Jump to content

Overlord

Members
  • Content Count

    27
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

4 Training Camp Body

About Overlord

  • Rank
    Newbie

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Canada

Previous Fields

  • Favorite Team
    Eagles

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. wanted to add im not sure if id go with Ojabo anymore. tbf i was never very high on him cause im a little sus on guys that are ultra raw and new to football and mostly drafted based on athletic profile rather than technical skill set. But add on that he just tore his achilles, if his game wasnt based so much on his explosiveness i could maybe over look it; but this injury could be pretty significant for a guy who's potential current is banking on his athleticism.
  2. pretty sure i seen Peterson signed a 1yr with Minny again but maybe im wrong -------------------- I actually really like this scenario. I do also wonder if McPherson is better than we know. in his limited snaps last year he was good in coverage (52.9%, 5.6y/t, 69.7 Rating but 4 missed tackles (20%)) But Stingley would be unreal. Unlike some of the other posters i like the idea of Mathieu signing, ya he may be declining some potentially, or maybe it was a result of the KC D not being that great around him. Either way the fact is we could do with atleast 1 better safety than either Epps or Harris. and if the intent is to only target S in the 3rd with Cross, he could do with some time to develop. Maybe take over Epps at S3 or eventually Harris at S2. and then it'll not force us to target 2 safeties again next year as well.
  3. Kerrigan gone, Barnett reduced But Reddick added and Graham returning I'd say that's a net increase on ability to block a prospect
  4. Except that's not true given Barnett had 68% of the snaps and Kerrigan ended with 33% snap count on defense. Kerrigan could barely put up a stat and still played a third of the time when someone more useful could be playing and Barnett who has been more of a negative (penalties) than positive played more than even Sweat did (62%) So no they both still very much blocked rookies from playing time despite being negatives on the field
  5. Milton Williams splitting time between DT and DE as well
  6. Those 2 maybe I can partially believe cause they're more polished. Mafe is too raw to leapfrog Barnett. Still.. even Kerrigan frustrated the heck out of us for all the playing time he got (over the rookies too) despite his lack of production and impact and Barnett is significantly better than that... even tho he's still marginal
  7. You're gunna have a frustrating year if that's your expectation
  8. Graham is cemented DE1 - he'll be nearly a year removed from the injury and doesn't play a skill position where that injury would be more concerning. Not to mention he was always more of a power rusher than speed rusher. Sweat will likely be DE2, Barnett DE3 as a vet, they brought him back at good value but he'll still take his share of playing time. DE4 could be situational, I wont call Reddick DE4 cause when hes on the field, hes the top guy but he won't solely be a LB cause that'd be a major bust by the coaching staff so he's taking DE snaps in rushing situations. then there Milton Williams who moves around between DT and DE a lot. All together thats 5 players at that position not even including Jackson who showed promise but certainly could be passed by a talented rookie if one were to be taken early. Pass rushers - Graham, Sweat, Reddick Solid depth Vet - Barnett Prospects with potential - Williams, Jackson thats a pretty full room right there
  9. ya keep in mind i tried to make that up on the spot. I dont have the rankings imprinted in my mind 😂 my point is mainly impact early and depth later. and ya i seen wut Howie said, i've worked in pro sports in the past so i don't tend to pay much attention to wut GMs and coaches say to media cause its mostly all just BS to satisfy the public. But maybe theres truth. Hard to say tho cause DE certainly feels pretty blocked now whereas before i woulda totally been in on the DE in rnd1 and LB is blocked for any non-1st rounder even if i do agree with the White signing (tbd if it works or is just another 1yr LB in the long rotation we've had at the position)
  10. I dont have one cause i keep flip flopping around between wut i would do between taking a WR in rnd1 or LB or DT or CB (this dependent on which are available tbh). I dont mind the positions you took obvs, but the order you took them i would change. So between DE, WR, LB, and S i would draft in a different order than you. I dont believe any DE you take will have big impact for the 1st couple years so long as Graham, Sweat and now Reddick are around. So I instead would look for something more impactful in the near term. Maybe a Brisker, Hill, Cine whether it be late 1st or in the 2nd (you can only pick with the picks you have, if you dont think they'll reach your next pick you then you gotta do it). There are other WRs that would make a more immediate impact: Wilson, Burks rnd 1. Bell, Moore, Dotson, Pickens maybe rnd 2. Someone with more polish that will actually see the field instead of needing time to sit and learn (which would be more ideal for a team that can stand to sit a develop him) LB is something that constantly troubles me. We have an OK group. So i dont believe we need to add more JAGs to the position. This LB group seems deep in the draft with guys like Muma, Chenal, Walker, Smith etc. and yet i dont think it's worth adding those guys when we have TJ, White, Reddick, Taylor, Bradley etc already on the roster. If i were to go LB id ideally go for Lloyd but Dean is also a possibility. Only because the only thing our group needs is a star, not just another body (or player that may take a couple years to grow, since we already have that in Taylor) So if i were using the picks you have including that mock trade: 15 WR Garrett Wilson 19 LB Devin Lloyd 31 S Daxton Hill 51 CB Roger McCreary 63 DT Demarvin Leal/Travis Jones 83 DE Gunter/Engabare/Jackson Immediate impacts in WR, LB and S, while still getting a quality CB (tho i could totally be convinced to go CB before S with say a McDuffie/Booth/Elam and Brisker/Cine combo) and depth at DT and DE that more appropriately represents their draft positions (but again i like Davis or even Wyatt if the team chose to go in that direction in rnd 1). Simply we need impact players at WR, LB, S, CB and depth players at DE, DT (RB, TE, OL) and i think it odd to draft the depth high and the impact low
