2019 NFL draft where the jags pick at 32;) (Update: pick at 7)

[DuvalsKing]

The bigger question for me is after the Senior Bowl who is still cool with taking Daniel Jones number 7?

[JaguarCrazy2832]

1 hour ago, DuvalsKing said:

The bigger question for me is after the Senior Bowl who is still cool with taking Daniel Jones number 7?

I haven't been paying attention to the Senior Bowl at all so I don't know which way you're asking that question. Has he been terrible or great?

[DuvalsKing]

15 minutes ago, JaguarCrazy2832 said:

I haven't been paying attention to the Senior Bowl at all so I don't know which way you're asking that question. Has he been terrible or great?

Let’s just say Matt Miller had Jones as the second best QB going into the senior bowl.. and he wasn’t as glowing coming out. Not saying Miller is some kind of a guru analysis but several scouts weren’t sold on senior bowl appearance but here it is.

 

Matt Miller:

Daniel Jones had a reputation in scouting circles as a player who would show off in Mobile with excellent accuracy, timing, mechanics and technique after he came out of Duke head coach David Cutcliffe's offense. Even though he earned the game's MVP honors, he failed to hit those marks.

Jones' arm strength looked less than impressive once exposed to poor weather. His accuracy was notably off, especially on back-to-back interceptions that were just misses during Tuesday's practice.

Jones had some QB1 hype at times this season, but he left Mobile as the second-best quarterback in attendance behind Lock.

Everyone wants to watch quarterbacks in the Senior Bowl practices and game. The two who helped themselves the most this week both came from the SEC.

Missouri's Lock left the week as the top-ranked senior quarterback, overcoming Jones for that prized spot. Lock's athleticism, arm talent and moxie make him a potential top-10 pick in the upcoming draft. It's very easy to envision a scenario where the Denver Broncos or Jacksonville Jaguars fall in love with his tools.

Auburn's Jarrett Stidham had Round 1 potential heading into the 2018 season, but a bad supporting cast in his final collegiate year—his offensive line and skill players offered almost no help—caused a poor statistical showing and led to inconsistent play. Stidham's tools are pretty, though, and NFL teams could realize he made the most of a bad situation but is still a viable starting quarterback prospect.

Stidham might not hit Round 1 like Lock, but he helped himself a lot throughout the season.

 

Edited January 27, 2019 by DuvalsKing

[JaguarCrazy2832]

I don't like to put too much stock into the Senior Bowl when someone had years of coaching and tape to view but with that said, I do love it as a tool to make you go back and watch someone more that killed it and came out of no where. 

[.Buzz]

Lock is such a polarizing guy.

Tools for days, think his floor is higher than Gabbert easily, but I'm not sure what to think of his ceiling. Not as much of a freak arm strength wise as Mahomes, gunslinger mentality...

Idk what to think honestly.

[JaguarCrazy2832]

9 hours ago, DuvalsKing said:

Let’s just say Matt Miller had Jones as the second best QB going into the senior bowl.. and he wasn’t as glowing coming out. Not saying Miller is some kind of a guru analysis but several scouts weren’t sold on senior bowl appearance but here it is.

 

Matt Miller:

Daniel Jones had a reputation in scouting circles as a player who would show off in Mobile with excellent accuracy, timing, mechanics and technique after he came out of Duke head coach David Cutcliffe's offense. Even though he earned the game's MVP honors, he failed to hit those marks.

Jones' arm strength looked less than impressive once exposed to poor weather. His accuracy was notably off, especially on back-to-back interceptions that were just misses during Tuesday's practice.

Jones had some QB1 hype at times this season, but he left Mobile as the second-best quarterback in attendance behind Lock.

Everyone wants to watch quarterbacks in the Senior Bowl practices and game. The two who helped themselves the most this week both came from the SEC.

Missouri's Lock left the week as the top-ranked senior quarterback, overcoming Jones for that prized spot. Lock's athleticism, arm talent and moxie make him a potential top-10 pick in the upcoming draft. It's very easy to envision a scenario where the Denver Broncos or Jacksonville Jaguars fall in love with his tools.

Auburn's Jarrett Stidham had Round 1 potential heading into the 2018 season, but a bad supporting cast in his final collegiate year—his offensive line and skill players offered almost no help—caused a poor statistical showing and led to inconsistent play. Stidham's tools are pretty, though, and NFL teams could realize he made the most of a bad situation but is still a viable starting quarterback prospect.

Stidham might not hit Round 1 like Lock, but he helped himself a lot throughout the season.

