2024 NFL Draft - five picks in the first three rounds (seven in four! [probably])

[Matches Malone]

The draft really needs to move up a couple weeks.

[Kerb Hohl]

There is zero chance teams think there are 50 pro bowlers in this draft. There is a large difference between drafting a dud and a pro bowler. We know most teams have about 15-20 players with 1st round grades in a given year. I'd venture to guess those are the guys that team thinks will be a Pro bowler. After those 15-20 players teams are just hoping to grab guys who can be starters.

I think we're talking about the archetype of player in their best-case scenario. It's kind of odd that people take issue with this.

A fan that has not eaten weeks of tape might understand the connection of Bo Nix to Dak Prescott and the characteristics he has/that make him good. They may not be able to make such a connection to Jake Locker or even know who he is. This is fine.

It's completely reasonable to infer upside of a player to a good/great NFL player than to come out in a comparison article and call your shot that the guy is Josh Rosen. If you're doing this, that means you are adding your own analysis to the article by actually saying various guys will suck or tiering them by comparisons vs. just giving an archetype and what they may look like if they are good NFL players.

There isn't a need to push up the nerd glasses and note that 90+% of these guys won't reach that level. Everybody gets that.

If Farrar(or any draft analyst, I don't mean to pick on just him) had said this was each prospects best case scenario then that's fair, I'd love for analysts to do a best case/worst case/middle case scenario. Frankly I don't think analysts talk about bust potential on top prospects enough. We know every draft has them so I think trying to find out which players have the highest bust potential is relevant. But when analysts only project to best case scenario then the exercise is flawed from the start.

I'll simplify further for you:

If there's a QB in the 1st round that is 5'10" but lightning quick with good accuracy in a spread offense, it's really easy to just say, "Russell Wilson" or "Kyler Murray" - it's really easy for a fan to picture this. That's it. If you give a few sentences or a paragraph describing the player, we've already read such things and there is a lot more to it then.

It's a simple article for a fan to picture what an NFL player's traits are.

Again - if you get into it and you say that MHJ is Larry Fitzgerald but you compare Nabers to Laquon Treadwell, you're doing something completely different than the simple, very useful act of giving an association for the fan to imagine what sort of player they are getting.

[ReasonablySober]

I think what Foxworth has been saying with regards to the draft has been instructive. This is a former player, a pretty good one, who played with legends like Champ Bailey, Ed Reed, and Ray Lewis. He's also been president of the Players Union and has now been an analyst on ESPN for a few years. He's incredibly smart and he obviously knows his NFL.

His big thing is about how situation effects how successful quarterbacks turn out to be. That everyone who's drafted into the NFL has the traits needed to play, but where you end up is the biggest factor in whether you succeed or not. The best QBs typically land in great situations, and the bad ones land in terrible situations.

I think you can expand on that to some degree with all players. I look at Kyle Pitts. Superhuman traits. Megatron like upside. Had he landed on a team with a good offensive coordinator and good quarterback play, he could be owning the league right now. Instead, his first three years in the NFL have been completely wasted.

So when we acknowledge that most players taken won't reach their high end potential, I think we have to remember that most guys don't have Kyle Shanahan, Andy Reid, or Bill Belichick as their coach. A lot of guys are playing in systems that suck, with players around them that are terrible, with coaches who don't know what their doing.

[MVP2110]

I think we're talking about the archetype of player in their best-case scenario. It's kind of odd that people take issue with this.

A fan that has not eaten weeks of tape might understand the connection of Bo Nix to Dak Prescott and the characteristics he has/that make him good. They may not be able to make such a connection to Jake Locker or even know who he is. This is fine.

It's completely reasonable to infer upside of a player to a good/great NFL player than to come out in a comparison article and call your shot that the guy is Josh Rosen. If you're doing this, that means you are adding your own analysis to the article by actually saying various guys will suck or tiering them by comparisons vs. just giving an archetype and what they may look like if they are good NFL players.

There isn't a need to push up the nerd glasses and note that 90+% of these guys won't reach that level. Everybody gets that.

