re: 2018 NFL Draft: Final quick-snap grades for all 32 teams

quote:

---

I know which positions were of need and which ones we didn't draft... that's the "effort" that i'm talking about here... DT, TE, QB...

---

So you know better than Payton? Because two of those he never listed as needs in the several times he was asked about needs.

And the TE "need" was for a future starter. After Goedert went in the mid second that ship sailed, and if not then then definitely when the next two went very early third. It's best to punt a soft need for a year than to reach or waste picks trading way too far up for it.

Funny how some people wanted to reach on a TE yet are also complaining about reaching on OT, which was a FAR more pressing need.

quote:

---

RB and OT were not positions of "need" last year

---

That's funny because Payton did list those as needs last year.

We had Strief on the brink of retirement, and an aging Peterson coming off injury. We went into that draft looking for those positions, despite what the insane fans or "experts" think.

Just like last year and this year, the draft isn't about now OR the future. It's ALWAYS about now AND the future. You try to hit needs but you still draft the best players on your board.

quote:

---

vs Alleman, Brown, and Rooks

---

I'm having a major brain fart on Brown, I remember Jamal Brown but that was before Payton. Which Brown are you referring to?

quote:

---

Charles Brown LT USC

---

Frick damnit, that's right. I always get he and Jamal Brown confused.

quote:

---

That's funny because Payton did list those as needs last year.

---

Perhaps, I can't remember his comments prior to last year's draft. Strief just came off a great year and I never heard talk of him regarding retirement before his 2 injuries this past season.

quote:

---

despite what the insane fans or "experts" think.

---

Well true, there is trolls and people who just get stuff wrong. But even though many of us played football, none of us are experts at the NFL level, if left up to only experts to discuss, there would be no message boards for sports

quote:

---

Just like last year and this year, the draft isn't about now OR the future. It's ALWAYS about now AND the future. You try to hit needs but you still draft the best players on your board.

---

I agree, I"m more of a BPA guy. Lately we have been fortunate to grab BPA that also happen to be positions of need. Peat kinda questionable only in my opinion due to in 2015 we were fine at T, but we were thin at G, and of course now he is a G. Rankins we needed DT bad, he was best on board also, same with Lattimore, needed CB, and he was by far the best on board. I feel the same with Davenport, it's played out well.

ETA: Just to be clear, I'm happy with the Peat pick. I don't care what position, if the guy plays well, it was worth it.

I was going to come back and edit that post but I'll put it here instead.

Payton lists things as musts (top priority; have to have them), needs (very important but not team breaking; they also have a few different types of needs), and wants (things you'd like to get, mainly for depth or the future, but aren't pressing this year).

Now OT and HB were needs (not musts) last year, but much in the way TE and LB were listed as needs this year. They were soft needs that if we didn't hit wouldn't have had a huge impact on the team (injuries and who we actually picked aside).

Instead they both turned into musts pretty much game 1, and that's something that's impossible to predict when looking at the team on paper.

The top 2 priorities heading into this draft were pass rusher (must 4 years straight) and Oline depth. We needed to hit those above all else, but still stay within BPA. We had to trade up for the first one. The second we felt comfortable with who we got and where we got them.

As an aside to that, the WR in the third was a BPA pick at a want position. It was lower priority but we took that over Oline because he was graded as a mid second on our board.

The RB we took strikes me as a guy they hope can return kicks so Kamara doesn’t have to but I certainly hope he turns out to be a lot more

quote:

---

Armstead. He's aging, expensive, and always hurt. If he can still healthy and fetch us a second rounder I'd do it.

---

all the other teams in the league know all this about him too, and you still think that he could get us a 2nd??

c'mon man.... you are smarter than that, and you KNOW that's extremely wishful thinking....

point being, we would have trade a young, valuable piece... like Marcus Williams, Sheldon Rankins, etc... Armstead is not getting you a 2nd... maybe a 4th, bc you have to take into consideration age and injury history, b/c other GMs certainly do...

quote:

---

It's best to punt a soft need for a year than to reach or waste picks

---

which it certainly appears we did... Leonard and Moore are both reaches and will more than likely be wasted picks...

quote:

---

So you know better than Payton?

---

get off the high horse.... i like you... you bring a lot to this board... but you are really coming off smug.... both you nor i know better, so let's BOTH ascertain that fact... agreed?

quote:

---

And the TE "need" was for a future starter.

---

how do you know who will or won't pan out as a future starter for your team if you NEVER EVEN DRAFT THEM??? we need to take a shot on a TE more than we did another fricking CB... and we ended up taking 2 CBs, being jamerson is gonna be there too... you telling me we couldn't spend at least one of those 2 picks on a TE? or DT?

quote:

---

After Goedert went in the mid second that ship sailed, and if not then then definitely when the next two went very early third.

---

Ian Thomas, who was the most compete combo TE in this draft, went in the 4th... Dalton Schultz, 4th... Herndon, 4th... Fumagalli, 5th.... there were still good options available after Goedert...

and only 1 TE went in the 3rd, Akins... so who are you referring to, as far as the ship sailing?

quote:

---

Funny how some people wanted to reach on a TE yet are also complaining about reaching on OT, which was a FAR more pressing need.

---

DEPTH at OT is a need... considering our starter for a majority of the season could be Josh Hill, TE is a bigger need... we have solid T's, even if Amsted is down, bc Peat can slide over.... we need back ups, but we need a TE that can push Hill either up or out... Fleener is probably one hit away from not knowing his name, at this point, so yeah, we needed a TE more than a backup, practice squad OT....

We do for the record, and a damn good one in Line.

We are also one of only a few teams that still use the FB a "fair" amount. Many teams have just stopped carrying them.