 

I'm sorry, as an Auburn fan I watched almost every game of his this year and last and while his assets were not as good this year as compared to last year, especially at RB with Pettway and Kerryon both gone, he made several "WTF were you thinking there" type plays. That Tennessee game was painful to watch. He had 1 INT that even Bortles wouldn't have made. He has tools and can make some plays with his legs on 3rd and 7 but to take him in round 1 would be a mistake. 

[DuvalsKing]

10 hours ago, JaguarCrazy2832 said:

I'm sorry, as an Auburn fan I watched almost every game of his this year and last and while his assets were not as good this year as compared to last year, especially at RB with Pettway and Kerryon both gone, he made several "WTF were you thinking there" type plays. That Tennessee game was painful to watch. He had 1 INT that even Bortles wouldn't have made. He has tools and can make some plays with his legs on 3rd and 7 but to take him in round 1 would be a mistake. 

I didn’t take the article as sayin Stidham should be a round 1 pick. Not a chance in hell I’d pick him with the 7th overall pick either. I just took it as Miller saying he was pretty high on Jones going in to the point where he’d draft him round 1 and he came away saying Stidham performed just as well if not better and that Miller isn’t too sure he’d take Jones round 1 after the senior bowl.

[Tugboat]

On 27/01/2019 at 3:41 PM, JaguarCrazy2832 said:

I'm sorry, as an Auburn fan I watched almost every game of his this year and last and while his assets were not as good this year as compared to last year, especially at RB with Pettway and Kerryon both gone, he made several "WTF were you thinking there" type plays. That Tennessee game was painful to watch. He had 1 INT that even Bortles wouldn't have made. He has tools and can make some plays with his legs on 3rd and 7 but to take him in round 1 would be a mistake. 

Yeah.  Not a chance i'd even think about Stidham anywhere near the 1st.  But i don't think that's what was being suggested at all.

I think it's just saying Stidham came into the season under hype that with a strong year of progress, he could start to work his way into that round 1 conversation.  But then he had a kinda crap season instead.  So that's obviously nixed.

As it stands, he's what you said he is.  A guy with some interesting tools and upside, who needs work.  He's the sort of project that makes sense to me more Round 3/4 range...maybe Round 2 if a team absolutely falls in love with what he could become in a better fitting system and with some work.  But that's roughly where i think he's being discussed at this point.

 

In that respect, i think it's essentially just suggesting Stidham probably at least held serve if not helped himself a bit on his Rd2/3/4ish draft stock at the SrBowl, whereas someone like Jones maybe sank down toward him a bit.  Some people pumping the brakes on the runaway Daniel Jones as a high 1st rounder train, after seeing some of the "flaws" on tape look even more pronounced at times over the Senior Bowl week.

Think Will Grier was probably the QB who did the most damage to his stock at the Senior Bowl though.  Man he looked full value for the concerns you have on tape and coming out of that system.  Yikes.

 

All of these guys have put at least a handful of kinda "WTF were you thinking there???" type plays down on tape.  That's sorta the issue.  They've all got tools and some upside, but some real knocks on them too.

Edited January 28, 2019 by Tugboat

[Tugboat]

On 26/01/2019 at 8:12 AM, .Buzz said:

Haskins has been viewed by many as a legit blue Chip QB worth trading up for.

Just because this draft isn't last year's and it doesn't have an Andrew Luck doesn't mean it's bad or there isn't legit franchise QB caliber guys. If they like a guy, go up and get him. It'd be ridiculous not to if they do indeed really like a guy, but especially if the guy they really like is Haskins who has been mocked/viewed by many as a top 5 lock as of late...

We aren't going anywhere until we get a guy. Just because you seem to not like anyone doesn't mean no one is worth trading up/going out and getting. Same stuff was being said with Watson/Mahomes draft...doesn't look like either of those teams are looking back in frustration for trading up/getting "their guy" in a "weak QB draft". May not have been top 5 to trade up for, but Haskins is also viewed as a prospect in a higher light than both of them were coming out and deservedly so at this point. But even the Chiefs traded their late 1+next year's first and a 3rd to get their guy.

 

I do like Haskins.  I just don't like him that much.  You're brushing off the bolded like it doesn't matter, but it tends to be a pretty big difference in reality between moving up into the teens vs moving up into the Top-5, from an already value-laden 7th overall pick plus a future 1st plus+++.  Even then, you're cherry picking a couple 10th/12th success story scenarios, when there's a laundry list a mile long of instances that were actually disastrous.  Using exceptions to prove the rule doesn't convince me.  I've seen too much other the more negative outcome with the Jaguars to just flippantly brush that risk aside on a 1-year college starter.

