2023 Comprehensive Draft Thread

[JamesMadisonSkins]

3 minutes ago, KDawg said:

Completely agree.

 

If we don't hit DE early, we could definitely hit it 2x at the end of the draft. Get a bigger edge and a pass-rushing specialist. Someone in R5 and someone in Round 6. Definitely a need from a depth perspective.

[KDawg]

2 minutes ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

 

If we don't hit DE early, we could definitely hit it 2x at the end of the draft. Get a bigger edge and a pass-rushing specialist. Someone in R5 and someone in Round 6. Definitely a need from a depth perspective.

My point is I don’t care if/when we hit it.

 

I want us to get the most value at each pick. That’s it. If it’s Edge… awesome. If it’s RB… great. OT/OG/C even better.

 

Value, value, value.

[NYSkins21]

8 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

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

 

 

Yes but we do have 2024 FA period, franchise tag and draft to fill these needs. Doesn’t necessarily need to be addressed in this draft.

[JamesMadisonSkins]

10 minutes ago, NYSkins21 said:

Yes but we do have 2024 FA period, franchise tag and draft to fill these needs. Doesn’t necessarily need to be addressed in this draft.

 

For sure. And like I said above, if we draft an OT, Center and TE through 4 rounds, and the OT and Center can be relied upon to start in 2024 (and the TE + Bates and the other young guys step up) we can easily move on from Thomas, Leno and Roullier after 2023 ... we have $89m in projected cap going into 2024 right now ... that could get to $119m with those 3 releases.

 

So PLENTY of $$ to throw around at guys. And I think it's pretty clear that Howell will be given the chance and if he isn't the guy then we look to the 2024 draft to go all-in on getting a rookie QB. We'll be well positioned to do that given we'll have $119m to re-sign who we want to re-sign and also be aggressive in FA to mitigate the loss of future draft capital needed to get a Top 3 pick and a QB. OR Howell pans out, and we are even better positioned with a new FO and tons of cap space and a full slate of picks in 2024.

 

We are well-positioned. I don't think we need to be too worried about DE in this draft cycle. But we could use some quality depth there either way. 

Edited April 26, 2023 by JamesMadisonSkins

[tmandoug1]

13 minutes ago, KDawg said:

My point is I don’t care if/when we hit it.

 

I want us to get the most value at each pick. That’s it. If it’s Edge… awesome. If it’s RB… great. OT/OG/C even better.

 

Value, value, value.

I kind of feel like there should be a category called BPA at needed positions.  Our needs are OT/CB/OC/C/LB/ TE.  If in RD1/2/3 there is a stud at our pick of any of those positions you take them.  I would love to see Harrison/Wright, Porter/Forbes, Campbell/Sanders, LaPorta/Musgrave. If Bijan is sitting at 16 we need to trade back...running back is not a need.

Edited April 26, 2023 by tmandoug1

[Skinsinparadise]

 

[actorguy1]

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour 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.

 

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.

 

This.

 

And just to expound a little on your point.  The D line is the most rotational spot on the field.    So even for the win now, its all about next season crowd -- you would indeed use that third pass rusher and likely quite a bit even if there are no injuries.

 

Why are the Eagles supposedly considering trading up for an edge even though they already have the best pass rush in the league and arguably the best depth.

 

1.  I bet on their board they have an edge that they feel is within reach that is likely a stud

 

2.  Part of why (and they say so) their pass rush is so good is because of their depth.   They don't feel like there is such a thing as too much depth and in their case they already have better depth IMO at D line than we do, yet they still want to double down. 

Edited April 26, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[JamesMadisonSkins]

I wonder if Philly is targeting #3 with Arizona to go and get Will Anderson.

[Skinsinparadise]

32 minutes ago, KDawg said:

My point is I don’t care if/when we hit it.

 

I want us to get the most value at each pick. That’s it. If it’s Edge… awesome. If it’s RB… great. OT/OG/C even better.

 

Value, value, value.

 

Exactly.  That's how you build a roster.  

 

Some here cite Logan Paulsen as someone they respect.

 

He's big time in the BPA crowd.  His point is you stack great players -- that's how you build a great roster.  And the needs work itself out -- the salary cap, injuries, etc -- needs can change in a heartbeat.   

[Est.1974]

4 minutes ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

I wonder if Philly is targeting #3 with Arizona to go and get Will Anderson.

I’m wonder Seattle at #5

 

Seattle could end up with 3 firsts in theory if they balance that trade out.

