AU-panther

Sorry, thought I was responding to someone else…

won't be that much. Huge difference between trading to 1 than 8. 21 to 8 is about 600 points. 9 to 1 is about 1650.

What happens if our defense is terrible again and we fire our DC and the next one runs a 4-3? Does he have the same value then? Would you still be happy with spending a top 10 pick on him? It's an odd draft, going defense seems logical. Walker makes sense from a value/grade perspective but there seems to be some interest in the bigger edges in the draft. Problem with the bigger edges is their tape/production might not be top-10 to some people. Really feels like we would like to trade down but doesn't really feel like a draft where a lot of teams want to trade up, unless one of the QBs spark some movement.

Does Walker's size scare anyone else?

by unproductive you mean "sack total", because by the tape he was disruptive and his pressures actually led the team, which was surprising by having limited pass rush sets.

yep, because one example proves a fact wrong.

"UDFA" is a bit of a stretch. I agree the sack numbers aren't what you would like but they don't tell the entire picture. His run defense was great. According to this article he actually led the team in pressures, which are actually sometimes a better indicator of future sacks than sacks are. The guy that gets the sack often isn't the guy that caused the sack. Thats the difference between scouting by watching film and box score scouting. Also, the fact he led the team in pressures is somewhat surprising because his true pass sets were actually limited. I'm not saying he is deserving of a top 10 pick but this idea that his tape is indictive of a UDFA or even 4th or 5th rounder is absurd.

curious to why you think he has a very low ceiling?

Because of positional value and/or need I think there is a good chance you can take DT, TE, OL, and RB off the table. My best guess at this point is one of the edges, maybe WR. If we trade down, I think it will be because we have several edges graded fairly close to each other.

That’s not how the minimum spending rule works. it’s a 4 year total, so they can in fact roll it over. https://www.profootballnetwork.com/how-does-nfl-salary-cap-work/

I never said anything about need or positional value, I was pointing out that comparing players based on their positional rank is pointless and that isn’t how teams look at it, they look at grade.

Teams don’t think in terms of positional rankings, they think in terms of grades. CB2 could have a higher grade than Edge2 or even WR1. Think in terms of tiers. Wouldn’t surprise me if a lot of teams end up with 1-2 players in their top tier, and 3-4 in the next. If any of those fall to 8 they have to be considered.

I hope we don't pass on a great player because of the "fit" of a coach and system that might not be here in the future.

I’ll be curious how he does when he starts to loose some of his assistant coaches. The “leader of men” deal doesn’t hit the same when you are losing.

Zero players in the top 10 at their respective positions. Only three top 20 players at their respective positions. This team needs to quit focusing on winning soon and instead focus on building a solid foundation that can last awhile.