My fear of Tremaine Edmunds

[Shive]

37 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

Prospect vs Prospect debates also involve people totally overblowing a prospect’s weaknesses. That what’s currently going on with Edmunds. 213 career tackles and 33 TFL is not bad instincts. Sure his play recognition could improve but the Smith fan club is making it seem like Edmunds is  TJ Green, and he’s not. I like both tbh. But both have flaws.

His stats alone don't show anything. His double digit tackles against teams like Delaware, Syracuse, and Duke don't tell me anything about his instincts, just that he was a much more superior athlete than the guys on those teams. When you look at the film of how he got those tackles, you don't see amazing instincts.

 

Like I said before, it's not directly comparing him to Green. It's saying that Green was a guy overdrafted because of his athletic upside. Edmunds' high draft projection is largely based upon his athletic upside and what he could become. My issue is that before the combine, Edmunds was projected as a mid to late 1st round prospect. Now he's a top 5 guy that we just can't pass up.

 

I do feel comfortable with the fact that Eberflus has his LB test that will help determine how well Edmunds processes. If he does well on it and we pick him, I'll at least know that the coaches feel like something I see as a glaring weakness isn't a big issue.

[NewEra]

11 hours ago, SolidGold said:

 

I'm sold on his pass coverage alone

[Shive]

5 minutes ago, NewEra said:

I'm sold on his pass coverage alone

His man coverage is really good. His zone, not as much (definitely has flashes of good zone coverage though). I think it has to do with his play recognition and processing, whereas with man, he's able to focus in and just play the man. His man coverage does give you a good glimpse into what he's capable of in coverage though. I think if he's able to get better at processing, with play recognition, and just developing his instincts, he'll be not only way better in the run game, but also in zone coverage.

 

One thing is for sure, he can move really well in space.

[rock8591]

Tremaine Edmunds floor = Jamie Collins

I'd take that.

[Shive]

19 minutes ago, rock8591 said:

Tremaine Edmunds floor = Jamie Collins

I'd take that.

I dont know how or where you got that, but Jamie Collins is a very solid player, who outplayed his draft position. Collins isn't a bust by any means. I see Edmunds' floor as more like Aaron Maybin or Aaron Curry, who were overhyped 1st round busts.

[rock8591]

8 minutes ago, Shive said:

I dont know how or where you got that, but Jamie Collins is a very solid player, who outplayed his draft position. Collins isn't a bust by any means. I see Edmunds' floor as more like Aaron Maybin or Aaron Curry, who were overhyped 1st round busts.

 

Both are athletic freaks, similar weight at 250 lbs, fast speed at 4.55-4.59 40-yard dashes.

 

Except Collins is 24 when he was drafted, Edmunds will be 20. By the time Edmunds is 22-24, he won't be 6'5'' 255 lbs, more like 6'6'' and 275 lbs. If he stays at MLB great, if not, then he'll just be a very big and fast OLB or DE.

 

Collins is not a bust at round 2, but in the top 6 picks of the first round, would be considered a letdown.

 

In any case, neither one would be a bust ala Bjoern Werner but if Edmunds becomes a Jamie Collins, then it'd be somewhat of a letdown for a top 6 pick.

[FalseStart]

He's still 19...wow. still taking Smith.   The Butkus award winner at 12... Would not select either at 6

[krunk]

Every team in our division is big on the down hill running game. Jacksonville, Houston, Tennesse. And if they see you have problems plugging that up they just keep hitting you with it. These are not passing teams for the most part. Again id take Tremaine. Hes built more for what teams do in this division.

[Shive]

24 minutes ago, rock8591 said:

Collins is not a bust at round 2, but in the top 6 picks of the first round, would be considered a letdown.

 

In any case, neither one would be a bust ala Bjoern Werner but if Edmunds becomes a Jamie Collins, then it'd be somewhat of a letdown for a top 6 pick.

Collins has been one of the better LB's in the league, earning a trip to the Pro-Bowl. With the benefit of hindsight, most teams would have gladly taken Collins in the 1st, possibly top 10. Regardless, his draft position isn't relevant. Edmunds having a season like Collins would be him not living up to his potential, but it definitely wouldn't be his floor. His floor could absolutely be Werner from a production standpoint and looking completely lost.

