Random mock drafts

[Sllim Pickens]

1 hour ago, Karnage84 said:

Prototypical size

Above average athleticism (he can make plays with his feet but he's not a dual threat)

Stanford offense was awful yet he still put up nearly 3,000 yards on the 5th most number of snaps (433) with a 61.2% completion rate. 

He had nearly as many Big Time Throws (dictated by PFF) as Hendon Hooker (15 vs HH's 17), tied for the second lowest Turnover Worthy Play % (1.8%, tied with Tommy Devito on 100 less snaps), dealt with 18 drops (above average) while facing the highest number of pressure attempts (t-148) and was sacked 40 times (highest). 

He has the tools to be a really solid NFL QB for a long time. I don't know if this is a proper comparison but a guy like Derek Carr seems to come to mind. A long time starter with upside but he isn't going to be that Tier 1 guy like a Mahomes. However, you can win a lot of games with someone like that and you can even win Super Bowls (Trent Dilfer, Joe Flacco). 

I agree with this.  I think McKee can be pretty much what Goff is for us but much cheaper.  If not, he is just a solid backup for the next few years. He has upside for sure but taking him in the second isnt nearly the risk of a high pick especially when adding extra picks in a trade down. 

And I also agree about Hooker.  He will have to be on IR most of the year so will be a rookie at 26 next year.  We likely would keep Goff for the final year of his deal unless Hooker really showed a lot if able at the end of 23. So really he would be 27 by the time he would be expected to start here and that just doesn't make sense to me.  McKee (or any other non injured QB) could get valuable reps this year and show the staff what they have to help us make a decision on Goff going forward.   

[Karnage84]

25 minutes ago, General Tso said:

Did a mock and would really love this result

Det trades 6, 48 to ATL for 8, 44, 75, 110

6: Christian Gonzalez CB

18: Calijah Kancey DT

44: Steve Avila G

55: Trenton Simpson LB

75: Jalin Hyatt WR

81: Hendon Hooker QB

 

I want absolutely nothing to do with Hooker. Seems like a great dude. Played really well in college. He's old and coming off of a significant injury. He's going to need to sit for at least 1 year. He'd be nearly as old as Jared Goff is now before he ever has a chance at stepping onto the field. Assuming he's this great player, you're getting a very limited amount of time to build around him, develop him and then take your shots at a championship before he starts to drop off. 

[Karnage84]

5 minutes ago, Sllim Pickens said:

I agree with this.  I think McKee can be pretty much what Goff is for us but much cheaper.  If not, he is just a solid backup for the next few years. He has upside for sure but taking him in the second isnt nearly the risk of a high pick especially when adding extra picks in a trade down. 

And I also agree about Hooker.  He will have to be on IR most of the year so will be a rookie at 26 next year.  We likely would keep Goff for the final year of his deal unless Hooker really showed a lot if able at the end of 23. So really he would be 27 by the time he would be expected to start here and that just doesn't make sense to me.  McKee (or any other non injured QB) could get valuable reps this year and show the staff what they have to help us make a decision on Goff going forward.   

I think he's better athletically and can offer more as a runner. If he can get somewhere in the 4.6 - 4.7 range, it'd be pretty impressive. 

We could potentially trade up with KC to #31 with #48, #81 and a 2024 4th if the Lions were convinced that a guy like McKee or AR15 could be the QBOTF and wanted to cement in the 5th year option. We have extra picks in hand, have flexibility to acquire extra capital in a trade down. 

I'd prefer that the Lions sit and take a guy next year but I can't rule out the possibility there could be someone they really like in the process. 

[Sllim Pickens]

20 minutes ago, Karnage84 said:

I think he's better athletically and can offer more as a runner. If he can get somewhere in the 4.6 - 4.7 range, it'd be pretty impressive. 

We could potentially trade up with KC to #31 with #48, #81 and a 2024 4th if the Lions were convinced that a guy like McKee or AR15 could be the QBOTF and wanted to cement in the 5th year option. We have extra picks in hand, have flexibility to acquire extra capital in a trade down. 

I'd prefer that the Lions sit and take a guy next year but I can't rule out the possibility there could be someone they really like in the process. 

