2013 Comprehensive NFL Draft Database

[stevemcqueen1]

I'd say he goes 4th similar to where Mike Williams went when he left Syracuse

That's what I'm thinking too.

[bird_1972]

Also, if people haven't noticed, our defense sucks. We need to be looking at the best available NTs, CBs, and safeties in the third and fourth rounds, unless a legitimate WR falls to us

This^^^

We need a NT and CB. I feel we'll need to spend our 2nd and 3rd rounders on those positions.

Hopefully, we can get a safety through free agency and target a WR with our 4th rounder. I'm still holding out hope that Garçon turns into something of a #1 WR (making a WR more of a hedge than a full-on bet), but I'm beginning to get worried that he may be one of those oft-acquired injury-prone FAs the Skins have a habit of signing.

[Laron Burgundy]

No. We can't afford to waste a third rounder on a DE who can't play the run on the off chance he will block kicks.

You don't believe this is something he can develop? And it's not just blocking kicks, he's better at getting to the qb than any other de we have on the roster. Certainly his height affects his leverage in the run game, but he looks like he could add weight. From what I hear he is strong, even for a 280 pound man, so I have to believe this is something he can work on. Isn't this just the high upside high risk kind of pick that people have been clamoring for?

[stevemcqueen1]

Consistency is all I ask for.

I haven't revisited that thread, but what you found is interesting. Everything you posted that I said was actually pretty dead on EXCEPT that Kerrigan was a stiff. He's a natural LBer, that much is clear. But he's also not an elite edge rusher, which I'm pretty sure me and several other posters concluded near the beginning of that thread. It would be in the conversations with a poster named theboomking if you're interested in dredging it up.

I've been pretty consistent for several years of doing this in my philosophy and methodology. I don't blow smoke and I don't really have an agenda other than I root for this team to succeed. I base my evaluations on what I see with my own eyes and form my opinions accordingly. If anyone has an agenda, I think it's you. I think you're a homer and are trying to defend Shanny's record arguing against clear mistakes despite the fact I'm saying I actually support him keeping his job. I see no purpose in ignoring the truth.

On Gabbert and Ponder, we got lucky at QB plain and simple. We got lucky Shanny's prior incompetency actually put him in position to draft a transcendent talent and that St. Louis chose to inexplicably honor their commitment to our deal even after Cleveland beat our offer.

If Shanny hadn't drafted RGIII, he'd be fired today. Even still, he might not make it past this year. Not many coaches get a third or fourth chance at QB.

Also, saying Gabbert or Ponder would have been a horrible decision because we ended up getting RGIII is an actual example of a hindsight based conclusion.

You've frequently stated that Gabbert was terrible as a rookie but I don't think you saw many of his games or followed Jacksonville closely. I did.

Gabbert played like a rookie QB thrust into a horrible situation, which is exactly what he was. He got drafted to a team in the midst of an ownership change, lost his HC midway through his rookie season, and is currently on his third coach by his second season. His FO is arguably the worst in the league, their mistakes painstakingly detailed by Bill Barnwell. I believe no young QB could succeed in his situation. I believe he would have played a lot better and his perception would be a lot better had he been drafted here. Or pretty much anywhere else. Jacksonville is where good prospects have gone to die recently. Believe me or don't believe me, I don't really care. I'm not spinning, I'm less interested in convincing you than I am in discerning the truth.

Go back through these posts and read my position. I never said Watt would have been my pick at ten. Perhaps you're confusing me with someone else. I've always been clear that Gabbert was my top player that year and QB was our top need. I was clear that I had Fairley and Quinn ahead of Watt. I was also clear that I was very high on Watt, much higher than I was on Kerrigan. I've been clear about what EXACTLY my board was--I had the balls to record it and save it. And actually, I'm not ashamed of anything I posted on that class because I ended up getting a pretty good read on that class so far, both before and after draft day.

This was my board from April 2nd that year:

1. Blaine Gabbert
2. Nick Fairley
3. A.J. Green
4. Robert Quinn
5. Marcell Dareus
6. Patrick Peterson
7. Julio Jones
8. Aldon Smith
9. Prince Amukamara
10. J.J. Watt
11. Von Miller
12. Tyron Smith
13. DaQuan Bowers
14. Cameron Jordan
15. Christian Ponder
16. Jake Locker
17. Adrian Clayborn
18. Justin Houston
19. Gabe Carimi
20. Derek Sherrod
21. Corey Liuget
22. Cameron Heyward
23. Muhammad Wilkerson
24. Stephen Paea
25. Akeem Ayers
26. Mike Pouncey
27. Ryan Williams
28. Mark Ingram
29. Martez Wilson
30. Danny Watkins
31. Aaron Williams
32. Brandon Harris
33. Rahim Moore
34. Jimmy Smith
35. Steve Wisniewski
36. Rodney Hudson
37. Ben Ijalana
38. Brooks Reed
39. Ryan Kerrigan
40. Cam Newton
41. Andy Dalton
42. Jabaal Sheard
43. Anthony Castonzo
44. Nate Solder
45. Jurrell Casey
46. Allen Bailey
47. Mikel Leshoure
48. Phil Taylor
49. Brandon Burton
50. Marvin Austin