[WarGhost21]

14 hours ago, Shive said:

Urlacher was a consensus All American and Heisman Finalist. He was legitimately one of the best college players in the country with the production and film to warrant getting drafted at 9 overall.

 

Edmunds is just over an inch taller and ran the 40 .05 seconds faster than Urlacher, but Urlacher benched 8 more than Edmunds and jumped 5 inches longer in the broad jump.

 

So he isn't really more athletic than Urlacher was and doesn't have anywhere NEAR the college production that Urlacher had. What makes you think he'll be a better player than Urlacher?

The fact that Urlacher already had all the nuances of the game down-pat and Edmunds is still getting to that point. If Edmunds ends up getting anywhere close to Urlacher's knowledge of the game, he could be better than Urlacher.

[Crunked]

To me Tremaine's knocks are not mountainous obstacles to overcome, I am quite fine taking him at #6......at worst he will be an "ok" LB for 10-12 years....and although that would be disappointing I don't consider that HIGH risk, HIGH reward.....TJ Green in the 2nd round was a HIGH risk, High reward proposition. If CB and the scouts do their due diligence, and if the kid is a worker, and they believe he can be taught bring it on.........

[southwest1]

2 hours ago, rock8591 said:

Tremaine Edmunds floor = Jamie Collins

I'd take that.

Let's not get crazy now. Edmunds isn't anywhere near Collins's level. I get the need to compare a prospect to a current player, but that's a leap too far I'm afraid. 

[Shive]

34 minutes ago, WarGhost21 said:

The fact that Urlacher already had all the nuances of the game down-pat and Edmunds is still getting to that point. If Edmunds ends up getting anywhere close to Urlacher's knowledge of the game, he could be better than Urlacher.

Thats like saying if Josh Allen gets anywhere close to Peyton Manning's accuracy and field reading ability, he could be the best QB of all time. You can do that with any prospect and it's just asinine to to so.

 

The only thing that tells me is that Urlacher was way better when he entered the league than Edmunds is. It's not like Urlacher plateaued as a rookie and never got better. He got better every year until he retired. Edmunds may be younger than Urlacher was when he got drafted, but he's also still behind the 8-ball in comparison. Edmunds would have to flip a switch and just "get it" in his first or second season to be on an Urlacher-like trajectory.

[NewColtsFan]

Why don't we all agree right now that Edmunds will NEVER be as great as Urlacher.   That doesn't mean he can't be great and easily worth the 6th overall pick.

 

This reminds me of when posters used to ask me if Luck would eventually be better than Peyton.

 

No, I always said.   And he doesn't have to be.    He just has to be the best Andrew Luck.   That will be good enough.

 

If we can coach up Edmunds or Smith to be the best they can be,  that will be good enough.

[SolidGold]

6 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Why don't we all agree right now that Edmunds will NEVER be as great as Urlacher.   That doesn't mean he can't be great and easily worth the 6th overall pick.

 

This reminds me of when posters used to ask me if Luck would eventually be better than Peyton.

 

No, I always said.   And he doesn't have to be.    He just has to be the best Andrew Luck.   That will be good enough.

 

If we can coach up Edmunds or Smith to be the best they can be,  that will be good enough.

Pump your brakes. Stop acting like Utlacher was the greatest of all time at his position.  It's not even close. The guy was a pro bowl player.. Wow. He has no rings. Might have been the best tackler on his team but he's no Ray Lewis or Derrick Brooks. He padded his stats playing cover 3 saftey until he retired.. It's about championships not individuals stats at the end of the day. It's linebackers playing right now that's better and will be HOF players if it's based on stats and pro bowl appearances. He's the Dan Marino of his position. Edmunds is being compared to this guy that doesn't mean he can't be better. Big RB's owned Urlacher. Tom Brady juked him out his shoes. Lance Briggs IMO was better.

[crazycolt1]

13 minutes ago, SolidGold said:

Pump your brakes. Stop acting like Utlacher was the greatest of all time at his position.  It's not even close. The guy was a pro bowl player.. Wow. He has no rings. Might have been the best tackler on his team but he's no Ray Lewis or Derrick Brooks. He padded his stats playing cover 3 saftey until he retired.. It's about championships not individuals stats at the end of the day. It's linebackers playing right now that's better and will be HOF players if it's based on stats and pro bowl appearances. He's the Dan Marino of his position. Edmunds is being compared to this guy that doesn't mean he can't be better. Big RB's owned Urlacher. Tom Brady juked him out his shoes. Lance Briggs IMO was better.

