Draftanomics
  • 2027 board
  • Consensus board
  • 2028 way-too-early
  • Draft news
  • Simulator
  • The house mock
  • Draft order
  • Trade calculator
  • The Scouting Slate
  • Sleepers & reaches
  • Movers & fallers
  • Player comps
  • Dynasty rookie board
  • Track record
  • Past drafts, re-graded
  • Analyst leaderboard
My rankingsAccountFounders’ rate
Founders’ rate →
Draftanomics

Honest NFL Draft analytics. The model's receipts against actual NFL teams live on the track record.

Boards
  • 2027 board
  • Consensus board
  • Sleepers
Tools
  • Mock draft simulator
  • Plays Like
  • Dynasty rookie board
Track Record
  • Year-by-year results
  • Accountability Index
  • Our board, on the record
  • Past drafts, re-graded
  • Methodology
  • Developers · free API
  • About
Account
  • My board
  • Premium
Data + sources
RAS by Kent Lee Platte·Consensus Big Board (Arif Hasan)·nflverse·PFR·CFBD·All sources & credits·Methodology
Career-value model, live
Privacy·Terms·Press ⌘K to search·Draftanomics2026
  1. Draftanomics/
  2. 2021 board/
  3. TEN

TEN

2021 team hubBacktestHaul · B
Refreshed just now
GM:Mike Borgonzinew regimehistory →
Scheme:Vertical4-3Match ZonePower Setter
Picks
8
1st @ #22
Draft capital
13.4
more capital than 38% of teams
Top model fit
Justin Fields
QB · best blend of grade and roster need
Draft haul
B
Solid value haul (picks averaged 36.1 sp…
🎯Mock as this team
TEN
TeamTeam hub·
ClassMock draft simulator
Target boardDraft capitalHaul gradeSchemeCap outlook
TEN's biggest positional needs
QBdepth need
top fit: Justin Fields (QB)

Who TENshould take — each prospect's model grade, weighted up where the roster is thin, so highly graded players at positions TEN needs rise to the top.

