Worst Move of The First Round

[RSJ]

I liked what the Giants did by trading down. I feel like it was a bailout after the guy they wanted got picked - but I liked it. However I hated the selection of Toney there. I like the player just felt they had more needs than him.


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

[Jetsfan80]

Worst 1st round decision, for me, easily goes to the Cowboys with the MLB Micah Parsons selection at # 12 overall.  Even after a trade down, and with Penn State being "LB U", historically, this was a terrible pick.  Even if Parsons ends up a stud, there was no logic behind it.

MLB is the most de-valued position in the NFL these days behind RB, with minimal impact on the game.  Yet Jerry Jones just had to make sure he was the first one to take a MLB in this draft class.

He did this even after having used a # 19 overall pick on Leighton Vander Esch in 2018.  Vander Esch is the # 11 highest paid player on the roster, and was penciled in as the starting MLB this season prior to the Parsons pick.  I believe I read they just declined his 5th year option after having taken Parsons?  Absurd decisions on both counts.  Parsons will have to be a truly special, elite talent to make this pick anything close to worthwhile.

The last 5 seasons, you can make a strong argument that the Cowboys have, quietly, been the worst drafting team in the NFL.  

[Augustiniak]

10 minutes ago, RSJ said:

I liked what the Giants did by trading down. I feel like it was a bailout after the guy they wanted got picked - but I liked it. However I hated the selection of Toney there. I like the player just felt they had more needs than him.


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

The trade back, the deal, was great for them.  But they should have gone d or OL.  That team is not ready to add a gadget guy in round 1 yet.  

[RSJ]

The trade back, the deal, was great for them.  But they should have gone d or OL.  That team is not ready to add a gadget guy in round 1 yet.  

Totally agree. They already have a good amount of weapons on offense.


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

[Augustiniak]

Just now, RSJ said:

 

Totally agree. They already have a good amount of weapons on offense.


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

 

Plus, they could have landed a very similar player in round 2.  Again, they did great by lucking out that the bears wanted to trade up, but now they have to scheme to get this guy the ball and use him as a returner, and you don’t want to use a 1st rounder as a returner.

[UntouchableCrew]

12 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Worst 1st round decision, for me, easily goes to the Cowboys with the MLB Micah Parsons selection at # 12 overall.  Even after a trade down, and with Penn State being "LB U", historically, this was a terrible pick.  Even if Parsons ends up a stud, there was no logic behind it.

MLB is the most de-valued position in the NFL these days behind RB, with minimal impact on the game.  Yet Jerry Jones just had to make sure he was the first one to take a MLB in this draft class.

He did this even after having used a # 19 overall pick on Leighton Vander Esch in 2018.  Vander Esch is the # 11 highest paid player on the roster, and was penciled in as the starting MLB this season prior to the Parsons pick.  I believe I read they just declined his 5th year option after having taken Parsons?  Absurd decisions on both counts.  Parsons will have to be a truly special, elite talent to make this pick anything close to worthwhile.

The last 5 seasons, you can make a strong argument that the Cowboys have, quietly, been the worst drafting team in the NFL.  

I think they were blindsided by both CBs going off the board right before them.

What they really should have done is traded back with the Bears, assuming they had the same offer the Giants got.

[J-E-T-S JETS]

That was a solid move because Trey would have been gone before then. And if you want a guy, you give up whatever to nab him. That move was solid given the team he is going to. San Fran gonna be scary with that kid. The best move was probably Chicago getting Justin Fields at 11 which was a steal. If you wanna call that a move. Arguably the best quarterback falls into your lap, not a bad first night.

Mac Jones does not scare me. None of these AFC East guys do.

[nyjbuddy]

3 hours ago, Smashmouth said:

San Fran moving from 12 to 3 giving up 2 firsts and a third to get a guy they could have drafted at 12. Dumb Move.

This move basically says they are giving Garoppolo a few years to do something while Lance hopefully develops. They could have easily done this by not trading at all still going with Garoppolo and getting a premium player at 12 this way if Garoppolo does not work out they can make a QB choice next year or the year after keeping their 2 number 1's and third.

