2024 Comprehensive Draft Thread

[Koolblue13]

Now that we have the coaching staff in place that we do, I am far more comfortable trading back for raw talent, than trading up. Peters allegedly has a knack at finding mid round talent as well. 

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

54 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

Now that we have the coaching staff in place that we do, I am far more comfortable trading back for raw talent, than trading up. Peters allegedly has a knack at finding mid round talent as well. 

 

I'm with this. There are some scenarios where we have an embarrassment of riches in the 2nd round and we should pick someone special that fell. But the more common scenarios have those special talents going ahead of us. Trading back for more shots at the above average talents can juice up the roster top to bottom faster.

[Voice_of_Reason]

2 hours ago, Koolblue13 said:

Now that we have the coaching staff in place that we do, I am far more comfortable trading back for raw talent, than trading up. Peters allegedly has a knack at finding mid round talent as well. 

I think that’s fine but there are cases where Peters might say “there isn’t a starting LT after the first 8 on my board so we’ve got to go get one.”

 

Being able to evaluate well doesn’t elevate the prospect pool.  If there isn’t a prospect at a position and you need to move up to get a guy, that’s a tool which you should be open to.

 

Just like moving back if you have the same grade on a bunch of players and would be happy with any of them.  Then you can move back and get assets.  
 

What being a good evaluator does for you is it opens more doors.

 

But remember, every pick is still 50/50 at best and probably not that to work out.  

[clskinsfan]

11 hours ago, Koolblue13 said:

Now that we have the coaching staff in place that we do, I am far more comfortable trading back for raw talent, than trading up. Peters allegedly has a knack at finding mid round talent as well. 

Thing is we already have 9 picks this year. I could see us flipping a third for a second next year though. We dont need more picks in this draft. 

[Anselmheifer]

6 hours ago, method man said:

 

It’d be very hard to say no to Kool Aid if he is available at 36

 

I feel like Kool Aid would be perfect for this defense. 

 

Does anyone else think JC Latham could fall? He doesn't seem to have had a very good draft season. I feel like if his workout numbers weren't going to be really bad, he would have worked out at his pro day.

[JamesMadisonSkins]

5 minutes ago, Anselmheifer said:

 

I feel like Kool Aid would be perfect for this defense. 

 

Does anyone else think JC Latham could fall? He doesn't seem to have had a very good draft season. I feel like if his workout numbers weren't going to be really bad, he would have worked out at his pro day.

I feel like one or both of Latham and Mims could fall.

[Warhead36]

Latham will probably go somewhere in the late teens or 20s. Mims mid to late 20s. There is a big time lack of OL talent in the NFL so teams are going to want to draft from this deep and talented pool.

[Going Commando]

Too much focus on need in here when it comes to this draft.  Too much of a sentiment that we have to draft an OT, reaches or wasteful trade ups be damned.  That is the Ron Rivera mentality and approach to the draft.

 

The draft is not for filling short term needs.  That's the worst way to use the tool, and it isn't even any good at doing it.

 

We need to stop thinking about building a football team as if the task is completing a puzzle and you are done when you fill in all of the pieces.

 

Instead, team building is like making a tower, and the teams with the tallest towers win.  But everyone gets the exact same number of blocks to build with, and has the exact same budget to pay for them, so the teams that find the biggest blocks are the ones that win.  The draft is a requisition process where teams get total long term control over the blocks they choose, and thus the best way to use the draft is to always hunt for the biggest possible blocks you can get at your turn.

 

It does not matter if the block is a left tackle or a tight end or whatever.  What matters is that it is big.  The Chiefs and the Patriots built dynasty sized towers without any big blocks at tackle.   The only position that provides meaningfully bigger blocks than any other is QB.

 

Right now, the only big block we have on our roster is Jonathan Allen.  If we're going to compete with the tallest and best built teams, we have to use this draft to find two or three more Jon Allen sized blocks.  We can get one with the QB we pick at 2.  Then the rest of our picks need to be about taking as many big swings as we can, because that's the only way we're going to find a gem or two outside of the early first round.

 

Stop thinking about which OT you can shoehorn in to our Day 2 picks and start searching for genuine value.  Who has a plausible path to becoming an annual pro bowler?  Who has All Pro upside?  If the biggest blocks we can find is T'Vondre Sweat or Payton Wilson, we should pick them.

[mhd24]

3 hours ago, Going Commando said:

Too much focus on need in here when it comes to this draft.  Too much of a sentiment that we have to draft an OT, reaches or wasteful trade ups be damned.  That is the Ron Rivera mentality and approach to the draft.