50/50 prospects
Rank↑PlayerPosTierCollegePos needModel rankFitWhy he fits
1
Justin Fieldsblend#1
QBBlue Chip· Ohio St.· model #1
QBBlue ChipOhio St.depth need#11.03Adds depth where the roster is thin; the board says top-15 talent.
2
Trevor Lawrenceblend#2
QBBlue Chip· Clemson· model #2
QBBlue ChipClemsondepth need#20.94Adds depth where the roster is thin; the board says top-15 talent.
3
Zach Wilsonblend#10
QB1st Round· BYU· model #10
QB1st RoundBYUdepth need#100.87Adds depth where the roster is thin; the board says top-15 talent.
4
Trey Lanceblend#16
QB1st Round· North Dakota St.· model #16
QB1st RoundNorth Dakota St.depth need#160.85Adds depth where the roster is thin; the board sees a first-rounder.
5
DeVonta Smithblend#3$11M
WRBlue Chip· Alabama· model #3
WRBlue ChipAlabamalow need#30.82A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board says top-15 talent.
6
Ja'Marr Chaseblend#4$10M
WRBlue Chip· LSU· model #4
WRBlue ChipLSUlow need#40.82A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board says top-15 talent.
7
Najee Harrisblend#5$9M
RBBlue Chip· Alabama· model #5
RBBlue ChipAlabamalow need#50.81A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board says top-15 talent.
8
Patrick Surtain IIblend#7$8M
CB1st Round· Alabama· model #7
CB1st RoundAlabamalow need#70.80A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board says top-15 talent.
9
Micah Parsonsblend#6$8M
LBBlue Chip· Penn St.· model #6
LBBlue ChipPenn St.low need#60.78A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board says top-15 talent.
10
Javonte Williamsblend#8$7M
RB1st Round· North Carolina· model #8
RB1st RoundNorth Carolinalow need#80.76A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board says top-15 talent.
11
Rashod Batemanblend#9$7M
WR1st Round· Minnesota· model #9
WR1st RoundMinnesotalow need#90.76A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board says top-15 talent.
12
Penei Sewellblend#11$6M
OL1st Round· Oregon· model #11
OL1st RoundOregonlow need#110.75A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board says top-15 talent.
13
Rashawn Slaterblend#14$6M
OL1st Round· Northwestern· model #14
OL1st RoundNorthwesternlow need#140.75A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board says top-15 talent.
14
Jaylen Waddleblend#12$6M
WR1st Round· Alabama· model #12
WR1st RoundAlabamalow need#120.75A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board says top-15 talent.
15
Alijah Vera-Tuckerblend#17$5M
OL1st Round· USC· model #17
OL1st RoundUSClow need#170.74A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board sees a first-rounder.
16
Teven Jenkinsblend#18$5M
OL1st Round· Oklahoma St.· model #18
OL1st RoundOklahoma St.low need#180.74A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board sees a first-rounder.
17
Christian Darrisawblend#19$4M
OL1st Round· Virginia Tech· model #19
OL1st RoundVirginia Techlow need#190.74A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board sees a first-rounder.
18
Kyle Pittsblend#15$5M
TE1st Round· Florida· model #15
TE1st RoundFloridalow need#150.74A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board says top-15 talent.
19
Jeremiah Owusu-Koramoahblend#13$6M
LB1st Round· Notre Dame· model #13
LB1st RoundNotre Damelow need#130.72A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board says top-15 talent.
20
Rondale Mooreblend#21$4M
WR1st Round· Purdue· model #21
WR1st RoundPurduelow need#210.71A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board sees a first-rounder.
21
Elijah Mooreblend#22$4M
WR1st Round· Mississippi· model #22
WR1st RoundMississippilow need#220.71A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board sees a first-rounder.
22
Landon Dickersonblend#24$4M
OL1st Round· Alabama· model #24
OL1st RoundAlabamalow need#240.70A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board sees a first-rounder.
23
Alex Leatherwoodblend#25$4M
OL1st Round· Alabama· model #25
OL1st RoundAlabamalow need#250.70A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board sees a first-rounder.
24
Michael Carterblend#23$4M
RB1st Round· North Carolina· model #23
RB1st RoundNorth Carolinalow need#230.70A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board sees a first-rounder.
25
Jaelan Phillipsblend#20$4M
DL1st Round· Miami (FL)· model #20
DL1st RoundMiami (FL)low need#200.70A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board sees a first-rounder.
26
Travis Etienneblend#26$4M
RB1st Round· Clemson· model #26
RB1st RoundClemsonlow need#260.69A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board sees a first-rounder.
27
Jaycee Hornblend#28$4M
CB1st Round· South Carolina· model #28
CB1st RoundSouth Carolinalow need#280.69A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board sees a first-rounder.
28
Kadarius Toneyblend#27$4M
WR1st Round· Florida· model #27
WR1st RoundFloridalow need#270.68A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board sees a first-rounder.
29
Creed Humphreyblend#31$3M
OL1st Round· Oklahoma· model #31
OL1st RoundOklahomalow need#310.67A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board sees a first-rounder.
30
Samuel Cosmiblend#34$3M
OLDay 2· Texas· model #34
OLDay 2Texaslow need#340.66A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board sees a top-100 player.
31
Kenneth Gainwell
RBDay 2· Memphis· model #33
RBDay 2Memphislow need#330.66A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board sees a top-100 player.
32
Mac Jones
QBDay 2· Alabama· model #56
QBDay 2Alabamadepth need#560.66Adds depth where the roster is thin; the board sees a top-100 player.
33
Zaven Collinsblend#29$4M
LB1st Round· Tulsa· model #29
LB1st RoundTulsalow need#290.65A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board sees a first-rounder.
34
Christian Barmoreblend#30$4M
DL1st Round· Alabama· model #30
DL1st RoundAlabamalow need#300.64A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board sees a first-rounder.
35
Caleb Farleyblend#37$3M
CBDay 2· Virginia Tech· model #37
CBDay 2Virginia Techlow need#370.64A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board sees a top-100 player.
36
Eric Stokesblend#38$3M
CBDay 2· Georgia· model #38
CBDay 2Georgialow need#380.64A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board sees a top-100 player.
37
Azeez Ojulariblend#32$3M
OLB1st Round· Georgia· model #32
OLB1st RoundGeorgialow need#320.64A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board sees a first-rounder.
38
Alim McNeill
DTDay 2· North Carolina St.· model #35
DTDay 2North Carolina St.low need#350.62A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board sees a top-100 player.
39
Amon-Ra St. Brownblend#39$3M
WRDay 2· USC· model #39
WRDay 2USClow need#390.62A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board sees a top-100 player.
40
Gregory Rousseaublend#36$3M
DLDay 2· Miami (FL)· model #36
DLDay 2Miami (FL)low need#360.62A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board sees a top-100 player.
41
Liam Eichenbergblend#41$3M
OLDay 2· Notre Dame· model #41
OLDay 2Notre Damelow need#410.62A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board sees a top-100 player.
42
Wyatt Davisblend#43$3M
OLDay 2· Ohio St.· model #43
OLDay 2Ohio St.low need#430.61A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board sees a top-100 player.
43
D'Wayne Eskridge
WRDay 2· Western Michigan· model #42
WRDay 2Western Michiganlow need#420.60A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board sees a top-100 player.
44
Trey Smithblend#47$2M
OLDay 2· Tennessee· model #47
OLDay 2Tennesseelow need#470.59A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board sees a top-100 player.
45
Pat Freiermuthblend#46$2M
TEDay 2· Penn St.· model #46
TEDay 2Penn St.low need#460.59A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board sees a top-100 player.
46
Kwity Payeblend#40$3M
DLDay 2· Michigan· model #40
DLDay 2Michiganlow need#400.58A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board sees a top-100 player.
47
Jalen Mayfield
OLDay 2· Michigan· model #49
OLDay 2Michiganlow need#490.58A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board sees a top-100 player.
48
Quinn Meinerz
CDay 2· Wisconsin–Whitewater· model #51
CDay 2Wisconsin–Whitewaterlow need#510.57A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board sees a top-100 player.
49
Brady Christensenblend#52$2M
OLDay 2· BYU· model #52
OLDay 2BYUlow need#520.57A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board sees a top-100 player.
50
Jamin Davisblend#44$3M
LBDay 2· Kentucky· model #44
LBDay 2Kentuckylow need#440.57A best-player-available play, not a need pick; the board sees a top-100 player.