They could have traded back in the first and got Najee Harris and accumulated more picks . I say this because their vaunted zone blocking scheme does well during a game but when they needed it most to secure a SB win vs Mahomes and KC they didn't have a runner to shut that game down when the box was stacked . Sure you can accumulate yards during the season and during games but its obvious you need a superior back to run the ball in the 4th when the RB by committee fails on an epic scale. This league still pushes the bad value of a RB in the first which is terribly flawed logic all while the smart teams like the Steelers jump all over Harris ...tell me the Steelers are a bad drafting team ? 

I hope to god the Jets get a solid every down back soon to not only do what I stated above but to take the pressure off Zack Wilson to ignore this would be a big mistake. 

Not sure the 49ers' pick of Trey Lance was that bad.  Sure they may not have needed to get to 3 but if that was their guy, they did what they needed to get him.  Same thing the Jets did by trading up from 23 to 14, but the 49ers did it for a QB, in which the cost is understandable.  Listening to several podcast this morning, some have noted that this could be similar to the Alex Smith/Pat Mahomes/KC situation with Garappolo playing out his contract until Lance is ready.  If you look back at grades and reviews of the Mahomes pick back in 2017, there was some praise but a lot of similar criticism for the KC move/pick.

Steven Ruiz - "Calling Mahomes a project is a major understatement. He’s nowhere near ready to play in the NFL. And, honestly, he may never be. Between his inconsistent accuracy due to poor mechanics, his tendency to bail from clean pockets and his lack of field vision, he’s going to leave as many big plays on the field as he creates. This was a risky pick."

Dan Kadar (gave KC a C) - "My grade on what Kansas City did in this draft is due to my opinion that they gave up way too much to trade up for quarterback Patrick Mahomes in the first round. Again, if he works out, I look dumb and it doesn’t matter. But to give up pick Nos. 27 and 91 this year and a first-round pick in 2018 is a lot."

Vinny Iyer (gave KC a C-) - "Trading up for Mahomes, a big-armed gunslinger who really doesn’t mesh with the true mentality as Alex Smith’s successor, set up a bad tone in this draft.”

I am not saying Trey Lance will be another Mahomes, but he is a player that has the potential to be a great player and Garappolo has limitations that prevent the 49ers from really having an explosive offense.  Lance allows the 49ers to open up the offense a bit more and enables them to run more RPO and more misdirection.  Imagine a 49ers offense that builds upon what they have now (high efficiency passing) with a bit of Baltimore Raven's (Lamar Jackson/J .K. Dobbins/Gus Edwards) highly efficient running game.  

[elvispookie]

As I agree with all of you on the Giants trade (excellent).. their pick was absurd.  But I think we are missing the bigger story.. it appeared the Giants were 100% dedicated to drafting a WR BEFORE showing up in Cleveland!!!  A position they didnt really need.  It would appear they really wanted Smith and then Philly traded up, leaving the Giants holding an empty bag.   

Thats some scary sh*t.  You're defense sucks, o-line is bad..  and your GM thinks.. nah.. lets pile up on those wide receivers.

Also, Raiders and Jags (Entiene) were so stupid.

[Smashmouth]

14 minutes ago, nyjbuddy said:

Not sure the 49ers' pick of Trey Lance was that bad.  Sure they may not have needed to get to 3 but if that was their guy, they did what they needed to get him.  Same thing the Jets did by trading up from 23 to 14, but the 49ers did it for a QB, in which the cost is understandable.  Listening to several podcast this morning, some have noted that this could be similar to the Alex Smith/Pat Mahomes/KC situation with Garappolo playing out his contract until Lance is ready.  If you look back at grades and reviews of the Mahomes pick back in 2017, there was some praise but a lot of similar criticism for the KC move/pick.

Steven Ruiz - "Calling Mahomes a project is a major understatement. He’s nowhere near ready to play in the NFL. And, honestly, he may never be. Between his inconsistent accuracy due to poor mechanics, his tendency to bail from clean pockets and his lack of field vision, he’s going to leave as many big plays on the field as he creates. This was a risky pick."

Dan Kadar (gave KC a C) - "My grade on what Kansas City did in this draft is due to my opinion that they gave up way too much to trade up for quarterback Patrick Mahomes in the first round. Again, if he works out, I look dumb and it doesn’t matter. But to give up pick Nos. 27 and 91 this year and a first-round pick in 2018 is a lot."

