(05-04-2021, 07:58 AM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]It’s a B - from me.
TL skews it high , but I like the CB and safety adds. Underwhelmed by the too early RB, but he may form a good tandem anyway.
If Little wins a job and plays well in 2022 and Tufele contributes, it’s an A.
It's an odd draft in that two first round picks by the same team in the same draft garner such diametrically opposite reactions. Both players skew the analysis up and down dramatically. I can't recall another draft like it-though I can not account for the responses of Jets fans.
(05-03-2021, 10:26 AM)Bullseye Wrote: [ -> ] (05-03-2021, 10:10 AM)Mikey Wrote: [ -> ]Would you take Leonard Fournette in the first round? Ki-Jana Carter? Trent Richardson?
I think it's more important to look at the player selected, rather than the round they were selected. Look at the team and its makeup/roster. How many teams take a RB in the first because they have a glaring need at the position, and are taking a top prospect? How many are taking a gadget RB in the first? How many are taking the guy at the top of their board irrespective of present need? Do they have a line that caters to the player's running style? Will the passing game pull defenders out of the box?
When teams are finding guys like MJD, Aaron Jones, Alvin Kamara outside of the first, they are getting value for their pick.
That doesn't mean a guy like Saquon or CMC should fall to the third. It also doesn't mean every 3rd rounder with a fantastic 3-cone time is going to shred a D.
Ronnie Brown was the 2nd pick of the 2005 NFL draft. His best season? 1008 yards, so he fit that cherry-picked stat that has been posted ad nauseum. In a ten-year career, he never again broke 1K. Just over 5000 yards in his career. Would you consider that worthy of "best RB" billing?
Ki-Jana Carter? Yes, without hesitation. He was an absolute STUD until he blew out his knee on astroturf behind a horrid OL in Cincy. Fournette? Maybe. He flamed out here in a dysfunctional organization with no QB and a poor OL, but Tampa picked him up and he was a major contributor in their Super bowl run, and they re-signed him.
Yes, look at the player selected. That applies across the board. Joeckel played a premium position-LT. Was HE worth the investment? Does it change even though there have been plenty of tackles that have been found in later rounds (Michael Roos, Erik Williams, David Bakhtiari, Jon Runyan)? Jamarcus Russell played QB-the most important position. There have been great QBs found in later rounds (Brett Favre, Drew Brees and Boomer Esiason in the 2nd round, Joe Montana and Russell Wilson in the 3rd round, etc.) Does that mean you should never draft a QB high? Of course not!
First round busts happen in every position, as do later round successes.
My criticism was more that just because an RB is taken in the first you can't say they are going to be the next Barry or Walter. You can't dismiss arguments from others claiming value lost because one tweet says (shockingly) that RBs taken early tend to be more productive. Just because an RB was taken in the first is no guarantee of their success, nor is it a condemnation of the talent available at other positions where the RB was taken.
It puts the argument of "early draftees tend to perform well" in poor light as well when you just finished a season in which a UDFA easily topped that same standard.
I get that had we waited till the second, we likely would miss out on Etienne. My contention is that a 1000 yard rusher, if that is the standard, could be found later. If we were looking for an RB that could open up the offense and catch passes out of the backfield, we could find those guys later. Would they be the same player Etienne is? Of course not! But if we passed on a franchise tackle, pass rusher, or other key position to take a guy at a position that is easily replaceable or where production can be found later in the draft, that is going to impact the team for years to come. That's the same with every pick, though. It's just less likely you'll find that bookend tackle or shutdown corner in the 3rd. There's probably a tweet out there to support that argument, too.
(05-04-2021, 09:19 AM)Jags@dajugular Wrote: [ -> ] (05-03-2021, 10:50 PM)TheDuke007 Wrote: [ -> ]I don't want to speak for all critics, but I believe many critics would argue that we got neither value nor need with our #25 and #33 picks. I just looked up the first 8 pre-draft rankings of 2021 draft prospects that I could find. 8 out of 8 (100%) not only had a player rated higher than Etienne available at that spot, but all of them had a higher rated player at what I would have considered a need position (offensive tackle, safety or edge). Ditto for the Campbell pick. Again, 8 out of 8 (100%) not only had a better player available, but they had a better player available at a need position. The situation was more dire for the Campbell pick. We took him at 33. The best ranking that I could find had him rated 39th. His average ranking was around 60th. It's one thing to abandon a need to get a great value or when there's simply no good players available at your need positions. It's another thing to abandon a need to get a player who the consensus doesn't even think is worthy of that spot. That's why people are upset.
