2 hours ago, cunninghamtheman said:

The more shots you take the better chance you get at bringing in the impact players. I believe we need a massive youth infusion. So adding a third and fourth round pick to slide back ten spots seems wise to me. 

Nope,the farther you get down in the draft the less the percentages are of finding an impact player. If what you said was true everyone would scramble to trade their round 1 picks for 15 round 6's. Must be balanced

2 hours ago, cunninghamtheman said:

I believe we need a massive youth infusion.

11 picks-53 man roster that 1 in 5 players. That a pretty good injection no? thats like drafting all new players on one side of the ball

2 hours ago, cunninghamtheman said:

 

You guys are on opposite sides here. I think it’s probably worth while for us to make that move...,partly because the guy we take at 12 will probably still be around at 22 anyway. Not sure what massive dropoff in talent occurs between the two spots?

Why would the Titans make this trade????? just because YOU want it, doesn't mean THEY do

1 hour ago, stine said:

  Ham, we obviously have different views here. I am sick of drafting players with injury history, only to see them go on IR. Or worse yet, not even play this year and get injured the following year. So now you have to wait until year three to see what you have. You saw the quote I copied for an article. Elite Football players coming back from this type of injury typically have 2.7-4.6 years. So, you want to spend a 1st round pick on someone who will not last the contract? Add a ACL to the equation. Sorry, I pass. You like it. I agree to disagree.....

 
Saying that Howie probably jumps on this guy..............

Right with you here, it's a crapshoot anyhow even when they are healthy, and now you are adding to the failure percentage taking an injury risk

1 hour ago, time2rock said:

I'm with you on this.  The draft is a big enough of a crap shoot as it is now ... finding a player that works out seems hard enough (especially for this organization) ... why compound the problem by taking a chance on a player with yet one more thing against him?  

I posted before I read this post lol

8 hours ago, joemas6 said:

I think you need to find the team that wants the remaining QB(s) bad enough in order for them to move up.   It's why I am looking at New England or Washington... staying at 15 or 19, but getting the 2nd rounder.  

Just wondering which QB rockets up into this area once the top 4 are gone. Pats would be the obvious trade partner if they think Mac Jones is their guy. Noone else is worthy of moving up for IMO. If Mac Jones is there at 12, he will be there at 15, so hard to see the Pats moving up without a reason. Wuss could trade up for him,but why would we want to help them out?

3 hours ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Thank goodness we didn’t overuse Sanders.

Gotta save him for his next team? 

2 hours ago, cunninghamtheman said:

 

You guys are on opposite sides here. I think it’s probably worth while for us to make that move...,partly because the guy we take at 12 will probably still be around at 22 anyway. Not sure what massive dropoff in talent occurs between the two spots?

Yes, this is an aspect I think people miss.   So caught up in CB and WR...and the " rankings "     forgetting its the Eagles who can easily take a linemen that was ranked in the 20s overall.    But it's why I like dropping just a little to either 15 or 19.  At those points I'm 99% sure it would be the guy they were going to take at 12 anyway. And I like the possibility of the 2nd round pick, 46 or 51... not so much a combo of 80s plus a 120s  type picks. 

If I get a DL first, then follow up with CB and OL, LB... I can use the late picks for offensive pieces like RB and a solid blocking type TE.  Package something to move up if needed with those late picks.  

But I would prefer multiple 2nd rounders this year.  Next year we are already in great shape in the draft.

2 hours ago, stine said:

  Ham, we obviously have different views here. I am sick of drafting players with injury history, only to see them go on IR. Or worse yet, not even play this year and get injured the following year. So now you have to wait until year three to see what you have. You saw the quote I copied for an article. Elite Football players coming back from this type of injury typically have 2.7-4.6 years. So, you want to spend a 1st round pick on someone who will not last the contract? Add a ACL to the equation. Sorry, I pass. You like it. I agree to disagree.....

 
Saying that Howie probably jumps on this guy..............

