On tonight's Path to the Draft show on NFL Network, they talked about the Jaguars extensively in three different segments.
The first segment discussed the last ten first round draft picks, rating them as "hit," "miss," or "meh." Of the last ten first round picks, five rated as a miss, three as hits, and two were meh. The breakdown is as follows:
2008 Derrick Harvey-Miss
2009 Eugene Monroe-Meh
2010 Tyson Alualu-Miss
2011 Blaine Gabbert-Miss
2012 Justin Blackmon-Miss
2013 Luke Joeckel-Miss
2014 Blake Bortles-Meh
2015 Dante Fowler-Hit
2016 Jalen Ramsey-Hit
2017 Leonard Fournette-Hit
The second segment discussed players that might fit/meet needs in the draft in the first three rounds. Judging on what posters here have expressed, their picks would not immediately be popular. They mentioned DJ Chark in the first, the CB out of North Carolina in the 2nd, and MLB Josey Jewell in the 3rd.
The last part of the Jaguars segment dealt with Bortles, and specifically if they wanted to replace him. They linked three players to the Jaguars-Lamar Jackson, Mason Rudolph, and Mike White. They said Jackson was a fit because they move Bortles around, and Jackson can move. They said Rudolph fits because they moved him some at Oklahoma State, and they used a lot of play action there, and he would do a lot of that in Jacksonville. Finally, they said Mike White was also good at play action.
They will show it again tonight at ten.
I would say Fowler was meh. His only good year was last year with a crap ton of other talent around him. Not sure we end up retaining him.
(04-09-2018, 06:56 PM)Markulous Wrote: [ -> ]I would say Fowler was meh. His only good year was last year with a crap ton of other talent around him. Not sure we end up retaining him.
But based upon that logic, just about everyone on the defense is questionable.
Campbell never had as many sacks in a season as he had last year. Same with Ngakoue, who did not have Campbell and Dareus along side him.
Jack couldn't crack the starting lineup until last year. Bouye wasn't a Pro Bowler until last year, and neither was Telvin Smith.
Everyone on the defense benefits from improved talent.
That's not the only reason though. Just looking at all those guys play, I don't see Fowler in the same tier. He was also rated quite a bit lower by PF, not to mention the maturity issues
I like Josey Jewell, not crazy about Chark and haven't watched the UNC guy
(04-09-2018, 07:05 PM)Bullseye Wrote: [ -> ] (04-09-2018, 06:56 PM)Markulous Wrote: [ -> ]I would say Fowler was meh. His only good year was last year with a crap ton of other talent around him. Not sure we end up retaining him.
But based upon that logic, just about everyone on the defense is questionable.
Campbell never had as many sacks in a season as he had last year. Same with Ngakoue, who did not have Campbell and Dareus along side him.
Jack couldn't crack the starting lineup until last year. Bouye wasn't a Pro Bowler until last year, and neither was Telvin Smith.
Everyone on the defense benefits from improved talent.
I think he is better than meh... but its hard to call a top 5 pick a HIT when he doesn't even start.
(04-09-2018, 06:51 PM)Bullseye Wrote: [ -> ]On tonight's Path to the Draft show on NFL Network, they talked about the Jaguars extensively in three different segments.
The first segment discussed the last ten first round draft picks, rating them as "hit," "miss," or "meh." Of the last ten first round picks, five rated as a miss, three as hits, and two were meh. The breakdown is as follows:
2008 Derrick Harvey-Miss
2009 Eugene Monroe-Meh
2010 Tyson Alualu-Miss
2011 Blaine Gabbert-Miss
2012 Justin Blackmon-Miss
2013 Luke Joeckel-Miss
2014 Blake Bortles-Meh
2015 Dante Fowler-Hit
2016 Jalen Ramsey-Hit
2017 Leonard Fournette-Hit
The second segment discussed players that might fit/meet needs in the draft in the first three rounds. Judging on what posters here have expressed, their picks would not immediately be popular. They mentioned DJ Chark in the first, the CB out of North Carolina in the 2nd, and MLB Josey Jewell in the 3rd.
