2023 Comprehensive Draft Thread

[The Consigliere]

11 hours ago, Going Commando said:

 

I think it's the worst position to play, pound for pound.  Blocking and getting blocked on every snap is brutal, but at least you can usually square up for that contact and see it coming.  You combine that kind of regular contact with the worst hits that WRs have to take when they play between the hashes and that's a TE's life.  Those guys play through each season with so much damage it's amazing when one has a long NFL career.  They don't get any sympathy either.  Makes me think Tony Gonzalez was one of the most remarkable players in NFL history.

 

A lot of the tall guys I've known who hated playing football as kids were tight ends.  Only the football lifers who live and breathe the sport seem to last a long time at the spot, as it's hard to be halfway into football when you're getting the Hell beaten out of you in practice every day.

 

It's historically been right there w/QB, but probably worse in terms of how many full time starters make it through a season w/o missing games, and that doesn't address that nearly all of them are walking wounded for big chunks of the season. It is the most injury impacted playmaking position by far. Which is probably also part of the reason it takes so long to develop. You need to learn two crafts: in line blocker, and pass catcher, not one, and then you are almost guaranteed to lose big chunks of time year after year that sideline you from practice and reps. 

[method man]

32 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Feels arbitrary to me.  Your point seems to be Hollywood got a first whereas Hockenson got a 2nd.  So Hollywood > Hockenson.

 

Heck how about Claypool fetching a high 2nd, too --does that mean Claypool is the better get?  Teams make good trades and make bad trades.

 

Yeah WR > TE.  Premium positions:  LT.  WR. CB. QB. Edge.  

 

 

I have never argued that TE is a premium postion.  I actually used the argument that its not to push Mayer ironically and I used Kyle Hamilton as an example last year -- apples to apples to some extent because we aren't picking in the top 10 hence a player like that could fall to us.  Is for example the 4th best LT > the first TE?  In some drafts yes, in this draft IMO nope. 

 

My larger point is what's the point of dissecting players on this thread if we are going to be slaves to past players to predict current players?  I get it if that player was some mirror clone of name that past player.  But when I am watching Michael Mayer -- flashes of Noah Fant do not run through my mind just because they both have gone/will go in the first.  

 

 

It’s arbitrary to you that a measurement of success is that your initial investment did not depreciate in value? 
 

Hollywood cost more than Hockensen regarding trade capital and Hollywood will likely sign for a much higher AAV than Hockensen. That is the market speaking - I understand there is inefficiency but the market is the market and it is objective

 

You have to use the past as one way to evaluate the future. That is what folks in any industry do

 

Consiglieri correctly pointed out that a reason for the disappointing TE production, especially over the rookie deal, is the learning curve. As it pertains to Mayer, that is one of the things I am less worried about. He is a smart guy who has gotten a lot of PT at a very good academic institution…it is no coincidence that great schools like Stanford and Notre Dame are factories for pro TEs.

 

The underlying point is that at #16, if they took Mayer, I’d be a little miffed if a guy they felt could be a top half of the league LT (say Jones with more seasoning) or a top half of the league CB1 (say Joey Porter Jr for argument’s sake) were there. If they traded down a few slots and picked him Mayer up and those guys were gone, I’d be happy about the pick as the bust rate seems to spike a bit more starting around pick 20 in many drafts

[The Consigliere]

5 hours ago, method man said:

Kittle - 5th

Andrews - 3rd

Kelce - 3rd

Waller - 6th

Schultz - 4th

Goedert - 2nd

Andrews strikes me as the biggest could've been there. The guy was the consensus #1 overall for his class going into his draft season, and then he didn't capitalize on it, had an okay season and Hurst and Goedert passed him and he became a ridiculous value, a guy who had multiple "best player in his draft class seasons" until his final year. Kecle, Kittle, Waller were all like rolls of the dice if I remember right (definitely Kittle and Waller, Kittle was day 3 speculation, Waller had a bunch of red flags, I don't remember Kelce sticking out. Schultz was seen as catch and fall. Only Goedert and Andrews were considered studs in the group but Goedert went pretty early (around 45), and Andrews was the value. It is very telling that we've gone basically 12 years w/all of the best TE's in the game not being first round guys other than Engram who most people hated because of the drops. Even Gronk and Hernandez in that double TE draft weren't first rounders. 

