That's when you trade back and get a nice haul.  Hopefully one of those QBs do fall to our pick

Hendon Hooker to the Vikings (pick 23) is picking up steam. That would make it difficult for the Jags to trade back, however I've seen a few mocks where the Chiefs trade up to Jacksonville to get their receiver of choice (Flowers or Hyatt). In return, the Jaguars get pick 31 and a 3rd rounder.

I seen that as well.  I'd definitely do that to pick up the extra 3rd

---

What a poll lol

Am I missing something in the poll?

no corn, no blank #2, poll is invalid.

---

From a Jags perspective, which of the edge rushers would be good fits for the system? It looks like quite a few will be available at 24 if we want one there.

---

From a Jags perspective, which of the edge rushers would be good fits for the system? It looks like quite a few will be available at 24 if we want one there.

Lukas Van Ness. Has plenty of size and versatility. Already showcases the ability to play inside and outside. Would be another big, strong body to compliment Walker. If not him? I really like Isaiah Foskey out of Notre Dame. Consistency alone he's one of my favorite edge rushers in this draft. RAS and measureable wise he compares to Marcus Davenport. I like Wisconsin's Nick Herbig as a day three option. I also like Yaya Diaby, Byron Young (TEN) and Nick Hampton.

---

"What do I know of cultured ways, the gilt, the craft and the lie? I, who was born in a naked land and bred in the open sky. The subtle tongue, the sophist guile, they fail when the broadswords sing; Rush in and die, dogs - I was a man before I was a king."

Yea because a team that already has a QB, is going to take another QB simply because he's the top player on their board huh? That's definitely how it works right? Please.

That's when you trade back and get a nice haul.  Hopefully one of those QBs do fall to our pick

...because it's so easy to trade back.

---

Been saying it for months. Branch is the right choice and will be our choice if he's there.

Meh. Hopefully the value matches up. Not sure I like him with his speed in the nickel spot as a rookie but if he's the answer at safety I guess then he's maybe worth it there. I still think passing up on a solid CB1 or EDGE rusher there is a mistake. Branch would be my seventh choice in RD1.

1. Tyree Wilson
2. Lukas Van Ness
3. Myles Murphy
4. Joey Porter Jr.
5. Cam Smith 
6. Isaiah Foskey
7. Brian Branch 
8. Darnell Wright
9. Dalton Kincaid
10. Will McDonald IV

My final Big Board for Round 1:

1. Myles Murphy
2. Deionte Banks
3. Joey Porter
4. Darnell Wright
5. Brian Branch
6. Will McDonald
7. Lukas Van Ness
8. Dalton Kincaid
9. Anton Harrison
10. Calijah Kancey

I'd have to put my money on Van Ness as the actual pick. The more I read about him, the more concerned I get. His body of work is small. He has amazing strength, but his pass rush moves are limited. Sound familiar? Of course, much will depend on the scheme they run on defense. I just don't know if he'll ever be more than a 4-3 defensive end who is very good at stopping the run. If they plan on staying primarily in a 3-4, I'd prefer McDonald as a true pass rusher at Edge and move Walker to the D. Line- playing both inside and out depending on the situation.

---

That's when you trade back and get a nice haul.  Hopefully one of those QBs do fall to our pick

...because it's so easy to trade back.

If a QB is the best player on the board it will be.  There is always a team that needs a QB.  If you are the only team in the league with a QB at the top of the board you might want to look in the mirror and ask yourself why.

---

...because it's so easy to trade back.

If a QB is the best player on the board it will be.  There is always a team that needs a QB.  If you are the only team in the league with a QB at the top of the board you might want to look in the mirror and ask yourself why.

LOL

There are gonna be several QBs going int he first round of this draft and every single one of them will be a need based pick for the team that picks them.  And you're trying to spin QB into your fantasy that teams don't draft based on need frequently. 

LOL, I can't...

---

Meh. Hopefully the value matches up. Not sure I like him with his speed in the nickel spot as a rookie but if he's the answer at safety I guess then he's maybe worth it there. I still think passing up on a solid CB1 or EDGE rusher there is a mistake. Branch would be my seventh choice in RD1.

