Lost's Big Board/Occasional Mock Draft

[January J]

With a strong draft we could really be pretty stout on both sides of the ball when you think about it. We just HAVE to keep our starters healthy next year by any means necessary.

[BmoreBird22]

Not that he won't knock you on the ground, but he doesn't have to. That's how sound he is. 

I really think this is a cop out excuse for Stanley. He doesn't have to or he just doesn't have that nastiness? I'm gonna go with the second by a large mile. Think of the nature of the position-

 

It's two three hundred plus pound big men trying to extract their will on their counterpart. Do you really not think one is going to want to put the other on the ground and stand over him and say, "I'll be here all day?" If you can put them on their butt all day long, you're going to want to. 

[PurpleCity5]

thats true too but look at teams like Denver and Kansas City. Their offenses have been fairly mediocre at best and their defenses have pretty much won or kept them in every single game. I agree were not that far off on offense..but contrary to what many believe we're not that far off on defense either. With a healthy Terrell Suggs the only thing we really need is to add another upper tier pass rusher.. A disciplined corner or safety ( depending on what we do with webby) and get our linebackers to do a little better in coverage. we got some work to do but that's not too tall of an order IMO.

I think K.C's offense is what will hold them back from reaching the SB, same could be said about Denver. I mean look at their losses, against Oakland and Kansas City, they could not even move the ball at all. They will be in trouble come playoff time if their offense plays like that. We don't have the cap space to make this defense elite, we don't have much money to even sign a premier CB, I think we could only get a competent one. When I look at the money teams, Bengals, Patriots, Steelers, and Packers(With Jordy)...I see teams with an elite offense, with a good OL, a respectable defense, and they win. 

 

Now I think we are close to building a good defense, but surely not a an elite one. I'm not saying we should neglect our defense, I think we should dedicate our defense to the free agency period. I think we could sign two or three players, two being starting caliber and one rotational guy, and move Webb to safety. It would not be elite, but at least you can hold teams to FGs and make stops from time-to-time. But I think in the draft, you get a franchise LT, in Stanley, or grab one of the stud WRs in Tyler Boyd and Michael Thomas. That's what I'm hoping to say the least. 

Edited December 19, 2015 by PurpleCity5

[January J]

I think K.C's offense is what will hold them back from reaching the SB, same could be said about Denver. I mean look at their losses, against Oakland and Kansas City, they could not even move the ball at all. They will be in trouble come playoff time if their offense plays like that. We don't have the cap space to make this defense elite, we don't have much money to even sign a premier CB, I think we could only get a competent one. When I look at the money teams, Bengals, Patriots, Steelers, and Packers(With Jordy)...I see teams with an elite offense, with a good OL, a respectable defense, and they win.

Now I think we are close to building a good defense, but surely not a an elite one. I'm not saying we should neglect our defense, I think we should dedicate our defense to the free agency period. I think we could sign two or three players, two being starting caliber and one rotational guy, and move Webb to safety. It would not be elite, but at least you can hold teams to FGs and make stops from time-to-time. But I think in the draft, you get a franchise LT, in Stanley, or grab one of the stud WRs in Tyler Boyd and Michael Thomas. That's what I'm hoping to say the least.

i hear ya. il be satisfied regardless as long as we nail this top 5 pick , have a strong draft and get playmakers on either side of the ball. Edited December 19, 2015 by January J

[52520Andrew]

I don't view the offense as being consistent enough to build around. Flacco can light it up when it matters but I never have seen him be consistent about it to have to depend on it week in and week out. You could argue a lot of it has to do with WR but I still am not sold on that being everything.

I'd rather invest in building the defense up again. We already have some pieces there and a very good run defense but we need a stud pass rusher and someone who can cover the middle of the field better(or a true FS to let Hill come down in passing situations). Corner could use some help but unless we spend our top pick on it, I don't see us getting an upgrade and I think the pass rush can make them look better. Corner depth is important though as well. Even the best corners get beat if the QB has time, we need to get them to think quicker.

I could see it taking more than one offseason to build ourselves back up again unless we actually stay healthy and the FO has an outstanding offseason.

