4 minutes ago, NCiggles said:

I don't think any team drafts players with the idea that they are projects.  No one thinks Mitchell and DeJean are projects.  They should contribute immediately.  I think the idea the Eagles have is drafting a player with starting upside and they place a premium on positional value.  I am not sure this is exactly the same as BPA.  They may pass on the best LB, wIho they think has more starting upside, for a player like Hunt at higher valued position. 

"Project" is an interesting term.  But, we've seen over the years... going way back, that this team usually drafts with an eye to the future, rather than the immediate moment.  Starting upside, absolutely is the goal, especially early in the draft.  But, they drafted Lito Sheppard and Sheldon Brown (granted over 20 years ago) knowing that they wouldn't be needed for that season, but would be desperately needed the following years.  Same goes with Westbrook in Round 3 that same year.  He was used exceedingly sparingly that rookie year, mostly as just a kickoff returner, IIRC, not even as punt returner.  The next year, Brian Mitchell moved on, and Westbrook stepped in as punt returner as well, and started to get into the RB rotation (2003 was the '3-headed monster' season, iirc)... and by 2004 he was well established as the most dynamic weapon on offense, even with T.O. on the team.  

This team has always done best when they didn't force things, but took what was there for the taking.   And that's what I am so optimistic about with this draft.  They didn't force a single pick (with the possible exception of Jeremiah Trotter, Jr.).    They let the board fall to them, and took advantage when things broke in their favor.  Mitchell at #22 was something no one saw coming.  Same with Dejean at 40.  Howie likely called around after Round 1 looking for a team that would take exactly what Washington took in trade... Trade up from 50, and trade down from 53... getting 2 picks back, though I they actually got a 3rd pick back as well with a trade up with a pick in Round 5 (turning it into Ainias Smith).

They didn't force themselves into a corner and trade away both 50 and 53 to 33 or 34 and get only Dejean, but instead found good value as he continued to fall.  They didn't panic as only WR and DT were being selected in that range.  And when they jumped up... 4 CBs went in a row.  They dictated the run on CBs, they didn't react to it.   It was masterful by Howie.

 

And then they got the 'lottery ticket' with the 78th pick as part of that trade.   It should have cost Pick 22, 50 and 53 (at least) to get both Mitchell and Dejean.  In fact, if Dejean had been the pick at 22, I don't think a lot of people would have been surprised at all prior to the draft.  So, Howie was playing with house money at that point.  Why not get creative with it?   He turned it into future picks and a boom or bust prospect that might just have great ST value, if nothing else.

 

But, projects in the third round seems like the right spot for the gamble, just as I think its the right value to grab a player that drops due to injury concerns.  There is a chance that they don't return to form, but you have mitigated the risk by lowering the cost.  The Eagles mitigated the risk with Hunt with the number of moves back they did from #78.  As pointed out... that pick became 2 future picks for 2025, Hunt, Shipley and Trotter, Jr.   If ONE of those guys hit... then the trade up and back from 50 and 53 is a stroke of genius.  As it stands now, just the move up for Dejean gets that move no less than a "B" score from me.  It can become an A+ if one of these 3 guys (or the picks next year) turn into someone significant.

6 minutes ago, Freshmilk said:

I hope it comes true but is is far more statistically probable he won't make it much past his 3rd season.  He'll, I full expect the Eagles to draft another DE next season that can play immediately. 

I kinda look at the Eagles this way, next off-season they’re likely going to either spend cap space on a defensive lineman/edge rusher or they’re gonna draft one relatively high. You look at their secondary, you’re starting corners are already on the team. Mitchell, Ringo and Cooper DeJean. They are likely going to be the guys competing to start in 2025 on the outside as bradberry and slay are likely gone. At safety you still have CJGJ, Blankenship and Brown. So you’re probably not adding anything in the secondary via free agency or high in the draft unless someone falls unexpectedly. They usually don’t spend big money at linebacker or have taken linebackers in the first two rounds in a while. You don’t need a running back as you still have Saquon Barkley so i doubt they go RB early on a draft. You don’t need wide receivers as brown and smith are extended and drafted smith to be your slot.  so either offensive line or defense/pass rusher are positions they likely address high in the draft or FA. I would be surprised if the Eagles don’t sign a pass rusher in free agency next year or draft one very high. 
 

