Just now, Bleedinggreen93 said:

We signed Reddick does that take LB off your board then or pass rusher which ever you view him as 

I have no clue what the Eagles think. In my mind we have only 2 LBs that should start, so yes, we need a third.

2 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

All positions are needed at this point.  All of them, with the exception of TE.    All of them.  Wrong year to worry about that stuff. 

Wrong, they set the board up the same way each year.

1 minute ago, stine said:

I have no clue what the Eagles think. In my mind we have only 2 LBs that should start, so yes, we need a third.

We only have two WRs that should start and we play way more 3 WR sets then we use 3 LBs in todays NFL 

Me personally not worried what we draft I’m no against taking a WR or a LB, CB, DE take our highest rated guys. Kinda hard to say what positions are more needed though. 
 

Based on the Eagles philosophy I’d saying the DL would edge any position if it’s close between 4 guys at those top spots 

Just now, Bleedinggreen93 said:

We only have two WRs that should start and we play way more 3 WR sets then we use 3 LBs in todays NFL 

BG, we also play more than 2 CB's on every down. So CB should be at the top of the list, no? Listen, I am not saying the Eagles see it the same way I do. All I am saying is, if they do, then WR may not be a priority if they sign one. It may still not be ahead of CB or Edge(DE) regardless.....

Just now, stine said:

BG, we also play more than 2 CB's on every down. So CB should be at the top of the list, no?

I’d say it would be at the same tier yes but I also gave my reason in a previous post why you can make the case CB is better off in the short term vs WR 

Slay>Smith

Maddox=Quez(might give a slight to maddox they close) 

1 minute ago, Bleedinggreen93 said:

Me personally not worried what we draft I’m no against taking a WR or a LB, CB, DE take our highest rated guys. Kinda hard to say what positions are more needed though. 
 

Based on the Eagles philosophy I’d saying the DL would edge any position if it’s close between 4 guys at those top spots 

  This is probably the way they will look at it! Also, Based by what we have at QB, why even bother drafting a WR? They never throw to the ones they have now! Smith would have easily had over 1000 yards last year with any decent QB lol

40 minutes ago, stine said:

  Wentz was ranked at the top of their board. So was Cox and Graham. You are missing the point entirely. If our WR room is in good shape for two years, you then set up your board with that in mind. They have 4 players ranked as Year one starters. Of those 4 you have WR, CB, DE and C. If WR and CB are the only two left, they take the CB. Not rocket science. Just forming your team as best you can. How does that correlate to Fantasy Foot Ball? I need to put the best team on the field as possible. That is what I am doing. Maybe it takes 3 years, but I am filling in as many as possible....

  There are many WR's that come out each year lately as round 1 players. So you can grab one next year or the following if you have other players available in this year's draft.

You can grab another position next year too.  There shouldn't be a vet available that should stop you from drafting a WR.   How can I explain this better..

You have a mediocre position, and a bad position.   You want to improve BOTH.    You need to improve BOTH.  You are a bad team, you have a long way to go to rebuild.   Why would the mediocre position vs the bad position matter in your draft when eventually you need to improve both. 

2 minutes ago, stine said:

All I am saying is, if they do, then WR may not be a priority if they sign one.

We can say that about lot of positions though if we sign a CB it might not be a priority. DL going to be a priority regardless that just the Eagles philosophy 

1 minute ago, Bleedinggreen93 said:

I’d say it would be at the same tier yes but I also gave my reason in a previous post why you can make the case CB is better off in the short term vs WR 

Slay>Smith

Maddox=Quez(might give a slight to maddox they close) 

Unless they sign Robinson as I mentioned above

1 minute ago, stine said:

Based by what we have at QB, why even bother drafting a WR? They never throw to the ones they have now! Smith would have easily had over 1000 yards last year with any decent QB lol

Gotta have weapons when you finally get your QB. 

1 minute ago, joemas6 said:

You can grab another position next year too.  There shouldn't be a vet available that should stop you from drafting a WR.   How can I explain this better..