Vinny Iyer (gave KC a C-) - "Trading up for Mahomes, a big-armed gunslinger who really doesn’t mesh with the true mentality as Alex Smith’s successor, set up a bad tone in this draft.”

I am not saying Trey Lance will be another Mahomes, but he is a player that has the potential to be a great player and Garappolo has limitations that prevent the 49ers from really having an explosive offense.  Lance allows the 49ers to open up the offense a bit more and enables them to run more RPO and more misdirection.  Imagine a 49ers offense that builds upon what they have now (high efficiency passing) with a bit of Baltimore Raven's (Lamar Jackson/J .K. Dobbins/Gus Edwards) highly efficient running game.  

I'm not Judging Lance in the post just saying I thought he would have been available at 12. The Lance hype came in long after the San Fran trade which makes it even worse to dump 2 1's and a 3. Most things I read had Lance going late in round one with a possible slip to round 2 and if you look at the way it played out he would have easily last to 12 where the Niner's were originally. 

No doubt there is potential but its mostly based on athletics since the guy has very little playing time and 1 game in the last 2 years. What has he learning the last 2 years doing nothing ? What happens if Jimmy G finally gets healthy an starts playing well ? That would equal 3 first round picks in the toilet IMHO. So once again I don't want to knock the potential of the player but I feel San Fran could have easily waited a year before making this move because Lance does absolutely nothing for them this year and they better be in a position to add a veteran back up if Jimmy gets hurt again or risk throwing the kid to the wolves way too early. That will wind up being a huge test for the zone scheme running game for sure

 

[sirlancemehlot]

2 hours ago, Big_Slick said:

Without steroids it's not possible for these guys to add 10% more muscle mass. It's not like they haven't been working out and lifting since Jr High School.

Disagree.  These kids haven't filled out their frames completely for the most part, at 21 years old.  They also haven't had the benefit of 24/7 trainers and dieticians the pro game offers.  10-15 lbs of muscle in a year to 18 months is possible in the young.  It can slow you down or cause inflexibility if not done properly, though.

[Smashmouth]

9 minutes ago, elvispookie said:

As I agree with all of you on the Giants trade (excellent).. their pick was absurd.  But I think we are missing the bigger story.. it appeared the Giants were 100% dedicated to drafting a WR BEFORE showing up in Cleveland!!!  A position they didnt really need.  It would appear they really wanted Smith and then Philly traded up, leaving the Giants holding an empty bag.   

Thats some scary sh*t.  You're defense sucks, o-line is bad..  and your GM thinks.. nah.. lets pile up on those wide receivers.

Also, Raiders and Jags (Entiene) were so stupid.

Giants D does not suck ranked 12th last season

[JustInFudge]

I know, I'd take Lance over Wilson but that's just me.

Pretty sure Leatherwood was the worst move of round 1.

[JustInFudge]

3 hours ago, Warfish said:

Dolphins, without all that trade around, could have had Pitts and Harris.

Not sure they did better than that, tbqh.

Raiders taking Leatherwood (who I liked) feels like a reach.

Carolina picking Horn (not that Horn is bad at all per se) instead of Offense to help Sam is a bit of a headshaker to me.

While I always like 'reunited elite college players' stories, did Jacksonville really need Etienne when they had a 1,000 RB in Robinson?  Can't fault them for wanting to support their new QB at least.  Robinson/Etienne should be a hell of a RB tandem.

Yeah but with the Fins, you're not considering the extra 1st rounder they got in the deal and call me crazy but Waddle/Phillips might end up being a better value then Pitts/Harris simply because I think a 10+ sack guy is more valuable then a non-game breaker, 3 yards and cloud of dust RB, I know Harris can catch too but he's not a 1 touch game changer.  And while I love Pitts, Waddle is is a 1 touch game changer.  Dude is pure electricity and while we're on the topic, Etienne is a 1 touch game changer whereas, Robinson is not, kind of similar to Harris, he doesnt have long game.  His longest run last year was only like 25 yards.

Leatherwood is the worst, hands down.  They could have got him the 2nd.

Horn is legit, CB is a huge need.  Lots of playmakers left.  

[Big_Slick]

12 minutes ago, sirlancemehlot said:

Disagree.  These kids haven't filled out their frames completely for the most part, at 21 years old.  They also haven't had the benefit of 24/7 trainers and dieticians the pro game offers.  10-15 lbs of muscle in a year to 18 months is possible in the young.  It can slow you down or cause inflexibility if not done properly, though.

