Assorted 2021 NFL Mock Drafts

[loyaljetsfan]

yeah probably.

I prefer a QB at #2, or like Mack suggested "a trade back". 

I'm also in agreement in your thinking that having to pay for 2 elite tackles will come back to haunt us down the line.

What do you mean pay for 2? Sewell is going to eventually replace Becton, bc we all know that this franchise doesn't know how to retain high draft picks.

[loyaljetsfan]

https://twitter.com/GetUpESPN/status/1346502328438951937?s=20

Kiper's Hot Take: Trade down to 5 so Cincy can take Sewell or just take Sewell at #2

[MBGreen]

What do you mean pay for 2? Sewell is going to eventually replace Becton, bc we all know that this franchise doesn't know how to retain high draft picks.

this is the season for optimism, dude. 

[Johnny English]

I'm also in agreement in your thinking that having to pay for 2 elite tackles will come back to haunt us down the line.

I don't really like this argument, because paying players well because they're performing to an elite standard sounds like a freaking excellent problem to have and I would love nothing more than to be wringing our hands over which of our elite players we have to trade because we have too many of them. The problem isn't paying elite players, it's that we've been paying too much to excrement ones.

[MBGreen]

I don't really like this argument, because paying players well because they're performing to an elite standard sounds like a freaking excellent problem to have and I would love nothing more than to be wringing our hands over which of our elite players we have to trade because we have too many of them. The problem isn't paying elite players, it's that we've been paying too much to excrement ones.

Which one are you going to put at LT, and which one at RT?


keep in mind LTs make more than RTs do....there's a 5 mil guaranteed per year difference between the highest paid LT and the highest paid RT.  So you're essentially asking Sewell or Becton (two elite LT prospects) to change positions, and then take a paycut.

[Heismanberg]

Which one are you going to put at LT, and which one at RT?

Becton should stay at LT because he is the tenured player.

[MBGreen]

Becton should stay at LT because he is the tenured player.

I agree.

I'm just saying drafting Sewell at 2 and then putting him at RT for the long term doesn't make a lot of sense.  It's great depth to have if Becton ever gets hurt, but we have too many holes to draft for luxury. Plus we have a fat question mark at QB.

[Heismanberg]

I agree.

I'm just saying drafting Sewell at 2 and then putting him at RT for the long term doesn't make a lot of sense.  It's great depth to have if Becton ever gets hurt, but we have too many holes to draft for luxury. Plus we have a fat question mark at QB.

Hard to predict the draft before free agency

[MBGreen]

Hard to predict the draft before free agency

Yes

Plus not having a HC yet makes it difficult to speculate on scheme fit too.

[Jumbo]

Looking more like the optimal move is trading down, but have to see how the QB moves go down first most likely.

[Libero_2]

Becton should stay at LT because he is the tenured player.

I disagree. Tenure shouldn’t matter one bit, otherwise Frank Gore should be our starter at RB next year.

If we draft Sewell (or any other OT prospect) it’s a competition, best player wins loser shifts to the right side. I expect Becton to win, but I’m going to make him prove it in that scenario. If he does excellent, it plays out as I thought. If he loses then the better player is protecting the blindside.

How on Earth is that a bad thing?

As for paying guys, that’s a 4 years from now problem, and one we haven’t had in nearly a decade. There’s also no guarantee both continue to play at an elite level. There’s also the chance of you draft Liam Eichenberg (or whomever) at 27 with the Seattle Pick and they become the best OT in the class and you have to worry about paying that guy too.

Draft the best players period.

[Johnny English]

I agree.

I'm just saying drafting Sewell at 2 and then putting him at RT for the long term doesn't make a lot of sense.  It's great depth to have if Becton ever gets hurt, but we have too many holes to draft for luxury. Plus we have a fat question mark at QB.

I do agree that the problem you have is that if you draft Sewell and play him at RT, then in two years' time you have to pay Becton as the elite LT he's become, then a year later you have to pay Sewell as the elite LT he could get paid as elsewhere versus the elite RT he is with us. That said, top RTs don't get paid that much less these days, it's just a bigger drop off after the first few.

Again, given the excrement we've had to eat for most of the last decade this really doesn't sound like the worst problem in the world to have to worry about.

[Derek Smalls]

I disagree. Tenure shouldn’t matter one bit, otherwise Frank Gore should be our starter at RB next year.

If we draft Sewell (or any other OT prospect) it’s a competition, best player wins loser shifts to the right side. I expect Becton to win, but I’m going to make him prove it in that scenario. If he does excellent, it plays out as I thought. If he loses then the better player is protecting the blindside.

How on Earth is that a bad thing?

As for paying guys, that’s a 4 years from now problem, and one we haven’t had in nearly a decade. There’s also no guarantee both continue to play at an elite level. There’s also the chance of you draft Liam Eichenberg (or whomever) at 27 with the Seattle Pick and they become the best OT in the class and you have to worry about paying that guy too.

Draft the best players period.

I agree. Becton was very good for a rookie this year, but I don't think he was so good where he can't be moved to LT just because he's one year older. If Sewell is a better fit at LT and Becton works equally well on both sides, do what's best for the team. Of course, if Becton thinks it's a demotion to be moved to the right side and clearly doesn't want to do it, then we don't really want to pee him off.

I don't care if we have to pay 2 elite OT. One elite OL doesn't make an offensive line. I think you want at least 2 studs up front ideally, and we would have that. We can go cheaper on the interior line once they get paid. It's not like paying 2 elite safeties.

But if Fields and/or Wilson are viewed as elite QB prospects by the NFL, we should either take them, or use the #2 pick to trade down to someone who will take them. We have a ton of needs to fill, and if we maintain that flexibility, we could also use those draft picks to make a big trade for someone down the line.

It's possible the media is higher on Fields/Wilson than NFL teams, and my scenario isn't realistic. But if those guys are franchise QBs, we should either take them or trade down and get the value of a franchise QB. Taking a right tackle at 2 is not the best use of that asset.

I felt the same way 2 years ago with Quinnen. The difference is that year, a trade down wasn't really realistic since there weren't QBs to trade up for. This year, there are.

[Derek Smalls]

Trading down also could give us extra assets in 2022 if the Texans hold on to Watson through the draft.

[Libero_2]

Trading down also could give us extra assets in 2022 if the Texans hold on to Watson through the draft.

If they don’t trade him prior to the draft, he won’t be “up for auction” until at least next offseason, and we can’t plan on that. That #2 pick needs to get us a QB for next year. Whether that’s Watson, Wilson or a ton of assets for Sam we need to use it to aid us