Just now, MidMoFo said:

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.
 

I agree with a lot of what you're saying except a few posts back when you said take Carter at 10.

I think having two 1st round picks really gives ammo to taking Robinson at 10.  If they had only their own 1st round pick, by all means, stick to your guns and take the positions you always do.  Howie made the bold trade last year to get this years Saints 1st round pick.  That pick might have a generational talent sitting right in their laps.  Who cares if it's not a position they typically value. 

2 minutes ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

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.

No it’s not. We have one 1st round pick on the Oline. 3 on the Dline. One of which is a question mark and the other 2 are from 10+ years ago.

We have the team we have because of stepping out of the box, free agency, and trades.

An undersized receiver that half the board didn’t want become a 1000 yard receiver. We developed a guy who barely played football to be our starting LT. We took a 6th round pick and he became a HOF center. We took a chance on an often injured lineman in Dickerson. We drafted a QB in the 2nd round who was run 1st while we just paid another QB a ton of money. I could go on and on. 

1 minute ago, MidMoFo said:

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.

It’s the reality of the NFL. It’s not the 19th highest paid offensive/defensive position because the billionaires don’t know what they’re doing. It’s because the impact a superstar RB can have on a football game can be mitigated by dirt cheap players.

Is Derrick Henry better than Miles sanders, straight up? Sure. But is the Titans RB group more relevant to them winning games than the Eagles RB pool was to us winning games? Or the pool we had in 2017 when all 4 guys were in and out of the league 2 years later? 

The value just isn’t there. We don’t even need to hold out for a superstar Dlineman to take over Bijan. A Brandon Graham-esque solid starter at 10 is worth way more than an all-pro RB. He’ll have more impact on more facets of the game, be more reliable, and have a longer career. That kind of player will definitely be available at 10. That’s how low the value of any individual RB is

5 minutes ago, Dwide Schrude said:

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 😁

#5 behind the best offensive line…

Do you think Josh Jacobs, Derek Henry, Nick Chubb and Saquon Barkley would have been held to 16 yards rushing behind our offensive line in the Super Bowl? 
 

We’ve been getting by with a great line and mediocre running backs for so long I don’t think some of you can even comprehend what a great running back can do.

7 minutes ago, MillerTime said:

No it’s not. We have one 1st round pick on the Oline. 3 on the Dline. One of which is a question mark and the other 2 are from 10+ years ago.

We have the team we have because of stepping out of the box, free agency, and trades.

An undersized receiver that half the board didn’t want become a 1000 yard receiver. We developed a guy who barely played football to be our starting LT. We took a 6th round pick and he became a HOF center. We took a chance on an often injured lineman in Dickerson. We drafted a QB in the 2nd round who was run 1st while we just paid another QB a ton of money. I could go on and on. 

We have 4 1st round picks on the Dline, not 3, and we had a second 1st round pick on the Oline just leave in FA, and that’s not counting the busts in Marcus Smith and Danny Watkins. That’s 8 lineman taken in our last 12 first round picks. You don’t just need to keep hitting the position to fill holes, but the draft is a crap shoot, some will inevitably bust.
 

The other things you mentioned supplemented the team as you don’t win with just 8 guys, but building our lines got  us where we are today. of course we can find talent in other rounds, and that’s no more prevalent than with the RB position. But the lines are our foundation, and they need to be continually hammered to keep it that way.

5 minutes ago, T-1000 said:

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.

No, I’m saying in our situation with the players in this draft Bijan is the right choice. I get the position value point and if there was a player at another position equal to him then you take them but that’s not the case IMO.

3 minutes ago, MidMoFo said:

#5 behind the best offensive line…

Do you think Josh Jacobs, Derek Henry, Nick Chubb and Saquon Barkley would have been held to 16 yards rushing behind our offensive line in the Super Bowl? 
 

We’ve been getting by with a great line and mediocre running backs for so long I don’t think some of you can even comprehend what a great running back can do.

A great running back doesn’t matter in a passing dominated league. 

43 minutes ago, ToastJenkins said:

And maybe hurts will grow three inches taller…

False

7 minutes ago, MillerTime said:

No, I’m saying in our situation with the players in this draft Bijan is the right choice. I get the position value point and if there was a player at another position equal to him then you take them but that’s not the case IMO.

The positional value difference is so severe though that the player doesn’t even need to be equal to Bijan to be the more beneficial choice

4 minutes ago, Dwide Schrude said:

A great running back doesn’t matter in a passing dominated league. 

We just had entire season where we built a lead in the first half with the passing game and then ran the clock out in the second half, which is why Sanders was #5 In rushing.