 

I missed on most of the guys I wished we'd taken over the years, but Andrews and Goedert are definitely two guys I wish we could've drafted as they were pretty known values w/o too much draft capital cost. The bulk of the other hits since '15 have been so random as for me to not be able to tell from adam which guy might hit on day 2 or 3 and which wont. Most of my guys were adequate, Im particularly fond of values like Tyler Conklin and Jonnu Smith that I stashed and eventually evolved into 40+ catch guys. Gerald Everett was another one, but none of these guys were worth day 1 or day 2 draft capital. It's just a position that's a problem. I'm dead set against TE in round 1, period. It just wreaks of ignoring history and risk for little justifiable reason. The Bengals picked up Hurst, a former top 20 pick this past offseason for freaking nothing. If we want to address TE, we should look for values like that, rather than wasting high end draft capital on the position. I hated Hurst as a prospect, no way in hell I give an overage middling athlete that kind of $$$ and draft capital, but getting a known quantity that can give you 45 plus catches at what he cost the Bengals? Sign me up for that. 1 year 3.5 mill. He caught 108 passes in 2020, and 2022 combined, 8 TD's (though only 2 this year). He's available on a free this year after a 52 catch 400something yard season. He won't cost a fortune. Just sign him, and swing for a day 3 guy with night athletic metrics on day 3. Hurst can give you 50 catch production the next two years when he's healthy. That's what makes sense to me, signing guys like him, speculating on trades for guys like Brevin Jordan, and using day 3 darts. 

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

15 hours ago, KDawg said:

We don’t need another “flyer” tight end. To me it’s Darnell Washington or Michael Mayer or bust.

 

Mayer or Washington are fools gold.   You are falling in the same trap I am.

 

Consider this: Evan Engram was taken in the first and Kittle was taken in the 5th.   So why not go with a likely 5th rounder like Luke Shoonmaker, instead?   It will increase your odds at best and at worse the odds should be about equal. 

 

 

[Chump Bailey]

Excellent TE contributions! Loving it.

 

My Contribution: TE Cade Stover Ohio State is who I have been trying to remember the past 24 hours. He always popped up to me when watching film on other players. I like him.

 

I think Jake Butt was going to be a good one - too bad about the injuries.

Edited January 24, 2023 by Chump Bailey

[Skinsinparadise]

39 minutes ago, method man said:

It’s arbitrary to you that a measurement of success is that your initial investment did not depreciate in value? 

 

I don't give a rats behind that S. Keim, who was canned recently and not known for being the sharpest tool in the shed overpaid in a trade for Hollywood Brown.  Yes that's arbitrary.  Do I think teams would take Hollywood Brown over Hockenson?  Heck no. 

 

I think we got a lot of strawmen arguments going back and forth, I don't think its intentional but its happening by osmosis in the process of making points.  

 

The argument is not a debate about whether

A.  TE is not a premium position

B.  Takes longer to develop or not

C.  It's a good position to get later in the draft

 

I've not only agreed with those arguments.  I've put an encylopedia's worth of info about all of those points on these threads over years.  Tight end is the one spot I typically go deep in as far anaylsis as much as anyone here.  Sometimes I go 25 deep.  Yes its not a premium spot.  Yes you often can find one later.  Yes it takes longer to develop.  I've written tomes for years about all of that.

 

The argument is a debate over this.

A.  The idea of being rigid about drafting a position or not based on other players as opposed to the player at hand that you are evaluating

B.  The idea that later in the draft is better than the first round -- while true to an extent and its a point like i said I've made, I think is hyperbole when you factor the bigger pool of players post first round so there is more room to hit on a player.  It's true but not to the extent I once thought.  There is more nuance to it than I gave it credit for.

C.  Taking a star at a nonpremium spot >>> the 4th best player at a premium spot in some drafts

 

Edited January 24, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[The Consigliere]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

TE is a slow evolving spot, I agree.  Hard to predict spot, I agree, too.

 

But there is a reason why teams have scouting departments versus just read PFF charts.  There are outliers.  There are exceptions and they aren't that difficult to spot all the time. 

