The 2025 Draft Thread

DogofWar1 said:
Listening to Jeremy Greene on Sportsocracy and he was talking about how sometimes teams bring in people on visits to try and get them to fall in love with the city so they can win the UDFA sweepstakes if they go undrafted. I wonder if that's what they're doing with some of these names.
Click to expand...

I liked on a recent podcast, Greene picked Kaleb Johnson for us in the 2nd round.

If they take a RB in the 2nd, Kaleb or Henderson are my guys.
 
skinsinparadise said:
I liked on a recent podcast, Greene picked Kaleb Johnson for us in the 2nd round.

If they take a RB in the 2nd, Kaleb or Henderson are my guys.
Click to expand...
I’m curious, would you rather take Ratledge or Milum at 61 and a back in the 4th+, or one of those ^ 2 backs with an OL later?
 
I do this every year. I fall in love with one player at one position and kind of tune out other info. For me this year it is Skattebo. Turn #29 into a 2 and a 3, Hopefully Higgins and a stud CB will be there for the 1st 2nd rounders, then grab BPA and Skattebo with the 2 3rds.
 
Commander Wraith said:
I’m curious, would you rather take Ratledge or Milum at 61 and a back in the 4th+, or one of those ^ 2 backs with an OL later?
Click to expand...

Am not hung up on whether they get an O lineman or not. 61 seems a little rich for Milum. Tough call as to Ratledge.

If its the 2nd or late 4th, I'd go 2nd for RB. Now if they pick up a mid third, I'd be OK with waiting until then.

But the late 4th, am guessing a lot of guys will be gone. If I knew that one of these guys would still be around in the late 4th: Tuten, Sampsn, Harvey, Skattebo, Giddens, Tuten, Martinez, then I'd take a chance. But am guessing all of those guys are gone.

Mock draft types are high on Etienne and Jordan James then me but even if I were, they have those guys typically gone by then.

Maybe Devin Neal and J. Hunter are there in the late 4th? Both dudes I like don't love, but I can live with it, especially Neal.

In short, i think that third tier of RBs are likely gone by the early 4th.
 
bifflog said:
And everything is sortable, LOVE IT.
Click to expand...

His take on the backs is very different than some others. But I like the nonconformists. Although judging by memory, Dane's more off beat takes don't always age well. But the dude puts in incredible time and effort into this guides. Eons ago I used to buy the Kiper draft books when he used to them and Brugler's are better by a mile.
 
Commander Wraith said:
I’m curious, would you rather take Ratledge or Milum at 61 and a back in the 4th+, or one of those ^ 2 backs with an OL later?
Click to expand...
I imagine I'm the only one here but ranking would go Kaleb, Henderson, Ratledge, Milum.

Kaleb will be an every down starter, Henderson a little more of an Ekeler type. Either would bring impact to our Offense. Ratledge will be a really good plug and play starting G who may be able to become a C down the line if needed.
 
Hail Raiser said:
That's the thing. Last year there were 3 1rst round QBs going into the draft, not 5 in the top 10.
Click to expand...
Oh, I don’t know that there were only 3 projected in the first round. I think between JJ, Penix and Nix, most folks thought there would be at minimum 4, there was some conversation who the 4th pick was. Actually, some had JJ over Maye.
 
Voice_of_Reason said:
Oh, I don’t know that there were only 3 projected in the first round. I think between JJ, Penix and Nix, most folks thought there would be at minimum 4, there was some conversation who the 4th pick was. Actually, some had JJ over Maye.
Click to expand...
Oh yeah, forgot about him. 6 1rst rounders.

3 was a lock, some saw 4, some might have seen all 6, but nobody saw 6 out of the first 12 picks.
 
Voice_of_Reason said:
Oh, I don’t know that there were only 3 projected in the first round. I think between JJ, Penix and Nix, most folks thought there would be at minimum 4, there was some conversation who the 4th pick was. Actually, some had JJ over Maye.
Click to expand...

Yeah by draft day JJ was more or less a lock for the first. I remember lots of mocks had him to the Jets at...10...I think. Wherever the Jets were.

Penix I think got mocked late first most of the time, for the 5th year option. 8th overall was a huge surprise but first round wasn't, but he also wasn't a lock. Like...75% 1st round chance.

Bo I think was the most surprising to many bc people pegged him as having a noodle arm. Him to the Broncos was a surprise to most too.
 
DWinzit said:
I imagine I'm the only one here but ranking would go Kaleb, Henderson, Ratledge, Milum.

Kaleb will be an every down starter, Henderson a little more of an Ekeler type. Either would bring impact to our Offense. Ratledge will be a really good plug and play starting G who may be able to become a C down the line if needed.
Click to expand...
I am close to that. I can be talked into Kaleb over Henderson.

In theory, I favor Henderson over Kaleb for this team because of the fit. We seem to run a bunch between the tackles and RPOs often create a crease to run on the inside. That fits Treveyon Henderson more. Also he's a better pass catcher and better pass protector.

