The NOT Too Early 2018 NFL Draft Thread

[oldman9er]

^ I still think it's weird that Fournette can go top 5, yet folks sneer at the idea of Guice being top 20. 

Guice is >>>> Fournette, imho. Not that the level of >>>> is far off, though.

[e16bball]

On 3/24/2018 at 7:35 AM, turtle28 said:

Rashad Penny is giving me a little bit of the steamies after watching this analysis. He’s got speed and vision! Two things tge Redskin# haven’t had in a starting RB since CP.

I’ll say this, my best friend (who is a D-III offensive coordinator) thinks Penny is going to be great. He likened him to David Johnson. 

The more I think about it, the better a trade down looks to me (if Roquan Smith is gone, as it appears he will be). Move down into the 20-24 range, look to get a defender like Payne or Evans or Vander Esch or even Harold Landry,  pick up somebody’s 2nd in the process, and look to target the run game with a LG and a back with the two picks in the 2nd. 

[RSkinGM]

4 minutes ago, e16bball said:

I’ll say this, my best friend (who is a D-III offensive coordinator) thinks Penny is going to be great. He likened him to David Johnson. 

The more I think about it, the better a trade down looks to me (if Roquan Smith is gone, as it appears he will be). Move down into the 20-24 range, look to get a defender like Payne or Evans or Vander Esch or even Harold Landry,  pick up somebody’s 2nd in the process, and look to target the run game with a LG and a back with the two picks in the 2nd. 

I like it but who's our trade partner? Why do they want #13 ?

[MikeT14]

28 minutes ago, RSkinGM said:

I like it but who's our trade partner? Why do they want #13 ?

If a big name falls since 4 QBs go before us - maybe Minkah, James, Edmunds, Smith, etc.

 

Could be a trade down and trade up situation - something like Az trades up to get a QB and whomever goes to their spot trades up a couple with their ammi to make sure they get someone they want.

[e16bball]

18 minutes ago, RSkinGM said:

I like it but who's our trade partner? Why do they want #13 ?

Sorta depends on who falls to us, but I think there are realistic options.

Maybe Carolina wants Denzel Ward or to get Cam Ridley before he gets to Baltimore, etc?

Maybe Detroit really wants Vea to be the new Wilfork-ian centerpiece of Patricia’s defense? 

Maybe the Rams want Marcus Davenport to complete their terrifying pass rush?

Maybe the Bills trade up before the draft to get the ammunition to move to #2 and leapfrog the Jets? #12 + #13 and a future 1st would be one hell of a package for that  #2 pick. 

[e16bball]

34 minutes ago, RSkinGM said:

I like it but who's our trade partner? Why do they want #13 ?

Sorta depends on who falls to us, but I think there are realistic options.

Maybe Carolina wants Denzel Ward or to get Cam Ridley before he gets to Baltimore, etc?

Maybe Detroit really wants Vea to be the new Wilfork-ian centerpiece of Patricia’s defense? 

Maybe the Rams want Marcus Davenport to complete their terrifying pass rush?

Maybe the Bills trade up before the draft to get the ammunition to move to #2 and leapfrog the Jets? #12 + #13 and a future 1st would be one hell of a package for that  #2 pick. 

And I think pretty much anyone could fall in love with Derwin James if he’s there. He would be awfully tough to pass on — but it might be the right call, given that the 2nd round area of this draft seems to be packed with talent that could change our whole run game.

[Jeezy Fanatic]

Will Malcolm Kelly still be available at 24?

[Eric]

Im on the RB bandwagon now, our first pick is going to that position i truly believe. The only question is Guice at 13, Guice later, or they miss out and go Michel late 1st. Who knows? But getting pretty confident its Running Back.

Not saying its going to happen but I think there is a possibility Payne will be there in 2nd. The last few years the defensive tackle in the draft is being undervalued just like the running back was prior. A'shawn Robinson, Jarran Reed went alot later than expected. Its kind of funny though that both of those players were frequently mocked to us in the first round a couple years ago. I believe  there is a chance (maybe Su'a Cravens can help us move up in 2nd to get him on a pick swap).

If you guys havent watched Harrison Phillips you need to. If Payne is gone then we take Phillips, I think its a no brainer. He would be the perfect Redskin.