 

Pitts was a freak in college.  Versus lets say a dude like Cole Kmet who to me was a solid player in Notre Dame but really kind of a traditional top TE in the draft.  Fun to watch but he doesn't blow you away.  While watching Kmet, would it be a bit wild to watch a TE 2 years younger than him stand out over him playing for the same team at the same time and by a good margin?  That dude would be Michael Mayer.

 

And if Hockenson with almost 90 catches, and 1000 yards and can also block is "solid". What's the definition of a good TE these days?  Those stats aren't that far from Kelce's.   So if Hockenson was just "solid".    I gather by the same standards, Kelce is just good.  

 

Kmet was god awful, and a terrible value where he was taken, he and the Bengals selection Drew Sample were very much: How on earth are you making this selection here? types of picks. Zero ceiling, limited upside. Good for Kmet to become his ceiling which was adequate, but still never worth the slot. He's not a difference maker you game plan against. 

 

As for Hockenson, my point with Hockenson was the value he produced where he was selected. He was a primo draft pick, where you take stars, a top 10 guy. He caught 32 passes as a rookie. Didn't do squat. Quickly he got back on the horse, produced above league average #'s for a starter his 2nd and 3rd years, and finally broke out on the last year before his rookie option hit this past season. Basically Detroit traded him rather than pay him his rookie option and second contract. They got 2 worthwhile complete seasons out of a top 8 overall pick. That's my point. He's not a bust, he's not average, he's good, there's a reason he's a top 3-4 TE in dynasty football, but part of the reason has been that the position has fallen off tremendously the last twenty years in terms of usable studs. So you've got a handful of elite guys, and a bunch of 45-60 catch Hurst types (who I'm advocating as a better use of our capital than a rookie selection in round 1) and a bunch of worse like what we've got. 

 

That's my point. If we take Mayer, 1 of 2 stories is the most likely way it plays out:

 

60-75% chance historically speaking Its OJ Howard level disappointing.

 

25-35% chance it's Hockenson or Evan Engram like where you're getting the production that's acceptable by year 2, and 3 but not the pro bowl difference making production you want.

 

1-5% chance you get the stud you thought you were getting (or more likely, hoped). 

 

The best case scenario, which is about 1 in 3 to 1 in 4 is that Mayer is useful by 2024 and a solid to above average starter by 2025. 

 

Does it sound like anyone is okay w/waiting for good TE production from a 1st rounder for another 2-3 years? I don't think they are, I think they're fooling themselves, based on the odds, into thinking Mayer will step in and be Hockenson and TGonzo instantly when both of those guys didnt even combine for 70 catches in their respective rookie years combined. 

 

Btw, Hockenson is a great example of what I would have done to address the position. He did not cost the Vikes a ton in capital and they got 1.5 seasons of him cheap before they have to pay him big money. That's not bad, and a far better strategy than using top 16 draft capital on a speculative shot in the dark pick. Imagine if we'd done that last offseason for Hock instead of for Wentz. I will say though, Hockenson cost far more than I would have expected in a trade so maybe I wouldn't have, I definitely would prefer Hurst at 3.5 mill to Hockenson for two day 2 picks out the door. Hurst and Engram strike me as perfectly exemplifying how to target the position for value. We could go after a Conklin too btw, he aint great, but he gives you 40-50 as a starter which is more than we're getting from our day 3 speculative dudes. 

1 hour ago, method man said:

A good test of whether a first has worked out/you got good value, especially for a top 15 pick, is whether you can resell that guy to another team during a rookie contract for a first like the Ravens got for Hollywood

Otoh, the guys that made that deal w/regards to Hollywood are all fired are they not? 

[Skinsinparadise]

1 minute ago, Chump Bailey said:

 

 

My Contribution: TE Cade Stover Ohio State is who I have been trying to remember the past 24 hours. He always popped up to me when watching film on other players. I like him.

 

 

interesting backgound he played D line in the mix.  Good blocker.  But if I recall alas he's not coming out in this draft.

[Chump Bailey]

Just now, Skinsinparadise said:

 

interesting backgound he played D line in the mix.  Good blocker.  But if I recall alas he's not coming out in this draft.

 

That figures  

[The Consigliere]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Unless I am missing your point, you are just saying he should hate this team because of Snyder.

 

OK, I've been in my Snyder hating dues diatribes.  I get the point more than most.

