glazeduck

Great athlete, lots of good tape too... He's a bit of a weird fit for us -- more of a 34 rush backer to me. He could fit Lorax's old role, but almost more of an edge in terms of role he's best suited for...

This has absolutely nothing to do with your above post, other than it made me think of it... More than anything else, the thing I will miss about not having a combine is not getting to watch the gauntlet drill. I love that thing, both for entertainment as well as evaluation and education, I could watch it all day long.

Agree with all of this. To be clear, I'm not making the case for him there, that's just the argument that I've heard be made. Now, for the sake of my buddies who are 9ers friends, I'd love nothing more 🤣

I will say that I agree on what we saw from Wilson, the kid can spin it, put it into tight windows, throw from a lot of different levels and works well off-script and off-platform. Here's what I keep coming back to -- the list of QBs who can do that 'on air' (without defenders) is LOOOOONG. I've seen absolute scrubs look great in those situations. Obviously what Wilson did wasn't literally against no one, but the level of competition was terrible, their competition had no time for advanced scouting (so were playing with basic gameplans) and many of BYU's players are grown men in their mid-20s (they averaged 21.4 years old). Frankly, he did exactly what we should've all expected him to do. Maybe he does the same against better competition, but he certainly didn't do anything special in 2019. He'll be going to a poorly run franchise with a ton of attention on him... I just don't see it playing out well for the kid.

I've seen the argument for Mac or Lance over Fields, and either would cause absolute mayhem in the draft (and benefit the Dolphins greatly). For Mac, it's that he's a Shannahan guy. Good processer, sees the field, manages games, puts the ball where his playmakers need it to be, doesn't make mistakes, etc. For Lance (and this one makes more sense to me), it's that he's got the highest ceiling and can be molded into something special with time. When you have Jimmy G, who they're saying they're sticking with, you don't need a guy to walk in on day 1 and take the reins.

Agree, to an extent. I like Wyatt Davis a lot and if the board is right, could see him being had in a trade down. To me it comes down to 4 things, given how our roster is shaping out prior to the draft (assuming no trades)... 1. Are you using your draft pick to make the biggest improvement to the team that you can? 2. What spots can you allow to stay "good enough" in order to see a larger improvement elsewhere? 3. When and where can you *coast* on being good enough through the season, in opting for higher upside picks that you hope are ready to make a bigger impact come playoff time? 4. To a lesser extent, where is the draft's depth, where you might be able to get a better value pick and how does that play in to the above 3? I think you can ask these questions about just about every position and come out with some interesting answers. Certainly guard, nose, edge, RB, TE, CB, LB/nickel, OT can all be upgraded, but I also think even without upgrades we're a playoff team. So where can you lean into that and start looking at how to optimize those picks and maximize the return? I'm not sure I even have a strongly formed opinion outside of trading up for Pitts if he slides out of the top 10...

At QB, specifically it's: Lawrence, Fields, Lance, and Wilson/Jones slapfight it out for 4 and 5 (probably Wilson by just a hair) Overall: Lawrence, Sewell, Pitts, Fields, Chase/Waddle probably...

Fields, with no hesitation.

Almost included G, but I think it's both addressable in FA and the least panic-inducing of the "needs" -- more of a "want", really. As much as I don't love the Ford pick, I think he deserves one more season to sink or swim...

No, I base QB based on the fact that he played no one and those no ones didn't even have a chance to prepare.

Yikes. Take him, he's all yours. To me, nothing screams bigger red flag than *never did anything until he reached a season where his team was scheduling games (against crappy competition) the week prior* The fact that he'll be a NY Jet does nothing to add any confidence in that taek...

How Jones and Wilson have elevated their stock is truly remarkable, their agents deserve just *all* the money. I think its important with draft prospects to have strong stances (while being able to adjust those as needed)... here's my strong takes -- Wilson will be a flat-out bust and Jones will be nothing more than a game manager, at best -- Trent Dilfer 2.0

1. Because you're not going just not play Johnson 2. Because rookies don't just walk into roles like that (take a look at Isaiah Simmons' snap count data -- better athlete/prospect/fit for that hybrid role, only played 34%) 3. Because he's still going to be a liability against the run. I'd be shocked if he got anything north of 40-45%...

Totally fair. We won't know until the draft plays out, obviously. JOK's a unique piece, I don't deny that. I think my biggest hesitancy is he's really not a run-downs player right now and we're in a championship window... Do we really want to spend our 1st round pick on a player that will see, maybe half of all defensive snaps?