Just my humble opinion

[MKnight82]

11 minutes ago, Eric said:

Im on the RB bandwagon now, our first pick is going to that position i truly believe. The only question is Guice at 13, Guice later, or they miss out and go Michel late 1st. Who knows? But getting pretty confident its Running Back.

Not saying its going to happen but I think there is a possibility Payne will be there in 2nd. The last few years the defensive tackle in the draft is being undervalued just like the running back was prior. A'shawn Robinson, Jarran Reed went alot later than expected. Its kind of funny though that both of those players were frequently mocked to us in the first round a couple years ago. I believe  there is a chance (maybe Su'a Cravens can help us move up in 2nd to get him on a pick swap).

If you guys havent watched Harrison Phillips you need to. If Payne is gone then we take Phillips, I think its a no brainer. He would be the perfect Redskin.

Just my humble opinion

Here's my issue, the three positions that people seem to be identifying for us as 1st and 2nd round needs (RB, G, NT) are all positions that are not considered to be "premium" positions.  Ideally, all 3 of these positions would be filled with later picks, and we'd draft a true impact player in the 1st round, like a WR or pass rusher.  

[Woz]

1 hour ago, e16bball said:

Maybe Carolina wants Denzel Ward or to get Cam Ridley before he gets to Baltimore, etc?

Ridley/Sutton (whatever you deem to be #1 WR) probably makes the most sense as the target for someone trading up. I could also see also Buffalo moving up from 22 for a WR as an option. We would be the optimum spot for a trade up for the top receiver since Green Bay, Arizona, and Baltimore could conceivably look at WR in the next three picks (Arizona only if the QBs are all gone).

[ripsean21]

3 hours ago, e16bball said:

I’ll say this, my best friend (who is a D-III offensive coordinator) thinks Penny is going to be great. He likened him to David Johnson. 

The more I think about it, the better a trade down looks to me (if Roquan Smith is gone, as it appears he will be). Move down into the 20-24 range, look to get a defender like Payne or Evans or Vander Esch or even Harold Landry,  pick up somebody’s 2nd in the process, and look to target the run game with a LG and a back with the two picks in the 2nd. 

I’ve been beating that Penny drum for a while. I really really like him.if Guice didn’t have the power and lateral balance and vision he doespenny would be behind only barkleyfor me. I love that idea but I do think Penny goes late one. Just my opinion because of my grade for him but would’ve elated grabbing him round 2

[oldman9er]

1 hour ago, MKnight82 said:

Here's my issue, the three positions that people seem to be identifying for us as 1st and 2nd round needs (RB, G, NT) are all positions that are not considered to be "premium" positions.  Ideally, all 3 of these positions would be filled with later picks, and we'd draft a true impact player in the 1st round, like a WR or pass rusher.  

I'm not sure how exclusive the two are viewed to be, anymore. (premium position/impact player)

Adding top talent at any of RB, G, or NT... I'd say... can still have quite an impact on the results in game success or failure. 

 

A top tier run game can have drastic effects on the efficiency of play-action passing, keeping defenses guessing, and even a general willingness to keep the offense balanced. (RB)

Good vet QBs have been stepping up into pass pockets for years now... frequently rendering the outside rush impotent, while making interior pockets.. potent to success. (IOL)

Having an immovable object at the 0 or 1 tech can make life easier for everyone around that player.. (NT) .. but that player better be a guy that isn't limited to a two-down role, if talking top 15 selection. 

 

Just trying to hammer out a thought, from reading your post. I'm sure you are plenty well enough aware of how teh foozballs works.  

 

[ripsean21]

1 hour ago, MKnight82 said:

Here's my issue, the three positions that people seem to be identifying for us as 1st and 2nd round needs (RB, G, NT) are all positions that are not considered to be "premium" positions.  Ideally, all 3 of these positions would be filled with later picks, and we'd draft a true impact player in the 1st round, like a WR or pass rusher.  

I’m not against going with any position in the first but I think the value just so happens to fall where our needs are this year. But I don’t value the WR position as much as most. In fact I value the TE position like most value the WR position. But I will say I don’t really value any position more so then any other as I believe a great player at any spot is the best pick regardless. Like I wouldn’t take Ridley over Guice I have Guice as the better player even though his position isn’t as popular atthis moment. The ILB talent at the top is amazing. I value that because we haven’t had a great player there in my lifetime. Plus Thos top tier ILB’s have a huge impact on a team. But I do understand most value positions higher then others I just grade the players and if they are tied then I go with the impact of the position

[MKnight82]

3 minutes ago, oldman9er said:

I'm not sure how exclusive the two are viewed to be, anymore. (premium position/impact player)

Adding top talent at any of RB, G, or NT... I'd say... can still have quite an impact on the results in game success or failure. 