You have a mediocre position, and a bad position.   You want to improve BOTH.    You need to improve BOTH.  You are a bad team, you have a long way to go to rebuild.   Why would the mediocre position vs the bad position matter in your draft when eventually you need to improve both. 

If they have two players available that are rated as Potential Day 1 starters then you fill in the BAD position first, no? Assuming both are available....

1 minute ago, stine said:

Unless they sign Robinson as I mentioned above

But we haven’t signed Robinson if we do maybe it changes slightly but we can say the same thing I’d we sign a CB… it’s like saying what if we sign Gilmore on a 1 year deal does that change you view drafting CB 

1 minute ago, Bleedinggreen93 said:

Gotta have weapons when you finally get your QB. 

Yep, we also need to be able to stop the other offense, which we could not last year....

43 minutes ago, stine said:

Sure, there may be no one that can fill in a need when they draft. 

Dude...  they have needs everywhere.  How can this Eagles team not fill a need with a draft pick?   How can you come into this particular draft and look at it that way?  

Just now, Bleedinggreen93 said:

But we haven’t signed Robinson if we do maybe it changes slightly but we can say the same thing I’d we sign a CB… it’s like saying what if we sign Gilmore on a 1 year deal does that change you view drafting CB 

Yes, it does. For the same reason I mentioned above

1 minute ago, stine said:

If they have two players available that are rated as Potential Day 1 starters then you fill in the BAD position first, no? Assuming both are available....

No difference for me... not a factor.  This " rated the same" crap I don't like. Always should be one player you like better.

Just now, joemas6 said:

Dude...  they have needs everywhere.  How can this Eagles team not fill a need with a draft pick?   How can you come into this particular draft and look at it that way?  

  OK, They pick at 19. The only player they have ranked as a possible day one starter is a OT. Do you take that player or try and trade back?

Just now, joemas6 said:

No difference for me... not a factor.  This " rated the same" crap I don't like. Always should be one player you like better.

You may not like it but that is how it works...

1 minute ago, stine said:

Yes, it does. For the same reason I mentioned above

Glad you aren't in charge where 1 year you make a draft decision. Absolutely a way to keep your team in the toilet. 

.  . 

1 minute ago, joemas6 said:

No difference for me... not a factor.  This " rated the same" crap I don't like. Always should be one player you like better.

Joe, you need to read up on how NFL Teams set up their Draft Boards. You are arguing based by what you think, even though ALL NFL teams think differently

2 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Dude...  they have needs everywhere.  How can this Eagles team not fill a need with a draft pick?   How can you come into this particular draft and look at it that way?  

His point really isn’t that hard to understand.

Yes take the best player we say it yearly but it’s not like it’s that black and white like oh this guy is clear cut the best player. 
 

Your going to have guys graded about the same his take is how do you opt for whack one to take. Not like he is saying pass up this guy we see as a Pro bowl player just to draft the need at CB 

2 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Glad you aren't in charge where 1 year you make a draft decision. Absolutely a way to keep your team in the toilet. 

.  . 

Glad you aren't in charge or we would possibly have 9 WR's and no CB's!

3 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

No difference for me... not a factor.  This " rated the same" crap I don't like. Always should be one player you like better.

What’s your preference for likening a guy better you have 100s of guys on your board.

how do you decide who to put at 49 vs 50 what’s that deal breaker. 

Joe, by your logic, the Eagles could possibly draft Wilson, Williams and Olave because you have them ranked highest on the board! WOW We will have the best WR corp in the world, but nothing else!

1 minute ago, stine said:

  OK, They pick at 19. The only player they have ranked as a possible day one starter is a OT. Do you take that player or try and trade back?

You may not like it but that is how it works...

Stine...  I don't need " day I starter ...with the idea " he starts on day 1 of 2022 because the roster sucks at that position "  

I'm surprised you view it that way as an Eagles fan who over the years have constantly drafted players who have not started day 1. 

Barnett, Dillard, Goedert .. 3 drafts in a row where the 1st guy taken wasn't set to start day 1.   Graham was drafted instead of the stud safety ...which was the huge need and obvious starter day 1.   

How do you miss all this and try to say..." that's how it works "?