2020 NFL Draft Thread

[JimZipCode]

For the record, I recognize the front 7 is clearly our biggest need. I would be happy if a front 7 guy is BPA at our pick. However, I'm not okay with reaching on one when there is better talent available at other positions of need. Given the talent in this receiver class, I do think there is a good chance BPA at our pick is a receiver, and I would think that would be a great way to spend our first round pic

Of course I agree that we can't ignore BPA.

I would be surprised if a WR is the BPA in rd 1 if we stick at #28. Seems to me more likely that a WR is the BPA when we get to our 2nd or 3d-rd picks.

There's a possibility that what I'm "really" saying is that IF a WR is BPA at #28, we should trade back to the region where BPA is a front-7 guy. And I haven't yet realized that that's what I mean. I don't think that's where I am; but I haven't really analyzed or clarified my thinking. Still early; we haven't even had the Combine yet.

Again, not sure why you keep harping about the fron 7 when what I originally quoted you about was potentially adding an outside receiver vs. a slot receiver. This constant straw man you're trying to push is just weird.

I don't see it as a straw-man at all. Did I miss the point where you entered-in? Was I arguing with someone else first, and then transferred to you when you chimed in?

What strikes me as the difference in your stance, and mine, is that I recognize there is more than 1 round.

Unnecessarily snarky.

I absolutely think we need to add 1st-round talent to the front 7. But I don't think one pick is sufficient, to stock up the defense.

I've been trying to have a conversation about what type of WR addition would benefit the team more. Please stop trying to take the debate off track.
...
you seem to be against adding an outside receiver at all anywhere in the draft because you want to just hand that number 2 role to Boykin. You apparently would rather add a slot guy at some point to challenge Snead for his 2 or 3 targets per game.

That overstates it – which may be my fault more than yours. I am in the way WAY way early stages of draft season, the stage where I fall in love with a different prospect every 3 or 4 days.

Coming off the season, I was dead-sure that what we needed to add at WR was a quick-twitch guy whose best fit might be in the slot but who could double-up as a return-man. Kill multiple birds with one pick: reinvigorate our return games, and add a situational playmaker.

Then a couple days ago I found myself swooning over Denzel Mims. This is the guy we REALLY need! Posted something about him.

There will be several more radical shifts in direction from me, over the next 60 days. This guy! No, THIS guy!

I have a strong lean that a player who can bring danger to our return game, even if he only plays on offense in 3-wide formations, would be of greater immediate benefit to the team as a whole, than a guy who "merely" replaces Boykin on offense without adding much value on spec teams. In this I'm influenced some by looking at who the Chiefs have drafted over the years at WR. They haven't spent a 1st on a WR since 2011. The players they've added have been "lumpy": talented but unpolished, and available later:

Chris Conley – 3rd rd, 2015.
Demarcus Robinson – 4th rd, 2016.
Tyreek Hill – 5th rd, 2016.
Jehu Chesson – 4th rd, 2017.
Tremon Smith – 6th rd, 2018.
Mecole Hardman – 2nd rd, 2019.

Kelce was a 3rd-rounder. (They added Watkins via trade.)

This makes sense to me. Julio or DeAndre or AJ Green aren't falling into our laps. So make the corps that you need, by drafting for traits and letting your MVP QB and your unique offensive environment mold them. Marquise & Boykin are poster boys for drafting that way (despite the round Marquise was taken in). And Harbs evidently worked his ass off to get Culley in-house, which is another argument for drafting that way.

AND it dovetails nicely with the way our current roster needs stack up, so that's sweet too.

But that's a "lean". My other very strong lean is that DeCosta is likely to do something that I don't anticipate whatsoever, and is genius. Last year I was super invested in who we pick, and really hoping for certain guys. This year I'm much more inclined to say "Whatever you think Mr DeCosta sir."

That's the part of your stance I'd like you to reconsider. I mean, are you that absolutely sold on both Boykin & Hollywood being future pro bowlers that you really don't see how it could benefit us to add competition for them from what is seemingly the most stacked WR class in years?

I doubt you have a grasp on my "stance".


My overriding "stance" is that building a football team is like building a sand castle on the beach. Nothing stays built, because forces are constantly acting to erode your roster. At the beach it's wind and the tide and kids playing frisbee, etc. In the NFL it's age and injury and free-agency and PED suspensions and taking 157 pounds of marijuana across the border or slugging one's wife in an elevator, etc etc etc. You never know what you have, until you actually get to opening day.

