Jordan Love

[Golfman]

8 hours ago, Joe said:

 

Hurts had a Zoom meeting with Jerruh FWIW. Hurts to the Raiders makes sense, but I suspect Gruden isn't high on Hurts given some of the inconsistencies he's had, which ultimately led to his transfer from 'Bama. Don't get me wrong, I actually like Hurts and think that he could be a great pro in the right system; but I don't think it's Oakland's system and Hurts doesn't strike me as a franchise guy. Personally, I think he can be the consummate game manager that isn't going to be a liability and can make a couple of key plays when necessary; he has to go to the right situation, however. Not like it would happen, but I think a couple years behind Taylor in San Diego(no I will not call it the LA Chargers...) would do some good for him.

Gruden in general is not fond of rookie QBs. He brought in Mariotta because he thinks he can make something of him. I don't see the Raiders in the QB market this year. I could be wrong, but don't think it's happening. 

[Pugger]

19 hours ago, Gopackgonerd said:

It's a big gamble though, we didnt do much in FA as it is, so drafting a QB round 1 is taking a potential difference maker this year off the board. I just dont feel great about it, I wouldn't bring out pitchforks or want Gute fired if it happened, I just dont like that approach even if it is BPA. It's not helping us win at all this year, and the window is closing in a hurry with Rodgers cap going up substantially next year. 

EVERY draft pick is a gamble.   You don't think it is smart to take the BPA?  I'd prefer a GM take the BPA than reach for a guy just because of short term need.   A smart GM has to think long term too.  

[Leader]

Just now, Pugger said:

EVERY draft pick is a gamble.   You don't think it is smart to take the BPA?  I'd prefer a GM take the BPA than reach for a guy just because of short term need.   A smart GM has to think long term too.  

True but I'll fall on the floor if we select Love with our first pick. Promise

[Scoremore]

Pass.  Think Love is going to bust out.  Still think the best option is giving Mia a call and offer up one of our 6th rounders for Rosen.  Let him sit behind Rodgers.  Low investment high upside.  Only guy I would consider at 30 is Herbert but he won't be there anyway.  I am not seeing any scenario where we will draft a QB early this year.  Late round flier maybe.  Grab one of the bigs OT or IDL or trade down in Rd. 1.  

[Gopackgonerd]

4 hours ago, Pugger said:

EVERY draft pick is a gamble.   You don't think it is smart to take the BPA?  I'd prefer a GM take the BPA than reach for a guy just because of short term need.   A smart GM has to think long term too.  

 I just don't like that timing this year of drafting a QB, and its not like we are making a huge mistake not drafting a QB this year anyways in Love. I guess I'm short term/go all in guy this year because we just went to a NFCCG, we didn't do a lot in FA, and we have a lot more pressing needs than QB atm. I would rather get the DL a piece, help the OL, or get a Weapon for Rodgers to help win a possible super bowl now than draft a QB who will probably sit for another 3 years. And they all aren't going to be colossal reaches over Love.

Edited April 7, 2020 by Gopackgonerd

[Joe]

6 hours ago, Golfman said:

Gruden in general is not fond of rookie QBs. He brought in Mariotta because he thinks he can make something of him. I don't see the Raiders in the QB market this year. I could be wrong, but don't think it's happening. 

Agreed. At this point in his career, I doubt Gruden can pour as much energy as he would need to into developing a QB. With Mariota, he's got a veteran that has played in numerous offenses and could use some stability.

[Pugger]

8 hours ago, Gopackgonerd said:

 I just don't like that timing this year of drafting a QB, and its not like we are making a huge mistake not drafting a QB this year anyways in Love. I guess I'm short term/go all in guy this year because we just went to a NFCCG, we didn't do a lot in FA, and we have a lot more pressing needs than QB atm. I would rather get the DL a piece, help the OL, or get a Weapon for Rodgers to help win a possible super bowl now than draft a QB who will probably sit for another 3 years. And they all aren't going to be colossal reaches over Love.

I wasn't just talking about Love or a QB.  I was referring to taking the BPA irregardless of position.  Too many times a GM - any GM - will reach for a player because of need and sometimes gets burned in the end.   Now that I'm thinking about this this happens a lot to QB needy teams!   IMO I think it is far better for a team to take the BPA unless you get real lucky and that best player left on your board also plays a position you need.

