Having a very difficult time with this new pick....

[Rey]

If the Eagles want Ramsey they are going to have to trade up to get him ... guys like that don't drop past the first 5 picks. That's like passing 7 times on a Patrick Peterson. I think the lowest he goes is to Dallas at 4.

How I see it if Cleveland trades for Kaepernick. Without predicting trades.

1.Tenn - Tunsil
2.Clev - Ramsey
3.SD - Buckner
4.Dallas - Bosa
5.Jags - Jack
6.Bmore - Stanley
7.SF - Wentz
8.Philly - ???

*** I think our question will be ... do we take Goff, do we trade back, or do we do neither and pick someone else?

Now, if we are predicting trades, I predict that the Ravens are the first team to trade back ... and if they do it will be with a team like the Rams who will take QB.

Revised with trade:

1.Tenn - Tunsil
2.Clev - Ramsey
3.SD - Buckner
4.Dallas - Bosa
5.Jags - Jack
6.Rams (via trade) - Wentz
7.SF - Goff
8.Philly - ???

*** 2nd question: Do we take OT Stanley at 8 in that scenario?

 

[old duke]

If the Eagles want Ramsey they are going to have to trade up to get him ... guys like that don't drop past the first 5 picks. That's like passing 7 times on a Patrick Peterson. I think the lowest he goes is to Dallas at 4.

How I see it if Cleveland trades for Kaepernick. Without predicting trades.

1.Tenn - Tunsil
2.Clev - Ramsey
3.SD - Buckner
4.Dallas - Bosa
5.Jags - Jack
6.Bmore - Stanley
7.SF - Wentz
8.Philly - ???

*** I think our question will be ... do we take Goff, do we trade back, or do we do neither and pick someone else?

Now, if we are predicting trades, I predict that the Ravens are the first team to trade back ... and if they do it will be with a team like the Rams who will take QB.

Revised with trade:

1.Tenn - Tunsil
2.Clev - Ramsey
3.SD - Buckner
4.Dallas - Bosa
5.Jags - Jack
6.Rams (via trade) - Wentz
7.SF - Goff
8.Philly - ???

*** 2nd question: Do we take OT Stanley at 8 in that scenario?

Yes, I would take Stanley. If those guys are gone, I take Stanley, if he's gone, then probably Hargreaves.

 

[WIZ]

Eli Apple becoming second favorite on many boards.

 

[SoShady]

I would go with Stanley in that scenario. I think best case would be if the Browns get Kaepernick. Then a good chance one of the two QB's drops to 8. Then we can trade down recouping our 2nd round pick with the team who wants a QB.

 

[Rey]

Yes, I would take Stanley. If those guys are gone, I take Stanley, if he's gone, then probably Hargreaves.

Here's the thing with Stanley though ... I don't see him as a very good fit at Guard (which he would have to play for at least 1 year). Anchoring and run blocking is not his forte; he's a guy born to play LT and pass protect. Plus we just paid Lane Johnson LT type money expecting him to move to LT as early as 2017. I think if Stanley is sitting there at 8 and someone wants to move up to grab him, I make the trade.

 

[WIZ]

RT is becoming as important as LT. Lane can stay at RT for all I care.

 

[Rey]

RT is becoming as important as LT. Lane can stay at RT for all I care.

True, plus it's not like Stanley's going to be making LT type money anyhoo till his rookie contract is over.

 

[Iggloo]

Can you imagine a 4-3 D line of Curry, Cox, Logan and Bosa, with Graham and Barwin as third down pass rushers?

 

[old duke]

I play Stanley at LG for a year, and then part ways with Peters, I then move Lane to LT, as he has been awarded that position. there is nothing wrong with Stanley playing RT, either way, both are interchangeable, I believe. Stanley can play Guard for a year, he is that good. He's not a Brandon Brooks type mauler, but is talented and strong enough. I know, I've said before that he is soft, but like a politician, I've come around on him, especially when scouts have pointed out his long arms, and is probably the best technician out there.

 

[DJ Fieri]

Goff would be my guess.....just not sure if he fits what the new coach is looking for.

 

[Rey]

If we were to get Stanley I would keep him at LT (after Peters moves on) and keep Lane at RT. Lane already has the footwork down at RT and Stanley at LT ... no reason to have them go through another adjustment period. If we have Stanley playing LG year one he would still use the same footwork he does now at LT.

 

[Wings]

I can't see the Chargers and the Ravens both passing on a STUD LT.

 

[Screamin Eagle]

The Eagles could still trade back....that is their history.

I keep hearing E. Elliot and I am OK with that but if someone falls like Stanley or Goff or Jack then...........??????

 

[Deano]

Is Stanley that much better than say Conklin? What if we have a chance to trade back, still get a stud OL and pickup a #2?

 

[old duke]

I take Howie's word that he wants one of the elite top 10 players.

 

[Wings]

Is Stanley that much better than say Conklin? What if we have a chance to trade back, still get a stud OL and pickup a #2?

Deano - Stanley is a STUD LT.....Conklin is a guard/RT....huge difference. Conklin probably gets drafted 15-22

 

[Wings]

I think Jack could easily fall depending what JAX does.

 

[Rey]

Is Stanley that much better than say Conklin? What if we have a chance to trade back, still get a stud OL and pickup a #2?

Stanley has more agility and better footwork to handle pro speed rushers. Conk is a throwback mauler type who relies more on leverage and tenacity ... I don't see Conk being a fit as a blind side protector, but imo he'll be a better run blocker than Stanley. So it's all in what you are looking for.

 

[Doc Green]

I don't like Treadwall that high. All I watch is SEC (being a Bama fan) and he is not very impressive.

For those that want to trade down...Ourlads' NFL Draft Value Chart
8 + our 4th = 15 + 47 (St Louis, who needs a QB)
8 = 16 + 48

At 8, I think about...(assuming that Tunsil, Bosa, Ramsey are definite NOs)
Jack
Wentz
Stanley
Elliot, maybe

Otherwise, trade down, take Conklin, and pick up a 2nd, where we can get Boyd, Coleman (maybe) and Dixon or Henry.

 

[Doc Green]

Trade down for a 1 and a 2. Get an OL like Conklin, Decker or even Whitehair. Use the #2 on Henry.

Yep.