If Farrar(or any draft analyst, I don't mean to pick on just him) had said this was each prospects best case scenario then that's fair, I'd love for analysts to do a best case/worst case/middle case scenario. Frankly I don't think analysts talk about bust potential on top prospects enough. We know every draft has them so I think trying to find out which players have the highest bust potential is relevant. But when analysts only project to best case scenario then the exercise is flawed from the start.

I'll simplify further for you:

If there's a QB in the 1st round that is 5'10" but lightning quick with good accuracy in a spread offense, it's really easy to just say, "Russell Wilson" or "Kyler Murray" - it's really easy for a fan to picture this. That's it. If you give a few sentences or a paragraph describing the player, we've already read such things and there is a lot more to it then.

It's a simple article for a fan to picture what an NFL player's traits are.

Again - if you get into it and you say that MHJ is Larry Fitzgerald but you compare Nabers to Laquon Treadwell, you're doing something completely different than the simple, very useful act of giving an association for the fan to imagine what sort of player they are getting.

That's exactly my point. It seems inherently flawed to me to compare every short & quick QB to Kyler Murray or Russell Wilson. It'd be much more helpful for example when Bryce Young came out last year to show his ceiling at those players, his middle ground to someone like Doug Flutie, and his floor as someone like Johnny Manziel. Let's be real, most fans when they see comparisons pop up on draft night they are expecting a career similar to that player as opposed to just playing style.

Remember when Chauncey Billups compared every NBA Draft prospect to an all star or Hall of Famer on draft night and got ripped for it? Farrar did something very similar here.

[Kerb Hohl]

If Farrar(or any draft analyst, I don't mean to pick on just him) had said this was each prospects best case scenario then that's fair, I'd love for analysts to do a best case/worst case/middle case scenario. Frankly I don't think analysts talk about bust potential on top prospects enough. We know every draft has them so I think trying to find out which players have the highest bust potential is relevant. But when analysts only project to best case scenario then the exercise is flawed from the start.

I'll simplify further for you:

If there's a QB in the 1st round that is 5'10" but lightning quick with good accuracy in a spread offense, it's really easy to just say, "Russell Wilson" or "Kyler Murray" - it's really easy for a fan to picture this. That's it. If you give a few sentences or a paragraph describing the player, we've already read such things and there is a lot more to it then.

It's a simple article for a fan to picture what an NFL player's traits are.

Again - if you get into it and you say that MHJ is Larry Fitzgerald but you compare Nabers to Laquon Treadwell, you're doing something completely different than the simple, very useful act of giving an association for the fan to imagine what sort of player they are getting.

That's exactly my point. It seems inherently flawed to me to compare every short & quick QB to Kyler Murray or Russell Wilson. It'd be much more helpful for example when Bryce Young came out last year to show his ceiling at those players, his middle ground to someone like Doug Flutie, and his floor as someone like Johnny Manziel. Let's be real, most fans when they see comparisons pop up on draft night they are expecting a career similar to that player as opposed to just playing style.

Remember when Chauncey Billups compared every NBA Draft prospect to an all star or Hall of Famer on draft night and got ripped for it? Farrar did something very similar here.

If fans really think all of these guys will be as good as the compared players - **** 'em, they have no idea. They all probably want the Packers to trade their entire draft for Stephon Diggs or something as well.

[ReasonablySober]

Barnwell had a fun article today. Did a mock with trades at every spot.

He listed two Packers possibilities:

18. Cincinnati Bengals
Packers get: 1-18, 3-97
Bengals get: 1-25, 2-58

The Packers have the youngest roster in football and a problem most teams would love to face: Where do they play their most promising young lineman? Zach Tom won the right tackle job last season and held his own, but ESPN's Rob Demovsky has reported the Packers think Tom can be a Hall of Fame center if moved there.

If the Packers plan on moving Tom to center, they could move up here and grab a tackle ahead of the Rams, Steelers and Dolphins, all of whom could be thinking offensive line help. That move could be for a right tackle, or the Packers could move Rasheed Walker to the right side and install their new rookie on the left side as a long-term replacement for the departed David Bakhtiari.

