Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Draft Board At #13 and #22
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
nephillymike
I took a look at four recent mock drafts over at NFL.com for the purpose of seeing who is projected to still be there at #13 and who is projected to be there at #22 (if we trade down with HOU). I'm guessing if we do trade down, it will be in that range as we need to get a 2nd round pick for our efforts and that trade spot is the projected break even point on the trade value chart.

http://www.nfl.com/draft/2016/mock-drafts?...tpage-mockdraft

So only focusing on the top five needs as I see them, PLUS QB (just because), and taking anyone that was selected in the first round by any of the four mocks as my sample, here is what is projected. I list the position, name, #times out of four they are available in the 13th spot, then in the 22nd spot and lastly, the overall ranking for this player by Mayock and CBS.

WR...Coleman, 4/4, 2/4, 33/23
WR...Treadwell, 4/4, 1/4, 23/6
WR...Fuller, 4/4, 4/4, 20/43
WR...Doctson, 4/4, 4/4, 40/40

OG...Ifedi, 4/4, 4/4, 47/51
OG...Whitehair, 4/4, 4/4, 15/37

CB...Alexander, 4/4, 3/4, 41/11
CB...Appell, 3/4, 2/4, 39/32
CB...JacksonIII, 4/4, 4/4, 42/63

S....Bell, 4/4, 4/4, 74/48
S....Neal, 4/4, 4/4, 48/138

OT..Conklin, 4/4, 0/4, 16/24
OT..Decker, 4/4, 1/4, 50/19
OT..Clark, 4/4, 4/4, 37/62

QB..Goff, 1/4, 0/4, 10/4
QB..Wentz, 1/4, 1/4, 12/10
QB..Lynch, 4/4, 3/4, 29/30

So, unless you want any of these seven guys; OT's Conklin, Decker, WR's Treadwell, Coleman, QB's Goff and Lynch or CB Appell, then trade down because with all of the other nine prospects shown here, we can get them at 13 or 22. How does the chance of getting any of the five change by waiting:

OT - Conklin - is avail in all four mocks at #13 but none at #22 (100 down to 0%)
OT - Decker - 100% down to 25%
WR - Treadwell - 100% down to 25%
WR - Coleman - 100% down to 50%
CB - Appell - 75% down to 50%
QB - Goff - 25% down to 0%
QB - Lynch - 100% down to 75%


Do you trade down? I do. There's a lot of good comparable talent at 22 vs 13. Give me #22 and the 2nd round pick.

BTW, I wonder if they have any MikeyNumbers types in the war room doing these probabilities and projections.

But, what if Goff or Wentz are there at #13, do you take one of them? According to these mocks, there is a 50% chance that one of them will be there. I know it would be a kill joy and a big controversy but I think I do. To me, Bradford is average at best. Either of these has a decent shot to be above average. And, more importantly, if we have any success at all next year, this may represent the best chance we have at getting an upper tier QB through the draft in quite a while. If Bradford leads a 7-9 to a 9-7, we're picking in the 19-21 range next year. It also represents a potential cap savings of almost $20M vs. Bradford's 2017 figure. I think we'd have to.

Anyone?
Zero
I'm not a talent evaluator and I don't watch college football much. From there, I've read people compare Treadwell's talent to Dez except he's a character guy, not a head case. If that's true, why would you pass on him, even if you don't get an extra pick?
nephillymike
QUOTE (Zero @ Mar 6 2016, 08:11 AM) *
I'm not a talent evaluator and I don't watch college football much. From there, I've read people compare Treadwell's talent to Dez except he's a character guy, not a head case. If that's true, why would you pass on him, even if you don't get an extra pick?



I would tend to agree with you Z, but just heard yet another two pundits, (Roob and Diddy), say that we should just develop the WR's we have and that OL is the biggest need.

Funny. I see our WR corps being rated bottom 2 and our OL as 12th this year and 2nd last year before the idiot GM moves.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/wr

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2016/...es-this-season/

They spout some stats about Bilitnikoff and Carter not doing much until the 2nd year etc etc.

BS. Draft the WR if best available and worst case scenario is our #4 WR is a valid NFL WR and injury protection for the top three.

This is such a no brainer for me, but I seem to be one of the few.

It's like they complain incessantly about it not being Bradford's fault but the WR fault all last year. Then the returning GM mentions we have to build up the line, the line the line, and then all of a sudden it was the OL fault and not the WR's.

I think the difference in this draft, is that the quality for WR will be gone by the mid 2nd but there should be stilll very good OG around by then. True, the top OT's will be gone, but we can get ne next year. And besides, we have Tobin right?

hunch.gif
Reality Fan
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Mar 6 2016, 10:50 AM) *
I would tend to agree with you Z, but just heard yet another two pundits, (Roob and Diddy), say that we should just develop the WR's we have and that OL is the biggest need.

Funny. I see our WR corps being rated bottom 2 and our OL as 12th this year and 2nd last year before the idiot GM moves.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/wr

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2016/...es-this-season/

They spout some stats about Bilitnikoff and Carter not doing much until the 2nd year etc etc.

BS. Draft the WR if best available and worst case scenario is our #4 WR is a valid NFL WR and injury protection for the top three.

This is such a no brainer for me, but I seem to be one of the few.

It's like they complain incessantly about it not being Bradford's fault but the WR fault all last year. Then the returning GM mentions we have to build up the line, the line the line, and then all of a sudden it was the OL fault and not the WR's.

I think the difference in this draft, is that the quality for WR will be gone by the mid 2nd but there should be stilll very good OG around by then. True, the top OT's will be gone, but we can get ne next year. And besides, we have Tobin right?

hunch.gif


I agree with them....I give Nelson a pass...he was a rookie and most don't do well...the previous year was an anomaly....most take time but there have been a few that do well in year one and now that is the expectation. Huff might also do well in the WCO format.