The last part of the Jaguars segment dealt with Bortles, and specifically if they wanted to replace him. They linked three players to the Jaguars-Lamar Jackson, Mason Rudolph, and Mike White. They said Jackson was a fit because they move Bortles around, and Jackson can move. They said Rudolph fits because they moved him some at Oklahoma State, and they used a lot of play action there, and he would do a lot of that in Jacksonville. Finally, they said Mike White was also good at play action.
They will show it again tonight at ten.
They also missed a key thing when evaluating the QB's for us. Coughlin prefers QB's who spent 4 years in college. Rudolph and White fit that mold. Lamar Jackson is an early entry, so unless Coughlin has changed, (which I find hard to believe), I still believe Rudolph and White are realistically, our top QB targets.
As for the other position picks they made, I love Chark, but I still don't believe WR should be a first or second day concern. I really like Jewell, but IMO, he is purely a MLB and Stewart would be an unbelievable reach. Nothing about him stands out. I see him as a late round pick.
(04-09-2018, 11:12 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ] (04-09-2018, 06:51 PM)Bullseye Wrote: [ -> ]On tonight's Path to the Draft show on NFL Network, they talked about the Jaguars extensively in three different segments.
The first segment discussed the last ten first round draft picks, rating them as "hit," "miss," or "meh." Of the last ten first round picks, five rated as a miss, three as hits, and two were meh. The breakdown is as follows:
2008 Derrick Harvey-Miss
2009 Eugene Monroe-Meh
2010 Tyson Alualu-Miss
2011 Blaine Gabbert-Miss
2012 Justin Blackmon-Miss
2013 Luke Joeckel-Miss
2014 Blake Bortles-Meh
2015 Dante Fowler-Hit
2016 Jalen Ramsey-Hit
2017 Leonard Fournette-Hit
The second segment discussed players that might fit/meet needs in the draft in the first three rounds. Judging on what posters here have expressed, their picks would not immediately be popular. They mentioned DJ Chark in the first, the CB out of North Carolina in the 2nd, and MLB Josey Jewell in the 3rd.
The last part of the Jaguars segment dealt with Bortles, and specifically if they wanted to replace him. They linked three players to the Jaguars-Lamar Jackson, Mason Rudolph, and Mike White. They said Jackson was a fit because they move Bortles around, and Jackson can move. They said Rudolph fits because they moved him some at Oklahoma State, and they used a lot of play action there, and he would do a lot of that in Jacksonville. Finally, they said Mike White was also good at play action.
They will show it again tonight at ten.
They also missed a key thing when evaluating the QB's for us. Coughlin prefers QB's who spent 4 years in college. Rudolph and White fit that mold. Lamar Jackson is an early entry, so unless Coughlin has changed, (which I find hard to believe), I still believe Rudolph and White are realistically, our top QB targets.
As for the other position picks they made, I love Chark, but I still don't believe WR should be a first or second day concern. I really like Jewell, but IMO, he is purely a MLB and Stewart would be an unbelievable reach. Nothing about him stands out. I see him as a late round pick.
Stewart is arguably the best nickel in the class. Up there with Duke Dawson.
He'd be the perfect replacement for Colvin and will be in rounds 2/3.
(04-09-2018, 11:20 PM)JackCity Wrote: [ -> ] (04-09-2018, 11:12 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ]They also missed a key thing when evaluating the QB's for us. Coughlin prefers QB's who spent 4 years in college. Rudolph and White fit that mold. Lamar Jackson is an early entry, so unless Coughlin has changed, (which I find hard to believe), I still believe Rudolph and White are realistically, our top QB targets.
As for the other position picks they made, I love Chark, but I still don't believe WR should be a first or second day concern. I really like Jewell, but IMO, he is purely a MLB and Stewart would be an unbelievable reach. Nothing about him stands out. I see him as a late round pick.
Stewart is arguably the best nickel in the class. Up there with Duke Dawson.
He'd be the perfect replacement for Colvin and will be in rounds 2/3.
I don't see it at all. IMO, Dawson is miles better.