So in general, drafting a Jon Ogden when you already have Tony Jones; or a Terrell Suggs when you already have Peter Boulware & Adalius Thomas; moves that look "inefficient" or unnecessary, duplicative; we've seen over and over that moves like that can be brilliant. So EVEN IF I had both Marquise & Boykin in the Pro Bowl this coming season, I would not necessarily call it a bad move to stock up at the position; esp in this draft, and esp when our other WRs are pushing 30 and approaching the end of their contracts.


As it stands, I'm NOT absolutely sold on either Boykin & Hollywood being able to finish this coming season on the active roster.

Unlike most on this board, I am a little more sold on Boykin than on Marquise. Boykin played in all 16 games; and he's established himself as a blocker, which means something to our OC and which Marquise will never, ever do. Marquise is a revelation with his change-of-direction and his ability to win the ball; but I worry that he will always be battling nagging injury, and I worry that he'll always have to be deployed in somewhat specialized roles due to his size.

I'm much more sanguine about Boykin's ability to get on the field in every formation where a team rolls out a WR. But there's still a moderately huge question about him. What if Boykin's personality is such – too reserved, or something? – that Lamar just doesn't EVER mesh with him, and they never develop the kind of chemistry that Lamar has with Marquise? Boykin has put enough on film to demonstrate that he can play WR in the league, but if Lamar just doesn't click with him then maybe he's a wasted pick and we need to run him outta town, get someone else in there.


Regardless: I think we need to draft another WR this year. For one thing there's the quality of the class: we kicked ourselves for YEARS post-2014. And for another there's the status of the squad. Snead is a free agent after this coming season; I think Seth Roberts might be a free agent NOW. Chris Moore has played his way off the team, so far as I'm concerned; and Jaleel Scott has one catch on three targets across two full seasons in the NFL. We need to keep building that room.

Yes, even if that means not "protecting" Miles Boykin.

I don't think the player needs to be a 1st-rounder. I think our defensive front seven desperately needs the infusion of first-round talent. I think the WR corps can benefit fine from a "lumpy" 2nd- or 3rd-rd prospect, who has traits and can grow up with Lamar (can Culley).

Unless Mr DeCosta thinks differently about it; then I agree with whatever his idea is.

[JimZipCode]

But we have a slot WR. Snead is average but he’s still a low end starter.
...
If we want to diversity and add a skillset we don’t have, adding a slot WR doesn’t make sense.

Snead's entering the final year of his contract, if I'm not mistaken. We don't have him in 2021.

[JimZipCode]

On the "production" thing.

Boykin has the highest Y/Target on the team at 9.0. 22 targets -> 198 yards.

What's very interesting is if you take out that 1 50 yard catch in the SEA game his numbers go to 21 targets -> 148 yards -> 7.0 Y/target.

Cuts both ways. On our 4th play from scrimmage vs the Titans, our first pass attempt, Boykin is running wide open up the left seam – he has beaten the safety – when Lamar comes off him and throws it to Andrews on the sideline for a 12-yd gain.

We just didn't throw him the ball enough.

We have to be very careful with sample size if we're calling Miles Boykin the "most efficiently productive WR this past season"

That's the traditional wisdom, sure.

The thing is, Boykin was one of our best two blockers at WR (along with Roberts). He did that, AND:

• He led all Ravens in yards-per-target and yards-per-reception.
• He led all Raven WRs in DVOA, TD% and Success Rate.

It's clear as day that we should have used him more. We didn't throw him the ball enough.

And I mean that in the most reductive, literal way possible. We should have thrown it to him at least ONE more time: that first pass play of the Titans game, our 4th play from scrimmage.

That one is inarguable. I'm sure there are more.

[jhoff66]

Cuts both ways. On our 4th play from scrimmage vs the Titans, our first pass attempt, Boykin is running wide open up the left seam – he has beaten the safety – when Lamar comes off him and throws it to Andrews on the sideline for a 12-yd gain.

We just didn't throw him the ball enough.


That's the traditional wisdom, sure.

The thing is, Boykin was one of our best two blockers at WR (along with Roberts). He did that, AND:

• He led all Ravens in yards-per-target and yards-per-reception.
• He led all Raven WRs in DVOA, TD% and Success Rate.