I do agree that Urlacher was over rated.

But your comment about it's all about championships is dead wrong. Picking out players and disrespecting them because their team didn't win championships is narrow minded it shows you also disrespect the game of football.

[SolidGold]

5 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

I do agree that Urlacher was over rated.

But your comment about it's all about championships is dead wrong. Picking out players and disrespecting them because their team didn't win championships is narrow minded it shows you also disrespect the game of football.

Individual accolades are great but it's a team game. I never disrespected a player. I said he wasn't the best. Yet you call him overrated. What was disrespectful was how Joseph Addai & Domonique Rhodes ran all over him and his defense in the Super Bowl. Which Gary Brackett got a ring. Fans all over the world enjoy individual players performances as we all should. We have favorite players and that's wonderful but we all are in this for wins and championships. Players and Fans. Don't question my love for the game because I care about wins and losses. My favorite player is TY and if he ball's out and we lose im not ok with that just because he had a good game. That's what Fantasy Football is for.

[pacolts56]

IMO.... if 4 QBs are taken prior to the #6 pick... the selection should simply be from whoever among Chubb, Nelson or Barkley or Smith remain.

 

Edmunds shows exciting potential for sure.... but unless the QB scenario results in a trade down to perhaps Buffalo at #12 or Arizona at #15.... the risk of taking him at #6 is just not a luxury we have if 2 of those 4 other guys are still on the board.

 

We need to get as much of a sure thing at #6 that we can.

[SolidGold]

30 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

I do agree that Urlacher was over rated.

But your comment about it's all about championships is dead wrong. Picking out players and disrespecting them because their team didn't win championships is narrow minded it shows you also disrespect the game of football.

And your disrespecting the game of football and any other team sport with that loser mentality.  This isn't pop warner. Participation awards are for children. " You play to win the game"

Your teammates dont train and put in extra work for your individual highlights. It's one common goal at the beginning of every season and that's to win and compete for a championship at the end.

[NewColtsFan]

55 minutes ago, SolidGold said:

Pump your brakes. Stop acting like Utlacher was the greatest of all time at his position.  It's not even close. The guy was a pro bowl player.. Wow. He has no rings. Might have been the best tackler on his team but he's no Ray Lewis or Derrick Brooks. He padded his stats playing cover 3 saftey until he retired.. It's about championships not individuals stats at the end of the day. It's linebackers playing right now that's better and will be HOF players if it's based on stats and pro bowl appearances. He's the Dan Marino of his position. Edmunds is being compared to this guy that doesn't mean he can't be better. Big RB's owned Urlacher. Tom Brady juked him out his shoes. Lance Briggs IMO was better.

Sorry...   but you completely misread my remark.    Completely.

 

There are no breaks to pump.

 

Urlacher is a Hall of Famer.  Edmunds is a promising rookie.    Period.

 

But the ultimate point that you missed is that Edmunds can also be a Hall of Famer,  but perhaps not as great as Urlacher.   And that's good enough.

 

One guy could be a 10, the other guy a 9.9.   Does it really matter which is which?

 

And if you can't agree to that then you're just looking to argue.   As long as we coach up our guy then it really doesn't matter.

 

[SolidGold]

25 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Sorry...   but you completely misread my remark.    Completely.

 

There are no breaks to pump.

 

Urlacher is a Hall of Famer.  Edmunds is a promising rookie.    Period.

 

But the ultimate point that you missed is that Edmunds can also be a Hall of Famer,  but perhaps not as great as Urlacher.   And that's good enough.

 

One guy could be a 10, the other guy a 9.9.   Does it really matter which is which?

 

And if you can't agree to that then you're just looking to argue.   As long as we coach up our guy then it really doesn't matter.

 

Thanks for the clarification. I totally misunderstood you and I get what your saying now I'm just not going to sale a guy short when he's being compared to a guy IMO that wasn't that great. HOF votes can be questioned as well. I wonder if Lance Briggs would have gotten inducted if they had won that Superbowl. Why is Urlacher in but Briggs isn't ? Urlacher played more seasons than Briggs as well but Briggs numbers and pro bowl apperances are better. So yeah ill take a 9.9 or a 10 , I just dont think Urlacher was either. Lawrence Taylor was a 10. Do you really think Urlacher is even close ? The right coaching and scheme Urlacher is Edmunds floor IMO.