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[KDawg]

42 minutes ago, tmandoug1 said:

I kind of feel like there should be a category called BPA at needed positions.  Our needs are OT/CB/OC/C/LB/ TE.  If in RD1/2/3 there is a stud at our pick of any of those positions you take them.  I would love to see Harrison/Wright, Porter/Forbes, Campbell/Sanders, LaPorta/Musgrave. If Bijan is sitting at 16 we need to trade back...running back is not a need.

I think this is basically what I’ve been saying. Except I see the value in snagging an elite running back. A simply “good” back I see the “not a need” statement. But a game breaker is a game breaker.

 

I don’t think of game breaking RBs as simply running backs. I think of them as weapons. 
 

Jahmyr Gibbs is a weapon. He’d bring tremendous value to the offense as a receiver/runner. 
 

Bijan Robinson isn’t the same receiver but is better in pass pro and ridiculous as a runner. Pairing them with BrRob and even Gibson this year is more WEAPONS.

 

A good OC finds a way to utilize good WEAPONS. The fact we have three RBs doesn’t matter. Use your weapons. 

[Est.1974]

I think Mayer is probably another one who we’ve not been linked with at all. Could he fall into the category of ‘wasn’t expecting that’ pick...?

[Darrell Green Fan]

I have always believed in the BPA, George Young once said "leave your depth chart out of the draft room". But there has to be flexibility.  If the BPA at 16 is a DT or WR and the OTs and CBs are all rated a tad below I think they would be better served taking one of the need positions. 

[bowhunter]

2 hours ago, Est.1974 said:

 

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.

Trading with Andy Reid??  Not a positive history there. I would want BOA to pre-approve anything before we sign it

[e16bball]

I think 32 + 49 from PIT is probably the most realistic excellent trade option out there. For a team looking to reload quickly (as I assume they are), the chance to get two guys they favor at their top pick might be enticing. Walk away with Darnell Wright and Joey Porter? Might be appealing to them. 

 

Maybe you could find a way to get HOU to bite on Hooker? If they went Anderson/Wilson at 2 and Smith-Njigba at 12, that would set them up very nicely to gamble on Hooker. Maybe they would do 33 + CLE’s 2024 1st. That’s fairly similar to what they did previously to land Watson (pick 25 and future 1st for pick 12). 

I think we need to be careful setting the sights much higher than that. Some of these dream scenarios (29 + 40) are just going to lead to disappointment when they do one of the actual trades that will be on the table. Unless one of the top 4 QBs falls, I don’t think anyone is going to substantially overpay for our pick. 

[tmandoug1]

I would still prefer a strong set of guys in the trenches on both sides of the ball. Weapons should be utilized from a strong platform. Can't be a great RB if you're getting blown up behind the LOS all day. I will leave it at that. RR and company know much more than I do and I can't wait for tomorrow night. 

[Est.1974]

8 minutes ago, e16bball said:

think 32 + 49 from PIT is probably the most realistic excellent trade option out there

Yeah I’ve looked at that. It’s pretty much a match value wise. Maybe we’d get them to throw a late day 3 pick in too. I could live with that, depending who was left on the board at #16 clearly.

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, NYSkins21 said:

Yes but we do have 2024 FA period, franchise tag and draft to fill these needs. Doesn’t necessarily need to be addressed in this draft.

 

As much as you can take the best player that's available in each round.  If its about a tie take the player who meets a need.  Some exceptions to this.  But try to get as many A level players as possible

 

The reason why the edge conversation started is some here, me included, believe specifically the edge rushers who might be available in the early rounds including the first might end up being the best player on the board.

 

As an example I like Anton Harrison.  But in the first -- Lukas Van Ness IMO > Anton Harrison.  Simple as that.

 

I'd rather have an A level player in lets say our 4th need versus a B level player at our top need.

 

Winning 9 games next season versus 8 games IMO shouldn't be the top priority.    The top priority should be building a championship level roster even if there is some delayed gratification from the draft.

 

 

Edited April 26, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[Lovi]

18 minutes ago, bowhunter said:

Trading with Andy Reid??  Not a positive history there. I would want BOA to pre-approve anything before we sign it

 

I agree with this, except for the fact that he isn't gonna screw EB over I don't think.  Plus Reid doesn't control our draft room.  We could screw that up all on our own.

[KDawg]

19 minutes ago, tmandoug1 said:

I would still prefer a strong set of guys in the trenches on both sides of the ball. Weapons should be utilized from a strong platform. Can't be a great RB if you're getting blown up behind the LOS all day. I will leave it at that. RR and company know much more than I do and I can't wait for tomorrow night. 

