draft a DE that is still pretty good, and may pan out to be better than who you were going to take in the 1st.

 

Blue chip is blue chip. But with Chase Young we;ve seen that nothing is a guarantee. We need more swings at the fence. Give me more picks in that scenario. Trade back and then BPA. But don't BPA with limited resources at a position you already have 4 1st rounders and 1 2nd rounder. 

 

I get this, but I'd rather be overly stacked in one position than get poor return on what I decided to pick to avoid that scenario.  One day, we'll get better at flipping our assets for proper value, and when that day comes this will matter a lot.

 

If trade-back value is good, sure.  If it's not, and the alternative players at different positions you have graded lower, then play your board.

Edited April 26, 2023 by Bifflog

[Est.1974]

6 minutes ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

My dream of 29 and 40 for 16 might come true!

That would be a nice trade for us.

 

If Edge falls to #16, I see KC on the phone. Blockbuster trade up. They are hosting the draft. Imagine the scene if they jump from 31 to 16. They don’t need all of their existing picks, they want a stud pass rusher. I’m sure Ron and Andy have already spoken.

 

PITT are also tempting for me at 32, they have another second rounder in the 40’s I think.  We get a good deal to drop out the first, they end up with 16 and 17. Why not.

[KDawg]

9 minutes ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

I totally understand BPA. And with Edge rushers, you really can never have too many. I just think we've over-invested in the DL. We need more 3rd-5th rounders to round out the group, not more 1st rounders.

To me, you still have Sweat and Young for 1 more year. You likely have one of them for more long-term too. So to me, you're drafting a DE because he's the best player there, but that means you let one of the studs walk out the door, a stud you already have in-house. So you're tunrstiling the position. And ignoring others.

 

So in that scenario, I don't overdraft the OT. I trade back, so that I can draft an OT, and maybe with the extra pick draft a DE that is still pretty good, and may pan out to be better than who you were going to take in the 1st.

 

Blue chip is blue chip. But with Chase Young we;ve seen that nothing is a guarantee. We need more swings at the fence. Give me more picks in that scenario. Trade back and then BPA. But don't BPA with limited resources at a position you already have 4 1st rounders and 1 2nd rounder. 

 

 

My dream of 29 and 40 for 16 might come true!

 

We DID overstock on the DL. Absolutely agree. Over drafted it.

 

But that’s done and in the past, in my opinion. You can’t go back.

 

But you can’t avoid taking the best players available (using need/value/skill/draft value) because we made a mistake in the past. 
 

That’s how you get in trouble, too. 
 

We over drafted for need. 
 

Don’t avoid a spot because we drafted like that before. Do it the right way and things will happen.

[Warhead36]

18 minutes ago, KDawg said:

Disagree 100%.

 

You don't get better drafting the way you described.

 

You don't get better drafting for need or to replace a guy.

 

You get better by drafting the best players that don't bust. That may seem obvious... but is it?

 

If an EDGE is the best player on the board at 16, you take him. It works out due to the defensive ends being possible moves and there is a potential need there... But anyone opting to draft any ONE position in the draft when you don't know what's available isn't completely thinking it through.

 

You draft the best players, your team gets better. 

 

That is it. 

 

It's that simple. 

I agree with accumulating talent but the draft is a value game. Its all about maximizing your resources and assets.

 

Sure an Edge might be the best player, but is a 3rd Edge who likely won't start going to be as impactful as, say, a quality starting OT? Or CB? Its not an efficient usage of assets. It'd be like if I own a two garage house and already have two cars and instead of buying a new refrigerator or fixing our leaky roof, we buy a third car.

 

Lets say we draft an Edge and he replaces Sweat or Young next year. That's great. But we haven't made our team better. We haven't built on our roster. We're just playing whack a mole. We'll be in the same position next year with the same holes.

 

Its one thing if this were a championship roster, or we're paying a franchise QB a ton of money and have to be able to churn guys in and out of our roster(see teams like KC), but we aren't at that point. We haven't even built up a roster yet, our QBs make peanuts, and we're already trying to play the replacement game.

[KDawg]

2 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

I agree with accumulating talent but the draft is a value game. Its all about maximizing your resources and assets.

 

Sure an Edge might be the best player, but is a 3rd Edge who likely won't start going to be as impactful as, say, a quality starting OT? Or CB? Its not an efficient usage of assets. It'd be like if I own a two garage house and already have two cars and instead of buying a new refrigerator or fixing our leaky roof, we buy a third car.

 

Lets say we draft an Edge and he replaces Sweat or Young next year. That's great. But we haven't made our team better. We haven't built on our roster. We're just playing whack a mole. We'll be in the same position next year with the same holes.