 

A top tier run game can have drastic effects on the efficiency of play-action passing, keeping defenses guessing, and even a general willingness to keep the offense balanced. (RB)

Good vet QBs have been stepping up into pass pockets for years now... frequently rendering the outside rush impotent, while making interior pockets.. potent to success. (IOL)

Having an immovable object at the 0 or 1 tech can make life easier for everyone around that player.. (NT) .. but that player better be a guy that isn't limited to a two-down role, if talking top 15 selection. 

 

Just trying to hammer out a thought, from reading your post. I'm sure you are plenty well enough aware of how teh foozballs works.  

 

Ya I get what you're saying, I mean I'm not going to argue the selection of any position if the guy ends up a HOFer.  But the reality is some positions impact the game more than others, just look at the way the positions are compensated salary wise.  These were the franchise tag amounts for positions in 2018 (which represent the average of the top 5 salaries in that position):

2017 Franchise Tag Values

POSITION	TENDER AMOUNT
Quarterback	$21,268,000
Running back	$12,120,000
Wide receiver	$15,682,000
Tight end	$9,780,000
Offensive line	$14,271,000
Defensive end	$16,934,000
Defensive tackle	$13,387,000
Linebacker	$14,550,000
Cornerback	$14,212,000
Safety	$10,896,000
Kicker/punter	$4,835,000

 

So in theory GMs are willing to pay the most to players that impact the game the most.  Obviously there are outliers, but these guys are paid for a living to evaluate the talents on the field and apply a price tag to them.  Lets just ignore QB cause that's been beaten to death around here.  Also some positions get a little fuzzy cause OLine lumps OTs, Gs and Cs together, same with OLBs and MLBs.  But in general this list argues WRs and pass rushers are the most valued commodities in the NFL.  So if the goal is to obtain a Star (impact) player with the first round pick worthy of an extension beyond his rookie contract, those should be the first positions targeted unless you have star players in place.  We do not, except for Ryan Kerrigan.  

[Woz]

11 minutes ago, MKnight82 said:

Also some positions get a little fuzzy cause OLine lumps OTs, Gs and Cs together, same with OLBs and MLBs

Which is odd since they separate DE from DT (and to a lesser extent, CB from S). You'd think at least separate OT from interior OL (the tackles would appreciate it, the guards and centers would not).

As a side point, the most recent reference I can find to the cap numbers (from Pro Football Talk) don't match up with yours. I also included the transition tag numbers because I thought maybe the reason the difference between DE/WR and the rest was due to a couple of high value players skewing the average (no, not really):

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2018/03/05/2018-franchise-tag-values-set-with-release-of-cap-number/

	FRANCHISE	RANK	TRANSITION	RANK	DELTA	RANK
Defensive end	$17,143,000	1	$14,200,000	1	$2,943,000	1
Wide receiver	$15,982,000	2	$13,924,000	2	$2,058,000	5
Cornerback	$14,975,000	3	$12,971,000	3	$2,004,000	6
Linebacker	$14,961,000	4	$12,810,000	4	$2,151,000	4
Offensive line	$14,077,000	5	$12,525,000	5	$1,552,000	8
Defensive tackle	$13,939,000	6	$11,407,000	6	$2,532,000	2
Running back	$11,866,000	7	$9,630,000	7	$2,236,000	3
Safety	$11,287,000	8	$9,536,000	8	$1,751,000	7
Tight end	$9,846,000	9	$8,428,000	9	$1,418,000	9

 

Not surprising, the top of the market sets the rate for the rest of the market.

What is interesting to me is that after the DE/WR tags, there's a lot less difference between corners, LBs, OLs, and DTs (only $1.036M difference in franchise tag values, and $1.564M for transition tags). RB and S are the next tier down, and then TE is the lowest non-specialist category.

 

I started to get curious about how the tags would be different if you segregated tackles from interior (and even right and left tackles), but then I remembered that it's based on the percentage of the cap and then my giveadamn hit zero.