18 minutes ago, TEW said:

Thinking about the pick, I believe we may see him on the field earlier than expected.

He has the profile of an excellent special teamer, which is really how he is going to get on the active roster.

And once he is on the active roster, he gives the defense something different. We just don’t have a guy who can move in space with his size. And Fangio loves him.

I’d expect him to start getting on the field around mid season in 2nd or 3rd down packages focused on pass defense.

I almost wonder if on third down we abandon a MLB entirely with him acting as the traditional LB in dime packages.

 

Probably need to tap the breaks on reasonable expectations for him as a rookie.

1 minute ago, BigEFly said:

Of course, Mitchell and DeSean are projects.  DeSean hasn’t played S or nickel and certainly not in the NFL.  Mitchell isn’t refined.   Lots of good on his tape but areas for improvement and biting against a MAC receiver isn’t the same as biting on a move by a top NFL WR.  Devonta Smith is going to be good for him.  38% of NFL CBs from the first round make it to a second contract with the drafting team.  CB has a high bust rate.  I am certainly happy with the picks  but they haven’t succeeded at the NFL level yet. This draft seemed more focused on potential than unusual.  

How could have been less focused on potential?  Pick more linemen?

First round WRs seem to have higher bust rates than CBs.  First round TEs never seem to live up to their draft slot.  Safeties are really hard to evaluate.  LBs and RBs usually aren't worth the draft capital.

Linemen are the easiest to scout.  Which is why they go early and often.  

Regarding Hunt...

Given all the big leads Moore and this offense will be giving us, having several pass rushers dressed and ready to go in the fourth quarter makes sense.

22 minutes ago, Freshmilk said:

You don't forsake one for the benefit of the other.  He did a good job of getting picks.  But if Mitchell and Dejean don't produce immediate impact it will be problematic.  In fact, with how most of us reacted to the picks, we are counting on them to have substantial impact right away.  Much of the conversation prior to the draft was around the strategy of drafting an OT who may not play for a couple years vs. drafting defenders who could improve the historically crappy defense immediately.   This idea that drafting for immediate impact is antithetical to success is confounding to me.

But like I said in a previous post, reaching for immediate impact is an issue.  

The true perfect pick is where NEED and VALUE intersect.  The Eagles got that with Mitchell and Dejean... in fact, they got NEED and MORE THAN VALUE with those picks.

BUT, it has been widely reported/speculated that the "plan A" was in fact to move up for an OL.  When the value dropped at that position, Howie pivoted to plan B, which frankly, I couldn't be happier with.  But, I'm not happy with it because he got a CB.  I'm happy with it because he got the two CBs with the highest ceilings.   If pick 22 was about 'immediate' impact, then the better selection would have been Arnold.  Arnold is the much more polished player at this point.  He played at Alabama, played against the highest level of competition in the NCAA AND had the best coaching.  Arnold is the selection for 'immediate impact'.  Instead, the Eagles rejected the immediate payoff with Arnold (which would have been a very good selection) and went for the guy with more upside down the road.  Mitchell can likely step in and play immediately, but likely won't be as good out of the gate as Arnold.  And that's ok.  This isn't about 2024 alone, its about '25, '26, and beyond.  Mitchell can be truly elite.  He has the skills, he just needs to work on the techniques.  Similarly I think Dejean offers the most unique set of skills of any of the DBs that were available.  Again, he's likely not going to be able to be fully unleashed in that role as a rookie, but moving forward his role should expand and new wrinkles be added to his game.    It isn't just about which position is selected, but which prospect within that position.  Mitchell over Arnold illustrates that that selection wasn't just about need, but about upside potential as well.  

