Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

What are we doing in the draft?


Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

I think a #1 CB is our biggest need at this time, depending on how one feels about Darnold.  I hate the idea of Erving at LT, and I think a decent LT prospect is there in round 2.  There are some tackles in the second round, but no #1 CBs.

If we get a #1 CB, it immediately makes Jackson better, because he can now cover the less established WR.  In the NFC South, that means we have a better player on Jones, Thomas, and Evans, for example--that makes a huge difference, moving Action Jackson to the #2.

If CB is the plan I’d rather move down to 12 or so and take 1 there’s 3 that fit the Bill 

  • Pie 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

Erving at G--how did he do in KC?  I have not given it thought, but we restructured Paradis and paid Elf a 3-year deal, so I did not see Erving at G.  What do you know?

I've always been a major fan of moving College OTs inside to play OG in the NFL. Erving hasn't nailed down a place at OT in the NFL, so I'd put him inside (I know he can play there though in a pinch).

Elflein - I've just seen Paradis play football. Also they restructured his deal to give us more cap space. I suspect he'll be cut at the end of the season. 

  • Pie 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

As much as I love to have Sewell, probably trade down now and try to get a 2nd this year or next year. If Fields or Lance isn’t available. I would still take Fields or Lance at 8. Still them behind Darnold. 

  • Pie 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Fox007 said:

This would be what I was thinking/wanting as well but if the LT is there you gotta get him. We can trade back and get a CB or even DL or even the later tier LT while picking up more picks. This is definitely something they are thinking about ofc but it will all depend on how the draft falls.

I know-but it is not going to be as simple as we are making it--if there is a QB there, and there might be--or if not, a damn good WR/CB/T will be there--do we move back?  I think we have to.

My favorite OT in this draft--Sewell is awesome--is Teven Jenkins--but he played RT.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

I do not think we go OT in round 1--there are about 8-10 good Tackles.  We can have BOTH a CB and a T, but the CB market gets thin at the back end of the first round--there should be tackles through the second--at least in the mocks I mess with.

I just do not get the Erving and Elfein signings.

 

 

Much like the Darnold trade - talented guys that this coaching staff think they can get more out of than previous coaching staffs.

Elflein was actually pretty good at C for the Vikings. He's been poor at OG, albeit he can play in a zone scheme there. Erving has never been an OT for me - his value is because he's a swing OLman. 

  • Pie 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, OldhamA said:

I've always been a major fan of moving College OTs inside to play OG in the NFL. Erving hasn't nailed down a place at OT in the NFL, so I'd put him inside (I know he can play there though in a pinch).

Elflein - I've just seen Paradis play football. Also they restructured his deal to give us more cap space. I suspect he'll be cut at the end of the season. 

I thought he was as good as cut this year--he did step up a bit, probably getting strength back after the injury, but he is no star.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, OldhamA said:

Much like the Darnold trade - talented guys that this coaching staff think they can get more out of than previous coaching staffs.

Elflein was actually pretty good at C for the Vikings. He's been poor at OG, albeit he can play in a zone scheme there. Erving has never been an OT for me - his value is because he's a swing OLman. 

Ryan Kalil was not that good at G--too small, but he was a nice center.  I like what I am hearing and want to believe it all...

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Yeah, the arm length isn't ideal but it feels like all these 1st round OT busts of the last 20 years or so are all these 6'5" 35"+ arm guys that everyone is willing to look past all their glaring issues.

I mean if you can get the job done, I dont care if arms are 28'inch. Its just a bigger mountain to climb, cause nearly all eilte DE/OLB can touch the ground standing. Only counter to long arms is long arms. Its very similar to boxing when theres a 2-3 inch reach advantage. Shorter guy has to take punishment and get dirty inside..... takes a different type of human to overcome it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

I know-but it is not going to be as simple as we are making it--if there is a QB there, and there might be--or if not, a damn good WR/CB/T will be there--do we move back?  I think we have to.

My favorite OT in this draft--Sewell is awesome--is Teven Jenkins--but he played RT.  

Well even though Fitts said he likes to trade back he also said there are tiers of players and at 8 with probably 4 QBs at least going in the top 8 we will for sure have a premium player so I could just as easily see them staying and getting a legit top 5 guy in other drafts at 8.

  • Pie 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Aussie Tank said:

If CB is the plan I’d rather move down to 12 or so and take 1 there’s 3 that fit the Bill 

I think we do something like this---we need 3 players in round 2 in my "imagination" and it takes me anywhere I want to go.

I want a #1 CB, a starting LT, and Mond or Mills (QB).  In round 3, I would like a 3 Tech and maybe a developmental G in round 4. 

  • Pie 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Basbear said:

I mean if you can get the job done, I dont care if arms are 28'inch. Its just a bigger mountain to climb, cause nearly all eilte DE/OLB can touch the ground standing. Only counter to long arms is long arms. Its very similar to boxing when theres a 2-3 inch reach advantage. Shorter guy has to take punishment and get dirty inside..... takes a different type of human to overcome it. 

This is getting eerily close to conversation my wife and I had recently...

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
  • The D 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, MHS831 said:

I think we do something like this---we need 3 players in round 2 in my "imagination" and it takes me anywhere I want to go.

I want a #1 CB, a starting LT, and Mond or Mills (QB).  In round 3, I would like a 3 Tech and maybe a developmental G in round 4. 

My dream now is to dump Teddys contact to the Bears for Hicks to pair with Brown.

  • Pie 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Fox007 said:

Well even though Fitts said he likes to trade back he also said there are tiers of players and at 8 with probably 4 QBs at least going in the top 8 we will for sure have a premium player so I could just as easily see them staying and getting a legit top 5 guy in other drafts at 8.

I have been trying to analyze his comments all day---there is a dropoff around 16 (and I see it) and then between 20-40 there is no difference.  So do we trade back with a team like New England (15) and then take a player, adding a pick in the 20-40 range?  I am so confused.

  • Pie 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • BELIEVE!!!

    jimmy-clausen.jpg

     

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I think there's a lot of truth here, but I will say something that may not be popular. I think Cam was a good QB that had could have been great. The GM never did enough to protect his blind side, but Cam never did enough to consistently fix his weaknesses as far as inconsistent mechanics, holding on to the ball too long, and simply consistent solid decision making. I don't know how much of the blame goes to the GM and unimaginative, old school OCs and an an HC, and how much of the blame was Cam's. But, it was a combination. Hell, they even drafted twin towers to help Cam out, but then they never got him an exclamation point at LT. Cam had great moments here--piercing that skin of the elite, but he never completely punched through. And, he is running out of time to get it done. I think this season will be his last opportunity (and I am rooting for him, unless we somehow get in the way).  I say all this because Luke was truly a great MLB. His elite play and consistency was rock solid! I think Luke was a greater LB than Cam has been a QB. I will admit that it's more difficult to be a great QB, but I don't believe that Cam and Luke should always be necessarily linked as the the main reasons why we were semi-successful during the Rivera era. I believe that Cam was an imperfect cracked wooden crutch that also held us back in some respects, while Luke was made of strong aluminum alloy that we could always depend on to get the job done. Just an observation and attempt at an objective opinion based over a period of time. It's my take and I'm sticking to it.
    • Seeing Brandon Beane in the top 5 of GM's that are drafting makes me die inside. fug JR, Bean would have been amazing here. Sigh. 
    • I mean it's the same for any of these professional talking head analysts.  Jeremiah, Brooks etc would all fail as GMs. That's why they're talking heads rather than in actual Front Offices.
×
×
  • Create New...