You all just want to be right regardless of what any one says.I can't wait til we have a better season than the Chargers did last year on offense. If those free agents continue to play to there level we address going yup win more of those closer games we lost. Again we don't have a squad of losers.We have a squad that is learning how to win...consistently
How on earth could you possibly know this when no one has seen this team play? No one has any clue what this team is at the moment. They're not learning to do anything right now lol
(05-04-2021, 09:31 AM)Mikey Wrote: [ -> ] (05-03-2021, 10:26 AM)Bullseye Wrote: [ -> ]Ki-Jana Carter? Yes, without hesitation. He was an absolute STUD until he blew out his knee on astroturf behind a horrid OL in Cincy. Fournette? Maybe. He flamed out here in a dysfunctional organization with no QB and a poor OL, but Tampa picked him up and he was a major contributor in their Super bowl run, and they re-signed him.
Yes, look at the player selected. That applies across the board. Joeckel played a premium position-LT. Was HE worth the investment? Does it change even though there have been plenty of tackles that have been found in later rounds (Michael Roos, Erik Williams, David Bakhtiari, Jon Runyan)? Jamarcus Russell played QB-the most important position. There have been great QBs found in later rounds (Brett Favre, Drew Brees and Boomer Esiason in the 2nd round, Joe Montana and Russell Wilson in the 3rd round, etc.) Does that mean you should never draft a QB high? Of course not!
First round busts happen in every position, as do later round successes.
My criticism was more that just because an RB is taken in the first you can't say they are going to be the next Barry or Walter. You can't dismiss arguments from others claiming value lost because one tweet says (shockingly) that RBs taken early tend to be more productive. Just because an RB was taken in the first is no guarantee of their success, nor is it a condemnation of the talent available at other positions where the RB was taken.
It puts the argument of "early draftees tend to perform well" in poor light as well when you just finished a season in which a UDFA easily topped that same standard.
I get that had we waited till the second, we likely would miss out on Etienne. My contention is that a 1000 yard rusher, if that is the standard, could be found later. If we were looking for an RB that could open up the offense and catch passes out of the backfield, we could find those guys later. Would they be the same player Etienne is? Of course not! But if we passed on a franchise tackle, pass rusher, or other key position to take a guy at a position that is easily replaceable or where production can be found later in the draft, that is going to impact the team for years to come. That's the same with every pick, though. It's just less likely you'll find that bookend tackle or shutdown corner in the 3rd. There's probably a tweet out there to support that argument, too.
This makes sense. No argument with any concepts expressed here.
There is the question of whether a "franchise" LT could have been had at pick 25 in this draft. Good LTs...possibly. Franchise LTs are a taller order.
I know UM said he wasn't thrilled with the LTs in this class (though given the selection of Little in the 2nd, I'm thinking he meant the free agency class).
It's not very difficult to envision next years draft being linemen heavy.
For me, in 3 years, this draft grade will come down to 2 players: Lawrence and Little. If the Jags finally find a true franchise QB and their first franchise LT since Boselli, then the draft is an A+.
(05-04-2021, 09:56 AM)Bullseye Wrote: [ -> ] (05-04-2021, 09:49 AM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ]For me, in 3 years, this draft grade will come down to 2 players: Lawrence and Little. If the Jags finally find a true franchise QB and their first franchise LT since Boselli, then the draft is an A+.
Agreed completely.
Little is definitely the predominant X factor.
And we probably won’t know until some point in 2022’s reg season.
(05-04-2021, 02:21 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ] (05-04-2021, 06:29 AM)MarleyJag Wrote: [ -> ]One thing Meyer has demonstrated in his career is the ability to recognize talent
How do we know this?
I would base it on the players he's produced at the NFL level.