18 minutes ago, Freshmilk said:

I'm saying teams draft guys high expecting immediate impact.  We always drool over teams that get immediate impact from their rookies.  That's what we want and it is needed.  

We drool foolishly a lot of times as well.  

Another thing...

There are two moments where you can/should evaluate a draft. 

Immediately afterwards, where you evaluate the process.  Scouting, use of resources, long-term vs immediate, fit with philosophy, etc.  Player outcomes are irrelevant, because, in the end, these are all bets.  As @TEW would endorse, the best poker players make the better decisions most often.  And they often lose hands after making the right decision.

Then 2,3,4 years later you can evaluate player results.  That's when you can identify flaws in scouting, coaching, usage, etc. in the event the pick doesn't meet expectations.  And 'expectations' is doing a lot of work in that sentence.  If Keegan is nothing more than an adequate backup at Guard, he has easily met expectations for a fifth round pick.

2 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

The true perfect pick is where NEED and VALUE intersect.  The Eagles got that with Mitchell and Dejean... in fact, they got NEED and MORE THAN VALUE with those picks.

BUT, it has been widely reported/speculated that the "plan A" was in fact to move up for an OL.  When the value dropped at that position, Howie pivoted to plan B, which frankly, I couldn't be happier with.  But, I'm not happy with it because he got a CB.  I'm happy with it because he got the two CBs with the highest ceilings.   If pick 22 was about 'immediate' impact, then the better selection would have been Arnold.  Arnold is the much more polished player at this point.  He played at Alabama, played against the highest level of competition in the NCAA AND had the best coaching.  Arnold is the selection for 'immediate impact'.  Instead, the Eagles rejected the immediate payoff with Arnold (which would have been a very good selection) and went for the guy with more upside down the road.  Mitchell can likely step in and play immediately, but likely won't be as good out of the gate as Arnold.  And that's ok.  This isn't about 2024 alone, its about '25, '26, and beyond.  Mitchell can be truly elite.  He has the skills, he just needs to work on the techniques.  Similarly I think Dejean offers the most unique set of skills of any of the DBs that were available.  Again, he's likely not going to be able to be fully unleashed in that role as a rookie, but moving forward his role should expand and new wrinkles be added to his game.    It isn't just about which position is selected, but which prospect within that position.  Mitchell over Arnold illustrates that that selection wasn't just about need, but about upside potential as well.  

Like I said earlier, immediate impact and development simultaneously. They want both, as do I.  As do you.  It's simple.  Impact today, better impact tomorrow, and hopefully it lasts for the next few years.  Then rinse and repeat.

1 hour ago, Freshmilk said:

I disagree.  You definitely draft for immediate impact. In baseball, hockey, sometimes basketball you don't draft for immediate impact.  In football, the top 100 draftees are drafted for immediate impact.  With the average career about 3 years immediate impact is imperative.  NFL players need to have impact quickly and develop simultaneously.   Very unique sport in that regard.  Careers are short, peak years are minimal.  

Reaching for immediate impact is another story.  

He was responding to drafting Hunt in the 3rd round and needing to be developed, that taking a different player in the 3rd round still probably wouldn't be a day 1 starter anyway.

Some 1st rounders start or contribute right away, some don't it depends on the team and situation. The transition to the NFL from college is much harder than basketball. Kids can go from high school or only play a year or two in college and go to the NBA. Football has so much with the playbook, schemes, techniques and adjustment. Coaches and players always talk about how much faster the game is, and after their rookie year is over the game starts to slow down for them. Belichick was discussing the Eagles drafting Mitchell, and he noted that a lot of smaller colleges don't teach all the techniques and schemes, they rely on athletic ability. He said only certain schools teach great technique making them more pro-ready and drafting from other schools means you have to spend time developing them.