1. Tyree Wilson
2. Lukas Van Ness
3. Myles Murphy
4. Joey Porter Jr.
5. Cam Smith 
6. Isaiah Foskey
7. Brian Branch 
8. Darnell Wright
9. Dalton Kincaid
10. Will McDonald IV

My final Big Board for Round 1:

1. Myles Murphy
2. Deionte Banks
3. Joey Porter
4. Darnell Wright
5. Brian Branch
6. Will McDonald
7. Lukas Van Ness
8. Dalton Kincaid
9. Anton Harrison
10. Calijah Kancey

I'd have to put my money on Van Ness as the actual pick. The more I read about him, the more concerned I get. His body of work is small. He has amazing strength, but his pass rush moves are limited. Sound familiar? Of course, much will depend on the scheme they run on defense. I just don't know if he'll ever be more than a 4-3 defensive end who is very good at stopping the run. If they plan on staying primarily in a 3-4, I'd prefer McDonald as a true pass rusher at Edge and move Walker to the D. Line- playing both inside and out depending on the situation.

Yeah. This first round is going to be nerve wrecking for awhile. Glad I am working from home this Friday. I like this big board of yours.

Those top three guys should go early before we get a chance at them I think. Baalke's got his work cut out for him this weekend.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

---

"What do I know of cultured ways, the gilt, the craft and the lie? I, who was born in a naked land and bred in the open sky. The subtle tongue, the sophist guile, they fail when the broadswords sing; Rush in and die, dogs - I was a man before I was a king."

...because it's so easy to trade back.

If a QB is the best player on the board it will be.  There is always a team that needs a QB.  If you are the only team in the league with a QB at the top of the board you might want to look in the mirror and ask yourself why.

So then you're saying every team's draft board looks the same?  LOL  Baloney, it will be 'easy'.  What a joke.  The 24th pick is not 'top of the board' and people's ideas of values are going to vary wildly.  Especially when you get into the 20s.

---

If a QB is the best player on the board it will be.  There is always a team that needs a QB.  If you are the only team in the league with a QB at the top of the board you might want to look in the mirror and ask yourself why.

LOL

There are gonna be several QBs going int he first round of this draft and every single one of them will be a need based pick for the team that picks them.  And you're trying to spin QB into your fantasy that teams don't draft based on need frequently. 

LOL, I can't...

Oh I know some teams draft for need frequently.  They are usually the ones picking at the top every year.  I'm just glad we have finally gotten away from it.

---

If a QB is the best player on the board it will be.  There is always a team that needs a QB.  If you are the only team in the league with a QB at the top of the board you might want to look in the mirror and ask yourself why.

So then you're saying every team's draft board looks the same?  LOL  Baloney, it will be 'easy'.  What a joke.  The 24th pick is not 'top of the board' and people's ideas of values are going to vary wildly.  Especially when you get into the 20s.

You don't have to have every board look the same.  It just takes one team.

---

Yea because a team that already has a QB, is going to take another QB simply because he's the top player on their board huh? That's definitely how it works right? Please.

That's when you trade back and get a nice haul.  Hopefully one of those QBs do fall to our pick

Ah yes of course, the classic "just trade back 4Head".

Anyways here's words out of Baalke's own mouth.

“You’re always balancing need and value, and when you say that, really, each year, the board is different. There are different strengths and weaknesses in every draft. Some years, the O-line, D-line are more prominent than maybe the edge guys or vice-versa, inside versus out. You’re still seeing the board based on value," Baalke said.

"Once you’ve got the board set on value, then you start looking at the needs. You don’t want to push players up the board value-wise just because you have a need at that postion. I’ve been doing this a while now, and most of the time, the value and need come together. Very few times have I looked at the board and said there’s just no value at the position of need we have. Sometimes it might be a card off, but it’s still close enough where you can address the need.”