Stine,  a couple things... one is this focus on CB early, I don't think they go there... definitely a probability if it's not a lineman, but the lines are old and we know the draft history. 

The other thing, what classifies a player as elite?   I doubt it's a young prospect,  so the " study" was probably done on older more established veterans.   

I remember Woody all about how Brandon Graham wasn't supposed to last with his specific injury.... this was like 8 years ago if not longer.   Younger players are different.  

55 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

Nope,the farther you get down in the draft the less the percentages are of finding an impact player. If what you said was true everyone would scramble to trade their round 1 picks for 15 round 6's. Must be balanced

Right.... so try my thing.   Do a couple mocks ...picking players at those slots.   When done, ask yourself if you would trade the players instead of the slots.   

It's why numbers in the end don't tell the story either way...specific players in specific drafts are what matters.  

Does the DL the Eagles would take at 12, have that much more of a chance than the one at 15, 19 or 22...if you actually do the mock?  

In the end would you trade the DL you got at 22 plus the additional player(s) you mocked .... for the DL you mocked at 12?    Idk...  for a goof, try it and see.

59 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

11 picks-53 man roster that 1 in 5 players. That a pretty good injection no? thats like drafting all new players on one side of the ball

Lol...like the 3 WRs we drafted last year,  bit you want to draft 3 more this year? 

54 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

Just wondering which QB rockets up into this area once the top 4 are gone. Pats would be the obvious trade partner if they think Mac Jones is their guy. Noone else is worthy of moving up for IMO. If Mac Jones is there at 12, he will be there at 15, so hard to see the Pats moving up without a reason. Wuss could trade up for him,but why would we want to help them out?

Because of what they might offer in the trade.   

20 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Stine,  a couple things... one is this focus on CB early, I don't think they go there... definitely a probability if it's not a lineman, but the lines are old and we know the draft history. 

The other thing, what classifies a player as elite?   I doubt it's a young prospect,  so the " study" was probably done on older more established veterans.   

I remember Woody all about how Brandon Graham wasn't supposed to last with his specific injury.... this was like 8 years ago if not longer.   Younger players are different.  

  Joe, the study was done on all ages, thus the space for recovery and playing time after such. Older players would most likely last the shorter time period and younger ones the other end. You need to read up on this Joe. Fact remains that this is an issue. So do you draft a player in the first round knowing chances are he will not last 5 years? To the point that we go O-Line or D-Line. I am not sure there are many players that fit this low in round 1. What if all are taken? Do we reach if we cannot trade back? That is Howie's history, so I don't push that aside as an option. But I am looking at this pick from what most draft experts feel, not what Howie will do. Because we really do not know anymore. We drafted Reagor last year! Yes there were rumors that was the pick, but ahead of Jefferson? I am now hearing we have analytics involved in the draft process.... If this is the case we are doomed to fail. That dude looking at stats has no clue. Anyone on this EMB has a better chance of making a solid pick!

Whooo only 15 days till the draft lol 

24 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Right.... so try my thing.   Do a couple mocks ...picking players at those slots.   When done, ask yourself if you would trade the players instead of the slots.   

It's why numbers in the end don't tell the story either way...specific players in specific drafts are what matters.  

Does the DL the Eagles would take at 12, have that much more of a chance than the one at 15, 19 or 22...if you actually do the mock?  

In the end would you trade the DL you got at 22 plus the additional player(s) you mocked .... for the DL you mocked at 12?    Idk...  for a goof, try it and see.

  Sure, All Mock drafts you do will look better if you get to pick more players you like. But we all know the chances of these players actually contributing to the team dwindles as the players picked increase. So, how many players drafted in the first 3 rounds make the team vs the last 4? The chances a player does better at 12 should be correct. We all know it is not an exact science. That is why you should prefer to grab the better prospect, because that player should have a better chance to succeed. So, unless no one you feel can contribute when you are up, you take that player that is on top of your board. The you move on....