[LosT_in_TranSlatioN]

I don't view the offense as being consistent enough to build around. Flacco can light it up when it matters but I never have seen him be consistent about it to have to depend on it week in and week out. You could argue a lot of it has to do with WR but I still am not sold on that being everything.

I'd rather invest in building the defense up again. We already have some pieces there and a very good run defense but we need a stud pass rusher and someone who can cover the middle of the field better(or a true FS to let Hill come down in passing situations). Corner could use some help but unless we spend our top pick on it, I don't see us getting an upgrade and I think the pass rush can make them look better. Corner depth is important though as well. Even the best corners get beat if the QB has time, we need to get them to think quicker.

I could see it taking more than one offseason to build ourselves back up again unless we actually stay healthy and the FO has an outstanding offseason.

I see it as we need to improve protection for Joe and run blocking. Stanley is not a bad run blocker. He's not great, but he's not bad. Keep KO at guard. If Flacco has an off day we'll need to get the run going.

But I do agree with you. I think if we're at 2 and Bosa is there, there's a good chance we take him.

[52520Andrew]

I see it as we need to improve protection for Joe and run blocking. Stanley is not a bad run blocker. He's not great, but he's not bad. Keep KO at guard. If Flacco has an off day we'll need to get the run going.

But I do agree with you. I think if we're at 2 and Bosa is there, there's a good chance we take him.

Yeah I think a good running game and O-line is always important. Would be fine with building there and if we go LT then I am perfectly fine with it with Monroe at this point

[GrimCoconut]

I think the first pick has to be Bosa or Tunsil for me if we are top-3. While it would be cool to trade down, I'm not sure I would if we can choose one of those two. If both are there, that may be a different story, but even then I don't know. 

 

While we do need a CB, we've seen very good and even elite CBs go later in the first round, such as Marcus Peters and even Jimmy Smith. Obviously Jimmy hasn't panned out as we all hoped with his injuries, but these injuries were never an issue in college. The only reason he really dropped was due to concerns surrounding drug-use related to marijuana, which never came to fruition as of this moment. 

 

It's much harder to find talents like Bosa and Tunsil in the top-10, let alone the top-32. I think if we have a shot at either then the trigger should be pulled.

[January J]

I think the first pick has to be Bosa or Tunsil for me if we are top-3. While it would be cool to trade down, I'm not sure I would if we can choose one of those two. If both are there, that may be a different story, but even then I don't know. 

 

While we do need a CB, we've seen very good and even elite CBs go later in the first round, such as Marcus Peters and even Jimmy Smith. Obviously Jimmy hasn't panned out as we all hoped with his injuries, but these injuries were never an issue in college. The only reason he really dropped was due to concerns surrounding drug-use related to marijuana, which never came to fruition as of this moment. 

 

It's much harder to find talents like Bosa and Tunsil in the top-10, let alone the top-32. I think if we have a shot at either then the trigger should be pulled.

one scenario that would really be agonizing is if we end up at 3 and bosa and tunsil both go 1 and 2 and we cannot find a trade back partner. 3 is very early For vh3 or Ramsey IMO so I'm not too sure what the move would be. Good problem to have though I suppose.

[JoeyFlex5]

one scenario that would really be agonizing is if we end up at 3 and bosa and tunsil both go 1 and 2 and we cannot find a trade back partner. 3 is very early For vh3 or Ramsey IMO so I'm not too sure what the move would be. Good problem to have though I suppose.

sadly I think that's exactly what will happen

[PurpleCity5]

sadly I think that's exactly what will happen

That would be a shot in the foot. Im hoping that if we are in the top 3 that either Bosa or Tunsil is there.

[Inqui]

one scenario that would really be agonizing is if we end up at 3 and bosa and tunsil both go 1 and 2 and we cannot find a trade back partner. 3 is very early For vh3 or Ramsey IMO so I'm not too sure what the move would be. Good problem to have though I suppose.

If Tunsil and Bosa go 1 and 2, our pick would become prime real estate for a team wanting a QB. We'd also be in a good position to get SF and Norleans in a bidding war against each other with the chance of staying in the top 10.