 

The draft is not for filling short term needs.  That's the worst way to use the tool, and it isn't even any good at doing it.

 

We need to stop thinking about building a football team as if the task is completing a puzzle and you are done when you fill in all of the pieces.

 

Instead, team building is like making a tower, and the teams with the tallest towers win.  But everyone gets the exact same number of blocks to build with, and has the exact same budget to pay for them, so the teams that find the biggest blocks are the ones that win.  The draft is a requisition process where teams get total long term control over the blocks they choose, and thus the best way to use the draft is to always hunt for the biggest possible blocks you can get at your turn.

 

It does not matter if the block is a left tackle or a tight end or whatever.  What matters is that it is big.  The Chiefs and the Patriots built dynasty sized towers without any big blocks at tackle.   The only position that provides meaningfully bigger blocks than any other is QB.

 

Right now, the only big block we have on our roster is Jonathan Allen.  If we're going to compete with the tallest and best built teams, we have to use this draft to find two or three more Jon Allen sized blocks.  We can get one with the QB we pick at 2.  Then the rest of our picks need to be about taking as many big swings as we can, because that's the only way we're going to find a gem or two outside of the early first round.

 

Stop thinking about which OT you can shoehorn in to our Day 2 picks and start searching for genuine value.  Who has a plausible path to becoming an annual pro bowler?  Who has All Pro upside?  If the biggest blocks we can find is T'Vondre Sweat or Payton Wilson, we should pick them.

 

 

I'm with you GC.  I'm not forcing a pick at 36 & 40.  Kool-Aid is my most realistic target at 36.  I think he's a clear cut above any of the other likely remaining outside CBs.  Still, I don't think he lasts till then because other teams will see the other deficiencies of the other CBs like Tampa.  Then again, DQ has had success finding DBs like Bland way late in the draft.

 

What are your thoughts on Lassiter?  I know you follow Georgia big time.  He has run slow during the draft prep, but he looks the part otherwise.

 

Wilson is easily a top 20 talent, but the injury history scares me tremendously.  Sweat's issue to me is purely a weight issue.  Jordan Davis's struggles in the pros shows  big concern as to whether you can draft someone like that.

[Going Commando]

1 hour ago, mhd24 said:

What are your thoughts on Lassiter?  I know you follow Georgia big time.  He has run slow during the draft prep, but he looks the part otherwise.

 

I'm worried about his speed.  I didn't think he looked slow on the field, but I went back through Georgia cut ups to watch Bullard and Smith and maybe there is a little trouble carrying speed deep with Lassiter.  He has to read it really well to stay in phase because I'm not sure the recovery speed to make plays is there when he doesn't.  But he generally does read the game well, and he is such a cautious player that he just doesn't really get beat or give up a lot of separation.

 

His super power is his hip fluidity and his really smooth backpedal and transition steps.  He has elite change of direction agility.  He can be twitchy and his closing speed is really good when he runs downhill or is carrying a crosser.  It's a real contrast between him and their other outside corner in how well he reads the game and avoids mistakes.  But his lack of aggression feels pretty notable, especially compared to the way Bullard, Smith, and Starks play.  He doesn't really make big plays and doesn't seem to have the instinct to do it.  He's out there just focusing on not getting beat.  Only one career INT and 14 PBUs.

 

He was kind of a dependable role player amidst more talented and aggressive defensive backs for Georgia, and that's probably the role I'd expect of him in the NFL too.  He doesn't really fit my desire to go big game hunting with our second rounders, but he wouldn't be a bad pick.  I think he would be a base hit.

[Going Commando]

1 hour ago, mhd24 said:

Sweat's issue to me is purely a weight issue.  Jordan Davis's struggles in the pros shows  big concern as to whether you can draft someone like that.

 

Davis's PFF grades are surprisingly strong.  He's not playing enough snaps to have a huge impact, but I wonder if that's about his weight or about the depth of the rotation he played in.  Cox and Carter are good enough to keep even a high quality IDL in a third wheel role.  When he's out there, he's good.

 

I also think that Davis came out of Georgia fairly immature, and might not have been ready to play many snaps as a rookie for that reason alone.  But his workload could start ramping up significantly next season as a third year vet.  Especially with Cox retired.  The opportunity is there anyway.  If it doesn't happen, then we'll know that he just doesn't have the tank to play many snaps.

 

FWIW, Sweat is going to come a lot cheaper than Davis, which effects the perception of value.  Getting 35 good snaps per game from someone you took in the 50s feels a lot better than getting the same from someone you took in the teens.