I deviated from the conventional wisdom at a bunch of those rankings, and ended up being right in those deviations more than I was wrong. For every Von Miller and Cam Newton I got wrong in ranking too low, I got a Watt, Aldon Smith, AJ Green, Stephen Paea right in ranking them higher than the norm. And if you read my evaluation of Miller from that time, I'm not sure I was actually wrong about him in the reasons why I ranked him low.

If you don't think that's good, I challenge you to put your money where your mouth is and make a draft board this year. I'll make one too. Save it and we'll compare them in a year or two.

[NLC1054]

I never said Watt would have been my pick at ten.

And I quote...

We should have taken Gabbert at 10. Now we have no plan at QB and were forced to settle for a stiff at OLB for consolation.

Yes, we absolutely should have drafted Watt instead of trading down.

Ya can think I'm a brainless homer if ya want to. It's no skin off my back.

But you're not being honest.

Also thought it was interesting that, while you expressed some disappointment with not getting Paea, you were quite pleased with the Jarvis Jenkins pick.

What a difference a year makes, huh?

Now, back to 2013.

[SMU Redskin]

You don't believe this is something he can develop? And it's not just blocking kicks, he's better at getting to the qb than any other de we have on the roster. Certainly his height affects his leverage in the run game, but he looks like he could add weight. From what I hear he is strong, even for a 280 pound man, so I have to believe this is something he can work on. Isn't this just the high upside high risk kind of pick that people have been clamoring for?

He'll be 26 on opening day next year, and he's very raw as a prospect- has only been playing football for a few years. Yeah, he's good at getting to the QB- against CUSA competition. And CUSA has been BAD this year.

Look, I'm all for us drafting more SMU players (obviously), but if we're going to target a Mustang, it needs to be RB Zach Line in the later rounds. Guy is big, insanely productive, great at finding holes and carrying tacklers for extra yardage. Reminds me a lot of Morris in that regard.

[windsofcreation]

Ya can think I'm a brainless homer if ya want to. It's no skin off my back.

But you're not being honest.

Also thought it was interesting that, while you expressed some disappointment with not getting Paea, you were quite pleased with the Jarvis Jenkins pick.

What a difference a year makes, huh?

Now, back to 2013.

Wow. Now that is just some gold old-fashioned ownage!

[darrelgreenie]

...The common denominator (other then quality DC's) is there big men up front.
The both have at least 6 quality players and then some.
You cannot run a 3-4 w/o good play from a rotation of solid players up front.
Right now between NT and our 3-4 ends we have maybe 3-4 players that fit into that rotation and none of them are playmakers: Carriker, Bryant Vonnie Holliday and maybe Jarmon?
If we could only updrade1 defensive position this off season I would vote for 3-4 DE.
I have far more faith in our rotation of OLB candidates opposite Orakpo: Rob Jackson, Chris Wilson, Alexander then at 3-4 DE.

---------- Post added November-12th-2012 at 08:45 AM ----------

Thats why there's a premium on guys like Cam Jordan, JJ Watt, Paea, Austin, Ballard.

My point was that you give up a lot defensively if the DL cannot rush the passer in base personnel and currently none of our base personnel DL can rush/penetrate.

I want/hope/ Jarmon can become an effective 5-tech pass rusher but at this point its a projection.
Plenty of teams (like us) make their living throwing on 1st down often from base personnel.

---------- Post added November-12th-2012 at 08:50 AM ----------

LMAO that's a funny picture and a funny post.
Well played.

---------- Post added May-4th-2011 at 04:34 PM ----------

I told myself I wasn't gonna comment on woulda/coulda picks because Jenkins will help our defense, but I'll say this and leave it at that: not having a pass rushing threat anywhere on the DL in base personnel limits the defense.

---------- Post added November-12th-2012 at 08:56 AM ----------

Getting him in the the 3rd or 4th will be an absolute steal if the team actually uses him. Just like the Jets are idiots for trading for Tebow, but not using him and sticking with a struggling Sanchez.