 

But I'd be in the bag for Stanley if we can't find a trading buddy that wants to sell the farm for Goff or Lynch.

[PurpleCity5]

If Tunsil and Bosa go 1 and 2, our pick would become prime real estate for a team wanting a QB. We'd also be in a good position to get SF and Norleans in a bidding war against each other with the chance of staying in the top 10.

But I'd be in the bag for Stanley if we can't find a trading buddy that wants to sell the farm for Goff or Lynch.

I would take anything in that trade back scenario. If all we can get is a 2nd round pick then I'm fine with that as long as we stay in range for Hargreaves or Stanley.

[Inqui]

I would take anything in that trade back scenario. If all we can get is a 2nd round pick then I'm fine with that as long as we stay in range for Hargreaves or Stanley.

Tbh I still wouldn't settle for anything less than a 2017 first and 2016 day three pick (ideally a 4th). If they don't take that I'd just give them the two-fingered salute (a British thing but it basically means the same thing as with one finger ) and decide between VH3 and Stanley. A couple of years ago Jake Matthews went at 6 in a loaded draft, so I don't think arguably a better prospect in a weaker class makes it past 5 or 6.

[PurpleCity5]

Tbh I still wouldn't settle for anything less than a 2017 first and 2016 day three pick (ideally a 4th). If they don't take that I'd just give them the two-fingered salute (a British thing but it basically means the same thing as with one finger ) and decide between VH3 and Stanley. A couple of years ago Jake Matthews went at 6 in a loaded draft, so I don't think arguably a better prospect in a weaker class makes it past 5 or 6.

It depends on how far back we are moving to take that 2nd. If we remain in the top 7 per say and we cannot trade back, then I would take the second. If we are moving further away from the top 7 then I agree, I don't think I would take the 2nd.

[Inqui]

It depends on how far back we are moving to take that 2nd. If we remain in the top 7 per say and we cannot trade back, then I would take the second. If we are moving further away from the top 7 then I agree, I don't think I would take the 2nd.

Even in the top seven, I wouldn't be impressed if we traded down for less than a 2017 first. We'd be trading with a side like SF at 6, and a second wouldn't convince me to budge tbh.

[JoeyFlex5]

Tbh I still wouldn't settle for anything less than a 2017 first and 2016 day three pick (ideally a 4th). If they don't take that I'd just give them the two-fingered salute (a British thing but it basically means the same thing as with one finger ) and decide between VH3 and Stanley. A couple of years ago Jake Matthews went at 6 in a loaded draft, so I don't think arguably a better prospect in a weaker class makes it past 5 or 6.

a 2nd this year and a 2nd next year would do it for me. The value at 3 is horrible and I'd rather take a lesser prospect at like 8th and have 2 early 2nd rounders and 2 early 2nds next year also. I'd take ramsey/jack/Smith at Around 8th before Stanley or hargreaves at 3rd.

[Inqui]

a 2nd this year and a 2nd next year would do it for me. The value at 3 is horrible and I'd rather take a lesser prospect at like 8th and have 2 early 2nd rounders and 2 early 2nds next year also. I'd take ramsey/jack/Smith at Around 8th before Stanley or hargreaves at 3rd.

Two 2nds might not be so bad. If we trade with a side like the Sailboats and they suck as badly next year as expected, their 2017 2nd would be close to a first anyway. We wouldn't be getting dreams of Fournette or Garrett (though a lot can happen in a year), but there'd still be a decent player available with that pick. Maybe something more like two 2nds and a 2016 5th or 6th would do it for me.

[JoeyFlex5]

Two 2nds might not be so bad. If we trade with a side like the Sailboats and they suck as badly next year as expected, their 2017 2nd would be close to a first anyway. We wouldn't be getting dreams of Fournette or Garrett (though a lot can happen in a year), but there'd still be a decent player available with that pick. Maybe something more like two 2nds and a 2016 5th or 6th would do it for me.