I get that taking a QB is always a gamble against the odds, and at some point you've just gotta take the plunge.  That's just where i think you have to be extremely discerning in the shots you do take.  If you take your shot on a guy this year, you're not going to get another shot for 3-4 years.  Especially if you're coughing up the king's ransom of draft capital to move up inside the Top-5 to do it.

 

That's where i have 2 issues with saying "we're not going anywhere until we get "The Guy".

1)We just came within half a game of going somewhere with an absolute duck of a QB under center.  A good QB isn't an automatic ticket to the Playoffs or Super Bowl either.  Plenty of teams with good or even franchise QBs missed, and bad QBs made it in.  There are only a few HoF track guys who seem to be any kind of guarantee of perennial playoff appearances...and we're in a year where there are probably going to be two legitimate Super Bowl winning QBs available as FAs.

but more importantly...

2)If you're taking that sort of long view of the QB position...what's 1 more year in the grand scheme of things?  Our dynasty gets postponed for a year?  There will be other QBs this year, next year, and the year after that too.  There are always more chances to take a shot on a guy.

 

That's where i think it fades into a grey area between getting, "Your Guy" vs "The Only Guy This Year".  You'd better be darn sure it's the former, because the latter tends to be where mistakes get made as desperation and impatience creep in.

I'd guess that's where the line in the sand is between us on Haskins.  And that's fine.  If you want Haskins this year, it's almost certainly going to be whipped into a frenzy where that's what it'll take to get him in a year where he's the only guy really worthy of that conversation.  If you're absolutely convinced he's the guy who is going to carry this franchise on his shoulders for a decade and that's all it's about, pull the trigger.  If it has nothing to do with an itchy trigger finger and impatience in being unwilling to wait another second to try to get "The Guy".  I'm just not quite as convinced as you seem to be, or desperate to make it happen this draft if it's not there. 

And i don't think it's nearly as unanimous as you're making it sound, that everyone thinks a 1-year starter is the guy to sell the farm for.  Yes, plenty of people are on a runaway Haskins hype train and absolutely love the guy.  Plenty of others are more wary.  I just think there's more of a split than you're acknowledging, on a guy who has substantially less track record to go on than even "massive gambles" with later picks like Mahomes and Watson.

 

If Haskins is there at 7 and we get him, cool.  I'd certainly be excited.  There's more than enough to like there and think it could work out brilliantly.  Just think the lack of top guys in this draft makes that unlikely without a big trade-up, and i think that's where i tap out on "cost" and just start looking at other alternatives.

[.Buzz]

If that's what it takes and we think he is"the guy", which is the only way we'd do this...

Get it done.

[LinderFournette]

On 1/27/2019 at 6:32 AM, DuvalsKing said:

The bigger question for me is after the Senior Bowl who is still cool with taking Daniel Jones number 7?

thats a hard pass. its a clear 2 QB draft with 1 over-drafted guy(lock).  

[JaguarCrazy2832]

I want Haskins but trading up to 1 probably isn't in the cards

[Tugboat]

On 28/01/2019 at 6:54 PM, .Buzz said:

If that's what it takes and we think he is"the guy", which is the only way we'd do this...

Get it done.

I think Hays makes a terrific point about "offseason planning".  If you're going to hinge your entire plan for 2019 on going the Haskins route...it's really hard to do that unless you hold the 1st pick.  If you don't, there's a very real chance you get left with nothing if you can't make it happen on draft day.  You've kinda gotta make that FA Starter/Rookie Starter decision before the draft; before you know if you're going to be able to land Haskins or get stuck searching in that next tier for a starter, or rummaging around the leftovers of the free agent bin.

 

But i think the rest of his plan kinda highlights the problem with this strategy in terms of setting a rookie QB up for success.  You just give up so many draft assets that you have to look in the FA market to bolster our offensive supporting cast...and it's a really really bad year to be doing that.  It's a wasteland out there.