I'm in the same boat.  I would like a late round guy this year just to have a cheaper backup with potential.  He doesn't have to be expected to beat out Goff but just not be a guaranteed L if Goff goes down.  And if he turns into Petty or Zappe we can make different decisions going forward.  

I think our staff and GM really like Goff and don't plan to move on from him anytime soon but depending on contract demands, we may need to.  But at a minimum we need a solid backup. 

[Karnage84]

4 minutes ago, Sllim Pickens said:

I'm in the same boat.  I would like a late round guy this year just to have a cheaper backup with potential.  He doesn't have to be expected to beat out Goff but just not be a guaranteed L if Goff goes down.  And if he turns into Petty or Zappe we can make different decisions going forward.  

I think our staff and GM really like Goff and don't plan to move on from him anytime soon but depending on contract demands, we may need to.  But at a minimum we need a solid backup. 

If Goff plays the way he played last year, I can see us signing him to a 2-3 year extension. That'd bring him until 2026/2027. He'd be 32/33 years old and starting to decline. They'd probably work it out so that it's similar to what the Raiders did with Carr - if you keep him around, he'll get paid $40- $45M. If he's good enough, they'll do it. If he's not, they'll just cut him with limited cap impacts. 

[LionArkie]

45 minutes ago, Sllim Pickens said:

I agree with this.  I think McKee can be pretty much what Goff is for us but much cheaper.  If not, he is just a solid backup for the next few years. He has upside for sure but taking him in the second isnt nearly the risk of a high pick especially when adding extra picks in a trade down. 

And I also agree about Hooker.  He will have to be on IR most of the year so will be a rookie at 26 next year.  We likely would keep Goff for the final year of his deal unless Hooker really showed a lot if able at the end of 23. So really he would be 27 by the time he would be expected to start here and that just doesn't make sense to me.  McKee (or any other non injured QB) could get valuable reps this year and show the staff what they have to help us make a decision on Goff going forward.   

I definitely don't disagree about Hooker. When I did the mock I didn't think about his age. I do like getting a backup and I do like one who has a different skill set than Goff does. I think it makes it a little harder to plan against in those cases Goff goes down. If he looks promising, but you want to stick with Goff you can trade him down the road. If he is better than advertised, maybe he takes Goff's spot. If he crashes and burns, then he's like 90% of the other first round qb's but you only wasted a second.

[Sllim Pickens]

10 minutes ago, LionArkie said:

I definitely don't disagree about Hooker. When I did the mock I didn't think about his age. I do like getting a backup and I do like one who has a different skill set than Goff does. I think it makes it a little harder to plan against in those cases Goff goes down. If he looks promising, but you want to stick with Goff you can trade him down the road. If he is better than advertised, maybe he takes Goff's spot. If he crashes and burns, then he's like 90% of the other first round qb's but you only wasted a second.

The alternative to being harder to plan for, its harder for the rest of the offense to adapt as well.  If you go from Goff to Lamar Jackson, the O line will struggle, the WRs will struggle and we may be less productive.  I dont mind finding a QB who can scramble or maybe has a stronger arm than Goff but I don't really want to go to an Anthony Richardson type who is a scramble that throws sometimes. 

[Karnage84]

1 minute ago, LionArkie said:

I definitely don't disagree about Hooker. When I did the mock I didn't think about his age. I do like getting a backup and I do like one who has a different skill set than Goff does. I think it makes it a little harder to plan against in those cases Goff goes down. If he looks promising, but you want to stick with Goff you can trade him down the road. If he is better than advertised, maybe he takes Goff's spot. If he crashes and burns, then he's like 90% of the other first round qb's but you only wasted a second.

Totally fair re: age

The problem is that you don't want to have two vastly different schemes. Having a guy that can do what Goff does but then a bit extra can help (maybe a bigger arm, more mobile). Tyler Huntley and Jared Goff in the same QB room does not really work. 

There aren't a lot of guys that have turned into much in the past couple drafts. Kyle Trask and Kellen Mond are guys that have been drafted in round 2 or so and they've amounted to nothing. I'd be interested in what the XFL offers this year, see if anyone really pops out. 

