> 2023 NFL Draft Prospects Thread <

[Jroc04]

21 minutes ago, Nabbs4u said:

 

I did mean to say 4, 5th year was after the contract extension and B2B 400 touch seasons. I do find it funny though that the year he averaged 120 total yds , 1 TD a game basically, wasn't considered  "special" because he only played 10 gms?

What defines "team success" in your eyes, actual SB wins curious? So Henry, Saquon, Zeke and CMC don't count? Not the fact all them lacked a true FQB that's actually the real catalyst to winning SB's?

The only reason those teams are or were relevant during those stretches was becuase of those RB, not Tannehill, Jones, Dak and a broken Cam after CMC rookie season?

Now if you're saying taking a 1st rd RB can set your franchise back more in the long run if he gets "Injured", yes positional value absolutely matters. I agree. 

We just got excited that Sanders finally had a break out season and that season wasn't even close to as good as those listed above, fully healthy and playing 1 less game.

Zekes first 4 seasons (3 1/2) really 7,000 total yds 48 TD in 56 gms. Or 125 yds almost a TD a week. 

What don’t you understand? He played 10 games. That’s not enough production to consider that someone had a HoF year. In the year in question, he averaged 4.1 a carry. It’s fine and all. But he carried 24.2 times game. It was more bulk stats than anything. It’s still impressive. It’s just not HoF worthy. If saying someone having 1200 yard seasons are HoF worthy then we just watched Miles have one. And that’s not what it looks like. Longevity and durability is a factor. Zeke is lacking. Like I said, 3 really good years and the rest were ok or underwhelming. Regardless, is that worth a top 5 pick or whatever he was? 3 good years, a half broke body and a now bloated salary which is hamstrung your team? 

What defines team success? I’d say playoff appearances and multiple wins. Not necessarily SB wins but they sure go a long way. And btw, Henry was a 2nd round pick. Kinda goes against what I’ve been talking about. Besides Dallas, who I already admitted is the best example there is, none of those teams have excelled. Saquon is 19-41 as a starter or something.  There’s no success there. Theres no relevance. And Carolina already moved on from CMC. Why would any struggling team trade away a special player that isn’t a malcontent? 

It’s just not worth it to me. Even if a RB is an absolute hit. Which, from what I’ve seen, is already a rarity season in and season out, it seemingly doesn’t do enough to really bring the team any real, sustainable success. And more often than not, it’s a detriment. It’s already a fragile position to begin with. If you do find someone that is a high contributor and can do it for long stretches, the pay they receive absolutely kills the cap comparatively. The 10M RB is really good but the 3M RB isn’t so far off from the 10M guy that you can’t make it up with the extra resources going to other positions. 

[EaglesPeteC]

7 hours ago, Jroc04 said:

And what if your RB is bad? Is that in the realm of possibility? 
 

I don’t understand, besides being antagonistic, you’re being coy. Simply put, taking a RB that early, even as a homerun pick, has its drawbacks. It’s extremely rare for a RB picked that early to work out well enough where it helps your team have ultimate success and doesn’t prove to be a detriment. 

I’m not being antagonistic. It’s simple. I don’t get the the “no way RB at all costs”. If he is the best player on the board, which there is a significant chance he could be, take him. I truly don’t understand taking a player with a worse grade because of vibes….. 

If two players have similar grades, yes take the higher value position but just reaching on a player because of some made up no RB rule is silliness. 

[IrishHooligan00]

I think it's highly realistic PHi trades down put of the 10, unlesssss Anderson falls to 5. Then I can see PHI trading up with SEA. 

10, both 2nds next year for 5? Or both our 1sts for 5 and their 2nd rounder? 

[EaglesFlySBChampsHigh]

14 hours ago, EaglesPeteC said:

It does not appear to be a great top end class. That is why I’d rather draft the elite player at the less valuable position then over drafting a lesser player at a more valuable position 

Well put

All the arguments back and forth and this is the answer. 

