2023 NFL Draft Watch and Post Thread - The Hangover Special

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

We seem to be signing more UDFA than the past couple of years.

[LetMeSeeYourWarFace21]

 

[88Comrade2000]

3 minutes ago, Daniel.redskins said:

I agree sir.  I don't see any of these player signing long-long-term except Stromberg .  Center is such an important position and I think we fixed it with Gates and Stromberg. But other than that it was very blah.  Should have gone bpa in rounds 1 and 2.  I think we missed the mark.  EB should feel sick.  I would have loved Kincaid or Mayer in round 1.  That would have been a franchise 10 year TE.  

Just hope the stench of the Commanders doesn't hurt  EB's prospects.  If he can at least put out a functional offense that can score 25+, regardless of the final win-loss record; it should help him land a head coaching spot. Maybe even as Ron's successor.

Edited April 30, 2023 by 88Comrade2000

[actorguy1]

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

1 minute ago, actorguy1 said:

 

 

 

That's a good amount of money, good sign

[PeterMP]

9 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I have a different complaint that some in the draft media have.  And fans on twitter.

 

I was listening to the Finlay podcast and they said what they hated by the Quan Martin pick was that they took Forbes first.  Why go secondary back to back?  For me I can give a rats behind about that.  The Eagles double down on the D line when they already had a great D line -- but they are geniuses and we are morons for doing the same thing?

 

Because you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how the modern NFL works, the Eagles roster, and the difference between being a SB team and one that didn't make the playoffs.

 

First, essentially every team plays more DL than DB.

 

In the SB, the Eagles had 10 DL and 6 CB/DBs get snaps.  The fact you are going to play more good DL means having more depth had DL makes more sense.

 

For the Chiefs, it isn't as slanted 7 vs. 5 but one of those DBs only got 1 snap vs. all of the DL got at least 20 so it was really 7 vs. 4.

 

So unless the Commanders are going to play a new style of defense where they rotate DBs the way the most of the rest of the NFL rotates DL having DL depth similar to what most teams have in their secondary doesn't make sense.

 

Second, you seem to misunderstand exactly how much depth the Eagles have on their DL.  Of those 10 guys that got snaps in the SB, two were picked up midseason (Suh and Joseph) and another two most people recognize are near the end of their careers (Cox and Graham).  So of those 4, it wouldn't be surprising if at least one of them isn't back and/or breaks down during the season.  Then they've lost one of their younger and better defensive lineman in free agency.  The Eagles probably need at least one impact DL that is going to get a lot of snaps that they currently don't have on their roster if they want to have the some production/rotation from DL.

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[KillBill26]

3 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

 

Because you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how the modern NFL works, the Eagles roster, and the difference between being a SB team and one that didn't make the playoffs.

Please forgive SIP, he is new to this football thing.

[Ball Security]

Is that, what, three UDFA WRs?  

[Skinsinparadise]

7 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

 

Because you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how the modern NFL works, the Eagles roster, and the difference between being a SB team and one that didn't make the playoffs.

 

First, essentially every team plays more DL than DB.

 

In the SB, the Eagles had 10 DL and 6 CB/DBs get snaps.  The fact you are going to play more good DL means having more depth had DL makes more sense.

 

For the Chiefs, it isn't as slanted 7 vs. 5 but one of those DBs only got 1 snap vs. all of the DL got at least 20 so it was really 7 vs. 4.

 

So unless the Commanders are going to play a new style of defense where they rotate DBs the way the most of the rest of the NFL rotates DL having DL depth similar to what most teams have in their secondary doesn't make sense.

 

Second, you seem to misunderstand exactly how much depth the Eagles have on their DL.  Of those 10 guys that got snaps in the SB, two were picked up midseason (Suh and Joseph) and another two most people recognize are near the end of their careers (Cox and Graham).  So of those 4, it wouldn't be surprising if at least one of them isn't back and/or breaks down during the season.  Then they've lost one of their younger and better defensive lineman in free agency.  The Eagles probably need at least one impact DL that is going to get a lot of snaps that they currently don't have on their roster if they want to have the some production/rotation from DL.

 

I have said to death that the D line is a rotational spot.  Almost like a religion to me.

 

I never said the secondary is a rotational spot.  Pumping up Martin as a swiss army knife is a different subject.

 

But I agree, if that's how you took my point than I'd indeed have a fundamental misunderstanding of football.   

Edited April 30, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[88Comrade2000]

 

Sean Payton during the draft, apparently.

[Est.1974]

 

[Ball Security]

1 minute ago, Est.1974 said:

 

Could this be EB’s Pachero?

[88Comrade2000]

Just 2 minutes please.

[PeterMP]

3 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I have said to death that the D line is a rotational spot.  Almost like a religion to me.

 

I never said the secondary is a rotational spot.

 

But I agree, if that's how you took my point than I'd indeed have a fundamental misunderstanding of football.   

