Maybe someone can tell me why Foskey has dropped out of everyone's minds. I still think he's a bottom of the 1st, top of the 2nd type of player. [Reply]
Originally Posted by The Franchise:
Maybe someone can tell me why Foskey has dropped out of everyone's minds. I still think he's a bottom of the 1st, top of the 2nd type of player.
I try to keep the list as short as possible, but he's definitely on the bubble for me. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
I don't think it's terribly likely - but lets say Harrison, Jones and/or Wright are all on the board when we pick.
Harrison gives you that really athletic natural long-term LT. Jones gives you a set and forget RT who probably has little chance to convert to LT (and who's best case scenario is probably Orlando Brown) and then Wright gives you some combination of the two.
I think I still take Harrison. I'm pretty sure I'm out on a 6'8" OT with some weight/feet concerns. Wright is the one that intrigues me - I think he's the one most likely to be the sort of versatile RT we want. With Taylor seemingly ensconced on the left side, I'm less worried about long-term LT prospects. And Harrison may get bullied a bit for a year or so.
I dunno - I really like Wright. He may be the best combination of immediate contributions and long-term ability. A good mix of ceiling/floor.
Kinda thinking this too. Sam La Porta fits us very well and isn’t much different later on, but isn’t he pretty much Noah Gray? Wouldn’t be mad at 2 good receiving TE’s to help Kelce’s workload.
And as much as the size concerns creep up, I would hate it if the Bengals drafted this kid to go with what they have bc damn. If we don’t get to Burrow quickly again he could carve us up with those weapons. Yeesh.
Just don’t think there’s a guy at WR I’d see them take, even as late at 31. The value just doesn’t seem to be there compared to DL or tackle. Feels like the value isn’t far off from rd 2 than it is in rd 1. And I think we’re involved with OBJ and Hopkins bc of that along with a bad FA class.
DL is very very deep though. You could get a very good one around 63. To me it just feels like the best value in rd 1 is a tackle. I don’t trust Niang to be anything more than a swing tackle. You could really solidify this OL for the next 2 years [Reply]
The more I look here....I think all these Wr's are a bit redundant with what we've got. I'm just not sure any of them are true outside guys, outside of maybe Hyatt.
IF you could get someone to give up a 4th rounder to recoup the one you give up for Hopkins and get back down in the 2nd........I might take Gibbs. [Reply]
Originally Posted by The Franchise:
Maybe someone can tell me why Foskey has dropped out of everyone's minds. I still think he's a bottom of the 1st, top of the 2nd type of player.
I think Spags would really like him. He checks off virtually every box we believe Spags to have.
He's a little stiff for my tastes but Spags doesn't look for the same things I do. I think Foskey could be a Marcus Davenport sort of player and you couldn't even begin to complain about that. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
I think Spags would really like him. He checks off virtually every box we believe Spags to have.
He's a little stiff for my tastes but Spags doesn't look for the same things I do. I think Foskey could be a Marcus Davenport sort of player and you couldn't even begin to complain about that.
I'm just not convinced that Spags is ever going to take a pure speed rusher like everyone wants him to. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RunKC:
Kinda thinking this too. Sam La Porta fits us very well and isn’t much different later on, but isn’t he pretty much Noah Gray? Wouldn’t be mad at 2 good receiving TE’s to help Kelce’s workload.
And as much as the size concerns creep up, I would hate it if the Bengals drafted this kid to go with what they have bc damn. If we don’t get to Burrow quickly again he could carve us up with those weapons. Yeesh.
I just don't know why I should be more worried about him than I was Hayden Hurst.
Fine Bengals - draft him in the 1st. Y'all had a developed version of him last year and it was...fine.
Just seems more and more apparent that I'm simply not on the Kincaid train. [Reply]
Originally Posted by The Franchise:
I'm just not convinced that Spags is ever going to take a pure speed rusher like everyone wants him to.
He's not.
I gave up on the idea last season.
It's the sort of mindset I have to put myself in during fantasy baseball season. "You play the game - you don't coach it..."
So I think Kenley Jansen is a washed up husk who's going to get 38 saves by the skin of his teeth while the Red Sox have 3-4 guys pitching the 6th through 8th innings who would do the job better than he does. So what? Don't draft those guys - they don't have the role. Draft Jansen because he does and THAT'S the guy that's going to actually help you. Sitting there with Tanner Houck on my roster screaming "DAMMIT BOSTON, WHY ISN'T THIS GUY GETTING THE 9TH!?!?!" doesn't do anything for me.
Do I think the Chiefs would be better with a fast DE opposite Karlaftis? Yeah, I do. But I seems increasingly obvious that Spags doesn't. So I'm gonna play the game and not coach it. [Reply]
They sure have met with a lot of those speed rushers though, and after drafting McDuffie last year, it could just be that they've gotten more flexible with their thresholds. [Reply]
Originally Posted by The Franchise:
Maybe someone can tell me why Foskey has dropped out of everyone's minds. I still think he's a bottom of the 1st, top of the 2nd type of player.
Love the guy. I’m just not sure where he is on the board now that we have Omenihu. Feels like they would have a similar role? [Reply]
Originally Posted by staylor26:
They sure have met with a lot of those speed rushers though, and after drafting McDuffie last year, it could just be that they've gotten more flexible with there thresholds.
It's possible but I'll believe it when I see it at this point. If we can somehow pull Hyatt and Foskey with our first two picks...then I'll be fucking happy. I just flip flop between DE and WR with that 1st rounder. [Reply]
Originally Posted by staylor26:
Is there anybody you guys feel should be on the list that isn't?
Ah - looks like you and I have the exact same OTs...
Would you consider Downs as a potential 1st rounder?
Smith and VanNess pipe dreams? Tuli seems very Spagsy, no? I can't imagine I'd go DE if he were the best one available, but I could be talked into it.
For the sake of a pretty streamlined board, I'd say Downs is the only one I'd really consider adding. I think you could make a viable argument for him in the 1st but he might just be too similar to Skyy. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Ah - looks like you and I have the exact same OTs...
Would you consider Downs as a potential 1st rounder?
Smith and VanNess pipe dreams? Tuli seems very Spagsy, no? I can't imagine I'd go DE if he were the best one available, but I could be talked into it.
For the sake of a pretty streamlined board, I'd say Downs is the only one I'd really consider adding. I think you could make a viable argument for him in the 1st but he might just be too similar to Skyy.
Downs, like Foskey just missed the list for me. I mean if I were to add 2-3, they'd be on it. [Reply]
Todays been boring so far, so I’ll drop a graphic.
For those wanting to spend a high pick on a TE, notice that the 75th percentile outcome (right end of box) for round 1 WR’s is better than all but 3 TE’s, none of whom were drafted in round 1.