glazeduck

The Packers have arguably the best QB of this generation AND more glaring needs elsewhere than we have, and used their 1 on a QB. The Chiefs have arguably the best offense in the history of the game AND more glaring needs elsewhere than we have, and used their 1 on a RB. The draft isn't always about "making sense" with your resources. It's about finding the best on-field value. Maybe Beane thinks that's at WR, maybenot, but simply adding up the total number of assets used doesn't really make a difference. Under your logic, the assets the Falcons gave up for Julio probably don't make any sense either, but that seems to have worked out just fine for them. Again, I struggle to see where else on the roster -- when taking in positional and draft value into account -- we have a bigger glaringly obvious deficiency (that can't also be addressed via free agency.) There's talent left at DB and a couple interesting guys at DE, but beyond that, we're set at QB, OL and DL, the talent/value isn't there at LB or TE, as many have posited a complementary RB can be had later in the draft... what's left? A wr with size (none of our top 3 WRs are tipping the scales at 6') can add a new dimension to this offense. Besides all of that, regardless of how many assets would've been spent on 2 WRs, we'd still have a 3, 4, 5, two 6s and a 7 to fill maybe 5 slots. It's not like we're hurting for draft capital in terms of numbers... I may be right on what eventually happens with this, I may be wrong. But it's not like this is SUUUUCH a crazy idea that it's not worth discussing, there's absolutely a logical path to taking a WR in the 2nd or 3rd...

That's certainly one way to break it down. The other is to say it was a 1, a future 4 and 2 scrubs for a proven veteran, and a late 2 for great value at a position that has the potential of opening up new attack vectors and aid in the confidence of your young franchise QB. Obviously get your point, but I still come back to the argument of, when taking into account draft value, where else are we that much more deficient on the roster?

I disagree here, actually. Gross is gross, yes. Epenesa is never going to be confused with Jevon Kearse, but I think he's actually a very technically sound, effective football player. Probably will never be a superstar but I could see him being a slightly poor-man's Calais Campbell type. I'd be fine with him in the 2nd -- wouldn't be my first choice -- but he should be an effective/productive enough pro...

In truth, unless one player is just vastly ahead of everyone else on our board, we'd be best suited to stay put. 5 big wrs: Pittman, Mims, Claypool (PLEEEEASE GOD!!!), Higgins, Viska 4 very talented rbs: Swift, Taylor, Dobbins, Akers 2 cbs who could've easily gone last night: Fulton, Johnson ditto for edge: Epenesa, Baun The concept I'm more interested is packaging our 3 with other picks and getting 2 of these guys. Let's get greedy!

I think the issue is less with the position and more with the player(s). If you want a big nickle, I'm all for that, but pound the table for Delpit or McKinney. Dugger and Chinn might be interesting prospects but they're FAR from a sure thing and this draft is going to be VERY heavy on sure things. Perhaps that means that somebody, maybe us, later in the draft gets a steal, but you cannot take 24 year old from THAT small of a school in the 2nd just because he looks like he fits the bill. If you're desperate to fill that spot, trade up for Delpit and call it good. Otherwise lean into the fact that the guy you're selecting will either be considered a gamble and a reach in the 2nd, or an unknown prospect later. With all that said, that's why many (like me) are pushing to fill other gaps with more proven commodities like one of the big WRs or one of the few available DEs left...

no

Fair enough, that's why it was a genuine question. I don't begrudge others NOT spending days at a time of watching film. I don't consider YGM anywhere near "elite". Epenesa would be a nice value at 54, as would Baun, but I'm legit not sure if I'd want YGM with our 4th or 5th rd picks. I think that little of him

You're not wrong, I'm just curious where it's coming from. I've seen him on "best available" lists, so was thinking maybe that was it? The guy's not going to be good. His tape is terrible. His combine was meh. Don't get it...

Genuine question for those who are wanting Gross-Matos -- have you watched him play? Or is the excitement about him based solely off of website rankings? That guy is not going to be a good NFL player...

IF there's a run, completely agree. We have picks to play with.

Chase Claypool. Trying to will this one into existence (because my ~75 DK Metcalf comments last year clearly were not enough!)

Not sure I agree there... For one, I think the logic when drafting Hardy (R.I.P.) was "we need a big WR, he seems like the best of group"; I'm saying (agnostic of position, since that apparently/somehow ruffled feathers) look for guys who have a high ceiling -- long-levered, athletes who need to learn/grow into their body and a position, guys who ooze talent or measurables who might've been in a bad coaching situation in college, guys who have everything you'd want athletically but might need refinement. Secondly, going back to the Hardy example, that was a historically bad draft for WRs, this is not that. In other years, WRs that will be available to us in the late 2nd could have otherwise easily gone in the 1st. Probably safer to say they'll still address those positions... Generally agree at RB, but the DE/Edge in this draft is SOOO bad that I could see them drafting for value and looking to free agency to fill the DE need...