(04-09-2018, 11:26 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ] (04-09-2018, 11:20 PM)JackCity Wrote: [ -> ]Stewart is arguably the best nickel in the class. Up there with Duke Dawson.
He'd be the perfect replacement for Colvin and will be in rounds 2/3.
I don't see it at all. IMO, Dawson is miles better.
What traits does Duke have that Stewart doesn't? I don't mind the Duke>Stewart take.
(04-09-2018, 11:38 PM)JackCity Wrote: [ -> ] (04-09-2018, 11:26 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ]I don't see it at all. IMO, Dawson is miles better.
What traits does Duke have that Stewart doesn't? I don't mind the Duke>Stewart take.
When comparing them, I see Dawson as having better ball skills, he looks much quicker at reading the QB, more fluid backpedal, he's more consistent in coverage, he has better hands and he has much more big play ability. IMO, Stewart is just average in all of these areas. He's not a bad player, but he doesn't stand out to me.
(04-10-2018, 01:11 AM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ] (04-09-2018, 11:38 PM)JackCity Wrote: [ -> ]What traits does Duke have that Stewart doesn't? I don't mind the Duke>Stewart take.
When comparing them, I see Dawson as having better ball skills, he looks much quicker at reading the QB, more fluid backpedal, he's more consistent in coverage, he has better hands and he has much more big play ability. IMO, Stewart is just average in all of these areas. He's not a bad player, but he doesn't stand out to me.
Ball skills wise Stewart is better than Dawson. He has 47 PDs + INTs , Dawson has around 23. Stewarts much better at the catch point.
Dawson's more boom-bust in coverage too where as Stewart is much more consistent. Only allowed a catch on 49% of passes in 2017. He guesses a lot.
Overall I think Dawson is more fluid but Stewart is more polished and a better blitzer. Both equal as run defenders.
(04-10-2018, 01:30 AM)JackCity Wrote: [ -> ] (04-10-2018, 01:11 AM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ]When comparing them, I see Dawson as having better ball skills, he looks much quicker at reading the QB, more fluid backpedal, he's more consistent in coverage, he has better hands and he has much more big play ability. IMO, Stewart is just average in all of these areas. He's not a bad player, but he doesn't stand out to me.
Ball skills wise Stewart is better than Dawson. He has 47 PDs + INTs , Dawson has around 23. Stewarts much better at the catch point.
Dawson's more boom-bust in coverage too where as Stewart is much more consistent. Only allowed a catch on 49% of passes in 2017. He guesses a lot.
Overall I think Dawson is more fluid but Stewart is more polished and a better blitzer. Both equal as run defenders.
Those stats can be deceiving. Stewart was largely a 4 year starter and Dawson has only started 2 years, so of course Stewart is gonna pile up more passes defended and interceptions for his career. If we just break down the past 2 seasons though, Stewart has 23 passes defended and no interceptions. Dawson has 4 interceptions including 2 touchdowns and 16 passes defended. I will give you that Stewart is probably a better blitzer, but I still see Dawson as the better coverage guy and I like his big play ability much better.
(04-10-2018, 02:41 AM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ] (04-10-2018, 01:30 AM)JackCity Wrote: [ -> ]Ball skills wise Stewart is better than Dawson. He has 47 PDs + INTs , Dawson has around 23. Stewarts much better at the catch point.
Dawson's more boom-bust in coverage too where as Stewart is much more consistent. Only allowed a catch on 49% of passes in 2017. He guesses a lot.
Overall I think Dawson is more fluid but Stewart is more polished and a better blitzer. Both equal as run defenders.
Those stats can be deceiving. Stewart was largely a 4 year starter and Dawson has only started 2 years, so of course Stewart is gonna pile up more passes defended and interceptions for his career. If we just break down the past 2 seasons though, Stewart has 23 passes defended and no interceptions. Dawson has 4 interceptions including 2 touchdowns and 16 passes defended. I will give you that Stewart is probably a better blitzer, but I still see Dawson as the better coverage guy and I like his big play ability much better.
You don't just take away traits shown because one player started earlier and the other didn't though. Traits evaluation is based on everything they've shown on the field. Not just a 2 year sample. Stewarts PDs + INTs is evidence of his ball skills.