[LionArkie]

27 minutes ago, Sllim Pickens said:

The alternative to being harder to plan for, its harder for the rest of the offense to adapt as well.  If you go from Goff to Lamar Jackson, the O line will struggle, the WRs will struggle and we may be less productive.  I dont mind finding a QB who can scramble or maybe has a stronger arm than Goff but I don't really want to go to an Anthony Richardson type who is a scramble that throws sometimes. 

Right, but I think your offense is going to already have its issues with the a backup. Might as well have the offense and defense struggle vs just your offense.

I believe a qb needs to be a qb first, then a scrambler second. Goff is a flag pole cemented into the ground. I want a flag pole on wheels that is portable. I am not interested in a running back who makes throws *edit - and misses everyone* (See Denard Robinson of Michigan or Malik Willis). Pass first, run second. But if the play breaks down, you can do serious damage. That's what I'm interested in for a backup because, to your point, the play is going to breakdown with a backup... any backup.

Edited February 22, 2023 by LionArkie

[Nnivolcm]

5 hours ago, Karnage84 said:

Oh noo...McKee and Hooker aren't the same. Hooker is going to be 26 years old and coming off of an injury. McKee is 22, has prototypical size, above average athleticism. Stats don't pop off because of that scheme. I only took him here because of the glaring value. If the Lions really like someone and they're about to slip out of Round 1, they should probably trade up to 31 to get that 5th year option. 

I'm still of the mind that we should wait on QB barring incredible value where you can take a calculated risk. 

Hooker's age doesn't scare me nearly as much as QB's second contract's do. Hooker will be 30 or 31 when his rookie contract ends, that's still fairly young especially considering he'll sit a year or two if picked by Detroit. 

[Karnage84]

13 minutes ago, Nnivolcm said:

Hooker's age doesn't scare me nearly as much as QB's second contract's do. Hooker will be 30 or 31 when his rookie contract ends, that's still fairly young especially considering he'll sit a year or two if picked by Detroit. 

Sure - but with limited playing time/experience. He's also going to be maxed out physically vs a guy coming in at 22 or 23. 

[Sllim Pickens]

46 minutes ago, Nnivolcm said:

Hooker's age doesn't scare me nearly as much as QB's second contract's do. Hooker will be 30 or 31 when his rookie contract ends, that's still fairly young especially considering he'll sit a year or two if picked by Detroit. 

Being 27 or 28 when you get your first start in the NFL isn't usually a good sign.  It still takes time to get used to playing, especially when you take likely two years off.  So by the time he gets comfortable, he is in his last year of his rookie deal and the whole point of having a cheap QB is defeated.  Also, typically guys who are older either have less room for growth or are stuck in their ways and harder to coach up.  Hooker is a talent, but between the injury and his age, it just doesn't make sense when there are other good options out there. 

[General Tso]

I'm also open to Tanner McKee or Dorian Thompson-Robinson in a later round.

[Nnivolcm]

4 hours ago, Karnage84 said:

Sure - but with limited playing time/experience. He's also going to be maxed out physically vs a guy coming in at 22 or 23. 

 

4 hours ago, Sllim Pickens said:

Being 27 or 28 when you get your first start in the NFL isn't usually a good sign.  It still takes time to get used to playing, especially when you take likely two years off.  So by the time he gets comfortable, he is in his last year of his rookie deal and the whole point of having a cheap QB is defeated.  Also, typically guys who are older either have less room for growth or are stuck in their ways and harder to coach up.  Hooker is a talent, but between the injury and his age, it just doesn't make sense when there are other good options out there. 

Hooker being older certainly isn't ideal, I just don't consider it a deal breaker. I'd much rather take an older QB with the production of Hooker in the 3rd than a younger guy with production like Anthony Richardson in the first. 

[Sllim Pickens]

18 minutes ago, Nnivolcm said:

 

Hooker being older certainly isn't ideal, I just don't consider it a deal breaker. I'd much rather take an older QB with the production of Hooker in the 3rd than a younger guy with production like Anthony Richardson in the first. 

I agree because I don't like Richardson as a QB.  But if we are drafting a QB in the 3rd-7th round, there are plenty of options that have production and athletic traits that aren't 25 years old and have a recent knee injury.