[DWinzit]

5 hours ago, Going Commando said:

Too much focus on need in here when it comes to this draft.  Too much of a sentiment that we have to draft an OT, reaches or wasteful trade ups be damned.  That is the Ron Rivera mentality and approach to the draft.

 

The draft is not for filling short term needs.  That's the worst way to use the tool, and it isn't even any good at doing it.

 

We need to stop thinking about building a football team as if the task is completing a puzzle and you are done when you fill in all of the pieces.

 

Instead, team building is like making a tower, and the teams with the tallest towers win.  But everyone gets the exact same number of blocks to build with, and has the exact same budget to pay for them, so the teams that find the biggest blocks are the ones that win.  The draft is a requisition process where teams get total long term control over the blocks they choose, and thus the best way to use the draft is to always hunt for the biggest possible blocks you can get at your turn.

 

It does not matter if the block is a left tackle or a tight end or whatever.  What matters is that it is big.  The Chiefs and the Patriots built dynasty sized towers without any big blocks at tackle.   The only position that provides meaningfully bigger blocks than any other is QB.

 

Right now, the only big block we have on our roster is Jonathan Allen.  If we're going to compete with the tallest and best built teams, we have to use this draft to find two or three more Jon Allen sized blocks.  We can get one with the QB we pick at 2.  Then the rest of our picks need to be about taking as many big swings as we can, because that's the only way we're going to find a gem or two outside of the early first round.

 

Stop thinking about which OT you can shoehorn in to our Day 2 picks and start searching for genuine value.  Who has a plausible path to becoming an annual pro bowler?  Who has All Pro upside?  If the biggest blocks we can find is T'Vondre Sweat or Payton Wilson, we should pick them.

The draft plans from Washington over the past few years have been horrendous, no one wants them brought back. It's awful going into a draft with so many must fill roster holes. 

 

Peters has done a great job of not breaking the bank and placing quality competition across most of the roster, QB excluded of course. This should allow the team to focus more on BPA at least within reason. I mean, taking a chance on the health of an incredible talent like Wilson would be pretty sweet. Few want to burn both second rounders to move up, that's too costly.

 

It is however pretty fair for Washington fans to have heightened concerns with the current Tackle positions. Especially with Mariota and a rookie to be named later at the helm. We just killed our last young QB. Yeah I know, new regime now but it hasn't left our memories. Either has the Wylie whiffs. Can Lucas sustain or a Daniels step in....eh?

 

We want and need at least one decent T out of this draft, that's where the off season has landed us at least for right now. If the draft doesn't come to us because of the overall need for OL in general league wide, it won't be great for our new QB. In the end, we may need to trade up at some point to that T. It may not be until late in the first, or later n the second, who knows, but it may need to occur. Of course that's not the case if they have a backup plan with a vet to trade for or figure they can grab someone after cuts later in the year. 

 

[Rolo Tomasie]

6 hours ago, Going Commando said:

Too much focus on need in here when it comes to this draft.  Too much of a sentiment that we have to draft an OT, reaches or wasteful trade ups be damned.  That is the Ron Rivera mentality and approach to the draft.

 

The draft is not for filling short term needs.  That's the worst way to use the tool, and it isn't even any good at doing it.

 

We need to stop thinking about building a football team as if the task is completing a puzzle and you are done when you fill in all of the pieces.

 

Instead, team building is like making a tower, and the teams with the tallest towers win.  But everyone gets the exact same number of blocks to build with, and has the exact same budget to pay for them, so the teams that find the biggest blocks are the ones that win.  The draft is a requisition process where teams get total long term control over the blocks they choose, and thus the best way to use the draft is to always hunt for the biggest possible blocks you can get at your turn.

 

It does not matter if the block is a left tackle or a tight end or whatever.  What matters is that it is big.  The Chiefs and the Patriots built dynasty sized towers without any big blocks at tackle.   The only position that provides meaningfully bigger blocks than any other is QB.

 

Right now, the only big block we have on our roster is Jonathan Allen.  If we're going to compete with the tallest and best built teams, we have to use this draft to find two or three more Jon Allen sized blocks.  We can get one with the QB we pick at 2.  Then the rest of our picks need to be about taking as many big swings as we can, because that's the only way we're going to find a gem or two outside of the early first round.

 

Stop thinking about which OT you can shoehorn in to our Day 2 picks and start searching for genuine value.  Who has a plausible path to becoming an annual pro bowler?  Who has All Pro upside?  If the biggest blocks we can find is T'Vondre Sweat or Payton Wilson, we should pick them.

