2024 - Way too early draft thread

PFF Mock:

www.pff.com

Post-Super Bowl 2024 NFL Mock Draft: Five quarterbacks go in the first round, Denver Broncos trade up to No. 2 for Drake Maye | NFL Draft | PFF

Caleb Williams, Drake Maye and Jayden Daniels go with No.s 1, 2 and 3 in Trevor Sikkema's post-Super Bowl mock draft.
www.pff.com www.pff.com

Trade away:

2024 - no. 2

Recieve:

2024 - no. 12
2025 - 1st round
2025 - 2nd round
2026 - 1st round

1707765926765.png


Trade away:

2024 - no. 12
2024 - no. 40 (2nd round)

recieve:

2024 - no. 10 - Take J.J. McCarthy
2024 - no. 73 (3rd round)

1707765965813.png
 
If we trade down I want a premier offensive tackle not the 4th or 5th best QB on the market. This team doesn't need another Ramsey or Campbell or mid first round QB project. If you are going to swing for QB do it at number 2. If not, build the team.
 
I am no talking about a trade down unless we get TWO picks back to pick in the first 15-30.

So, in my mind it's the franchise LT AND the quarterback.

I would not go any lower than a first pick at 6-8 overall.
 
I’m keeping an open mind.









I want Drake Maye. I want Drake Maye. I want Drake Maye. I want Drake Maye. I want Drake Maye. I want Drake Maye. I want Drake Maye. I want Drake Maye. I want Drake Maye. I want Drake Maye. I want Drake Maye. I want Drake Maye. I want Drake Maye. I want Drake Maye. I want Drake Maye. I want Drake Maye. I want Drake Maye. I want Drake Maye. I want Drake Maye. I want Drake Maye. I want Drake Maye.
 
I don’t see any team in the top 10 that would move up for a QB except possibly Atlanta, but many feel Fields going there. Are the NYG interested in taking the financial hit to move on from Jones?
 
We could see the Young/Purdy effect where teams will stay put as they might think that its proven you don't have to pick high or that the risk level of failure is too much to trade up. Talk about playing high stakes poker......
 
Utah said:
We could see the Young/Purdy effect where teams will stay put as they might think that its proven you don't have to pick high or that the risk level of failure is too much to trade up. Talk about playing high stakes poker......
Click to expand...


Is it though?
 
burgold said:
If we trade down I want a premier offensive tackle not the 4th or 5th best QB on the market. This team doesn't need another Ramsey or Campbell or mid first round QB project. If you are going to swing for QB do it at number 2. If not, build the team.
Click to expand...
I don't totally understand that logic, there are plenty of QBs that have "made it" from other spots. So, if they believe there is a QB worth getting and he doesn't require positioning at #2... this dictum of yours doesn't make sense.

If THEY themselves see it as high risk vs other players, then I understand what you are saying; go for the more solid players. The idea that their logic can or even should match what "pundits" or other teams say, just isn't right. We just have to hope that unlike Ron, they DO actually know what they are talking about. Ron had so many head-scratching moves. It was very Cerrato-esque - telling us that this guy or that guy was an amazing steal because their board said so, and then the results following would indicate that... no... their board was just wrong. Ron compounded it by using a lot of players outside of their comfort zone as well.
 
I guess this is the simplest way to put it. We generally take it as fact that QB is the most important position on the field. If that’s true and you think you have a franchise QB who can lead you for ten years that’s worth more than anything.

If the above is true, then there isn’t a QB who you honestly think is a FRANCHISE QB if hes not worth the second pick. If he’s a reach at two, but okay at ten then you don’t wholly believe in that player.

That’s probably a bit more overstated then what I actually believe, but I’m much more okay with taking a QB at 2 then settling for the scraps ten other teams passed on to take the “6th best” QB.

I say this knowing Pat Maholmes was a mid first rounder and Joe Montana or Tom Brady got skipped over 100’s of times. So, of course you’re right that you could trade down and find an amazing QB, but why take that chance? What if three other teams think that player X is the real gem of the draft. Why risk losing him?

So, that’s why I feel at 2 you take a QB but after a trade down you build the team first.
 
The other factor we have to always keep in mind is that Pat Mahomes, Tom Brady, and Aaron Rodgers aren't in every single draft... Equally speaking, neither are Heath Shuler, Jamarcus Russell, or Bryce Young. C.J. Stroud was the 2nd pick in the draft. Statistically he appears to have been a 'hit' at the 2nd pick. In reality, that doesn't mean a single thing toward any 2nd pick in the draft's likelihood of hitting, because the players are different. C.J. Stroud was successful because he's C.J. Stroud, and it's got nothing to do with his draft position.

