AZ54

With his size and athleticism putting Shaheen next to either Massie or Leno is going to make it tough for any pass rusher to get through. Of course he has a lot to learn with blocking at the NFL level but forcing someone to either get around him or move through a double team block won't come easy. Knowing the weaknesses of our OTs and the lack of OT talent in this draft this is like drafting a LT-lite. He also has good enough feet to get out to the 2nd and 3rd levels as a blocker. I really like what this can do for our running game this year while we work on developing a passing game over the next couple seasons. Over time Shaheen will be significant part of that too.

It's interesting that everyone always cites the David Carr situation for why teams shouldn't take a QB before the team is rebuilt. I lived in Dallas when Aikman was taken and enjoyed watching them lose 15 games that year. Yes, I enjoyed that. What was in place when Indianapolis selected Peyton Manning 1st overall?

No, we need him to win some games (hopefully) this season.

You are actually making the other point because you have already forgotten all that Seattle gave up to find a QB: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Whitehurst Seattle Seahawks[edit] Whitehurst was traded to the Seattle Seahawks on March 17, 2010, in exchange for a 2011 third-round draft pick to San Diego, and the two teams switched second-round picks in the 2010 NFL draft. He was signed to a two-year, $8 million contract. Seattle's front office later stated they had already picked up a potential franchise quarterback in the draft by acquiring Whitehurst with the 2011 pick.[10] A year later they did this: http://archive.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/143215686.html A day after Flynn made a visit to the Miami Dolphins, Seattle closed the deal with Flynn Sunday afternoon, agreeng to terms on a three-year deal that a source with direct knowledge of the deal said is worth $19 million with about $10 million guaranteed. There will be opportunities for Flynn to make as much as $24 million. Then they tripled down on their bet and selected Wilson with a 3rd Rd pick right after signing Flynn to that huge contract. They didn't care they were throwing darts at the target until they hit on one. FWIW Wilson didn't exactly light it up his rookie season, they won because of that defense. Likewise, Pace only has to be right on either of Glennon or Trubisky. If he is, the rest will be forgotten. If he's wrong on both it will never be forgotten. That's what he's paid for. I believe it was Adam who said hope is not a strategy. We signed the best FA QB at the time, and we signed the best QB in the draft. If he can't get it right we're better off finding out sooner than later, such as after we've lived with numerous 8-10 win seasons of mediocrity. There's a reason KC spent so much on a rookie QB even though Alex Smith can get them into the playoffs annually. I'd rather ride this gamble into the future than be stuck like Cleveland with another season of no QB hopeful on the roster. They have Jabril Peppers on their roster, now if only they can find a position for him.

This is actually wrong. We have quite a bit of evidence Cleveland was talking with numerous teams to trade up from the 12th pick. Pace sat back, let Trubisky stay off his radar as far as the league was concerned, and it is quite likely he was having discussions with Cleveland about trading back. In fact that was rumored just a few days ago. The obvious target for Cleveland in any trade up was Trubisky so if they called Pace about making a deal to trade up he had a really good idea of how much they were willing to give up to make the deal. There was also quite a bit of chatter the last few weeks that Cleveland was strongly considering using the #1 overall on Trubisky. It seems pretty clear there were some in their organization who felt he was worth 3000 pts (for those who rely on the draft trade chart), and they'd have walked away from drafting Garrett in order to get him. ------ If you want to evaluate how well Pace assessed the QB market then you have two other trades up for QBs in the first round to compare. Keep in mind there is some debate about what next years picks are worth but generally carry about the same value. That's because in this day and age anyone drafting late could easily be drafting 10 positions earlier the next year. Or our case being early in the 3rd Rd, the value of next year's 3rd Rd pick could easily be worth less than this years. I used Drafttek's trade value chart. KC grabbed #10 worth 1300pts. They gave up #27 680pts, next year's first which we can assume is worth the same but since it is next year it has a bit lower value, and then added in #91 worth 136pts. Total given up for their QB 1496. Overpayment of 15% Texans went from #25 to #12 worth 1200pts. #25 = 720pts plus next years first so again assume similar draft position of 720pts minus small next year discount. Total given up for their QB 1440pts. Overpayment of 20% Bears bought a pick worth 2600pts. We gave up #3 2200pts, 3rd Rd x2 255x2 = 560pts. #111 worth 72pts. In total we spent 2832pts. Overpayment of 9% So yes, we overspent to get our QB but the market as established by those other trades shows that our deal fits in very well. Some history on big trades for QBs: Here they devalue next year's picks more than I have. Yet if you do that then our 2018 pick we gave up brings our deal pretty close to face value. http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2015/4/30/8383...anation-history Take the Robert Griffin III trade. The St. Louis Rams owned the No. 2 overall pick (worth 2600 points) in the 2012 NFL Draft, the slot most expected the Baylor quarterback to come off the board. However, the Rams drafted Sam Bradford just two years earlier and did not feel compelled to give up on him so quickly. Washington, desperate for a signal caller, sent St. Louis the sixth overall pick in the same draft (1600 points), their second-round pick (520 points) and two future first-rounders. While picks later years are devalued, those two selections ultimately combined for more than 3,300 points.

