The 2021 Draft- We Need This One

Share this page

spacecrime said:
What is TBR in the chart?
Click to expand...
It ranks the talent of a player based solely on play on film. It does not take in other factors. So a player could be listed as a top 25, but his play on film earns him a 2nd or 3rd round grade.
The rankings 1-200 are base on conversations with NFL scouts or GM'S and some other factors.

I hope that is clear.:)
 
Last edited:
chevss454 said:
Just a reminder that Fields & Lance are pocket passers that can run 4.4 - 4.5. As a Pats fan these two are clearly my top choices for the Pats but I'd gladly take Mac Jones.
I'd also be happy with Davis Mills in a later round
Click to expand...
Mac Jones, please. I am really biased because I want TFB 2.0 and if there is one in the draft it is Mac.

I didn't see Lance except for the loss. I hear he is better than that game.

I live in B1G country. I saw enough of Fields to make me concerned he is way over valued.

I am terrible at this so Fields will be a HOF'er.

Belichick pulls a....well he pulls a Belichick and doesn't get a first round QB, then I'll take Trask in the 3rd.
 
chevss454 said:
Should teams invest a high pick for an OT though? I've always been told no.
Maybe Sewell will be an exception but spending a top 10 pick on him goes against a lot of NFL draft "rules".

Investing heavily in a Left Tackle is a luxury bad teams can not afford

The game is won in the trenches, I know. As we hit the halfway mark of the season, some teams are already thinking about next year, and in particular, the 2013 draft. If I was in charge of a bad team, and specifically, a bad passing team, I would try to avoid spending a lot
www.footballperspective.com www.footballperspective.com

The debate is hot and heavy in Cincinnati.
theathletic.com

What Bengals' Penei Sewell vs. Ja'Marr Chase debate tells us about how teams value positions

The Chase-Sewell conundrum leads to more theoretical discussions about team building and the scarcity of talent at certain positions.
theathletic.com theathletic.com
The Bengals’ front office has to start building around their franchise quarterback, and the opportunity to potentially draft the best non-QB in the draft could go a long way in jumpstarting that process.

Over the past few weeks, a debate has been raging about which player Cincinnati should draft at No. 5, and it’s primarily come down to two players: LSU receiver Ja’Marr Chase and Oregon offensive tackle Penei Sewell (Florida tight end Kyle Pitts may actually be the best choice of the three, but that’s a conversation for another time).

My opinion: take the superstar receiver and get an OT later.
Click to expand...

I believe you can make the same argument about any position except QB. In fact, the most frequent position referenced is WR, since it's a short list of premium blue-chip WRs that have been a part of a winning Super Bowl team. Still, Mike Evans and Godwin last year and I have nothing against great WRs, but, to use your example, if the guy you take is on a level with Anthony Munoz or Walter Jones then you absolutely take him. Sewell isn't a great player now, but gives every indication that he can be. The big problem with signing big ticket 1st rounders is that you have to resign them after 4 or 5 years, but that's the price of doing business. Somebody will pay them if they're great.

This is why getting Onwenu last year where we did was such a major draft coup. He outperformed the approximately 16 OTs drafted before him (he was thought to be a G but he bested them, too). There were a couple of standouts (Becton with the Jets), but I believe PFF ranked Onwenu as the best rookie OL in the league.

I love Chase and Pitts, but my guess is that you can't really go wrong with any of them. One issue I have with Burrow is that he will take too many hard hits to extend a play and giving him time outweighs, to me, giving him better weapons. But, the bottom line is that the Bengals are in a great position to get somebody that can help change that offense and we'll see which way they decide to go.

I have to watch Pitts on the field to see if he catches the same way in a game as he does in drills, but I'm already sold. The way he engulfs a ball with those big, soft mitts was a thing of beauty. He reminds me of a chameleon catching a fly with it's tongue--- WHAP!!!! Super impressive. It's clear to see why he'll go very early.
 
Caserio spoke at the recent MIT Sloan Sports Analytics Conference and discussed the effect of data science on the draft
"He’s a tough receiver who can’t get open? Let’s weigh separation a little more next time."
No kidding.

www.bostonherald.com

Forget the 40-yard dash. How the Patriots incorporate analytics into their draft process

Former Patriots executive Nick Caserio explained at the MIT Sloan Sports Analytics conference how the team has used advanced data to its advantage in recent years.
www.bostonherald.com www.bostonherald.com
 
Certainly, we have a more prominent need for a true slot now that Jules has left the building. I'm not sure how Jakoby Meyers really fits the Edelman role even though he can play out of the slot. It makes sense that we'll look for somebody that has that start/stop elite quickness to try and fill those big shoes. I'd been thinking we have room for only one rookie field-stretcher, but now it looks like we need to rethink that and find the next elite slot guy.

It does appear to be a draft with a fair number slot-type guys, so I'm going to add Cade Johnson -- who is supposed to be a day 3 pick-- to the list.

Here are Johnson's one on ones from the Senior Bowl. Not lightning like Jules, but he can shake, bake and catch.


View: https://youtu.be/ED1eAJi3rnk
 
Well not strictly draft related, with #11 gone, is this the chance to try to put Harry in the slot (where some have said he has the best chance to succeed), and not really worry about drafting for that position? Nevermind Myers,Gunner, other guys I'm probably forgetting about probably can fill in there, with theoretical better receivers filling out the O.
 
