1 hour ago, greendestiny27 said:

I don't want Skoronski but between him and Paris, if I had to make a choice between them two I'm going Skoronski. I think he is just the better overall player and I have to use that as my tie breaker at 10, if it comes down to them. Though I would take Brod Jones over both. 

Not a Skoroski guy. Want more measurable and upside with Stoutland as the O line coach 

3 minutes ago, DaEagles4Life said:

Not a Skoroski guy. Want more measurable and upside with Stoutland as the O line coach 

If Stout thinks he has all-pro potential at G, I’m fine with it. 

Skoronski is the best lineman in the draft. He's super boring and he doesn't have the upside of some of the other guys but chances are he's going to be a very good to pro-bowl level RG for the next decade. It really comes down to how much you value the idea of hitting a double with the 10th pick versus swinging for the fences and potentially striking out.

6 minutes ago, DaEagles4Life said:

Not a Skoroski guy. Want more measurable and upside with Stoutland as the O line coach 

I agree, I would take Broderick Jones. Maybe even Wright. I'm just not a real big fan of Paris but he has been a model player with all of his off the field stuff and he's very smart in the classroom too. I could see all that helping him quite a bit in this process.

2 minutes ago, T-1000 said:

Skoronski is the best lineman in the draft. He's super boring and he doesn't have the upside of some of the other guys but chances are he's going to be a very good to pro-bowl level RG for the next decade. It really comes down to how much you value the idea of hitting a double with the 10th pick versus swinging for the fences and potentially striking out.

The only thing is he never played on the right side of the line nor at guard. I would imagine he makes the transition but just wanted to point that out. Wright did excel on the right side. 

6 hours ago, HazletonEagle said:

The interesting thing is, there are probably no analytics when it comes to a super bowl team picking in the top 10 in a year when there is really a top 10 worthy back available.

We know, from a few years ago that an elite RB can increase a teams W/L record by 4 games. That stat was reported, and shared in here by me, I believe during the Fournette draft year. But thats bad teams picking a RB who can carry their offense. Makes a massive difference for them, but theyre not us.

We cant realistically improve by 4 games in the W column from last year by drafting a RB. But for a super bowl runner up, is there any other position that affects win shares as much to get you over the hump? Answer would be a clear no. RB can make the largest difference. Especially on a roster that currently does not have a legit 3 down RB.

We are in a rare position here to do something that there arent any stats on. Howie talked on the Kelce podcast of behing ahead of things.... this is his chance to zig.

A stud running back wins us the super bowl, as Sanders couldn't do Jack ish.  It's the last piece of the puzzle, our offense would be top 2 for the next 4 years

9 minutes ago, devpool said:

A stud running back wins us the super bowl, as Sanders couldn't do Jack ish.  It's the last piece of the puzzle, our offense would be top 2 for the next 4 years

that and getting back to the SB. In this current version of the NFL, ball control offense is a great defense

33 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

They both said his interception real was really unimpressive, like maybe one good play among them. 

Idk - if their critique mentioned worries about being targeted in the run game or by bubbles, so be it… the INT reel not being up to their standards doesn’t resonate with me as it’s an obvious indicator of ball skills. It seems like a similar beef Bo Wulf had with CGJ.

15 minutes ago, greendestiny27 said:

The only thing is he never played on the right side of the line nor at guard. I would imagine he makes the transition but just wanted to point that out. Wright did excel on the right side. 

Wright is intriguing but that stuff on twitter recently is extremely concerning. I like Johnson after Skoronski I just feel like he would sit for two years. I know he played some G at Ohio State but I feel like his height, build, and skillset is much more suited for T. Like others have said though I trust Stoutland's opinion on OL so if/whomever they take there they will have my benefit of the doubt.

26 minutes ago, T-1000 said:

Skoronski is the best lineman in the draft. He's super boring and he doesn't have the upside of some of the other guys but chances are he's going to be a very good to pro-bowl level RG for the next decade. It really comes down to how much you value the idea of hitting a double with the 10th pick versus swinging for the fences and potentially striking out.

We usually strike out badly on picks that are advertised on immediate review as hitting doubles and singles.

33 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

If Stout thinks he has all-pro potential at G, I’m fine with it. 

Howie quote something along the lines of "If he has the right traits in his body, and technique issues, hes gonna be fine". Skoronski may not have technique issues. Thats a plus. But does he have the right traits in his body?

He also talked about complementing Kelce with bigger Guards. Skoronski doesnt seem to fit.

Rather than drafting a RG at 10, what if the Eagles look at making some sort of trade for a guy like Caesar Ruiz?  He came in to the league as a very young 1st round pick in 2020.  He turns 24 in June but hasn't lived up to being selected with the 24th pick.  He's 6-4, 315 and the kind of clay that I think Stoutland would love to build from.  

Not sure if the Saints are giving up on him yet or what it would cost to bring him in but that could be an attractive option.

 

28 minutes ago, T-1000 said:

Skoronski is the best lineman in the draft. He's super boring and he doesn't have the upside of some of the other guys but chances are he's going to be a very good to pro-bowl level RG for the next decade. It really comes down to how much you value the idea of hitting a double with the 10th pick versus swinging for the fences and potentially striking out.

Give me Zavala. I think he can be near what Brandon Brooks was. Hes big and nasty, and athletic. Not quite the athlete Brooks was, but quite close. Better traits than Skoronski. Would love to see him with Stout.

1 hour ago, Captain F said:

Trade up for: Carter

Pick at 10: Bijan

Trade down from 10: Porter JR. 

 

Your turn.  