Can I ask you where you’ve seen anyone say they don’t prefer strong trenches?

 

This statement comes across like you think we don’t realize the OL is a weakness. But we do.

The argument is: you don’t draft a player you don’t feel is as strong as another player just because they play a position you want.

 

Help me understand this position. Is it that the 5th OT who is graded as a, say, 70 overall prospect is more valuable than the 1st RB who is a 95 prospect?

 

Otherwise you have the same position as most. If all things are equal, load the line.

 

A lot of us don’t think all things are going to be equal given what the projected board looks like. But let’s wait and see.

 

If Paris Johnson is at 16 it’s a no brainer. I think Skoronski at G would be as well.

[Skinsinparadise]

Wright, who spent the predraft process training with other top prospects at the state-of-the-art facilities at Exos in Phoenix, says he'll continue to trust his own process at the next level That said, he'll keep picking the brains of the more experienced players around him to keep improving his game in the pros.

"I'm definitely gonna get with the older guys and see what they do," Wright says. "Everybody has their own way that they break things down. I think I've gathered this throughout the years that I've played, just learning from the older guys and taking what they've given me. I'm gonna do the same thing at the next level, talk to the older guys, and see what they do. If it helps me, it helps me. I'll have my way that I break it down either way, but I'll try to keep doing it that same way, and just keep learning. That's the biggest thing, just keep learning."

Speaking of those veteran tackles, Wright has one in particular whose game he tries to emulate on the field.

"Trent Williams, because he's a freak athlete, and he can do whatever he wants," Wright says.

 

https://athlonsports.com/nfl/nfl-draft-darnell-wright-tennessee-volunteers-senior-bowl-combine

[Skinsinparadise]

I've rewatched some Emmanuel Forbes today.  Off coverage mostly, zone -- eyes on the QB which helps him with his picks.  But looked good when he pressed.

 

I'd hard for me to get over his weight and sticks for legs.  And while he's feisty against the run and as a tackler he often flings his whole body into the block -- I wonder how well that would work in the NFL when dealing with bigger players who can steamroll him.

 

But overall, he'd be a fun player.  I get the method to the madness of getting a ball hawk.  Some players I've watched with some picks, luck into them.  He made plays on a lot of them -- and took 6 to the house over his career which is insane.  16 to me is too rich.  But wouldn't hate it in a trade down.  

 

https://walterfootball.com/nflhotpress/article/2023-NFL-Draft-Week-Rumors-Wednesday

 

The consensus has been to project the Washington Commanders to take a cornerback in the first round of the 2023 NFL Draft, which is definitely a strong possibility. Washington loves Illinois' Devon Witherspoon, but knows he will be long gone. Oregon's Christian Gonzalez could also be gone by pick No. 16, but if he makes it there, the Commanders could easily end the fall. Sources say that Washington likes Mississippi State's Emmanuel Forbes more than Joey Porter Jr. Forbes is a candidate at for the Commanders with the 16th pick of the 2023 NFL Draft.

Another route Washington might go, according to sources, is offensive tackle. The Commanders are hoping that a quality tackle slides to them, so they have that option to consider as well. Northwestern's Peter Skoronski, Tennessee's Darnell Wright and Georgia's Broderick Jones could all be off the board by No. 16, but if one of them slides, the Commanders might end that fall.

[tmandoug1]

17 minutes ago, KDawg said:

Can I ask you where you’ve seen anyone say they don’t prefer strong trenches?

 

This statement comes across like you think we don’t realize the OL is a weakness. But we do.

The argument is: you don’t draft a player you don’t feel is as strong as another player just because they play a position you want.

 

Help me understand this position. Is it that the 5th OT who is graded as a, say, 70 overall prospect is more valuable than the 1st RB who is a 95 prospect?

 

Otherwise you have the same position as most. If all things are equal, load the line.

 

A lot of us don’t think all things are going to be equal given what the projected board looks like. But let’s wait and see.

 

If Paris Johnson is at 16 it’s a no brainer. I think Skoronski at G would be as well.

My position is BPA of need. If Paris Johnson / Skoronski is there take them. If not and you can't trade back to get picks and an Oline guy then you move to the next need which would be CB. If there isn't one then you look for the next need. To say I think a 3rd round Oline guy should be taken at 16 is just plain silly. But if the oline guy you like is within 5 or 6 picks of where you're and you like him then take him.