 

I don't generally bother to recognize what a poster has posted in the past or in another post, but in the post I quoted, you gave no sense of understanding that DL is more of rotational post than CB/DB.  If that's something you believe and have said in the past, then I'm sorry.  But then the post I quoted doesn't make much sense.

 

Doubling down on DL is "genius" because it is more likely that person is going to play a significant amount vs. doubling down on DB (unless they are going to trade somebody or cut somebody and use the cap space to get a significant player at another position.)

[Epochalypse]

Could this be EB's Pacheco?

[clskinsfan]

Tinsley is a nice get. He played well opposite Dotson. Smart idea to put them together again. 

[mhd24]

According to Keim, we really liked Gibbs and would have considered trading up for him if he fell to the 2nd.

[MartinC]

26 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

 

Because you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how the modern NFL works

Or you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what the poster you are replying to is saying. Seek first to understand …

[Jumbo]

My es/NFL +/NFL network draft war couch is so much more impressive than the commanders facility.

[MartinC]

Just now, Jumbo said:

My es/NFL +/NFL network draft war couch is so much more impressive than the commanders facility.

Yeah - but you have the budget. 🙂

[Riggo#44]

Just now, Jumbo said:

My es/NFL +/NFL network draft war couch is so much more impressive than the commanders facility.

My bathroom is more impressive than the Commanders Facility.

 

I remember an article calling the HQ the equivalent of a back office at a 7-11.

[Skinsinparadise]

22 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

 

I don't generally bother to recognize what a poster has posted in the past or in another post, but in the post I quoted, you gave no sense of understanding that DL is more of rotational post than CB/DB.  If that's something you believe and have said in the past, then I'm sorry.  But then the post I quoted doesn't make much sense.

 

 

OK fair enough.  But to that point.  i might have posted 1000 times over the years -- that the D line is rotational.  It's one of my calling card points if anything.    I was even good with them drafting a pass rusher in the first round for that reason.    I made that point multiple times on this very thread. 

 

But I get it you focused on that post alone and took it in a different direction.  It's cool. 

 

22 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

 

 

Doubling down on DL is "genius" because it is more likely that person is going to play a significant amount vs. doubling down on DB (unless they are going to trade somebody or cut somebody and use the cap space to get a significant player at another position.)

 

To clairify.  My point had nothing to do with D line versus the seconday. Zero. 

 

The point I made was in reference to a podcast i listened to where Pete Hailey didn't like them doubling up with two picks in the secondary.  So I said the Eagles also doubled up on the D line with back to back picks.  And its OK for them to hit the same spot back to back.  It's OK for us to do it, too.   Hailey's point wasn't that Martin wouldn't start.  His point was they should have switched to ANOTHER need position -- don't do two picks at the same spot.  His concern wasn't that Martin wouldn't play.  But its like hey lets do o line with the next pick, since we just did the secondary.  

 

I get your point, if your point was I saw Martin as a depth pick.  But nope. He's 100% a starter to me.   

 

What I said when they made the pick for Quan Martin is I love the player.   And he filled a specific hole that IMO still existed in the secondary at the slot spot.  

 

Also, this team seems to really struggle when they lose Kam Curl because of injury because of how eclectic his skills are as to serving numerous roles.  Martin is a similar cat, smaller size to Curl but he has similar swiss army skills.  I don't see Quan as a backup.  But i do like starters with position flex. 

 

So for me, loved the player, loved the fit.  Not because I saw him as a rotational player but i saw him as the nickel CB from day 1 -- replacing McCain in that role.   And its OK in my book to draft back to back at the same spot. Considering outside corner and slot are different roles.  But yeah if they are using the 2nd pick in the draft for a backup -- any backup -- "meh". 

 

And i agree with the D line adding players are not apples to apples like other spots.  it's a rotational spot.  It feels odd that i have to defend that point -- your argument is almost my mantra on the draft thread -- let alone i need the point explained to me back by someone else.

 

But its cool.    We are more than the same page about the D line.  I know some who would disagree with you and me on it -- I've debated them plenty of times. 

 

And I get its a misunderstanding.  We are on the same page. 

Edited April 30, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[Jumbo]

3 minutes ago, MartinC said:

Or you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what the poster you are replying to is saying. Seek first to understand …

 

 

[bearrock]

14 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

 

I don't generally bother to recognize what a poster has posted in the past or in another post, but in the post I quoted, you gave no sense of understanding that DL is more of rotational post than CB/DB.  If that's something you believe and have said in the past, then I'm sorry.  But then the post I quoted doesn't make much sense.

 

Doubling down on DL is "genius" because it is more likely that person is going to play a significant amount vs. doubling down on DB (unless they are going to trade somebody or cut somebody and use the cap space to get a significant player at another position.)

I know you're a smart and well informed poster yourself, but I wonder if you don't read a lot in stadium.  @Skinsinparadise is one of the most thoughtful, sensible, and well informed posters in Stadium.  I would read his posts with a healthy heaping of benefit of the doubt.  If something seems off to you, it may make more sense in the broad context of his posts in general.