I offered up one example of the type of player I'm wanting -- in agreement with you. Relax.

Sounds like Ezra Cleveland will be going in the 1st. Michael Pittman feels like a solid bet to as well. Jacob Eason? Austin Jackson? CEH? Frankly not sure how *crazy* any of these are (they're certainly less crazy than Hurts or Tyler Johnson). Don't know which one, but my *crazy* guess will be an edge guy that no one expects.

This and the available backfills still in free agency, is exactly why a guy like Chase Claypool makes so much sense. We're already deep and balanced. Go get a guy who can fill a small niche initially, but whom you can develop into a monster in a year or two. My draft would be all high-ceiling guys because we have the ability to do that for once.

I agree (I think). But too many factors go into that to make it apples:apples. Health, environment, scheme, support system, age, etc. Not hard to say that right now, Buffalo is a much better environment for a young defensive prospect to be than the Jets. I'd still take a Williams for Oliver trade straight across 7 days a week.

Considering the fact that the rumors were that we were talking WITH the Jets, I'm not sure that logic flies, but weird stuff happens around now. I think the truth is much closer to us genuinely checking in on what it would cost to make that move, but then I also think Williams is the vastly superior prospect...

Don't know about kickback, that seems like it's skirting the edges of ethics probably a little too much. But certainly favors, yes, absolutely. Especially with our current social media attention span, nobody will remember the 20 times they got something "wrong" if they're the first to get something major right. EDIT: I'll also add that this is something that EVERY franchise knows, participates in, and anticipates. Just the nature of the beast. I haven't read the thread but trust me when I say that no team is taking everything being reported -- either publicly or privately -- as gospel truth, and, other than in extremely unlikely circumstances, ever holds any grudges or beefs with this sort of thing. It's just become how the industry works.

I've been told -- from arguably the most well known reporter in sports, personally -- that this happens all the time. 100%.

They ARE worth more than 2 pts. They're 2 pts and a turnover.

It's a classic.

One of my favorite sayings of all-time: wish in one hand, ? in the other, see which one fills up first. Given his injury history and contract, he's not going to fetch a high pick, regardless of how badly they "want" one...

Not sure if I have any super hot takes with respect to specific players... More generally, this draft has the potential to create a serious "haves" and "have nots" in the league for years to come. Some teams are going to absolutely bomb this draft and others are going to find steals right and left -- I wouldn't be surprised if 3 or 4 years from now, you'll see a few SB champs as having been those teams who crushed it. Follow up hot take -- those who excel are likely going to be the more analytics/tech-forward teams (and not just because the draft will be virtual)... There's going to be some picks that will appear to us as being bonkers reaches -- TE, Edge, QB and LB talent all really fall off after the obvious couple prospects. Probably doesn't qualify, but here it is anyway, there will also be guys who drop like lead balloons and the commonalities with them will be a) behavioral, b) injury risk, c) small school/poor competition prospects, d) (less likely) personality "issues" -- put another way, most teams will be playing it VERY safe. I won't be surprised if a guy like Sahdiq Charles goes undrafted... A vast majority of the trades that go down will occur early in each day, as they'll have been scoped out the night prior. Wouldn't look for a ton of action late in the 1st, 3rd, or really anytime after the 5thish...

I'm having a really hard time figuring out what all the consternation is about... Even if you remove concepts like future roster planning, or drafting for value, it's still not a hot take to suggest (even with the addition of Diggs) that we're stronger on defense than offense. So if we're aiming for roster balance (again, not exactly a hot-takey strategy), it would seem that putting our resources into improving the offense would be a reasonable call. From there, we return our entire OL nucleus, have added to that, and haven't exactly been linked to any splashy signings at the position, so that doesn't exactly seem like too likely a move. We have our franchise QB in place, so nothing to see there. That leaves us with: RB, WR, TE and special teams as the most "obvious" areas to address, by deduction -- and again, that's not even considering the makeup of our roster or positional depth in the draft. Certainly possible that in a week Beane opts for more defense due to value or some other reason, but speaking in purely logical terms, I'm really struggling to understand why some folks are so militantly against the idea of adding more offensive weapons. It's not like we're the greatest show on turf right now...

*SWOON*