 

Its one thing if this were a championship roster, or we're paying a franchise QB a ton of money and have to be able to churn guys in and out of our roster(see teams like KC), but we aren't at that point. We haven't even built up a roster yet, our QBs make peanuts, and we're already trying to play the replacement game.

How do you know a third edge wouldn’t start?

 

How do you know we wouldn’t move one of the current guys?

 

If that third edge is rated (need/value/skill/position) better than the top OT available but a half a letter grade, do you take the OT?

 

I don’t.

 

If it’s close? Yes. I take the OT. But a better player is a better player.

 

Also, if the edge starts next year we DID make the team better. Avoided the major contract for one of the edges. That lets us improve other spots.

Edited April 26, 2023 by KDawg

[seantaylor=god]

1 hour ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

I'll say the drafting/mismanagement of this DL at the expense of other positions (OL specifically, QB) is and should get Ron and Co fired.

 

If we draft another DE in the 1st, I'll be SO done with them. And it has nothing to do with the fact that they drafted a DE in the 1st round because we DO need long-term solutions there. It has more to do with their absolute mismanagement of the DL in general.

 

Drafting Mathis in R2 only to franchise tag and extend Payne is a perfect example. We clearly did that for depth but also in anticipating of Payne walking. Now we have a high-priced R2 backup DT, when we could have gotten away with getting that role filled by a later pick (or a pick this year). 

 

Same can be said for DE. Drafting a Myles Murphy to be a 3rd rusher so that we can let a 2020 #2 overall pick walk after 2023 is not only poor drafting, but poor roster management. It would be smart roster management to draft replacements for impending free agents if the team was more built out and complete. But they've been implementing that strategy ONLY along the DL at the expense of other positions, and it sucks.

 

Drafting a 5th round DE this year would be the move. Not a 1st round. I hope they prove me wrong.

 

Many experts and local media folks thought we were over-investing in the DL and at some point we'd have to pay all these guys once their rookie contracts expired. I argued you could do that by drafting cheap backups for a few years while extending the studs. But once that strategy of all 4 being studs blew up in our faces (to an extent, NFL is unpredictable and they all could still prove out studs), then it's time to move to a diff. strategy/invest elsewhere. But doubling down on drafting DL every year in R1 and R2 at the expense of other spots is not smart.

 

We can deal with a rookie 2nd round DE next year if we let Sweat or Young walk. Draft a 5th round DE this year so that you have depth/3rd rusher type on the roster so you don't have to fill 2 DE spots next year.

 

/rant

I definitely understand the frustration. But I see Mathis as the NT replacement for Settle and Ion. The real issue I have is how can you spend a 2nd round pick on a guy you project as a NT/rotational DT? It’s just a poor use of a premium pick. And if they actually saw him as the BPA and think he’s a legit starting caliber player, than their evaluation is certainly going against the grain because the explosive numbers don’t show that for him. A DT in the 4/5th round? Absolutely. But things like that, which seemed like a panic move at the time, really makes me question the acumen of the guys making the decisions and their long term plan. It’s the same feeling I had about Jamin when we had a need at ILB. He can still become a good player, but using a first round pick on a non-pass rushing LB that doesn’t show ridiculous instincts? Just questionable value. There is a reason ILBs get paid so much less than OTs by the league. Finding an average LT is so much harder and thus more valuable. Darrisaw was there for us and we chose the lesser valuable position.

 

If BPA is a DE, I’m all for it. It’s an expensive position and we ask a lot of our DEs. But I don’t think I will be able to stomach if we use 16 on Torrence or Avila because it’s just such a poor use or draft capital. It’s so expensive to get certain positions in FA- that’s who you need to draft, with some exceptions.

 

OT, CB (this year there is depth at the spot, I’ll concede) pass rusher that’s who you need to target in the first round. 

[Warhead36]

1 minute ago, KDawg said:

How do you know a third edge wouldn’t start?

 

How do you know we wouldn’t move one of the current guys?

 

If that third edge is rated (need/value/skill/position) better than the top OT available but a half a letter grade, do you take the OT?

 

I don’t.

 

If it’s close? Yes. I take the OT. But a better player is a better player.

I think its highly doubtful a rookie Edge starts over two established players like Sweat and Young. And I don't think either has much trade value(MAYBE a 2nd for Sweat if we're lucky but even that I doubt).

[KDawg]

Just now, Warhead36 said:

I think its highly doubtful a rookie Edge starts over two established players like Sweat and Young. And I don't think either has much trade value(MAYBE a 2nd for Sweat if we're lucky but even that I doubt).

 

I think they have more value than you think.