 

But when I consume anayltics in paticular.  I subscribe to PFF and I always get the Warrn Sharp and Football Outsiders season previews. -- I am looking for numbers and trends.

 

I used to TA stats and studied the psychology of the discipline too (in another life, long ago).  So I understand to an extent get even numbers guys let their emotions and biases overtake their anaylsis at times.  But Aaron takes it to a new orbit for me.  I read about other teams in his football gude and its normal.

 

Then I get to the Washington section and just wow.  His main point is a variation of there are teams that incompetent and dysfunctional but you are doing those teams a disservice to compare than to Washington -- Washington is in their own orbit of sucking and let me tell you why they are the worst.  And that stuff carries to some of his radio interviews, too.

 

Look, he's not wrong that its dyfunctional.  But he's no holds barred just about always.  Even people like JLC who some here gave a hard time for being a hater -- is miles tamer than Aaron.  For me, its being over the top, he hates this team and gives it zero benefit of the doubt and its so deep that it spills beyond just Dan.

 

Im not taking issue w/your opinion just explaining it. I honestly think a lot of journo's and whatever he is feel like it's not ethical to talk about the team w/o referencing the vile cretin running it and how thoroughly he has debased its reputation. Right or wrong these guys feel its almost a necessity to note it. Living far from DC, we're rarely every even noticed but if we are, it's for that and that more than literally anything. 

 

Will be nice when he's gone for that to be donezo. It's been a long 24 years. 

[The Consigliere]

37 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Disappointment and bust are two different words.    

 

And disappointment, you can fit any argument just about and say its a disappointment by just moving the goal posts.  Hockenson is just "solid" even though his numbers are clearly better than that this season.  And now its he is a top ten pick lets judge him that way.  Would it feel better if he were picked at 16?  I am not advocating taking Mayer at #8.

 

And of course we aren't running with the premise that TE is the ONLY spot where first rounders fail.  Where its like crap that dude didn't make it and if we picked any other spot all these other guys are hits.  But we were suckers to take a TE, the one spot where you have a shot to fail unlike the others.

 

Lets go back ten years.

 

2021 Pitts

2019 Hockenson, Fant

2018 Hayden Hurst

2017:  OJ Howard, Evan Engram, David Njoku

2016 Hunter Henry

2015 Maxx Williams 

2014 Eric Ebron

2013 Tyler Eifert

 

It's not hot but its not a disaster either.  And the numbers of failures between the 2nd-5th round is pretty high.  Every draft doesn't bring a Kittle.

 

And again I am in the camp of TE is better after the first round typically.  I've probably made the point as much as anyone over the years.  My point i am not digging deeper on that point after actually going through draft after draft just to makes myself come off right because of what I've said in the past.  My point is I think i was over the top on the point, after dissecting this further.  Your point is I was dead on correct and can be even more over the top on this than i was if anything.  Cool. I just don't agree.

 

My larger point though is I am not stuck on ANY rule.   Exceptions exist.  Noah Fant and Even Engram to me do not equal Michael Mayer just because they are all first rounders.  It just feels lazy to me to look at drafts like that.

 

I actually like Noah Fant and Evan Engram a lot. They're both very much pass catching prospects w/super limited in line skill sets when drafted, I don't know where they stand anymore but I think both, mostly paid out the cost of drafting them. Neither were taken in the top 10, both were selected in the 20's if memory serves. Fant and Engram also had two of the better rookie years we've seen from high draft capital TE's the past decade, and have also just been legit good. They're hits in my view, and if you can take guys like them in the 20's (I think both were taken there) I'm not gonna scream bloody murder because the CV's were very good coming out. I don't mind that nearly as much as I mind the litany of guys taken inside the top 20 and especially the top 15 who just have been whatevers which is a ton of them. 