Because the contract we gave to Glennon we'd have given to JimmyG, plus likely a lot more guaranteed. I think it's safe to think JimmyG might have gotten two years salary guaranteed vs. Glennon getting 1.2 years. With the 3rd pick and the QB cap hit Pace would have received one shot at finding a starting QB. Pace instead chose to take two shots at finding his QB with approximately the same investment. You have to keep in mind that we gave up valuable draft picks but in exchange we get more flexibility than what we'd have had with JimmyG contract. If we don't want Glennon around next year we can either trade him and get value (picks) back thus mitigating the investment in Trubisky. Or we cut Glennon and use his money to sign FA players to fill the holes we have from the draft picks we gave up. If Glennon hits it big then we trade Trubisky. We won't get everything back on balance that we gave up but if we hit on a starting QB the net loss won't be nearly as much as it first appears.

I liked Trubisky all along so I'm ok with this. Getting a QB is almost always expensive or just pure dumb luck.

Since it's just Rd 1 today I'm only forced to make one pick: Jamal Adams FS/SS/UltraSafety (didn't we used to have the Ultra Back?) I do not see Cleveland moving all the way up to #3 to select Trubisky, much less #2. I suspect all their shopping around is to see who, if anyone, will move down and accept a pick or picks from next year's draft. If the 49ers are stuck at #2 I think Thomas is their pick. They don't have a decent DE for their scheme and Thomas is that at LDE. Bears simply go BPA and Need and bring home a stud DB.

I'm all in!

Reporters spread rumors but much of that comes from teams themselves either through their actions such as player visits or intentional leaks. Last year the rumors of the Bears liking Leonard Floyd were largely derived from his almost 3 day visit with the team. This year SF has been totally quiet about who they like at #2 and then suddenly it leaks out they like Trubisky. This after Cleveland makes inquiries about trading up, and they are the only team apparently actively inquiring about trading up. Now we all know every GM is making phone calls to every team asking about certain rounds and what they might be looking for in a trade up/down scenario. They all gauge interest because they all want a shortlist of who to call should they want to move up. There's only 10-15min on the clock, or less. There is little point of calling someone who says they won't trade down in the 1st Rd. If there were no rumors, no trades, no lies, and no major screw-ups like Cleveland taking Manziel at #22 then this wouldn't be as much fun. Modern technology enables us to get close to the action because it's easy to review many players' game tape or highlights and make our own evaluations. This is reality TV for corporate espionage in action and since we're dedicated fans who live and die with the results, we're part of it. The fans in Philly will make that known early.

IF there is any truth to this rumor it begs the question of why. There is a little rumor of the Bears liking Trubisky but he's also the QB we've spent the least time with among the top 4. On the flip side we've been very active around Watson, Mahomes, and Kizer. If we want Trubisky we'd just stay at #3 and take him, why trade back with Cleveland? Prior to this Cleveland was reportedly in talks with the Jets to trade up to #6. Apparently there are some rumors of the Jaguars being very interested in taking Watson at #4. http://www.bigcatcountry.com/2017/4/25/154...-could-take-him I've felt all along that Watson's leadership is the better fit for Cleveland (I'm sure I'll get change back on my 2 cents) so perhaps all this talk of Trubisky is smoke when their real target has been Watson all along. Thursday is going to be very interesting.

I'm good with this trade. The trade chart is a guideline not something that is set in stone. With so many teams looking to trade back because of the depth of this draft, and thus little reason for many teams to move up, it simply drops the market value of the early picks. Three 2nd Rd picks gives Pace tons of flexibility to maneuver anywhere he wants to be in the rest of the draft.

