8 minutes ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

And what does that change? He gets some more rush yards. Is that as valuable as potentially having Micah parsons ourselves? He was taken 12th overall.

Yeah, if Micah Parsons or Will Anderson, Tyree Wilson or Jalen Carter is there at 10, we should absolutely take them. If they’re gone, I think it’s foolish to rule out another player who can change your team just because it’s a RB.

6 minutes ago, MidMoFo said:

Miles Sanders had 16 yards rushing in the Super Bowl. We had the lead going into the 4th quarter… do you watch football very often?

Cool now tell me how he did all season long instead of just the one game. Where does he rank among other RB? What round was he drafted in? 
 

I finally found someone that Random Reglar is smarter than

2 minutes ago, MidMoFo said:

Yeah, if Micah Parsons or Will Anderson, Tyree Wilson or Jalen Carter is there at 10, we should absolutely take them. If they’re gone, I think it’s foolish to rule out another player who can change your team just because it’s a RB.

I’m not saying rule him out, I’m saying take precedence with the superior position, which will almost always be there. Before Micah was drafted, no one knew he’d be Micah, or he would have gone top 3. There are players in this draft with similar grades that Micah had who’ll be available at 10. So "a Micah” will be there.

31 minutes ago, Dwide Schrude said:

You guys really think Bijan will be that much of a difference maker in a game against the Cowboys if Lane goes down & we have to watch Jack Driscoll line up against Micah Parsons again?

We'll RPO him to death. He'll be so afraid of Bijan he'll be rooted in place. We did it to hm. We did it to Von Miller. And, just suppose, Lane is healthy. Your IF goes away. Plus, Micah didn't really do a lot against Driscoll that I can recall, whenever that was. If my memory serves.

1 minute ago, just relax said:

We'll RPO him to death. He'll be so afraid of Bijan he'll be rooted in place. We did it to hm. We did it to Von Miller. And, just suppose, Lane is healthy. Your IF goes away. Plus, Micah didn't really do a lot against Driscoll that I can recall, whenever that was. If my memory serves.

Micah wrecked Driscoll on that final play of the game which forced Minshew to throw the ball early. Eagles could have won that if Minshew had maybe a second or so longer

16 minutes ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

Because we’re not drafting for 2023, We’re drafting for 2024-2027. To expect Bijan to be an "explosive addition” is unrealistic in his rookie year. It has happened before with players, but those are notable because they are outliers. To draft a player solely on the expectation that he’ll play like a seasoned vet his rookie year is exactly how the Lions and the Browns and the Cardinals have been throwing away picks for decades.

You never draft a player for that year, you draft him for the future. If he contributes his rookie year then that’s a bonus. What’s our Dline in 2024? Sweat is going into his last year and it’s entirely possible if he has another big sack season that we can’t afford him. Graham is 35. Cox is 33. Barnett will most likely be gone. A rotational Dlineman who can slowly work into the starting lineup is absolutely more valuable than a RB who may or may not have a major impact before year 3.
 

And even then, his impact can be at least mostly replicated by a functional committee, even if he turns into a Star. A star pass rusher cannot be easily replaced. 

 

9 minutes ago, ToastJenkins said:

Bc the draft isnt about 2023

1st rounders have a 5th year option… it takes FOUR YEARS to get to that 5th year option… 2027.

4 minutes ago, MidMoFo said:

 

1st rounders have a 5th year option… it takes FOUR YEARS to get to that 5th year option… 2027.

And in 4 years we’d be lucky if we currently have 2-3 guys who’ll still be in our 2027 8 man Dline rotation. There is still a valuable role for a new player there even with the roster we have, there is always playing time available for talent on the Dline. That’s the best play

5 minutes ago, Dwide Schrude said:

Cool now tell me how he did all season long instead of just the one game. Where does he rank among other RB? What round was he drafted in? 
 

I finally found someone that Random Reglar is smarter than

He did well… had him on my fantasy team. I was a little disappointed since he was running behind arguably the best offensive line in football. He was a 2nd round pick, which comes right after the first round. ONE whole round later than a first round pick.

