Rnd 1: Zach Ertz TE Stanford
Rnd 2: Deandre Hopkins WR Clemson
Rnd 3: Zaviar Gooden OLB Missouri
Rnd 4: Ricky Wagner OT Wisconsin
Just some thoughts peeps. Let me know what you think will probably estimate a full 7 RND once i get more research in.
McGruff wrote:3 of 4 picks fail to meet and need at all, and most are unrealistic.
pehawk wrote:McGruff wrote:3 of 4 picks fail to meet and need at all, and most are unrealistic.
Hawks draft pruely on need?
kearly wrote:I'm going to assume that Flynn was traded to Jacksonville moving our #57 pick up to #34. That's the only likely way I see us getting Hopkins in round 2. I'd also assume that Seattle had a monster free agency with defensive line additions.
Still, if that mock was justifiable based on a strong showing in free agency, I'd love it.
hawksfan515 wrote:kearly wrote:I'm going to assume that Flynn was traded to Jacksonville moving our #57 pick up to #34. That's the only likely way I see us getting Hopkins in round 2. I'd also assume that Seattle had a monster free agency with defensive line additions.
Still, if that mock was justifiable based on a strong showing in free agency, I'd love it.
I do not want to keep relying on FA to solve our D-line problems, honestly. Earlier I was doing a big, long post about the average round we drafted all our positional groups of players, and D-line graded out near the worst at 5 (remember the numbers will be skewed with more lower round picks than higher round picks, and I counted FA's as a round, and they didn't even have UDFA's! The highest pick we have spent on D-line (other than our weird LEO position with the Irvin selection) is a 4th rounder . The only guy who has been on the field even consistently is a 7th rounder in Scruggs, and of course our first rounder in Irvin. D-line is the only area our FO hasn't worked it's magic on in the draft (you could argue RB is another, but we have only needed 1 draft pick for a backup RB, and Turbo is fine), and I'd love for that trend to be broken. Our FO hasn't shown they can get it done on the D-line with later round picks, so let's use early rounders instead. Our D-line is downright horrible right now, and is dragging down the whole team, but if we upgrade it we will be near unstoppable.
chris98251 wrote:hawksfan515 wrote:kearly wrote:I'm going to assume that Flynn was traded to Jacksonville moving our #57 pick up to #34. That's the only likely way I see us getting Hopkins in round 2. I'd also assume that Seattle had a monster free agency with defensive line additions.
Still, if that mock was justifiable based on a strong showing in free agency, I'd love it.
I do not want to keep relying on FA to solve our D-line problems, honestly. Earlier I was doing a big, long post about the average round we drafted all our positional groups of players, and D-line graded out near the worst at 5 (remember the numbers will be skewed with more lower round picks than higher round picks, and I counted FA's as a round, and they didn't even have UDFA's! The highest pick we have spent on D-line (other than our weird LEO position with the Irvin selection) is a 4th rounder . The only guy who has been on the field even consistently is a 7th rounder in Scruggs, and of course our first rounder in Irvin. D-line is the only area our FO hasn't worked it's magic on in the draft (you could argue RB is another, but we have only needed 1 draft pick for a backup RB, and Turbo is fine), and I'd love for that trend to be broken. Our FO hasn't shown they can get it done on the D-line with later round picks, so let's use early rounders instead. Our D-line is downright horrible right now, and is dragging down the whole team, but if we upgrade it we will be near unstoppable.
WTF, they have rebuit the O -LINE, RB'S LB'S, DB'S WR'S. Pete stated explicitly Pass rushers in his last post game after the Atlanta loss, 3 years and almost a totally rebuilt team with the exception of the D-line, even with that they have done their best to keep it from falling apart with the FA's they have brought in. This was a 4 year project, they brought back Quinn who's strength is the D-line.
Horrible D -Line on a defense that was top 10, you cannot sell that bag of goods either. Lighter on the pass rush then all of us want yes.
hawksfan515 wrote:I do not want to keep relying on FA to solve our D-line problems, honestly.
chris98251 wrote:You don't need high picks, Porter, Sinclair, Danials, just a couple examples
pehawk wrote:Good DT's are rare AND require high picks.
chris98251 wrote:pehawk wrote:Good DT's are rare AND require high picks.
3 tech guys many times yes. But you may find guys on the fringe that can play it that just don't show up because of their supporting cast makes it easy to either run away or double up on them and have a back as protection as well.
This is the area where John, Pete, and Dan will have to return to the no stone left unturned approach.
chris98251 wrote:Looking at prospects there were several that were injured or had some problems. Guys with 4.9 speed to 5.10 which I think is good for a big kid and weighed in between 290 and 325. Those are the types I think we look at, I'm sure they will be gone over by the staff as well. Those are the players that can be steals if we evaluate the talent and situation well.
chris98251 wrote:Jacobbi McDaniel, DT, Florida State
Height: 6-1. Weight: 297.
A.J. Francis*, DT, Maryland
Height: 6-3. Weight: 305.
Guys that are worth looking at I think, would be later round mostly.
Kelly.Orr wrote:I am sorry but i just do not see any DT's in this draft that will fix our problem besides Richardson and Lotulelei. You really think they are going to be there at 25? I sure don't. Unless we trade up to get "OUR GUY" i am just not seeing it in this class.
McGruff wrote:I think the idea the draft is weak at DL is crazy.
If we can't get Richarson, kawann Short is a more than adequate plan b. Ansah is a beast, and we'll have a shot there.
Failing that, adding a WR is a definite option.
It is currently Thu Apr 26, 2018 11:46 am
Return to [ THE NCAA FOOTBALL & PRO DRAFT FORUM ]