[AlexGreen#20]

1 minute ago, Pugger said:

I wasn't just talking about Love or a QB.  I was referring to taking the BPA irregardless of position.  Too many times a GM - any GM - will reach for a player because of need and sometimes gets burned in the end.   Now that I'm thinking about this this happens a lot to QB needy teams!   IMO I think it is far better for a team to take the BPA unless you get real lucky and that best player left on your board also plays a position you need.

Nobody takes BPA. Every team factors in positional value and need. 

"Pure BPA" is a dumb myth.

[Gopackgonerd]

1 minute ago, Pugger said:

I wasn't just talking about Love or a QB.  I was referring to taking the BPA irregardless of position.  Too many times a GM - any GM - will reach for a player because of need and sometimes gets burned in the end.   Now that I'm thinking about this this happens a lot to QB needy teams!   IMO I think it is far better for a team to take the BPA unless you get real lucky and that best player left on your board also plays a position you need.

I'm all for BPA, I'm just not taking a QB this year round 1. If a WR/DL/OL have a similar grade I'm taking them over Love.

[cannondale]

If Burrow falls, take him. He's the only QB that comes close to the Rodgers situation that fans think applies here. Otherwise you can find another 4 year project QB just as raw as Love later on. 

Edited April 8, 2020 by cannondale

[Jaegybomb]

I wouldn't mind Tua.

[Pugger]

1 hour ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Nobody takes BPA. Every team factors in positional value and need. 

"Pure BPA" is a dumb myth.

Nobody?   How do you know it is a myth?  When was the last time you were in a team's war room?  You do know a lot about football but sometimes you can come across as condescending towards others like you know so much more than the rest of us when you are just another fan on a message board.  It really isn't a good look.

[Pugger]

1 hour ago, Gopackgonerd said:

I'm all for BPA, I'm just not taking a QB this year round 1. If a WR/DL/OL have a similar grade I'm taking them over Love.

I agree.  Unless one of the top 2 tumble, which is highly unlikely, I too hope Gute targets a different position and I believe he will.

[AlexGreen#20]

6 hours ago, Pugger said:

Nobody?   How do you know it is a myth?  When was the last time you were in a team's war room?  You do know a lot about football but sometimes you can come across as condescending towards others like you know so much more than the rest of us when you are just another fan on a message board.  It really isn't a good look.

Look at draft history. 

10 of the first 15 picks last year were either QB, OT, DT, or Edge Rusher.

10 of the first 15 picks two years ago were either QB, OT, DT, or Edge Rusher. 

2017 was a goofy *** year. Only 6 of the first 15 picks were either QB, OT DT, or Edge Rusher

9 of the first 15 picks in 2016 were either QB, OT DT, or Edge Rusher.

9 of the first 15 picks in 2015 were either QB, OT DT, or Edge Rusher.

 

44/75 of the last 5 years of top 15 picks have played QB, OT, DT, or Edge Rusher.

Those positions make up 7/22 starting spots on an NFL team. 

When a set of positions makes up 30% of available spots and makes up 59% of the selected draft picks, teams are heavily favoring those spots. 

 

Pick any team and track their draft picks through the years and pick the ones not taking positions of need. Just look at last year:

Just looking at the last 6 picks of last year's draft. Every single one was a pick for need.

Oakland: Erik Harris/Curtis Riley was slated to be a battle for starting SS before they drafted Abraham

Chargers: Justin Jones and Brandon Mebane was the starting DT duo. Enter Jerry Tillery

Seattle: Cassius Marsh as an every down edge rusher? No think you. Enter L.J. Collier

Giants: How do you feel about both Grant Haley and Antonio Hamilton being your starting CBs? Enter DeAndre Baker

Atlanta: The winner of the Ty Sambrailo/Matt Gono rock fight was going to be the starting RT before they drafted McGary

New England: Badly needed WRs this year and jumped on N'Keal Harry

 

Just looking through it very broadly, who weren't need picks last year? Rashan Gary, Nick Bosa (if the team believes in Solomon Thomas) and . . . one might argue Josh Allen, but I wouldn't even agree with that. The only picks selected that aren't a straight need are pass rushers, and everybody knows you need more than two of those anyway, so I might not even say those aren't need picks. 

 

 

 

 

[Golfman]

Daniel Jeremiah has us taking Love in his latest mock draft. He spoke last nigh on NFL network about us possibly trading up in the mid-20's to get him. I'm not sure it plays out that way, but he seems to be pretty connected. Maybe there is some interest on Green Bays part, maybe not.