You absolutely should not draft for immediate need. Sometimes they do contribute to immediate need, such as DeVonta Smith. But you want to draft the best players that fit your team and long-term plans. You want to build the core of your roster for years to come. Drafting for immediate need this year would have been taking a RG and not taking two guys for the secondary. Drafting for immediate need leads to reaches. Or it leads to drafting a guy that could be ok/solid and fill a starting position vs a guy that could be a star player and have greater impact. 

 

1 hour ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

Reaching for immediate impact IS the story.  GMs without job security prioritize immediate impact over effective use of draft resources.  They reach trying to keep their jobs.  They don't look to move picks down or into next year. 

Teams that pass on 10's and 9's to address immediate needs with 8's end up with at team full of 8's.

Howie was already looking at the 2025 draft when he recognized the need to bolster their draft capital next year. 

It is good business.

Yep, this. Even 6's and 7's. 

3 minutes ago, NOTW said:

Yep, this. Even 6's and 7's. 

Or in the case of Jon Harris and Danny Watkins.... 2s and 3s.   

27 minutes ago, Freshmilk said:

I'm saying teams draft guys high expecting immediate impact.  We always drool over teams that get immediate impact from their rookies.  That's what we want and it is needed.  

I think over the last 2 seasons that has been a coach issue not necessarily a draft issue.  Nolan Smith had a great camp and it was reported that they would get him on the field.  The DC did not get him on the field or put him on the field in a situation that didn't match his skillset (i.e. in coverage). Reddick had 74% of the defensive snaps.  Smith had just over 14%.  Talent wise I thought he showed promise.  He did have some injuries that limited him but I think the coaches could have played him much more.  Similarly, Bradberry had over 90% of the snaps.  He played like trash.  Ringo should have been playing much more than he did.  

AJ Brown retiring here love it 

28 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

Regarding Hunt...

Given all the big leads Moore and this offense will be giving us, having several pass rushers dressed and ready to go in the fourth quarter makes sense.

That's kind of Kool Aid drinking thinking I like to see! Oh yeah!

33 minutes ago, Freshmilk said:

I'm saying teams draft guys high expecting immediate impact.  We always drool over teams that get immediate impact from their rookies.  That's what we want and it is needed.  

How frequently do fans drool over another team's 3rd round pick immediate impact as a rookie? 1st and 2nd rounders maybe. But we've had those too. We just haven't had it in the secondary or at LB, and now they've drafted two top talents for the secondary that should see plenty of snaps this year. Mitchell might even start right away.

Eagles recent picks with immediate impact: Carter, Davis, Smith, Dickerson (took over as starter due to injury), Reagor (sucked, but was a starter), Sanders became starter and led the team in rushing. Then you have other picks that had immediate impact by rotating in or starting some games due to injury like Goedert, Maddox, Driscoll, Watkins, Milton Williams, Gainwell, Sydney Brown, Ringo.

Nevertheless, you want to build through the draft for long-term not just one season. Otherwise as I said earlier their top priority this year would have been RG or LB. Instead they grabbed two 1st round grade defensive backs that should be centerpieces of the secondary for 8-10 years. And they will both get playing time this year if not earn a starting job.

3 minutes ago, NOTW said:

He was responding to drafting Hunt in the 3rd round and needing to be developed, that taking a different player in the 3rd round still probably wouldn't be a day 1 starter anyway.

Some 1st rounders start or contribute right away, some don't it depends on the team and situation. The transition to the NFL from college is much harder than basketball. Kids can go from high school or only play a year or two in college and go to the NBA. Football has so much with the playbook, schemes, techniques and adjustment. Coaches and players always talk about how much faster the game is, and after their rookie year is over the game starts to slow down for them. Belichick was discussing the Eagles drafting Mitchell, and he noted that a lot of smaller colleges don't teach all the techniques and schemes, they rely on athletic ability. He said only certain schools teach great technique making them more pro-ready and drafting from other schools means you have to spend time developing them.