Dawson's been worse in coverage every year of his career. He's given up more TDs, higher passer rating + completion rate allowed. He's much more boom bust even though he has 3 TDs.
(04-10-2018, 12:19 PM)JackCity Wrote: [ -> ] (04-10-2018, 02:41 AM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ]Those stats can be deceiving. Stewart was largely a 4 year starter and Dawson has only started 2 years, so of course Stewart is gonna pile up more passes defended and interceptions for his career. If we just break down the past 2 seasons though, Stewart has 23 passes defended and no interceptions. Dawson has 4 interceptions including 2 touchdowns and 16 passes defended. I will give you that Stewart is probably a better blitzer, but I still see Dawson as the better coverage guy and I like his big play ability much better.
You don't just take away traits shown because one player started earlier and the other didn't though. Traits evaluation is based on everything they've shown on the field. Not just a 2 year sample. Stewarts PDs + INTs is evidence of his ball skills.
Dawson's been worse in coverage every year of his career. He's given up more TDs, higher passer rating + completion rate allowed. He's much more boom bust even though he has 3 TDs.
Dawson is more of a gambler. I like that. In a Nickle role, I think he's be much more consistent, because he wouldn't be facing the oppositions #1 receiver. I like his ability to create turnovers. I guess it depends on what you're looking for. Personally, I like DB's that take risks and create big plays. If you like "play it safe" kind of DB's, that's fine. It's just not what I'd be looking for.
(04-10-2018, 12:29 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ] (04-10-2018, 12:19 PM)JackCity Wrote: [ -> ]You don't just take away traits shown because one player started earlier and the other didn't though. Traits evaluation is based on everything they've shown on the field. Not just a 2 year sample. Stewarts PDs + INTs is evidence of his ball skills.
Dawson's been worse in coverage every year of his career. He's given up more TDs, higher passer rating + completion rate allowed. He's much more boom bust even though he has 3 TDs.
Dawson is more of a gambler. I like that. In a Nickle role, I think he's be much more consistent, because he wouldn't be facing the oppositions #1 receiver. I like his ability to create turnovers. I guess it depends on what you're looking for. Personally, I like DB's that take risks and create big plays. If you like "play it safe" kind of DB's, that's fine. It's just not what I'd be looking for.
It's not like Stewart isn't able to make big plays. He does , regularly. He isn't a "play it safe" type. Hes just really good in coverage. Not sure how much you've seen of him.
(04-10-2018, 12:41 PM)JackCity Wrote: [ -> ] (04-10-2018, 12:29 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ]Dawson is more of a gambler. I like that. In a Nickle role, I think he's be much more consistent, because he wouldn't be facing the oppositions #1 receiver. I like his ability to create turnovers. I guess it depends on what you're looking for. Personally, I like DB's that take risks and create big plays. If you like "play it safe" kind of DB's, that's fine. It's just not what I'd be looking for.
It's not like Stewart isn't able to make big plays. He does , regularly. He isn't a "play it safe" type. Hes just really good in coverage. Not sure how much you've seen of him.
To me, big plays for a DB results in turnovers. Maybe we just have different definitions of what a "big play" is.
(04-10-2018, 02:45 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ] (04-10-2018, 12:41 PM)JackCity Wrote: [ -> ]It's not like Stewart isn't able to make big plays. He does , regularly. He isn't a "play it safe" type. Hes just really good in coverage. Not sure how much you've seen of him.
To me, big plays for a DB results in turnovers. Maybe we just have different definitions of what a "big play" is.
Stewart has 12 turnovers throughout his career , 11.5 TFLs , 3 sacks and 41 PDs.
He's around the ball a ton.
(04-09-2018, 06:56 PM)Markulous Wrote: [ -> ]I would say Fowler was meh. His only good year was last year with a crap ton of other talent around him. Not sure we end up retaining him.
I was thinking the same when they were running that down.
Blake and Fowler are on equal terms. If you like him, you may be tempted to say hit. But realistically, both have been meh (yet both could change to solid hit with a strong 2018.)