2024 Comprehensive Draft Thread

[philibusters]

3 minutes ago, 757SeanTaylor21 said:

Mainly I want Brian's burns st all cost in free agency. He has shown that he is a dynamic pass rusher in the hopes we wanted for sweat or young. Of course we need help too but he needs to be priority one

 

He is going to cost 28 to 30 million a year and while is a dynamic pass rusher, he is a below average run defender.  He will give you between 9 sacks and 12.5 sacks per season (over the last four years, his lowest year was 9 sacks, highest 12.5) so he will give you a good, but arguably not elite pass rush and while not truly awful as a run defender, he averages out as a mid 50's PFF run defense player.   I rather go after a player like Danielle Hunter who is a similar pass rusher, better run defender and probably cheaper.  He'll  possible be cheaper because he is four years older than Burns (Hunter is currently 29 years old compared to Burns who is 25 years old).  I get the Burns love as he is a very good pass rusher entering his prime, but I am not even really considering him.  Plus I think you would have to trade for Burns as the feel is he will be franchised if the Panthers cannot reach an agreement with him.  

[JamesMadisonSkins]

1 minute ago, Warhead36 said:

There are exceptions of course, and the Eagles were in a unique position of having a top 10 pick despite being a contender and not having any real needs so they could scoop up a talent like Jalen Carter, but for the most part when you're still in the building stage you need to maximize your assets by drafting premium players at the premium positions.

We took Jansen in 99 and Samuels in 00, but I get your premise. Man, those were the days. Then remember a few years later when that OL had Dockery, Thomas, and Rabach on the inside? I miss having good OLs like that.

 

That's right, forgot Jansen was the year before. 

 

The perfect rebuild of our OL would likely include a high-quality LG in the free agent cycle, drafting a LT in R1, and a RT in R2. You can't fix it in one off-season, but that would set you up with LT-LG-RT long-term. Cosmi TBD if we bring him back long-term at RG, but if we have LT, LG, RT locked down for the next 3-4 years, you can figure out RG and C in future off-seasons. 

[Warhead36]

The Panthers will tag Burns and I'm not trading our high 1st for him.

1 minute ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

 

That's right, forgot Jansen was the year before. 

 

The perfect rebuild of our OL would likely include a high-quality LG in the free agent cycle, drafting a LT in R1, and a RT in R2. You can't fix it in one off-season, but that would set you up with LT-LG-RT long-term. Cosmi TBD if we bring him back long-term at RG, but if we have LT, LG, RT locked down for the next 3-4 years, you can figure out RG and C in future off-seasons. 

My ideal OL set up would be drafting a LT and RT high(wouldn't mind one in the 1st and then another with one of our 2nds), sign a FA LG(I think the Lions LG is gonna be a FA, so if we get Ben Johnson as coach that could be a possibility), keep Cosmi at RG, and hope Strom can take over at C.

[JamesMadisonSkins]

My solution for DE would be to get a solid DE on a 2nd contract in FA. Then draft one in R2. Then draft another in R4 - R6. That way you have the two rookies from 2023, 2 rookies in 2024, and a veteran presence with upside. It won't make it an elite unit, but you can at least start building it smartly without over-extending resources. 

 

We have a ton of cap space and a great slate of draft picks, but we aren't going to solve all of our needs in one off-season. Truly, you never solve for every hole anyway. I just want to start allocating resources in a way that makes sense, build around Howell. 

[757SeanTaylor21]

For sure you don't trade for him. But who else is on that defense that is helping him? If he gets the chance to market...you got to get him. Especially since there isn't that many top tier talent available and if nobody noticed...we need top talent. We need an entire o line. A te, somebody with hands at receiver.. dbs and de and mlb. If the one thing we learned from gruden to Rivera is...stop with the middle tier players to round a team and get top players when the chance is there. Albeit it being draft or free agency.

[JamesMadisonSkins]

4 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

The Panthers will tag Burns and I'm not trading our high 1st for him.