OR

25. Green Bay Packers
Colts get: 1-25, 2-58
Packers get: 1-15

It must be fun to be GM Brian Gutekunst. In addition to fielding the league's youngest team last season, the Packers have two second-round picks and two third-round picks to go with this selection, leaving them with plenty of flexibility as they approach the draft. There's no obvious weakness they need to address, which leaves them the ability to take the best available player five times in the top 100 picks if so inclined.

I've already talked about the idea of Green Bay moving up for a tackle. Bouncing up to No. 15 would get them ahead of the Jaguars and a handful of other teams in that conversation. The Packers could also hit cornerback with both Jaire Alexander and Eric Stokes battling injuries over the past couple of seasons, which is another position the Jags might consider addressing at No. 17. Gutekunst would still manage to hold onto the second-rounder the Packers received for Aaron Rodgers at No. 41, while the Colts would land another second-round pick for their collection.

I think there's a pretty good chance that Latham, Mims, Barton, and Guyton are all gone by #25, so if they're really into the idea of a first round tackle, trading up could be the move.

[MVP2110]

Read on Twitter

?t=0BdofrUQO-kFeqcWi8Jb5w&s=19

[Matches Malone]

Barnwell had a fun article today. Did a mock with trades at every spot.

He listed two Packers possibilities:

18. Cincinnati Bengals
Packers get: 1-18, 3-97
Bengals get: 1-25, 2-58

The Packers have the youngest roster in football and a problem most teams would love to face: Where do they play their most promising young lineman? Zach Tom won the right tackle job last season and held his own, but ESPN's Rob Demovsky has reported the Packers think Tom can be a Hall of Fame center if moved there.

If the Packers plan on moving Tom to center, they could move up here and grab a tackle ahead of the Rams, Steelers and Dolphins, all of whom could be thinking offensive line help. That move could be for a right tackle, or the Packers could move Rasheed Walker to the right side and install their new rookie on the left side as a long-term replacement for the departed David Bakhtiari.

OR

25. Green Bay Packers
Colts get: 1-25, 2-58
Packers get: 1-15

It must be fun to be GM Brian Gutekunst. In addition to fielding the league's youngest team last season, the Packers have two second-round picks and two third-round picks to go with this selection, leaving them with plenty of flexibility as they approach the draft. There's no obvious weakness they need to address, which leaves them the ability to take the best available player five times in the top 100 picks if so inclined.

I've already talked about the idea of Green Bay moving up for a tackle. Bouncing up to No. 15 would get them ahead of the Jaguars and a handful of other teams in that conversation. The Packers could also hit cornerback with both Jaire Alexander and Eric Stokes battling injuries over the past couple of seasons, which is another position the Jags might consider addressing at No. 17. Gutekunst would still manage to hold onto the second-rounder the Packers received for Aaron Rodgers at No. 41, while the Colts would land another second-round pick for their collection.

I think there's a pretty good chance that Latham, Mims, Barton, and Guyton are all gone by #25, so if they're really into the idea of a first round tackle, trading up could be the move.

I don’t hate that move. Get one of the tackles you like or if DeJean/Mitchell are there, I’d take one of them too.

[jakecronus8]

The more advanced metrics I read the more I'm on board with JPJ in the first. Getting a safe bet 10 year starter at C is good value if he's there for us. Keeps Tom at RT which I'm more than fine with.

[humanrefutation]

I just don't see positional value in taking a center in round 1.

[ReasonablySober]

I just don't see positional value in taking a center in round 1.

I think you can convince me of a C or guard in round one so long as they're the best available OL. My hope is that's how the Packers are thinking. Just put together the five best possible linemen.

[ReasonablySober]

If my goal was building the offensive line, I would probably go with something that looked like this (based on the consensus draft rankings):

LT: Walker
LG: Jenkins
C: Frazier (41)
RG: Tom
RT: Amarius Mims (25)

If you did it based on who visited the Packers, it'd be

LT: Walker
LG: Jenkins
C: Tom
RG: Zinter (91)
RT: Amarius Mims (25)

[Matches Malone]

Read on Twitter

[Ron Swanson]

Just like Safety, I don't think there's enough separating the top-tier guys from the depth of quality prospects that'll be available in the 2nd-3rd round for me to really want to spend a 1st round pick on an interior lineman. Cooper Beebe, Zach Frasier, Van Pran, etc. Just grab one of those guys in Day 2. Or hell, keep him home and just grab Bortolini in Day 3.