[MikeCurtis]

If Edmunds works his way to be 80% of what Urlacher was....... we would all be happy

 

And...... if you ever visit Chicago...  (I fly there every 4-5 weeks)  I get tired of seeing all the dang hair billboards

 

I mean there must be 50 with Urlacher WITH hair......... It aint natural

 

 

Oh..... and I still dont want a guard at 6 

 

 

[Alex22]

On 08/04/2018 at 10:26 AM, bananabucket said:

His instincts and processing are trash right now compared to Roquan's.  Seriously, watch their tape back to back.  It is night and day.  Though Edmunds did seem to improve in this area towards the end of the year.

 

I don't really want a player who COULD be special so long as they develop.   There are plenty of safer bets to choose from at 6.  If we trade down to 11 or 12 and he's still there, I'd be much more willing to take the gamble.  I just worry Ballard will get enamored with his elite traits and will take him over superior players. 

 

 

Roquan gets caught up on downfield blockers all the time - regularly loses the runner in the backfield. 

 

He needs a good MLB to be anything in the NFL. 

 

Much rather Edmunds - considering we have a former LB coach as our new D coordinator. 

[Alex22]

4 hours ago, southwest1 said:

Let's not get crazy now. Edmunds isn't anywhere near Collins's level. I get the need to compare a prospect to a current player, but that's a leap too far I'm afraid. 

 

Collins isnt really that good. 

 

He was good in a system that utilized his size speed and athleticism. but so far on the Browns he has been mediocre at best. 

[Shive]

11 minutes ago, SolidGold said:

 The right coaching and scheme Urlacher is Edmunds floor IMO.

I don't think you understand what that word means....

[crazycolt1]

3 hours ago, SolidGold said:

Individual accolades are great but it's a team game. I never disrespected a player. I said he wasn't the best. Yet you call him overrated. What was disrespectful was how Joseph Addai & Domonique Rhodes ran all over him and his defense in the Super Bowl. Which Gary Brackett got a ring. Fans all over the world enjoy individual players performances as we all should. We have favorite players and that's wonderful but we all are in this for wins and championships. Players and Fans. Don't question my love for the game because I care about wins and losses. My favorite player is TY and if he ball's out and we lose im not ok with that just because he had a good game. That's what Fantasy Football is for.

Figures you would bring up fantasy football into it.

[NewColtsFan]

2 hours ago, SolidGold said:

Thanks for the clarification. I totally misunderstood you and I get what your saying now I'm just not going to sale a guy short when he's being compared to a guy IMO that wasn't that great. HOF votes can be questioned as well. I wonder if Lance Briggs would have gotten inducted if they had won that Superbowl. Why is Urlacher in but Briggs isn't ? Urlacher played more seasons than Briggs as well but Briggs numbers and pro bowl apperances are better. So yeah ill take a 9.9 or a 10 , I just dont think Urlacher was either. Lawrence Taylor was a 10. Do you really think Urlacher is even close ? The right coaching and scheme Urlacher is Edmunds floor IMO.

 

Thanks...   I appreciate your post...

 

I wasn't trying to be literal about Urlacher being a 10 and Edmunds being a 9.9.  Only saying that they both can be great..   that Edmunds has scary upside...   and as long as we coach him up then I don't want to get sidetracked into who is better and why.    

 

I love Edmunds.   Seriously.   But I love Smith too.   I think Ballard would love to be able to trade down a little..   like with Chicago at 8.    Let the Bears take Nelson and Tampa take whoever they want and then take Edmunds or Smith at the 8 spot.

 

I think Ballard wants to make one more mini-trade, collect more picks, then draft inside the top-10 where the guys he really wants will still be there..

 

Just my hunch...

 

Thanks again...

 

 

[SolidGold]

1 minute ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Thanks...   I appreciate your post...

 

I wasn't trying to be literal about Urlacher being a 10 and Edmunds being a 9.9.  Only saying that they both can be great..   that Edmunds has scary upside...   and as long as we coach him up then I don't want to get sidetracked into who is better and why.    