My ideal OL set up would be drafting a LT and RT high(wouldn't mind one in the 1st and then another with one of our 2nds), sign a FA LG(I think the Lions LG is gonna be a FA, so if we get Ben Johnson as coach that could be a possibility), keep Cosmi at RG, and hope Strom can take over at C.

 

I think we are aligned here. An alternative solution could be:

 

LT in Round 1

Center in Round 2

Sign one of the top FA RTs

 

Rookie LT

Wylie/Stromberg

Rookie C

Cosmi

FA RT

 

Many ways to skin that cat. Unfortunately our FO did absolutely no favors to the next FO with their 2023 FA moves. Wylie may be serviceable at LG ... not sure about Gates. Will be tough to move on from one or both of them this year because of their contracts, so I am sure one or both will be part of the equation, either with depth or switching positions.

Edited November 21, 2023 by JamesMadisonSkins

[method man]

28 minutes ago, philibusters said:

 

He is going to cost 28 to 30 million a year and while is a dynamic pass rusher, he is a below average run defender.  He will give you between 9 sacks and 12.5 sacks per season (over the last four years, his lowest year was 9 sacks, highest 12.5) so he will give you a good, but arguably not elite pass rush and while not truly awful as a run defender, he averages out as a mid 50's PFF run defense player.   I rather go after a player like Danielle Hunter who is a similar pass rusher, better run defender and probably cheaper.  He'll  possible be cheaper because he is four years older than Burns (Hunter is currently 29 years old compared to Burns who is 25 years old).  I get the Burns love as he is a very good pass rusher entering his prime, but I am not even really considering him.  Plus I think you would have to trade for Burns as the feel is he will be franchised if the Panthers cannot reach an agreement with him.  

Good to see someone else here gets it regarding Hunter. He is one of the few true blue chip guys who will hit the market and he is only hitting the market this year because the Vikings agreed to not to tag him in order to get him to come back this year. He is the most underrated edge rusher in the league and is just right below the Bosa/Garrett/Watt tier. I think he is going to age well and I would have no qualms about giving him something like 3/90 as he would be the first true blue chip player this team would have since Trent (maybe Jon Allen just touches this in 2021 and 2022).

 

This is also why my focus in the draft is getting a guy who profiles as a blue chip player more than focusing on a position. If we take a Harrison or Bowers, we have the resources to move up to take a Fuaga, Latham or Kingsley in the mid 1st (with all three guys having the potential to be blue chip on their own right as RTs).

 

We ultimately need to do what we can to get to at least 4 players who have a very realistic chance of being All Pros as soon as possible with another set of players behind them who can be Pro Bowlers/Pro Bowl alternate level starters 

Edited November 21, 2023 by method man

[Warhead36]

4 minutes ago, method man said:

This is also why my focus in the draft is getting a guy who profiles as a blue chip player more than focusing on a position. If we take a Harrison or Bowers, we have the resources to move up to take a Fuaga, Latham or Kingsley in the mid 1st (with all three guys having the potential to be blue chip on their own right as RTs).

 

We ultimately need to do what we can to get to at least 4 players who have a very realistic chance of being All Pros as soon as possible with another set of players behind them who can be Pro Bowlers/Pro Bowl alternate level starters 

I like this thought process and I'm with you, although I remain anti-TE high in the draft but Bowers is a heck of a prospect.

[JamesMadisonSkins]

5 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

I like this thought process and I'm with you, although I remain anti-TE high in the draft but Bowers is a heck of a prospect.

 

Seems like there are several good looking TEs that could be there in the 2nd-4th round range, and that is where I would prefer to hit the position.

 

So many non-1st round TEs have smashed. LaPorta, Andrews, Kelce, Kittle.

Meanwhile, the R1 TEs that have smashed? Hockenson, Kincaid ... the list of solid but not great TEs in R1 are Njoku, Engram, Pitts ... 

 

Just seems the best way to build a team is to hit on TE in the 2nd-4th round range. Yes a young QB needs a TE as an outlet, but if we are choosing between a blue-chip LT or a blue-chip TE, give me the blue-chip LT 10x10

[Darrell Green Fan]

Have we given up on Stromberg already?  