I agree with this sentiment in 99% of the cases, but there is a bit of a caveat. The QB is everything, and as has been repeatedly identified in the QB thread, when you're breaking in a high caliber rookie QB, the situation you pull him into is the major factor in his development.

 

I want to inject some reality into this "QB Nursery" situation.....uh, ours sucks. We have spent a lot of time this off-season congratulating ourselves on a new owner, new GM, new coaching staff. And that's all good news to be sure. But for the new QB:

1. There is no established culture and development program because pretty much everyone in the franchise is new.
2. The head coach is defensive minded
3. The OCs history of developing a rookie QB is middling at best. I am a little concerned about the KK hire, honestly.
4. The whole team will be installing a new offense, new to everyone 
5. Most of the offensive coaching staff is working together for the first time
6. The talent at TE is poor, and a good TE is often a young QBs security blanket
7. The talent at WR is just ok
8. The talent on the O line is terrible
9. There is some talent at RB and Ekeler in particular could really help the young QB. But KK doesn't have a background in creating heavily run-focused offensive schemes
10. The veteran QB brought in to be the mentor is also new to this offense and has a history as a failed prospect who is not seen as a particularly smart, fast reader of defenses and decision maker on the field. He also quit on at least one team in his past
11. We were just rated as having the worst facilities and player support in the league

If we are objective about it, I think we are the most difficult situation for a rookie QB to come into, worse in that regard than Chicago, New England, the Giants, Minnesota, and even Las Vegas. It's on par with the Carolina situation that Bryce stepped into - probably better coaching talent and ownership, but that isn't proven out yet.

 

I think our draft strategy has to consider this and while we do have to go BPA, that player really MUST be a player who can help with factors 6, 7, or 8 above. And to me there is only one TE who is immediately ready to help as a rookie, and we are not going to get him at pick 36. And picks past day 2 are typically not immediate starters. So the only options to improve the QB development situation with the round 2/3 picks are O-line or WR.

 

Free agency did bring in some players who should help. But If we don't get continued improvement in the areas above, we need to seriously look at a redshirt season for the new QB. 

Edited April 7 by Rolo Tomasie

[Warhead36]

7 hours ago, Going Commando said:

Too much focus on need in here when it comes to this draft.  Too much of a sentiment that we have to draft an OT, reaches or wasteful trade ups be damned.  That is the Ron Rivera mentality and approach to the draft.

 

The draft is not for filling short term needs.  That's the worst way to use the tool, and it isn't even any good at doing it.

 

We need to stop thinking about building a football team as if the task is completing a puzzle and you are done when you fill in all of the pieces.

 

Instead, team building is like making a tower, and the teams with the tallest towers win.  But everyone gets the exact same number of blocks to build with, and has the exact same budget to pay for them, so the teams that find the biggest blocks are the ones that win.  The draft is a requisition process where teams get total long term control over the blocks they choose, and thus the best way to use the draft is to always hunt for the biggest possible blocks you can get at your turn.

 

It does not matter if the block is a left tackle or a tight end or whatever.  What matters is that it is big.  The Chiefs and the Patriots built dynasty sized towers without any big blocks at tackle.   The only position that provides meaningfully bigger blocks than any other is QB.

 

Right now, the only big block we have on our roster is Jonathan Allen.  If we're going to compete with the tallest and best built teams, we have to use this draft to find two or three more Jon Allen sized blocks.  We can get one with the QB we pick at 2.  Then the rest of our picks need to be about taking as many big swings as we can, because that's the only way we're going to find a gem or two outside of the early first round.

 

Stop thinking about which OT you can shoehorn in to our Day 2 picks and start searching for genuine value.  Who has a plausible path to becoming an annual pro bowler?  Who has All Pro upside?  If the biggest blocks we can find is T'Vondre Sweat or Payton Wilson, we should pick them.

I get what you're saying and I agree with your general premise, but at the end of the day you need to build a viable roster with active parts that fit. It doesn't do you any good to have, say, 3 starting caliber DTs if you have no starting caliber OTs(just as an example since DT is the one position of strength we have). 

 

This is a very deep OT draft class and we're going to be drafting a QB at 2. Its important that we ensure his protection, at least early on, so he can develop properly. I agree that we don't need a star LT(we had stud LT play for almost 20 years and didn't win squat) but a T tandem of Lucas and Wylie is just not good enough long term. This is the year to take a shot at a LT that can help stabilize the OL based on where we pick.