You absolutely should not draft for immediate need. Sometimes they do contribute to immediate need, such as DeVonta Smith. But you want to draft the best players that fit your team and long-term plans. You want to build the core of your roster for years to come. Drafting for immediate need this year would have been taking a RG and not taking two guys for the secondary. Drafting for immediate need leads to reaches. Or it leads to drafting a guy that could be ok/solid and fill a starting position vs a guy that could be a star player and have greater impact. 

 

I'm gonna stop after this, but long term in the NFL is a few years.  Teams aren't raising children.  Eagles 2017 SB Champs, by 202O dregs of the league, 2022 back in the SB, 2023 historic collapse with the leagues worst defense.  All of this within 8 seasons.  There is no such thing as long term planning, only short term planning.

29 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

The true perfect pick is where NEED and VALUE intersect.  The Eagles got that with Mitchell and Dejean... in fact, they got NEED and MORE THAN VALUE with those picks.

BUT, it has been widely reported/speculated that the "plan A" was in fact to move up for an OL.  When the value dropped at that position, Howie pivoted to plan B, which frankly, I couldn't be happier with.  But, I'm not happy with it because he got a CB.  I'm happy with it because he got the two CBs with the highest ceilings.   If pick 22 was about 'immediate' impact, then the better selection would have been Arnold.  Arnold is the much more polished player at this point.  He played at Alabama, played against the highest level of competition in the NCAA AND had the best coaching.  Arnold is the selection for 'immediate impact'.  Instead, the Eagles rejected the immediate payoff with Arnold (which would have been a very good selection) and went for the guy with more upside down the road.  Mitchell can likely step in and play immediately, but likely won't be as good out of the gate as Arnold.  And that's ok.  This isn't about 2024 alone, its about '25, '26, and beyond.  Mitchell can be truly elite.  He has the skills, he just needs to work on the techniques.  Similarly I think Dejean offers the most unique set of skills of any of the DBs that were available.  Again, he's likely not going to be able to be fully unleashed in that role as a rookie, but moving forward his role should expand and new wrinkles be added to his game.    It isn't just about which position is selected, but which prospect within that position.  Mitchell over Arnold illustrates that that selection wasn't just about need, but about upside potential as well.  

FWIW this is what Belichick said, that over time after developing Mitchell would be a better player. We'll see how it goes.

30 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

We drool foolishly a lot of times as well.  

Even with our own players that seem great at first. Remember the goat WR that was going to save the franchise? Travis Fulgham? At one point fans were excited about Mack Hollins and yes even Quez Watkins when they caught TD passes and people thought we found gems. Every year there's some roster bubble RB people think will be the next big thing. Josh Adams was supposed to be great. Clement played well in the Super Bowl and his career was short lived. I remember fans thinking RB Tony Hunt was going to be great. It happens.

And of course the inspiration for the Nasty Nate award.

2 minutes ago, Freshmilk said:

I'm gonna stop after this, but long term in the NFL is a few years.  Teams aren't raising children.  Eagles 2017 SB Champs, by 202O dregs of the league, 2022 back in the SB, 2023 historic collapse with the leagues worst defense.  All of this within 8 seasons.  There is no such thing as long term planning, only short term planning.

Meh.   The only way a team can yo-yo like that is if they have long term building blocks in place on the roster.   This team absolutely did, and still does.  The bridge from 2017 to 2023 was Kelce, Johnson, Cox, Graham... but a lot of the fill-in around them aged out.  Brooks out, Dickerson in.  Peters out, Mailata in.  Ertz out, Goedert in.  Wentz out, Hurts in.   These are major building block pieces and the team had a succession plan in place.  That's how long term success is built.  And that's why this team really has had it, and the down years have been the outliers.  None of the pieces I mentioned above are about 3-4 years.  They were all about close to a decade of impact with the team, the exception being Wentz.  And oh what an outlier he is.

29 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

Another thing...

There are two moments where you can/should evaluate a draft. 