 

And because I edited late, here is what I added to the post: 

 

Also, if the edge starts next year we DID make the team better. Avoided the major contract for one of the edges. That lets us improve other spots.

[seantaylor=god]

I will say I don’t really understand announcing you aren’t signing Chase to the option before the draft. It sends a signal to the league that DE/OLB is in play. Why do that when you don’t have to?

 

The logical answer is they don’t like the DE/OLB options at 16 and are desperately trying to gin up some interest in a trade down. Put some hesitancy in another FO that they will not get Nolan Smith or Myles Murphy unless you trade ahead of Washington or to 16.

 

That’s the only logic in it, to me.

[Est.1974]

3 minutes ago, seantaylor=god said:

I will say I don’t really understand announcing you aren’t signing Chase to the option before the draft. It sends a signal to the league that DE/OLB is in play. Why do that when you don’t have to?

 

The logical answer is they don’t like the DE/OLB options at 16 and are desperately trying to gin up some interest in a trade down. Put some hesitancy in another FO that they will not get Nolan Smith or Myles Murphy unless you trade ahead of Washington or to 16.

 

That’s the only logic in it, to me.

The whole league already knew he wasn’t getting a 5th year option. It won’t be a surprise. Who the Hell would give him a fully guaranteed for injury 17mil. Nah, was never happening.

[JamesMadisonSkins]

3 minutes ago, seantaylor=god said:

I will say I don’t really understand announcing you aren’t signing Chase to the option before the draft. It sends a signal to the league that DE/OLB is in play. Why do that when you don’t have to?

 

The logical answer is they don’t like the DE/OLB options at 16 and are desperately trying to gin up some interest in a trade down. Put some hesitancy in another FO that they will not get Nolan Smith or Myles Murphy unless you trade ahead of Washington or to 16.

 

That’s the only logic in it, to me.

 

Agree here. It makes no sense to come out and say it before the draft. Now if we liked Murphy and he fell to #16, I could totally understand why you wouldn't pick up Young's option after the draft. Before the draft, I think it would be mostly to drum up interest in getting a team to trade ahead for a DE to push another position down, or to engage them in a trade. 

 

NO and KC both want EDGE. We could be playing them for a trade. 

[NYSkins21]

39 minutes ago, KDawg said:

Disagree 100%.

 

You don't get better drafting the way you described.

 

You don't get better drafting for need or to replace a guy.

 

You get better by drafting the best players that don't bust. That may seem obvious... but is it?

 

If an EDGE is the best player on the board at 16, you take him. It works out due to the defensive ends being possible moves and there is a potential need there... But anyone opting to draft any ONE position in the draft when you don't know what's available isn't completely thinking it through.

 

You draft the best players, your team gets better. 

 

That is it. 

 

It's that simple. 

***Matt Millen and the Detroit Lions have entered the chat.

[JamesMadisonSkins]

There's still a ton of good talent out there on the FA market.

 

Still think we can be aggressive in the draft at TE, C, OT ... and the resulting cuts from those additions could free up enough $$ to make some solid additions in FA ... Rock Ya Sin ... Isaiah Wynn ... Shaq Griffin ... S Josh Johnson ... players still out there.

[Chump Bailey]

5 minutes ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

There's still a ton of good talent out there on the FA market.

 

Still think we can be aggressive in the draft at TE, C, OT ... and the resulting cuts from those additions could free up enough $$ to make some solid additions in FA ... Rock Ya Sin ... Isaiah Wynn ... Shaq Griffin ... S Josh Johnson ... players still out there.

 

I'm surprised Rock Ya-Sin is still available. 

[Cooleyfan2007]

Apologies I Haven't been on the board for a bit, is there an Extremeskins tailgate happening this year? These are always fun. I tried searching and couldn't find anything other then the last homegame tailgate.

[clskinsfan]

Not really surprised to hear Richardson may slide a little bit. His tape, especially in the first half of the season, was pretty abysmal last year if we are being honest. Nice piece of athletic clay to mold though. 

[NYSkins21]

1 hour ago, KDawg said:

 

25 minutes ago, NYSkins21 said:

***Matt Millen and the Detroit Lions have entered the chat.

Lol. I do agree with your assessment of BPA tho @KDawg

Edited April 26, 2023 by NYSkins21

[Redskins 2021]

Any shot KC gives up 31 for Young? They need a pass rusher and they offered alot for B.Burns from panthers last year. I think it was 2 # 1 picks.

[Skinsinparadise]

I am a BPA guy but even if I were about needs edge is clearly in that mix 

 

 

[KDawg]

4 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

I am a BPA guy but even if I were about needs edge is clearly in that mix 

 

 

Completely agree.