 

I love Edmunds.   Seriously.   But I love Smith too.   I think Ballard would love to be able to trade down a little..   like with Chicago at 8.    Let the Bears take Nelson and Tampa take whoever they want and then take Edmunds or Smith at the 8 spot.

 

I think Ballard wants to make one more mini-trade, collect more picks, then draft inside the top-10 where the guys he really wants will still be there..

 

Just my hunch...

 

Thanks again...

 

 

I agree.

[Track Guy]

8 hours ago, rock8591 said:

Edmunds will be 20. By the time Edmunds is 22-24, he won't be 6'5'' 255 lbs, more like 6'6'' and 275 lbs

 

This guy ain't getting any taller lol. He's 6'4.5" and will stay that height. He can pack on more weight - if that's what the coaches want him to do - but he's already plenty big enough! It's his longevity and mental growth potential that makes him being young more exciting than his physical growth potential imo. 

 

[rock8591]

9 hours ago, southwest1 said:

Let's not get crazy now. Edmunds isn't anywhere near Collins's level. I get the need to compare a prospect to a current player, but that's a leap too far I'm afraid. 

 

Jamie Collins is so underrated, he's become overrated.

Good, but not great nor elite player.

 

Nowhere near Luke Kuechly or Bobby Wagner. Some games, he's great. Other games, he gets embarrassed (see 2016 AFC championship game vs. Broncos).

 

With all of his physical skills (and college production), I find his floor to be Jamie Collins, sky to be Brian Urlacher.

 

As for Roquan Smith, his floor is Cato June. Sky to be Thomas Davis.

[Defjamz26]

19 hours ago, Fisticuffs111 said:

That's a good point. I also like both, and I know to some of Smith's supporters it could sound like nitpicking, but the reason I and others bring up those weaknesses (getting off blocks/run D) is because it could hurt his potential as a Mike.

No I agree fully with that. It’s something Smith supporters often overlook. As great as he is, he’s just a WILL at the next level. Can’t let him play Mike. 

[southwest1]

18 hours ago, rock8591 said:

 

Jamie Collins is so underrated, he's become overrated.

Good, but not great nor elite player.

 

Nowhere near Luke Kuechly or Bobby Wagner. Some games, he's great. Other games, he gets embarrassed (see 2016 AFC championship game vs. Broncos).

 

With all of his physical skills (and college production), I find his floor to be Jamie Collins, sky to be Brian Urlacher.

 

As for Roquan Smith, his floor is Cato June. Sky to be Thomas Davis.

Oh I agree, Collins is good when he wants to be & he does take off more plays then he should. Kuechly & Wager are absolutely elite LBs. 

 

Right now, Edmunds & Collins don't belong in the same sentence. Part of that is playing for the dismal Browns too. No one really wants to play ball in Cleveland. So, I cut Collins some slack there. 

 

[Superman]

On 4/8/2018 at 10:15 PM, SolidGold said:

IMO he will be better than Urlacher. 

 

I wonder how many other highly touted LBs this has been said about over the last 15 years, and how many of those guys got blown out of the league...

 

Take a look at Urlacher's bio: https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/U/UrlaBr00.htm 

 

Expecting any prospect to be better than a HOFer is setting yourself up for disappointment.

[SolidGold]

4 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I wonder how many other highly touted LBs this has been said about over the last 15 years, and how many of those guys got blown out of the league...

 

Take a look at Urlacher's bio: https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/U/UrlaBr00.htm 

 

Expecting any prospect to be better than a HOFer is setting yourself up for disappointment.

You guys are really serious about this overrated guy. Don't confuse popularity with actual stats. Over the last 15 years are you serious ? He's a HOFer obviously because of popularity and probably for other reasons I won't speak on but its definitely not the numbers. If it was his numbers then we wouldn't be debating this. His numbers are no different from players like Lance Briggs, Lawrence Timmons, Karlos Dansby, Thomas Davis , David Harris and so many more linebackers.

 

* Facts: 3-4 in playoffs/ no rings

* 5 of the 7 playoff games he had 0 tackles.

* Only 2 seasons with 100 solo tackles

* Wasn't even the best linebacker on his team.

