Somewhat early 2024 Draft thread

[Bronco Billy]

We haven't talked a ton (unless I have missed it) about Jermaine Burton. Does his talent overcome his maturity issues?

Are his "red flags" just one game where he pushed two different fans after a game when fans stormed the field? Like I get it pushing a girl who tried to move around him while storming the field is a move most wouldn't pull but is that the extent here?

He didn’t push the TEN girl. She made an effort to go around him and create some distance between them and he reached out to strike her in the face as she was going past. Then there’s his taunting of opposing fans and that he has been seen as a locker room cancer in multiple locations. He’s been forced into anger management.

The huge question is can he grow out of this? If so, his talent would put him up there in the 2nd tier of WRs this draft, but he’s got that underlying risk that teams are likely to factor into their evaluations. Maybe Reid rolls the dice on him - character (or lack of it) doesn’t seem to affect his evaluation of players. He’d be a great fit talent-wise for KC.

[Cameron Giles]

Dane Brugler: “The talent’s there. It’s a matter of consistency on and off the field. He’s been to 6 schools in 8 years. As one NFL scout put it, he was on the bleep list of the coaches of both Georgia and Alabama”

Here in lies my concern

Personally, I'll let whoever have that. He could potentially be a third rounder in rookie drafts, so it's not a huge risk you're taking with him, but. I pass on players who have a deep pedigree of off field issues. Every now and then it may end up being nothing, but most times....it's something.

[murphysxm]

Dane Brugler: “The talent’s there. It’s a matter of consistency on and off the field. He’s been to 6 schools in 8 years. As one NFL scout put it, he was on the bleep list of the coaches of both Georgia and Alabama”

Here in lies my concern

Personally, I'll let whoever have that. He could potentially be a third rounder in rookie drafts, so it's not a huge risk you're taking with him, but. I pass on players who have a deep pedigree of off field issues. Every now and then it may end up being nothing, but most times....it's something.

I tend to lean this way as well. I am actually rooting for him to go to KC because everything will be forgotten and he will be talked about as a late 1 or early 2 rounder in fantasy drafts!

[AZK]

^ Draft Capital should tell us what we need to know here then right?

[Cameron Giles]

^ Draft Capital should tell us what we need to know here then right?

Yes and no. There are players with good draft capital whose bad rep off the field followed them to the NFL and they flamed out because of it. So, yes it's good to have, but it doesn't make those concerns a nothing burger.

For example, if McConkey and Burton get the same pedigree, I'm taking McConkey.

[AZK]

^ Draft Capital should tell us what we need to know here then right?

Yes and no. There are players with good draft capital whose bad rep off the field followed them to the NFL and they flamed out because of it. So, yes it's good to have, but it doesn't make those concerns a nothing burger.

For example, if McConkey and Burton get the same pedigree, I'm taking McConkey.

Agree here. I have McConkey over Burton already. But say Burton and Legette both get equal draft capital. What's your choice then?

[Cameron Giles]

^ Draft Capital should tell us what we need to know here then right?

Yes and no. There are players with good draft capital whose bad rep off the field followed them to the NFL and they flamed out because of it. So, yes it's good to have, but it doesn't make those concerns a nothing burger.

For example, if McConkey and Burton get the same pedigree, I'm taking McConkey.

Agree here. I have McConkey over Burton already. But say Burton and Legette both get equal draft capital. What's your choice then?

I'm taking Legette. I just have no interest in players with that level of off field history at the allure of "upside". There will be similar players who come with a fraction of the baggage in this draft and future ones.

[murphysxm]

^ Draft Capital should tell us what we need to know here then right?

Or it tells us that one organization views the off the field issues as less of a concern than others. Doesn't change the issues.

[wickerkat1212]

I think we've talked about this a bit, but how do you all feel about Bensen and Brooks? I know landing spot is important. If either go to Dallas that should shoot them up charts. It's supposed to be a weak RB class but there are the top TWO I keep hearing about.

