Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 73

Thread: Rate your draft

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    7,968
    Quote Originally Posted by tp13baby View Post
    B+ for Denver.
    Day 1 A-Jeudy is a hell of a pick, that takes away attention from Noah and Sutton. Best route runner in the draft.

    Day 2 B- Hamler gives Denver something we didnít have, questionable hands though. Cush can be penciled in at C from day 1 allowing Glasgow to be G where he was better at. A CB that I know Mel said will be a reserve, but from a system look he fits and we need someone who can play on the other side of Bouye. Agim doesnít have to come in immediately but shows pass rushing potential.

    Day 3 A- I loved Denverís day three picks. Potentially a TE that can play along Fant with athleticism. Strnad that can be a cover LB but isnít forced into big playing time day 1. Muti a nice backup interior lineman. Tuszka who has the potential to be a quality rusher.
    You will come to love Hamler. Kid just makes plays.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Rhode Island
    Posts
    34,015
    I like what the Pats did positionally. They have a roster with a lot of needs but they also have a tough depth chart to crack at a lot of those needs.

    People talk about how we need a WR. We kind of do. But not just "a" WR. We need a "a top" WR. Our depth chart is Julian Edelman, Mohammed, Sanu, N'Keal Harry, Jacobi Meyers, Damiere Byrd, Marqise Lee, Gunner Olszewski. If you look at that, Edelman is a very good football player but weak as a #1 option. Sanu struggled last year, but with a full year in the system and hopefully not being injured and missing all practice time as he picks up a new team, you'd hope he can be his ATL self. That's a good football player, but probably more #3 than #2. N'Keal Harry missed training camp and the first 10 weeks last year. Came back and got some role but never got on the same page. You'd think he grows on his role this year, but even as a #3 he's unproven.

    So based on what I said there, WR is definitely a need. But as a top 3 WR. If you're drafting anyone lower than those 3, then it gets tougher. Their depth chart from #4 WR on down is actually very solid. So unless you're drafting someone who's immediately better than Edelman/Sanu or what you expect Harry to be, he's not exactly "filling a need" and he's exaggerating a tight roster crunch further.

    The Pats have a lot of positions like this where the depth chart is well stocked, but lacking at the top. Lots of positional needs in one sense but few available roster spots, if that makes sense.

    I thought the Pats did a good job of targeting players with specific paths to roster spots.

    Dugger was surprising so high as a small school guy. Looking into him, he was 5'11" coming out of HS and only 170 lbs. Now, he's 6'2" and a chiseled 220 lbs. He was a late bloomer physically so the guy you're getting now definitely has an NFL body and athletic ability compared to the scrawny high schooler that was forced into D2. That part I'm not worried about. But how does his football acumen and game skills translate against better competition. He looked great in the senior bowl which was a glimpse. For the Pats, Patrick Chung plays a very important role at SS. He's been one of our best players since coming back, but he's shown signs of age related decline and some issues staying healthy as he goes into his 30s. A replacement is probably needed to be ready to go by next year. I would have loved McKinney, but to be fair he doesn't have the psychical traits Dugger does. Delpit was a bigger names but he can't tackle so he wasn't on my radar. Jeremy Chinn had an interesting athletic profile but seems to struggle showing natural coverage ability. Dugger seems to show those skills, albeit against lower competition. Chinn was a guy I liked in round 2 though for sure. And then beyond him K'Von Wallace in the 3rd/4th round was a target I liked for the role. Seems Dugger ranked higher though on most boards despite small school.

    Josh Uche was a guy I kind of looked over because he was listed as an EDGE. He's too small to be a full time edge for BB. But apparently he also has some ILB skills and raw ability. Seems to fit into a Jamie Collins type profile. That makes a lot more sense. The Pats have Hightower at LB and then Juwhaun Bentley is a solid thumper. So Uche can be more of a package player to start as he fine tunes his skill set. Projects to be a good scheme fit for us with his tools. I think there's lots of upside here.

    Anfernee Jennings is more of a boring pick. Those guys above I think have upside to be great players. Jennings to me, not so much. He projects as a rotational EDGE that makes his contributions on the boring side - setting the edge, playing the run, being disciplined. At DE the Pats have John Simon (a solid all around player but only a rotational guy), Deatrich Wise (been a situational pass rusher for 3 years and is fine but not expecting anymore) and Chase Winovich (played well as a situational pass rusher last year - hoping for a year 2 leap). Behind them there's Shalique Calhoun and Brandon Copeland, each of whom have played scrap snaps on D and been core 4 STers. So it's a crowded depth chart, but needs guys near the top of it. Simmons seems to have a strong skill set as a base end setting the edge than anyone of those guys so he should be able to carve out a role, albeit not a particularly glamorous one. But hey, someone's good do it. Simmons also has a little off the line LB experience but doesn't seem likely to do that in the NFL.