 

Trade up for: Anderson Jr

Pick at 10: Carter(fingers crossed)

Trade down from 10: Bijan

5 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

Howie quote something along the lines of "If he has the right traits in his body, and technique issues, hes gonna be fine". Skoronski may not have technique issues. Thats a plus. But does he have the right traits in his body?

He also talked about complementing Kelce with bigger Guards. Skoronski doesnt seem to fit.

Skoronski clearly does as a guard. He’s probably gonna end up at 315-320. That’s plenty big enough at guard, and bigger than Seumalo. 

5 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

Skoronski clearly does as a guard. He’s probably gonna end up at 315-320. That’s plenty big enough at guard, and bigger than Seumalo. 

I don't think his workout was very impressive. 

Don't see the right traits in his body.  Especially not at 10. I say no way there's any truth to this.  He's a great smokescreen because as an OL everyone will assume Philly has to be interested.

I don't buy it. Not at 10. 

Zavala

5 hours ago, just relax said:

Yep. The thing that drove me crazy more than anything else was the WR starting in and then reversing back out. They did it several times and Gannon never adjusted to it. The DBs were coached to pass the receiver along. KC exposed that and Gannon was too stupid to notice it. I was done with him after that.

Wonder what role Dennard Wilson had as defensive passing coordinator in that failure and how that impacted his future with the Eagles. 

1 minute ago, HazletonEagle said:

I don't think his workout was very impressive. 

Don't see the right traits in his body.  Especially not at 10. I say no way there's any truth to this.  He's a great smokescreen because as an OL everyone will assume Philly has to be interested.

I don't buy it. Not at 10. 

Zavala

Who are the clear cut better options if you have to pick at 10. For the sake of the argument, the players off the board are Young, Anderson, Wilson, Stroud, Carter, Witherspoon, Richardson, Gonzalez, Smith. 

Even if they project Skoronski as an all pro guard, they can't take him at 10 unless they also project him as a top level tackle. You don't take guards at 10 the same general reason you don't take RBs. OGs are easier to find. Hell, they can get a guy like Torrence later who projects to be a great guard also. Who knows when the Eagles will pick this high again. Have to go to one of the more premium and harder to find positions.

1 minute ago, ManuManu said:

Who are the clear cut better options if you have to pick at 10. For the sake of the argument, the players off the board are Young, Anderson, Wilson, Stroud, Carter, Witherspoon, Richardson, Gonzalez, Smith. 

Bijan Robinson.

If we arent taking a RB at 10, you trade down.

Skoronski is not some cant miss guy where you feel totally screwed if you trade down and miss out on him. 

Trade down. Then take Skoronski if you really want him. Or Murphy, or one of the OTs. Or Van Ness. Or Porter. All of those guys are still on his level. He doesnt belong in the top 10 conversation. 

4 minutes ago, Sack that QB said:

Even if they project Skoronski as an all pro guard, they can't take him at 10 unless they also project him as a top level tackle. You don't take guards at 10 the same general reason you don't take RBs. OGs are easier to find. Hell, they can get a guy like Torrence later who projects to be a great guard also. Who knows when the Eagles will pick this high again. Have to go to one of the more premium and harder to find positions.

Id have no problem with a Guard top 10 if hes an incredible athlete with great size. Skoronski is just ok size, and not an incredible athlete.

9 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

Bijan Robinson.

If we arent taking a RB at 10, you trade down.

Skoronski is not some cant miss guy where you feel totally screwed if you trade down and miss out on him. 

Trade down. Then take Skoronski if you really want him. Or Murphy, or one of the OTs. Or Van Ness. Or Porter. All of those guys are still on his level. He doesnt belong in the top 10 conversation. 

I don’t love Skoronski. The point is if Stout does, take him. He has a 9.31 RAS so he’s obviously athletic. I just don’t see any slam dunk picks at 10 if it goes the way I laid out  I’d hope for a trade back. Robinson would be fun, but he’s bad value. 

Murphy seems like a reach at 10. I’d be incredibly underwhelmed by Van Ness. I don’t see Porter as a scheme fit at all.

 

2 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

I don’t love Skoronski. The point is if Stout does, take him. He has a 9.31 RAS so he’s obviously athletic. I just don’t see any slam dunk picks at 10 if it goes the way I laid out  I’d hope for a trade back. Robinson would be fun, but he’s bad value. 

Murphy seems like a reach at 10. I’d be incredibly underwhelmed by Van Ness. I don’t see Porter as a scheme fit at all.

 

CBS actually has Deonte Banks as the next best prospect on their board.  He does have very good tape and tested through the roof, but #10 does seem rich.

Still, there’s often one guy who goes earlier than most expect 

Just now, Alphagrand said:

CBS actually has Deonte Banks as the next best prospect on their board.  He does have very good tape and tested through the roof, but #10 does seem rich.

Still, there’s often one guy who goes earlier than most expect 

I think Banks ends up going top 15 or so. 

10 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

I don’t love Skoronski. The point is if Stout does, take him. He has a 9.31 RAS so he’s obviously athletic. I just don’t see any slam dunk picks at 10 if it goes the way so laid out  I’d hope for a trade back. Robinson would be fun, but he’s bad value. 

Murphy seems like a reach at 10. I’d be incredibly underwhelmed by Van Ness. I don’t see Porter as a scheme fit at all.

 

I dont think Murphy or Van Ness are more of a reach than Skoronski at 10. Im saying you trade down, and take any of them. Theyre all in the same territory imo. Skoronski was an excellent college player, but hes not some generational talent at all. He shouldnt be in the discussion at 10.