Immediately afterwards, where you evaluate the process.  Scouting, use of resources, long-term vs immediate, fit with philosophy, etc.  Player outcomes are irrelevant, because, in the end, these are all bets.  As @TEW would endorse, the best poker players make the better decisions most often.  And they often lose hands after making the right decision.

Then 2,3,4 years later you can evaluate player results.  That's when you can identify flaws in scouting, coaching, usage, etc. in the event the pick doesn't meet expectations.  And 'expectations' is doing a lot of work in that sentence.  If Keegan is nothing more than an adequate backup at Guard, he has easily met expectations for a fifth round pick.

Look at the offensive line. Lane Johnson is the only one who started as a rookie. Dickerson took over as a starter as a rookie due to injury. Yet Mailata and Dickerson are stud players who got their contracts extended and will retire Eagles. Totally worth the wait rather than draft for "immediate impact." 

2 hours ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

I’m not talking about their actual positions.  I’m talking just about how raw they were when they came out of college football and how it was going to take them 1-2 seasons. That was true with Taylor and it’s true for hunt. Neither were going to be ready year 1 to contribute (unlikely to contribute at an high level year 2) and they were considered high upside raw talent but projects that need at least a year and likely 2 to maximize the pick. I’m not comparing the two besides just how it was gonna take them multiple years to see the fruits of your labor due to their rawness and needing to be coached up due to their rawness. Thats nothing to do with either’s position or the players IQ. it has to do with when drafted they aren’t ready to contribute right off the bat and were considering more of projects coming into the league that needed likely multiple years to reach the long term upside

would rather me use Bryan smith? who frankly was less raw than hunt when he came out (still needed to add strengths and bulk along with more pass rushing moves as he was limited) but was still considered somewhat of a raw talent (that also played at a lower level football so more of a transition) that was going to need at least 1 year to transition if not 2 to begin to make his impact they envisioned in the nfl. Unfortunately he never really made it. The transition to the NFL for all 3 was expected to take at least 1 and likely 2 years of nfl Level coaching to fully see it. That’s the comparison, not what position they play or the players overall ability, just that all 3 were expected to take 1-2 years to be the player eagles envisioned and selected in round 3.

Heck we can throw Jordan mailata in this category as he was just pure raw talent that you knew wasn’t likely playing the first year or likely even the second year (he was way more raw than any of these 3) as he was a project that needed coaching to get him there. I think his is way more extremely than those 3 cause he never played. But all 4 you were banking on multiple years of not playing significant snaps and coaching to get the most out of their raw talent 

Yes Bryan Smith is a good one. Most 3rd rounders and down aren't ready to contribute right away. Hell 1st and 2nd rounders aren't always in a position where they're ready to immediately jump in (Hi Nolan). That could be a positional thing as well with other circumstances at play. Guess it's just me. I didn't immediately think of a work out warrior LB who we didn't know if they could even play football (turns out it he couldn't) when the Eagles selected Hunt.

9 minutes ago, Freshmilk said:

I'm gonna stop after this, but long term in the NFL is a few years.  Teams aren't raising children.  Eagles 2017 SB Champs, by 202O dregs of the league, 2022 back in the SB, 2023 historic collapse with the leagues worst defense.  All of this within 8 seasons.  There is no such thing as long term planning, only short term planning.

Roster building is a year to year process. Teams change from one year to the next.  OTOH drafting a player with upside to potentially fill upcoming holes is also a good philosophy.  Without drafting Hurts in 2020, this team doesn't go back to the Super Bowl in 2023.  

10 minutes ago, NOTW said:

FWIW this is what Belichick said, that over time after developing Mitchell would be a better player. We'll see how it goes.

Mitchell is going to have a learning curve just because of competition.  It doesn't mean he won't contribute this season.   

Jags cut Zay Jones. I'd be interested. Had a down year in 2023 but he's still 29 and had 830 yards as recently as 2022. Has speed, can do some things with him. I'd rather have him on the roster than Parker or Campbell I'll say that much.