The 2023 Draft Thread - We're picking #7

[jimkelly02]

4 hours ago, Dessie said:

I have been saying this for a while, we shouldn’t be having to rely on 3-4 rookies starting off the bat and it’s a bad sign for the DC that we think we might need to. 

Concerned probably isn’t the word for it, but l’d be concerned we pass up better offensive talent that’s fallen out of round 1 just to fill holes on the defense.

I’m hoping we don’t do that an if we can’t fill the defensive holes we go back into FA after the draft to do that.

[bucksavage1]

Bryce Young steamed to a -210 favorite for the number #1 pick. 
On the same day a report that 6 teams have attempted to trade up to #3 

Stroud SZN #3?

[BayRaider]

1 hour ago, bucksavage1 said:

Bryce Young steamed to a -210 favorite for the number #1 pick. 
On the same day a report that 6 teams have attempted to trade up to #3 

Stroud SZN #3?

The concerns about Bryce’s height are probably cooling down slightly, and Stroud would be a pretty underwhelming #1 draft pick. He’ll never be Mahomes. He’ll never be Allen. He’ll never be Burrow. He is in the Carr, Prescott, Stafford’s of the world, but can be better than all of them. He just won’t ever be elite, but he can be pretty damn good. Bryce Young and Anthony Richardson the sky is the limit, although both more risky than Stroud. If height really is an issue, look at Kyler. He hasn’t been terrible. And Bryce is way smarter, way more accurate, and WAY more motivated than Kyler. Kyler has a stronger arm, but Bryce isn’t far off. Bryce and Richardson both have Top 5 QB potential. 

I’d say Stroud/Young are 50/50 to go 1/2. I’m still confident Richardson is the third QB off the board. But he will go #3 with someone trading up. Just like 2021, the first 3 picks will be QB’s. 

[jpaulthe1st]

4 hours ago, big_palooka said:

For those that don't have the Athletic, here is Dane Buglers beast guide:

https://cdn.theathletic.com/app/uploads/2023/04/08224218/TheBeast_NFL_Draft_Guide.pdf

Password: Bea$stguide2023!

Covers 1893 player rankings and 401 scouting reports, which props to him on the grind. 

This is dope! Thank you for sharing 

[Dessie]

13 hours ago, raidr4life said:

That's called rebuilding the defense and we don't have to rely on them but if they can show they can take the job then that means we drafted well. The 2 spots I think can make instant impact is #1 CB but we have a bunch of guys to compete, and NT I think Mazi Smith or Ika could come in and beat out Ferrell and Jenkins. A LB who can fill in for Sillane or Deablo if either of them can't get the job done.

The point being that if the draft doesn’t play out as we want we will end up reaching on defensive guys just because we are short of players. That’s not a recipe for success. 

[ronjon1990]

49 minutes ago, Dessie said:

The point being that if the draft doesn’t play out as we want we will end up reaching on defensive guys just because we are short of players. That’s not a recipe for success. 

Draft is always a gamble, but this class has so much on D that I would be surprised if we were forced to reach unless literally every pick from 1-109 was defense lol. 

In mocks, I'm almost always playing a game of "who do I give up on taking". I feel like really reaching would take some impressive skill with this class, especially with how all over the place some rankings are. 

[raidr4life]

56 minutes ago, Dessie said:

The point being that if the draft doesn’t play out as we want we will end up reaching on defensive guys just because we are short of players. That’s not a recipe for success. 

I don't think you can reach when the first 3 rounds are packed.

We have a better chance of guys falling.

Edited April 11, 2023 by raidr4life

[Dessie]

8 minutes ago, ronjon1990 said:

Draft is always a gamble, but this class has so much on D that I would be surprised if we were forced to reach unless literally every pick from 1-109 was defense lol. 

In mocks, I'm almost always playing a game of "who do I give up on taking". I feel like really reaching would take some impressive skill with this class, especially with how all over the place some rankings are. 

If you are pre determining that we are going to take only defensive players that is going to lead to reaching, what if there is a G/TE/QB there? 

[Dessie]

7 minutes ago, raidr4life said:

I don't think you can reach when the first 3 rounds are packed.

We have a better chance of guys falling.

You will if you are only interested in defensive guys. 

