2021 NFL Draft Day!!

[Defensewins]

TE John Bates being reviewed by Zach Ertz
John shows to be a good blocker and a decent receiver. Not as slow as his 40 time implies.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bqh4MDvJAq8

[Scalper]

4th round
124 overall
John Bates - TE - D grade

Bates is a Y tight end, meaning he is a balanced or inline tight end. In English, a blocker. If you aren't an athletic receiver, you are a Y tight end, LOL. All teams need a Y tight end for running, goal line, etc. situations. Bates has size, is an accomplished blocker, and serviceable WR, though no one will ever mistake him for the type of receiving threat that teams covet.

This is a need pick. There were much more athletic and proven players at several positions if you went BPA. You don't have to draft a player like this in 4th round. You can get one in 6th or 7th or as UDFA. Most pundits had Bates rated 6th to UDFA.

The value of a block-first TE is not to be underestimated, however, amid all the obsession with pass catching TEs. It is difficult to have the weight to take on 260-290# DLs when you are as light as most receiver TEs, and the Y tight end is often a fundamentally different body type and a strength more than fast twitch athlete. Maybe he has upside as a receiver, but this is a major reach by pigeonholing need rather than going BPA. I don't give this an F grade solely because Bates is a VERY good blocker.

[Scalper]

5th round
163 overall
Darrick Forrest - Safety - C grade

This continues the obvious strategy of the FO of going down the laundry list of needs and drafting a player for that need, rather than focusing more purely on BPA. LB. Check. LT. Check. Third CB. Check. Etc. Safety. Check.

You aren't going to get totally complete player at this point in draft. Forrest has some track-type speed, but it often doesn't translate into real world production on tape. He seems more like a balanced safety, not a pure FS. At best he is a backup FS, if you need a center fielder or two deep guy. He has produced and has good instincts, but looks slower than you want when asked to cover distance and close range--perhaps the most important attribute of an NFL FS. He made some good plays in college, but also got torched a bit, which will worsen in NFL against more consistent speed and athleticism.

A C grade is probably too generous. This guy will make some good plays and look competent as FS, but then get torched deep and give up big plays because he lacks elite speed and is a bit tight hipped. He also misses tackles at times. If you love drafting for need, you might give this pick a B, thin class of FS in FA, and even worse draft for position, and also thin next year in draft, so you NEED to draft a S somewhere, right? The right move would have been not to reach at FS and to take a G or RB or other position, BPA, and sign Boston or whoever.

This pick and previous pick demonstrate why coaches should not be GMs. They emphasize short term need at the expense of maximizing long-term talent acquisition by drafting BPA.

[Scalper]

6th round
225 overall
Camaron Cheeseman - LS - F grade

We now know that Washington could have traded down with its higher 3rd round pick spent on St-Juste and that a team wanted to trade up for him. We should have taken that trade. Again, more picks better given historical 50% whiff rate of even good GMs.

In not trading down, given that FO is filling every need and shunning BPA, you then don't have enough picks to fill all needs so you trade next years 5th for a 6th and 7th this year. A higher pick for lower picks not worth nearly as much FROM A LONG TERM PERSPECTIVE. I favor trading down, but also getting good value when doing so, and this was not good value. In English, this is called mortgaging the future, and even in later rounds, it is a horrible practice from a long-term perspective, especially if you are not a SB contender. Cascading errors, not trading down 3rd round, necessitated this trade with our need-focused FO. Think Smith makes horrible picks and decisions like this if he's GM? Not a chance.

And what did we mortgage the future for? A long snapper, with some consistency issues. The FO will argue he'll play 10 years and fill a long term need, but there were at least 2 other LSers just as good, and which many rated higher, that went undrafted you could have signed off the street. Every team in college football has a LS. There are hundreds, a good FO can find one without spending draft picks. This is an F grade, even if Cheeseman becomes the best LS in NFL history and goes to the HOF as a long snapper. LS is the lowest leverage position on whole team, playing less than 10 snaps a game on average. When you combine the mortgaging future with the horrible use of picks we mortgaged for, this is an easy F grade.