    Next were the 2 TEs, Devin Asiasi and Dalton Keene. Not going to lie, not sure they were the top TEs on everyone's board. The local reporters have been on Keene for a month now. Athletically and tape wise they had him pegged as a tremendous fit. He's kind of a move, H-back type. Asiasi is a little more traditional but needs to round out the edges of playing in-line. This was a huge need to I like doubling up. Kmet was off the board in the second as the top TE taken and then NE took Asiasi at #91 next. That kicked off a stretch of 8 TEs taken from #91 to #136. So it seems they timed the board right of when to take their guys and trade ups make sense in that way IMO. We'll see if they got the right guys.

    Next NE took a kicker in the 5th. It is what it is. We needed one. Probably a round two early but their attitude on special teams has been that for a virtual guaranteed roster spot like that just make sure you get the top guy on your board. From the 5th round on you're talking about a fight for a roster spot most times except for these positions. So just get the top one.

    Then NE took 3 OL players in the 6th/7th. One center, one guard and one tackle. OL on paper is actually a pretty strong unit but with qualifiers. Isaiah Wynn looked really good at LT last year. But there were injury questions coming out of Georgia. Then he missed his rookie year. Then he missed a stretch of last year. So there are real durability concerns. Thuney is an all pro LG, but is on his bloated franchise tender. Could still be traded for a pick or even allowed to walk next year if he's not extended. David Andrews is a solid center but was just cleared to play after blood clots in his lungs last year and is a FA after the season. Shaq Mason was an awesome RG but seemed to be playing hurt last year - wasn't as athletic on his pulls which is his strength. Marcus Cannon remains a solid RT but has had problems getting nicked up and is aging - likely to be a cap cut next year. So the starting OL is strong on paper but it's easy to see it springing leaks everywhere by week 8 too. So depth is needed. Behind those guys, we had an OT who missed all of last year as a 3rd rounder, a guard who missed all of last year as a 4th rounder and then another guard/tackle each that we traded for as depth to get through the year. Now we add these guys to mix. Good spot to use the late round picks to add competition.

    They also used a 6th on a special teams LB that maybe can contribute as a thumper even though undersized - Elandon Roberts type.

    All in all, I like the positions they took. A few cases where they maybe went off the board a little but you gotta trust professional teams over internet mock drafts to a degree. That's more explaining the reasoning/logic behind picks then grading. Idk what that comes out to... C? B?


    NE Patriots Forum HOF (Class of 2011)

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Annapolis MD
    Posts
    17,306
    I give the Redskins a B. Chase Young pick was a no brainer. Gibson should work a McCaffrey/Curtis Samuel hybrid. Charles is a good value pick and should be well supported by the Redskins and held accountable. AGG is going to be a good receiver. After that, we took a whole lot of depth guys, who are similar to who we already have on the roster, instead of taking some chances on some boom or bust players.

    I'm also glad we didn't reach for a TE just to draft one. For as great as this WR class was, the TE class was terrible. No point in spending a mid-round pick on a guy who would normally be a late rounder in a normal draft. We ended up with Thad Moss as an UDFA, and with the bloated TE depth charts around the league, the chance to get a starter still is pretty good, and that's waht the Redskins need. Not more depth guys there.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    20,237
    Quote Originally Posted by SiteWolf View Post
    I believe it's a 7-round record
    I was told the Vikings were stupid for having all those picks, but for one, the Vikings have fewer than normal guys under contract and two, Spielman likes to us late picks (especially this year) to prioritize guys who may otherwise be UDFAs he'd have to compete with other teams for. The 2 trades he did make netted him 3 higher 2021 picks so he already has 12 in 2021 (with a compensatory pick or two likely added)

    I loved their Day 1 and 2, although I thought they'd move around some in round 3. Day 3 was something of a head scratcher just from the standpoint of coming into it with 13 picks...and never trading up. Maybe when they tried, they couldn't or it was too rich, I don't know....but the guys they picked are growing on me (although I really wanted Quez Watkins!)

    Given the odd offseason, they supposedly prioritized 'clean' players, guys they were comfortable with medicals and character issues....so maybe that impacted some trade opportunities and picks.....and after all, they scouted every player more than I scouted all of them put together. I'd have preferred another WR, but they signed a solid one in UDFA.

