2023 2nd round #41 pick is BJ Ojulari LB

dreamcastrocks

Chopped Liver Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2005
Posts
46,065
Reaction score
11,598
This. A younger player always carries the short term risk that the NFL might have too many more developed guys and you struggle a bit.

Ojulari was the youngest player in the 2023 draft and he's now physically a year ahead of the guys who were still in college last year.

I think 8 sacks is the benchmark, but what I really want to see more is consistent pressure.
More than that, he is a year ahead mentally as he already went through the rookie season and all that entails.
 

Stout

Hold onto the ball, Murray!
Joined
Dec 30, 2002
Posts
38,499
Reaction score
21,525
Location
Pittsburgh, PA--Enemy territory!
And dude is STILL younger than most of our rookies.

That rookie contract for Beej is nearly all just OJT. I don't expect we will see who he really is as a player until it's about expired... the key IMNSHO is to see continuous growth from him.
I think I would be pretty happy with 7 sacks from him this season if they came with a dozen hits, a couple dozen pressures and a handful of TFL's
Yep, and that is problematic. Big time.
 

Ouchie-Z-Clown

I'm better than Mulli!
Joined
Sep 16, 2002
Posts
61,193
Reaction score
53,583
Location
SoCal
He was initially tried at Edge (because of injuries) though during his rookie season and was awful.
Yeah but that was break glass in case of emergency. That wasn’t the position he had been taught, studied and prepared for. Shocking he stunk. A rookie being switched mid season.
 

dreamcastrocks

Chopped Liver Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2005
Posts
46,065
Reaction score
11,598
Exactly. His age is nothing but a hinderance for us at the moment, unless (if he does hit big) we get him tied down to a long-term contract. If the problem is he is too young and raw, that wouldn't set us up well at all. That would have him spend the bulk of his contract acclimatizing and developing just in time to leave and be good elsewhere.
Or we just re-sign him? :shrug:
 

kerouac9

Klowned by Keim
Joined
Feb 14, 2003
Posts
37,389
Reaction score
27,544
Location
Gilbert, AZ
Having high production players at market price is a good position to be in.
A better position to be in is having high-production players below market price, either because they’re on rookie deals or you extended them early.
 

Krangodnzr

Captain of Team Murray
Joined
Jul 21, 2002
Posts
35,667
Reaction score
32,662
Location
Orange County, CA
Yeah but that was break glass in case of emergency. That wasn’t the position he had been taught, studied and prepared for. Shocking he stunk. A rookie being switched mid season.
Eh he was so bad that everyone thought there was going to be a big drop off when he stepped on the field in his fourth year. His big season with the Cardinals was a pretty big surprise and quite a few AFSNers didn't want to resign him because of the potential that he was a flash in the pan.

The real moral of the story is that you don't just assume that a highly drafted player can switch a position, but also to have patience with a player as well because sometimes it takes awhile for the player to develop.
 

CardNots

ASFN Lifer
Joined
Sep 12, 2002
Posts
3,991
Reaction score
3,593
Location
Jenks, Oklahoma
A better position to be in is having high-production players below market price, either because they’re on rookie deals or you extended them early.
We have gotten smarter in utilization of the option year but for the current management the jury is still out how they will manage high production players going forward.
 

oaken1

Stone Cold
Supporting Member
Banned from P+R
Joined
Mar 13, 2004
Posts
16,777
Reaction score
13,450
Location
Modesto, California
Yep, and that is problematic. Big time.
Ehh..could be. But if we see continuous growth we can re sign him at a reasonable rate right before he hits his peak.
At his age he should continue to show maturity into his second contract. But we will be paying him based on first contract production. That's kinda the entire point in player development.
 

BritCard

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jan 10, 2020
Posts
21,315
Reaction score
37,791
Location
UK
Because I’m looking for sustainable success in pass rushers, not a sugar rush. Thats why I rated whether the player turned out to be good. A single data point doesn’t mean much to me—for example, with the guys from Buffalo and Seattle who were mid second-year players but turned out pretty good.

It’s bizarre that perspective matters only sometimes with people who only want to make cheap points instead of have a real conversation.

We're having a real conversation, it's just that nearly everybody disagrees with your unique "perspective".
 

Stout

Hold onto the ball, Murray!
Joined
Dec 30, 2002
Posts
38,499
Reaction score
21,525
Location
Pittsburgh, PA--Enemy territory!
A better position to be in is having high-production players below market price, either because they’re on rookie deals or you extended them early.
And that's the problem. We're basically paying him to develop and then praying we get to pay through the nose for top production. This is why his age and immaturity work against him. He may not bust, but it doesn't make him a good pick. The advantage of rookies is getting a lot for paying a little. There doesn't seem to be the chance for that with him. His biggest supporters hope he makes it to a scintillating 6 or 8 sacks.

This board tried to tell me he was the answer to our edge woes. If we wanted that, he was the last pick we should have made. Our best hope, IMO, is that he breaks out in time for us to cripple our cap by paying him a giant wad of cash. Which we should do, for sure, if he finally develops into a star, but we'll have wasted his rookie deal because he was not at all a 2nd-round pick due to age and immaturity. And injury. Cripes, what a mess.
 