Hawg73 said:
Certainly, we have a more prominent need for a true slot now that Jules has left the building. I'm not sure how Jakoby Meyers really fits the Edelman role even though he can play out of the slot. It makes sense that we'll look for somebody that has that start/stop elite quickness to try and fill those big shoes. I'd been thinking we have room for only one rookie field-stretcher, but now it looks like we need to rethink that and find the next elite slot guy.

It does appear to be a draft with a fair number slot-type guys, so I'm going to add Cade Johnson -- who is supposed to be a day 3 pick-- to the list.

Here are Johnson's one on ones from the Senior Bowl. Not lightning like Jules, but he can shake, bake and catch.


View: https://youtu.be/ED1eAJi3rnk
Click to expand...


headcase said:
Well not strictly draft related, with #11 gone, is this the chance to try to put Harry in the slot (where some have said he has the best chance to succeed), and not really worry about drafting for that position? Nevermind Myers,Gunner, other guys I'm probably forgetting about probably can fill in there, with theoretical better receivers filling out the O.
Click to expand...

I like both of these options. CJohnson is a player I'd consider as an UDFA.
Harry would be much better from the slot where he'll be covered by a linebacker or slot CB. Faster/quicker than a LB and bigger than a slot CB.
 
Last edited:
Hawg73 said:
Certainly, we have a more prominent need for a true slot now that Jules has left the building. I'm not sure how Jakoby Meyers really fits the Edelman role even though he can play out of the slot. It makes sense that we'll look for somebody that has that start/stop elite quickness to try and fill those big shoes. I'd been thinking we have room for only one rookie field-stretcher, but now it looks like we need to rethink that and find the next elite slot guy.

It does appear to be a draft with a fair number slot-type guys, so I'm going to add Cade Johnson -- who is supposed to be a day 3 pick-- to the list.

Here are Johnson's one on ones from the Senior Bowl. Not lightning like Jules, but he can shake, bake and catch.


View: https://youtu.be/ED1eAJi3rnk
Click to expand...

I wonder if Bill will see slot as position of real need anymore. Brady was a one of a kind QB who made the slot position lethal because of his ability to read the defense and get the ball out quick. I do not see that as a strength of Cam. Just judging by FA, it seems we are going big to be a smash mouth team with our TEs as the main cogs. Cam used to be pretty good at the deep ball but now with his shoulder, he is compromised there so I think we go with the RBs and TEs.

Now, I am highly interested in seeing what type of QB we draft because that may give us an indicator for the future as to what type of offense we will run. Perhaps then the slot becomes more of a focus but I don't see it in the short term.
 
This was part of an article today on WEEI that had some great stats on why it is so critical to select a QB in the first round.

Since 2010, 130 quarterbacks have been drafted overall, which include 33 in the first round and 11 in the second. Of those 44 players, they have averaged 43.5 games started in the league.

Then when it comes to Rounds 3-5, the same number of players (44) have been selected during that time, but yet those players have only averaged 13.9 games started. The three outliers are Dak Prescott (69 starts), Russell Wilson (144) and Kirk Cousins (104).

Lastly, the only player selected in Rounds 6-7 to really amount to anything is Tyrod Taylor, who has 44 career starts. And those stats are only in terms of games started, it’s even more staggering when it comes to actual team success.

Albeit just one season of a sample size, of the 14 starting quarterbacks in the playoffs in 2020, 11 were selected in the first round (Drew Brees was pick No. 32, but was Round 2 in 2001). Additionally, eight of the 14 were drafted in the top 10.

Bottom line, the majority of franchise quarterbacks get selected in the first round and more often than not in the top 10.

 
I really, really hope Fields falls to us and Bill goes up and gets him. Every time I watch him, I get goose pimples. Guy has all the tools.
 
If I'm hearing right, this draft is loaded with talent at both tackle and WR
Hawg73 said:
I believe you can make the same argument about any position except QB. In fact, the most frequent position referenced is WR, since it's a short list of premium blue-chip WRs that have been a part of a winning Super Bowl team. Still, Mike Evans and Godwin last year and I have nothing against great WRs, but, to use your example, if the guy you take is on a level with Anthony Munoz or Walter Jones then you absolutely take him. Sewell isn't a great player now, but gives every indication that he can be. The big problem with signing big ticket 1st rounders is that you have to resign them after 4 or 5 years, but that's the price of doing business. Somebody will pay them if they're great.

This is why getting Onwenu last year where we did was such a major draft coup. He outperformed the approximately 16 OTs drafted before him (he was thought to be a G but he bested them, too). There were a couple of standouts (Becton with the Jets), but I believe PFF ranked Onwenu as the best rookie OL in the league.

I love Chase and Pitts, but my guess is that you can't really go wrong with any of them. One issue I have with Burrow is that he will take too many hard hits to extend a play and giving him time outweighs, to me, giving him better weapons. But, the bottom line is that the Bengals are in a great position to get somebody that can help change that offense and we'll see which way they decide to go.

I have to watch Pitts on the field to see if he catches the same way in a game as he does in drills, but I'm already sold. The way he engulfs a ball with those big, soft mitts was a thing of beauty. He reminds me of a chameleon catching a fly with it's tongue--- WHAP!!!! Super impressive. It's clear to see why he'll go very early.
Click to expand...
My understanding is that offensive line in round one has by far the best hit rate of any position. Something along the lines of 80%. But that might have to do with how it's measured, with starts being the driving factor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top