[jakecronus8]

I just don't see positional value in taking a center in round 1.

Normally I'd agree but JPJ looks to be about the safest multi time pro bowl talent in the draft. Not sure if Green Bay would see him as BPA when they pick (assuming he even makes it that far) but wouldn't shock me at all and he fits all their metrics.

[MVP2110]

"There were 140 trade-ups for non-quarterbacks in the first three rounds from 2013 to 2022. In terms of total Approximate Value (AV) accumulated through the 2022 season, 85 of those deals were "won" by the trade-down team, 49 were "won" by the trade-up team and six were a tie"

Read on Twitter

?t=pCU31rVkjE_C6oZZke1x2A&s=19

[Frank Nova]

The draft really needs to move up a couple weeks.

Seriously tho, it’s excruciatingly painful to drag it out this far every year. The purgatory period between the combine and actual draft is light years longer than it really needs to be. The whole process is terrible, including the actual draft imo. Crowning all these college kids as future nfl stars and the whole red carpet treatment has been overdone for decades now. Just rip the bandaid off and get this **** over with so teams and especially fans can evaluate the new players where they’re actually going to be playing next year as pros. Such a high % of these college kids end up on practice squads or out of the league before their rookie deals are even up anyhow. But on draft night, they’re all king of kings. It’s ridiculous.

[ReasonablySober]

Chad Reuter on NFL.com did a seven rounder.

Had the Packers dropping down from #25 and picking up SF's 3rd. I love the move, not a fan of the pick.

#31 - Roger Rosengarten - OT (over Mims FFS)
#41 - Trevin Wallace - LB (over Cooper and Wilson, yuck)
#58 - Javon Bullard - S
#88 - Brandon Dorlus - DT
#91 - Nehemiah Pritchett - CB
#94 - Christian Hayes - OG
#126 - Myles Cole - Edge
#169 - Ray Davis - RB
#202 - Jha'Quan Jackson - WR
#219 - Tory Taylor - P
#245 - Drake Nugent - S
#255 - Kedon Slovis - QB

I really, really hate this draft.

[MVP2110]

Chad Reuter on NFL.com did a seven rounder.

Had the Packers dropping down from #25 and picking up SF's 3rd. I love the move, not a fan of the pick.

#31 - Roger Rosengarten - OT (over Mims FFS)
#41 - Trevin Wallace - LB (over Cooper and Wilson, yuck)
#58 - Javon Bullard - S
#88 - Brandon Dorlus - DT
#91 - Nehemiah Pritchett - CB
#94 - Christian Hayes - OG
#126 - Myles Cole - Edge
#169 - Ray Davis - RB
#202 - Jha'Quan Jackson - WR
#219 - Tory Taylor - P
#245 - Drake Nugent - S
#255 - Kedon Slovis - QB

I really, really hate this draft.

That's a really weird draft. I love all 3 of Rosengarten, Wallace, & Bullard. But the Rosengarten & Wallace picks specifically are way above where most projections have them. I'd honestly probably be mostly OK with this draft but I'd assume I'd be on an island.

[Mags FTW]

Barnwell did a "mock" where he did a hypothetical trade at each pick. Biggest takeaway for us, is that he felt we could really just go BPA each pick and not force anything.

It must be fun to be GM Brian Gutekunst. In addition to fielding the league's youngest team last season, the Packers have two second-round picks and two third-round picks to go with this selection, leaving them with plenty of flexibility as they approach the draft. There's no obvious weakness they need to address, which leaves them the ability to take the best available player five times in the top 100 picks if so inclined.

https://www.espn.com/nfl/draft2024/story/_/id/39949788/2024-nfl-mock-draft-all-trades-deals-32-round-1-picks-players