2 early second rounders and a top 10 pick would go a loooong way for this team. Some of the 2nd round guys this year are really good, the first round is weak but I love the top half of the 2nd. Boyd, fuller, ngakoue, nassib, Kearse, Alexander, doctson, ifedi, thompson, and then the guys who are inevitably gonna fall, we can seriously load up with 2 early 2nds

[PurpleCity5]

Even in the top seven, I wouldn't be impressed if we traded down for less than a 2017 first. We'd be trading with a side like SF at 6, and a second wouldn't convince me to budge tbh.

I just don't like the value of picking Hargreaves or Stanley at 3, I like it better at 6, I feel that we could get more while getting the guy we're going to pick anyways. 

[PurpleCity5]

2 early second rounders and a top 10 pick would go a loooong way for this team. Some of the 2nd round guys this year are really good, the first round is weak but I love the top half of the 2nd. Boyd, fuller, ngakoue, nassib, Kearse, Alexander, doctson, ifedi, thompson, and then the guys who are inevitably gonna fall, we can seriously load up with 2 early 2nds

That's why I like the extra 2nd. I really think the 2nd round is money in this draft. 

[JoeyFlex5]

who are some guys that have potential to fall to the early 2nd that will automatically become the top guy on our board? First one that come to mind is Leonard Floyd, we won't like him In the first because we won't take a rotational defender that high, but I think we take a rushing specialist like Floyd in a heartbeat In the 2nd. Another guy that I think is a late first but could fall to our 2nd and would easily be the pick is jayron Kearse, I have become a huge fan of him, a 6'5" true FS with legitimate nfl level range for single high coverage? Yes please

[GrimCoconut]

The problem is we are not the only team that likely realizes this. If we, the fans, realize that this draft is probably best in the low-1st to mid-2nd round, then a lot of teams and professional GMs who get paid to do this probably realize this as well. We likely won't get premium compensation from teams like we normally would. In the 2013 Draft, the Raiders had the #3 overall and moved back to #12 and only got the Dolphins' 2nd round pick. The Niners moved from 31st overall to 18th overall and only surrendered their 3rd round pick from the Chiefs (I believe), which was 72nd overall IIRC. That's a big jump with small compensation.

 

I don't see this draft as quite that bad, but it's just not a good draft, especially early. There's no real elite talent in my eyes outside of Tunsil, and arguably Bosa who also has his own fleas. 

[January J]

a 2nd this year and a 2nd next year would do it for me. The value at 3 is horrible and I'd rather take a lesser prospect at like 8th and have 2 early 2nd rounders and 2 early 2nds next year also. I'd take ramsey/jack/Smith at Around 8th before Stanley or hargreaves at 3rd.

Two 2nds might not be so bad. If we trade with a side like the Sailboats and they suck as badly next year as expected, their 2017 2nd would be close to a first anyway. We wouldn't be getting dreams of Fournette or Garrett (though a lot can happen in a year), but there'd still be a decent player available with that pick. Maybe something more like two 2nds and a 2016 5th or 6th would do it for me.

I just don't like the value of picking Hargreaves or Stanley at 3, I like it better at 6, I feel that we could get more while getting the guy we're going to pick anyways.

The problem is we are not the only team that likely realizes this. If we, the fans, realize that this draft is probably best in the low-1st to mid-2nd round, then a lot of teams and professional GMs who get paid to do this probably realize this as well. We likely won't get premium compensation from teams like we normally would. In the 2013 Draft, the Raiders had the #3 overall and moved back to #12 and only got the Dolphins' 2nd round pick. The Niners moved from 31st overall to 18th overall and only surrendered their 3rd round pick from the Chiefs (I believe), which was 72nd overall IIRC. That's a big jump with small compensation.

