2020 NFL Draft Thread

[jimkelly02]

1 hour ago, BayRaider said:

Blacklock is not getting selected in the 2nd Round. That is simply not happening. You are obviously lower on him than most people, which is fine. That’s an opinion. 
Also, why don’t you like Blacklock? Curious. His size, bullrush, and first step are great. And with Rod coaching, could be looking at a great 3T. Something you will never see with Hurst. 

Do you really read my entire posts or just skim for context?

i said I liked Blacklock as a mid to high 2nd rounder when he wasn’t even discussed and considered a 4-5th rounder.  I’ve said numerous times I like him but that he’s not NFL elite and doesn’t have elite NFL skill sets/attributes.  (yet every time you reply to what I say it comes with “you don’t like him”) He’s a solid starter imo.  Idk why you think usually hyperbolic adjectives makes your opinion more valid.  He has good 1st step etc.  not elite.  You can keep saying it and convince yourself of it all you want but that doesn’t make it true.  

You say everything like it’s a fact.  “Blacklock isn’t going round 2” is your opinion.  I’ve followed the draft for 27ish years and there’s always a ton of guys like him who are fringe 1st rounders that go round 2.  In this draft if you look at the top 45ish prospects they’re all in round 1 mocks.  Yet only 32 1st round picks.  Blacklock certainly could go round 1 but he could also go 33-45ish.  
You do this “create a narrative” nonesense all the time.  You claim I’m just low on him.  Im not.  He’s a tier 2 DT prospect.  Brown and Kinlaw are tier 1, Blacklock, Madubuike, Elliot, Gallimore, R.Davis are tier 2.  Blacklock has some nice attributes but he’s a guy with an injury history and is the “hot” player at the moment.  If he played 4 years he’d be suffer from over analysis a saturation.  Since he hasn’t played but 2 years, people tend to only talk about the good stuff and over project the potential.  

Comparing Chris Jones to Blacklock is a strech.  Idk how Jones fell to the 2nd. He was a significantly better prospect that RB.  I think your once again trying to find the “next Jones” and inflating RB as a result.  
Blacklock has a lot of nice things going for him, but he’s underdeveloped at this point.  He’s got issues with inconsistencies.  He’s a risky pick IMO, but it could pan out that he succeed past his draft spot.  But there’s nothing about his tape that screams “elite NFL” DT.  Elite DT means around top 5 in the NFL.  That’s a big reach to say that’s where he’s end up.

do I think a team should consider him at 25-40? Absolutely.  To the Raiders at 19? That’s in the same category as saying “Lamb and Jeudy/Ruggs at 12/19” is “nfl laughingstock”.   I even question the 2 WRs thing but... with Collins, Hurst (your right he ain’t gonna be elite but he’s a nice 3rd DT), plus Hall (who isn’t trash, he’s not a stud either, but I think he steps up this year) drafting Blacklock at 19 is exactly the same as 2 WRs in first (both are spending too much resources at one position) yet the WR option is considered because positive value of Jeudy/Ruggs at 19 whereas Blacklock isn’t a BPA value at 19.  In fact it’s a small reach to be honest.  

i could just as easily say why don’t you value WR? Why do you overvalue DT?  Your arguments are always from a position of self proclaimed superior Knowledge or authority.  You like Blacklock and thing more of him then most but anyone who questions your value of him deserves scrutiny.  Yet your higher on him then most so your valuation of him is what should be questioned.  

Blacklock has a nice bull rush and initial jump off snap, yes.  I also like his frame allowing him to play 3T, 4i, 5T and even 1T On passing downs on in a 1gap scheme.  I think he’d do real well in Seattle if they take him at 27.

But let’s be real about the player, not over inflate him with adjectives and claim he’s the next Jones or whoever.  He’s a solid 2nd tier DT who should go 25-45 not the next great DT.  
what does Blacklock bring over Collins and Hurst that warrants #19?  

im also a little concerned about his weight chance but admit I might not have enough info on it.  He was listed at 329 and is now 290? 40 pound weight drop is huge.  I think he should be playing at 310ish.  290 is way to light for him, he’s gonna lose his stength too much. I’m like a sideshow carnie who runs the guest your weight booth.... I’m not trying to brag it’s not that great a skill and im sometimes off, but it looked to be that Blacklock played around 305-310 this year.  At combine he was 290.  I think once he’s back to that weight he’s more of a 4.98-5.02 guy then the 4.90 he ran. 

Just because I don’t think hyperbolically me you often do doesn’t mean I under value a player.  My valuation of him is independent of your opinions.  My opinion of him isn’t in juxtaposition to yours.  It’s independent of it.  If I have him as a 25-40 player thats not “low”.  It’s narcissistic to believe im low on him only because YOU have him so high.  Like I said before there 40-45 prospects I could pick and show tons of mock drafts With them as 1st round picks.  Some you’ll have as 2nds that i have as 1st.... doesn’t mean your “low” on them.