"I’m just expecting that the board is going to fall a certain way ... years ofexperience, you tend to get a feel for how the board is going to fall. That doesn’t mean it’s going to fall; I’ve been sittng at 29 before and had nobody on the board we felt was valued at that level. That happens. We feel good about this group, this class, that there’s going to be enough depth in the draft, that there’s going to be a player at a need-position we have valued in that area that will be there when we pick.”

So as you can see, from his own words, even if there's a player that's graded slightly lower than another, but fits the need they'll still take him. It's almost like we've been telling you this for years... Crazy right?

---

That's when you trade back and get a nice haul.  Hopefully one of those QBs do fall to our pick

Ah yes of course, the classic "just trade back 4Head".

Anyways here's words out of Baalke's own mouth.

“You’re always balancing need and value, and when you say that, really, each year, the board is different. There are different strengths and weaknesses in every draft. Some years, the O-line, D-line are more prominent than maybe the edge guys or vice-versa, inside versus out. You’re still seeing the board based on value," Baalke said.

"Once you’ve got the board set on value, then you start looking at the needs. You don’t want to push players up the board value-wise just because you have a need at that postion. I’ve been doing this a while now, and most of the time, the value and need come together. Very few times have I looked at the board and said there’s just no value at the position of need we have. Sometimes it might be a card off, but it’s still close enough where you can address the need.”

"I’m just expecting that the board is going to fall a certain way ... years ofexperience, you tend to get a feel for how the board is going to fall. That doesn’t mean it’s going to fall; I’ve been sittng at 29 before and had nobody on the board we felt was valued at that level. That happens. We feel good about this group, this class, that there’s going to be enough depth in the draft, that there’s going to be a player at a need-position we have valued in that area that will be there when we pick.”

So as you can see, from his own words, even if there's a player that's graded slightly lower than another, but fits the need they'll still take him. It's almost like we've been telling you this for years... Crazy right?

"You don’t want to push players up the board value-wise just because you have a need at that postion. "

---

That's when you trade back and get a nice haul.  Hopefully one of those QBs do fall to our pick

Ah yes of course, the classic "just trade back 4Head".

Anyways here's words out of Baalke's own mouth.

“You’re always balancing need and value, and when you say that, really, each year, the board is different. There are different strengths and weaknesses in every draft. Some years, the O-line, D-line are more prominent than maybe the edge guys or vice-versa, inside versus out. You’re still seeing the board based on value," Baalke said.

"Once you’ve got the board set on value, then you start looking at the needs. You don’t want to push players up the board value-wise just because you have a need at that postion. I’ve been doing this a while now, and most of the time, the value and need come together. Very few times have I looked at the board and said there’s just no value at the position of need we have. Sometimes it might be a card off, but it’s still close enough where you can address the need.”

"I’m just expecting that the board is going to fall a certain way ... years ofexperience, you tend to get a feel for how the board is going to fall. That doesn’t mean it’s going to fall; I’ve been sittng at 29 before and had nobody on the board we felt was valued at that level. That happens. We feel good about this group, this class, that there’s going to be enough depth in the draft, that there’s going to be a player at a need-position we have valued in that area that will be there when we pick.”

So as you can see, from his own words, even if there's a player that's graded slightly lower than another, but fits the need they'll still take him. It's almost like we've been telling you this for years... Crazy right?

Thank you!

Everyone has been saying this forever!

---

I've said multiple times there is rare instances just like Baalke said. It's rare. If you are so stacked at a position that the player wont even see the field its not a need so of course you don't take him and take the next guy on your board or trade back. You don't push players up your board because of need.

---

Ah yes of course, the classic "just trade back 4Head".

Anyways here's words out of Baalke's own mouth.

“You’re always balancing need and value, and when you say that, really, each year, the board is different. There are different strengths and weaknesses in every draft. Some years, the O-line, D-line are more prominent than maybe the edge guys or vice-versa, inside versus out. You’re still seeing the board based on value," Baalke said.

"Once you’ve got the board set on value, then you start looking at the needs. You don’t want to push players up the board value-wise just because you have a need at that postion. I’ve been doing this a while now, and most of the time, the value and need come together. Very few times have I looked at the board and said there’s just no value at the position of need we have. Sometimes it might be a card off, but it’s still close enough where you can address the need.”

