2018 Draft Thread I

[mw2noobbuster]

We need to take Nelson no matter what slot we draft in. If Nelson's the biggest OL talent and since the interior line is the biggest need who cares if we draft him at 3? It might look bad to others drafting an OL so high but it's a plug and play elite talent. 

[rudyZ]

I think that picking an OT with the idea of replacing Staley down the line is kind of a luxury pick, even if we can use that guy at OG in the meantime. When Staley retires or leaves, we'll still have to replace an OG. And one think we've seen in the draft, when an OT is picked to play OG for a few years, it usually ends up being permanent. The redskins drafted Brandon Scherff with that idea in mind, and never really played tackle at all (and was a #5 overall pick). Okay, really bad research on my part, because I can't think of many other people. Point is, there's just no guarantee a T playing G will develop into a probowl T years later. You're asking him to face a tougher learning curve at a new position, then doing it all over again a couple of years later. To me, that's a recipe for having a less than great OG for two years, then having a less than great OT for the next 10 years. Personally, I'd take the natural guard now, hopefully getting a probowler, then figure out the T situation when Staley is done. Historically, have OTs really regressed a ton before retiring? I know Staley has had ups and downs over the course of his career, but it has gone up and down with our teams overall going up and down. He plays great when we're doing well, and plays average when we're not. I don't see decline in his game, I just see a guy who maybe isn't motivated when losing. He's not Joe Thomas, but he's more than good enough when things are functional. And I have no doubt he'll be more than good enough over the next two or three years, barring injuries.

When he does retire, who knows, maybe there will be a free agent ready to fill in. Maybe we'll have a surprise gem on the roster in the next couple of drafts. Maybe we'll be in a position to draft an immediate replacement right then. Maybe we'll just have to find a good RT, if we have Trent Brown switching sides (if he's still on the team). I'm just not a fan of fixing a problem too far ahead of time, since you might be opting for a solution now that would be worse than the solution you'd have then. If you do find Staley's replacement now in the draft, he better be a homerun, or a guy you absolutely want to have on the roster, and it could happen, seeing how Lynch handled his first draft, taking a guy at a position where we were already strong, instead of addressing other issues on the roster. He went for talent and character with Thomas. If he does that this year with an OT, and we decide to play him at OG in the meantime, I can understand the thinking. But getting out of your way for any other reason might end up being counterproductive. Really not a fan of temporary position changes for rookies.

[757-NINER]

My thing is guards are easier to find/replace than tackles. I firmly believe that. Maybe I'm not as enamored with Nelson as most. Think he's going to be very good. But drafting a OG top 5 just goes against my personal draft philosophy. You would have to be a transcendent talent that position has never seen before. Nelson isn't that. 

 

[Forge]

1 hour ago, 757-NINER said:

My thing is guards are easier to find/replace than tackles. I firmly believe that. Maybe I'm not as enamored with Nelson as most. Think he's going to be very good. But drafting a OG top 5 just goes against my personal draft philosophy. You would have to be a transcendent talent that position has never seen before. Nelson isn't that. 

 

I wonder how much this is the case any more. I mean, there are some teams out there that just have abysmal guard situations, us included. Houston is dreadful on the interior. Arizona. Cincinnati is really bad. I don't think you can just grab guys and throw them in the interior any more and be okay. I think that's starting to be recognized league wide now, as well. The pass rush coming from the interior on teams now is greater than it has ever been in my opinion, so I assume that has something to do with it. 

That being said, I totally get the "against my personal draft philosophy". I've said that same exact thing about drafting Barkley this high for us countless times. I said it last year about Fournette, so I'm with you there. 

FWIW, Nelson is probably the best guard I have seen since I started "scouting" college guys (or you know, watching a lot of football and started pretending I know what I talk about). Now granted, I wasn't doing this when guys like Faneca, Mankins or Hutchinson came out, so my experience in this is limited with regards to elite guard play. He's better than Warmack and Cooper. He's better than Scherff and Decastro (though i did love the latter coming out). There are no weaknesses in his game. He's nasty, finishes blocks, flawless technique, good feet, he's smart, and he's got an awareness that is absolutely insane for a guard. I also like that he comes from ND, to be perfectly honest. 

[big9erfan]

I don't think it's any easier to find a great G than a great T, or a great guy at any position really. I think what you're really saying is that you can live with an OK G easier than an OK tackle.  I do agree with that.  But as Forge says I think that is changing.  I think that RTs are almost as important as LTs these days.  Many of the best pass rushers in the league line up against the right tackle as often as against the left, some do that regularly.  As for Guards, as passing has become more important defenses have responded by having much better interior pass rushers than they used to have.  So guards have to handle them.  Add a big increase in stunts and twists where the other team's best pass rusher slides inside to take on a Guard and I think it's much closer than it used to be.