To say Drake Maye's likelihood to be successful if taken at no. 2 because C.J. Stroud was successful imho is just wrong.

In reality, to your point on some level Burgold, if you truly believe a guy is 'the guy' then it doesn't matter what draft position it is, you get him.

That said, there's a whole other debate to this conversation, a figurative 'chicken or the egg' conversation.

Had Washington in fact drafted Tom Brady, does he become Tom Brady? Is Russell Wilson who he is without the Legion of Boom and Marshawn Lynch? This is not to say to dismiss the QB position, but i think there's a real conversation about who these guys are and the situations they found themselves in. Of course there are exceptions, like Patrick Mahomes, who appear to be THAT good that they can do it virtually single handedly... Peyton Manning being another with his ability to manipulate a defense simply by himself, though even he had the reputation of not being able to get over the hump til he eventually did.

SO. Jason Campbell and Patrick Ramsey, could their fate have been a bit different in a different situation? Hell, even Sam Howell. That's where the debate takes place of "Is this guy good enough he can be a starter for many years" and "Is this guy good enough that we simply cant pass on him." If it's the former, I have a feeling that there are A LOT more QBs out there that fall into this category. If Drake May is a guy who 'can be a starter' then i don't know if i want to use no. 2 overall on him, when we can get a MUCH higher return on the investment elsewhere. There are 'starters' up and down this league that wouldn't be worth the no. 2 pick. If any of these guys appears like they simply can't be passed on.... then you HAVE to take him at 2.
 
We might have part of that answer in regards to Jason Campbell and RGIII as they both got second chances and still their star never rose that high, but your point is true. A QB in the wrong situation is unlikely to prosper without the right scheme, complementary players, etc. It's also fair to point out that some QBs who were bums in their first year turned out to be among the best in NFL history by the time their career was done.

Still, it seems to me that if you don't value a QB enough to draft him at number 2 then you have questions about whether he can be the guy. If that's the case, then drafting a QB just to draft one seems a poor strategy. Now, that changes by the second and third round obviously where you can expect the players to be less polished and ready, but do we really want a project QB with the number eight overall pick in the draft?

Now, if we believe Marshall is the GUY and Maye and Daniels are not I don't care what the pundits project or how much we fans will complain. Draft him at two. But, if you don't have confidence in him at Two then I don't think you have confidence in him at eight or twelve... or at least not as much confidence as you might have in a player at a different position.

As for Howell, I think Howell can turn it around. I think he can have a Joey Theismann career or better and Joey T was a fine QB for several years.
 
burgold said:
We might have part of that answer in regards to Jason Campbell and RGIII as they both got second chances and still their star never rose that high, but your point is true. A QB in the wrong situation is unlikely to prosper without the right scheme, complementary players, etc. It's also fair to point out that some QBs who were bums in their first year turned out to be among the best in NFL history by the time their career was done.

Still, it seems to me that if you don't value a QB enough to draft him at number 2 then you have questions about whether he can be the guy. If that's the case, then drafting a QB just to draft one seems a poor strategy. Now, that changes by the second and third round obviously where you can expect the players to be less polished and ready, but do we really want a project QB with the number eight overall pick in the draft?

Now, if we believe Marshall is the GUY and Maye and Daniels are not I don't care what the pundits project or how much we fans will complain. Draft him at two. But, if you don't have confidence in him at Two then I don't think you have confidence in him at eight or twelve... or at least not as much confidence as you might have in a player at a different position.

As for Howell, I think Howell can turn it around. I think he can have a Joey Theismann career or better and Joey T was a fine QB for several years.
Click to expand...


This is where i continue to come back to.... I can't say "You have to take a QB at 2 no matter what" because I don't believe that.

I also don't think you ever take a QB in the 2nd round if you can avoid it... if a guy falls, trade up into the end of the 1st round to retain the 5th year option. Of course you have to have a trade partner without getting hosed, but you still do whatever you can to get him in the 1st instead of in the 2nd if it's within your control.

I want a player capable of being an All Pro when picking no. 2. I need a talent that's capable of being top 2 at their position.
 
I think we’re mostly saying the same thing. I’m saying if you stick at two it’s because there’s a QB you fully believe in. If that’s the case, you take him.

However, if you aren’t 100% sold on any QB at number two I find it hard to believe you’d be 100% sold on a QB you’ve already passed on (as did no nine other teams) at number ten.
 