Edited April 11, 2023 by Dessie

[jimkelly02]

1 hour ago, Dessie said:

The point being that if the draft doesn’t play out as we want we will end up reaching on defensive guys just because we are short of players. That’s not a recipe for success. 

That’s exactly what I was trying to articulate when I said what I said. 

i seen a mock that had us drafting Michael Mayer in round 2, which I think is a stretch but anything is possible.  Unless there’s a defender that’s really good I think I’d prefer the longterm play with Mayer.  

Edited April 11, 2023 by jimkelly02

[raidr4life]

5 minutes ago, jimkelly02 said:

That’s exactly what I was trying to articulate when I said what I said. 

i seen a mock that had us drafting Michael Mayer in round 2, which I think is a stretch but anything is possible.  Unless there’s a defender that’s really good I think I’d prefer the longterm play with Mayer.  

If he fell but like you said it's a stretch

[jimkelly02]

2 minutes ago, raidr4life said:

If he fell but like you said it's a stretch

If not him someone else… I’m not locking onto one player… there’s always players that fall and are available at the top of rounds.

I just think you have to be okay with coming out of the draft with 2 of the 3 defensive starters needed and going back into FA for the rest right after the draft. 

Edited April 11, 2023 by jimkelly02

[big_palooka]

Honestly, if you stick to your board and go best player available, things should work out appropriately. The strength in this class is on defense. With exception of TE where there is some legit talent, there won't be many offensive players that I'd feel they missed out on opting for a defensive player. One of Mayers, Kincaid, Musgrave would be a luxury I'd afford depending on the spot. But TE is deep and there will be several pushed past the top 100. 

 

 

[raidr4life]

35 minutes ago, big_palooka said:

Honestly, if you stick to your board and go best player available, things should work out appropriately. The strength in this class is on defense. With exception of TE where there is some legit talent, there won't be many offensive players that I'd feel they missed out on opting for a defensive player. One of Mayers, Kincaid, Musgrave would be a luxury I'd afford depending on the spot. But TE is deep and there will be several pushed past the top 100. 

 

 

Exactly what I'm saying.

[ronjon1990]

54 minutes ago, Dessie said:

If you are pre determining that we are going to take only defensive players that is going to lead to reaching, what if there is a G/TE/QB there? 

I'm not advocating for that though. Just saying I don't see many scenarios where the pick would be a reach. It may be a pick that ignores a different need or passes up a player at a different position that might've wound up more impactful, but I don't think that means it would be a reach per se. 

Put it this way- we get to pick 70 and Luke Musgrave is there. We've gone CB at 7 and DT at 38. We're eyeballing Musgrave, but we still need LBs. Sewell, To'oTo'o, Pace, Overshown, etc are all still there. Would grabbing one be a reach? Maybe, given the number of them still available, it would be a questionable pick, but I wouldn't be mad about it and feel that we reached. 

Take the same approach but say we went CB at 7 and LB at 38. At 70, we're looking at Musgrave. Somehow, Dexter, Benton, and Ika are still there. We don't pick again until 100 and there's no chance they're still around then. Would it be reaching? Again, I don't think so. 

Now, take the above two scenarios and say it comes down to Musgrave or one of Diabate, Pickens, Roy, Williams, someone who doesn't come particularly close to cracking the top 100. In that case, taking someone 30+ picks ahead of their projected range would indeed be a huge reach, especially considering we have pick 100 and 109. Musgrave would be gone, but at least 2 of those 4 would almost assuredly be there. But with the numbers game as it is, I would be absolutely shocked if this type of scenario played out. 

Theen again, it comes down to subjective opinions. I wouldn't waste my time or assets on any QB in this class prior to pick 70, which already limits the options. There's a couple of OG's I'd look at, but not at the expense of a DT or LB right now. I wouldn't take Torrence over a DT or LB at 38 for example, because I would just target Avila at 70 or Curtis, Daniels, Vorhees, or Zavala in round 4+. Ditto for TE- we have Hooper and Howard. I'd love Musgrave or Washington, and if either fell it would be a tough call. But again, I like Kuntz, Latu, and Mallory enough to look at post pick 100 that I wouldn't jump on either if the board shook out to where the next crack at defensive talent came with a marked drop in talent. Other people would trade the house for a QB. Others would grab a faller on offense in the form of a G or TE.