Draft Hooker at #61 - would you?

[panfanman]

I didn't exactly understand the poll part of the question but to answer whether or not to take him at 61?  Absolutely.  I'm rarely for moving up in the 1st when the cost is so high.  Add in you're reaching for a player at a position that is such a crapshoot.  I would rather take advantage of another sucker (team) that's will to give up draft capital to move into our spot.  I can't remember a year since drafting Cam that I didn't want to trade back.

 

Now I know these draft simulators are highly suspect but let me present to you this draft scenario.

 

Here you'll see I traded back several times right out of the 1st round (normally not ideal).  When I started taking players I did it from the position we signed a good bridge QB that didn't break the bank like Wentz.  We also resigned Bozeman and Coleman.  We also picked up Jalen Ramsey.

 

You can't look at any of my selections and not say they're not good players, better yet excellent value, and furthermore fill needs.  The trades I made were not me going to other teams trying to cook something but rather other teams coming to me.

 

We get one of the top 2 LB in the back extremely versatile and an edge that is solid.  My only question on these two would be how do they fit into our new defense?

We also get arguably the best OG in the draft.  A great WR (although I was hoping for Hyatt to make things maybe a little more comfortable for Hooker).  A TE that has been mocked many times in the 1st round.  A bruising running back.  And an eventual replacement and sub rotation for Bozeman at the OC position that also has substantial OG experience (2 OGs coming off injury I'm sure we could use that depth.

 

As far as what we have left for picks in 2024, you'll see I gained a 1st, but gave up a 2nd and two 6ths.. . .but I degress.

 

Back to Hooker.  Here's the issue with waiting until 61.  Where's he going to go?  Really, he could go in the 1st round or easily well before 61.  So waiting is a huge gamble.  But when 61 came along he was still there.  I was offered a trade to fall back.  I can't remember what team made the offer but they and the teams between 61 and 70 either already had a superstar QB, had already taken on in the draft or had other glaring needs so I took the gamble and he was there at 70.  I was lucky he wasn't gone by 61.  The extra pick I gained I used on the RB Charbonnet so that was icing on the cake.

 

So yes, I'd be thrilled with Hooker at 61.

[Basbear]

Hooker at 61, fug NO, I have standards!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What does she look like tho.....

[MHS831]

4 hours ago, BrianS said:

When you dismiss a player as a gimmick or system QB, you're the same person who would never have drafted Mahomes.

I'm not saying that Hooker is the next Mahomes, I'm just saying that it's a weak argument.  You have to come up with actual "flaws".

With Hooker, it's hard to spot them.  The only one I can really find is that his offense doesn't have very many opportunities for anticipation type throws.  But he reads the field.  He makes all the throws.  His mobility is focused on continuing to look downfield.  He's played more than one year, against good competition.  He's improved every year.

I like him a lot.

 

His injury and the age thing is why he will be available in round 2---and we would not have to spend draft capital to get him.  Richardson or Levis are not playing next year (much) anyway, so why not?