Thoughts on the 2026 NFL draft. What does your team need?
Raiders: RT, OG, DT, edge, CB, S, WR
Seahawks: OG, edge, DT, CB
29 thoughts on “2026 NFL Draft”
I do not like the Chiefs getting a good CB.
I hope the Cowboys don’t get Styles…Well, they didn’t get Styles, but I also didn’t want them to get Downs. I heard he’s really good, super intelligent. Cowboys need help in the secondary, too, if I’m not mistaken.
I would be really happy if the Seahawks could somehow get a good RG.
I kept hearing the top 7 or 8 picks are locks in term of players (not in terms of order). Caleb Downs and Rueben Bain are the two that weren’t picked as experts thought. Glad the Cowboys got one of those two. I’m still hoping the Cowboys trade out of 20, but happy they didn’t need to trade up to get Downs.
Note Bain has the short arms and the fatal car accident, which could explain his fall. Maybe the Cowboys can get him at 20, I’m in on that.
Oh yes the Cowboys traded up one spot for a couple 5th rounders.
Oh Pickens signed his tag today, and most insiders thought that’s because he was going to get traded. I’m surprised it didn’t happen yet, but I guess there is still time. I would have thought he would have gotten the Cowboys a first rounder though.
Is it Pickens or most WRs? I think most GMs would give a first rounder for Pickens at this point. However, without knowing what Dallas wanted in return, what kind of massive contract Pickens is after, or if the Cowboys were even listening to offers, it’s hard to say why a trade didn’t happen
It’s mostly Pickens. Do reports suggest that Pickens has turned himself around, in terms of attitude, etc.? Genuine question, as I really don’t know the answer, but my vague sense is that he really hasn’t changed significantly. I wouldn’t want a guy like that, and I wouldn’t want to give up a high draft pick to get him.
He didn’t seem to be any trouble in Dallas in his one year. I’m not 100% sure how big of an issue he was in Pittsburgh as well now looking back with hindsight. He’s probably a diva and I think there was some talk of taking plays off last year, but I think they said that about Randy Moss too. I’m not sure someone like AJ Brown is that much better in terms of character.
I followed the Steelers when Russ played there. My sense is that Pickens was a serious problem. In terms of difficult catches, requiring great body control and hands, Pickens is terrific. I don’t think the Steelers would try to move on from him. Also, I thought he didn’t start one game because of some off field issue. No? Finally, if the Cowboys thought he turned things around, wouldn’t they try to keep him? Also, if other teams believed he turned things around, I think he would be in high demand.
The Cowboys cannot afford Pickens. After finishing top three last year in terms of stats, he was asking for top three money. I think the Cowboys would rather stick with Ceedee. The latest news though, is the Cowboys is saying they will not trade him.
Daniel Jeremiah thought Jadarian Price would be a good pick for the Seahawks. The Hawks needed a RB, but I would have liked a good OG or D-lineman. I think I might have preferred a good CB. But if Price is a really good RB, I think the pick will be worth it. I heard that NFL.com compared Price to Javonte Williams. If that proves true, and Price stays healthy, I will be happy with this pick. Williams is hard-nosed, physical runner. If Price is like that, he’ll be a good tone-setter for the offense.
Don,
How are you feeling about what the Cowboys did? Based on what I’ve heard about the edge rusher, I think he was a solid pick. Downs seems like a sure thing–at least a solid starter at worst.
Mitchell,
Any preference on positions or players the Raiders should draft in the next rounds?
I would love to see them get help in the trenches. A good RT and DT would be great. I’d be have with a DE/edge as well. Ultimately, I would like good-to-great players at almost any position. (I think getting a solid RB2 would be nice as well.)
I keep hearing Caleb Downs is probably in the top three of least likely to be a bust. I think safeties aren’t high draft capital type of players, but Downs is supposed to be a great leader and very smart. Based on what people have said thus far, I think I will like him over Sonny Stiles, even though Stiles is a greater need.