  11. congrats at reading and not understanding just because you received a response that was negative and disregard my sig... it was made back in January. 21k posts, figured you'd have been around long enough to notice peoples sigs grow out of date pretty fast lol after the petty stuff, Gainwell was getting pushed down the depth chart all year to the chagrin of the fans lol, he was RB2 for the few games we played early on when we barely ran the ball and then got pushed down to RB3/4 when Scott and Howard started to get on the field. Dickerson was injury replacement and lucky (for him) at that cause Seumalo and Brooks weren't going to be benched for him mid season if not for injury. But relying on an injury for a draftee to get playing time is poor judgement cause while injuries always happen you cant predict who or when. So including specifically Gainwell but also Dickerson is a strange argument to go with. fwiw: Gainwell 29% of the snaps, Williams 41%. again, Pierce, love the athletic potential but you're over estimating his readiness if you think he'll immediately be on the field. Even as the featured WR on what ended up being a playoff team he struggled to put up numbers. His rawness is similar to Reagor coming out (not saying he's comparable as a player just in how raw they were). Davis will eventually be the 1st/2nd down DT but who are you stapling to the bench on those downs Fletch or Hargraves? no doubt he'll play, as i said i do like Davis. Athletic profile doesnt earn starting spots in regards to Cross, maybe down the road he can take over a starting spot but im not the only one thats sus on the idea of him immediately coming in and taking over a spot and in order to do so we would need either Epps or Harris to play badly enough to bench them. As for Mafe, I have Graham, Sweat, Reddick (pass rusher so ofc he'll have DE snaps), Barnett ahead of him. Sure he has potential but again he's a guy thats incredibly raw and wasnt overly productive even in college. So to ask him to beat out Barnett is a tall task, we might not like Barnett for his bone headed penalties and recent lack of pass rush productivity but he's stable and good against the run. Mafe may get occasional passing down plays as a pure rusher but even then you might see Reddick or Sweat or heck even Milton Williams slotting in ahead of him. the rest of your draft im actually fine with. 4th rnd and beyond is all about depth. I just think you're going too hard on just bolstering depth in the 1st three rounds instead of looking for impact players. "This could be a pivotal draft if we get impact players that can make an impact early in their rookie contracts. The players you selected are 'ok' players but may take as long as year 3 or 4 of their contracts before they even see the field regularly"
  12. idk... i dont see a lot of starting potential either now or in the immediate future I do like Davis ofcourse but he will be DT3 at best now, maybe DT2 next year IF Fletch leaves. Booth ofc is likely CB2 so that's good. Mafe would be DE#5 (lets be real, fans like to think coaches will play prospects ahead of vets but that rarely happens), and maybe DE4 maaaaybe DE3 at best. Pierce has potential but is very much a project rn too, so he most certainly will not be penciled in at WR2. Likely WR4 after Pascal, and thats assuming the staff doesn't continue to pander to Reagor and try to manufacture touches for him ahead of Pierce. Tho he does have the potential to rise to WR2/3 in a year if his route running dramatically improves. Smith would be LB4 most likely off the bat behind TJ, White, Taylor. Maybe he flashes enough to beat out White or TJ but again coaches always prefer the vet over the rookie and Taylor is competing just the same for those 2 spots on the field and add in Reddick who will possibly split time at LB and DE, pushing Smith down further. Going forward the outlook is better tho, assuming one of TJ or White dont return the following year, but if they don't then we may never see Smith on the field beyond ST. and Cross would be S3, behind Harris and Epps. Tho tbf that is in itself nearly a starting position for us. Lots of potential going forward tho given the uncertainty at that position. Overall it's not so much that i have an issue with the positions. It's just the spots you select them at. This could be a pivotal draft if we get impact players that can make an impact early in their rookie contracts. The players you selected are 'ok' players but may take as long as year 3 or 4 of their contracts before they even see the field regularly in a starting role at which point we'll have had 2/3 FAs and drafts to replace them as well (See Davion Taylor who has shown flashes but going into year 3 of his contract and we've signed LBs in back to back years trying to better the position. Patience is low in the league.
  13. wouldnt mind if you had wrote out your trades... makes it difficult to follow how you got there
  14. any mock that happens before FA i wont mind seeing a WR in it. i dont give a damn if we been drafting and missing in the past early rounds on WRs, until we have 2 guys, we're still weak at the position. I will say tho, there are plenty of WRs in this draft id be happy with and multiple could likely be available in the 2nd rnd
  15. disagree with so much of this firstly picks 15-19 are hardly bona fide prospects, we'd like to think they are but they all definitely have reasons for falling to that point and the reason is hardly ever that theres just SO much talent above them that these studs are still available. and comparing Lindstrom to linderbaum and Ojabo to Gunter seems silly, yes of course theres a reason both are projected ahead of the others; however, pretending Lindstrom would never equal Linderbaum ignores every prospect ever thats outplayed their draft position (Hello Kelce), and Ojabo himself is just a one year wonder with crazy athletic traits, its not like that has never busted before. i understand wut youre saying but theres just so much assumption there. Assuming picks 15-19 are the only ones with potential and everything past that is just throwing darts, assuming those 2 prospects have no bust potential and the others have limited hit potential. idk, just sounds like you like who you like and anything different will be view with immense skepticism.
×
×
  • Create New...