Scouting the NFL 2023 Draft Prospects

[Mesa_Titan]

Since I don't pretend to have any clue about evaluating players, I'm going to be happy with most anyone we draft, and then criticize and/or praise based off of hindsight.🤷‍♂️ 

Edited April 5, 2023 by Mesa_Titan

[615finest]

 

[Chocolateman78]

17 hours ago, KingTitan said:

Thinking about this team. 

We won't be able to pick high next year with Tannehill. 

Even in Miami he was good for about 7-8 wins. 

I'm warming up to trade up for all the QBs. I wouldn't trade up for Levis Richardson but if they went through everything and  was convinced that either one was worth it then I'm good. 

I hate this logic. 

You have to get the RIGHT QB, not necessarily the first one.

the Chiefs were a playoff team before they drafted Mahomes. So we’re the Ravens with Lamar. The Texans won a playoff game the year before they drafted Deshaun. The bills were a 9 win team when they got Josh Allen. 

How we MIGHT perform next year should have zero impact on how who we select this year

 

[KingTitan]

23 minutes ago, Chocolateman78 said:

I hate this logic. 

You have to get the RIGHT QB, not necessarily the first one.

the Chiefs were a playoff team before they drafted Mahomes. So we’re the Ravens with Lamar. The Texans won a playoff game the year before they drafted Deshaun. The bills were a 9 win team when they got Josh Allen. 

How we MIGHT perform next year should have zero impact on how who we select this year

 

I'm speaking towards the people that think we should pass on a QB this year because "next year will be better."

My thing the whole time has been if you believe you found a QB you take them, similar to how the Chiefs or whoever else did. Not because they had to take one.

My point is exactly, don't bank on how you might do next year because nothing next year is for sure.  And I mention Tannehill's history again for those that think we will be in "perfect" position to take a top QB next year. 

You can't depend on that. 

Tannehill has shown that he and Vrabel as coach can get you to a point where you are no longer in position to take a top QB without a major cost. 

So if they feel they have the RIGHT QB, then take them. Don't pass on them because you THINK maybe next year will be better or that you will be in position to draft one. 

[KingTitan]

 

[deeluxx3]

1 hour ago, KingTitan said:

 

Thinking we — or any team for that matter — “can’t” or “shouldn’t” trade up for a qb cuz of supporting cast is just foolish

[Chocolateman78]

28 minutes ago, deeluxx3 said:

Thinking we — or any team for that matter — “can’t” or “shouldn’t” trade up for a qb cuz of supporting cast is just foolish

It’s the price though. The bills didn’t trade 3 1’s for Josh Allen. They traded 2 second round picks, a 5th, and a mediocre offensive tackle to move from 21 to 7 to draft Allen. They didn’t even trade any future picks. They were a playoff roster who still had a lot of draft capitol even after acquiring Allen. So justifying trading 3 1s for a QB based off what the Bills did is illogical to me. 
 

there’s no success record trading that much draft capitol for a QB. 

[titans0021]

2 hours ago, KingTitan said:

 

This is such a weird point to me. Josh Allen was bad both of those years. Is the argument that forcing your young QB to suffer with a bad supporting cast doesn’t necessarily break them every time? Because, sure, that’s true. But I’m not sure if it’s necessarily the ideal plan. Especially if it involves trading away a bunch of the valuable future assets that would give the young QB talent to work with.

If you’re convinced that Richardson will be a franchise guy, you go and get him. I can’t argue with that. But you better be sure that he is. Because that’s a big swing on a guy who put up average numbers and completed less than 54% of his passes in his one year as a starter.  Especially if it involves mortgaging your future to land him.

[titans0021]

7 minutes ago, Chocolateman78 said:

It’s the price though. The bills didn’t trade 3 1’s for Josh Allen. They traded 2 second round picks, a 5th, and a mediocre offensive tackle to move from 21 to 7 to draft Allen. They didn’t even trade any future picks. They were a playoff roster who still had a lot of draft capitol even after acquiring Allen. So justifying trading 3 1s for a QB based off what the Bills did is illogical to me. 
 

there’s no success record trading that much draft capitol for a QB. 