I like BPA but I want them to restock the O line...they need to do that for the next 2 years
nephillymike
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Mar 6 2016, 11:02 AM) *
I agree with them....I give Nelson a pass...he was a rookie and most don't do well...the previous year was an anomaly....most take time but there have been a few that do well in year one and now that is the expectation. Huff might also do well in the WCO format.

I like BPA but I want them to restock the O line...they need to do that for the next 2 years



The thing is, there may be some good WR's who struggle early but so do the bad ones.
Zero
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Mar 6 2016, 11:02 AM) *
I agree with them....I give Nelson a pass...he was a rookie and most don't do well...the previous year was an anomaly....most take time but there have been a few that do well in year one and now that is the expectation. Huff might also do well in the WCO format.

I like BPA but I want them to restock the O line...they need to do that for the next 2 years

If they sign a guy like Allen in FA the "need" on the OL drops. Still a need, but lest we forget, Congressman Runyan was a fourth rounder. If Peters has one or two years left in him, the RT will be playing a G for that time anyway. IMO, if Treadwell is Dez without the headaches he will do more for any QB than the difference between a 2016 first round OL and a 2016 third round OL. Assuming Agholor plays to his billing, how do you like that WR corps?

If Treadwell is who they say he is, for me it's also a no-brainer.
nephillymike
QUOTE (Zero @ Mar 6 2016, 11:26 AM) *
If they sign a guy like Allen in FA the "need" on the OL drops. Still a need, but lest we forget, Congressman Runyan was a fourth rounder. If Peters has one or two years left in him, the RT will be playing a G for that time anyway. IMO, if Treadwell is Dez without the headaches he will do more for any QB than the difference between a 2016 first round OL and a 2016 third round OL. Assuming Agholor plays to his billing, how do you like that WR corps?

If Treadwell is who they say he is, for me it's also a no-brainer.


The WR corps with Treadwell??
Zero
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Mar 6 2016, 11:32 AM) *
The WR corps with Treadwell??

Yes ... Matthews, Agholor, and Treadwell. Huff as #4 and KR or, trade him to Kelly for their #1. laugh.gif
nephillymike
I go further.

Give me a FA WR and a pick WR.

That gives us:

FA WR
Matthews
Algholar
Rookie
Huff
Ajirotutu

I expect nothing significant from Huff other than #5 WR contributions to depth and ST's, which is more consistent with the 4th-5th round talent he has. I'd trade him to Chip in a heart beat.

If I get FA WR, I am more willing to go OL, CB BPA in the 1st, but just willing to listen as my inclination is still to go WR, unless there is a star in another PON that falls to us.

We we HORRIBLE last year.

Our best WR was rated 41st!!

I did notice all avoided the 50% chance that Wentz or Goff are there at #13.

People??

Reality Fan
QUOTE (Zero @ Mar 6 2016, 11:26 AM) *
If they sign a guy like Allen in FA the "need" on the OL drops. Still a need, but lest we forget, Congressman Runyan was a fourth rounder. If Peters has one or two years left in him, the RT will be playing a G for that time anyway. IMO, if Treadwell is Dez without the headaches he will do more for any QB than the difference between a 2016 first round OL and a 2016 third round OL. Assuming Agholor plays to his billing, how do you like that WR corps?

If Treadwell is who they say he is, for me it's also a no-brainer.



I take an OL but would not be upset with Treadwell....but I think he is gone by 13
Joegrane
I am one who wants them to trade down for a 2nd or 3rd round pick, draft the Rt OT of the future and start him at OG. I would pass up the WR. It would be tough to pass up one of the two QBs even though it would screw up my rebuild of the offense.
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Mar 6 2016, 11:54 AM) *
...

I did notice all avoided the 50% chance that Wentz or Goff are there at #13.

People??

Zero
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Mar 6 2016, 11:54 AM) *
I did notice all avoided the 50% chance that Wentz or Goff are there at #13.

They apparently believe in Bradford. Listening to Ray, I think they wait and take Prescott or someone similar in the fourth or fifth. They're stocked on QB teachers and adding one at 13 when they have needs to fill supporting Bradford doesn't make sense.

If Goff or Wentz is there the hope would be that the Rams trade their #2 for one of our #5's to move up in fear that Houston would do the same. They've got tons of cap $ but have been locked in QB hell. My worry would be that they'd jump ahead of us.

The ideal would be to trade down and still get Treadwell, but I'd still take him at 13 but not a QB. Not now. I'd also think about taking someone like Driskel or Sudfeld late.
nephillymike
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Mar 6 2016, 12:02 PM) *
I take an OL but would not be upset with Treadwell....but I think he is gone by 13


It was a refreshing surprise that he was there at #13 on all four mocks.

Not so much at 22 though.

These things change as teams have private meetings with the prospects, so we'll see how it shapes up.
Dreagon
Since you guys are probably stuck with Murray another year or two, I really think offensive guards should be high on your lists. On the other hand, if Lynch falls to you guys at the second round I would stop and consider that strongly too.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (Dreagon @ Mar 6 2016, 08:32 PM) *
Since you guys are probably stuck with Murray another year or two, I really think offensive guards should be high on your lists. On the other hand, if Lynch falls to you guys at the second round I would stop and consider that strongly too.



I want no part of lynch....he got bad advice on keeping the nasty stache and whatever the rest that mess is.....if he looked in the mirror and said "damn, that looks cool" than he is guilty of bad judgement.....no thanks!!!! If he can't het that right he can't run an offense...lol
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2017 Invision Power Services, Inc.