We've gone our rounds about Dennard. But even if he projects to have the skills to play WR or RB he's a novelty player a gadget player that requires specific tinkering. We are an incomplete team with limited resources in the impact rounds (1-4). We need to build our team before using our valueable draft picks to draft a novelty player.

The problem with Tebow for the Jets is the tried to use him as a situational novelty player like you want to do with Dennard. They're faced with the harsh reality that an offensive staff already has enough on their plate to get their gameplan installed. Then they have to gameplan and install plays for 1 non-positional player? And using a mid round pick on Tebow made sense because he can he's also the back-up QB. Dennard would merely be a situational player with no true position.

[gorebd82]

We've gone our rounds about Dennard. But even if he projects to have the skills to play WR or RB he's a novelty player a gadget player that requires specific tinkering. We are an incomplete team with limited resources in the impact rounds (1-4). We need to build our team before using our valueable draft picks to draft a novelty player.

The problem with Tebow for the Jets is the tried to use him as a situational novelty player like you want to do with Dennard. They're faced with the harsh reality that an offensive staff already has enough on their plate to get their gameplan installed. Then they have to gameplan and install plays for 1 non-positional player? And using a mid round pick on Tebow made sense because he can he's also the back-up QB. Dennard would merely be a situational player with no true position.

Yeah, this is my last comment about this for now. I'm tired of talking in circles to have the point I'm making overlooked just so folks can keep harping on their positions. It's frustrating for people to keep saying that we need to look at a real WR like Austin or Terrence, when I have made it clear that IMO Robinson would project better to scatback. I also think that his worth is more than a gadget guy because throwing is just one part of what he can do. Tell me, why is it ok to target Barner or Ellington, but not Denard? He can be used in the same plays but also throw sometimes. The value of him throwing is not about the frequency, but more about the threat. Defenders have to pause for a split second just to make sure he isn't throwing.

Now I can respect your specific position about limited resources. That is a totally different conversation. My position on that is that our cupboard isn't quite so bare. From my perspective we have two holes on this team, RT and a top CB. I do not consider safety a hole because neither off our starters has seen the field. If Meriweather struggles with his injury or the NFL makes Tanard's suspension permanent, then I'll reconsider. But as of now, my perspective is that we need to invest in backup plans. Part of that plan involves keeping DHall on a reduced salary in a different role. We are currently putting him in a position to fail by overpaying him and asking him to cover top WRs. He should be covering 3rd and 4th WRs and playing some free safety, he should be a role player. Because we can't afford to gamble on getting a top CB in the 2nd round, it needs to be addressed in FA with this strong class.

While a pass rushing DE or heir to Fletch would be nice, I don't see a rookie cracking the starting front 7. So while spending a higher pick on one of those positions would be a nice long term investment, but only add a rotational player in the present. That would fall under the category of not maximizing the impact of our limited resources. On offense we're set at QB, RB, LT, have decent interior OLs with a pipeline of prospects, and a very good WR. The issues are at RT, WR, and TE. TE is a wait and see situation that needs some short term insulation. WR will be determined by how strong Hank finishes up. Opinions are split on him, but as someone in the pro-Hank camp, I think he'll settle in and look better across from Garçon. That leaves RT. That is my priority position and where I would spend our top pick.

So IMO our starting lineup will pretty much be set by the close of the 2nd round and all other picks are depth/competition. At that point, a hybrid role like Denard is more likely to see the field than drafting a backup at other positions. Adding speed and that element of unpredictability is an investment in all other offensive positions because his threat keeps the defense with one eye on him at all times. If you're a safety and they pitch it out to him, are you going to come crashing down to the box? Go ahead and he'll lob it right over top of you. The Pats have Woodhead, the Saints have Sproles, the Packers have Cobb and all of those teams have way more proven weapons than us, but find major value in this type of element in their offense. I'm advocating having that same threat, but with the added dimension of throwing on occasion.

[darrelgreenie]

o I think you drastically overestimate the threat of Dennard as a passer.
o A key flaw that you don't acknowledge is that everything for Dennard is a projection whether its at WR or RB

o Disagree that they're only 2 holes on this team
o Just as you repeatedly supported and held out faith in Jammal Brown its equally if not more pie in the sky to project Tanard Jackson and Meriweather as solutions to our SS/FS
o

...we can't afford to gamble on getting a top CB in the 2nd round, it needs to be addressed in FA with this strong class.

The draft is one giant gamble, regardless of position.

While a pass rushing DE or heir to Fletch would be nice, I don't see a rookie cracking the starting front 7. So while spending a higher pick on one of those positions would be a nice long term investment, but only add a rotational player in the present.