[JamesMadisonSkins]

9 minutes ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

Have we given up on Stromberg already?  

 

No I really liked him coming out. I suspect he is considered the long-term solution to the position, but it is hard to know what a new FO will think/do with the old FOs additions.

[KDawg]

Bowers is a legitimate generational talent.

 

I still don't think I'd take him in the first unless he is heads and shoulders better than the tackles available (like him vs. OT4). And still, you have to pause for guys like Harrison as well.

 

But I'd consider him in the top 10 given a few factors, which is saying something given my overall view on tight ends being drafted in the early first.

[Rufus T Firefly]

2 hours ago, clskinsfan said:

You would have Harrison on a 5 year affordable rookie contract. By the time you would need to pay him Terry will be retired anyways. That is why adding elite talent in the draft is so important.

"Resources" includes draft picks, especially picks in the top 4 of the draft, which is what it would require to be considering Harrison jr. 

 

And what I said was that if you take Harrison you should look to trade McLaurin. He has two years left on his deal, at which point he would be entering his age 31 season. So yeah, you're a team bad enough to go 4-13 and you've just spent your best asset to improve one of your best position groups, you're not contending for anything with McLaurin for the rest of his contract. So try to trade him. 

[Warhead36]

I mean if we draft Harrison and a team offers a 1 for McLaurin, I'd think about it. But I'd rather just keep all three and try to build a super group of WRs that can just dominate games.

 

When the Bengals had Higgins and Boyd, they still drafted Chase. The Cowboys had Cooper and Gallup and still drafted Lamb.

 

Accumulate weapons. Score points. Win games.

[Rufus T Firefly]

4 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

I mean if we draft Harrison and a team offers a 1 for McLaurin, I'd think about it. But I'd rather just keep all three and try to build a super group of WRs that can just dominate games.

 

When the Bengals had Higgins and Boyd, they still drafted Chase. The Cowboys had Cooper and Gallup and still drafted Lamb.

 

Accumulate weapons. Score points. Win games.

So, question then- Are you planning to re=sign a 31 year old McLaurin for the big money that will require in two years?

[Warhead36]

2 minutes ago, Rufus T Firefly said:

So, question then- Are you planning to re=sign a 31 year old McLaurin for the big money that will require in two years?

Maybe. Is the offense humming? Is McLaurin still productive? What's our QB/rest of the roster situation look like?

 

I think the possibility of letting McLaurin go in two years actually strengthens the argument to taking a WR like Harrison jr.

[BigDibbs31]

13 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

I mean if we draft Harrison and a team offers a 1 for McLaurin, I'd think about it. But I'd rather just keep all three and try to build a super group of WRs that can just dominate games.

 

When the Bengals had Higgins and Boyd, they still drafted Chase. The Cowboys had Cooper and Gallup and still drafted Lamb.

 

Accumulate weapons. Score points. Win games.

Yep. We have accumulated weapons on the wrong side of the ball in an offense heavy league for far too long.

[Koolblue13]

To the folks saying it's easy to get a LBer in FA.

 

What game changing LBer has been in FA in recent years? Wagner for one year at a ridiculous cost and then went back to Seattle?

 

I think that's it. You can get gap fillers like Holcomb or Barton, but not great LBers.

 

LB, like TE is a strong day two draft position.

 

You have to draft your LBers and TEs if you want above average ones.

[clskinsfan]

1 hour ago, philibusters said:

 

He is going to cost 28 to 30 million a year and while is a dynamic pass rusher, he is a below average run defender.  He will give you between 9 sacks and 12.5 sacks per season (over the last four years, his lowest year was 9 sacks, highest 12.5) so he will give you a good, but arguably not elite pass rush and while not truly awful as a run defender, he averages out as a mid 50's PFF run defense player.   I rather go after a player like Danielle Hunter who is a similar pass rusher, better run defender and probably cheaper.  He'll  possible be cheaper because he is four years older than Burns (Hunter is currently 29 years old compared to Burns who is 25 years old).  I get the Burns love as he is a very good pass rusher entering his prime, but I am not even really considering him.  Plus I think you would have to trade for Burns as the feel is he will be franchised if the Panthers cannot reach an agreement with him.  