"I’m just expecting that the board is going to fall a certain way ... years ofexperience, you tend to get a feel for how the board is going to fall. That doesn’t mean it’s going to fall; I’ve been sittng at 29 before and had nobody on the board we felt was valued at that level. That happens. We feel good about this group, this class, that there’s going to be enough depth in the draft, that there’s going to be a player at a need-position we have valued in that area that will be there when we pick.”

So as you can see, from his own words, even if there's a player that's graded slightly lower than another, but fits the need they'll still take him. It's almost like we've been telling you this for years... Crazy right?

"You don’t want to push players up the board value-wise just because you have a need at that postion. "

Yea no [BLEEP], hes talking about when he reached for AJ Jenkins because nobody met any value at the pick. We all know you don't do that.

Now what about the other dozen sentences he said. Exactly what we've been telling you for years. EVERY team uses Need and BAP when making their decisions. It isn't simply BAP, or bust like you seem/claim it is.

---

"You don’t want to push players up the board value-wise just because you have a need at that postion. "

Yea no [BLEEP], hes talking about when he reached for AJ Jenkins because nobody met any value at the pick. We all know you don't do that.

Now what about the other dozen sentences he said. Exactly what we've been telling you for years. EVERY team uses Need and BAP when making their decisions. It isn't simply BAP, or bust like you seem/claim it is.

"We all know you dont do that"   hahahah.  You must be new here.  Yes, he was talking about when he took Jenkins and drafted for need, which a lot of teams do believe it or not and they are out of a job in short order.  He said it's rare and of course if you are stacked a position and a player won't even see the field you won't take said player.  I've said this multiple times that its a rare occasion.  That's when you take the next player on your board or trade back.  It's rare the top player on your board won't be a need.  MLB, QB, and maybe RB are the only positions on this team like that.  Any other position is considered a need and you don't move a player up the board just becuase one is more of a need than the other, you take the top player.

---

Yea no [BLEEP], hes talking about when he reached for AJ Jenkins because nobody met any value at the pick. We all know you don't do that.

Now what about the other dozen sentences he said. Exactly what we've been telling you for years. EVERY team uses Need and BAP when making their decisions. It isn't simply BAP, or bust like you seem/claim it is.

"We all know you dont do that"   hahahah.  You must be new here.  Yes, he was talking about when he took Jenkins and drafted for need, which a lot of teams do believe it or not and they are out of a job in short order.  He said it's rare and of course if you are stacked a position and a player won't even see the field you won't take said player.  I've said this multiple times that its a rare occasion.  That's when you take the next player on your board or trade back.  It's rare the top player on your board won't be a need.  MLB, QB, and maybe RB are the only positions on this team like that.  Any other position is considered a need and you don't move a player up the board just becuase one is more of a need than the other, you take the top player.

No that's not what you've said. You're the poster boy for preaching "you take the BAP no matter what. Doesn't matter the position, just add talent. BAP no matter what. Everybody who drafts with needs in mind get fired".

You can try and spin it however you want, now that you see his exact words, but that's not what you've been preaching bud.

---

"We all know you dont do that"   hahahah.  You must be new here.  Yes, he was talking about when he took Jenkins and drafted for need, which a lot of teams do believe it or not and they are out of a job in short order.  He said it's rare and of course if you are stacked a position and a player won't even see the field you won't take said player.  I've said this multiple times that its a rare occasion.  That's when you take the next player on your board or trade back.  It's rare the top player on your board won't be a need.  MLB, QB, and maybe RB are the only positions on this team like that.  Any other position is considered a need and you don't move a player up the board just becuase one is more of a need than the other, you take the top player.

No that's not what you've said. You're the poster boy for preaching "you take the BAP no matter what. Doesn't matter the position, just add talent. BAP no matter what. Everybody who drafts with needs in mind get fired".

You can try and spin it however you want, now that you see his exact words, but that's not what you've been preaching bud.

I have said that multiple times.  Do you want me to go back and find them? Multiple times. People that draft for need do get fired.  You dont draft for position you draft for the best player.

---