1 minute ago, Arsenal79 said:

It's not a win-win if Peters costs another $10M in cap.  We need that money to get a veteran LB (Bradham?), possibly a DE (Curry?), possibly a starting corner (Amukamara?), and/or to eat the dead cap when we cut Alshon,.

 

I agree with that. He would have to take $5M or less.

No one is going to sign Peters until the second week of the season because they are not going to guarantee his salary at 38 for the year. 

My thoughts on JP are simple. If he comes back, he's there to push Dillard and if he starts week 1, will he be there on merit by week 10?  Clearly the market for him was less busier than he would have anticipated

17 minutes ago, ToastJenkins said:

I think we need to see how our class fares vs the jets class before we draw much of a conclusion

howie could have learned and/or made a conscious decision to alter his pick profile

Theres no question this draft was much different than the last 3 douglas drafts. 

Not drawing a conclusion about either of these current classes. Just saying we know for sure the Joe Douglas era drafts here werent good. 

 

7 minutes ago, schuy7 said:

I agree with that. He would have to take $5M or less.

Yeah I can live with it if he comes for under $5M.  Makes it more likely he can settle for a backup role too.  If its anywhere near $10M that's a big problem.

Also I had no idea Dillard is going into his age 25 season.  He was a 24 year old rookie, which is OLD.  It's very troubling if he's not able to start in 2020 at age 25.

I also assume if the Eagles bring Peters back that means they have no faith in Jordan Mailata to be a contributor.  Would be sad as the guy has (had?) a ton of physical potential.  Just another failed experiment I guess.

Even though it’s a preseason game (never do a regular season game or it being like the real thing) this is cool 

 

2 hours ago, QBhunter58 said:

Young was a raw gunslinger, and he needed major refinement under Walsh, but Bill stated that he saw Young as a starter. He felt he could push Joe, while also develop in a better situation. I am not just  making this up, I can try and see if the documentary/interview is one youtube lol 

You are misinterpreting his words, he saw Young as a starter for him... eventually, not when he made the trade.  That part is obvious, because if he had seen Young as an immediate starter, he'd have traded Montana for a windfall.  But, he didn't. 

20 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

No one is going to sign Peters until the second week of the season because they are not going to guarantee his salary at 38 for the year. 

This comes up every year. Eagles don't care about that. As far as other teams, maybe if he was depth. What team would intentionally not play their starting LT just to save an out?

30 minutes ago, greend said:

You do sign crappy veterans at the end of their careers as depth though. 

Agreed completely.  But that's easier to pull off with semi-anonymous vets...not with HOF players who are friends with the owner and have massive sentimental equity.

7 minutes ago, Arsenal79 said:

I also assume if the Eagles bring Peters back that means they have no faith in Jordan Mailata to be a contributor.  Would be sad as the guy has (had?) a ton of physical potential.  Just another failed experiment I guess.

Nothing wrong with a failed experiment in round 7.  

9 minutes ago, Arsenal79 said:

I also assume if the Eagles bring Peters back that means they have no faith in Jordan Mailata to be a contributor.  Would be sad as the guy has (had?) a ton of physical potential.  Just another failed experiment I guess.

I don't know if I'd necessarily say that. Handing the swing tackle role to a project who spent two full seasons on IR is risky. They could still be high on him but not want to hand him such a big role just yet. 

15 minutes ago, UK Eagle said:

My thoughts on JP are simple. If he comes back, he's there to push Dillard and if he starts week 1, will he be there on merit by week 10?  Clearly the market for him was less busier than he would have anticipated

Who wouldn't want a morbidly obese LT who relies on his HOF equity from officials to let his early kick backs slide and who plays 75% of the snaps in games when he doesn't get hurt?  

55 minutes ago, Alphagrand said:

Interview with Sal Pal discussing the draft and roster construction, specifically regarding Reagor, Hurts, and Dillard.  He really doesn’t like 2 of these guys:

 

Well, I'm not going to click that, but basically anyone that Sal Pal is against, I love.  So.... Eagles win the draft.  Done.

15 minutes ago, Arsenal79 said:

I also assume if the Eagles bring Peters back that means they have no faith in Jordan Mailata to be a contributor.  Would be sad as the guy has (had?) a ton of physical potential.  Just another failed experiment Nasty Nate award winner I guess.

FYP

I've come around on Hurts.

Do I like it?  No.  

As I explained multiple times at other positions over the years...it's a disappointment when they draft a position in which you like someone on the roster.  The vast majority of us really like Wentz.  To invest a 2nd round pick in Wentz insurance is a disappointment from day 1.  It sucks.  We should all hate that they made that pick.  

While I will not concede that they know vastly more about the draft than we do (sounds incredibly arrogant, but we know it's a crap shoot and there are some very incompetent people across the NFL making picks), they do know VASTLY more about the players they've been coaching for 1+ years than we do.

So if they think a second round pick is a worthwhile investment in Wentz insurance, then they are probably right.  And that SUCKS for us to learn that.  But I trust the investment was worthwhile.

And under the same rationale, that's why I'd hate it if they sign Peters.  They know more about Dillard than we do.  And if signing Peters is a good idea, then you can pretty much stick a fork in Dillard.