* I've seen articles with him rated higher than Mike Singletary on greatest bears off all time list. That's a joke.. But now I see why. Hahaha public perception at its best. The HOF process is a joke.

[SolidGold]

4 minutes ago, SolidGold said:

Expecting any prospect to be better than a HOFer is setting yourself up for disappointment.

Funny how every HOFer started out as a prospect. 

[rock8591]

1 hour ago, SolidGold said:

You guys are really serious about this overrated guy. Don't confuse popularity with actual stats. Over the last 15 years are you serious ? He's a HOFer obviously because of popularity and probably for other reasons I won't speak on but its definitely not the numbers. If it was his numbers then we wouldn't be debating this. His numbers are no different from players like Lance Briggs, Lawrence Timmons, Karlos Dansby, Thomas Davis , David Harris and so many more linebackers.

 

* Facts: 3-4 in playoffs/ no rings

* 5 of the 7 playoff games he had 0 tackles.

* Only 2 seasons with 100 tackles

* Wasn't even the best linebacker on his team.

* I've seen articles with him rated higher than Mike Singletary on greatest bears off all time list. That's a joke.. But now I see why. Hahaha public perception at its best. The HOF process is a joke.

 

LOL troll.

 

I try not to be critical of folks with less than 1000 posts, but you prove every stereotype.

 

http://www.nfl.com/player/brianurlacher/2504098/profile

 

8 seasons with 100+ tackles.

[SolidGold]

37 minutes ago, rock8591 said:

 

LOL troll.

 

I try not to be critical of folks with less than 1000 posts, but you prove every stereotype.

 

http://www.nfl.com/player/brianurlacher/2504098/profile

 

8 seasons with 100+ tackles.

Hold this L you clown.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/U/UrlaBr00.htm

[SolidGold]

1 hour ago, rock8591 said:

 

LOL troll.

 

I try not to be critical of folks with less than 1000 posts, but you prove every stereotype.

 

http://www.nfl.com/player/brianurlacher/2504098/profile

 

8 seasons with 100+ tackles.

If your combining his Assisted tackles yes of course. But most importantly this is a debate about a retired football player. No need for name calling or being judgemental. I apologize for calling you a clown but I don't appreciate you jumping in immediately calling me a troll because we don't agree on something. Either you agree with me or you don't. For the record I will never be trolling. It might sound stupid to some folks and I might be misinformed on some things and that's ok but I don't want to be labeled by you or anyone else on here and that's the end of it. I'm done with the Urlacher discussion. I rather get back on topic.

[Dark Superman]

Don't feat the reaper.

[Superman]

3 hours ago, SolidGold said:

You guys are really serious about this overrated guy. Don't confuse popularity with actual stats. Over the last 15 years are you serious ? He's a HOFer obviously because of popularity and probably for other reasons I won't speak on but its definitely not the numbers. If it was his numbers then we wouldn't be debating this. His numbers are no different from players like Lance Briggs, Lawrence Timmons, Karlos Dansby, Thomas Davis , David Harris and so many more linebackers.

 

* Facts: 3-4 in playoffs/ no rings

* 5 of the 7 playoff games he had 0 tackles.

* Only 2 seasons with 100 solo tackles

* Wasn't even the best linebacker on his team.

* I've seen articles with him rated higher than Mike Singletary on greatest bears off all time list. That's a joke.. But now I see why. Hahaha public perception at its best. The HOF process is a joke.

 

I don't want to debate over Urlacher. His resume speaks for itself, and whether or not he's overrated, he had a long career and had a lot of impressive achievements, including a DPOY (which no one else on your list up there was able to do; between the five of them, they have a total of one DPOY vote... total). 

 

Even if you said you expect Edmunds to be better than one of those other five, it would be more draft season silliness. And that's not because Edmunds isn't a good prospect; it's because projecting prospects to be better than great players who had long, productive careers is silly.

 

That's before we talk about how the Edmunds projection -- especially in this thread -- pretty much ignores every flaw and weakness in his game in the name of 'he's going to get better!' There are a lot of "great" prospects over the years who never panned out, relegated to the ash heap of NFL history. To fall in love with a player's potential and wish away his weaknesses isn't honest evaluation/scouting. It's gotten a lot of GMs fired.

 

There are a lot of reasons to shy away from a player like Edmunds, especially at the top of the draft.