With the current 7 picks that we have, how many of each position do you want us to draft? Not necessarily a specific player, but specific positions. Here is what I am hoping we walk away with barring a trade:
1 QB
1 OT
1 OG/C
1 WR
2 TE
1 RB
QB is obvious. This TE class is deep and I think we can pick 2 of them and fill a huge need. I wouldn't mind 2 WR over 2 TE but I would hope at least one of them will be a large body/red zone threat type WR. I am hoping we can fill our line with youth instead of veteran cast offs. Ideally I would like us to draft a guy who can play C/G and a swing tackle but at worse I would love a natural RT. This RB class is pretty deep and has some talent on it and I would love if we sent a late round pick to add depth to our RB stable.
TBH...
2 QBs
2 WRs
1 OL
2 TEs
2 OT (RT and RG)
1 QB
1 TE
1 RB
2 WR
We need a reliable QB and a developmental QB prospect. Whether one or both come through the draft, so be it.
We need some angry, big uglies on the line, especially if we plan to build around the run game.
I also want us to be open to moving around in the darft, so that we can accrue some extra picks in this year or the next.
Unless we get the QB and linemen, all the other positions are going to be wasted effort.
The idea of what positions are desired in the draft is tough when we don't know for sure who is getting released or traded, and veteran free agency from an acquisition standpoint has yet to occur.
Making some swag assumptions about which vets are gone and who is getting acquired, my positional priorities in the draft are:
QB
OG
DT
WR
OT
TE
RB
DS
LB
(02-01-2019, 11:32 AM)Jay Carter 904 Wrote: [ -> ]TBH...
2 QBs
2 WRs
1 OL
2 TEs
I have actually considered the idea of 2 QBs, similar to what Washington did when they drafted RG3 and Cousins in the same draft. I just can decide should they get 2 QBs in the similar mold or just get the 2 best available regardless of playing style?
2 Oline : give our QB a better protection please !!!
1 TE : I would like to see the Jaguars with a real tight end receiver.
1 QB : not before the 3rd round.
2 WR : I feel like our WE core is below average right now.
1 MLB : I don't like Jack in the middle. Not like he was terrible this season, but he is some much better on the outside.
2 OL
1 WR
1 TE
1 MLB
1 RB late round
(02-01-2019, 01:38 PM)JAGFAN88 Wrote: [ -> ]2 OL
1 WR
1 TE
1 MLB
1 RB late round
You missed a pick.
I'd go mostly offense I think. Draft a QB but don't trade up to do it. Then focus on offensive line and TE. Maybe look at adding some talent at linebacker after the first 3 rounds.
Order of preference:
1. QB - One in the first 3 rounds. All these guys are developmental honestly. Would almost not want to waste a 4th/5th round pick on a flyer, unless truly BPA
2. Center/OG - Preferably one who can play both positions and even long snap.
3. TE - Really need to get 2 in this draft, 1 catching and 1 blocking.
4. Speed WR - Don't care if only elite trait is speed, a la Ted Ginn, but really need more deep/vertical threats on roster
5. LB - Need depth at this position really badly.
6. Pass catching RB - Could find this guy as UDFA.
7. Secondary Depth - BPA.
I just think this a very poor OT draft. There may be few guys, but they will be overdrafted due to so many teams having a need. Would rather try to fill in a journeyman guy, utilize the new scheme they may try to implement, and use TE's help set the edge.
1. Quarterback
2. Tight end
3. Offensive line (2)
4. Wide receiver
5. Running back
These are in order of importance. If Haskins is available, he'd be the first pick. After that, I'd keep going BAP between tight end, offensive line and wide receiver. I'd wait until the 6th or 7th round to go running back. No defense among these choices, although they need to find depth at linebacker in free agency or among undrafted free agents.
If I had to rank them in order of importance it would go something like this...
1.) RG and RT/Swing Tackle
2.) QB
3.) TE
4.) WR
5.) RB
I think our issues have been and will continue to be predicated on how the OL functions as a group. Feels wrong to invest in skill positions that won't matter without a strong OL. I know some would throw QB at the top of this list but it is serviceable with a strong OL and I am not high on this year's class or FA crop.
QB
OG/OT
WR
TE
Swing Tackle who has experience at LT and RT
DE
LB
I don't wanna waste a draft pick on a RB, because this class is so deep and so rich with talent, there will be very good players we could get after the draft as UDFA's.