Look at Wilson's father and Wilson who has said he's been playing football since he was 7 years old and working towards the NFL. I believe that he was training, lifting and had the best nutrition for a long time.

In just one year a normal kid who just played video games could add 10-15 pounds of muscle with a structured w/o and diet but not someone who was working hard since an early age.

[nyjbuddy]

5 minutes ago, Smashmouth said:

I'm not Judging Lance in the post just saying I thought he would have been available at 12. The Lance hype came in long after the San Fran trade which makes it even worse to dump 2 1's and a 3. Most things I read had Lance going late in round one with a possible slip to round 2 and if you look at the way it played out he would have easily last to 12 where the Niner's were originally. 

No doubt there is potential but its mostly based on athletics since the guy has very little playing time and 1 game in the last 2 years. What was he learning the last 2 years doing nothing ? What happens if Jimmy G finally gets healthy an starts playing well ? That would equal 3 first round picks in the toilet IMHO. So once again I don't want to knock the potential of the player but I feel San Fran could have easily waited a year before making this move because Lance does absolutely nothing for them this year and they better be in a position to add a veteran back up if Jimmy gets hurt again or risk throwing the kid to the wolves way too early. That will wind up being a huge test for the zone scheme running game for sure

 

I agree they probably didn't need to trade up so high.  I think the 49ers traded up to 3 after they saw his pro day.  Since January, Lance has been considered a top 10 pick and eventually rose to top 7 (https://www.nflmockdraftdatabase.com/players/2021/trey-lance).  They probably could have traded up to around 7, as they would have needed to get in front of Carolina since the Darnold trade happened later.  But with QBs getting pushed up toward draft time, getting into the top 5 was probably their best bet.

With Garappolo though, there is just a limitation in his abilities similar to the limitation with Alex Smith in KC.  So even with a healthy Jimmy G, the 49ers probably want to move to a more explosive and dynamic offense.  Lance allows them to do that.  Also, Garappolo's best year (2019) is slightly above the NFL average in terms of production.  If you can get a similar level of passing production from Lance, basically league average, and add to it 200-300 rushing yards and a 3-4 rushing TDs, thats top 10 production from the QB.

Also, I agree they probably need another veteran backup in case Garappolo gets injured but they also don't want a backup that hinders Lance's development by taking away practice snaps.

 

[jago]

3 hours ago, Sonny Werblin said:

After the Jets jumped the Raiders and took AVT, the Raiders panicked and fell back into age old practice of reaching for a pick and taking Alex Leatherwood. They could have traded back into the second round and still taken Leatherwood, or a comparable player.

agreed. and for those dinging the giants, they were in the same dilemma, and executed the trade back, still getting a very productive SEC wr and picking up lots of value.

[#27TheDominator]

3 hours ago, nycdan said:

My favorite example is walterfootball.

Dinged the Jets for taking Wilson with Fields still on the board.  Yet in their rankings, they had WIlson at 2, Fields at 3, Lance at 4.

Then they gave SF an A for taking Lance after moving up BIG to do it.

But wait!

They gave SD an A for taking Slater but then they dinged the Jets again for moving up for AVT, WHO THEY HAD RANKED HIGHER.  Why?  Because the Jets traded to move up.  Apparently, that only counts against the Jets, but not against the 49ers.  And their pre-draft rankings don't count either.  

Walter and CBS are tied for the worst examples of narrative-based reviews I have ever seen.  

I was honestly surprised that Walter Football was still around, but as I said earlier, I recently re-discovered them.  Your critique is unfair and shows a lack of understanding of their rankings.  They have rankings somewhere, but the rankings you are discussing are purely based on Charlie Campbell talking to teams (I think it is usually area scouts) and guessing where he thinks players will go.

If you read the reviews, his ranking of Fields says: 

Quote

In this writer's opinion, he is the second best quarterback in the 2021 NFL Draft, behind only Trevor Lawrence and ahead of Zach Wilson, but Wilson will get drafted ahead of Fields in part because Wilson is more ready to play. 

I also think that the guy that wrote the review you are complaining about is "Walt" not Charlie Campbell, so that represents two different "analysts."