14 minutes ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

Think about what we did the 5 years before we had shady. Then think about what we did the 5 years after we had shady.

Its awesome for highlight reels and really pretty stats, but what did we actually achieve as a team by drafting shady and subsequently paying him a lot of money that we didn’t when we went with a thrift store backfield?

That whole era of Eagles football is vastly overrated by a lot of this fanbase. I don't know if it's people in their 20s now who came of age with that team, but I never understood the love for those teams with Vick, Shady, DeSean, etc. I get it's sentimental and Shady did have some strong seasons. I came of age during the early 2000s McNabb run and those teams still mean a lot to me. But at least they won playoff games and went to five NFC title games and one Super Bowl. And those teams were built through the offensive line and the defense. They didn't have a stud, workhorse running back, as much as I like Westbrook. His only workhorse year was really 2007. Those teams with Vick, Foles v1.0, and Shady never did anything in the grand scheme of things and it's not a way to build a championship team. 

4 minutes ago, Dwide Schrude said:

Micah wrecked Driscoll on that final play of the game which forced Minshew to throw the ball early. Eagles could have won that if Minshew had maybe a second or so longer

He also left the first game with a concussion around halftime. Parsons was doing his best to make it a game with Johnson out. 

1 minute ago, MidMoFo said:

He did well… had him on my fantasy team. I was a little disappointed since he was running behind arguably the best offensive line in football. He was a 2nd round pick, which comes right after the first round. ONE whole round later than a first round pick.

The 10th overall pick is worth at least 3 2nd round picks, that’s the main point here. Investing draft capital in a RB is not wrong to consider, but investing THAT much draft capital is not to the benefit of the team 

11 minutes ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

Think about what we did the 5 years before we had shady. Then think about what we did the 5 years after we had shady.

Its awesome for highlight reels and really pretty stats, but what did we actually achieve as a team by drafting shady and subsequently paying him a lot of money that we didn’t when we went with a thrift store backfield?

You can do this exercise with any back who had significant draft investment. Were the AP era Vikings way better than they were before it, or than they are now, beyond the 1 year they had a HoF QB drop into their laps? Are the Dallas Cowboys not exactly the same with Zeke as they were pre-Zeke? NYG pre-Saquon?

Now picture SF without Bosa, Dallas without Micah, KC without Chris Jones. The disparity between the value of these players is so dramatic, and what they get paid on second contracts directly correlates to this.

If there was a Nick Bosa, Micah Parsons or Chris Jones at 10, sign me up.  That's not my argument though.  I'm suggesting that if the Eagles are true to their BPA philosophy, then Bijan Harris is most likely night and day above the rest of the players that would be sitting there at 10.

I think you have to look at the teams surrounding those RB too.  I think this Eagles team is better than any Eagles team Shady was on.  They are better than the Vikings, Cowboys and Giants in those situations.  If you added Shady, AP, healthy Zeke/Saquon to this team I would be thrilled. 

2 minutes ago, just relax said:

We'll RPO him to death. He'll be so afraid of Bijan he'll be rooted in place. We did it to hm. We did it to Von Miller. And, just suppose, Lane is healthy. Your IF goes away. Plus, Micah didn't really do a lot against Driscoll that I can recall, whenever that was. If my memory serves.

Exactly.

injuries happen in football. I get the reasoning. But not drafting the BPA because you’re scared of what ifs and injuries is crazy. It doesn’t eliminate other options to acquire depth.

We have only used a 1st round pick on oline 4 times in 20 years. Only 1 of them worked out. Yet we have an elite oline.

 

3 minutes ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

And in 4 years we’d be lucky if we currently have 2-3 guys who’ll still be in our 2027 8 man Dline rotation. There is always a valuable role for a new player there, there is always playing time available for talent on the Dline. That’s the best play

So if all the top DLine options are off the board at 10 this year… and we step outside of the box ONE single time and draft a RB at 10 this year… we’re not allowed to draft DLine again until 2027? I’m not sure what you’re saying is anywhere close to accurate.