Having said all that I don't know that the positional value of the best G in the draft still amounts to a top 5 pick even though I think it's a lot closer call than it used to be.  Might be a moot point though if we win another couple of games. 

[TecmoSuperJoe]

Colts still in front of us because of their loss. At least Denver gets pushed back because they won I suppose. Don't think they go QB with what they invested in Paxton. Unless they want to trade him.

[757-NINER]

1 hour ago, PapaShogun said:

Colts still in front of us because of their loss. At least Denver gets pushed back because they won I suppose. Don't think they go QB with what they invested in Paxton. Unless they want to trade him.

Lynch has been horrible, right along with Seiman. Though Osweiler did look good last night, he's still Osweiler. Denver is definitely in the market for a franchise QB. 

[rudyZ]

2 hours ago, 757-NINER said:

Lynch has been horrible, right along with Seiman. Though Osweiler did look good last night, he's still Osweiler. Denver is definitely in the market for a franchise QB. 

Yeah, I see no reason for them not to be looking at QBs. It's basically the only reason why they're not competitive, right now. They only have to be honest with themselves and admit Lynch was a mistake. Or he might not be a mistake just yet, but get a QB anyway. Pull a Chargers, and draft the Rivers to your Drew Brees. Better to have two capable QBs than having none. But honestly, they might go after a veteran QB as well. Who knows.

[Forge]

Denver is definitely getting a quarterback this year. Their guys are purely awful, and Lynch is done. I do think that out of the bad teams in need a quarterback, they are the most likely to solve their problem through free agency / trade rather than the draft. 

[big9erfan]

I just read an article - pure speculation of course, that Denver would be willing to give up it's first and third this year plus their first and 4th next year to move up from wherever they end up to the second position to take Rosen.  That kind of trade is why I have wanted to end up with the second pick.  Looks like that is out of the question now.

[Forge]

6 minutes ago, big9erfan said:

I just read an article - pure speculation of course, that Denver would be willing to give up it's first and third this year plus their first and 4th next year to move up from wherever they end up to the second position to take Rosen.  That kind of trade is why I have wanted to end up with the second pick.  Looks like that is out of the question now.

Honestly, that's a super weak return to be quite frank. 

[rudyZ]

4 hours ago, big9erfan said:

I just read an article - pure speculation of course, that Denver would be willing to give up it's first and third this year plus their first and 4th next year to move up from wherever they end up to the second position to take Rosen.  That kind of trade is why I have wanted to end up with the second pick.  Looks like that is out of the question now.

It's really weird that anyone already knows what Denver is willing to give up. Because we don't even know who's going to declare or where the denver picks will end up, or whether or not the #2 pick will actually be available for a trade. And if the planets aligned and the #2 was available and a QB was available there to be taken, I bet the #2 team would ask for more, so is that really all that Denver is willing to give? It just sounds like a trade some kid pulled off on Madden, and not like actual reporting. Maybe it's just Denver opening up a channel of communication with whoever will have the top 2 picks that they're open for business. 

In an ideal situation, yeah, it would be nice to be in that position and get all these picks. But counting on it in order to achieve a rebuild is a little pathetic. I'm more optimistic with our staff and a lower pick than the browns are with their staff and their higher pick, year after year. A good organization doesn't need that king's ransom in order to build a championship team. A good organization adds the right pieces, one after another, and if the coach knows what he's doing, he'll get these pieces to win games. Brick by brick, that's Lynch's philosophy. Bad organization will get a ton of bricks and won't manage to build a wall out of it.

[Forge]

Generally I don't start checking out the mock drafts this early in the year outside of once every few weeks, but wow, Walter's two guys have Connor Williams going in the second and third round. And I thought that I wasn't a fan of his. 

[Forge]

Official draft order through week 15

1. Browns (0-14, .510)
2. Giants (2-12, .544)
3. Colts (3-11, .495)
4. 49ers (4-10, .485)
5. Browns (from 4-10 Texans, .505)
6. Bears (4-10, .582)
7. Buccaneers (4-9, .530)
8. Bengals (5-9, .459)
9. Broncos (5-9, .480) 
10. Jets (5-9, .515)

***We could be in a very good place to still make a move with Denver for a quarterback if the guy that they love (and they don't get someone like Eli / Smith / Cousins) is there at 4. Lot of familiarity between organizations, which helps the negotiations, no doubt. But also, cbs is projecting, based on the remaining two games, that Houston will catch us in SOS because of our last two opponents. That being said, they finish with Indy, which is a winnable game for them. 

****Bucs and Bears would flip flop now with the Bucs' loss to the Falcons. 

[J-ALL-DAY]

We're likely to lose the next two games as long as the Rams have something to play for, so we should have a top 5 pick. The SOS is obviously going to improve with the Jags/Rams both being 10-4 right now.