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

[Tugboat]

On 02/03/2019 at 8:36 AM, VLoo said:

First time in a while that it looks like there's some strong depth at the C position in this draft. Do we consider moving Linder back to RG if the right guy falls to us in Rd 2?

I think you'd certainly have to think about it.  We need to continue to upgrade that OLine.  Whether you do it with a RG, or by drafting a starting caliber C who moves Linder back to a position he can play at a Pro Bowl level...either way works.

Still think OT is probably the biggest key position to upgrade high in the draft though.  Whether that's a LT who moves Cam over to RT, or more realistically...just finding a great book-end for him at RT.  We can probably find a way to survive with just "serviceable" RG play from some sort of competition between stopgap vets and a rookie.  Whereas i think last year highlighted just how catastrophic bad Tackle play can be.  Our line is going to stink massively no matter what we invest in the Interior, if we don't get two starting caliber OTs out there.

[Tugboat]

On 02/03/2019 at 10:58 AM, DuvalsKing said:

I want to go on record saying now I’d rather have Smith over TJ because I feel like they are going to give you about the same production I’d rather spend my number 7 overall on another pick and try to grab Irv in the second or trade back into the bottom of the first to acquire him. Then to reach with TJ in the 7 spot.

I think Trey Burton is a pretty fair projection for what Irv Smith could be.  But therein kinda lies a question in its own right.  Burton was a UDFA.

I'm just not as high as others on Irv Smith tbh.  He could be good.  He could be Burton 2.0.  But he doesn't have that "ideal" TE size, and while i get that there were a lot of other weapons to spread the ball around to at Alabama...he doesn't have the on-field production and amazing tape i'd want to see.  There's a lot of sorta "unrealized potential" with Irv.  People expecting him to be a better Pro than he was in College.  Which is always risky.  Just like it's risky with projecting DK Metcalf...who does at least have some eye-popping measurables to bank on, along with some outstanding flashes of huge potential on tape.

 

On 02/03/2019 at 2:43 PM, .Buzz said:

If Haskins isn't available and we go the Foles route I'm here for Metcalf/Hockensen.

Problem I now have with Hockensen is Fant/Irv Smith etc in this class. Seems it's fairly deep.

I think you could say that same thing in reverse as well though.

ie. Problem with Metcalf, is that it looks like a deep WR class too.  I'd maybe even argue the depth of high quality WRs could actually stretch further than the TEs.  If you go get Hockenson Rnd1 and sort out your TE position for years to come...there's a chance you're still looking at guys like Butler/AJ Brown/Deebo or someone like that, who could still be very good.

Then there's the thought of potentially using some extra draft capital to actually move back up into the later 1st if a guy like N'Keal or Fant is there.  Imagine walking out of the draft with a Metcalf/Fant or Hockenson/Harry duo.  

 

I could really go either way on it, and be pretty happy with the result.  Though i think it's fair to suggest that Hockenson probably feels a bit "safer" than Metcalf at the top.  Albeit, with potentially lower "ceiling".  Also, if it is Foles we're bringing in, he's going to want a great TE to continually feed the ball to.  He's going to want some great possession WR targets too though.

[Tugboat]

On 03/03/2019 at 10:16 AM, .Buzz said:

Why did we not wait on DL til this year.

This is a darn good question tbh.

I know they weren't exactly expecting to be picking nearly this high in 2019, but the depth on DLine is staggering and pretty much continues on down through at least the 1st round and then some.  And even at the time, i think the general consensus around draft day 2018, was that next year was going to be an absolutely loaded DLine group.  Doesn't always hold true in the end, but it certainly did in this case.  I think it would've been awfully hard for Taven to even crack the 1st round this year, with his rawness and the depth of this group.

 

But hey...this is where we are now.  I guess.  Doesn't exactly look like the greatest display of foresight on their part though.

[.Buzz]

Damn...Haskins gonna be there at 7 and we're going to pass. 

[Speedyg]

Anyone tempted by Gary at 7? The production didn't match the measurable, but that happens sometimes in college when teams try to scheme against you (especially in the DL). We saw it with Clowney, saw it with Garrett.

I say this because the TE and WR classes are deep and we can potentially greet near equal value there even to 2nd or 3rd round.

Tackle is the one that is a big need and isn't as deep, but there doesn't appear to be a consensus on the T position, and the ceiling isn't as high. 

Gary on the other hand will likely not start, but will rotate. He can potentially start at LDE next season when we will likely have to part with Calais.

 

[LinderFournette]

2 hours ago, Speedyg said:

Anyone tempted by Gary at 7? The production didn't match the measurable, but that happens sometimes in college when teams try to scheme against you (especially in the DL). We saw it with Clowney, saw it with Garrett.