 

I am stuck on this I suppose, I just don't think it's worth it, period to take guys in that blue chip zone. Would I have made an exception for Pitts or Engram or Fant where they were taken? Yes, but only if as GM I knew without question I wouldn't hear in mini camp and later in training camp that the team was taking him along slowly because his "blocking wasn't up to snuff". I would want him used as a pass catcher, period, and work on the blocking on the side so that by year 2 or 3 he was adequate there, I would not be blocking his access to reps or snaps because he doesn't block well enough and let me tell you the pass catching specialist types like Engram, and Fant etc are obviously those types and when FO's pull the trigger, only to **** about the blocking later as a justification for a lack of reps and snaps, its a fireable offense to me. Whether they can do that or not is a known, known going in, and if its a deal breaker for your staff you should NEVER EVER use a first rounder on one of those guys. Its beyond idiotic (that's my pet peeve) but if you're willing to accept the bumps in the road that come w/a pass catching firstTE like Njoku, or Engram or Fant (which I know the Browns werent, and I dont think the Giants were happy either) that aint great at blocking, go for it, but if you aren't you should always pass. The Browns went as far as ridiculing him at a combine a year or two after drafting Njoku (granted it was a new regime ----ing on the old one) Straight up ----ing idiots. 

 

Anyway, so I guess technically its a hard rule for me w/exceptions based on the coaching staff. I'm smart enough to know that Engram, Njoku and Fant and Pitts are natural as hell pass catchers, and that all but Pitts came in crap as pass blockers. If the regime can deal with that, cool, take the pick, if not not, never make that pick, it's a colossal waste (and I really dont like people doing picks like the Pitts pick, but Pitts was the best player in the '21 draft, period from what I can recall other than Lawrence and Chase, so I could understand it if a team planned to use him properly). 

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

32 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:

 

 

That's my point. If we take Mayer, 1 of 2 stories is the most likely way it plays out:

 

60-75% chance historically speaking Its OJ Howard level disappointing.

 

25-35% chance it's Hockenson or Evan Engram like where you're getting the production that's acceptable by year 2, and 3 but not the pro bowl difference making production you want.

 

1-5% chance you get the stud you thought you were getting (or more likely, hoped). 

 

The best case scenario, which is about 1 in 3 to 1 in 4 is that Mayer is useful by 2024 and a solid to above average starter by 2025. 

 

 

It reminds me in some ways of our Terry McLaurin argument years ago and in some ways its very different.  You thought I was foolish for liking him because of various metrics.  He wasn't the featured WR, he was a late bloomer, didn't have the stats, etc.    My point is I dont discount that but sometimes look past that stuff if warranted.  The dude's intangibles were billed as special.  He is fast. He killed the Senior Bowl.  And his numbers aren't that bad considering context which is they had other WRs -- you used that context against him, I used it in a favorable way.  It's a different perspective on the same thing.

 

As for Michael Mayer.  Unlike Terry he's not a late bloomer.  Heck and if you value receivers by their dominator scores/the top receiver -- Mayer should be your guy.  Otherwise you are using metrics of other players against him.  Even though there are metrics that make him stand out if you focus on said metrics.  Just like with Terry, his numbers weren't hot but they were still good considering context -- 20 YPC, over 700 yards.   

 

As for 1-5% chance of being a stud.  Based on what?  If you think almost 90 catches, 900 plus yards is just "solid" in Hockenson's case.  What's a good TE supposed to do -- 130 catches,1500 yards?   I am being sarcastic here intentionally because I think you are forcing your point some.

 

I bring up Hockenson because that's who Mayer reminds me to some extrent of but better college tape than him.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 24, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[The Consigliere]

I'm not looking at the guy, I'm looking at the position. Everything that's being said about him was said about the previous dozens of bust TE's taken in round 1. They all came out with CV's that were great to some extent or another (except for the handful of inexplicable block first, no pass catching repertoire TE's that were picked from time to time, particularly by the jets). I think Mayer's been great for Notre Dame, but I'm still not investing top 16 draft capital in a TE, period, especially with a crochety team like ours where I 100% believe they'd demand he be a perfect in line blocker from day 1 to get regular snaps (one of the key reasons so many of these guys take forever to produce, and I know Mayer is not an Engram/Fant/Njoku in terms of blocking). I just wouldn't do it. The track record is terrible. Are their outliers like McLaurin? Yes. But they're outliers. That's the whole point. Just because there are what 5-10% of the guys that give you what you want from day 1, doesn't mean you should bet on that when there are guys and positions with hit rates far, far higher.

 

If we could get him trading down, and I trusted the regime wouldn't sit him because he needs work on blocking but would plug him right in, I'd consider it in a trade down, but beyond that, I have less than no interest. Of course they'll do what they'll do, im irrelevant. I happen to think like most, I think, they go OL or CB and address TE perhaps in free agency and on day 3. 