Not sure what this means? Any pick might be a rotational player or might be a pro-bowl starter.

At that point, a hybrid role like Denard is more likely to see the field than drafting a backup at other positions.

Even going by your scenario Dennard is a back-up player himself. In fact he's less then a back-up he's a positionless situational player. And most spots on a football team involve some rotation where the back-up player see some snaps almost every game.

The Pats have Woodhead, the Saints have Sproles, the Packers have Cobb and all of those teams have way more proven weapons than us, but find major value in this type of element in their offense. I'm advocating having that same threat, but with the added dimension of throwing on occasion

Are we building the best team for us or trying to build some other franchises team?

Adding speed and that element of unpredictability is an investment in all other offensive positions because his threat keeps the defense with one eye on him at all times. If you're a safety and they pitch it out to him, are you going to come crashing down to the box? Go ahead and he'll lob it right over top of you.

And again I think you're drastically overrating the impact Dennards passing threat will make.

If I'm a safety it depends on my assignment, but I'm not going to come crashing into the box because (a) as a Safety it usually isn't my role to come crashing into the box (b) I'll notice they have their gadget player in backfield and I'll play the pass then react to the run

[Kostaskins]

Yeah, that seems right. He's an intriguing guy, though. If you give him some time to learn how to separate, though, he's got playmaking ability like crazy. Poor man's Brandon Marshall if you ask me.

But b Marshall an even green have more mass that him. From what I read of the kid he's very lacked due to himself being that gifted, and well that worries me allot. In the nfl everyone is gifted and works hard. I would do my homework over and over on him and see how much he wants to hit the weight room and how much mentally he can take. He needs to run good routes and also be able to read defenses.

He also reminds me of Alston Jeffries in a sense. Due to there bein so many question marks on him and having so much potential.

[NLC1054]

Look, I'm all for us drafting more SMU players (obviously), but if we're going to target a Mustang, it needs to be RB Zach Line in the later rounds. Guy is big, insanely productive, great at finding holes and carrying tacklers for extra yardage. Reminds me a lot of Morris in that regard.

I was just talking with Dukes and Skins about Zach Line. Really seems like he'd be an awesome fit in this scheme, but th ething is, he's not that much of a different back than Alfred Morris. Not that Mike is going to throw his hat behind a "Change-of-pace" guy for the hell of it, he'll take the best guy for his scheme, but you wonder if he wouldn't want someone with more speed to compliment Morris.

[gorebd82]

o I think you drastically overestimate the threat of Dennard as a passer.
o A key flaw that you don't acknowledge is that everything for Dennard is a projection whether its at WR or RB

o Disagree that they're only 2 holes on this team
o Just as you repeatedly supported and held out faith in Jammal Brown its equally if not more pie in the sky to project Tanard Jackson and Meriweather as solutions to our SS/FS
o The draft is one giant gamble, regardless of position.

- Not sure how I drastically overestimate his threat as a passer. Our offense has had big plays in recent seasons with Banks throwing passes, Denard is a huge upgrade on the ability of Banks. He only has to pass 2-3 times a game or not even pass some games. If you give him snaps as a regular part of your personnel, then the "gadget" element is completely unpredictable because you can run it without having to sub in guys that only fit that package.
- I acknowledge that he has to project at either position, but RB is a more fair and reasonable projection because Denard has the size of a pro RB and over 4000 rushing yards. Right now, he's projected as a 4th rounder at WR which means that there's risk he can't make the transition, but enough upside that he is expected to be drafted ahead of other guys that played WR their entire college career. RB is not as big of a jump to make.
- I see hole as different from need. A hole means you have nothing and need an immediate solution. Needs are areas where you can stand to improve. We have solid players with a track record of quality NFL production at every spot in our starting lineup except RT and top CB. You can't name a position with a hole. You may want to upgrade over the starter, but that doesn't mean that it's a hole.
- I'm holding out hope for Jammal, but I acknowledge that he is an unlikely long term solution because he has a chronic hip injury and is well past 30. Meriweather has a knee sprain which is a short term injury and is under 30. Tanard was suspended for substance abuse and is under 30. The league has no reason to extend his suspension beyond a year, if they do I'm sure the NFLPA will have something to say. Our only risk is future suspension, but his violation happened prior to joining our organization and he's no more of a risk than Fred or Trent. So IMO, LT is just as much a need as FS if drug suspension is the basis.
- I agree that the draft is one big gamble, but earlier picks tend to target guys who will actually play. Denard has a chance to play lots of snaps if he shows he can play multiple positions as other guys like Cobb, Sproles, etc. have done.