7 minutes ago, bpac55 said:

If there was a Nick Bosa, Micah Parsons or Chris Jones at 10, sign me up.  That's not my argument though.  I'm suggesting that if the Eagles are true to their BPA philosophy, then Bijan Harris is most likely night and day above the rest of the players that would be sitting there at 10.

I think you have to look at the teams surrounding those RB too.  I think this Eagles team is better than any Eagles team Shady was on.  They are better than the Vikings, Cowboys and Giants in those situations.  If you added Shady, AP, healthy Zeke/Saquon to this team I would be thrilled. 

We don’t have a BPA philosophy though, we never have in the Lurie era. We have a positional value philosophy. We haven’t taken a LB, S, TE, or RB in the first round since before 2000 when this philosophy began.

Howie said last summer straight up that we had Nakobe Dean as a target in the second round. However, Cam Jurgens also had second round draft grades last year, and he took Cam in  instead because Nakobe is not a lineman, and made him not an option in that scenario. 

2 hours ago, MillerTime said:

My question for the blog is would you select Christian McCaffrey or Derek Barnett? (2017 draft) Would you select Josh Jacobs or Andre Dillard? (2019 draft)

Barnett is the last DE we selected in the 1st. He is still on the team but we still see it as a need and most were annoyed we brought him back.

Dillard was the last Oline we selected in the 1st. He was on the team for 4 years.

McCaffrey was gone when they took Barnett. Either way, coming up with two examples of lineman not working and RB's working out in a particular draft proves nothing. There would be just as many examples of RB's who were taken in the first round before OL and DL in the same draft where the lineman worked out better. The draft is not an exact science as much as people would like for it to be.

2 minutes ago, MidMoFo said:

So if all the top DLine options are off the board at 10 this year… and we step outside of the box ONE single time and draft a RB at 10 this year… we’re not allowed to draft DLine again until 2027? I’m not sure what you’re saying is anywhere close to accurate.

There is no stepping out of the box. The box is building a perpetual contender, why would decide to derail that?

And we don’t need just 1 d-lineman before 2027. We need to take them repeatedly, bludgeon the Oline and Dline to death with picks year after year, that’s how we became the relevant team we are today.

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

I’m fine if it’s him. If he turns out to be an all pro/pro bowl type player that’s a hit and 4/5th of our line is set for the foreseeable future. I don’t love van ness but I’d at least understand the reasoning behind it and why they took him. 

I’d always want a pick and having 10 is nice but this is a really bad draft having 10. Removing the QBs, i think there’s definitely a drop off after Carter, Anderson, Wilson, Witherspoon and Gonzalez. Which likely all 5 are gone by 10. I’d be fine with Johnson Jr, jones, skoronski, LVN, Nolan Smith cause imo 10-24 i think there’s a lot of guys higher and lower on other team’s boards to the point i think we see some surprises on draft night. That said id love to move down from 10 if all 5 of those guys gone and get some extra picks. Fran Duffy nailed it when he said the sweet spot in this draft is like 35-70 range. 

I would agree with you. HOWEVER, if they absolutely love Skoronski or Smith and have them in their top 10 they should just take them and not mess around. The actual picks and teams individual boards often end up being far different than what draft experts and fans expect so you just never know. To us as fans 10 looks like a bad spot in this draft and trading down seems to be the right move. However, the Eagles might be in love with someone who will be there at 10.

4 minutes ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

The 10th overall pick is worth at least 3 2nd round picks, that’s the main point here. Investing draft capital in a RB is not wrong to consider, but investing THAT much draft capital is not to the benefit of the team 

If the top DLine are off the board at 10, I’m all in favor of moving back to the mid-late teens, adding day 2 picks and seeing what’s available later. I just think it’s silly for us to rule out a talent like Bijan solely because he’s a running back expected to go top 20.

5 minutes ago, MidMoFo said:

He did well… had him on my fantasy team. I was a little disappointed since he was running behind arguably the best offensive line in football. He was a 2nd round pick, which comes right after the first round. ONE whole round later than a first round pick.

