section122 Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 And what makes you more qualified than the "hacks" like Walter and others who work full time analyzing and scouting college players regarding the draft, as well as using sources to gauge team's interests in certain players and positions? Blokes! Then he said Walter Football analyzes and scouts College players! Just messing with you but Kizer has been universally panned since declaring. It has been Trubisky and Watson as the top 2 qbs in the draft for a good bit now. The process begins now though. Regardless of what we have read or seen up to this point. Last year Goff and Wentz weren't the first 2 picks off the board. I think Trubisky is the first qb off the board with Watson not too far behind him (even though I prefer Watson). I won't be shocked if that is in the top 10. I'm torn about this draft. I don't know if I prefer picking up the option on TT and drafting Watson, skipping Watson altogether and building on the team, etc...
26CornerBlitz Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 @emilymkaplan How does Deshaun Watson project as a pro? I asked a Super Bowl winning coach and two NFL QB's. https://t.co/2dWJoIvzty
Nihilarian Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 Cleveland is not going to take a qb with their first pick and San Fran is probably not going to take a qb with their first pick because the top two players in this draft are top tier defensive linemen. The top three ranked qbs (so far) are good prospects but not the type of prospects to gamble on when the players at the top of the draft are substantially more highly touted players. From what I have read the Jets are very interested in Trubinsky, especially their owner. The Bills will be in a good position to select one of the top three qbs in this draft. Odds are they won't. Instead they will select a highly rated DB who will not have an appreciable effect on the team. A patching the holes mentality is what has kept this franchise an irrelevant and invisible franchise. It's a reprise of the Levy/Jauron reasoning for drafting of Whitner. Knowing Cleveland they will probably trade that #1 overall for more picks and perhaps trade back up for a QB. Sadly, If Whaley is the GM I see the team drafting a DB in either a CB or Safety and although the team needs upgrades on defense I'd rather go offense in WR, RT first.
CountDorkula Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 Knowing Cleveland they will probably trade that #1 overall for more picks and perhaps trade back up for a QB. Sadly, If Whaley is the GM I see the team drafting a DB in either a CB or Safety and although the team needs upgrades on defense I'd rather go offense in WR, RT first. Taylor to Cleveland for their 2nd rd pick!
Koufax Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 He won't be there at 10, but moving up is fine if he is the answer. The big game and championship drive attention, but accuracy and decision making is what will make him as an NFL QB. I think the Conversation Young pessimistic comparisons are a little unfair, because I see a more intelligent player, but he still has to evolve and improve, and unless you project him to do so more than Young, then he isn't your guy. Moving #10 to #1 for him is probably a little steep unless scouting is more bullish on the certainty he will improve accuracy than I am, as I would only move that far for a certainty. And if he gets to draft day as a realistic #1, the browns need a QB more than they need a DE. Definitely worth some strong consideration if he made it to #10, but also if he falls to a non QB slot in between, especially 3, 4, 5 if the DEs go top two. But again only if you project him to improve and evolve quickly from what he is now. I am cautiously bullish on him, but have seen a few too many throws slightly off target for the NFL, and know that is the hardest quality to evaluate and project, yet is vital to becoming an elite QB and NFL secondaries are less forgiving on inaccurate throws.
starrymessenger Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 He won't be there at 10, but moving up is fine if he is the answer. The big game and championship drive attention, but accuracy and decision making is what will make him as an NFL QB. I think the Conversation Young pessimistic comparisons are a little unfair, because I see a more intelligent player, but he still has to evolve and improve, and unless you project him to do so more than Young, then he isn't your guy. Moving #10 to #1 for him is probably a little steep unless scouting is more bullish on the certainty he will improve accuracy than I am, as I would only move that far for a certainty. And if he gets to draft day as a realistic #1, the browns need a QB more than they need a DE. Definitely worth some strong consideration if he made it to #10, but also if he falls to a non QB slot in between, especially 3, 4, 5 if the DEs go top two. But again only if you project him to improve and evolve quickly from what he is now. I am cautiously bullish on him, but have seen a few too many throws slightly off target for the NFL, and know that is the hardest quality to evaluate and project, yet is vital to becoming an elite QB and NFL secondaries are less forgiving on inaccurate throws. This makes sense to me. His intangibles are off the charts terrific and thats important but based on going an admittedly small sample size (in my case) his accuracy is not. He very clearly needs to develop as a passer IMO. There are no guarantees. If the Bills love the guy and think he has a decent chance of developing I could see them rolling the dice at 10. I have a hard time seeing that the risk is worthy of gutting the front end of a couple of drafts to move up.
CodeMonkey Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 Then the Bills need to pull a Sammy Watkins and trade up. If your going to do it, it's for a franchise QB. 6'3, 215 lbs. Averaged 4100 passing yards and 36 TDs last two seasons as well as 850 yards and 10 TDs in the ground. He has also played 29 games the last two seasons so hitting the rookie "wall" would be less likely. He's as elusive as Taylor but bigger and has a stronger arm. No issues throwing down the field. He's performed big time in big time games, and there isn't a bigger pressure situation than being 2 yards from the end zone with a handful of seconds left to win or lose the national championship. Him and Watkins would make a dynamic tandem with the same college ties. It might cost a kings ransom, but the alternative of not finding a franchise QB would probably limit DW time in Buffalo any ways so might as well go all in. The two situations couldn't be more different. With Watkins you are talking about a WR in what was generally considered to be a WR rich draft. Not the Bills greatest draft moment, IMO. Compared to now where there are several teams in need of a QB, one of them being the team drafting first, in a QB poor draft. As an exercise, try and come up with an offer that the Bills could make to Cleveland for this kid if he ends up being the only highly regarded QB in the draft.