[Scalper]

7th round
240 overall
Will Bradley-King - Tweener Pass Rusher - C+ grade

You don't get superstuds in the 7th round, BK is an average maybe slightly-above-average athlete who gets by on hustle and some strength, and also good instincts enhanced by film study. He has some power as a rusher, and some athleticism, but is not an elite edge rusher with bend and devastating speed. He is high floor low ceiling guy. You could argue it either way, this is the type of guy more apt to make the roster, or maybe you should roll the dice on a guy that has more natural talent but severe flaws and may not make the team. Some see him as having more athletic potential, FO must, let's hope they are right.

He played in a 3-4 and goes 6'4" 250. We run a 4-3, though obviously in this day and age, teams shift a lot. BK is too light for 4-3 DE, and perhaps too big and slow for LB. What the FO is thinking is anyone's guess? An absolute beast SLB? A tiny situational DE? Rusher from more 3-4 sets? They see some pass rush potential in him obviously. I would give it a B if he weren't a tweener who played in a different scheme. Does he get slower bulked up? You can't have too many pass rushers, if Young or Sweat goes down, depth limited, at third most important position, so getting some depth to develop smart, and to perhaps spell them in games. FO sees upside here, Kerrigan replacement, but why not draft non-tweener? Anyhoo, Kerrigan produced solid a long time without being some elite fast twitch athlete, that may be an analogue for this pick.

Some projected BK as high as 5th or 6th round, so in theory good value--if you run a 3-4 D. A B grade might not be preposterous here, but sticking with C+ again because of Tweener-ness and scheme.

[Scalper]

7th round
246 overall
Shaka Toney - Tweener Pass Rusher - B grade

He'd win the coolest name award of our draft class if we hadn't taken Cheeseman. More the type of player you like to see a team take a flyer on in 7th. He is athletic, with natural speed and bend. He is another tweener, however, ideal fit for 3-4 OLB, but not sure what you do with him in 4-3. He's 6'2" and 242. Too small framed and light for DE. If he adds 20 lbs, does he lose speed, and does it even matter because he's still awfully short. Can he play WLB? SLB? On passing downs on the edge where none of that matters and he just rushes?

He also lacks toughness and strength, but both those can be developed, the latter especially. He is a gifted pass rusher, but is soft against run and tough blockers = not a 3 down LB or DE at this point. He really struggles against mauler edge OL at times, a problem which could get worse in NFL. Coaches can hopefully work on these things. Not absurd to think he could develop into a solid rotational backup at minimum, but B not B+ because of tweener status. Not sure why we keep drafting guys that seem more of a fit for scheme we just abandoned, but it is the 7th round, Reggie White isn't sitting there, very athletic player many had graded as 5th or 6th rounder.

[GridIron26]

Originally Posted by Scalper

6th round

225 overall

Camaron Cheeseman - LS - F grade



We now know that Washington could have traded down with its higher 3rd round pick spent on St-Juste and that a team wanted to trade up for him. We should have taken that trade. Again, more picks better given historical 50% whiff rate of even good GMs.



In not trading down, given that FO is filling every need and shunning BPA, you then don't have enough picks to fill all needs so you trade next years 5th for a 6th and 7th this year. A higher pick for lower picks not worth nearly as much FROM A LONG TERM PERSPECTIVE. I favor trading down, but also getting good value when doing so, and this was not good value. In English, this is called mortgaging the future, and even in later rounds, it is a horrible practice from a long-term perspective, especially if you are not a SB contender. Cascading errors, not trading down 3rd round, necessitated this trade with our need-focused FO. Think Smith makes horrible picks and decisions like this if he's GM? Not a chance.



And what did we mortgage the future for? A long snapper, with some consistency issues. The FO will argue he'll play 10 years and fill a long term need, but there were at least 2 other LSers just as good, and which many rated higher, that went undrafted you could have signed off the street. Every team in college football has a LS. There are hundreds, a good FO can find one without spending draft picks. This is an F grade, even if Cheeseman becomes the best LS in NFL history and goes to the HOF as a long snapper. LS is the lowest leverage position on whole team, playing less than 10 snaps a game on average. When you combine the mortgaging future with the horrible use of picks we mortgaged for, this is an easy F grade.

Per Keim, Cheeseman was one of the best LS in NCAA. Granted, I didn't expect us to spend a pick on LS but since it's only 6th round pick so it's a small price to pay to ensure we don't have issues with LS this season. If we have trouble with LS, it can cost us games.