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

Speaking of Senior Bowl, do practices start next week?

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, Always A Commander Never A Captain said:

Speaking of Senior Bowl, do practices start next week?

 

Yep and we have some assistant coaches there including Kerrigan, should be fun.

 

1 hour ago, The Consigliere said:

I'm not looking at the guy, I'm looking at the position. Everything that's being said about him was said about the previous dozens of bust TE's taken in round 1.

        

Really?  Dozens of first round busts how far back are we going for dozens? 

 

When I read about Mayer yeah it doesn't bring me back to this is exactly what was said about Noah Fant and name that other TE.  

 

I'll leave it alone.  I get some of your points.  But on others IMO you are reaching. 

Edited January 24, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[Skinsinparadise]

Watched some Parker Washington.  Same school and reminds me in some ways of Dotson albeit I like Dotson more.  4th roundish?  Watched 2 games including one from 2021 where he played slot, Dotson played Z and Parker was just as big of a target in that game as Dotson.

 

Like Dotson, Parker for a small dude is feisty at the catch point and with the ball in his hands. 

 

Great contested catch number from PFF, 70 plus.   Only 6% drop rate.  Played well now for multiple years.   Not a great run blocker from what I saw but is willing.  Acrobatic catches.  Seperates well and quickly underneath -- natural slot WR.  Looks to me high floor.  Combine for me is interesting in his case.

 

He's still just 20 years old and he had production in all three seasons.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 24, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[Warhead36]

I wouldn't mind taking a stab at WR in the middle rounds. Can always use more weapons and if we cut Samuel we're dangerously thin after McLaurin and Dotson. Brown hasn't really developed and I am just about done with Milne.

[KDawg]

8 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

I wouldn't mind taking a stab at WR in the middle rounds. Can always use more weapons and if we cut Samuel we're dangerously thin after McLaurin and Dotson. Brown hasn't really developed and I am just about done with Milne.

I’m all about BPA in the first and figuring it out the rest of the way.

[Skinsinparadise]

25 minutes ago, KDawg said:

I’m all about BPA in the first and figuring it out the rest of the way.

 

Me too but I seriously doubt they take a WR in the first the way they typically operate.   But I'll reserve judgment as to what I think they will do for another few weeks or so, usually in late Februrary give or take Keim has a pretty good take on what the FO is thinking at least in terms of general parameters.

35 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

I am just about done with Milne.

 

 Another upside to Parker

 

 

 

Edited January 24, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[KDawg]

7 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Me too but I seriously doubt they take a WR in the first the way they typically operate.   But I'll reserve judgment as to what I think they will do for another few weeks or so, usually in late Februrary give or take Keim has a pretty good take on what the FO is thinking at least in terms of general parameters.

 

 Another upside to Parker

 

 

 

We’ll see. I don’t think they go WR, either. But I hate the idea of taking lesser than OT2 and I have a feeling we’re going to take OL no matter what.

 

Having said that, because we won’t have much of a FA period, I also understand the need for linemen. But you have to do it where the value is right in the draft and I think the mid rounds are loaded

[COWBOY-KILLA-]

My biggest concern for Mayer in the first is his speed, agility, and overall athletic ability.  If he were more lean and fluid like Kelce, I'd feel better about him.

My concern is he turns too lumbering and slow as he matures body wise. He can still be really effective even if he's slower and lumbering.

 I'm just thinking out loud.  Maybe the guys who know him well can speak to this concern, but its what I think when I see him play.  

 

How will this look in 3-5 years?

Would love to give Howell a security blanket, is he the right one for the first round? 

Is he Gronk or is he Kyle Rudolph?

 

Edited January 24, 2023 by COWBOY-KILLA-

[Skinsinparadise]

42 minutes ago, KDawg said:

We’ll see. I don’t think they go WR, either. But I hate the idea of taking lesser than OT2 and I have a feeling we’re going to take OL no matter what.

 

Having said that, because we won’t have much of a FA period, I also understand the need for linemen. But you have to do it where the value is right in the draft and I think the mid rounds are loaded

 

I think the top 3 tackles are gone by 16.