 

Ultimately its about how Peters and co. grade their board. If they have, say, 8 OTs with 1st round grades and 7 are taken, and they have a shot to move up to say like 29 to get the last one, I think that's something they'll strongly consider. 

 

But Peters's outstanding eye for talent also means I wouldn't mind him having lots of bullets in the chamber to fire with so to speak. 

 

Day 2 will be very fun to watch that's for sure. Four picks that Friday night. I anticipate a lot of moving around to secure franchise corner stones.

1 hour ago, Rolo Tomasie said:

I agree with this sentiment in 99% of the cases, but there is a bit of a caveat. The QB is everything, and as has been repeatedly identified in the QB thread, when you're breaking in a high caliber rookie QB, the situation you pull him into is the major factor in his development.

 

I want to inject some reality into this "QB Nursery" situation.....uh, ours sucks. We have spent a lot of time this off-season congratulating ourselves on a new owner, new GM, new coaching staff. And that's all good news to be sure. But for the new QB:

1. There is no established culture and development program because pretty much everyone in the franchise is new.
2. The head coach is defensive minded
3. The OCs history of developing a rookie QB is middling at best. I am a little concerned about the KK hire, honestly.
4. The whole team will be installing a new offense, new to everyone 
5. Most of the offensive coaching staff is working together for the first time
6. The talent at TE is poor, and a good TE is often a young QBs security blanket
7. The talent at WR is just ok
8. The talent on the O line is terrible
9. There is some talent at RB and Ekeler in particular could really help the young QB. But KK doesn't have a background in creating heavily run-focused offensive schemes
10. The veteran QB brought in to be the mentor is also new to this offense and has a history as a failed prospect who is not seen as a particularly smart, fast reader of defenses and decision maker on the field. He also quit on at least one team in his past
11. We were just rated as having the worst facilities and player support in the league

If we are objective about it, I think we are the most difficult situation for a rookie QB to come into, worse in that regard than Chicago, New England, the Giants, Minnesota, and even Las Vegas. It's on par with the Carolina situation that Bryce stepped into - probably better coaching talent and ownership, but that isn't proven out yet.

 

I think our draft strategy has to consider this and while we do have to go BPA, that player really MUST be a player who can help with factors 6, 7, or 8 above. And to me there is only one TE who is immediately ready to help as a rookie, and we are not going to get him at pick 36. And picks past day 2 are typically not immediate starters. So the only options to improve the QB development situation with the round 2/3 picks are O-line or WR.

 

Free agency did bring in some players who should help. But If we don't get continued improvement in the areas above, we need to seriously look at a redshirt season for the new QB. 

Yep agree with this. That's why I liked the Ertz and Ekeler signings so much, they are perfect for rookie QBs. And Biadasz at C was a coup. But we have not stabilized the T spots. I think we're ok at WR and RB but of course could use more talent(I really want a quality 3rd WR. Ladd McConkey is dat dude but I don't think he'll last to 36).

 

I will say I think the defense will be drastically better and that will help a young QB. He won't be forced to throw 40+ times in shootouts because the D will actually get stops, and hopefully get us some short fields to work with as well. 

[Going Commando]

You guys are wildly overestimating both

A - the impact that offensive tackles have on winning and/or QB prospect development

B - the impact that any rookie tackle from this class will have next year

 

Why is it so essential to find some kind of tackle prospect to present as a long term plan at the position, that you all would abandon BPA to do it even though you know BPA drafting is the only good way to draft?  It's not the kind of position where quality rookie impact is likely, nor is it the kind of position necessary to fill in order to win.  It doesn't break your offense to have JAGs at tackle, nor does having great tackles keep your QB from getting killed, as Minnesota has proven.  Our tackles were not the reason Sam Howell didn't work out here.  And probably no tackle that we draft is actually going to be better than Wylie and Lucas platooned with some ordinary vet.  They're probably going to be an overwhelmed kid who gets a 50 grade from PFF like Anton Harrison.  We're still going to be having these need discussions about tackle this time next year despite any pick we make in this year's class.

 

I think many of you guys still looking at team building like it's fitting together a puzzle, and making justifications for need drafting as a consequence of viewing the problem wrong.  The way you build an effective QB nursery is to build a stacked roster that the QB can win with ASAP.  That is literally the only path to securing their long term future.  And the draft is the best tool for doing this, but only if you use it the best way.  And even when used optimally, it still takes multiple years to get a return on the vast majority of your picks.  You guys need to zoom out and look at this draft class in a three to four season window.  Who has the best chance at earning a second contract here?  Who has the chance to become a dominant player and a huge foundation building block?  Who is the guy whose face you can see on the promos during games, who defines the identity of our team?  These are the guys we need to find, and there are a lot of pitfalls to doing so even when you draft the most talented kids possible.