[MissouriSkin]

Originally Posted by GridIron26

Per Keim, Cheeseman was one of the best LS in NCAA. Granted, I didn't expect us to spend a pick on LS but since it's only 6th round pick so it's a small price to pay to ensure we don't have issues with LS this season. If we have trouble with LS, it can cost us games.

People are literally looking for ways to be unhappy if they put in time to research how a sixth round pick sucks and is going to ruin the franchise. I would suggest they find another team or at least find another board to post their over the top ramblings on.

[BaltimoreSkins]

Originally Posted by GridIron26

Per Keim, Cheeseman was one of the best LS in NCAA. Granted, I didn't expect us to spend a pick on LS but since it's only 6th round pick so it's a small price to pay to ensure we don't have issues with LS this season. If we have trouble with LS, it can cost us games.

Let’s put it this way we use a late round pick which historically don’t contribute right away and ensure we have a long snapper or we gamble that we can sign a quality rookie LS undrafted. It is a conservative move that ensures we get production out of a late round pick.

[Scalper]

Originally Posted by GridIron26

Per Keim, Cheeseman was one of the best LS in NCAA. Granted, I didn't expect us to spend a pick on LS but since it's only 6th round pick so it's a small price to pay to ensure we don't have issues with LS this season. If we have trouble with LS, it can cost us games.

One of the best is correct.
And at least 2 of the other best could have been signed off the street without spending a draft pick and without mortgaging the future.
You can get a LS that doesn't cost games without trading future picks and drafting one.

[KI Skins Fan]

I think I'll wait to see the players we drafted perform before I get upset about how they were drafted; nevertheless, it's nice to see the insights of someone who is so into the WFT and football.

During the draft, I got the feeling that the WFT executives were drafting based on a blend of BPA and need, using their own criteria to determine the BPA.

For example, good character and work ethic is a must for RR. What good does it do a team to draft players like Ryan Leaf, Aldon Smith, and Randy Gregory? They won't be playing on Sundays for long due to suspension for off the field issues. We also know that RR & Co. may value position flexibility and speed more than some other organizations. So, yes, they did draft for need this time around but I hardly think it was a binary choice between need and BPA.

[EdmundDorf]

Did feel like a bit of a box ticking exercise at times, that is maybe Martin Mayhews influence, there is such a thing as being too conservative. We will have to wait and see for the results

[MissouriSkin]

Originally Posted by EdmundDorf

Did feel like a bit of a box ticking exercise at times, that is maybe Martin Mayhews influence, there is such a thing as being too conservative. We will have to wait and see for the results

I would say the plan is to establish a more solid base before you take bigger risks. I think that is a wise approach. Say the team does well this year, and we have a solid base of younger players....then next year you maybe take a bigger risk to say get a QB. It’s easier to do when you have less holes to fill. Then that gives your new young QB a better team around him, which makes him better from the start. Conversely if we struggle this year, then it’s not a bad thing that we didn’t trade away a ton of high picks for a QB, and we have those picks to fill out the roster more.

[EdmundDorf]

I was not and would not advocate for trading the farm for a QB at this point. I am a believer in building the core up before dropping a rookie QB into the middle of it and expecting him to win. That I think is why so many highly drafted QBs fail. But a blocking TE, and a LS along with the trade of next years 5th for a very low 6th and a 7th seems like they were trying to fill needs in an area of the draft when BPA becomes more important

[MissouriSkin]

Originally Posted by EdmundDorf

I was not and would not advocate for trading the farm for a QB at this point. I am a believer in building the core up before dropping a rookie QB into the middle of it and expecting him to win. That I think is why so many highly drafted QBs fail. But a blocking TE, and a LS along with the trade of next years 5th for a very low 6th and a 7th seems like they were trying to fill needs in an area of the draft when BPA becomes more important

Well I feel BPA is overrated. If the BPA is in an area that you already have enough players at, then there is no sense drafting him. I think they did what is best, which is take the best available at a position of need and see what happens. To me, by that point in the draft you’re mostly just throwing darts at the dart board anyway. I mean, in round 6 if the guy was really good, he’d have already been taken. So in my mind, why not err on the side of the mix of BPA and need as opposed to just straight BPA. But I’m just a fan so I readily admit I don’t know anything. 🙂