6 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

I've come around on Hurts.

Do I like it?  No.  

As I explained multiple times at other positions over the years...it's a disappointment when they draft a position in which you like someone on the roster.  The vast majority of us really like Wentz.  To invest a 2nd round pick in Wentz insurance is a disappointment from day 1.  It sucks.  We should all hate that they made that pick.  

While I will not concede that they know vastly more about the draft than we do (sounds incredibly arrogant, but we know it's a crap shoot and there are some very incompetent people across the NFL making picks), they do know VASTLY more about the players they've been coaching for 1+ years than we do.

So if they think a second round pick is a worthwhile investment in Wentz insurance, then they are probably right.  And that SUCKS for us to learn that.  But I trust the investment was worthwhile.

And under the same rationale, that's why I'd hate it if they sign Peters.  They know more about Dillard than we do.  And if signing Peters is a good idea, then you can pretty much stick a fork in Dillard.

Dillard might suck. And while we immediately rationalized the pick by looking at his sack numbers, it was disappointing to take an OT in round 1 of a horrible OT class. Not only that, but to have traded up for the one no one wanted that "surprisingly" slid for reasons no one could figure out.

BUT

It might also be more due to concerns about Mailata's unreliable health and Prince TW not being ready yet. 

We need depth. And there may not be better depth around than Peters. Even if for 1 more year Peters makes Dillard a backup. 

23 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

I don't know if I'd necessarily say that. Handing the swing tackle role to a project who spent two full seasons on IR is risky. They could still be high on him but not want to hand him such a big role just yet. 

Two years out of his four year contract are up.  If Mailata is not ready to even be a backup at this point, then it's not happening.

7 hours ago, ManuManu said:

Probably gonna post something like this once a week. 31 percent... double yikes. 

That’s awesome. I wasn’t a fan of Reader at 21 so this would be great to look at. Though I’ve come around on him since... Now he’s just gotta be a versatile and productive weapon. 

15 minutes ago, Arsenal79 said:

Two years out of his four year contract are up.  If Mailata is not ready to even be a backup at this point, then it's not happening.

I'd agree if he was your normal draft prospect. But as I said, two full seasons on IR means the only practice and reps he had are 2 OTA's and 2 TC's. That's nothing for a guy who never even played the sport. I'm not sure how realistic it is for someone with so little experience he couldn't even put his pads on properly his first year to be trusted in a key role.

I'd also make the more key argument in all this is that IF Peters does come back, they would need still need someone to play backup RT which Mailata could possibly fill, because we all know Dillard ain't it. 

1 hour ago, eagle45 said:

I got in a massive blowout on the old blog about Hollins, a draft pick I LOVED when they signed Wallace.  

You don't sign a crappy veteran at the end of the line...yes, I'm calling Peters that...to start over a 2nd year player when you have any expectations for that player.  It means you know they can't do the job.  So if they sign Peters, that's it for Dillard.  

Or they want depth and options. A veteran at the end of his career gives you a level of comfort from his understanding of the game and experience. The young guy generally gives you more speed and athleticism.

There is a problem when coaches use the experience as a default crutch rather than weighing the pros and cons of starting the young guy. Jim Johnson had that issue with Bishop/Lewis. But we have yet to see how Dougie P would handle that situation, how good Dillard is, how much Peters has left, etc.

15 minutes ago, Arsenal79 said:

Two years out of his four year contract are up.  If Mailata is not ready to even be a backup at this point, then it's not happening.

Tough to say, really. The guy had never even seen a game a few years ago. To expect him to be the primary option at two spots going into year 3 might be a bit ambitious.

You're right though that at some point he needs to take the step from project to player. I’d be pretty happy with the time line if he was a legitimate 4th OT this year. Maybe he gets by more on his athleticism than anything else, but if he demonstrates an understanding of the game and doesn’t make numerous mistakes, I’d consider that a win in his development.

1 hour ago, PrinceKelby said:

I going to have to change my screen name if we sign Amukamara as it will get confusing with he and the other 2. 

I think the Prince would be perfect as the outside #2 at this point. We don’t have much there and he would provide better competition between himself and Jones/Maddox. If one of the incumbents wins out, so be it. Our depth is greatly improved then. I think Rasul gets traded later in the summer. 

12 minutes ago, greendestiny27 said:

That’s awesome. I wasn’t a fan of Reader at 21 so this would be great to look at. Though I’ve come around on him since... Now he’s just gotta be a versatile and productive weapon. 

I had him pegged as an eagles target well before the combine. I think he’s going to be a real weapon. Maybe not your prototypical 100 catch 1300 yard pro bowler, but a guy who makes a lot of game changing plays.

1 hour ago, Alphagrand said:

Interview with Sal Pal discussing the draft and roster construction, specifically regarding Reagor, Hurts, and Dillard.  He really doesn’t like 2 of these guys:

 

He's a complete and total fraud. He was on get up earlier this week putting a major positive spin on the Hurts pick. Then every time he goes on Philly sports talk radio he trashes it. He just panders to whatever crowd he is talking to at the time.