I do not see the Cardinals drafting a QB in the 1st Rd. Carson Palmer decided to come back for one more year to have a shot at the Superbowl. It seems Arians with his health issues could be in the same boat, and possibly Fitzgerald. I can't imagine the conversation with Palmer in the offseason was centered on him returning and then helping the team win by finding his replacement. Maybe in the 2nd Rd they'll draft a QB but in the first I expect they'll be drafting someone they think will help them win this year. Jets are a possibility but after putting so many resources into QBs lately I tend to think their management and coaches are in a spot where they must find immediate help this year. No QB is ready to help them. Buffalo might be tempted to draft a QB. That doesn't appear to be at the top of the fans' wish list. http://billswire.usatoday.com/2017/04/25/n...ream-scenarios/

I liked this article and thought I'd post it. Interesting background on scouting and all those little things we will never know. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap300000080...eal-draft-intel

It depends on who we take in Rd 1 but I'll assume we take Adams. In Rd 2 there's a list of players I'd like to see: If any of the top 4 QBs are on the board take them. Kizer, Trubisky, Mahomes, Watson If that fails then I feel the same way if any of the top 3 OTs are on the board. Ramczyk, Bolles, Robinson When both fail: Other players I like are CB Awuzie, NB Baker, King, White, TE Evan Engram

I never wanted an in-the-box safety who can't cover. We already have one, although Peppers is better around the LOS. We need players who can cover, defend passes, and hopefully get some INTs. I'm good with Adams or Hooker in Rd 1, but if we go safety later I prefer the players who are better in coverage.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2705445...017-nfl-combine

I'd take Luck in heartbeat but you are correct that his glaring deficiencies have been conveniently overlooked by the media.

If his hip injury is not an issue then I like him and think he's a better fit in the rotation than Unrein.

I don't think Cleveland drafts a QB #1 overall. Garrett is just too good to pass up. I absolutely think they want to, and will, draft a QB early because they don't have one. If they walk away from the QBs again this year after trading away from Wentz then their owner is likely to fire the whole bunch after the season. We all know one of these QBs if not two, is very likely to be a good starter. Nobody knows which one. That leaves their #12 pick for the selection, or #33. If they think Trubisky, Watson, Kizer, or whoever is their target is, will be gone then I think they know they have to trade up to get him. It's a near certainty Trubisky and Watson will be gone before #33, probably Mahomes too. Kizer is up in the air because at such an expensive position ($20+mil/yr for a starter) it's fashionable for teams to trade up into the late 1st Rd to get that 5th year on the rookie contract. In the age of Osweiller and Glennon earning $14-15mil/yr the extra $10mil saved on year five can easily be used for FAs to offset the "missing" draft picks that were given up in the trade. Among the top 5 QBs Webb is most likely to be there at 33. Rumors have built that Trubisky is the Browns favorite. I think they'd be best off with Watson and his leadership. With the entire league knowing they will likely take a QB at #12 I don't think every team will sit back and let it happen without someone trading ahead of them to get their guy.

Of course I can see how players turned out but I'm really making that post regarding all the comments (in general) that I recall for these QBs, both in the media and here, leading up to their draft. It's not a perfect lens for seeing everything, and I'm just not doing the work to put up a bunch of links to back it up because I'm busy. At times we definitely weren't in the QB market and that naturally reduced the tension in how people think about drafting or even rating a QB. I don't recall many here who were in favor or Mariota (spread QB, Oregon QBs suck, etc.). It seemed about half the board hated Winston and when he was drafted there were a ton of concerns about his INTs, much less his maturity, even among draft experts. I know I didn't like Bortles despite his measurable talent because he was inaccurate and inconsistent and it was easy to find similar concerns in the media. The media were stunned when Philly gave up the farm to move up and draft Wentz. Absolutely not worth it they said. Tannehill was a very good athlete but little more than that as a QB when he was drafted 8th overall. -------------- Bottom line for me is that what I see in these QBs evaluations against the QBs in recent NFL draft history it indicates there will be at least 3 QBs taken in the 1st Rd, and likely 4. History also says that usually at least one QB from each draft becomes a legitimate starter in the NFL. If Pace thinks he knows who that future starter is then he'll have to draft that player in Rd 1, or sit back and hope he gets lucky in the 2nd Rd like the Raiders did. How many recent drafts have had 4 QBs chosen in Rd 1? http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/agents-t...likely-to-fail/ This is an easy article to write by the way because anyone who is breathing knows the vast majority of NFL QBs fail to become a good starter. I've shown in other threads that history also says your best odds of drafting a starting QB will be among the QBs drafted in Rd1. FWIW Trubisky is still my favorite QB in this draft. If Pace thinks he can be a legit starter, even at the level of Andy Dalton, then I don't care if he takes him #3. If last year's draft was repeated (knowing rookie performance) there is zero chance Dallas takes Elliot over Prescott at #4.