Malachi “Crunch” Lawrence (I added that nickname…) is supposed to be a reach. I think a lot of pundits had him later first round or probably a second-round guy. But everyone is saying this was Dallas’ guy all along. It was a guy they were going to pick at 20 almost regardless of who was there. I think he is supposed to be super athletic, but on the smaller side. If he bulks up a little, he can be a every down player and hold the edge on run plays, if not he will probably just be a pass rusher. I think most experts had Keldrick Faulk over him and he was picked 31st.
Kayden McDonald to the Texans. I heard good things about that DT. If he’s good, Texans D just got stronger. (I was hoping the Raiders would get someone like McDonald.)
I wanted talk about two general topics relating to drafts that puzzle me–namely, the importance of draft position and positional value when evaluating a GM/draft.
Let’s take draft position issue first. I’m assuming most fans would agree that getting good players is easier when picking near the beginning of every round versus picking near the end of every round. Here’s what puzzles me: suppose a GM is picking near the end of everyone round, the draft turns out to be a dud, but fans blame the GM for having a bad draft–as if the poor draft was largely due to GM’s bad decisions. Is it just me, or does this seem off?
Second point. Some fans put too much weight on positional value when assessing a draft pick. For example, they would take a CB over an RB because CBs are more valuable. To me, this type of thinking is way too simplistic. That some positions are, in a general sense, more valuable than others makes sense to me. But the specific players and specifics of a team’s situation matters a great deal. To me, the quality of the player matters a bit more than positional value. For example, I’d take a an RB that would likely be top 3 in his position over a CB who would likely be a solid starter, especially if the team didn’t have a good RB and the offense was run-based.
Just to clarify, your first point is evaluating picks based solely on rounds. For example, if a team picks 25th in every round, that team’s picks are evaluated against other teams in that round even though the other teams got picks in the top ten, for example? I doubt a fan would do that. Picks are normally evaluated based on when the pick happened.
Picks by pundits are always evaluated based on when the pick is made. In most cases too much so. For example, in this year’s draft, Dallas really wanted Malachi Lawrence, despite him getting a grade as a mid-second rounder almost by consensus. But Dallas didn’t have a second-round pick and who knows if other teams had him as a low first round pick. In those situations, you try trade down as much as you willing to gamble and still get your guy. Regardless though, you will get a low draft grade by picking your guy. The draft needs to be evaluated somehow, but a draft grade doesn’t necessarily tell the story of a pick or in some cases of a team’s draft in general.
I’m in agreement with the positional value point. However, I want to say RBs have to be sort of an outlier. Their success could have a life of five years or less. That compared to an o-linemen who could have a life of ten years or more. Maybe those are extremes, but I think o-linemen have success for at least 1.5 times longer than an RB. So, in that case there is a case for positional value.
For example, if a team picks 25th in every round, that team’s picks are evaluated against other teams in that round even though the other teams got picks in the top ten, for example?
No, I’m not saying the team’s/GM’s picks are “evaluated against” other team’s picks. I’m saying that some fans forget or ignore the draft position of a team when evaluating a draft. For example, Seahawk fans will talk about previous drafts–e.g., 2017 was a terrible draft, etc. Additionally, my sense is some fans like attributing better recent drafts to a change in approach by John Schneider. Me, I attribute the better drafts to better draft position and more draft picks, especially from trading Russ and also Geno and DK.
In contrast, the Hawks picked at the end of the round this year, they only had four draft picks, and this was supposedly a weak draft. If the Hawks 2026 draft, overall, is lackluster, that shouldn’t be a surprise and I wouldn’t blame Schneider for a having a bad draft.
With positional value, I do agree with you about the value of the OL. It’s not just the longevity, though, but the scarcity of good O-linemen and the importance of continuity. A solid starting O-lineman has a lot of value in my view. (I actually would have preferred the Hawks drafting a good guard, even though they really needed an RB.)
Any thoughts on the Rams picking Ty Simpson early? I never saw him play, nor did I read comments about him, but I heard a lot of razzing with regard to this pick. My reaction to that was that if McVay really liked him, I would be concerned. But later there was some speculation (based on McVay’s body language in the press conference) that McVay was unhappy with the pick. If that’s true, then I’m happy!