[Frankie2Gunz]

52 minutes ago, NYRaider said:

The excuse to draft a WR is that we've lacked talent there for years and adding a very good one could transform our entire offense. Which is why we took a huge risk with Antonio Brown last offseason and we saw how his departure negatively effected our offense last season. 

We will get a Wr in this draft, there is not doubting that, the question is will any of those WR's pose good value at 12?  You guys can homer out all day about Ruggs but as you can see from my prior post Wr's in the 1st round over the last 5 years have been terrible value.  Is Ruggs Hill or Ross?  People were saying how great Ross was coming out and now look at what Cicny has.  Terrible value bc they were mesmerized with his speed.  Sounds like someone who used to makes picks for us LOL 

[NYRaider]

1 minute ago, Frankie2Gunz said:

We will get a Wr in this draft, there is not doubting that, the question is will any of those WR's pose good value at 12?  You guys can homer out all day about Ruggs but as you can see from my prior post Wr's in the 1st round over the last 5 years have been terrible value.  Is Ruggs Hill or Ross?  People were saying how great Ross was coming out and now look at what Cicny has.  Terrible value bc they were mesmerized with his speed.  Sounds like someone who used to makes picks for us LOL 

Ross just hasn't been able to stay healthy. Last season he was on pace for 1,012 yards and 6 TD but missed half of the season and was 4th in the league in YPC (18.1) for players with 20+ catches. 

[Frankie2Gunz]

18 minutes ago, NYRaider said:

Ross just hasn't been able to stay healthy. Last season he was on pace for 1,012 yards and 6 TD but missed half of the season and was 4th in the league in YPC (18.1) for players with 20+ catches. 

I don't deal in hypotheticals, Ross has 49 receptions in 3 years.  He is another 1st round Wr that has posed terrible value and has underperformed. 

"On pace for" means nothing.  After week one Sammy Watkins was on pace for 3200 yards and 48 Td's.  

Edited April 1, 2020 by Frankie2Gunz

[jimkelly02]

Ruggs isn’t going to be Ross or Hill.  He’s going to be Ruggs.  The comparison is just polarized to both ends of the spectrum.

i struggle to see Ruggs value at 12 because he’s “someone who spreads the defenses”.  He does do that but a decoy in the top 10 isn’t value.  He’s not just a decoy I know, but he doesn’t strike me as the top WR on a good team.  I don’t see him being a high volume WR target.   That’s what I want if I’m picking a WR at 12.  If i want a complementary WR who scares a team deep im not using a top 12 pick on that.

the reason I like Lamb (and admit ideally im taking him several picks after 12) is because I think he can be a high target WR1.

in the end tho this WR class has a good amount of starters (I consider there to be 3 WR starters per team these days) and a lot more backups but no elite WRs.  

This draft as a whole is full of good starters and depth guys but only a handful of elite talents. 

ideally, I’d accept this isn’t the draft to get a franchise player and try to get a WR1 like lamb and a future starter at WR and a DB who can start mid year to next year, a RB2, and 1-2 depth guys who can replace starters down the road potentially.... and trade all remaining draft capital for picks in ‘21.

if were going to be a consistent Playoff Team in ‘21 and beyond we need to get 1 elite playmaker on both O and D.  Our best bet to do that is trade for Future high pick(s) next year, hopefully to a bad team or one whose QB gets hurt, and package picks to move up for a stud playmaker.

only playmaker I see this year is Simmons.  I’d be cool with trading 12 and a mix of 3rd/4-5th’s to get him at 7-9.  Everyone loves his coverage, but I think he can be a 10 sack SAM.  That’s a lot of capital to invest at LB in one year I know.  But I’d rather get a star player then a bunch of average starters and backups.  We can get those kind of guys in FA during the 2-3rd waves at value prices.

[jimkelly02]

6 minutes ago, Frankie2Gunz said:

I don't deal in hypotheticals, Ross has 49 receptions in 3 years.  He is another 1st round Wr that has posed terrible value and has underperformed. 

"On pace for" means nothing.  After week one Sammy Watkins was on pace for 3200 yards and 48 Td's.  

Exactly, Ross is never going to play 16 games for Cincy.  I’d bet he gets hurt and is traded for next to nothing after this year.

this is why i absolutely don’t chase the “next play x” guys.  They never work out.  For every next Tyreke Hill there’s 5-10 Ross’s.

I never thought Ross was that great a prospect anyways.  He had 1 good year.  Wasn’t a high volume target... his game was go deep, slants, and screens.  And it was absolutely apparent his frame was significantly lacking.  

Edited April 1, 2020 by jimkelly02

[Blazer026]

1 hour ago, big_palooka said:

WR are a dime a dozen for me when you are absent a Julio, Calvin type talent. You can find them later and develop them the same. 

