2024 NFL Draft Position/Tracker - Final Pick #2

[Anselmheifer]

Do we have any idea what the injury report is for tomorrow and who is likely not to play?

[Curtisp5286]

30 minutes ago, KDawg said:

Shen is an analytics guy. Caleb Williams is not a great analytics QB. I'd be shocked if WIlliams was the pick given Eugene Shen's style if Harris and the new GM/HC are also of the same mindset.

Seems like you could probably say the same thing about Maye, no?  I suppose it depends what “analytics” you are referring to.

 

32 minutes ago, KDawg said:

It's about the plan. Not necessarily the results.

 

I'd argue drafting a bad QB is worse than not drafting one as well. 

Worse result, yes, but a worse plan/process? 

[@DCGoldPants]

10 minutes ago, Going Commando said:

You can't pass on getting a long term option at QB. 

 

Like @KDawg said to someone else. We're going to disagree here. I'm firmly in the, you need a QB and you need to love the guy you're taking when picking in the top 3. If this were pick 15 and one of these guys were there. I can see taking the flyer. I'll shut up now. 

[KDawg]

11 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

One of the things that has me so excited about Harris, is his patience to build a sustainable winner. He has even said so. We've been in this 30 year panic mode under Snyder and it's over. You aren't going to add an entire new FO, Coaching team and roster in one offseason and have it just gel out of the gate. He's going to get all the best people he can at all the right positions and let it come together. I think that's why I don't feel as rushed to go QB. Like Mike Tomlin bragging to Chase young about his team not drafting that high (which is how I view the coach of TJ Watt saying "a player like you"). We're going to become one of those teams, but not over night. Although I do think we're in the PO hunt at worst next year.

 

And this is kind of the hard part...

 

I have NO idea what they should do.

 

Do they have a shot at a QB in FA that they like a lot? Or a great deal on a QB in a trade that they love and would rather have than a rookie? Do they have a lead on OL that they love more than those in the draft and they would rather go QB?

 

Do they have a lead on OL/QB and want to focus on weapons or defense?

 

There are just so many variables to have this conversation right now with our season not even over. We have a staff and front office that doesn't exist yet. It's hard for me to really nail down what I think at this point.

 

One thing I've been trying to do lately is separate names out of things... It's an exercise I've taken in life and I'm trying to apply it all over. Sometimes its stupid and I hate it.

 

But in this case I have asked myself:

 

Would I rather have Draft pick #2 or Draft pick # 6, 38, and 17 next year?

 

My answer to that is give me 6, 38 and 17 next year. But then I get back to my "too many unknowns" thought. Who's to say 6, 38 and 17 next year are even on the line?

 

And I go back to, "What did we do in FA?"

 

And I go back to, "Who is our staff and FO?"

 

And I'm left thinking, "I have no idea."

4 minutes ago, Curtisp5286 said:

 

 

Worse result, yes, but a worse plan/process? 

 

Could be, yes.

 

Could also not be. Do you know what the new regime is going to do to support the new QB? I sure as heck don't.

 

Of course, I want to think they'd do everything they can to surround them including FA OL and drafting more. And I'm sure they will. 

 

But I don't KNOW their plan and have nothing to go on because they don't exist yet.

 

These conversations are fun as hell to have now, but they are completely useless until more info is available. 

 

And yes, you can say the same about Maye. 

Edited January 6 by KDawg

[Voice_of_Reason]

PSA:  Just a reminder, we want Pitt to beat Baltimore and the Colts to beat Houston.  today. 
 

Steelers at Ravens is at 4:30 on ABC

texans at Colts is at 8:15 also on ABC

 

[philibusters]

11 minutes ago, Curtisp5286 said:

Seems like you could probably say the same thing about Maye, no?  I suppose it depends what “analytics” you are referring to.

 

Worse result, yes, but a worse plan/process? 

 

From listening to podcasts, analytics people are most confident that analytics tells you what to do 

1) In game situations

2) And general roster building strategy, like how much to value certain positions, or certain draft picks.