[Jroc04]

4 hours ago, EaglesPeteC said:

I’m not being antagonistic. It’s simple. I don’t get the the “no way RB at all costs”. If he is the best player on the board, which there is a significant chance he could be, take him. I truly don’t understand taking a player with a worse grade because of vibes….. 

If two players have similar grades, yes take the higher value position but just reaching on a player because of some made up no RB rule is silliness. 

What’s made up about it? It’s simple history at this point. 
 

Any team picking in the, top 10 let’s say, have dire needs. Usually at positions that are fundamental to winning. QB, OL, DL. When those teams ignore those positions and opt for the pretty 1st round RB, when does it ever work out? The RB struggles because they don’t have the pieces around them that they require to actually excel. (Barkley, Harris) Or by the time they actually get their act together and build a balanced team ready to compete, it’s time to pay that RB. And the next time giving a RB a huge contract works out into a SB will probably be the first time in modern day NFL. 
 

The draft tends to be a crapshoot. This is unavoidable. Taking Barnett over CMC would have been a “mistake” clearly. CMC has proven to be the better footballer. But there are 10 guys that could be cornerstone players still playing for Carolina if they just opted for a position that directly correlates with winning. They wanted and needed a RB, got a good one and he’s not even on the team anymore. And he’s good. If they drafted Mahomes, Reddick, Humphrey, Watson, Watt instead, chances are they are still on their roster and they are building around them. But Carolina is a mess and trading their RB for pieces to actually try and build the team correctly. 
 

The Eagles are actually in an odd position coming off a SB appearance and drafting in the top 10. This would actually be one of those times that drafting a RB might make sense if it was their only real hole. But why the hell would you? Miles Sanders just played in the SB as our starter and he’s just a middling RB. Our OL is the star of the running game. We can get a blue chip prospect at a more valuable position, pick up a RB in the 2nd or 3rd (or off the FA scrap heap), keep the RB position cheap and production shouldn’t fall off.  Besides, we have holes and a couple more potential holes in a couple years. I’d rather prepare for those than take a position where it’s production is easily replaced by mid tier starters. 

[EaglesPeteC]

41 minutes ago, Jroc04 said:

What’s made up about it? It’s simple history at this point. 
 

Any team picking in the, top 10 let’s say, have dire needs. Usually at positions that are fundamental to winning. QB, OL, DL. When those teams ignore those positions and opt for the pretty 1st round RB, when does it ever work out? The RB struggles because they don’t have the pieces around them that they require to actually excel. (Barkley, Harris) Or by the time they actually get their act together and build a balanced team ready to compete, it’s time to pay that RB. And the next time giving a RB a huge contract works out into a SB will probably be the first time in modern day NFL. 
 

The draft tends to be a crapshoot. This is unavoidable. Taking Barnett over CMC would have been a “mistake” clearly. CMC has proven to be the better footballer. But there are 10 guys that could be cornerstone players still playing for Carolina if they just opted for a position that directly correlates with winning. They wanted and needed a RB, got a good one and he’s not even on the team anymore. And he’s good. If they drafted Mahomes, Reddick, Humphrey, Watson, Watt instead, chances are they are still on their roster and they are building around them. But Carolina is a mess and trading their RB for pieces to actually try and build the team correctly. 
 

The Eagles are actually in an odd position coming off a SB appearance and drafting in the top 10. This would actually be one of those times that drafting a RB might make sense if it was their only real hole. But why the hell would you? Miles Sanders just played in the SB as our starter and he’s just a middling RB. Our OL is the star of the running game. We can get a blue chip prospect at a more valuable position, pick up a RB in the 2nd or 3rd (or off the FA scrap heap), keep the RB position cheap and production shouldn’t fall off.  Besides, we have holes and a couple more potential holes in a couple years. I’d rather prepare for those than take a position where it’s production is easily replaced by mid tier starters. 

You are focusing way too much on needs and generalities of positions. We have a whole free agency to see what the holes are. 
 

