2021 DRAFT PROSPECTS

[diehardlionfan]

18 minutes ago, SimbaWho said:

Trade downs are a different conversation but I've about had it with TE's/LB's in the top 10. You're pretty much bucking a trend and going against history when you pick guys this high. ( They aren't worth it. )

I agree with you. Pitts being an exception due to his ability to line up anywhere.

This year is limiting due to the top end DL not being there. At least not worthy of pick 7. Do you see a dlineman worthy of pick 7?

I expect it to be a WR/OT/CB if they keep the pick. With the SF move I’m not certain how likely a trade back is.  It’s also possible, not likely, they move up to number two for Wilson.  

So much of the early draft will be determined by what the Jets do.
 

 

[NFL_Fan]

40 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

And making the incredibly illogical jump to the conclusion that he hasn't produced because he didn't play this year is?  He was viewed as a likely top 10 pick prior to his decision to sit out the 2020/21 season because of COVID-19.  If he played this year, do you think he would have produced or not?

oh nice you like to put words in others mouths. I mean based off your question yes, he did not produce this year. and would he have? no clue. cant predict the future. I know he didnt. I know he cant cover. I know he has a bad bad history. With that if im GM I am out. Let the Raiders have him. 

[NFL_Fan]

15 minutes ago, diehardlionfan said:

I agree with you. Pitts being an exception due to his ability to line up anywhere.

This year is limiting due to the top end DL not being there. At least not worthy of pick 7. Do you see a dlineman worthy of pick 7?

I expect it to be a WR/OT/CB if they keep the pick. With the SF move I’m not certain how likely a trade back is.  It’s also possible, not likely, they move up to number two for Wilson.  

So much of the early draft will be determined by what the Jets do.
 

 

Rosseau or Paye if you're nuts lol 

[CWood21]

4 minutes ago, NFL_Fan said:

oh nice you like to put words in others mouths. I mean based off your question yes, he did not produce this year. and would he have? no clue. cant predict the future. I know he didnt. I know he cant cover. I know he has a bad bad history. With that if im GM I am out. Let the Raiders have him. 

Mr. Lionzzz was the one who said that Parsons didn't produce.  You argued that tackles aren't a good indicator of production, which is a fair argument ONLY if you're willing to back that argument up with supporting evidence.  If he produced as a freshman and he produced as a sophomore, it's logical to believe that he'd produce as a junior.  And if you're going to use the "cop out" that you can't be sure he was going to produce as a junior, it's a bad an argument as the "LT is overrated because he might get injured" argument.  If you're scared off by the potential character concerns, that's ABSOLUTELY fair game.  And a very legitimate concern if those rumors turn out to be true.  But drop the whole production argument.  It's not based on facts.

EDIT: And for the record, I'm a big believer that LBs are only as productive as the DL in front of them.

[Karnage84]

The rumour is that the Bengals want to pair Burrow and ex-LSU Tiger Ja'Marr Chase at #5. 

#1 - JAC - Lawrence

#2 - NYJ - Wilson (Has to be the guy after that pro day)

#3 - SF - Mac Jones (Chris Simms is buddies with Shanahan. Not insider info but would have an understanding of the scheme/need, etc.). 

#4 - ATL - This feels like the sweet spot for a trade down - either someone wanting Fields or Lance (depending on what SF does) or maybe to grab Sewell (Dallas maybe?). Falcons could also take Fields or Lance as a bridge to Ryan. 

#5 - CIN - Chase

#6 - MIA - Pitts (apparently the rumour is they want him badly)

#7 - DET

It's not out of the realm of possibility that Sewell could be sitting there for us at #7 if these rumours hold true. 

Edited March 29, 2021 by Karnage84

[NFL_Fan]

3 hours ago, Karnage84 said:

The rumour is that the Bengals want to pair Burrow and ex-LSU Tiger Ja'Marr Chase at #5. 

#1 - JAC - Lawrence

#2 - NYJ - Wilson (Has to be the guy after that pro day)

#3 - SF - Mac Jones (Chris Simms is buddies with Shanahan. Not insider info but would have an understanding of the scheme/need, etc.). 

#4 - ATL - This feels like the sweet spot for a trade down - either someone wanting Fields or Lance (depending on what SF does) or maybe to grab Sewell (Dallas maybe?). Falcons could also take Fields or Lance as a bridge to Ryan. 

#5 - CIN - Chase

#6 - MIA - Pitts (apparently the rumour is they want him badly)

#7 - DET

It's not out of the realm of possibility that Sewell could be sitting there for us at #7 if these rumours hold true. 

be aware of ALLL the smoke screens before April 27. If the Bengals are smart they protect Burrow. Their oline is a joke. 

[diehardlionfan]

Sewell is a player none of us thought would be there a few weeks ago. It would be a very fortunate course of events that would make him available. 

Find another starter for RG and the line would be set for a number of years.

He’s number two on my preferred player chart. 

I would love to know if they’ve tried, or considered trying to get the Jets pick? Wilson being the target.

[NFL_Fan]

Just now, diehardlionfan said:

Sewell is a player none of us thought would be there a few weeks ago. It would be a very fortunate course of events that would make him available. 

Find another starter for RG and the line would be set for a number of years.

He’s number two on my preferred player chart. 

