Jump to content

NFL Draft: What do we need NOW and LATER


JaguarCrazy2832

Recommended Posts

19 hours ago, .Buzz said:

Schrager said 7-12 for Simmons.

I'm starting to think he's the one that falls.

I still really don't know where exactly Simmons would play here, and have very little faith in this staff to creatively use him to his fullest potential.  But honestly, i've warmed up to the idea that he's just too unique and talented a prospect to pass on.  We'll have a new staff next year who can hopefully figure out how to use him properly and he has the dynamic versatility to be a factor in so many different ways, and a real headache for OCs.

 

17 hours ago, .Buzz said:

 

I mean...buddy basically just crumpled and hit the deck before Wirfs even got there.  xD  Not that i blame him, but still lol.

 

17 hours ago, JaguarCrazy2832 said:

We need everything though so while I agree we need elite level guys, I'm curious if someone comes running with a good trade offer do we run to the podium with the obvious pick or trade down for a ransom?

Yeah.  That's definitely an interesting question.  If someone ends up falling to pick 9 that another team would be willing to cough up a lot for...depending on who it is that "fell", i'd probably do it.  We need so much help at practically every position.  And big ammunition from a little trade-down would give us lots of opportunity to move up and grab a second "top tier" prospect too.  I think an "obvious target" falling is probably our best chance at getting an actually significant return in a trade-down though.  Otherwise...we're probably getting a lot lesser value unless teams get really anxious about their pick of the WRs, or the last of the top OTs.

I think i kinda view the "obvious picks" differently for us though.  I'm a lot more lukewarm on Brown and Okudah.  Though those do feel like what would be "obvious picks" for Caldwell, given all the rumours and rumblings we've heard.  Would certainly be interesting to see what he'd do, considering how he talks about trading down pretty much every year he's run the draft...it'd be funny to see him finally get a real offer and pass on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You put him at safety with Harrison and let him flourish.

Once he gets his feet under him, move him around if he's fine with that like Derwin.

Another option is play him at SLB on early downs and put him back at Wilson's spot on 3rd down.

Don't overthink him, imo. Just because he's very versatile doesn't mean he can't be great at any one spot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, .Buzz said:

You put him at safety with Harrison and let him flourish.

Once he gets his feet under him, move him around if he's fine with that like Derwin.

Another option is play him at SLB on early downs and put him back at Wilson's spot on 3rd down.

Don't overthink him, imo. Just because he's very versatile doesn't mean he can't be great at any one spot. 

I think you have to kinda overthink Simmons though.  To actually get the most out of what he can do, and make it worth the Top-10 pick.

You have to have an actual plan to capitalize on the rare versatility and flexibility when that is the defining feature of a prospect's "value".  Which isn't necessarily hard to conceive of in a general sense...but seems a lot more difficult within the confines of our decidedly less creative defensive systems here.

 

Too often, "don't overthink it" with prospects seems to just boil down to, "this guy is highly ranked on most boards, just take 'em and expect it to work".  Scheme fit and landing spot can be hugely important to a prospects success.  I think that gets lost too often in the shuffle and hype of draft season.  Good strong organizations don't just take guys willy nilly...they target guys that fit what they want to do, and can think of a coherent plan for.

 

Just plugging a guy like Simmons in at SS while moving Ronnie to FS where he's not as well suited, is just a recipe for disappointment.  You don't draft box safeties Top-10, and i'm skeptical Ronnie as FS makes that work anyway.

Closest i can imagine this staff to using someone like Simmons properly, would be something like that 3 safety look they occasionally used Ronnie in as a rookie - against teams with TE weapons that Church obviously couldn't handle.  But that obviously has limitations.  If you're going to get the most in making a guy like Simmons a Top-10 pick moving around as a defensive chess piece, you have to:

1)Ultimately figure out who you're taking off the field in his place in a wide range of situations, and how the rest of the personnel will fit around that.

2)Make sure that your plan is going to allow you to use your chess piece to erase matchup problems, or dictate advantageous matchups defensively.  Rather than trying to just plug something in, and hope the offense doesn't exploit it.

Some defense are very multiple and diverse in their looks, and they've spent years building up a collection of very flexible talent to make it work.  Ours is generally...pretty far toward the rigid and straightforward end of things.  Incorporating some more true mixed front packages is a step in the right direction, and if that's what they're building and transitioning toward...cool.  But we've still got a lot of pieces to collect to be really flexible in that, especially in losing some guys who would make that work more effectively.