It is interesting. Has a team actually benefitted from trading huge draft capitol to move up for a QB? The Chiefs moved up for Mahomes, but only gave up picks in that year if I remember correctly. Otherwise the list in the last 10 years or so is what? Goff, Lance, Trubisky, RG3?

[KingTitan]

I think it's splitting hairs.  

Teams traded up to get "their" QB is bad. 
Examples of teams who did it.

Well it's not only trading up it's the price paid to trade up. 

That can't be the reason for not drafting a guy.

There are more examples of teams taking the QB at their pick without trading up that failed than people who traded up and the QB didn't work out. 

It's not about trading up, it's about who are you trading up to get.

Would it not have been worth it to trade a couple of 1st to draft Luck or Burrow? 
Just feels like a moving the goal post type deal when saying ok it's not just about trading up to get your guy, it's the price paid.

Trading up to get the guy you want isn't a bad thing. It works and it doesn't work. Similar to picking a QB at whatever pick you pick. 

Trading up for the QB you want works. Again if the Chiefs didn't move up, then where would they be? Yes the price is different but still the philosophy is the same.  Luckily for them in that draft people didn't want to draft Mahomes in the first 5 picks. But I'm willing to be they would have explored it or done it if Mahomes was thought to be a top 5 pick. 

And people are willing to sell 5 drafts apparently to draft Caleb Williams. Does he not fall under those same rules?  
"But King he is a better prospect!"  

Naw, naw, the ground rules are established as trading up a "heavy" price is not a good idea never worked. lol

[KingTitan]

1 hour ago, titans0021 said:

This is such a weird point to me. Josh Allen was bad both of those years. Is the argument that forcing your young QB to suffer with a bad supporting cast doesn’t necessarily break them every time? Because, sure, that’s true. But I’m not sure if it’s necessarily the ideal plan. Especially if it involves trading away a bunch of the valuable future assets that would give the young QB talent to work with.

If you’re convinced that Richardson will be a franchise guy, you go and get him. I can’t argue with that. But you better be sure that he is. Because that’s a big swing on a guy who put up average numbers and completed less than 54% of his passes in his one year as a starter.  Especially if it involves mortgaging your future to land him.

Yeah I think the point is that if you draft the right guy, move up or not, he will develop. 
If they move up, I'd assume the believe in him 1000%.

I'd want that if they stayed at 11 and took a QB. 

They need to be sure and not throw away a pick(S). for a blind hope. 

[Chocolateman78]

And how good would Burrow be today if they would have traded the picks that wound up being Tee Higgins and Jamar Chase in order to get him? People would likely be screaming about how the idiot Bengals can’t protect their franchise QB OR get him weapons. 

 

[KingTitan]

7 hours ago, Chocolateman78 said:

And how good would Burrow be today if they would have traded the picks that wound up being Tee Higgins and Jamar Chase in order to get him? People would likely be screaming about how the idiot Bengals can’t protect their franchise QB OR get him weapons. 

 

Moving goal post. 

Get him a line. Ohhh they drafted a WR. Great move! 

We will have a lot of money next year so maybe they say we will supplement those picks in FA or trade. 

Im just not so bullish against moving up and taking a QB if they are sold. 

They have way more information than any of us have. They know how they will work and if they will work to improve. 

I'd trade down personally if possible. Or take JSN at 11. 

But if they did their work and said this is the QB that can win us games. Then let's roll!  

 

[TitanSlim]

Where I’m at with the whole situation.

-I’m ok if we traded up to 3 for Stroud or Young. I’m not in favor for it, but I’d be ok with it and understand.

-If Anthony Richardson falls outside of the top 5, I’m ok with trading up for him. I get the concerns with him but his raw athleticism and potential peak is too hard for me to ignore.

-I’ve come around on JSN being the guy if we stay at 11. At worse, I feel he’s a better version of 2022 Robert Woods from day one.

-My favorite option, trade back. Load up on as many draft picks as we can for this year and possibly next year. 

[TitanRedd]

Last I check how many 1st rd picks scratch that, how much draft capital the Rams gave the titans to get Jared Goff 🤔. Goff got them to the SB & got them a SB, because he was included in the stafford deal. Now you tell me who won the trade the titans or the Rams…

in conclusion the world don’t move to the beat of just 1 drum, what might work for you, may not work for some. It take different strokes to draft a QB yes it does .