I also heard Dan Patrick and Chris Simms question this pick, basically arguing that they should have gotten players to help them next season. I don’t really agree with that–if Simpson turns out to be a franchise QB. If Simpson becomes that guy, people won’t criticize the pick, and the Rams would be in contention for a long time. Additionally, the Rams did make splash moves in FA, bolstering their secondary. (My concern would actually be their ST. Did they do enough to improve that area, because they lost several games because of their ST.)
There’s a theory that McVay was toning down his reactions because Stafford is on his final contract year—basically “acting” the part of the supportive coach without over-celebrating.
The Rams are the team known as the team that doesn’t care about draft picks. They consistently trade them away. This pick will then fall in line with that. Also, as I stated prior, most of the pundits were in consensus on the top 7 or 8 guys. Rams were outside of that. That being said though, I pretty sure short arm Bain was still on the board and was one of the 7 or 8 guys.
McVay’s not wanting to ruffle Stafford’s feathers makes sense, and I guess that’s the most plausible explanation. I can’t imagine Snead doing this if McVay strongly opposed it. Then again, if McVay’s tenure in LA is likely short, maybe this could happen?
This pick will then fall in line with that.
I don’t see that. It’s one thing to trade away picks and another to make a careless pick at #13 (or whatever it was). Even if only seven players were sure things, they could have gotten a player with decent probability of being a solid starter…or they could have tried to trade down to get more picks.
But if a GM places less value on draft picks, they may be more cavalier with their picks. I will also say if the Rams didn’t try to move back at least a little bit and still get Simpson, that is bad GMing. However, moving back is harder than you think. In this year’s draft Arizona announced pre-draft they were open to trading back and no one was willing or “offered enough” because they didn’t trade back. I believe Baltimore also claims they were trying to trade back, but the other team pulled out last minute. There were also rumors that Dallas wanted to trade back again at 23, but I never heard anyone substantiate it.
My guess is that “not valuing picks” really means not valuing end of the round picks as much and easily trading these picks for a good player. I would be surprised if they would be cavalier when drafting players, especially high draft picks.
I agree that moving back isn’t always easy. In this draft, it seems like there was a lot more movement in general, though. That could make it harder. For example, the Hawks wanted to move back but several teams ahead of them traded back, and I think that prevented them from doing the same.
When I said the Rams don’t value picks, I meant because they are famous for trading their picks away. I looked it up and the Rams had only two first round picks since picking Jared Goff in 2016, one in 2024, which they picked Jared Verse and this past draft.
Yeah, so I’m guessing you don’t feel there is a correlation? Like if a GM feels drafting a player is too much of a crap shoot, then why not take a bigger shot, especially when drafting outside of the consensus “top players”.
Yeah, so I’m guessing you don’t feel there is a correlation?
Yeah…and that’s partly because I don’t think they don’t value draft picks, in general. But I can believe that they place less value on back of the round picks and they’re willing to give up 1st and 2nd round picks at the end of the rounds for good players.
This doesn’t mean they wouldn’t highly value early picks near the beginning of the 1st and 2nd rounds. That makes sense, right?
I just think the Rams’ drafting and acquiring players strategy is unique and unconventional. Can you think of a team that is comparable?
But I think if the Rams truly valued high picks in a particular round, they would try and bundle their picks to move up. Instead, they seem to be only willing to use them as capital for trades for existing NFL players.
How many times have they made these aggressive trades? Stafford, Ramsay…I’m pretty sure there is one or two more, but I can’t recall. I can’t think of many teams that have made these aggressive trades.
Do you think they would be this aggressive if they had a good feeling that they would be picking within the top 10 of every round? I would be surprised if that were the case.
But I think if the Rams truly valued high picks in a particular round, they would try and bundle their picks to move up.
For example, if they valued a top 10 pick, they would create a package to trade up to get that pick? I’m guessing the cost in draft picks would be way too much.
I do not like the Chiefs getting a good CB.
I hope the Cowboys don’t get Styles…Well, they didn’t get Styles, but I also didn’t want them to get Downs. I heard he’s really good, super intelligent. Cowboys need help in the secondary, too, if I’m not mistaken.
I would be really happy if the Seahawks could somehow get a good RG.
I kept hearing the top 7 or 8 picks are locks in term of players (not in terms of order). Caleb Downs and Rueben Bain are the two that weren’t picked as experts thought. Glad the Cowboys got one of those two. I’m still hoping the Cowboys trade out of 20, but happy they didn’t need to trade up to get Downs.
Note Bain has the short arms and the fatal car accident, which could explain his fall. Maybe the Cowboys can get him at 20, I’m in on that.
I thought the Cowboys traded up one spot to get Downs. No?
Re: Bains
The people I listened to mentioned the short arms, and I guess I’m convinced that’s significant red flag.
Oh yes the Cowboys traded up one spot for a couple 5th rounders.
Oh Pickens signed his tag today, and most insiders thought that’s because he was going to get traded. I’m surprised it didn’t happen yet, but I guess there is still time. I would have thought he would have gotten the Cowboys a first rounder though.
Personally, I wouldn’t give up 1st rounder for Pickens.
Is it Pickens or most WRs? I think most GMs would give a first rounder for Pickens at this point. However, without knowing what Dallas wanted in return, what kind of massive contract Pickens is after, or if the Cowboys were even listening to offers, it’s hard to say why a trade didn’t happen
It’s mostly Pickens. Do reports suggest that Pickens has turned himself around, in terms of attitude, etc.? Genuine question, as I really don’t know the answer, but my vague sense is that he really hasn’t changed significantly. I wouldn’t want a guy like that, and I wouldn’t want to give up a high draft pick to get him.
He didn’t seem to be any trouble in Dallas in his one year. I’m not 100% sure how big of an issue he was in Pittsburgh as well now looking back with hindsight. He’s probably a diva and I think there was some talk of taking plays off last year, but I think they said that about Randy Moss too. I’m not sure someone like AJ Brown is that much better in terms of character.
I followed the Steelers when Russ played there. My sense is that Pickens was a serious problem. In terms of difficult catches, requiring great body control and hands, Pickens is terrific. I don’t think the Steelers would try to move on from him. Also, I thought he didn’t start one game because of some off field issue. No? Finally, if the Cowboys thought he turned things around, wouldn’t they try to keep him? Also, if other teams believed he turned things around, I think he would be in high demand.
The Cowboys cannot afford Pickens. After finishing top three last year in terms of stats, he was asking for top three money. I think the Cowboys would rather stick with Ceedee. The latest news though, is the Cowboys is saying they will not trade him.
Oh and Bain got picked already.
Dallas traded down 3 spots for a fourth round pick and another later pick.
Daniel Jeremiah thought Jadarian Price would be a good pick for the Seahawks. The Hawks needed a RB, but I would have liked a good OG or D-lineman. I think I might have preferred a good CB. But if Price is a really good RB, I think the pick will be worth it. I heard that NFL.com compared Price to Javonte Williams. If that proves true, and Price stays healthy, I will be happy with this pick. Williams is hard-nosed, physical runner. If Price is like that, he’ll be a good tone-setter for the offense.
Don,
How are you feeling about what the Cowboys did? Based on what I’ve heard about the edge rusher, I think he was a solid pick. Downs seems like a sure thing–at least a solid starter at worst.
Mitchell,
Any preference on positions or players the Raiders should draft in the next rounds?
I would love to see them get help in the trenches. A good RT and DT would be great. I’d be have with a DE/edge as well. Ultimately, I would like good-to-great players at almost any position. (I think getting a solid RB2 would be nice as well.)
I keep hearing Caleb Downs is probably in the top three of least likely to be a bust. I think safeties aren’t high draft capital type of players, but Downs is supposed to be a great leader and very smart. Based on what people have said thus far, I think I will like him over Sonny Stiles, even though Stiles is a greater need.
Malachi “Crunch” Lawrence (I added that nickname…) is supposed to be a reach. I think a lot of pundits had him later first round or probably a second-round guy. But everyone is saying this was Dallas’ guy all along. It was a guy they were going to pick at 20 almost regardless of who was there. I think he is supposed to be super athletic, but on the smaller side. If he bulks up a little, he can be a every down player and hold the edge on run plays, if not he will probably just be a pass rusher. I think most experts had Keldrick Faulk over him and he was picked 31st.
Kayden McDonald to the Texans. I heard good things about that DT. If he’s good, Texans D just got stronger. (I was hoping the Raiders would get someone like McDonald.)
I wanted talk about two general topics relating to drafts that puzzle me–namely, the importance of draft position and positional value when evaluating a GM/draft.
Let’s take draft position issue first. I’m assuming most fans would agree that getting good players is easier when picking near the beginning of every round versus picking near the end of every round. Here’s what puzzles me: suppose a GM is picking near the end of everyone round, the draft turns out to be a dud, but fans blame the GM for having a bad draft–as if the poor draft was largely due to GM’s bad decisions. Is it just me, or does this seem off?
Second point. Some fans put too much weight on positional value when assessing a draft pick. For example, they would take a CB over an RB because CBs are more valuable. To me, this type of thinking is way too simplistic. That some positions are, in a general sense, more valuable than others makes sense to me. But the specific players and specifics of a team’s situation matters a great deal. To me, the quality of the player matters a bit more than positional value. For example, I’d take a an RB that would likely be top 3 in his position over a CB who would likely be a solid starter, especially if the team didn’t have a good RB and the offense was run-based.
Just to clarify, your first point is evaluating picks based solely on rounds. For example, if a team picks 25th in every round, that team’s picks are evaluated against other teams in that round even though the other teams got picks in the top ten, for example? I doubt a fan would do that. Picks are normally evaluated based on when the pick happened.
Picks by pundits are always evaluated based on when the pick is made. In most cases too much so. For example, in this year’s draft, Dallas really wanted Malachi Lawrence, despite him getting a grade as a mid-second rounder almost by consensus. But Dallas didn’t have a second-round pick and who knows if other teams had him as a low first round pick. In those situations, you try trade down as much as you willing to gamble and still get your guy. Regardless though, you will get a low draft grade by picking your guy. The draft needs to be evaluated somehow, but a draft grade doesn’t necessarily tell the story of a pick or in some cases of a team’s draft in general.
I’m in agreement with the positional value point. However, I want to say RBs have to be sort of an outlier. Their success could have a life of five years or less. That compared to an o-linemen who could have a life of ten years or more. Maybe those are extremes, but I think o-linemen have success for at least 1.5 times longer than an RB. So, in that case there is a case for positional value.
No, I’m not saying the team’s/GM’s picks are “evaluated against” other team’s picks. I’m saying that some fans forget or ignore the draft position of a team when evaluating a draft. For example, Seahawk fans will talk about previous drafts–e.g., 2017 was a terrible draft, etc. Additionally, my sense is some fans like attributing better recent drafts to a change in approach by John Schneider. Me, I attribute the better drafts to better draft position and more draft picks, especially from trading Russ and also Geno and DK.
In contrast, the Hawks picked at the end of the round this year, they only had four draft picks, and this was supposedly a weak draft. If the Hawks 2026 draft, overall, is lackluster, that shouldn’t be a surprise and I wouldn’t blame Schneider for a having a bad draft.
With positional value, I do agree with you about the value of the OL. It’s not just the longevity, though, but the scarcity of good O-linemen and the importance of continuity. A solid starting O-lineman has a lot of value in my view. (I actually would have preferred the Hawks drafting a good guard, even though they really needed an RB.)
Any thoughts on the Rams picking Ty Simpson early? I never saw him play, nor did I read comments about him, but I heard a lot of razzing with regard to this pick. My reaction to that was that if McVay really liked him, I would be concerned. But later there was some speculation (based on McVay’s body language in the press conference) that McVay was unhappy with the pick. If that’s true, then I’m happy!
I also heard Dan Patrick and Chris Simms question this pick, basically arguing that they should have gotten players to help them next season. I don’t really agree with that–if Simpson turns out to be a franchise QB. If Simpson becomes that guy, people won’t criticize the pick, and the Rams would be in contention for a long time. Additionally, the Rams did make splash moves in FA, bolstering their secondary. (My concern would actually be their ST. Did they do enough to improve that area, because they lost several games because of their ST.)
There’s a theory that McVay was toning down his reactions because Stafford is on his final contract year—basically “acting” the part of the supportive coach without over-celebrating.
The Rams are the team known as the team that doesn’t care about draft picks. They consistently trade them away. This pick will then fall in line with that. Also, as I stated prior, most of the pundits were in consensus on the top 7 or 8 guys. Rams were outside of that. That being said though, I pretty sure short arm Bain was still on the board and was one of the 7 or 8 guys.
McVay’s not wanting to ruffle Stafford’s feathers makes sense, and I guess that’s the most plausible explanation. I can’t imagine Snead doing this if McVay strongly opposed it. Then again, if McVay’s tenure in LA is likely short, maybe this could happen?
I don’t see that. It’s one thing to trade away picks and another to make a careless pick at #13 (or whatever it was). Even if only seven players were sure things, they could have gotten a player with decent probability of being a solid starter…or they could have tried to trade down to get more picks.
But if a GM places less value on draft picks, they may be more cavalier with their picks. I will also say if the Rams didn’t try to move back at least a little bit and still get Simpson, that is bad GMing. However, moving back is harder than you think. In this year’s draft Arizona announced pre-draft they were open to trading back and no one was willing or “offered enough” because they didn’t trade back. I believe Baltimore also claims they were trying to trade back, but the other team pulled out last minute. There were also rumors that Dallas wanted to trade back again at 23, but I never heard anyone substantiate it.
My guess is that “not valuing picks” really means not valuing end of the round picks as much and easily trading these picks for a good player. I would be surprised if they would be cavalier when drafting players, especially high draft picks.
I agree that moving back isn’t always easy. In this draft, it seems like there was a lot more movement in general, though. That could make it harder. For example, the Hawks wanted to move back but several teams ahead of them traded back, and I think that prevented them from doing the same.
When I said the Rams don’t value picks, I meant because they are famous for trading their picks away. I looked it up and the Rams had only two first round picks since picking Jared Goff in 2016, one in 2024, which they picked Jared Verse and this past draft.
OK, but then you said that this might lead to them being more cavalier when they do make a pick. Or did I read that wrong?
Yeah, so I’m guessing you don’t feel there is a correlation? Like if a GM feels drafting a player is too much of a crap shoot, then why not take a bigger shot, especially when drafting outside of the consensus “top players”.
Yeah…and that’s partly because I don’t think they don’t value draft picks, in general. But I can believe that they place less value on back of the round picks and they’re willing to give up 1st and 2nd round picks at the end of the rounds for good players.
This doesn’t mean they wouldn’t highly value early picks near the beginning of the 1st and 2nd rounds. That makes sense, right?
I just think the Rams’ drafting and acquiring players strategy is unique and unconventional. Can you think of a team that is comparable?
But I think if the Rams truly valued high picks in a particular round, they would try and bundle their picks to move up. Instead, they seem to be only willing to use them as capital for trades for existing NFL players.
How many times have they made these aggressive trades? Stafford, Ramsay…I’m pretty sure there is one or two more, but I can’t recall. I can’t think of many teams that have made these aggressive trades.
Do you think they would be this aggressive if they had a good feeling that they would be picking within the top 10 of every round? I would be surprised if that were the case.
For example, if they valued a top 10 pick, they would create a package to trade up to get that pick? I’m guessing the cost in draft picks would be way too much.