Josh Allen interests me as well. He is a 9-10 sack guy. But he is very good against the run as well. He might be expensive though. 

[Rufus T Firefly]

3 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

Maybe. Is the offense humming? Is McLaurin still productive? What's our QB/rest of the roster situation look like?

Well, the roster situation probably depends on how we improve the team's absolutely abysmal D and OLine while spending our best asset on another WR. 

 

But leaving that aside, the point being you just drafted a WR because we presumably think he is going to be a top 5ish WR in the league. In two years, Howell will be onto his second contract. McLaurin will either have declined enough that you'll wish you traded him now or he'll be requiring even more money than his current 23 mil per year deal.

 

In a vacuum, that contract might not be bad. But the odds would be enormously stacked that his cost will outstrip his production for that deal. Outside the vacuum, you're paying that huge amount of money to a team's second WR on a deal that runs parallel to a big second contract for a QB and likely running into Harrison's second deal as well.

 

12 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

think the possibility of letting McLaurin go in two years actually strengthens the argument to taking a WR like Harrison jr.

 It absolutely does. What it does not do, however, is strengthen the argument for not trading McLaurin now. 

 

 

If we are in position to draft Harrison, realistically it means we finished 4-13. Maybe 5-12, but doubtful.

We currently have the league's worst scoring defense, and that's mostly before we traded away our two best pass rushers. 

In spite of how bad that is, the OLine is still the team's worst unit. 

 

If you're looking at that situation and advocating any kind of "let's go for it for the nest two years!" scenario, you're basically Dan Snyder. it's exactly how he operated this team for a quarter century and if you really want to continue that, I don't know what to tell you. 

 

if not, then we need to plan for more than 5 minutes into the future. There's an argument for trading Terry now regardless. But if you need him to help Howell develop and there's a pretty good chance he's our #1 WR going forward, then understandable to keep him.

 

If Harrison is the best value in the draft, then taking him is also obviously understandable. 

 

But basically adopting the "go for it for two years" approach to the WR position while the rest of the team is so bad is definitely not understandable. 

[method man]

1 hour ago, Warhead36 said:

I like this thought process and I'm with you, although I remain anti-TE high in the draft but Bowers is a heck of a prospect.

I am normally anti-TE in the first round too. I would have hated taking Mayer, for example, in rd 1 last year.

 

However, this is a true two way Y TE who has been the #1 weapon at the top football program in the nation. He apparently runs a 4.5 and is a heck of an athlete and I feel his skillset will translate really well to the pros. The only real ding is that he does not have elite size.

 

He seems like he would be an enhancer in both the running game with his blocking (and the occasional carry) and in the passing game as both a safety blanket and downfield threat for Sam & offering better chip help for the tackles.

[Redskins 2021]

Where are the top tackles expect to fall. I suspect we win 5 to 6 games probably puts us picking 5 at best 15 at worse. Can we get the top tackle at 7?

[Warhead36]

2 minutes ago, Redskins 2021 said:

Where are the top tackles expect to fall. I suspect we win 5 to 6 games probably puts us picking 5 at best 15 at worse. Can we get the top tackle at 7?

I believe there are three blue chip Ts. I don't think any of them are sure fire studs like an Ogden or Pace but all three should be at least good to very good in the pros.

 

One of them will definitely be available at 7. If not, that means either Harrison jr or Bowers will be.

[KDawg]

Shaq Leonard was just released. Getting him would be a huge get. Problem is… this regime has no reason to sign him.

[method man]

4 minutes ago, KDawg said:

Shaq Leonard was just released. Getting him would be a huge get. Problem is… this regime has no reason to sign him.

I don’t know about that. Seems like the injuries have caught up to him and he is a JAG now