 

I hear people talk about analytics less when it comes to player evaluation.  To the extent I hear about analytics is player evaluation it is that they value certain stats more than others.  For example some stats are more stable than others.  For example with QB two of the more stable stats are sacks allowed and accuracy from a clean pocket.  Other stats like effectiveness under pressure have greater variability and to the extent you are going to use them you need to use as big of a smaple size as possible, not just one season.  For example, Zach Wilson was really efficient with how he played under pressure his last year in college and he has been terrible at in the NFL.

 

But my main point, it that at least from what I have gathered a little bit, analytics is less focused on player evaluation and more focused on team building strategies and in game strategies.

[Going Commando]

8 minutes ago, @DCGoldPants said:

 

Like @KDawg said to someone else. We're going to disagree here. I'm firmly in the, you need a QB and you need to love the guy you're taking when picking in the top 3. If this were pick 15 and one of these guys were there. I can see taking the flyer. I'll shut up now. 

 

Why does picking top three give you a pass to punt on getting a QB?  That actually makes it worse, because you're punting on the opportunity to get the best QB prospects in the class.

 

Everyone has to build a team every year, and that process starts with answering the question "who is my QB?"

 

Getting a guy who you can answer that question with each winter is the key to competing in the NFL.  It doesn't matter if you don't love the guy unconditionally, you have to have that answer.  I don't really understand your basis for thinking it's OK to pass on getting a QB when you don't have one.  Do you think it's not worth it for everyone outside of the Chiefs, Bengals, Chargers and Bills to compete each year?

[Skinsinparadise]

53 minutes ago, @DCGoldPants said:

 

You helped make my point. I'm asking which QB you love. It seemed like it was Maye to me before. Maybe I misread. But saying you like the top 3 guys is like saying you don't love any single one of them and it's the position you justifiably love. Which is fair for a fan to feel. 

 

 

 

 

Not sure why you think you are in best position to redefine how I feel.   I've told you how I feel.  

 

And the logic to me is wild. It was a stacked TE draft last year, I liked multiple TEs.  So because I liked Sam Laporta, Michael Mayer and Dalton Kincaid -- i really didn't love any of them?  it was more about me just liking the TE position apparently.    

 

And last year apparently i didn't love with QB position.  But this year that love bug just struck me out of nowhere for the QB spot, so now its give me 3 QBs, ANY Qbs, apparently.   And this year i am turning on TE becuase I don't love three of them like I did last year. 

 

If you think the idea that last year the hype about the TE position is BS so you can't like that many of them or conversely the QB position hype this year is BS so I can't dig multiple options, cool.  But I am buying into the convention in this case.  I know that's boring to go with the flow.  But it is what it is.   i am willing to go against convention plenty with my takes.  But as far as the hype about the QB class, I am with the crowd that its a very good class at the top versus the outlier takes on it.   

 

And like I said I don't care if the GM has an outlier take.  It's in their right to think differently.  I'll ride with it.   But they better be right.  For a team starving for a franchise QB for decades, passing over them in a draft where there are three guys with that level of billing would be a wild twist in the soap opera of this team's failures at QB.  And if the GM takes that turn and is right -- super cool of course.   But if it backfires and we remain in QB Hell -- then adios to that GM -- you can't survive Herbert-Tua round 2 and keep your job IMO. 

 

39 minutes ago, Anselmheifer said:

Do we have any idea what the injury report is for tomorrow and who is likely not to play?

 

No J. Allen, Fuller are the big misses.  Maybe Curl is out, too. 

Edited January 6 by Skinsinparadise

[Anselmheifer]

Let’s hope that the Ravens rest Lamar Jackson today.

[NYSkins21]

Is there any scenario in which we bypass this 1st round altogether? Trade the #2/#3 overall pick FOR:

•2nd/3rd this year 2024

•1st’s, 2nd’s, 3rd’s 2025

•1st’s, 2nd’s, 3rd’s 2026

 

Think about the haul we can get if we trade this years 2nd/3rd overall and not get a 2024 first rounder back. We’d be set up for rebuild success from this one pick.

 

Thoughts?