Stout

Hold onto the ball, Murray!
Joined
Dec 30, 2002
Posts
38,499
Reaction score
21,525
Location
Pittsburgh, PA--Enemy territory!
We have gotten smarter in utilization of the option year but for the current management the jury is still out how they will manage high production players going forward.
Ojulari has no option year as he was a 2nd-round pick. This is the problem with drafting a kid who needs forever to develop. Patience works against us in that scenario.
 

Stout

Hold onto the ball, Murray!
Joined
Dec 30, 2002
Posts
38,499
Reaction score
21,525
Location
Pittsburgh, PA--Enemy territory!
Ehh..could be. But if we see continuous growth we can re sign him at a reasonable rate right before he hits his peak.
At his age he should continue to show maturity into his second contract. But we will be paying him based on first contract production. That's kinda the entire point in player development.
Except even his supporters are preaching so much patience that we won't know in time to get him signed to a team-friendly deal. We'll either have to pray he develops into what we need and sign him to an extension that might end up overpaying for little to nothing, or wait to see if he breaks out and then pay him the bag and have wasted the cheap contract years.
 

DVontel

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jan 28, 2015
Posts
12,533
Reaction score
21,643
Ojulari has no option year as he was a 2nd-round pick. This is the problem with drafting a kid who needs forever to develop. Patience works against us in that scenario.
We’re not a Super Bowl contending team as of this moment, so I believe it made perfect sense to drafting a dude who needs time to develop. If we were contending for a SB, then I would agree with you.

If that isn’t the perfect time to develop a young player to you, then I’m not sure when is. Unless, you just don’t believe in that at all.
 

CardNots

ASFN Lifer
Joined
Sep 12, 2002
Posts
3,991
Reaction score
3,593
Location
Jenks, Oklahoma
Ojulari has no option year as he was a 2nd-round pick. This is the problem with drafting a kid who needs forever to develop. Patience works against us in that scenario.
Then it’s his worth year…

I don’t expect management will have anything but a short leash on any currently rostered player.

Players they held onto last year will be shown the door.

I didn’t see drafting of recently injured players which is different than last year’s draft.
 

Ouchie-Z-Clown

I'm better than Mulli!
Joined
Sep 16, 2002
Posts
61,193
Reaction score
53,583
Location
SoCal
Eh he was so bad that everyone thought there was going to be a big drop off when he stepped on the field in his fourth year. His big season with the Cardinals was a pretty big surprise and quite a few AFSNers didn't want to resign him because of the potential that he was a flash in the pan.

The real moral of the story is that you don't just assume that a highly drafted player can switch a position, but also to have patience with a player as well because sometimes it takes awhile for the player to develop.
At the end of the day he was a bad selection to prove the “patience” argument because he had to change positions to bear fruit. That wasn’t “patience,” that was being played out of position.
 

Krangodnzr

Captain of Team Murray
Joined
Jul 21, 2002
Posts
35,667
Reaction score
32,662
Location
Orange County, CA
And that's the problem. We're basically paying him to develop and then praying we get to pay through the nose for top production. This is why his age and immaturity work against him. He may not bust, but it doesn't make him a good pick. The advantage of rookies is getting a lot for paying a little. There doesn't seem to be the chance for that with him. His biggest supporters hope he makes it to a scintillating 6 or 8 sacks.

This board tried to tell me he was the answer to our edge woes. If we wanted that, he was the last pick we should have made. Our best hope, IMO, is that he breaks out in time for us to cripple our cap by paying him a giant wad of cash. Which we should do, for sure, if he finally develops into a star, but we'll have wasted his rookie deal because he was not at all a 2nd-round pick due to age and immaturity. And injury. Cripes, what a mess.
If he gets 8 sacks this year, he'll be a very good pick in the 2nd round.

But like I've said, I don't want to see just 8 sacks, I want to see him pressure the QB consistently.
 

WakeForestCard

Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2014
Posts
263
Reaction score
694
Location
Texas
And that's the problem. We're basically paying him to develop and then praying we get to pay through the nose for top production. This is why his age and immaturity work against him. He may not bust, but it doesn't make him a good pick. The advantage of rookies is getting a lot for paying a little. There doesn't seem to be the chance for that with him. His biggest supporters hope he makes it to a scintillating 6 or 8 sacks.

This board tried to tell me he was the answer to our edge woes. If we wanted that, he was the last pick we should have made. Our best hope, IMO, is that he breaks out in time for us to cripple our cap by paying him a giant wad of cash. Which we should do, for sure, if he finally develops into a star, but we'll have wasted his rookie deal because he was not at all a 2nd-round pick due to age and immaturity. And injury. Cripes, what a mess.
I think the issue is that there’s not really a finished product pass rusher that’s going to get you 10+ sacks a year available at pick 41. Look at all the DL and LB picks in top two rounds over the past 4 years.

A scintillating 6-8 sacks is what should be expected. If you want consistently over 10 you better be drafting that player in the top 10 overall.

We need BJ to develop into the solid #2 pass rush option (and that’s all that should be expected from a 2nd round pick unless you have unrealistic expectations). We need to find the #1 guy still.
 

Latest posts

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
540,486
Posts
5,293,818
Members
6,287
Latest member
NoObstacles92
Top