 

I offered T'Vondre Sweat as an example of big game hunting with one of our second rounders, because he's got a profile that hints at the "foundation building block" ceiling I'm searching for.  He won the Outland Trophy, had a 91.7 PFF score, and spent SB week dominating all of the clowns who lined up in front of him.  He's demonstrated an ability to physically overmatch his peers that is sometimes a good fundamental indicator of NFL potential.  None of this is a guarantee that he can translate to the NFL, and even if he could, there is no guarantee he lives up to his potential.  That's why you have to take these kinds of swings with all of your picks.  If you do, some of your swings will eventually connect for triples and home runs.

 

All of that said, I'm absolutely not opposed to drafting an OT in the second round.  I'm actually pretty intrigued by the upside of Kingsley Suamataia and Kiran Amegadjie.  The value starts feeling OK for Kingsley at 40, and around 50 for Amegadjie.  But I am absolutely not married to drafting either of these guys, and there is a good chance they won't even be close to the BPA options when our picks come up.  I've also heard that Kingsley has some maturity/work ethic concerns, so that has the be weighed against his physical potential, just as Payton Wilson's injury history has to be weighed against his.

 

Bottom line, if we stick to BPA and just let the draft come to us, we will end up further along in our build than if we go trying to force picks at specific positions.

[Rolo Tomasie]

35 minutes ago, Going Commando said:

You guys are wildly overestimating both

A - the impact that offensive tackles have on winning and/or QB prospect development

B - the impact that any rookie tackle from this class will have next year

 

Why is it so essential to find some kind of tackle prospect to present as a long term plan at the position, that you all would abandon BPA to do it even though you know BPA drafting is the only good way to draft?  It's not the kind of position where quality rookie impact is likely, nor is it the kind of position necessary to fill in order to win.  It doesn't break your offense to have JAGs at tackle, nor does having great tackles keep your QB from getting killed, as Minnesota has proven.  Our tackles were not the reason Sam Howell didn't work out here.  And probably no tackle that we draft is actually going to be better than Wylie and Lucas platooned with some ordinary vet.  They're probably going to be an overwhelmed kid who gets a 50 grade from PFF like Anton Harrison.  We're still going to be having these need discussions about tackle this time next year despite any pick we make in this year's class.

 

I think many of you guys still looking at team building like it's fitting together a puzzle, and making justifications for need drafting as a consequence of viewing the problem wrong.  The way you build an effective QB nursery is to build a stacked roster that the QB can win with ASAP.  That is literally the only path to securing their long term future.  And the draft is the best tool for doing this, but only if you use it the best way.  And even when used optimally, it still takes multiple years to get a return on the vast majority of your picks.  You guys need to zoom out and look at this draft class in a three to four season window.  Who has the best chance at earning a second contract here?  Who has the chance to become a dominant player and a huge foundation building block?  Who is the guy whose face you can see on the promos during games, who defines the identity of our team?  These are the guys we need to find, and there are a lot of pitfalls to doing so even when you draft the most talented kids possible.

 

I offered T'Vondre Sweat as an example of big game hunting with one of our second rounders, because he's got a profile that hints at the "foundation building block" ceiling I'm searching for.  He won the Outland Trophy, had a 91.7 PFF score, and spent SB week dominating all of the clowns who lined up in front of him.  He's demonstrated an ability to physically overmatch his peers that is sometimes a good fundamental indicator of NFL potential.  None of this is a guarantee that he can translate to the NFL, and even if he could, there is no guarantee he lives up to his potential.  That's why you have to take these kinds of swings with all of your picks.  If you do, some of your swings will eventually connect for triples and home runs.

 

All of that said, I'm absolutely not opposed to drafting an OT in the second round.  I'm actually pretty intrigued by the upside of Kingsley Suamataia and Kiran Amegadjie.  The value starts feeling OK for Kingsley at 40, and around 50 for Amegadjie.  But I am absolutely not married to drafting either of these guys, and there is a good chance they won't even be close to the BPA options when our picks come up.  I've also heard that Kingsley has some maturity/work ethic concerns, so that has the be weighed against his physical potential, just as Payton Wilson's injury history has to be weighed against his.

 

Bottom line, if we stick to BPA and just let the draft come to us, we will end up further along in our build than if we go trying to force picks at specific positions.