Then we had a 4th quarter lead in the Super Bowl, our top RB had 16 yards rushing, we lost the game, and you don’t think the running game is relevant? 😂😂😂

9 minutes ago, MillerTime said:

No, I’m saying in our situation with the players in this draft Bijan is the right choice. I get the position value point and if there was a player at another position equal to him then you take them but that’s not the case IMO.

IF Bijan was guaranteed to be a 1,400 yard rusher for the next 5 years, sure. He isn't though. Trent Richardson was supposed to be a can't miss RB prospect too. Take the position that is more important, has far more longevity, and is harder to find. Games are won and lost on the line, not based on who has the best RB. Just my opinion of course.

24 minutes ago, T-1000 said:

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.

Yeah if they absolutely love someone at 10 they should so they don’t get cute and moss out. Have a feeling there’s gonna be like 5-6 guys they like but don’t love unless someone unexpected falls.

I felt this way for a while if the Eagles love one of those three OL then they should take whichever one at 10. Because it tells me multiple things. One they believe he can be a high quality starter and worth value at 10. But also stoutland has to be telling them he loves the tools that that player has to work with. They’re never gonna take an offensive lineman that high without asking stoutland and having his approval. So if he approves of any of those offensice lineman we should all be on board because he’s got a pretty good job. I think the only one you could say the Eagles didn’t do enough due diligence was dillard and that’s because they came out and said they didn’t think he was going to be available at that point so they didn’t really do as much detail about it. But they asked asked stoutland before making the move and selection. 

3 minutes ago, MidMoFo said:

We just had entire season where we built a lead in the first half with the passing game and then ran the clock out in the second half, which is why Sanders was #5 In rushing.

Then we had a 4th quarter lead in the Super Bowl, our top RB had 16 yards rushing, we lost the game, and you don’t think the running game is relevant? 😂😂😂

Pretty much!

2 minutes ago, MidMoFo said:

We just had entire season where we built a lead in the first half with the passing game and then ran the clock out in the second half, which is why Sanders was #5 In rushing.

Then we had a 4th quarter lead in the Super Bowl, our top RB had 16 yards rushing, we lost the game, and you don’t think the running game is relevant? 😂😂😂

He's right. Running the ball and stopping the run while important isn't all that important relative to the passing game in 2023 NFL. Having the right QB, protecting him, and getting to the other QB is what's really important to success in today's NFL. Also, I could easily say the Eagles lost the SB because they didn't get any pass rush whatsoever which resulted in zero stops from the defense in the 2nd half. That and a stubborn DC who refused to make adjustments and get creative to get to the QB.

1 minute ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

Yeah if they absolutely love someone at 10 they should so they don’t get cute and moss out. Have a feeling there’s gonna be like 5-6 guys they like but don’t love unless someone unexpected falls.

I felt this way for a while if the Eagles love one of those three OL then they should take whichever one at 10. Because it tells me multiple things. One they believe he can be a high quality starter and worth value at 10. But also stoutland has to be telling them he loves the tools that that player has to work with. They’re never gonna take an offensive lineman that high without asking stoutland and having his approval. So if he approves of any of those offensice lineman we should all be on board because he’s got a pretty good job. I think the only one you could say the Eagles didn’t do enough due diligence was dillard and that’s because they came out and said they didn’t think he was going to be available at that point so they didn’t really do as much detail about it. But they asked asked stoutland before making the move and selection. 

Skoronski honestly might be the only player they could take at 10 who could be a day one starter from day one. IF they think he will be an all pro guard for the next 10 years, along with the chance to make an impact right away they should take him.

Bijan is the other one but I'm not going down that road again.

Just now, T-1000 said:

Skoronski honestly might be the only player they could take at 10 who could be a day one starter from day one. IF they think he will be an all pro guard for the next 10 years, along with the chance to make an impact right away they should take him.

Bijan is the other one but I'm not going down that road again.

I think the pick will be Skoronski at 10

I’m more interested in who the pick at #30 will be. 

16 minutes ago, T-1000 said:

IF Bijan was guaranteed to be a 1,400 yard rusher for the next 5 years, sure. He isn't though. Trent Richardson was supposed to be a can't miss RB prospect too. Take the position that is more important, has far more longevity, and is harder to find. Games are won and lost on the line, not based on who has the best RB. Just my opinion of course.

I think either Berman or solak used this anology  with taking a RB that high in the first round, the issue is you’re drafting a RB that high they’re a depreciating asset at that point. Because the more years or more miles you put on them their value decreases. likely hit their peak 2-3 years into the rookie contract and then you are gonna have to pay on the depreciating value and years where he’s not at his peak. 

Meanwhile other positions they’re gonna have miles put on them and years put on them as well. but each year going forward they usually hold their residual better and even increase value as they get better and better learning the position. usually when you pay the second contract you are likely not paying on a depreciating asset whereas running backs in their second contract a majority of the time you are already spending on the assets that’s depreciating.

basically the point that they had was if you’re picking at 10 you don’t want to go into the second contract with the player decreasing in value. you want them increasing in value so you want to pay them the second contract and with running back it’s usually not the case 

3 minutes ago, Dwide Schrude said:

Pretty much!