33 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Lol...like the 3 WRs we drafted last year,  bit you want to draft 3 more this year? 

LOL I didn't want Reagor, didn't want Jjaw,but at some point if you get TOO far away from the top the amount of picks doesn't matter because the talent ceiling isn't there. As I said you need balance. BTW I DID have Hightower as a late snag and he is doing better than Jjaw in my view

28 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Because of what they might offer in the trade.   

If Jones is there at 12,he will be there at 15,why would they give up anything?

5 minutes ago, stine said:

  Sure, All Mock drafts you do will look better if you get to pick more players you like. But we all know the chances of these players actually contributing to the team dwindles as the players picked increase. So, how many players drafted in the first 3 rounds make the team vs the last 4? The chances a player does better at 12 should be correct. We all know it is not an exact science. That is why you should prefer to grab the better prospect, because that player should have a better chance to succeed. So, unless no one you feel can contribute when you are up, you take that player that is on top of your board. The you move on....

Yep, gotta balance this

1 minute ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

If Jones is there at 12,he will be there at 15,why would they give up anyting?

  Well, this depends if there are more than one team looking for him. NE, Washington and maybe someone else.... Then there is a bidding war which lands you a 2nd round pick

4 minutes ago, stine said:

  Well, this depends if there are more than one team looking for him. NE, Washington and maybe someone else.... Then there is a bidding war which lands you a 2nd round pick

Talking about the Pats. There is no reason for them to trade from 15 to 12 and I see no reason we would help the Wuss by trading them the 12 pick(of course we could be stupid enough to do this just like we gave Dullaz a shot at Pitts if ATL passes on him)

6 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

Talking about the Pats. There is no reason for them to trade from 15 to 12 and I see no reason we would help the Wuss by trading them the 12 pick(of course we could be stupid enough to do this just like we gave Dullaz a shot at Pitts if ATL passes on him)

What if Fields or Lance was available and Washington was offering a 2nd round pick to the Eagles to switch 1st rounders? IF NE wants that QB they would have to step up to the plate, right?

   This is an assumption of course.

55 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

but the lines are old

Because the young guys we draft don't move up into starters. So back to "old reliable". If we can't develop players we aren't going anywhere. I'm anxious to see if this new staff sets these guys jocks on fire. Seems most are just there for the paycheck and that's not good enough. Seems this is a common theme in this place. Can't develop CB's, LB's, WR's so we have to hit FA and get more "old reliables". it's very sad

8 minutes ago, stine said:

What if Fields or Lance was available and Washington was offering a 2nd round pick to the Eagles to switch 1st rounders? IF NE wants that QB they would have to step up to the plate, right?

   This is an assumption of course.

Lance/Fields not falling to 12,at least I can't fathom that happening,so we are talking about Mac Jones QB 5. Maybe he goes to SF, but I still don't see the last guy(lance or Fields) falling to 12. If that happened I would bet Carolina snaps them up at 8(Darnold insurance lol)

19 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

Lance/Fields not falling to 12,at least I can't fathom that happening,so we are talking about Mac Jones QB 5. Maybe he goes to SF, but I still don't see the last guy(lance or Fields) falling to 12. If that happened I would bet Carolina snaps them up at 8(Darnold insurance lol)

Maybe 1 of the 5 fall to 12, maybe not. Carolina needs allot of help. I would think drafting a top talent at 8 would be better than the 5th QB. If 4 QB's are gone before they pick, then only 3 of Pitts, Chase, Sewell, Parsons, Paye, Surtain and Waddle are off the board. Allot of great options at 8 if you ask me. But we are not the GM of Carolina either...

2 hours ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

Why would the Titans make this trade????? just because YOU want it, doesn't mean THEY do

Obviously I don’t have any power to negotiate any trades. It’s called hypothetical

1 hour ago, joemas6 said:

Gotta save him for his next team? 

I think it’s wise because he’s a RB we DO plan on resigning. Can’t really have lower mileage on a RB than Sanders at this point in his career.