"You all?"

The whole point of my long post is that day 2 picks dosn't have to be a OT but it better be something that can help foment a good QB development environment, because improving the environment for QB development is critical to the health of the franchise for the next several seasons.

[Conn]

35 minutes ago, Rolo Tomasie said:

"You all?"

The whole point of my long post is that day 2 picks dosn't have to be a OT but it better be something that can help foment a good QB development environment, because improving the environment for QB development is critical to the health of the franchise for the next several seasons.

His argument is just that winning games and keeping the staff employed for organizational stability is actually your best bet at helping “foment a good QB development environment”, so it doesn’t matter what positions you draft as long as you take swings at elite players and keep doing it year after year. I think it’s a fairly compelling argument even though I get your OL/TE/WR thing

[Koolblue13]

15 hours ago, clskinsfan said:

Thing is we already have 9 picks this year. I could see us flipping a third for a second next year though. We dont need more picks in this draft. 

How many players do we have under contract? 

 

The talent in this draft is stacked from 40-120 and the more picks in that range, the better.

 

We're drafting for depth players as well as future starters. You can't have enough picks in the draft IMO.

[Skinsinparadise]

I 100% agree on BPA.  I've explained why and how a zillion times over the years.

 

But I do think its OK to pine for premium positions that fit a need when the draft is stacked at that spot.  And that goes double for spots that have typically nada in FA.  If I had to pick one spot that FA typically sucks at it would be LT and by a mile. 

 

DE was stacked last year.  Some of the players I among others liked who were taken in the 2nd-4th rounds did well or showed promise this season.  I talked about it in the thread we had about picks we wish they'd have taken.  But Ron didn't hit that spot until the run was basically over.

 

TE is an example, too.  It's not a premium position.  But it was stacked last year, unusually so.  Ron just ignored it.    I'd kill to have some of the TEs from that class in this class.   Not easy either to find good TEs in FA.  But at least its not a premium position.  And you can find more in FA than LT.

 

This draft is unusually stacked at tackle.  Some of us whined not so much last year.  But it is stacked this year.  For a team desperate for a LT to just blow it off, it would be a bad look IMO.  I don't expect it to happen so am not worried.

 

If people want to argue don't trade up.  OK.  But I think its a bridge too far if we don't do that and to also blow of that next tier which is arguably better than the typical 2nd tier at that spot in a typical year.

 

Right now, I got to watch more but Foster is rising for me on that front.  I was impressed by the game I watched.  But it was only one game.

 

My point is premium positons which are usually stacked in a particular draft -- its something to seriously consider versus ignore.  Ron ignored it.  Ron just cared about his needs.   And look am not a needs based drafter.  But I do care if a position especially a premium position is bountiful in a draft.  I find that point VERY relevant and IMO should be a factor in draft strategy.

 

 

 

Edited April 7 by Skinsinparadise

[mhd24]

5 hours ago, Going Commando said:

 

I'm worried about his speed.  I didn't think he looked slow on the field, but I went back through Georgia cut ups to watch Bullard and Smith and maybe there is a little trouble carrying speed deep with Lassiter.  He has to read it really well to stay in phase because I'm not sure the recovery speed to make plays is there when he doesn't.  But he generally does read the game well, and he is such a cautious player that he just doesn't really get beat or give up a lot of separation.

 

His super power is his hip fluidity and his really smooth backpedal and transition steps.  He has elite change of direction agility.  He can be twitchy and his closing speed is really good when he runs downhill or is carrying a crosser.  It's a real contrast between him and their other outside corner in how well he reads the game and avoids mistakes.  But his lack of aggression feels pretty notable, especially compared to the way Bullard, Smith, and Starks play.  He doesn't really make big plays and doesn't seem to have the instinct to do it.  He's out there just focusing on not getting beat.  Only one career INT and 14 PBUs.

 

He was kind of a dependable role player amidst more talented and aggressive defensive backs for Georgia, and that's probably the role I'd expect of him in the NFL too.  He doesn't really fit my desire to go big game hunting with our second rounders, but he wouldn't be a bad pick.  I think he would be a base hit.

 

 

Thanks for the writeup GC.  Yeah, I'm not sure who the first DB after the big 5 (Arnold, Mitchell, Wiggins, Dejean, Kool-Aid) is going to be.  I'd rather have Lassiter than Rakestraw for sure however.  