I don't see this draft as quite that bad, but it's just not a good draft, especially early. There's no real elite talent in my eyes outside of Tunsil, and arguably Bosa who also has his own fleas.

would it be completely out of the question for US to trade up from 3? It's not that high of a jump so we maybe could get away with giving up 2 second rounders.. But if we are really high on tunsil or bosa why not make it a point to go and get one of them if we think they will be gone? Just a thought...me personally thinks we're better off stayin put in that scenario ( if we can't find a trade back candidate) especially considering the amount of talent in the second round this year. Edited December 21, 2015 by January J

[GrimCoconut]

would it be completely out of the question for US to trade up from 3? It's not that high of a jump so we maybe could get away with giving up 2 second rounders.. But if we are really high on tunsil or bosa why not make it a point to go and get one of them if we think they will be gone? Just a thought...me personally thinks we're better off stayin put in that scenario ( if we can't find a trade back candidate) especially considering the amount of talent in the second round this year.

I can't see why not. I'm not sure if we would, but it all depends on how much we like a guy. We have heard of reports of Ozzie Newsome wanting to trade up for a guy he really wanted before. Look no further than the report of Ozzie trying to trade up to get Khalil Mack. 

[PurpleCity5]

would it be completely out of the question for US to trade up from 3? It's not that high of a jump so we maybe could get away with giving up 2 second rounders.. But if we are really high on tunsil or bosa why not make it a point to go and get one of them if we think they will be gone? Just a thought...me personally thinks we're better off stayin put in that scenario ( if we can't find a trade back candidate) especially considering the amount of talent in the second round this year.

I do think so as well but two second round picks? I don't know man, the top 3 has two elite talents in Bosa and Tunsil, after that the rest of the prospects outside of Hargreaves are questionable so it's going to be tough to convince a team to move back. Two seconds could be enough, but it would not surprise me if someone asks for more. 

[JoeyFlex5]

would it be completely out of the question for US to trade up from 3? It's not that high of a jump so we maybe could get away with giving up 2 second rounders.. But if we are really high on tunsil or bosa why not make it a point to go and get one of them if we think they will be gone? Just a thought...me personally thinks we're better off stayin put in that scenario ( if we can't find a trade back candidate) especially considering the amount of talent in the second round this year.

trading from 3 to 2 would probably cost more than it would to trade from like 8 to 3 lol. The drop off is enormous there

[January J]

trading from 3 to 2 would probably cost more than it would to trade from like 8 to 3 lol. The drop off is enormous there

yeah your probably right. But if it could assure us getting our guy do you think it would be worth it? The thing is we have no idea what Cleveland is going to do..and the way they typically operate I'd be willing to bet they go after a qb and leave us with 1 of the 2 between bosa and tunsil anyway. Unless we end up at 4- which is a strong possibility. But another thing is so much is going to change from now until April - and players draft stocks are going to fluctuate a bit after the combine and what not..injuries may occur..etc. but we may end up wanting a guy that hasn't even really been on our radar for the top 10. Stanley's stock may skyrocket and he may be a steal at pick 4... Who knows. Some analysts already have him above tunsil. I'm just way too anxious to get the 2016 season started.

[JoeyFlex5]

yeah your probably right. But if it could assure us getting our guy do you think it would be worth it? The thing is we have no idea what Cleveland is going to do..and the way they typically operate I'd be willing to bet they go after a qb and leave us with 1 of the 2 between bosa and tunsil anyway. Unless we end up at 4- which is a strong possibility. But another thing is so much is going to change from now until April - and players draft stocks are going to fluctuate a bit after the combine and what not..injuries may occur..etc. but we may end up wanting a guy that hasn't even really been on our radar for the top 10. Stanley's stock may skyrocket and he may be a steal at pick 4... Who knows. Some analysts already have him above tunsil. I'm just way too anxious to get the 2016 season started.

yeah the top 10 will probably look drastically different come april. im not one for buying into combine hype, if a prospect rises from 10th to 4th on everyones big board, its likely because their combine numbers are being overhyped, if the ravens bit on false hype then im unhappy with it, but if the combine hype pushes an inferior prospect up the board and lets the real top player fall to us then im all for it. 

[ravefan52]

I think it's very unlikely we get an extra 1st to move down, unless you're talking about like from 3 to the teens. I don't think it's a strong enough draft class and the lack of concensus top QB's hurts. Depending on where we pick and who is there I would take a 2nd to move down a bit.