(02-01-2019, 08:56 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ]QB
OG/OT
WR
TE
Swing Tackle who has experience at LT and RT
DE
LB
I don't wanna waste a draft pick on a RB, because this class is so deep and so rich with talent, there will be very good players we could get after the draft as UDFA's.
I wont be surprised if they bring Ereck Flowers back on a cheap deal to be the swing tackle. He'll only be 25 in a couple months and has plenty of experience. He isn't good by any means, but he's serviceable and should be cheap.
(02-01-2019, 09:05 PM)Eric1 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-01-2019, 08:56 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ]QB
OG/OT
WR
TE
Swing Tackle who has experience at LT and RT
DE
LB
I don't wanna waste a draft pick on a RB, because this class is so deep and so rich with talent, there will be very good players we could get after the draft as UDFA's.
I wont be surprised if they bring Ereck Flowers back on a cheap deal to be the swing tackle. He'll only be 25 in a couple months and has plenty of experience. He isn't good by any means, but he's serviceable and should be cheap.
Serviceable is just another word for bad. I'm tired of having bad backups. I wanna at least have mediocre. Flowers flat out, sucks! It wouldn't take much to beat him out for a roster spot.
(02-01-2019, 10:19 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ] (02-01-2019, 09:05 PM)Eric1 Wrote: [ -> ]I wont be surprised if they bring Ereck Flowers back on a cheap deal to be the swing tackle. He'll only be 25 in a couple months and has plenty of experience. He isn't good by any means, but he's serviceable and should be cheap.
Serviceable is just another word for bad. I'm tired of having bad backups. I wanna at least have mediocre. Flowers flat out, sucks! It wouldn't take much to beat him out for a roster spot.
We're very thin at the position and only have so many draft picks. Backups are backups for a reason, especially on the OL.
PFF had him as the 3rd highest graded player on this Jags Offense (250 snap min) behind Linder and Westbrook. Maybe that speaks volumes for just how terrible everybody else is on this Offense, or maybe Flowers wasn't as god awful as everybody thinks he was with us.
I'm not saying he's good at all, but the chances you find somebody better with a 5th round pick is slim. QB, TE, OG, WR all need to be addressed before a swing tackle, at the minimum.
(02-01-2019, 10:46 PM)Eric1 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-01-2019, 10:19 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ]Serviceable is just another word for bad. I'm tired of having bad backups. I wanna at least have mediocre. Flowers flat out, sucks! It wouldn't take much to beat him out for a roster spot.
We're very thin at the position and only have so many draft picks. Backups are backups for a reason, especially on the OL.
PFF had him as the 3rd highest graded player on this Jags Offense (250 snap min) behind Linder and Westbrook. Maybe that speaks volumes for just how terrible everybody else is on this Offense, or maybe Flowers wasn't as god awful as everybody thinks he was with us.
I'm not saying he's good at all, but the chances you find somebody better with a 5th round pick is slim. QB, TE, OG, WR all need to be addressed before a swing tackle, at the minimum.
This is the perfect example of why I largely ignore PFF ratings.
Flowers was bad. Really bad. So was Walker, but they had him rated otherwise as well.
Nonetheless - they have to do something about depth - and Flowers May be in camp to compete for a backup role. Doubt he wins it, but...
(02-01-2019, 11:23 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ] (02-01-2019, 10:46 PM)Eric1 Wrote: [ -> ]We're very thin at the position and only have so many draft picks. Backups are backups for a reason, especially on the OL.
PFF had him as the 3rd highest graded player on this Jags Offense (250 snap min) behind Linder and Westbrook. Maybe that speaks volumes for just how terrible everybody else is on this Offense, or maybe Flowers wasn't as god awful as everybody thinks he was with us.
I'm not saying he's good at all, but the chances you find somebody better with a 5th round pick is slim. QB, TE, OG, WR all need to be addressed before a swing tackle, at the minimum.
This is the perfect example of why I largely ignore PFF ratings.
Flowers was bad. Really bad. So was Walker, but they had him rated otherwise as well.
Nonetheless - they have to do something about depth - and Flowers May be in camp to compete for a backup role. Doubt he wins it, but...
I mean, besides Linder, who wasn't bad on the OL? They were all garbage, but you can't replace all of them and you don't just run off guys when you literally have nobody else.
FA comes before the draft and you can't assume you're going to fill every need in the draft. I also never said Flowers would win out anything, or be the guy. I simply just said that I wouldn't be surprised if they resigned him on a short/cheap contract to try and fill that swing tackle role.
Gotta add a LB. Watching Derrick Henry just beast on our "great defense" was infuriating