[Skinsinparadise]

59 minutes ago, Going Commando said:

 

Punting on QB is just as damning of a mistake for GMs, and also results in getting fired.  See Ron Rivera for example.  And it'd be an even worse outcome in a QB class where there are three stud prospects with MVP type potential in a year where you picked second.

 

 

We so rarely pick this high.  This is the third time since 2000, we'd be picking 2nd or third (assuming we loss Sunday).  I don't count 2012 because that was a trade and it helps make my point, teams desperate for a QB will give up a lot to get in this spot. 

 

Like you, I've followed the draft forever, if I had to pick the #1 thing that I have been the most jealous about over the years is we don't pick super high that often but more on point we aren't picking that high in ballyhooed drafts for QBs.

 

On the QB thread during the season, I would say I am not thinking of Caleb and Drake because its unrealistic to get either one.  We wouldn't be picking high.  But on the wild off chance we do, we got to pull the trigger.

 

Now we are likely here.  IMO its insane to pass over the opportunity to take a QB high unless you have super conviction in Sam or one of those next tier QBs. 

 

I know some fans here feel different but its a vocal minority judging by fan polls, talk radio, etc.  Not one person who covers this team thinks they should forgo QB -- and among the mock draft types they all have us going QB now that they might be picking 2nd.  The conventional take here is to go QB. 

 

If the GM goes unconventional he better nail it, otherwise its a fatal mistake that should cost them his job.  Frankly, I am not that worried about it though. I'd be very surprised if they did something differently.

 

59 minutes ago, Going Commando said:

 

 

We have never had a natural pick high enough in a draft to get a prospect like Maye in the first year of a new regime with a clean slate.  That alignment of the stars just doesn't happen for a franchise like us, which is why I'm still expecting to pull off a disastrous win against the Cowboys tomorrow, or for something crazy that has New England finish in front of us.  But if it did happen, and we spit on the hand of fate that's trying to lift us up, then we deserve to stay in the gutter.

 

It's one of the points of a PFF guy who was on talk radio this week -- this is a golden opportunity with a new GM, new HC to start with a QB that they both like and get on the same page.  They love it from that context.

 

lol, I know what you mean about it being too good to be true that something might screw it up.  How many times have they drafted high when I expected them to go QB and it happens to be in a really good draft for QBs?  Never.  It would feel almost surreal for me.

 

16 minutes ago, Anselmheifer said:

Let’s hope that the Ravens rest Lamar Jackson today.

 

They are

Edited January 6 by Skinsinparadise

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, MisterPinstripe said:

I lovr reading your posts and the insight you provide, but I disagree with this one point. If you are at 2 and take a swing and miss its more understandable. It happens a lot, QBs are hard to find. However if you tried back from 2 and one of the 2 QBs that were available at your pick are great it is WAY more damning and hard to come back from.

 

Yep.  It's not lost on the world that you can swing and miss at the QB spot even if you are picking super high.  

 

If a dude like Drake Maye with that level of hype and pedigree still actually misses -- it happens, people would see it as swing and a miss so take another swing in the near future.

 

If conversely, you pass on Drake Maye in spite of the hype and pedigree and he indeed as many say is Justin Herbet or Josh Allen Part 2 and you miss on your swing lower in the draft -- that's much worse.  It's worse by a mile.

 

If you take friends to Chris Ruth's steakhouse for a meal and it disappoints -- then heck stuff happens but the intention was clear to swing for the fences.  It's forgivable. If you instead have a coupon for Ruth's but tell your friends heck lets go to Outback instead and the meal disappoints while one of our mutual friends raves about the meal they just had at Ruth's -- that's egg on your face. 

 

And that goes double when you don't have to trade up.  When you trade up, you better get it right.  But if you don't have to trade up -- its like someone handing you a free meal at Ruths.  You take it.  Assuming you like Ruths.

 

 

Edited January 6 by Skinsinparadise

[DiscoBob]

10 hours ago, Conn said:

Kind of a weird thing to say about a kid who doesn’t have those sorts of off field concerns. Stuff people are concerned about with him are more ephemeral personality questions—ego, vanity, leadership, toughness, entitlement. Impossible to tell from the outside but none of his issues are about getting into trouble or hanging around the wrong people. 