Pretty simple: QB trumps everything else. If you don't have one, you have to take one. The top WRs are pretty special too, special players go at the top of the draft. In the top 10-12 we'll likely see 5 QBs and 3 WRs go (see above) along with a TE, a LT, and likely a CB and DE -- all special. It's going to happen. The market to trade up for a QB is simply too strong to not either take one or trade back. Lawrence and Wilson are locked in at 1 and 2, and the 9ers did not spend 3 1st round picks to not take a QB of the future. 3-3 is a lock, and the other 2 won't be too far behind.

I'm not saying Taron Johnson is a hall of famer, but I think he's far from our biggest weakness that needs addressing. You'd rather upgrade Johnson than: CB2 -- Levi Wallace/Dane Jackson TE1 -- Dawson Knox Edge -- Mario Addison/Jerry Hughes (33/32 years old, respectively) 1T -- Star Lotuleilei (will be 32 this season) WR -- Emanuel Sanders/Cole Beasley (34/32 this season RB -- yuck Again, JOK would be great, add a fun dynamic to the defense and could certainly help cure some of what ails us. I'm just not convinced that a guy who's not going to get 3-down snaps at a splurge position is our biggest need...

Who are you taking off the field for this "desperately needed" Nickel LB? Our slot corner who's played extremely well? The off-ball we just gave a ton of money to? The QB of our defense? One of our top-10 safeties?

Beane loves to play games with the draft... I'm willing to bet he calls in favors on occasion to create smoke, misdirect, etc. This could also be that...

My take on Moses: 1. get intel on his teammates (Harris, Barmore, maybe Waddle?) 2. in case we get a sweetheart offer for Edmunds 3. standard due diligence in case he falls to the 5th or something... I don't see any other real likely scenario for McBeane to be overly interested in him otherwise...

My first read on this topic was one of complete disinterest. Then I started to think about it a little more and I think it's actually a really nuanced *answer* (such that you want to call the following an "answer"). Here's my take: the "answer" is yes, no, and it depends... Yes, from a purely objective standpoint, factoring in bust rates, opportunity cost of the many first round players you'd be able to draft instead, and the general "OMG they paid what for who?" perspective, it's not hard to argue that prices have become exorbitant for rookie QBs. Especially when you already have your stud QB locked in. No, from the perspective of a team that doesn't have a franchise QB, there's almost no price that's too much. As we've seen over the last decade, or so, championship windows, with rare exceptions, are really mainly confined to a talented QB's rookie contract. If you don't have the QB, you don't really have a chance, and when you factor in scarcity, any quality swing at getting one feels like it has to be worth it. Factoring everything in, however, the answer is that it depends. If you're going to pay the current market price to trade up for a franchise QB, you darn well better make sure you're drafting the right one, putting him in the right system, giving him weapons and protection, and aligning a coaching staff that will get the most out of him -- you need a plan for him. If you've got that in place, nothing else really matters; those first round pics being traded away could quickly go from top 5 or 10 to 25 or 30, and the opportunity cost can be offset in free agency or a few solid later picks and quality player development, etc. As we're seeing currently, talented players want to paly for winners. If you can find the right guy, have the right plan and staff in place, the financial support needed to keep building on top of the QB and the balls to make all of it happen, I don't think the current prices being paid are exorbitant. There will be a day when the asking price becomes too much, but I don't think we're there yet.

Quick Twitter search pops these two up. Plenty good enough, but he doesn't win with athleticism anyway, so more of a box to check than a needle mover.

He has concussion issues in his past. But as I've said before, since none of us are team doctors, we'll never know what the true concern level is there. Personally, I don't let stuff that I can't get accurate information on or control factor into how I view players. The teams and doctors will sort out the medical stuff -- if its a concern, then the discussion is moot and he's off the board, but no sense in dealing with what-ifs and rumors when trying to get concrete evaluations...

Also this...

Just gonna leave this here...

Exactly. And even if they had the #1, Darnold may have been the true "their guy", only the people in the war room and a scant few other will ever know for sure, and the way that's played out, absolutely no one will be saying otherwise anytime soon. I'm sure they have a guy that they'd LOVE to have, but sitting at 30, there's dream wants and there's realistic wants. So no, there's not *one* guy that they've targeted that they'll go all in for, even if they tell you that's what happened afterwards. They'll have their board, they'll have needs and wants and value pretty clearly defined, and they'll have to take it from there. There's simply far too many variables to hone in on one guy at 30... Yeah, I think the closest we could be to this sort of thing is my fever dream of Pitts falling to the early teens. Beane & co. will have also scouted out and had speculative conversations with just about every team above us (within realistic reach) about what it would take to move up -- as every team will have. So yeah, in the case that a Pitts, Paye, maybe a waddle start to slide, it's not unrealistic to think we could go get them, but under no circumstances are they honed in at one guy. The Jets at 2 aren't even honed in on one guy! 🤣 Not to be pedantic about it, but Allen wasn't even Beane's only DRAFT pick that night...