 

It's like...think of Jamie Collins.  He was a freak athlete "defensive weapon" for the Pats who made quite a few plays under creative usage.  Goes to Cleveland where they didn't "overthink it", tried to plug him into more conventional roles, and really didn't accomplish much of anything.  These types of players can be awesome...but they can also be extremely mediocre without the right plan.

If you don't think about it enough and just plug these guys into a more standard singular role...you run the risk of having drafted a SS or a WLB in the Top-10.  Which isn't great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, .Buzz said:

Gimme this guy at 20.

I can see why Sullivan would sign off on a guy like Jefferson for sure, and his fingerprints are there.  There's a lot of nuance to his game that's pretty appealing.

He's the sort of potential volume target who can win in a lot of different ways that we need opposite Charks sort of "downfield big play" ability imo.  He also very clearly fits the mold of what Caldwell generally appears to like, in explosive athletes with speed to burn at the WR position.

I'd be down for that.  Even in a WR class that's going to be deep right through the 2nd round, maybe even the top of the 3rd...i think there are still those 4 guys Lamb/Ruggs/Jeudy/Jefferson who are a cut above as potential "top volume target" type receivers who can pretty much do it all.  Where after that, it's more "specialist" to me.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tugboat said:

Yeah.  There's definitely a risk to moving back, that we could move ourselves right out of range of the top tier of those positions.  Especially dropping below 15.

The way things are shaping up, i'd probably almost be happiest just standing pat and grabbing a top WR or OT at 9.  Unless something really wild happens, i think you can be pretty confident you'll have strong options there.

The way a trade back would really make sense to me, would be if they aren't going to go after either of those positions anyway or think "their guy" is going to slip to them anyway...and can get enough from moving back a few spots from 9...to move up a few spots from 20.  That'd position us better overall for the sort of tiers/drop-offs in the way i see the board.  To potentially land two players from that upper tier (assuming at least a few QBs go early and that there will inevitably be one or two unexpected "off the board reaches").

For me if Wills, Wirf, Brown, are not there I’m taking Jerry Jeudy I was leaning Lamb but I think Jeudy may have better upside than Lamb I think Jeudy hasn’t scratched the surface of what he is going to be. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, .Buzz said:

I'm getting slight on edge.

Schefter said we have talked with Detroit for 3.

Prisco mocked a trade up for a QB.

If they let Caldwell draft a QB before round 4... or let him move up for anything outside of QB... I just might fly back to Jax hunt Caldwell down and slap the **** out him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, .Buzz said:

Albert Breer just said he thinks we go Becton if Brown is gone and we don't trade down.

Sounds good to me.  Obviously there's a bit of a gamble with Becton.  He's not the most polished OT to ever come out.  But like Solder, he's a kinda rare mountain of a man, with every tool to really pay off.  Though i don't necessarily trust our OLine coaching to get things sorted quite so much.

It'd be the absolute biggest impact on our offense if he pans out imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Tugboat said:

Sounds good to me.  Obviously there's a bit of a gamble with Becton.  He's not the most polished OT to ever come out.  But like Solder, he's a kinda rare mountain of a man, with every tool to really pay off.  Though i don't necessarily trust our OLine coaching to get things sorted quite so much.

It'd be the absolute biggest impact on our offense if he pans out imo.

Becton scares me as a pick it’s a boom or bust pick and for this franchise if you redraft Eric Flowers who I think he is going to end up becoming that’s essential redrafting Joeckle I couldn’t stomach it... as bad as we are right now I need a sure shot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, .Buzz said:

I'm getting slight on edge.

Schefter said we have talked with Detroit for 3.

Prisco mocked a trade up for a QB.

It'd be absolutely insane if they let Caldwell move up to draft another QB that high.

Or really...move up for anyone that high.  I'm almost afraid it's that they're crazy paranoid about the gaping holes they've created at CB and are getting antsy enough to potentially blow a ton of draft capital moving up for Okudah out of desperation to get a Day 1 starter or something.  :/

 

10 hours ago, JaguarCrazy2832 said:

Pretty much my thoughts as well. Although again if the powers that be are worried about job security drafting a QB that definitely needs work isnt a good get rich quick scheme 

The thing about drafting a QB that high...especially assuming Burrow is gone, is that it's basically a built in excuse as a potential ploy for these goofs to extend their tenure by at least a year.

"Can't judge us on this season, because we're still waiting on our top pick franchise saving QB to develop/get healthy."

Sadly...i can actually see it happening, the way things have gone lately.  xD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...