 

It wasn't directed at him personally, nor was it very serious... more of general comment based on the tendency of NFL players to get in trouble with the law

[philibusters]

Roughly three options

1.  Take QB:  By far the most likely

2.  Take non-QB:  Very unlikely

3.  Trade down: Unlikely

 

If I am a GM, I am probably taking Drake Maye.  If not I am trading down.  There is no shot I am taking a non-QB player at #2 given what I could get in a trade down.  How confident am I that taking a QB will be better than trading down.  Not confident.   However, the payoff on the QB is so much bigger potentially.

 

This is the analogy to me:

 

1.  Take QB:  In real people terms, its equal to maybe having a 40% chance at winning a million dollars

2.  Trading down:  In real people terms, its equal to say having an 80% chance of winning a quarter of a million dollars

3.  Taking best non-QB player:  Having an 85% chance of winning  $125,000

 

Look given to that there is a 60% chance you don't win anything in that analogy, there is close to a 48% chance you come out better trading down (80% of 60%=48%) and a 12% chance you come out the same meaning if you compared trading down to taking a QB:  You only do better 40% of the time taking the QB, 48% of the time trading down, and 12% of the time you lose no matter what.  However if you win on taking the QB, you win a million dollars whereas if you win trading down you win only 1/4th of that.  So if you win you win big taking the QB. Translating that to the NFL, if you win big on QB, you set yourself up to be good for 10 to 15 years.

 

That is kind of how I see the issue.  If you hate getting nothing and losing out, trading down or just taking the best player is the best choice.  But in terms of maximizing value, you got to go for the QB.

 

Obviously this analogy has flaws, but its gives a basic picture of how I am seeing things.

[Skinsinparadise]

2 hours ago, DWinzit said:

The first pick will be of extreme importance. The thing is, all of the QB's, are rolls of the dice and we can identify flaws with each of them. We can only hope they can build a great support system around them from coaching to weapons to protection that fits their strengths and the vision of the new regime.

 

If it is a trade down, a good thing is even if the QB doesn't prove legit, the other picks will be looked at as building blocks for the future

 

We've had good rosters before without the QB.  It's still nowhere land.  It's the fast track to 8-8 which ironically makes it harder to find the QB.

Edited January 6 by Skinsinparadise

[woodpecker]

1 hour ago, Anselmheifer said:

Let’s hope that the Ravens rest Lamar Jackson today.

Yes he’s sitting though of course the ravens are good enough to win the game anyway.

[TheGoodBits]

1 hour ago, NYSkins21 said:

Is there any scenario in which we bypass this 1st round altogether? Trade the #2/#3 overall pick FOR:

•2nd/3rd this year 2024

•1st’s, 2nd’s, 3rd’s 2025

•1st’s, 2nd’s, 3rd’s 2026

 

Think about the haul we can get if we trade this years 2nd/3rd overall and not get a 2024 first rounder back. We’d be set up for rebuild success from this one pick.

 

Thoughts?

Highly doubt it BUT I’ve had Madden fantasies of my team doing something like this. It makes most sense if you gamble that your trade partner will fail to be competitive in future years, therefore your acquired future picks will be high. See: Bears/Panthers trade last year. 
 

If Harris is really trying to implement “the process” here and setting the team up to be competitive no sooner than 2-3 years from now, figuring out a way to earn multiple top 5 or top 10 picks in 2025-26 drafts would be a great way to do it. 

[AlvinWaltonIsMyBoy]

1 hour ago, Anselmheifer said:

Do we have any idea what the injury report is for tomorrow and who is likely not to play?

[Conn]

46 minutes ago, DiscoBob said:

 

It wasn't directed at him personally, nor was it very serious... more of general comment based on the tendency of NFL players to get in trouble with the law

There is no tendency, NFL players have a way lower incidence rate with the law than the average American population. When it happens it’s just high profile. It’s an ugly stereotype. 