Like give me a Reagor or Hamler later than Ruggs at 12. Yes, Ruggs is the better WR, but I can get what I need + something additional with those guys with a trade for example.

I agree somewhat. Only WR I want at 12 are Lamb, Jeudy, or Shenault. Although I know Shenault is debatable to most. Ideally trading down a little from 19 and getting another 2/3 pick and then taking a WR is what I’m hopeful for. 

[raidr4life]

34 minutes ago, jimkelly02 said:

Exactly, Ross is never going to play 16 games for Cincy.  I’d bet he gets hurt and is traded for next to nothing after this year.

this is why i absolutely don’t chase the “next play x” guys.  They never work out.  For every next Tyreke Hill there’s 5-10 Ross’s.

I never thought Ross was that great a prospect anyways.  He had 1 good year.  Wasn’t a high volume target... his game was go deep, slants, and screens.  And it was absolutely apparent his frame was significantly lacking.  

That's why Ruggs isn't him, much more solid frame runs all the routes, excellent hands can be what Gruden wanted AB for he can easily be a high volume guy because he does it all.

[jimkelly02]

2 minutes ago, raidr4life said:

That's why Ruggs isn't him, much more solid frame runs all the routes, excellent hands can be what Gruden wanted AB for he can easily be a high volume guy because he does it all.

I agree Ruggs has a solid frame, tho same specs as Ross but different bodies... I just don’t see him as a high volume WR1.... It trying to say your wrong, i just have a different view.

[BayRaider]

 

[BayRaider]

Johnson watches a lot of film looks like. 

[jimkelly02]

2 minutes ago, BayRaider said:

Johnson watches a lot of film looks like. 

Johnson and Terrell would both be nice additions, but 19 is too rich for them, IMO.  In an ideal world we can trade back to the top end of the 2nd and still be able to get one of them.... and if their both gone I’d hope McKinney or Delpit has fallen there.  

[BayRaider]

7 minutes ago, jimkelly02 said:

Johnson and Terrell would both be nice additions, but 19 is too rich for them, IMO.  In an ideal world we can trade back to the top end of the 2nd and still be able to get one of them.... and if their both gone I’d hope McKinney or Delpit has fallen there.  

The thing is though, we don’t know this. 
 

A lot of people thought Ferrell was too rich at 4 and he was 20-30 on a lot of “Media” Big Boards. However, he was obviously Top 10 on Mayocks board. 
 

As for Johnson and Terrell, they could be Top 20 on Mayocks Board. And I’ve been seeing a ton of mocks lately where Johnson goes 22 to the Vikings, 25 to the Vikings, and 31 to the 49ers. 

We’ll just have to wait and see but I’d personally have no issues with Johnson at 19. I also had zero issues with Ferrell at 4 last year. 

Edited April 2, 2020 by BayRaider

[jimkelly02]

6 minutes ago, BayRaider said:

The thing is though, we don’t know this. 
 

A lot of people thought Ferrell was too rich at 4 and he was 20-30 on a lot of “Media” Big Boards. However, he was obviously Top 10 on Mayocks board. 
 

As for Johnson and Terrell, they could be Top 20 on Mayocks Board. And I’ve been seeing a ton of mocks lately where Johnson goes 22 to the Vikings, 25 to the Vikings, and 31 to the 49ers. 

We’ll just have to wait and see but I’d personally have no issues with Johnson at 19. I also had zero issues with Ferrell at 4 last year. 

It’s my opinion that it’s too rich.  I literally wrote “IMO”.  Idk how much more clear I can be.  I’ll write it long form next time.

Ferrell was a top 4 pick up until combine.  Some people slid him to 20ish, but I feel he was never really in that range.  Just because some random people post a mock draft doesn’t mean it has any value, at all.  Ferrell probably was always a 6-14 ranked player.  I can’t see him ever falling past GB.

i was upset we didn’t trade down for Ferrell at the time, but i thought we were in a position of power to do so.  When it later came out there was no legit trade options I was absolutely fine with the decision.  It was a less than ideal situation for sure. 

[oakdb36]

7 hours ago, jimkelly02 said:

i was upset we didn’t trade down for Ferrell at the time, but i thought we were in a position of power to do so.  When it later came out there was no legit trade options I was absolutely fine with the decision.  It was a less than ideal situation for sure. 

Don't expect trade options for 19 either. What Gil Brandt said about the 1st tier ending at 16 players is pretty accurate, meaning after those 16, teams' boards are going to look very different and there won't be much desire to trade up for anyone. It's well reflected in this forum where every prospect brought up is deemed a reach at 19 for the simple fact that it's the 2nd tier territory in which a bunch of prospects running through the 2nd round range are really close. In the end, you still got to pick someone and probably at 19 since trading won't be easy.