We had the lead going into the 4th quarter. You don’t think having the ability to to impose our will on the Chiefs defense running the ball in the 2nd half, drain the clock, score TDs on 8-10 minute drives, keeping Mahomes off the field, would have won us the Super Bowl?

We had 0 sacks after leading the league in team sacks on the regular season. Remember that.

7 minutes ago, T-1000 said:

Skoronski honestly might be the only player they could take at 10 who could be a day one starter from day one. IF they think he will be an all pro guard for the next 10 years, along with the chance to make an impact right away they should take him.

Bijan is the other one but I'm not going down that road again.

I think skoronski makes the most sense of the 3 OL cause he has a ton of positional versatility. I do like Paris johnson more than most so i wouldn’t be shocked if he was talked about. I like jurgens but I’m not sure he’s a guard or plays it at a high enough level nor do i think he has the ceiling skoronski can have at guard. I’d love skoronski a lot more if he could be lane’s long term replacement however if he becomes a day 1 starter and a pro bowl caliber guard for years to come it was a great pick. I get easier to find guards later then tackle but i think if they take him tells you stoutland loves the kid and believes he can develop him into a career like he did with lane, brooks, mailata, Dickerson and helped kelce as well. 

19 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

I’m more interested in who the pick at #30 will be. 

In 2021 we had 3 1st round picks and only used 1. in 2017 we had Minnesota’s first round pick, and we traded ours away the year before. In 2009 we had 2 first round picks and only used 1. 
 

Maybe it’s avoiding multiple fifth round options hitting at the same time, maybe it’s the continued spread-the-wealth mentality for future drafts, or maybe it’s Howie with too many draft assets burning a hole in his pocket and he can’t resist the trade block. But Until I see it happen one day, I continue to believe Howie will not use both.

6 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

I’m more interested in who the pick at #30 will be. 

I feel there’s more of a chance the eagles move that pick 

9 minutes ago, T-1000 said:

He's right. Running the ball and stopping the run while important isn't all that important relative to the passing game in 2023 NFL. Having the right QB, protecting him, and getting to the other QB is what's really important to success in today's NFL. Also, I could easily say the Eagles lost the SB because they didn't get any pass rush whatsoever which resulted in zero stops from the defense in the 2nd half. That and a stubborn DC who refused to make adjustments and get creative to get to the QB.

So adding a weapon at RB to take pressure/carries off Jalen Hurts, and who could drain the clock with time consuming drives in the 2nd half, keeping Mahomes on the sideline isn’t an option?

10 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

I’m more interested in who the pick at #30 will be. 

That’s such a tough one to peg. I think that’s where we see the trade down to add a 4th and/or a 5th at least. Gibbs makes a ton of sense if they trade back and don’t go back too far. I’ve wondered if they’d be ok with Forbes given his light frame considering the success they’ve seen with Devonta. It entirely depends on what happens at 10 first though.

 

8 minutes ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

I think either Berman or solak used this anology  with taking a RB that high in the first round, the issue is you’re drafting a RB that high they’re a depreciating asset at that point. Because the more years or more miles you put on them their value decreases. likely hit their peak 2-3 years into the rookie contract and then you are gonna have to pay on the depreciating and years where he’s not at his peak. 

Meanwhile other positions they’re gonna have miles put on them and years put on them as well. but each year going forward they usually hold their residual better and even increase value as they get better and better learning the position. usually when you pay the second contract you are likely not paying on a depreciating asset whereas running backs in their second contract a majority of the time you are already spending on the assets that’s depreciating. 

I believe it was Bill Barnwell who just published an excellent read on why drafting in the RB is a bad idea because of the contracts rookies will make at their given draft slot compared to what low level players make at highly valuable positions. Once I read the article I was firmly against taking Bijan at 10

5 minutes ago, MidMoFo said:

We had the lead going into the 4th quarter. You don’t think having the ability to to impose our will on the Chiefs defense running the ball in the 2nd half, drain the clock, score TDs on 8-10 minute drives, keeping Mahomes off the field, would have won us the Super Bowl?

We had 0 sacks after leading the league in team sacks on the regular season. Remember that.

If Sanders had 16 total yards, maybe Bijan pushes it to 24, or 30, or 40. They had a great scheme to stop our running game. No RB changes the offense that much. AP didn’t, Saquon doesn’t, Zeke didn’t, Henry doesn’t, why would Bijan.
 

That doesn’t prevent Mahomes from winning it anyway. Remember, he didn’t just win by 3, they had an easy 7 that they turned down to run the clock.