Edited January 6 by Conn

[RWJ]

8 minutes ago, AlvinWaltonIsMyBoy said:

[Skinsinparadise]

48 minutes ago, philibusters said:

Roughly three options

1.  Take QB:  By far the most likely

2.  Take non-QB:  Very unlikely

3.  Trade down: Unlikely

 

If I am a GM, I am probably taking Drake Maye.  If not I am trading down.  There is no shot I am taking a non-QB player at #2 given what I could get in a trade down.  How confident am I that taking a QB will be better than trading down.  Not confident.   However, the payoff on the QB is so much bigger potentially.

 

This is the analogy to me:

 

1.  Take QB:  In real people terms, its equal to maybe having a 40% chance at winning a million dollars

2.  Trading down:  In real people terms, its equal to say having an 80% chance of winning a quarter of a million dollars

3.  Taking best non-QB player:  Having an 85% chance of winning  $125,000

 

Look given to that there is a 60% chance you don't win anything in that analogy, there is close to a 48% chance you come out better trading down (80% of 60%=48%) and a 12% chance you come out the same meaning if you compared trading down to taking a QB:  You only do better 40% of the time taking the QB, 48% of the time trading down, and 12% of the time you lose no matter what.  However if you win on taking the QB, you win a million dollars whereas if you win trading down you win only 1/4th of that.  So if you win you win big taking the QB. Translating that to the NFL, if you win big on QB, you set yourself up to be good for 10 to 15 years.

 

That is kind of how I see the issue.  If you hate getting nothing and losing out, trading down or just taking the best player is the best choice.  But in terms of maximizing value, you got to go for the QB.

 

Obviously this analogy has flaws, but its gives a basic picture of how I am seeing things.

 

Agree in general. 

 

But I'd add there is a medium pay off potentially, too from swinging for the fences.  Maybe it ends up like a Kyler Murray, a swing and not a full miss -- 2nd tier QB so the Qb taken high isn't a million dollars but turns into the $250,000. 

 

You can argue the higher end pedigree QB as a miss might have a better shot at being a 2nd tier NFL QB than trading down and banking on a 2nd tier college QB turning into a 2nd tier NFL one.  Especially in a case like Drake Maye where arguably he has a high floor.

Edited January 6 by Skinsinparadise

[woodpecker]

12 minutes ago, Conn said:

There is no tendency, NFL players have a way lower incidence rate with the law than the average American population. When it happens it’s just high profile. It’s an ugly stereotype. 

Yeah thanks for bringing that up. That comment had rubbed me wrong because it assumed the friends/family would be a bad element. Just as likely that the people around him are a net positive which based on his success so far is actually more likely the case. Sorry to sound lecturey

[skinsfan66]

2 hours ago, Going Commando said:

 

Why does picking top three give you a pass to punt on getting a QB?  That actually makes it worse, because you're punting on the opportunity to get the best QB prospects in the class.

 

Everyone has to build a team every year, and that process starts with answering the question "who is my QB?"

 

Getting a guy who you can answer that question with each winter is the key to competing in the NFL.  It doesn't matter if you don't love the guy unconditionally, you have to have that answer.  I don't really understand your basis for thinking it's OK to pass on getting a QB when you don't have one.  Do you think it's not worth it for everyone outside of the Chiefs, Bengals, Chargers and Bills to compete each year?

If you have 1 of those 4 QB's there is no question, because they know who your QB is. But only 1 was picked with a top 3 pick. Too many to list the failures of being picked top 3.  Mahomes has the rings, Lamar Jackson MVP, Jalen Hurts, Justin Herbert, Josh Allen. 6th pick and down. That alone gives a new staff a option to punt with a team with many holes to fill. Carolina might have wished they punted last year? Houston was a winner. Options, this team has many.

[mistertim]

2 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

We've had good rosters before without the QB.  It's still nowhere land.  It's the fast track to 8-8 which ironically makes it harder to find the QB.

 

This is my feeling as well. I have no interest in building up a roster to the point where we're continuing to be a middle of the pack team. I'd much rather take a big swing on a QB at 2, have him bust, and then try again in a couple of years with another likely high pick than go with more "safe" picks at other positions who will probably, along with more journeyman or mediocre QBs, help get us right back into mediocrity and sit there for another 5-10 years.