I would love to know if they’ve tried, or considered trying to get the Jets pick? Wilson being the target.

at least 7/ nxt year 1st and a 2nd. maybe more. no way for Wilson. Can we say it together. OVER-RATED lol

[diehardlionfan]

1 minute ago, NFL_Fan said:

at least 7/ nxt year 1st and a 2nd. maybe more. no way for Wilson. Can we say it together. OVER-RATED lol

No, it would be a first next year and a third (possibly conditional). I’m just curious about their thought processes. I also wonder if they like like Mond or Newman

You and I disagree about Wilson’s ability. I think he will be very good. 

I suspect they’ve considered everything and the plan is to roll with Goff. 

[Karnage84]

BREAKING NEWS: Devonta Smith's college coach who has a vested interest in Devonta being a high draft pick and won't have to worry about his stature at the NFL level says his stature isn't an issue at the NFL level. 

Edited March 29, 2021 by Karnage84

[NFL_Fan]

1 minute ago, Karnage84 said:

BREAKING NEWS: Devonta Smith's college coach who has a vested interest in Devonta being a high draft pick and won't have to worry about his stature at the NFL level says his stature isn't an issue at the NFL level. 

huh??? lmao 

[MrLionzz]

On 3/28/2021 at 3:26 PM, CWood21 said:

Mr. Lionzzz was the one who said that Parsons didn't produce.  You argued that tackles aren't a good indicator of production, which is a fair argument ONLY if you're willing to back that argument up with supporting evidence.  If he produced as a freshman and he produced as a sophomore, it's logical to believe that he'd produce as a junior.  And if you're going to use the "cop out" that you can't be sure he was going to produce as a junior, it's a bad an argument as the "LT is overrated because he might get injured" argument.  If you're scared off by the potential character concerns, that's ABSOLUTELY fair game.  And a very legitimate concern if those rumors turn out to be true.  But drop the whole production argument.  It's not based on facts.

EDIT: And for the record, I'm a big believer that LBs are only as productive as the DL in front of them.

What I was saying was that going on tackles alone as production can be misconstrued. Yes tackles mean production, but production as it pertains to coverage ability and tackles. Do the tackles after reception mean production? yes, but from the coverage aspect, you want passes defended over passes completed then tackles. That is what I was going for. That's all, I wasn't getting nasty or rude. I was just stating that if he excelled in coverage like a lot of analysts say then he would not have had the amount of tackles due to more passes defended. I just fear that his bust potential is much higher than other prospects they could take at 7.  Waddle, Pitts, Chase, Surtain, and if you wanted to trade back and acquire picks then you could go with Paye, Collins, Barmore. I personally like the trade back scenario because the Lions need some 6th and 7th rounders. 

[Sllim Pickens]

10 hours ago, MrLionzz said:

What I was saying was that going on tackles alone as production can be misconstrued. Yes tackles mean production, but production as it pertains to coverage ability and tackles. Do the tackles after reception mean production? yes, but from the coverage aspect, you want passes defended over passes completed then tackles. That is what I was going for. That's all, I wasn't getting nasty or rude. I was just stating that if he excelled in coverage like a lot of analysts say then he would not have had the amount of tackles due to more passes defended. I just fear that his bust potential is much higher than other prospects they could take at 7.  Waddle, Pitts, Chase, Surtain, and if you wanted to trade back and acquire picks then you could go with Paye, Collins, Barmore. I personally like the trade back scenario because the Lions need some 6th and 7th rounders. 

He had 5 PD's in 2019.  Thats more than JOK had, more than Collins had in any year other than this year (well he had more PDs than Collins but Collins also had INTs agiainst lesser comp).  

[NFL_Fan]

12 hours ago, MrLionzz said:

What I was saying was that going on tackles alone as production can be misconstrued. Yes tackles mean production, but production as it pertains to coverage ability and tackles. Do the tackles after reception mean production? yes, but from the coverage aspect, you want passes defended over passes completed then tackles. That is what I was going for. That's all, I wasn't getting nasty or rude. I was just stating that if he excelled in coverage like a lot of analysts say then he would not have had the amount of tackles due to more passes defended. I just fear that his bust potential is much higher than other prospects they could take at 7.  Waddle, Pitts, Chase, Surtain, and if you wanted to trade back and acquire picks then you could go with Paye, Collins, Barmore. I personally like the trade back scenario because the Lions need some 6th and 7th rounders. 

im just saying the more tackles the more on the field he is. not all on him penn state is just trash. but even if yuo said yo this guy had 400 tackles. that just tells me cte and he couldnt get off the field cause they are trash...say he has 20 PB or 6 sacks and 6 picks. then im impressed. Even if he did hae that since the bully stuff came out i just hope he gets covid or something bad

[NFL_Fan]

12 hours ago, MrLionzz said:

What I was saying was that going on tackles alone as production can be misconstrued. Yes tackles mean production, but production as it pertains to coverage ability and tackles. Do the tackles after reception mean production? yes, but from the coverage aspect, you want passes defended over passes completed then tackles. That is what I was going for. That's all, I wasn't getting nasty or rude. I was just stating that if he excelled in coverage like a lot of analysts say then he would not have had the amount of tackles due to more passes defended. I just fear that his bust potential is much higher than other prospects they could take at 7.  Waddle, Pitts, Chase, Surtain, and if you wanted to trade back and acquire picks then you could go with Paye, Collins, Barmore. I personally like the trade back scenario because the Lions need some 6th and 7th rounders. 

i really hope they dont trade down...for 6/7 you can trade down in the 5thrd for a 6/7 lmao..i hope we get 1/2rd picks or dont trade down. unless you  mean of course those andddd the 6/7 on top of. that would be nice. 

Edited March 30, 2021 by NFL_Fan
spelling