It appears Trubisky is the Browns QB target. The world knows the 49ers want to trade down becaue they put it on every news outlet in the country. http://www.walterfootball.com/nfldraftrumormill Browns might be talking with Jets about a trade so they can grab Trubisky. If true this is clearly where they view the threat level and as far as they need to trade up. Suddenly the 49ers leak that they might like Trubisky if they have to stay put. Last week the Bears were rumored to like Trubisky but it appears they've done extensive work on other top QBs and not much with Trubisky. Is that because they think he'll be gone before they select a QB later in the 1st Rd or 2nd Rd? Or is Pace laying low so his target is available at #3? Kizer: Combine meeting, Private workout, Official Visit, and Local visit Mahomes: Combine meeting, Private workout, Official Visit Peterman: Combine meeting, SR Bowl (of course) Trubisky: combine meeting Kaaya: combine meeting Webb: not listed but I thought we coached him for a day at Sr Bowl?

I think this QB draft class is better than last years and compared to many recent years offers a decent pool to choose from. Minus of course the sure fire QB in an Andrew Luck type. Next year Sam Darnold looks to fill that elite draft spot but behind him I see lots of QBs with question marks no different than this year's group. #1 Goff: spread offense QB, not ready to start and while he can be very accurate he fades a lot under pressure. Plus physically he was pretty skinny. He basically lost his rookie year and the long term outlook is unknown. Trubisky is more accurate, better TD:INT ration (5:1 vs. 3.3:1), better QB rating, and much better on the run (both running and throwing). #2 Wentz: Physical tools but level of competition he played against didn't come close to comparison against any of the top 5 QBs this year. Played well initially then once teams learned the new Eagles offense things got tougher. I still like his long term outlook. #26 Lynch: Physical tools but again poor traits from spread offense and lower level of competition. Started to show some signs of getting it late in the year but remains a work in progress. #51 Hackenburg: I'd take any of the 2017 top 5 QBs ahead of him. (Here's where someone throws out Prescott but this is more about likely draft position of this year's QBs) Mix and match Watson, Trubisky, Mahomes, Webb, and Kizer among any of last year's top 4. I get all the questions regarding each of the QBs, and I have my criticisms and concerns for each as well. QB value in the NFL says 4 of them go in Rd 1. I also think much of the fretting over the concerns for each QB this year is related to the struggles of last year's QBs. 2015: I can go back to all the criticisms of Winston (INTs) and Mariota (spread offense and those QBs never work out in the NFL) and they both went 1/2. Behind them it was Grayson at #75. 2014: Blake Bortles #3 overall, Manziel #22, Bridgewater #32, Carr #36 (the best of the bunch), JimmyG #62 2013: EJ Manuel #16, Geno Smith #39, Mike Glennon #73 (we'll see how that turns out soon enough), Matt Barkley #98 2012: Luck #1, Griffin #2, Tannehill #8 (been a big long term project), Brandon Weeden #22, Osweiller #57

It makes his behavior at the medical tests that much more intriguing.

Not sure if you've been able to watch any of his games but LSU used Adams all over the field. He played NB, CB, SS, FS. His elite traits in the box led to him being used more often around the LOS but he's not Jabril Peppers and can definitely cover WRs or TEs. Is he the elite single high FS that Hooker can be? Probably not but Hooker is a rare talent too. Adams has more than enough skills (speed, agility) along with his study habits and leadership to get everyone else aligned pre-snap to be a very good FS. But at the same time he can fill a hole at the LOS scrimmage and stop a RB cold. Leonard Floyd's versatility gave Fangio flexibility around the LOS. Adams will do the same as a DB and we won't worry as much about matchups. 2 TE sets can be easily matched with Adams and Floyd out there either for run support or pass coverage.