It's clear as day that we should have used him more. We didn't throw him the ball enough.

And I mean that in the most reductive, literal way possible. We should have thrown it to him at least ONE more time: that first pass play of the Titans game, our 4th play from scrimmage.

That one is inarguable. I'm sure there are more.

So now your saying Lamar Jackson is the problem and we should replace him. That Lamar Jackson is a bum for missing that throw and we should clearly draft a newqb to throw Miles Boykin thee ball......

[GreatWhiteNorthRaven]

Cuts both ways. On our 4th play from scrimmage vs the Titans, our first pass attempt, Boykin is running wide open up the left seam – he has beaten the safety – when Lamar comes off him and throws it to Andrews on the sideline for a 12-yd gain.

We just didn't throw him the ball enough.


That's the traditional wisdom, sure.

The thing is, Boykin was one of our best two blockers at WR (along with Roberts). He did that, AND:

• He led all Ravens in yards-per-target and yards-per-reception.
• He led all Raven WRs in DVOA, TD% and Success Rate.

It's clear as day that we should have used him more. We didn't throw him the ball enough.

And I mean that in the most reductive, literal way possible. We should have thrown it to him at least ONE more time: that first pass play of the Titans game, our 4th play from scrimmage.

That one is inarguable. I'm sure there are more.

You know I remember watching the 2017 Eagles and being enarmoured by a big play machine named Mack Hollins. He always seemed to make a big play.

Coincidentally he led the team in Y/Tgt on the same number of targets as Boykin. But I'd be out of my mind to suggest he was a better pass catcher than Ertz and Jeffrey.

That's the thing about these guys who can come on for a few targets and turn a couple of them into big plays. They don't do it on a consistent basis, but cna shine when they're nto the focus of the defense (Brown and Andrews were)

For every play you can show me of Boykin wide open running free, I can show you four where he's running ugly ass 10+ yard routes and can't get na inch of separation.

Stats won't tell you that. Y/Tgt is absolutely relevant and needs to be considered, but like all statistical analysis it needs to factor in sample size and be contextualized with the film.

He didn't get used more because on film he wasn't getting separation consistently. Not even close.

HE's a rookie, he has a bright future, but there's a reason he wasn't out there and I respect the coaching decision based on what you can see on A22.

[GreatWhiteNorthRaven]

So now your saying Lamar Jackson is the problem and we should replace him. That Lamar Jackson is a bum for missing that throw and we should clearly draft a newqb to throw Miles Boykin thee ball......

While I disagree with Jim, I don't think this is an accurate takeaway from what he said. We all know how reads work. If Boykin is wide open and he's the 4th read in a given set it's not on Lamar depending on the initial progressions.

[GreatWhiteNorthRaven]

Unlike most on this board, I am a little more sold on Boykin than on Marquise. Boykin played in all 16 games; and he's established himself as a blocker, which means something to our OC and which Marquise will never, ever do. Marquise is a revelation with his change-of-direction and his ability to win the ball; but I worry that he will always be battling nagging injury, and I worry that he'll always have to be deployed in somewhat specialized roles due to his size.

I get that the best ability is availability, so I kind aget it. But based purely on football skill, Brown showed significantly, and I mean significantly, more polish than Boykin did.

I'd also argue we didn't modify a certain role even while he was playing injured. Of 641 snaps, he was used in the slot on 187 of them, which is enough to show they beleive in moving him around the formation. He was used on screens and jets, all routes that will welcome contact.

That said, you could make an argument he was coached to go down at the contact point, which is relevant. But in terms of offensive play design they didn't seem nervous about his use within the plays and used him in a hell of a lot of ways that would result in contact (All of which he managed quite well).

You're entitled to your opinion, but I just haven't seen remotely close to enough from Boykin to be excited about him right now. That said, WR is a year 2 position in this league and he has every opportunity to get it going with a full NFL offseason, which hopefully includes working with some guys that specialize in pacing strides.

[tnsmith90]

I don't see it as a straw-man at all. Did I miss the point where you entered-in? Was I arguing with someone else first, and then transferred to you when you chimed in?

You were chatting with GWNR about the benefits of drafting an outside WR vs. a slot WR... the first post of yours I replied to was this:

Understood about reps for a slot WR. But at least a slot guy adds some diversity to the skill sets we have.