I say this because the TE and WR classes are deep and we can potentially greet near equal value there even to 2nd or 3rd round.

Tackle is the one that is a big need and isn't as deep, but there doesn't appear to be a consensus on the T position, and the ceiling isn't as high. 

Gary on the other hand will likely not start, but will rotate. He can potentially start at LDE next season when we will likely have to part with Calais.

 

gary is interesting but he seems to produce better as an inside guy then an edge but hes too light to be a full time inside guy.   i feel if we want to keep an outside pass-rush even in base maybe Sweat is that guy cuz hes already 6 foot 6 260 pounds but lets also keep in mind that this DL class is also pretty deep. 

his get off is great for a 280 pounder and his speed is more of 260 pound guy but his agility/bend is that of a 285 pound guy so it isnt very good. 

[.Buzz]

2 hours ago, Speedyg said:

Anyone tempted by Gary at 7? The production didn't match the measurable, but that happens sometimes in college when teams try to scheme against you (especially in the DL). We saw it with Clowney, saw it with Garrett.

I say this because the TE and WR classes are deep and we can potentially greet near equal value there even to 2nd or 3rd round.

Tackle is the one that is a big need and isn't as deep, but there doesn't appear to be a consensus on the T position, and the ceiling isn't as high. 

Gary on the other hand will likely not start, but will rotate. He can potentially start at LDE next season when we will likely have to part with Calais.

 

He definitely has, and I'm not sure if a lot have thought about available top DL at 7 but I think it's a possibility. I like Taylor, Dillard, Jonah etc. but 7 is a high spot and when comparing them to the talent of a guy like Gary, Oliver, etc.

I'm unsure how we look at WR although I think we definitely need to. Lee, Dede, Conley, Chark, Cole are all sticking I imagine. I think we need to go with a guy decent early but I wonder how they attack it.

I feel like a guy like Irv or Moreau would be fine later, but man I'd be lying if I didn't love the idea of getting Hock/Fant, and I don't think either will be there in round 2.

As far as OL you can usually find some strong guard options mid rounds but tackle is a lot less likely and I'm not sure if we view Richardson Oghuebi as legit starting options or not.

[.Buzz]

 

[Adrenaline_Flux]

yes pls

[.Buzz]

26 minutes ago, Adrenaline_Flux said:

yes pls

I'm just not sold they invest such a high pick in a TE. I'm here for it because he'd be such a large weapon in our offense and we need it but with how deep the class is I just don't see it happening until it actually does.

 

 

[Adrenaline_Flux]

2 minutes ago, .Buzz said:

I'm just not sold they invest such a high pick in a TE. I'm here for it because he'd be such a large weapon in our offense and we need it but with how deep the class is I just don't see it happening until it actually does.

We're talking about the same team that picked a RB #4.

[.Buzz]

6 minutes ago, Adrenaline_Flux said:

We're talking about the same team that picked a RB #4.

That's a fair point. But when you take into account they were trying to take the pressure off a QB that they had taken and missed on to attempt to save face...

We'll see though. I do feel like he fits their ideal TE profile.

I will say I'm slightly concerned about RT though if we pass early. Feel like we need to grab an OL in the first few rounds. Foles has a quick release but with Linder and his injury history, Cann, and a whole lot of questions marks at RT that worries me a bit.

[KhanYouDigIt]

I’m pretty certain TE/OL will be addressed with our first two picks.

Hock would be dope. He is the total package.

[Speedyg]

13 hours ago, LinderFournette said:

gary is interesting but he seems to produce better as an inside guy then an edge but hes too light to be a full time inside guy.   i feel if we want to keep an outside pass-rush even in base maybe Sweat is that guy cuz hes already 6 foot 6 260 pounds but lets also keep in mind that this DL class is also pretty deep. 

his get off is great for a 280 pounder and his speed is more of 260 pound guy but his agility/bend is that of a 285 pound guy so it isnt very good. 

Depends what were looking to do scheme wise. Sweatt doesn't fit our big end profile, unless they decide to go away from that. But since they basically benched Malik for his run stopping (lack of), I would guess their priority is still run stopping.

Gary would be playing Calais (and what they initially tried to do with Taven) role of big End on run downs and going inside on passing downs.

[Speedyg]

12 hours ago, .Buzz said:

 

Hock is really intriguing because he does fit what we want out of our TE. I'm not sure if they are willing to invest in that position that high, but we can hope that Coughlin and his offenses had threats on TE in Mitchell, Brady, and Shockey. I think he also signed Bennett after Shockey left so he has invested FA money on the position in the past.

Problem is TE is typically a slow impact position as a rookie. Combined with the lack of depth at tackle, they may feel that they have to reach for a T that high.

Then again, one of TC's best pick was a DT over a Florida T that everyone wanted them to take (when T was viewed as a need for us).