 

IMO of the next run: Harrison, Bergeron, Wright -- one of them will be there at 47.  I like Mauch too if at guard.  16 is too rich for all of those guys IMO. I don't like D. Jones as much but wouldn't hate him at 47.

 

If they are stuck on OT or CB, CB is likely the better bet at 16.  One of these guys, maybe two might be left between Witherspoon, Gonzalez and Porter.  That's what i'd likely do if they are stuck on OT or CB.  CB in the first, OT in the 2nd.

 

But yeah if it were me the whole draft is open in the first.   I've argued so much for Mayer to this point that its exhausting, they got to take him now. 

 

Its pure gut on my end but especially if they release Logan Thomas, it wouldn't shock me if they'd consider Mayer or Washington in particular.  Because for starters they need a TE.  And if they are obsessive about a run oriented team the value of Mayer and Washington are obvious. 

 

Washington might be even more so on their radar considering how unique of a blocking weapon he is.  Blocking chess piece.  I am sometimes a bit gun shy about players who are freak athletes but don't have the production to match when it comes to picking them high in the draft.  But i am warming up more and more to Washington.  Not at 16 but if they traded down or if by chance he's there at 47 he would definitely be on the table for me.  Considering he wasn't the go to TE, having 450 yards, 16 plus YPC is good.  Just a 6% drop rate.   7 yards YAC per reception. 

 

Kyle Pitts was a receiving freak-athlete.  Washington IMO is the blocking freak-athlete version of that -- and while raw as a receiver has plenty of upside.  My gut is Washington goes early 2nd round. 

Edited January 24, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[The Consigliere]

46 minutes ago, KDawg said:

We’ll see. I don’t think they go WR, either. But I hate the idea of taking lesser than OT2 and I have a feeling we’re going to take OL no matter what.

 

Having said that, because we won’t have much of a FA period, I also understand the need for linemen. But you have to do it where the value is right in the draft and I think the mid rounds are loaded

I have no problem with them trading down, or taking at slot. Its before the combine and workouts, so we can expect more shuffling over the next 10 weeks or so, but for now anyway, that 10-20ish zone of prospects has plenty of OL's and CB's, it's not a zone where none should go, it's a zone where that's actually where they're valued this year. So we can just pluck one, or if we want to get more darts, just move down, there will probably be demand for the tier 1 OL's and CB's before the roof falls out of that tier (which appears to be a little bit after where we pick). We can go either route and I'd be fine w/either. To me DB/OL as needs means we wont need to reach if we stay pat, at all. 

[KDawg]

3 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:

I have no problem with them trading down, or taking at slot. Its before the combine and workouts, so we can expect more shuffling over the next 10 weeks or so, but for now anyway, that 10-20ish zone of prospects has plenty of OL's and CB's, it's not a zone where none should go, it's a zone where that's actually where they're valued this year. So we can just pluck one, or if we want to get more darts, just move down, there will probably be demand for the tier 1 OL's and CB's before the roof falls out of that tier (which appears to be a little bit after where we pick). We can go either route and I'd be fine w/either. To me DB/OL as needs means we wont need to reach if we stay pat, at all. 

I don’t think there’s a ton of OL worth the 10-20 slot.

[Chump Bailey]

Quick & Dirty OT Top 10 because damn, so many prospects and only so much time to glean from what we have access to.

 

1. Paris Johnson Jr., Ohio State

2. Blake Freeland, BYU (elite wingspan)

3. Broderick Jones, Georgia (good feet, questionable hands, poor technique, bending etc.)

4. Darnell Wright, Tennessee (Silverback 2.0 for me)

5. Dawand Jones, Ohio State (impressive feet for a guy that big)

6. Anton Harrison, Oklahoma (good feet, hands need work, needs to work on strength)

7. Matthew Bergeron, Syracuse (underrated player)

8. Jaelyn Duncan, Maryland (good feet, needs to get stronger)

9. Peter Skoronski, Northwestern (decent tape vs. Zach Harrison he is capable but also very bad tape too, needs a lot work IMO and I think these Northwestern OT's are being overrated to a good extent)

10. Jordan McFadden, Clemson * Tyler Steen, Alabama (underrated player) & Trevor Reid, Louisville (underrated player) 

 

Edited January 31, 2023 by Chump Bailey