I think it's just that people now "know" these particular mock simulators, and can either sense or actually SEE that certain QBs are going to fall, so they make the trade, fully confident that Daniels or Maye will still be there at #6, so why not add capital "for free?" I tend to not do that, and just TAKE the QB if he's there at #3 b/c that feels more realistic, but to each his own.
I guess one scenario for trading down from 3 to 5 is if you have say Daniels and JJM equally rated and you can get Arizona and the chargers into a bidding war if they both really want MHJ or whomever. Pretty good shot one of JJM and JD are still there at 5, if not both, assuming the chargers don’t resell the #3 pick to a qb needy team and AZ also trades back. (Or I guess Harbaugh could take his guy JJ at 3 and have a deal for Herbert to Minnesota for all their draft picks or something). I guess even in this scenario you take MHJ at 5 and go from there.
I like that draft a lot. My biggest concern is let's say you do the trade with the Chargers and move back to #5. They jump ARI and take MHJ. What if Arizona doesn't love what's left? They put #4 up for auction and you risk missing out on your guy. With teams like the Giants, Falcons, Vikings and Broncos lurking at picks 6-12, it's a risky approach. If you're ARI and you need a lot of help, something like #11 & #23 from MIN could be pretty tempting.
Landing Daniels, McConkey, Roman Wilson, the TE Sanders AND Marshawn Lloyd would be a ridiculously GREAT draft.
That's a good draft and seems to be pulling from the Top 30 visits quite a bit. I also like those additional possibilities from 34 onward. I've been leaning toward a WR in R2 because the OT options in R3 and R4 seem decent. I'd rather go WR in R2 then pick Corley in R3.
Honestly if Brugler is even close to right it makes me more sure I want Suamataia at 34. You could MAYBE talk me into Rosengarten as a potential future starter, but it's him and Paul. So that means all but 1 of the potential starters are gone by the 40s, and then you're hoping on 1 guy?
Oh, the drinks will flow in the Bone household should this be the order of things.
If the Pats pass on QB and draft two interior offensive linemen in the first 68 picks, I will break something.
If Patriots trade back and do not get a future #1 to potentially trade up and get a QB rated around the same as the guy they passed on this year, I will break something.
Passing on a QB without getting a haul of 1st rounders or at least a 1st in 25, 2 interior linemen early and no front 7 help. Yeah I’d be joining you in breaking something.
Have we given up on the other Andrews as the developmental C from last year’s draft?
Agreed and not just future #1 pick but preferably a 2025 1st of a team that’s likely to be really bad even if that team takes QB3. Is Minnesota, plugging in Daniels, a good bet to be a top 10 picking team next year? I wouldn’t think so.
I don’t think he has much upside beyond being a spare part or mildly useful backup interior guy with some positional versatility.
While I understand that might be your preference, is it the Pats’ when it comes to centers? Thinking back to players like Koppen, Stork, and even David Andrews, it seems to me that the team favors intelligence, toughness, and technique from that position. Could Jake follow in that tradition of late (or undrafted) additions?
Andrews is slightly larger than Koppen or David Andrews, but he doesn't appear to have their lateral movement and agility. I wouldn't give up on him, but he's probably just a better version of James Ferentz.
Yes, and also intelligence, toughness, etc. But the big difference, to me, between them and Jake Andrews is the mobility.
I guess I have to repeat (even when it's in my OP) the caveat every time I post that this is a hypothetical exercise with the assumption that they don't like the QB that is available at #3.
Sure, but are their big similarities more important than their big difference?
I‘m not sure that the phrase “don’t like” is particularly useful, as it suggests a binary of like/don‘t like and presumes that they “like” these OL prospects, but yes, my position in your scenario is that they should take a Lloyd Dobbler dare-to-be-great swing at the most important position on the field rather than use their draft capital on some dare-to-be-good interior linemen.
Doesn't to me. I'm not sure I would accept 11, 23, and a 2025 1st for #3. Reason being, the 2025 1st is also unlikely to be a top 10 pick. I think I'd need an additional top 2 round pick to move 3 to Minnesota:
I'm going to be super curious to see what NE ends up doing with this pick (won't we all?). I think at the end of the day, they're just going to take Maye or Daniels and be done with it.
Yeah, I know the draft points thing isn't perfect, but a pick in the mid-20s from Minnesota and say NE slots in next year at #8. We'd probably have to use both of them to jump up to take next year's QB that's likely gonna be rated around where Maye/Daniels are this year. If there's one there. Or maybe there's some mid to late 1st kinda guy. That will be fun again. Or we can stay at #8ish and hope we get next year's JJ McCarthy to slip. Or something.
I need jefferson or darrisaw.
Yeah. I think asking for JJ as well is just too much.
I do not want the Pats to trade down but if I were them it’d be 4 firsts from the Vikings to do it. If not, fuck off and draft Maye or Daniels.
Sure... that's the point though, making up imaginary super-hauls is pointless. Do you want the QB or do you want to trade down. If you want to trade down that's what the offer almost certainly is.
Sure... that's the point though, making up imaginary super-hauls is pointless. Do you want the QB or do you want to trade down. If you want to trade down that's what the offer almost certainly is.