Not sure what this means? Any pick might be a rotational player or might be a pro-bowl starter.

But they don't get chance to show they're a Pro Bowl player if they don't get many snaps due to sitting on the bench behind an entrenched vet. I acknowledge that Denard might become a situational gimmick player, but others don't acknowledge that he can be an explosive game changer like other teams had with an added throwing element. I just think the things he brings to the table are things that others in our offense don't have and that will give him more opportunity to contribute than rookies at other positions.

Even going by your scenario Dennard is a back-up player himself. In fact he's less then a back-up he's a positionless situational player. And most spots on a football team involve some rotation where the back-up player see some snaps almost every game.

Yes, he is a backup. Some view him as positionless. I see him as a backup at 3-4 positions. And some reserves are semi-starters like slot WRs, 3rd down RBs, and nickel CBs. A player that can fill two of those roles can essentially get starters reps. So he can be a backup that plays as much as a starter. Rather than have multiple players filling numerous roles, target one guy that can fill multiple roles.

Are we building the best team for us or trying to build some other franchises team?

This is funny because others have argued against Denard because they want an offense more like the Packers and Saints. I'm not trying to build their offenses, but it's not bad to incorporate successful elements of their attack that make it more difficult for defenses to gameplan. The throwing element is our specific wrinkle to that role. But the kicker is that I'm not talking about adding something so our offense is like other teams, these plays are already in our gameplan. I'm advocating investing in a superior talent to run the plays as the Packers and Saints have done.

And again I think you're drastically overrating the impact Dennards passing threat will make.

Just like teams have to spend time preparing for Tebow, they'll have to do the same for Denard. That's less time for them to prep for RGIII or Morris. Teams have to be aware of his presence because his speed/throwing combination means that anytime he touches the ball, the offense can score from anywhere on the field. The best way to make that work is by giving him the ball frequently and occasionally having him throw.

If I'm a safety it depends on my assignment, but I'm not going to come crashing into the box because (a) as a Safety it usually isn't my role to come crashing into the box (b) I'll notice they have their gadget player in backfield and I'll play the pass then react to the run

If you don't crash down when Denard is running a sweep, he can beat your front 7 to the corner and streak down the sideline. He runs a low 4.3 and is 200 lbs. You have to respect his ability to create in open space. If you decide to attack him, he is a quality enough passer to torch you. He is better at it than Sanu and we got burnt.

Tebow was successful in Denver because when they ran the spread option, he could read the defense and make a decision based on their reaction. Our offense is designed to do the same in our running game with tosses and stretch plays and passes that only require reading half the feld because the pocket has shifted such as bootlegs. If you pitch it out to Denard, he can hit the corner, cut back against the grain, or throw it to designed outlets. The Chargers did it with LT and we did it with BMitch, but Denard is faster than them and an throw better. We want defenses reacting rather than attacking and Denard gives us options no matter what the reaction may be.

This is really simply a matter of some people thinking he can ate the transition and others thinking he can't. Some have succeeded in a similar transition in the past and others failed. Either way, it's projecting his adjustment to the NFL like any other prospect. I simply lean towards his success because our playbook elements that we use frequently that are I like the things he was already successful at during college. The things he needs to develop are WR skills and that is a complete unknown. But if he can run the route tree or beat press coverage, then he still can do those other things. If Tavon can't beat NFL press coverage, then he'll ride the bench behind Hank, Garçon, Morgan, and Aldrick because his only other contribution is KR/PR. That's how Anthony Armstrong lost his spot.

So I think there's lots of reason he can be successful and others don't think he can e successful. So lets just leave it as that difference of opinion.

[Dukes and Skins]

I was just talking with Dukes and Skins about Zach Line. Really seems like he'd be an awesome fit in this scheme, but th ething is, he's not that much of a different back than Alfred Morris. Not that Mike is going to throw his hat behind a "Change-of-pace" guy for the hell of it, he'll take the best guy for his scheme, but you wonder if he wouldn't want someone with more speed to compliment Morris.

And I think we both agreed, good player, but doesn't really differentiate himself from Morris at all and I have a feeling they'll look for a C-O-P guy to match with Morris

[RonArtest15]

I am SO thankful that we aren't in contention for taking a QB in this years draft. More specifically, I'm happy we won't have to debate the pros/cons of Matt Barkley. IMO, a guy like Ryan Nassib will be the better pro.

As far as Robinson - who is overestimating his ability as a passer? Dude is AWFUL throwing the ball. There's a reason why he's going to have to change positions on the next level.