Scanned a few mock drafts for the fun of it this morning. A bunch think we're leaning towards Daniels or trading down.
 
Herd mentality.

My view hasn't changed. If a QB we love is available at #2, take him. If not, entertain trade offers, grab BPA at a position of need with the first pick, and if a QB you think has potential to be The Guy in a year (even two) is still available late first or early second, use the draft capital to get him.

Either way, Sam starts in the fall until someone else is ready/better.
 
Steelers didn't panic. They sat at #11 and just drafted Ben Roethlisberger to play quarterback in 2004.

The teams that are 'wheeler dealers' most often in my experience fail to achieve their aims at the position.

Trading a generation of picks for a position where the odds are 50/50 to me is a mistake.

There is no consensus John Elway, Peyton Manning or Andrew Luck type prospect available in 2024, although the draft is better depth wise than most in the past 5-10 years.

So, at worst a team should stay where they are and take a Drake Maye or Daniels or Penix or McCarthy and roll with that decision.

In the end it costs ONE pick.

But to trade a number of #1 and #2 picks out into the future for a single pick usually works in the favor of the team getting the picks.

See the 2023 Chicago Bears in that regard.

In terms of trade downs, it usually helps the team getting the picks because it increases the odds of coming out of the draft(s) with productive players.

Bobby Beathard and Jimmy Johnson realized that the draft is a crapshoot and having a lot more picks means the chance to be successful more often.

For years the Patriots with Scott Pioli and others in the front office used to do the same thing.

New England regularly used to trade down and pick up extra picks in Rounds 3 and 4, where they found a number of pro bowl players on cheap rookie contracts.
 
I guess the issue here, burgold, is really risk/reward + draft prognostication.
If your FO is talented enough and dynamic enough, it can actually adapt to situations very quickly. So, for example, as a draft goes on, and you have Russell Wilson rated fairly highly, but are equally confident no one is taking him in the first, then you may be willing to wait even at the risk of losing him. You consider that risk very minimal, and apparently you are OK accepting that risk. You are saying (I think?), that you should not risk it if you strongly believe he is a franchise QB. I don't know about that, the metrics are really complicated and layered. It depends on the levels of risk and confidence you have in those factors I just listed. The reality is, if you are 100% sure someone is a franchise QB, I got news for you, you're probably wrong. There is no guarantee of anything. Injury alone negates any "100%" but taking that out of the equation, there are just too many factors to be 100% certain.

So, I don't think we should operate in a reality vacuum where is 100% certainty; given that, we have to operate with more inexact terms like confidence and risk. I can definitely see someone "getting their QB" later because they believe that the risk is acceptable and their confidence that this QB would be available later is there. That's how dynasties generally are created, with high value picks in the draft.
 
All fair, but I'd counter that when picking in the top 2 or even the top 10, you should try to get as near to 100% consensus as possible. So again, if you haven't gotten total room agreement on a guy at number 2 then I think it's unlikely that everyone's on board at 10. Now, you're right. Everyone might get on board at a later round. Sam Howell was a consensus 100% pick in the fifth round (from all reports,) but that was not true of him in the first, second, or third rounds. S

So, if you have 100% agreement between coaches and scouts about Joe Alt's potential and fit then maybe he's a better selection than the QB you and nine other teams already bypassed. Which is why I think if we trade down, I hope it's not to get a later QB with our new number one pick.
 
Ultimately, if you are the GM you have to the make the call.

That is what you are being paid for.

You take in as much information and advice as you can from scouts, other executives, head coach, assistants, etc.

But in the end you are on the mountaintop alone.

When Bobby Beathard traded his #1 pick in the 1982 draft for 3 draft picks in Rounds 3 and 5 (two picks) in the 1981 draft almost everyone in the NFL thought Beathard was crazy.

The upshot is he took one Hall of Fame lineman (Grimm) and one 3-time pro bowl DE in Manley who lead the NFL in sacks twice.

In the end EITHER ONE of those players was worth the first round pick in 1982.
 
If anyone hasn’t noticed, and I’m not sure that it matters but Rick Spielman appears noticeably higher on Drake Maye than Jayden Daniels. I was very pleased when I heard him talk about the QBs. Especially since this week was Jayden Daniels is the greatest qb ever week. Spielman also guaranteed that JJ McCarthy would go in the top 15 of the draft.

Also that Nabers is the clear #2 wr in the draft. Not Odunze
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Help Users

You haven't joined any rooms.

    You haven't joined any rooms.
    Top