But, Henderson isn't a #1 back IMO, he's that change of pace back who gets 10-12 carries. He struggles dealing with muddy traffic. He doesn't have the durability considering his history or has shown that he can be a do it all back and handle 20-25 carries a game.

Kaleb is more of a #1 back. Once he gets past that first level, he's dangerous and can take it to the house. But so much of what he did was outside zone. Can he adjust to our running scheme? If this team thinks so and takes him, I'd be on board.

The thing that bothers me about Henderson is the fact that he's a rotational guy but he's so good as that rotational guy.
 
Is Henderson who Antonio Gibson was supposed to be?
 
burgold said:
Is Henderson who Antonio Gibson was supposed to be?
Click to expand...

Maybe. Though Gibson has the size to be a #1 RB from the standpoint of taking the beating. Henderson doesn't have the size or the history of holding up that way.

Gibson though is a case in point about the 40 time not being everything for RBs. Gibson is 20 pounds heavier than Henderson yet ran faster than him. that's freakish.

But the ability to pull off explosive runs isn't purely about speed clearly, Henderson is fast. But there are enough running backs in this class who are faster. Yet, Henderson can turn that corner and break away runs with the best of them.
 
skinsinparadise said:
I am close to that. I can be talked into Kaleb over Henderson.
Click to expand...
The biggest single draft move to upgrade our offense right now would grabbing one of the top 5 RB's. Either of these two would be incredible and should be available in the second round. Just not sure if they will last until 61 so lets hope they get a trade partner at 29

Regarding Gibson/Henderson, Gibson could line up anyplace on the field plus return kicks and punts and be dynamic, or at least that's what was expected of him
 
skinsinparadise said:
Maybe. Though Gibson has the size to be a #1 RB from the standpoint of taking the beating. Henderson doesn't have the size or the history of holding up that way.

Gibson though is a case in point about the 40 time not being everything for RBs. Gibson is 20 pounds heavier than Henderson yet ran faster than him. that's freakish.

But the ability to pull off explosive runs isn't purely about speed clearly, Henderson is fast. But there are enough running backs in this class who are faster. Yet, Henderson can turn that corner and break away runs with the best of them.
Click to expand...

I just trust 40 times less and less. Tuten posted a significantly better 40 time than Henderson, for example. But Henderson’s long speed looks better on the field and Henderson’s top speed during the 40 was the best in the class, I think.

Now that all of these teams now have GPS data on the WR’s and RB’s, CB’s, etc, I think the 40 may be less important for those players. I think it’s still probably pretty useful to get a 10 Yard split on these edge players and OL, who you never naturally get to see do that on the field.
 
Anselmheifer said:
I just trust 40 times less and less. Tuten posted a significantly better 40 time than Henderson, for example. But Henderson’s long speed looks better on the field and Henderson’s top speed during the 40 was the best in the class, I think.

Now that all of these teams now have GPS data on the WR’s and RB’s, CB’s, etc, I think the 40 may be less important for those players. I think it’s still probably pretty useful to get a 10 Yard split on these edge players and OL, who you never naturally get to see do that on the field.
Click to expand...


Something i've subscribed to more and more.

The difference between a 4.35 and a 4.5 is .15 seconds over 40 yards. Its damn near immeasurable to the human brain to actually identify .15 seconds. Beyond 40 yards has very little to do with speed. It's more about stamina and conditioning.

I actually would almost prefer they have prospects run the 100 and break it down to 20 and 40 yard splits. That would tell you a hell of a lot more about who the player will be in a football game situation than the 40. As an RB i'd be more interested in what they do 0-10 to identify their explosiveness off the line and acceleration. Then i would like to see the drop from 40-60 as a better testament to their home run ability. There is a science to running a 40 yard dash now that guys are training specifically for. Being able to squeeze out every possible .10 of a second to get a better number. Training that has no effect on their ability on the field.
 
SilentThreat said:
Something i've subscribed to more and more.

The difference between a 4.35 and a 4.5 is .15 seconds over 40 yards. Its damn near immeasurable to the human brain to actually identify .15 seconds. Beyond 40 yards has very little to do with speed. It's more about stamina and conditioning.

I actually would almost prefer they have prospects run the 100 and break it down to 20 and 40 yard splits. That would tell you a hell of a lot more about who the player will be in a football game situation than the 40. As an RB i'd be more interested in what they do 0-10 to identify their explosiveness off the line and acceleration. Then i would like to see the drop from 40-60 as a better testament to their home run ability. There is a science to running a 40 yard dash now that guys are training specifically for. Being able to squeeze out every possible .10 of a second to get a better number. Training that has no effect on their ability on the field.
Click to expand...
Players also reference the difference in running with pads/helmet on, full gear, adrenaline, game-situations, vs the timed 40. It makes sense to me that the metrics don't always match what we see on the field.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 2, Members: 0, Guests: 2)

Help Users

You haven't joined any rooms.

    You haven't joined any rooms.
    Top