And With The 5th Pick Of The NFL Draft Chargers Select....Discussion

[DerwinBosa]

I'm very intrigued with the idea of trading down and getting Taliese Fuaga or one of the three pass-rushers (Latu, Jared Verse, Dallas Turner). That has the potential of taking a huge step in the direction of the team Harbaugh is looking to build.

[DerwinBosa]

Georgia's offense was also very balanced. 2 good RB's. 3 good WR's... one them was a RB/WR hybrid. Their offensive line was one of the best in college football. They could run, they could pass. There was a lot of pre-snap motion and shifts. They created mis-matches and spread the ball everywhere. You will see Brock wide open on many plays... and wasn't precise route running that got him there. A lot of his YAC can be contributed to Kirby Smart's offensive play-calling. Other times, he's getting favorable matchups with slower LB's or smaller CB's and safeties. His 75-yard TD run came against an over-matched Kent State club that didn't adjust defensively. Is he very fast and athletic for a TE...? You betcha! Will he get those mismatches in the NFL to the extent he got them at Georgia...? Man... everbody's fast and big in the NFL...

Very well put. The 75-yard reverse so many are gushing over is making me laugh. Yes, it was an exciting play, but he ran through a hole the size of two Mack trucks and beat a corner who won't get drafted by the UFL.

[Steve]

Kelce was not the only weapon they had. Tyreek Hill was still a member of the Chiefs in that game.

I don't know how you consider my point disingenuous. It all starts up front.

It starts up front, but there have been good OL and DL lines who never make it to the SB. And plenty of OL and DL have had players of lesser draft status develop into good or great players.

Your example is poor because KC had a good OL prior to the SB. They lost that SB NOT because of how the roster was built. KC lost that SB because unlucky timing of a couple of injuries. KC HAD a great line that year. No team can overcome 2 starting OT missing the SB, unless the other team's edge rushers are hurt too.

[Steve]

Has there ever been a TE picked at #5? Can you imagine Harbaugh going TE at 5 and then have to use him to block most of the season. TE is not the top Priority and most teams picking in top 10 have many holes to fill.

If Bowers is the starting TE, then yes, he will get plenty of snaps as a blocker. The same way our TE did this year.

Bowers is a good blocker. He is a better blocker than any TE we have on the roster the last few years. He is an upgrade there.

Bowers is a better receiver than blocker, but that doesn't mean he can't do some of both. If you look at the highlights of the GA RB, especially James Cook last year, Bowers is frequently pulling and leading him across the formation. While Bowers may lack bulk inside, he is a good lead blocker in space, and there just aren't a lot of those guys around at any position (OL,FB or TE).

As far as the clip (https://www.thepowderblues.com/forum...56#post1629956), the bigger issue *might* be that you have a TE - (ANY) TE - blocking a DE who has leverage. The days where NFL TE can block DE on their own are pretty much over. Most NFL teams don't try, or at least not very much. MOST TE coming out of college these days are not very good blockers, which is partly why Bowers is considered such a talent. He can't throw every block, but he can pull and lead, and he is not horrible blocking LB and S inline (or as part of a double vs a DE).

Pitts for all his ability was drafted more for his potential than his skill. He has a lot of talent and won a lot of deep balls in college. But he is not an NFL-caliber blocker and can't run routes (still). He has to beat people by running past them, or with his size. Bowers is a big receiver who can run routes, win with size and win contested catches. Bowers is a better (more skillful) route runner than Pitts. Pitts has more upside (talent) but he is not as refined or physical as Bowers. I don't think he is as smart either.

[Ghost of Quacksaw]

The Falcons also passed on Penei Sewell, Micah Parsons, and Rashawn Slater to take the "generational talent" at tight end in that draft.

To me, this illustrates the whole point, trade-down wise, is who you'll have access to drafting AFTER trading down.

If the Bolts trade down to, say, #20, there's virtually no doubt they completely miss out on this particular draft class's top tier talent.

If they trade down to... #9? There will STILL be a top tier guy there. Could still be Brock. But if it's not Brock, then it's Nabers. Possibly Odunze. Maybe Alt.

Because this trade down to #9 scenario nets a 3rd round pick, minimum-- and you're a team beginning a youth movement-- you make this move, if you can find the trade partner you need.

Maybe you CAN'T find the trade partner that ensures you a coveted top tier guy. But if you can? You do it, IMO.

Trading OUT of Blue Chip territory? No, I wouldn't recommend *that*.

[gzubeck]

To me, this illustrates the whole point, trade-down wise, is who you'll have access to drafting AFTER trading down.

If the Bolts trade down to, say, #20, there's virtually no doubt they completely miss out on this particular draft class's top tier talent.

If they trade down to... #9? There will STILL be a top tier guy there. Could still be Brock. But if it's not Brock, then it's Nabers. Possibly Odunze. Maybe Alt.

Because this trade down to #9 scenario nets a 3rd round pick, minimum-- and you're a team beginning a youth movement-- you make this move, if you can find the trade partner you need.

Maybe you CAN'T find the trade partner that ensures you a coveted top tier guy. But if you can? You do it, IMO.

Trading OUT of Blue Chip territory? No, I wouldn't recommend *that*.

Not a chance I move down for only a third rounder inside the top ten picks. getting a third is for like a flip of positions let's say 5th to 6th pick. Third rounders are like 20% chance of success vs. like maybe a 2nd rounder you can get much much higher success rate. Maybe third rounder if they have two of them otherwise I'm not moving down 4 spots. Just crazy thinking there.