We aleady have two fast & talented outside boundary WRs, in Marquise & Boykin. I don't see how adding another moves the needle very much; esp considering how much 12 and 21 we play.

I responded specifically about the benefits of drafting an outside WR vs a slot receiver:

Boykin is far from a sure thing at this point, and the same could even be said for Marquise who has shown far more than Boykin. Adding another talented outside boundary receiver prospect improves the odds that the team hits on one or two of them. Heaven forbid we hit on all three, and have depth, or a trade piece.

Meanwhile, a slot receiver just isn't something that will likely be a big part of our offense any time soon given our extensive use of 2 & 3 TE sets. A slot guy would not only be competing for targets working the same areas of the field as Andrews/Hurst/Boyle, but they would be competing for snaps with those guys to even be on the field at all.

Furthermore, when you look at the weekly passing charts posted here each week, it's pretty clear that the main area for possible improvement is on the outside in the intermediate to deep portions of the field. Adding another guy that could bloom into a difference maker in that part of the passing game would directly impact the greatest area of weakness on offense.

I know you are a big Boykin fan, but that doesn't mean we should bank on him. On the contrary, we should give him competition, and let him battle it out for his place in the offense. Iron sharpens iron.

I never said we shouldn't consider a front 7 player in the first round, or insinuated we shouldn't try to improve our front 7. I was merely co-signing with GWNR on there being a greater need for an outside WR than a slot WR for the team at this time.

Of course I agree that we can't ignore BPA.

I would be surprised if a WR is the BPA in rd 1 if we stick at #28. Seems to me more likely that a WR is the BPA when we get to our 2nd or 3d-rd picks.

There's a possibility that what I'm "really" saying is that IF a WR is BPA at #28, we should trade back to the region where BPA is a front-7 guy. And I haven't yet realized that that's what I mean. I don't think that's where I am; but I haven't really analyzed or clarified my thinking. Still early; we haven't even had the Combine yet.

I could understand that line of thinking. Personally, I don't like trading back to fill the top need at better value when there is a BPA sitting there at a different position of need though. I tend to place more of a premium on high end talent, and so I'd rather we just take the best guy we can when he's there. If we have several players rated similarly, then sure, trade back to pick up extra picks. However, I don't like the idea of passing up a clear BPA at a position we could use, because we'd rather try to move back for a different position. I get why you would maybe want to do that, but it just isn't how I would do things.

Unnecessarily snarky.

I probably could have worded that more diplomatically.

I absolutely think we need to add 1st-round talent to the front 7. But I don't think one pick is sufficient, to stock up the defense.

This is probably a big part of where we disagree, and I think it's bleeding into the original discussion of an outside guy vs. a slot guy...

The way I tend to approach the draft, as a fan, is I identify positions of immediate team need, and positions of future team need for the next season. Then, from those positions, I decide what I would ideally like to see the team come out of the draft with (e.g., 1 WR, 2 ILB, 1 EDGE, 1 DL, 1 IOL, 1 Returner, etc.) From those positions, I don't particularly care what rounds the players are selected in all that much. I just hope we go BPA out of positions of need along the way. I do look at the board to try to identify the sweet spots in the draft for each position, but ultimately I'm okay with taking any of the need positions at any point as long as it's BPA during the pick. So, I don't think we absolutely need to add a 1st-round talent to the front 7, per se. I'm okay with it, but I'd be okay with taking those 4-5 guys later on throughout the draft.

I think this area of disagreement might be bleeding into the outside vs slot conversation I was focused on having, because maybe you feel like a slot type would be easier to find later on in the mid to late rounds, but a quality outside prospect probably needs to be taken in round 1 or 2. So, maybe that's why you'd rather see us go for a slot guy?

That overstates it – which may be my fault more than yours. I am in the way WAY way early stages of draft season, the stage where I fall in love with a different prospect every 3 or 4 days.

Coming off the season, I was dead-sure that what we needed to add at WR was a quick-twitch guy whose best fit might be in the slot but who could double-up as a return-man. Kill multiple birds with one pick: reinvigorate our return games, and add a situational playmaker.

Then a couple days ago I found myself swooning over Denzel Mims. This is the guy we REALLY need! Posted something about him.

There will be several more radical shifts in direction from me, over the next 60 days. This guy! No, THIS guy!