The Bosa brothers, Chase Young, Ezekiel Elliott, Mike Thomas, Percy Harvin and, before he went on a killing spree, Aaron Hernandez were all very good pros.
Of course, recruiting and developing at the college level is different from identifying and drafting talent at the NFL level.
Brand new newbie here; I'd give the the Jaguars 2021 draft -TLaw an B-.
(05-04-2021, 02:47 PM)Bullseye Wrote: [ -> ] (05-04-2021, 02:44 PM)TLawIsEnforced Wrote: [ -> ]Brand new newbie here; I'd give the the Jaguars 2021 draft -TLaw an B-.
Welcome.
Please elaborate.
Been burned so many times since, well almost forever, sure hope the post TLaw selections do indeed end up as starters for as long as possible and NO BUSTS of high rounders!!!!
So sick of seasons after seasons of nothing better than sub-mediocrity...2017 the lone exemption of course....
I just want actual playmakers again like the good old days as in 1995--2008 or so before the so called " the lost decade "
(05-04-2021, 02:21 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ] (05-04-2021, 06:29 AM)MarleyJag Wrote: [ -> ]One thing Meyer has demonstrated in his career is the ability to recognize talent
How do we know this?
Well everyone who knocks his record in college always say his success is because he's got the best players on the field. To get the best players you first have to identify the best players.
(05-04-2021, 02:39 PM)Bullseye Wrote: [ -> ] (05-04-2021, 02:21 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]How do we know this?
I would base it on the players he's produced at the NFL level.
The Bosa brothers, Chase Young, Ezekiel Elliott, Mike Thomas, Percy Harvin and, before he went on a killing spree, Aaron Hernandez were all very good pros.
Of course, recruiting and developing at the college level is different from identifying and drafting talent at the NFL level.
Recruiting and developing sure but the identification of raw talent isn't.
Here comes the "Soooooooeeee Pigs" kinda screen names we talked about in the other thread haha
(05-04-2021, 09:49 AM)WingerDinger Wrote: [ -> ]It's not very difficult to envision next years draft being linemen heavy.
are you speaking to our strategy/picks, or the class itself? It seemed like this class had a lot of linemen, especially in that 25-45 range.
My fear is that we have a big hole next year and end up with a Luke Joeckel clone because we are chasing need. Let's hope that Little is able to fill one of the spots, at least.
(05-04-2021, 04:52 PM)Mikey Wrote: [ -> ] (05-04-2021, 09:49 AM)WingerDinger Wrote: [ -> ]It's not very difficult to envision next years draft being linemen heavy.
are you speaking to our strategy/picks, or the class itself? It seemed like this class had a lot of linemen, especially in that 25-45 range.
My fear is that we have a big hole next year and end up with a Luke Joeckel clone because we are chasing need. Let's hope that Little is able to fill one of the spots, at least.
Jags picks.. I have a feeling that Walker is going to pan out and be pretty damn productive.. I can't say that for the rest of those goons. No faith in them..
(05-04-2021, 04:52 PM)Mikey Wrote: [ -> ] (05-04-2021, 09:49 AM)WingerDinger Wrote: [ -> ]It's not very difficult to envision next years draft being linemen heavy.
are you speaking to our strategy/picks, or the class itself? It seemed like this class had a lot of linemen, especially in that 25-45 range.
My fear is that we have a big hole next year and end up with a Luke Joeckel clone because we are chasing need. Let's hope that Little is able to fill one of the spots, at least.
Because we have so many expiring contracts on the O-Line after the season and we really didn't draft or bring anyone in to replace them. We are "placing all our eggs in one basket" that Little will be able to win one of the OT positions. If he fails, we are in an even more uncomfortable position. Robinson, Norwell, Cann, Richardson and Shatley will all be UDFA's at the end of the season. Linder will have a $10 million cap hit in 2022, so they might want to get rid of him as well. That would be a
ton of turnover. Not to mention that if Taylor doesn't step up his play significantly, he will have to be replaced. He was statistically the lowest rated starting OT in the NFL last season. I would have at least brought in 2-3 UDFA O-Linemen to compete for roster spots, but we didn't. I'm really concerned about suffering any major injuries this year as well.
I was also looking at the potential O-Line class for the 2022 draft and it is bleak.