Reed83HOF Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 This guy has so many holes in his game and people want to trade up for #1
MAJBobby Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 Gonna need to get alot higher than 10 after his second top end National Championship Game showing This guy has so many holes in his game and people want to trade up for #1 You know what you make this post good. If you actually listed ALL these Holes lol
Maury Ballstein Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 This guy has so many holes in his game and people want to trade up for #1 The South Carolina defense that watched him throw 6 touchdowns agrees !
MAJBobby Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 Did you read my post? I hadn't seen a single mock draft prior to Monday that had Watson going in the first round - now he's top five in many of them. I saw very little talk of him here or in the media as a viable option for the bills prior to Monday, now everyone seems to think they will have to trade up to get him. It's nonsense. Sure, a QB starved team may give him a chance, but Kizer and Trubisky remain much safer for teams picking early in the first round.watson and trubinksy have been top 2 since october for me And end of the day there will be 4 QBs taken in the 1st this year. Watson Trubinksy Mahomes Kaaya ?? There might go early second Ok, I'll take your word on that I guess. The fact remains that nearly everyone (except you), both fans and those paid to analyze the draft, would have seen taking Watson at ten to be a terrible reach prior to Monday. Now, everyone is in love, after one game, when the larger body of work this year shows far less promise.So so sk wrong
Kirby Jackson Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 watson and trubinksy have been top 2 since october for me And end of the day there will be 4 QBs taken in the 1st this year. Watson Trubinksy Mahomes Kaaya ?? There might go early second No Kizer? I am not a fan but Matt Miller has him as at either 16 or 17 on his big board (MT is the other) and they are the 2 highest QBs on his board. He is a draft guy that I like quite a bit.
GunnerBill Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 Anyone who thinks Kizer is safer than Watson needs removing from any position of responsibility in the NFL. That isn't to say Kizer is without a chance. He is just incredibly incredibly raw.
MAJBobby Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 No Kizer? I am not a fan but Matt Miller has him as at either 16 or 17 on his big board (MT is the other) and they are the 2 highest QBs on his board. He is a draft guy that I like quite a bit. Kizers really weird for me. Earlie in year i would have said yes. But now for me based off his fall off and really should stay in school he is my 5th best QB at this point. Though now is the time i really start looking harder. I dont think my 1 and 2 will change there might be movement in the other 2 though. The guy i really think that makes a jump and solidifies the 3rd QB is mahomes one team see him in something other than that air raid offense
GunnerBill Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 (edited) Ok, I'll take your word on that I guess. The fact remains that nearly everyone (except you), both fans and those paid to analyze the draft, would have seen taking Watson at ten to be a terrible reach prior to Monday. Now, everyone is in love, after one game, when the larger body of work this year shows far less promise.That is not true. There are lots of credible evaluators on Twitter who have much better track records than Walter who have had Watson graded as a 1st rounder. I have evaluated all the alleged consensus top 3 myself, looking at their game film and breaking down their college careers. I have had Watson as my clear #1 for a month or so since I started that work. I am an amateur... I might be wrong. But I gonna stand by my own work and what I see and not repeat what Walter Football or any other mug thinks. Edited January 11, 2017 by GunnerBill
KOKBILLS Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 Knowing Cleveland they will probably trade that #1 overall for more picks and perhaps trade back up for a QB. For some reason this post reminded me of something I heard yesterday...Can't remember who said it but they were explaining why Cleveland should not take a 1st round QB...He started his explanation with..."Look...you have to understand...Cleveland is not going to be a Playoff team for another 8-9 years...So..."
Alphadawg7 Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 (edited) Knowing Cleveland they will probably trade that #1 overall for more picks and perhaps trade back up for a QB. Sadly, If Whaley is the GM I see the team drafting a DB in either a CB or Safety and although the team needs upgrades on defense I'd rather go offense in WR, RT first. Cleveland should absolutely trade down if they are targeting a QB...however, the hands down best choice for them is to take Garrett or Allen if they prefer at #1 (they are special talents) and grab one of the QB's at top of 2nd as one of them will certainly be there, maybe even the one they like best. Well if Gilmore leaves, then DB is a smart choice as there are some really talented ones at the top of this draft and we still play NE twice a year. But I agree with you, I hope we keep Gilmore so we don't need to go DB at 10 and I would rather see us take wither Mike Williams or Davis at WR with the 10th pick. Safety is a BIG need, but this is considered a very talented and deep draft at Safety and I think we can find one in the 2nd or 3rd that can come in and start. With Sammy's health issues the last season and part of the season before, the overall weakness of the WR group was exposed. Woods is not a guy who can be a feature WR, hell he can barely keep his feet running around out there (still never seen a WR hit the ground on his own so much in my life)...so we need a real threat opposite of Sammy who can also be a guy if Sammy can't shake this bad luck injury bug. Woods would be more effective out of the slot IMO. Edited January 11, 2017 by Alphadawg7
GunnerBill Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 Woods won't be back anyway Alpha. He is gonna get $7-8m a year.
Alphadawg7 Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 Woods won't be back anyway Alpha. He is gonna get $7-8m a year. I hope this is the case...not a fan. Like how he blocks, but he just never steps up and also always dinged up himself. Plus that puts more emphasis on taking Williams or Davis at 10 which I think is the best choice for us.
MAJBobby Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 What Watson is going through is he has been very good and all these "draft gurus" have started nitpicking weaknesses to generate conversation
Recommended Posts