 

(This is not just directed at you, but in general). I've also seen lots of people talk about how much we or the FO "loves" or "likes" QB prospects, which is vague. So I'm curious what everyone's quantitative take would be with regards to grades and relative positional value. If they have MHJ graded as a 95 and <insert top QB available at 2> rated at 90, do they go with QB? To me that's an absolute no-brainer. But then it gets trickier when the QB grades goes down. What if it's 95/85? Does QB still take the prize? To me, definitely, but others may differ.

 

What grade would you consider a "love" grade, and what grade would you consider a "like" grade?

Edited January 6 by mistertim

[HTTRDynasty]

2 hours ago, philibusters said:

Roughly three options

1.  Take QB:  By far the most likely

2.  Take non-QB:  Very unlikely

3.  Trade down: Unlikely

 

If I am a GM, I am probably taking Drake Maye.  If not I am trading down.  There is no shot I am taking a non-QB player at #2 given what I could get in a trade down.  How confident am I that taking a QB will be better than trading down.  Not confident.   However, the payoff on the QB is so much bigger potentially.

 

This is the analogy to me:

 

1.  Take QB:  In real people terms, its equal to maybe having a 40% chance at winning a million dollars

2.  Trading down:  In real people terms, its equal to say having an 80% chance of winning a quarter of a million dollars

3.  Taking best non-QB player:  Having an 85% chance of winning  $125,000

 

Look given to that there is a 60% chance you don't win anything in that analogy, there is close to a 48% chance you come out better trading down (80% of 60%=48%) and a 12% chance you come out the same meaning if you compared trading down to taking a QB:  You only do better 40% of the time taking the QB, 48% of the time trading down, and 12% of the time you lose no matter what.  However if you win on taking the QB, you win a million dollars whereas if you win trading down you win only 1/4th of that.  So if you win you win big taking the QB. Translating that to the NFL, if you win big on QB, you set yourself up to be good for 10 to 15 years.

 

That is kind of how I see the issue.  If you hate getting nothing and losing out, trading down or just taking the best player is the best choice.  But in terms of maximizing value, you got to go for the QB.

 

Obviously this analogy has flaws, but its gives a basic picture of how I am seeing things.

I like this analogy, and the conclusion is fairly obvious (or maybe that’s just the Investment Analyst in me).

 

It’s just a simple projection of Expected Value (EV):

1) Take QB: 40% x $1mm = $400k EV

2) Trade Down: 80% x $250k = $200k EV

3) Take Non-QB: 85% x $125k = $106k EV

 

In the scenario above, your EV is doubled by taking the QB. 
 

Now, some would say your chance of hitting on a QB at #2 is probably closer to 25% than 40%.  In that case, you are STILL ahead of the Trade Down case by $50k. The Take Non-QB case doesn’t even bear mentioning. 
 

It’s just a no brainer to take the swing at QB given the potential payoff and I would hope we have an analytics staff in place that can do the basic math to understand this. 

 

30 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

This is my feeling as well. I have no interest in building up a roster to the point where we're continuing to be a middle of the pack team. I'd much rather take a big swing on a QB at 2, have him bust, and then try again in a couple of years with another likely high pick than go with more "safe" picks at other positions who will probably, along with more journeyman or mediocre QBs, help get us right back into mediocrity and sit there for another 5-10 years.

 

(This is not just directed at you, but in general). I've also seen lots of people talk about how much we or the FO "loves" or "likes" QB prospects, which is vague. So I'm curious what everyone's quantitative take would be with regards to grades and relative positional value. If they have MHJ graded as a 95 and <insert top QB available at 2> rated at 90, do they go with QB? To me that's an absolute no-brainer. But then it gets trickier when the QB grades goes down. What if it's 95/85? Does QB still take the prize? To me, definitely, but others may differ.

 

What grade would you consider a "love" grade, and what grade would you consider a "like" grade?

It depends on what the grades represent relative to the rest of the league. To simplify, I look at it more as percentage chance to become a top X QB. For example does a 90 grade represent a 50% chance of becoming a top 10 QB?  Does an 80 grade represent a 30% chance?

 

As I mentioned above, it’s a no brainer to me to take the QB even if you view the chance he’ll be a top QB at ~25%.