I have a strong lean that a player who can bring danger to our return game, even if he only plays on offense in 3-wide formations, would be of greater immediate benefit to the team as a whole, than a guy who "merely" replaces Boykin on offense without adding much value on spec teams. In this I'm influenced some by looking at who the Chiefs have drafted over the years at WR...

Julio or DeAndre or AJ Green aren't falling into our laps. So make the corps that you need, by drafting for traits and letting your MVP QB and your unique offensive environment mold them. Marquise & Boykin are poster boys for drafting that way (despite the round Marquise was taken in). And Harbs evidently worked his ass off to get Culley in-house, which is another argument for drafting that way.

You can name plenty of different strategies for finding weapons in the draft. The Chiefs take a plethora of skill positions in the mid to late rounds hoping they hit on some. Another strategy is to identify guys early on in the draft, the way a team like the Steelers has been successful with. I don't particularly care one way or the other. Like I said, I just look at the draft holistically for the most part. I do place a bit of a premium on "premium"positions, and a discount on lesser value positions like IOL, ILB, RB, & TE. Yet, even then I'm okay with taking those positions early when talent demands.

One key thing to keep in mind here with this draft though is, a Julio/DeAndre/Green type could very well "fall into our laps" at/around 28. There are about 6 guys I think have good potential to be real number 1 weapons. It's rare to have a shot at that type of WR at the end of round 1 in most drafts, but this year there's a good chance. Then again, there is tremendous depth to this class as well. So, it's not the end of the world if we miss out on those top 2 tiers of round 1 grade WR either.

I doubt you have a grasp on my "stance"...

What you just articulated here is reasonable overall. Previously, it just seemed like you were very much against adding an outside type of receiver over a slot type, and that's really the only thing I wanted to discuss. If the board falls in a way where we might decide to double-dip on WR, then sure, let's bring in a slot type to develop behind Snead for a year. However, if we only bring in one guy, I hope it's not someone that's only going to eventually replace Snead's 2 or 3 targets when there are so many outside WR weapons in this class that could help completely transform our offense for the better.

Also, let's not overlook versatility here either. Some of the top WR's in this class could play outside, in the slot, and even potentially return kicks. Also, both Boykin & Hollywood could kick inside at times moving forward too.

[JimZipCode]

I get that the best ability is availability, so I kind aget it. But based purely on football skill, Brown showed significantly, and I mean significantly, more polish than Boykin did.

I don't dispute that.

I notice from your OL breakdowns that you place a very high value on "polish". And comparatively less value on "upside". It's a reasonable viewpoint; but it's certainly not the only way to look at a young player.

That said, you could make an argument he was coached to go down at the contact point, which is relevant.

On his college tape he went down at first contact, not necessarily because he'd been coached to, but just because of his stature.

[JimZipCode]

Personally, I don't like trading back to fill the top need at better value when there is a BPA sitting there at a different position of need though. I tend to place more of a premium on high end talent, and so I'd rather we just take the best guy we can when he's there. If we have several players rated similarly, then sure, trade back to pick up extra picks. However, I don't like the idea of passing up a clear BPA at a position we could us

Same. I'd only advocate that trade-back tactic when we have an "emergency" -type hole on the roster. We've come into way too damn many drafts recently, with just such a hole (TE, WR, etc). Would be nice to get back to being able to go BPA.

This draft might be another of those "emergency" situations. Our need on the D-front is pretty dire.

One key thing to keep in mind here with this draft though is, a Julio/DeAndre/Green type could very well "fall into our laps" at/around 28. There are about 6 guys I think have good potential to be real number 1 weapons.

See, I don't think WR6 in this draft is going to be Julio/DeAndre/Green. Maybe WR4 is.

Also, let's not overlook versatility here either. Some of the top WR's in this class could play outside, in the slot, and even potentially return kicks. Also, both Boykin & Hollywood could kick inside at times moving forward too.

Oh sure. Marquise can absolutely play some in the slot. Boykin's 3-cone score would suggest he could too, though he has some work to do.

[GreatWhiteNorthRaven]

I don't dispute that.

I notice from your OL breakdowns that you place a very high value on "polish". And comparatively less value on "upside". It's a reasonable viewpoint; but it's certainly not the only way to look at a young player.

I was very disappointed with his routes vis-a-vis his usage. I think his best upside in the NFL is going to be as a big slot.

[BearArms]

I think we need to discuss what type of receiver to draft and whether it's more important than front 7 in the first round.

There hasn't been enough debate on this