Not your fantasy team, how did he rank among all rushing leaders? That would be #5 in the entire league. A 2nd round draft pick was the fifth best rusher in the league. Also a 2nd round draft pick was #2, #3, and #6. Thank you for proving my point that you can find quality & productive RB beyond the first round 😁

1 minute ago, T-1000 said:

McCaffrey was gone when they took Barnett. Either way, coming up with two examples of lineman not working and RB's working out in a particular draft proves nothing. There would be just as many examples of RB's who were taken in the first round before OL and DL in the same draft where the lineman worked out better. The draft is not an exact science as much as people would like for it to be.

That was the point. The draft isn’t an exact science. There are situations and draft classes where the RB makes more sense.

1 hour ago, eagle45 said:

That's a daaaaaangerous proposition, just like it was in 2018.

In 2018, coming off an elite SB offense, no one was willing to call our offense slow...but it kind of was.  Another year on Jeffery, dropping the token deep threat, and transitioning to 12 personnel made it a hell of a lot slower.

Heading into 2023, no one wants to call our offense slow...but it kind of is.  The token deep threat, Watkins, is hanging on by a thread.  Put some more wear/tear on Brown, replace Watkins with a 1st round TE you need to get on the field with 12 personnel...and this offense could get real congested real fast.

Everyone will love the pick FOUR years from now when Goedert is washed and we have a top starting TE in his prime on a second contract after doing little before the extension, but is that how we want to use the pick?

I would not like this. Defense is lacking and needs youth, upgrades at safety and linebacker, could use another receiver as Quez is a disappointment, defensive line could use multiple players. O-line could use a OG or better depth, a swing OT. RB is a need at some point as well. I can't get on board with a TE any earlier than day 3. 

9 minutes ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

The 10th overall pick is worth at least 3 2nd round picks, that’s the main point here. Investing draft capital in a RB is not wrong to consider, but investing THAT much draft capital is not to the benefit of the team 

When you’re a Super Bowl team, you don’t normally have a top 10 pick… we still have our own pick to do what is rational under normal circumstances. I’m just saying I’m not against making a bold move since we are in an abnormal situation.
 

1 minute ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

We don’t have a BPA philosophy though, we never have. We have a positional value philosophy. We haven’t taken a LB, S, TE, or RB in the first round since before 2000 when this philosophy began.

Howie said last summer straight up that we had Nakobe Dean as a target in the second round. However, Cam Jurgens also had similar draft grades last year, and he took Cam in the second round instead because Nakobe is not a lineman, and made him not an option in that scenario. 

I thought they began leaning more towards BPA as of late.  If they had Dean and Jurgens graded similarly, then of course, you know the Eagles are going OL.

I just don't think anyone comes close to Robinson talent wise sitting at 10.  I'm not suggesting I want Robinson, but I think it would make a lot of sense.  I posted about it a few days ago but they need to look at the next 2 drafts as 1.  If there isn't a must have game changing talent on the DL or OL sitting there at 10, they have 17 more picks over the next 2 years to address that.  This team is not going to be picking in the top 10 again for a while, or at least they shouldn't.  Would a player that many say has HOF potential make more sense or would an OL who is going to be sitting/changing positions make sense?  

It's a fun discussion to have because you can easily make an argument for so many different scenarios.  The question is, what's the clear cut best decision for this team.  As much as I like Van Ness, they can find a Van Ness next year.  I don't see a Bijan Robinson in the draft next year.

 

1 minute ago, MillerTime said:

That was the point. The draft isn’t an exact science. There are situations and draft classes where the RB makes more sense.

You were implying that because of two examples, take the RB over the lineman. Am I not reading into your point correctly?

My point is taking neither is a guarantee versus the other. The reason you take the lineman though is because of positional value. Even IF you hit on the RB what are you getting, 5 or 6 good years. If you hit in the lineman you could easily get 10 years of high level play. It's also far easier to find good RB's than lineman, the league is a passing league now, etc etc. It's about positional value when it comes to RB's in the draft. There is a reason 20 or 30 years ago more RB's went in the top 10 and first round than now.