4 hours ago, Going Commando said:

 

Davis's PFF grades are surprisingly strong.  He's not playing enough snaps to have a huge impact, but I wonder if that's about his weight or about the depth of the rotation he played in.  Cox and Carter are good enough to keep even a high quality IDL in a third wheel role.  When he's out there, he's good.

 

I also think that Davis came out of Georgia fairly immature, and might not have been ready to play many snaps as a rookie for that reason alone.  But his workload could start ramping up significantly next season as a third year vet.  Especially with Cox retired.  The opportunity is there anyway.  If it doesn't happen, then we'll know that he just doesn't have the tank to play many snaps.

 

FWIW, Sweat is going to come a lot cheaper than Davis, which effects the perception of value.  Getting 35 good snaps per game from someone you took in the 50s feels a lot better than getting the same from someone you took in the teens.

 

From perusing Philly, it seems like Davis can't stay in shape.  He should have came out and beasted in his 2nd year.  Philly needs him & Carter to bring the wood.  Cox retiring leaves a giant void in leadership for them.  That's probably why they resigned Graham more than anything.  

[Koolblue13]

1 hour ago, Rolo Tomasie said:

"You all?"

The whole point of my long post is that day 2 picks dosn't have to be a OT but it better be something that can help foment a good QB development environment, because improving the environment for QB development is critical to the health of the franchise for the next several seasons.

The thing that killed our QB last year, was poor OL play, sure, but it was also the position coaches and play calling as much as anything.

 

We now have premier position coaches everywhere and about 8 former QBs to bring ours along. I'm assuming that you think KKs pedigree with mentoring young QBs is middling at best is exclusively because of Kyler? Because he's had a ton of success with other QBs.

[Skinsinparadise]

Giants have two stud edge rushers and a maybe the best DT in the league middle. They are likely for real what some of us thought our D line would be last year.

 

Eagles have sick depth at the D line.

 

Cowboys with a top 5 edge rusher and Lawrence isn't too bad.

 

We got swept within this division last year.   2 different Giants backup Qbs beat us.   We've sucked forever in ths division.

 

Greg Cosell who does tape review for ESPN and covers the Eagles closely last year when asked to stack this team to the Eagles basically said look at the Eagles D line stack it to the Washington O line.  Now reverse it, Washington D line versus Eagles O line.  Enough said.  It's not that complicated. 

 

it's a cliche that you got to at least set up good matchups within your own division and need to win within your own division first.

 

Draft geek after draft geek, PFF guy, scout leaks, etc -- all seem to converge to the idea that there will be a big run on tackle in the first round.  In part because they are so hard to get elsehere.  We had all the cap room in the world but there wasn't a single attractive option at LT -- whether its age-durability, ability, etc.

 

We talk about find your QB when you can because they are hard to find.  LT isn't nearly that same conversation but there is a parallel to it in that arguably outside of QB its the hardest spot to find outside the draft.   In FA you can find pretty much everything except LT.

 

So for me I don't see targeting tackle as a bad move.  It's not an apples to apples position to others.  That's the one and only position I'd target.  And please nobody get it twisted.  I don't mean heck I can't believe McConkey is still there at 40 but crap we got to take Paul instead.  My point is there are enough of them available that the draft really would have to go off the rails where need and BPA aren't a mile off.

 

At 36, I think there is a shot Morgan is there.  Maybe Kingsley (who I need to rewatch)

 

At 40 and the 3rd round between Paul, Kiran, Fisher, Foster, Rosengarten, Puni -- none of them will likely be even close to being BPA at that spot feels likely absurd to me.

 

And yes IMO everything being equal some positions outweigh others.  The 7th best tackle is often more valuable than the 5th best safety for example.   Tackles aren't easy to get.  This draft at tackle feels to me like how the last draft felt at DE-TE.  When you got a big harvest of a fruit -- and its unusual then grab at least one piece of fruit.  Some teams like GB actually grabbed multiple pieces of fruit at TE last year.  That's IMO smart.  Ignoring a bounty at a position -- especially a premium position at a spot of need IMO is borderline nuts -- and actually ignoring the bounty would feel very Riverish that was Rivera's playbook last year.

Edited April 7 by Skinsinparadise

[skinny21]

3 hours ago, Rolo Tomasie said:

"You all?"

The whole point of my long post is that day 2 picks dosn't have to be a OT but it better be something that can help foment a good QB development environment, because improving the environment for QB development is critical to the health of the franchise for the next several seasons.

I think he’s referring to those who feel we “have” to trade up for a tackle (or “reach” for one at 36/40). 

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[mhd24]

14 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

Ok, he's off the draft board for me personally now.