[Ghost of Quacksaw]

Not a chance I move down for only a third rounder inside the top ten picks. getting a third is for like a flip of positions let's say 5th to 6th pick. Third rounders are like 20% chance of success vs. like maybe a 2nd rounder you can get much much higher success rate. Maybe third rounder if they have two of them otherwise I'm not moving down 4 spots. Just crazy thinking there.

I'm not clear on what the "chart" says about the compensation in the kind of trade down I was describing. Anyone? Bueller?

[gzubeck]

I'm not clear on what the "chart" says about the compensation in the kind of trade down I was describing. Anyone? Bueller?

Kind of like I'd rather have a bird in the hand versus maybe a bird in the hand and a bird in the bush...trades are done because two parties value the trade not just us trying to get more average picks. I just don't perceive all these holes for trading away potential superstar players as a good move. Minimum 2nd rounder for moving down 4 spots or it's equivalency and I don't mean a bunch of garbage picks in the 4th, 5th round etc.

[Bolt4Knob]

To me, this illustrates the whole point, trade-down wise, is who you'll have access to drafting AFTER trading down.

If the Bolts trade down to, say, #20, there's virtually no doubt they completely miss out on this particular draft class's top tier talent.

If they trade down to... #9? There will STILL be a top tier guy there. Could still be Brock. But if it's not Brock, then it's Nabers. Possibly Odunze. Maybe Alt.

Because this trade down to #9 scenario nets a 3rd round pick, minimum-- and you're a team beginning a youth movement-- you make this move, if you can find the trade partner you need.

Maybe you CAN'T find the trade partner that ensures you a coveted top tier guy. But if you can? You do it, IMO.

Trading OUT of Blue Chip territory? No, I wouldn't recommend *that*.

Agreed - I am not trading out of the top 9-11 - Vikings are 11. Broncos are 12 and they don't have the picks

But really, not even going lower than 9, or even 8 as I want Bowers Nabers, Odunze or even Alt.

Trading from 5 to 8 by the draft chart should get you the 3rd 4th and a either a 5th this year or a future 3rd next year. But thats just the draft chart - this is a top 5 pick so thats not enough

Trading from 5 to 9 - that starts with a 2nd round draft pick - and Chicago doesn't have a second round pick this year so they are not a match

Trading from 5 to 10 - the Jets don't have a 2nd round pick this year - keep walking

Trading from 5 to 11 - Minnesota - that would be a 2nd and 4th at minimum but that is 6 players - thats too much to move down

For me - its Bowers or trading to Atlanta -- I don't like any team below 8 - the draft capital is there. And to go from 5 to 8 -- I would do something like Chargers 1/4 for Falcons 1/2/5

[northerner]

Agreed - I am not trading out of the top 9-11 - Vikings are 11. Broncos are 12 and they don't have the picks

But really, not even going lower than 9, or even 8 as I want Bowers Nabers, Odunze or even Alt.

For me - its Bowers or trading to Atlanta -- I don't like any team below 8 - the draft capital is there. And to go from 5 to 8 -- I would do something like Chargers 1/4 for Falcons 1/2/5

agree with this. if we can pick up an extra pick, but still get one of the premium players, let's do it.

i think it will depend on what the draft team sees, if Bowers, Nabers, etc. blows them away, then it might be stay at 5 and make the pick. we can't get too cute for a 3rd round pick (that is what the Bosa trade is for).

[Fouts2herbert]

We could easily see both the Raiders and Broncos take a QB in Round One. Aiden O'Connell isn't who they want to build around in Vegas, and Russell Wilson's stint in Denver is over. I'd love to see each of these teams take a Drew Lock, and then take three years to figure out it won't work.

The odds are in favor of your desire to see these teams struggle to find a franchise QB, I think they hired TT primarily because he drafted Herbert...they probably feel that he can help them find their franchise quarterback going forward...so herbert might've helped TT get that job in LV...as for Payton, we know he usually does well in improving QB play, even last year Russell seemed to be trending up, but we don't know if the guy knows how to draft one, he lucked into Brees because Miami screwed up and I'm not familiar with his drafts enough to know if he's ever drafted one that amounted to anything...

[Fouts2herbert]

Not in the NFL w/49ers.
Vernon Davis was the #3 WR... behind Anquan Boldin and Mario Manningham.

I think the bigger point is... Jim Harbaugh's offenses are generally more balanced. He'll run the ball more than we've seen in quite a while.
"Everybody feeds" is what he says IIRC.

I agree, I think Harbaugh likes QJ more than 99% of the posters here.
IMO, QJ wasn't used correctly by Kellen Moore. QJ crushed Michigan in 2022. Jim won't forget that. Hopefully, Jim uses QJ properly.
So now... you have an offense that will run the ball more. You have a #1 WR that consistently catches 100+ catches per year. A young, undeveloped WR that Jim seems to recognize his potential. And an under-used Joshua Palmer who has outplayed most of the WR's drafted his same year... Oh, and don't forget the #30 pass defense last year... that is losing several starters to free agency.

Does this really scream TE@#5 for you...?
By all means, get a TE. But if you can, trade back and help that suck-ola defense.
Please just take a moment to consider it...

I love Bowers and to me it would be really difficult to pass up drafting him, but if the right package of either a massive haul of draft capital or perhaps a combination of draft capital and players is offered up and we trade down and STILL get the top CB on our board, IDK, that would be really really hard to pass up too...I can see the chargers going DB, DT, and Center with their first 3 picks...the defense will most likely be the primary focus of this offseason, center and TE are the offensive positions that they might target early, RB and WR will be addressed on day 3...