[murphysxm]

I think we've talked about this a bit, but how do you all feel about Bensen and Brooks? I know landing spot is important. If either go to Dallas that should shoot them up charts. It's supposed to be a weak RB class but there are the top TWO I keep hearing about.

I have the top 3 as 1. Brooks 2. Lloyd and 3. Benson.

I will be avoiding whoever goes to Dallas because I don't want to pay the landing spot premium that RB will get. I see myself with a lot of Lloyd shares.

[wickerkat1212]

I think we've talked about this a bit, but how do you all feel about Bensen and Brooks? I know landing spot is important. If either go to Dallas that should shoot them up charts. It's supposed to be a weak RB class but there are the top TWO I keep hearing about.

I have the top 3 as 1. Brooks 2. Lloyd and 3. Benson.

I will be avoiding whoever goes to Dallas because I don't want to pay the landing spot premium that RB will get. I see myself with a lot of Lloyd shares.

So in a weak class, of RBs, how do you evaluate them based on raw talent? It's a talented, deep WR class, so are you putting these RBs in the late first, early second range for fantasy drafts?

[Bronco Billy]

Why is DAL considered such a great spot for a rookie RB to land? They were hardly a great running team last season and had massive losses of talent in their O line this past offseason with no meaningful replacement. There’s a wide open backfield with lots of opportunity for carries, but those look like they’re going to be seriously low quality opportunities to me, and they’re also looking to be throwing more (read fewer rushing attempts) because they lost a lot of talent overall in the +/- of FA.

I can think of at least 6 situations immediately that I’d rather see a rookie RB go to. By God, if Brooks goes to DAL we’re looking at almost a perfect match made in Hell.

[Jigga94]

Why is DAL considered such a great spot for a rookie RB to land? They were hardly a great running team last season and had massive losses of talent in their O line this past offseason with no meaningful replacement. There’s a wide open backfield with lots of opportunity for carries, but those look like they’re going to be seriously low quality opportunities to me, and they’re also looking to be throwing more (read fewer rushing attempts) because they lost a lot of talent overall in the +/- of FA.

I can think of at least 6 situations immediately that I’d rather see a rookie RB go to. By God, if Brooks goes to DAL we’re looking at almost a perfect match made in Hell.

Some reasons people think DAL is a great spot.
1. It's likely that they have the most empty RB room in the league
2. It's also likely people still think they have an elite OL and Yada yada

[wickerkat1212]

Why is DAL considered such a great spot for a rookie RB to land? They were hardly a great running team last season and had massive losses of talent in their O line this past offseason with no meaningful replacement. There’s a wide open backfield with lots of opportunity for carries, but those look like they’re going to be seriously low quality opportunities to me, and they’re also looking to be throwing more (read fewer rushing attempts) because they lost a lot of talent overall in the +/- of FA.

I can think of at least 6 situations immediately that I’d rather see a rookie RB go to. By God, if Brooks goes to DAL we’re looking at almost a perfect match made in Hell.

Well, historically they have a great OL and RBs do well there—Zeke, Pollard, etc. That's my take.

[Bronco Billy]

Why is DAL considered such a great spot for a rookie RB to land? They were hardly a great running team last season and had massive losses of talent in their O line this past offseason with no meaningful replacement. There’s a wide open backfield with lots of opportunity for carries, but those look like they’re going to be seriously low quality opportunities to me, and they’re also looking to be throwing more (read fewer rushing attempts) because they lost a lot of talent overall in the +/- of FA.

I can think of at least 6 situations immediately that I’d rather see a rookie RB go to. By God, if Brooks goes to DAL we’re looking at almost a perfect match made in Hell.

Well, historically they have a great OL and RBs do well there—Zeke, Pollard, etc. That's my take.

How many holes does history open?

Sorry, that’s pretty snarky. But do FFers seriously ignore offseason action this badly?