To me there is a difference between “an” RB and “this” RB and in this particular class.   

[Jroc04]

35 minutes ago, EaglesPeteC said:

You are focusing way too much on needs and generalities of positions. We have a whole free agency to see what the holes are. 
 

To me there is a difference between “an” RB and “this” RB and in this particular class.   

We’ve seen this dozens of times before. Unless Robinson is a game changer (likely) and he comes cheap (highly unlikey) chances are he ends up not being worth the price. You’ll spend precious draft resources and valuable cap space (especially considering allocation) for a guy who’s value is relatively easily and cheaply replaced. Maybe the guy we ultimately get won’t be as big a stud, but is it really difficult to think we can’t replace Miles Sanders? We went to the SB with him. Take that value, invest in the defense where we are losing parts. There’s no reason to overpay at a positon that we were just fine at with a guy that’s not really all that special. 

[EaglesPeteC]

1 minute ago, Jroc04 said:

We’ve seen this dozens of times before. Unless Robinson is a game changer (likely) and he comes cheap (highly unlikey) chances are he ends up not being worth the price. You’ll spend precious draft resources and valuable cap space (especially considering allocation) for a guy who’s value is relatively easily and cheaply replaced. Maybe the guy we ultimately get won’t be as big a stud, but is it really difficult to think we can’t replace Miles Sanders? We went to the SB with him. Take that value, invest in the defense where we are losing parts. There’s no reason to overpay at a positon that we were just fine at with a guy that’s not really all that special. 

What I am saying is if who you are passing on him for isn’t as good of a prospect, like what are we even doing? If it’s between Bijan and a closely rated prospect at another position, then yes, take the other guy, but a very realistic scenario is he is the best player on the board. Going down a tier and getting a worse player because you can also get a worse RB later doesn’t make sense to me. 

[Jroc04]

Just now, EaglesPeteC said:

What I am saying is if who you are passing on him for isn’t as good of a prospect, like what are we even doing? If it’s between Bijan and a closely rated prospect at another position, then yes, take the other guy, but a very realistic scenario is he is the best player on the board. Going down a tier and getting a worse player because you can also get a worse RB later doesn’t make sense to me. 

Is he far and away the best player? With all value considered, the next best prospect would have to be a projected mid level starter to even consider it. 
 

If so, then flip the pick. Trade up, trade down, trade for a vet. Taking a RB that high is a death knell. 
 

 

[Danger]

3 hours ago, EaglesFlySBChampsHigh said:

Well put

All the arguments back and forth and this is the answer. 

No. No it's not. Bijan in no draft is worth a top 10 pick.

[Danger]

Even if we had an elite RB, that's not going to move the needle on this team hardly at all.

[EagleBlueDon]

Seems like every safety prospect in this class is being touted as more slot corners than actual safeties. I know there's overlap between the positions but idk. Kinda bothers me.

 

[Danger]

1 hour ago, EagleBlueDon said:

Seems like every safety prospect in this class is being touted as more slot corners than actual safeties. I know there's overlap between the positions but idk. Kinda bothers me.

 

Doesn't seem to be any high end safeties in this draft.

TBH, this whole class feels kind of week. There is depth at CB and some late round positions, but it's just not that exciting this year.

[AZ_Eaglesfan]

Bijan is a very good RB prospect, but he is not top 10 worthy imo. If we traded back to around 20 I would be ok with it, but there will be better players at 10.

[Nabbs4u]

5 hours ago, Jroc04 said:

Maybe the guy we ultimately get won’t be as big a stud, but is it really difficult to think we can’t replace Miles Sanders?

How many Eagle RB have had 1300 yds and Dbl digit TD in a season over the past 20 years? 2-3? Or are you assuming because of Hurts/RPO/OL any and all RB are basically interchangeable and capable of putting up those numbers? Eagles are now say Mike Shannahan esq' plug and play any RB and he will get 1,000 yd in his system?