    B+/A- for the Vikings from me
    They are stupid.

    Either they only roster about half those players which makes all those picks an utter waste, or they roster the majority of them which means they will have awful depth... Either way it's incredibly stupid.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    16,687
    I never really do the ratings thing because I donít watch a ton of college . I say this every year . I basically just go by the few games Iíve watched and reading draft profile after draft profile . Dallas and Baltimore seem to be grading out with the best drafts .. but like I said what do I know . This DE from Utah really seems like a steal from what Iím reading . Consensus All American in the 5th round at a premier position just because he had a bad 40 at the combine?

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Annapolis MD
    Posts
    17,306
    Quote Originally Posted by surf and turf View Post
    I never really do the ratings thing because I donít watch a ton of college . I say this every year . I basically just go by the few games Iíve watched and reading draft profile after draft profile . Dallas and Baltimore seem to be grading out with the best drafts .. but like I said what do I know . This DE from Utah really seems like a steal from what Iím reading . Consensus All American in the 5th round at a premier position just because he had a bad 40 at the combine?
    40 time and speed at the next level is something to look at. Not all athletes are competing on the same level in college, and the competition really heats up at the next level. Athleticism and speed is something you can't teach, and that is why a lot of stock is put into the 40 times.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    16,687
    Quote Originally Posted by ThomasTomasz View Post
    40 time and speed at the next level is something to look at. Not all athletes are competing on the same level in college, and the competition really heats up at the next level. Athleticism and speed is something you can't teach, and that is why a lot of stock is put into the 40 times.
    Yeah but he ran faster 40 times at his pro day and a couple other verified workouts . But to me the 10 yard dash is whatís important to a DE .

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    7,887
    I would give Dallas an A for their draft. The only reason itís not an A+ is because they needed an edge rusher more than a WR and Chaisson was still on the board at 17. Canít argue with BPA available though when it comes to Lamb. Every player they picked had a higher grade than where they selected him except for the QB in the 7th. You canít really knock any team for their 7th round pick. Even Reggie Robinson had a higher grade than where they picked him. There were at least 2 CBís still on the board though with higher grades than Robinson. Those guys play in the slot though and Dallas needed an outside CB so they selected Robinson. Those are the only reasons the Cowboys donít get an A+ from me.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    86,866
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.B View Post
    I would give Dallas an A for their draft. The only reason itís not an A+ is because they needed an edge rusher more than a WR and Chaisson was still on the board at 17. Canít argue with BPA available though when it comes to Lamb. Every player they picked had a higher grade than where they selected him except for the QB in the 7th. You canít really knock any team for their 7th round pick. Even Reggie Robinson had a higher grade than where they picked him. There were at least 2 CBís still on the board though with higher grades than Robinson. Those guys play in the slot though and Dallas needed an outside CB so they selected Robinson. Those are the only reasons the Cowboys donít get an A+ from me.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    They certainly had a good draft and I agree with your assessment of the Lamb over Chaisson pick. Chaisson would have made a bigger difference IMO.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    In a crib
    Posts
    35,519
    Quote Originally Posted by BDawk4Prez View Post
    They certainly had a good draft and I agree with your assessment of the Lamb over Chaisson pick. Chaisson would have made a bigger difference IMO.
    Definitely agreed

    Your baby can't do this

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    58,751
    I'm seeing a lot of "experts" panning the Steelers draft because we didn't fill the "need" of RB, LT, NT.

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    11,927
    Quote Originally Posted by BDawk4Prez View Post
    They certainly had a good draft and I agree with your assessment of the Lamb over Chaisson pick. Chaisson would have made a bigger difference IMO.
    Would he? Picking Lamb also ensured he didn't become an Eagle
    gotta love 'referential' treatment

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    86,866
    Quote Originally Posted by SiteWolf View Post
    Would he? Picking Lamb also ensured he didn't become an Eagle
    Well that's a silly tactic. The issue with Dallas was QB play (against better teams) and the defense.

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    11,927
    Quote Originally Posted by BDawk4Prez View Post
    Well that's a silly tactic. The issue with Dallas was QB play (against better teams) and the defense.
    Didn't call it a (Goedert) tactic, called it an ancillary result
    gotta love 'referential' treatment

  15. #45
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    [emoji288]
    Posts
    17,073
    Quote Originally Posted by SiteWolf View Post
    Would he? Picking Lamb also ensured he didn't become an Eagle
    The Cowboys ensuring that Lamb wouldn't become an Eagles didn't annoy me as much as the Cardinals ensuring Isaiah Simmons wouldn't become an Eagle.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •