Longgone

I'm just countering Budda

Charles Rogers? Titus Young?

No, you don't draft him if he is immature, unfocused, unreliable and uncommitted, despite his physical talent.

To me it's pass/fail, if, after you do your due diligence, he passes as an acceptable level of risk, take him at 6, if not, take him off your board.

To what end?

The problem with this draft, as wonderfully deep as it is, it is light at the top. Pretty much anyone at 6 is going to have some discouraging flaws.

This just isn't true. Gradewise, talentwise, valuewise, Skoronski fits right in with any pool of players who might be available at 6. To downgrade him simply due to arm length is ignorant.

Skoronski, everyone grades him as a star at either tackle position, he may profile better as a guard, but that doesn't diminish his prospects as a tackle.

I understand, but it's tough to hit playing sporadically, its often not indicative.

I believe he's a much better hitter than he's shown so far in the bigs, he's never gotten regular at bats.

I don't think Holmes rules out any position. He'll draft whoever is highest on his board. Draft for value, fill needs with free agency.

For all Baddoo's considerable gifts, he's still quite raw, he needs reps. A full year in Toledo would not hurt him at all.

There's not too fine a point to be put on the fact that you need two wide-outs as well as a slot receiver, and the loss of Chark leaves a prime opportunity for upgrade.

No, they play different positions, Williams will take Reynolds spot as the z receiver. Who will be the x? Cephus? Reynolds? Not ideal.

He plays hard, just runs out of gas, and he's probably the most physically talented player in the draft. It's well known Smart has had to stay on him, and he's not always practiced hard or prepared well. This isn't all that unusual for those who can get by on their ability alone. However, this does not sound like a guy that has the "it factor" that Holmes and Campbell always talk about looking for when they talk about additions to the team. I think, early in the draft especially, they will want someone who has those character attributes that they claim to value so much.

It's not the one issue for Carter, he has a history of not training or practicing hard, of stamina issues, of not being reliable and responsible, of being immature. Does not sound like a Holmes/Campbell kind of guy.

Wrong

I think if Detroit wanted Chark, they'd have him, we just don't know why they opted not to, or what alternatives they have in mind. I don't believe they'll want to run Reynolds or Cephus out as the primary x. I don't think a rookie is ideal either, because wr, like db, takes a while to learn the nuances of the position.

He's a splendid tackle, some project him to guard solely because his arm length is less than ideal. He could star at any of the 5 oline positions. That kind of flexibility is valuable.

He has character issues of his own, a $20 million salary, is of an age where skill players generally decline and would cost draft assets. I'd rather sign Chark.

Point is you need both, Reynolds is a nice depth player, but you want better starting.

If Amon-Ra is sad about it, I'm sad about it.

I agree, I'm not sure why you would trade assets and make a major salary commitment when you could have Chark for 5 mill, as well as his rapport with Goff and established knowledge of the offense.

He's a prototypical z

He's taking Friday off?