A receiving corps of Lee/Dede/Cole/Chark and John Brown isn't very good.  It's a collection of mediocre middling sort of guys who don't belong at the top of any good WR depth chart.  And Jared Cook may still be able to play, but him as a senior citizen and a collection of late round/UDFA guys isn't scaring anyone either.  I like Ingram and think he's an underrated all-around back, but doesn't seem like the best place to be spending a bunch of money to support a rookie.  However, the fact that RB is where Hays is spending that hypothetical money earmarked for "weapons" is telling i think.  This is a really cruddy WR/TE free agent crop.  There's just nothing really worth spending on.  What it does have, looks like a lot of quality RBs and an unusually strong QB free agent group with multiple bonafide starter caliber guys potentially up for auction.  Which...if you go all-in trading up for a QB like Haskins...doesn't really help you at all.

And that's not even addressing an OLine that would have a mid-round project who is a de facto rookie they didn't trust much, presumably starting at RT.  With...probably Shatley or Omameh or something trying to bandaid the RG spot?  That's not a very good OLine, even if Cam comes back 100% at LT.

That's not the kind of situation a 1-year college starter rookie QB walks into and is likely to thrive in.  But if you have to spend all your draft capital moving up to make sure you get Haskins so you can plan your offseason accordingly...that's kind what you're left with.  And without a top pick to address the issue next year either.

It's the catch-22 of the whole situation.  Because we don't really have a viable stopgap starter on the roster...it's going to make it really obvious what we're trying to do if they go into the draft without having signed a big FA QB.  Which probably makes it really expensive to get Haskins, to where we'd be just as well off trying to get the 1st pick ahead of time anyway.

 

idk.  I just don't see how you can realistically move up to get Haskins and still support him with the weapons to be successful right away like Watson with Hopkins, or Mahomes with Kelce, Hill, Watkins et al.

Edited January 30, 2019 by Tugboat

[LinderFournette]

2 hours ago, JaguarCrazy2832 said:

I want Haskins but trading up to 1 probably isn't in the cards

id be okay with Murray. 

[.Buzz]

58 minutes ago, Tugboat said:

I think Hays makes a terrific point about "offseason planning".  If you're going to hinge your entire plan for 2019 on going the Haskins route...it's really hard to do that unless you hold the 1st pick.  If you don't, there's a very real chance you get left with nothing if you can't make it happen on draft day.  You've kinda gotta make that FA Starter/Rookie Starter decision before the draft; before you know if you're going to be able to land Haskins or get stuck searching in that next tier for a starter, or rummaging around the leftovers of the free agent bin.

 

But i think the rest of his plan kinda highlights the problem with this strategy in terms of setting a rookie QB up for success.  You just give up so many draft assets that you have to look in the FA market to bolster our offensive supporting cast...and it's a really really bad year to be doing that.  It's a wasteland out there.

A receiving corps of Lee/Dede/Cole/Chark and John Brown isn't very good.  It's a collection of mediocre middling sort of guys who don't belong at the top of any good WR depth chart.  And Jared Cook may still be able to play, but him as a senior citizen and a collection of late round/UDFA guys isn't scaring anyone either.  I like Ingram and think he's an underrated all-around back, but doesn't seem like the best place to be spending a bunch of money to support a rookie.  However, the fact that RB is where Hays is spending that hypothetical money earmarked for "weapons" is telling i think.  This is a really cruddy WR/TE free agent crop.  There's just nothing really worth spending on.  What it does have, looks like a lot of quality RBs and an unusually strong QB free agent group with multiple bonafide starter caliber guys potentially up for auction.  Which...if you go all-in trading up for a QB like Haskins...doesn't really help you at all.

And that's not even addressing an OLine that would have a mid-round project who is a de facto rookie they didn't trust much, presumably starting at RT.  With...probably Shatley or Omameh or something trying to bandaid the RG spot?  That's not a very good OLine, even if Cam comes back 100% at LT.

That's not the kind of situation a 1-year college starter rookie QB walks into and is likely to thrive in.  But if you have to spend all your draft capital moving up to make sure you get Haskins so you can plan your offseason accordingly...that's kind what you're left with.  And without a top pick to address the issue next year either.

It's the catch-22 of the whole situation.  Because we don't really have a viable stopgap starter on the roster...it's going to make it really obvious what we're trying to do if they go into the draft without having signed a big FA QB.  Which probably makes it really expensive to get Haskins, to where we'd be just as well off trying to get the 1st pick ahead of time anyway.

 

idk.  I just don't see how you can realistically move up to get Haskins and still support him with the weapons to be successful right away like Watson with Hopkins, or Mahomes with Kelce, Hill, Watkins et al.

I get you, and it may be rough...but if we draft a TE/sign Brown, Lee comes back, and decent here I think we're decent off. There's also a chance Cole bounces back and Chark gets on track. It's not great, but it's a solid setup I'd say.