​
https://preview.redd.it/qtlxsbe27nxa1.jpg?width=900&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2ca4c839a8acd26ebcf04a5f72c394ba1806045d
The 2023 NFL Draft is in the books and it’s time to break down everything that happened over the weekend! Obviously everybody got better by adding young talent, but some teams used their draft capital better than others – whether that’s just the players they picked or their overall strategy – and there are selections I was a bigger fan of than others.
So in this article, I will lay out my five biggest winners and losers, as well as my ten biggest steals and reaches respectively. Plus, I added a few more contenders for each category at the end. As far as winners/losers go, this can be a specific team that did really well in terms of how they used their assets, individual prospects, position groups or NFL veterans, due to how they will be affected. The steals/reaches portion is pretty self-explanatory, as I will judge the names selected based on my personal rankings in correlation consensus boards and looking at who was still available or how these picks fit into the overall picture of the draft.
One name I considered as a winner here was Ravens quarterback Lamar Jackson, since he signed the contract that in terms of average annual value is the largest in NFL history, before his team got him a new stud receiver in the first round. However, I didn’t want the first half of this equation to factor in too much here, even though in terms of Thursday, nobody had a better 24 hours than him personally.
Let’s break it all down now:
​

Winners:

​
https://preview.redd.it/dd0f2pf67nxa1.jpg?width=900&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=39a8e3b0483b5e214e303a0831560c43bf540d29
​

Howie Roseman & the Bulldogs graduate program

Early on day three, I tweeted out that this has to be a bit at this point, because of the absurd amount of Georgia players joining the Eagles recently. Last year, they traded up a couple of spots for big defensive tackle Jordan Davis in the first round and then were able to take advantage of some medical concerns around Nakobe Dean, who I thought purely based on tape was worthy of a day one selection. Now this time around, they actually spent both of their first-rounders on two more members from that historic 2021 Bulldog defense.
Jalen Carter was my number one overall prospect purely based on tape and swapped spots with the Bears at number nine in exchange for a ’24 fourth-rounder. And while I personally had Nolan Smith as my number six edge rusher right in that range he was selected at, I don’t think anybody thought he’d be available at 30th overall. They came back on day three and picked cornerback Kelee Ringo at 105th overall, who was mocked in the first round a couple of months ago still and I had as my CB6. And because they didn’t feel like any Georgia guys they liked were still on the board, they called the Lions, who just shocked everybody by taking a running back 12th overall, and traded a ’25 fourth-rounder for a still very talented (when healthy) player in D’Andre Swift.
While it’s certainly not always the soundest strategy to pick the guys from the best programs in the country, those were all among the best names available at the points Philly was on the clock for and we can all appreciate them not overthinking things and potentially reaching on some smaller names that they feel in love with on tape. That’s obviously also great for the Georgia program, to have this pipeline to the NFL, where more kids coming out of high school want to commit to Kirby Smart, because they know he can’t get them to the pros ultimately. I also really liked the Eagles’ four other selections, in Alabama tackle Tyler Steen (65th overall) as somebody whose only weakness at this point is the way he can absorb power effectively, Illinois’ Sydney Brown (66th) was my number two safety and somebody I believe has the potential to be a Brian Dawkins-like player if he becomes a more reliable tackler, Tanner McKee (188th) is a bit curious because of how drastically different his profile is to Jalen Hurts but was my QB8 and finally, Texas’ Moro Ojomo (249th) could have easily gone in the early 100s as a powerful athlete with alignment versatility along the D-line.
​

Geno Smith

In a terms of a veteran quarterback who didn’t just earn a massive contract to secure himself the face of the franchise like Lamar Jackson, probably nobody had a better weekend than Geno Smith. First, the Seahawks were in prime territory for one of the top QBs in the draft at fifth overall – which I wouldn’t expect them to get another chance like this anytime soon because the roster is too good at this point – but instead they selected Illinois cornerback Devon Witherspoon. Then at 20th overall, Kentucky’s Will Levis, who most teams had as QB4 on their boards, was still available, yet instead they picked Ohio State wide receiver Jaxon Smith-Njigba – a perfect fit for them in the slot, to tie their room of pass-catchers together.
Seattle still had a chance to trade back into the late first round or even up to one of the top two picks of day two for Levis. Instead, they let the Titans pick him 33rd overall and then after some people connected them to Tennessee QB Hendon Hooker, they passed on him with both of their second-round picks, in favor of Auburn edge rusher Derick Hall (37th overall) to help them close out games and the consensus number three running back in Zach Charbonnet from UCLA (52nd), to give them one of the most formidable backfield duos along with another second-rounder last year in Kenneth Walker. On day three, the Hawks still got two more interior O-linemen with starter qualities in LSU’s Anthony Bradford (108th) and Michigan’s Olu Ouwatimi (153rd), along with another RB in the seventh round, with Kenny McIntosh (237th) as a replacement for Travis Homer as a designated third-down back.
So instead of potentially taking advantage of the increased draft capital they possessed to invest into a future signal-caller to eventually replace Geno, they actually got him an uber-reliable slot receiver, who does a great job of being friendly to the quarterback with his angles out of breaks, his feel for secondary plays and how he instantly gets upfield after the catch. They added some bodies to an interior O-line that was a bit concerning and they filled out that backfield with two guys that can help out in the passing game as well, when you look at Charbonnet’s work in the screen game and making guys miss in the flats off dump-offs, while McIntosh can be a legit extra receiver, who can flex out wide and go vertical. This offense has a chance to be really explosive and without any competition added, Geno is going to pull the trigger for them the next couple of years at least.
​

Pittsburgh Steelers

Thinking of a team that every single time they were on the clock selected a prospect I had higher on my personal board, I think the Steelers absolutely aced their draft. The one name where it wasn’t an actual surplus but rather right in line with my rankings was actually the first one. However, with the top three offensive tackles off the board already, they did what I projected them to in my final mock draft and moved up – not four spots like I thought, but rather three – in exchange for a fourth-round pick (120th overall) with the Patriots and sniped the Jets a spot later, who everybody projected to go O-line. The Gang Green brass vehemently denies that they were locked in on that position but I certainly think that’s the case. So Pittsburgh recognized that they needed to make this move, probably were helped out gladly by New England, allowing them to move in front of their AFC East rivals, and got a pro-ready right tackle, after which I saw a significant drop-off.
From day two on however is when they really started to add value. Having the very first pick in the second round, they received several calls about teams wanting to move up, but instead stuck there and selected the guy many projected them to target at 17th overall due to his dad being a cornerstone player for that defense in the past and them addressing their other big position of need with Penn State’s Joey Porter Jr. – a super-long, talented corner, who will be a great fit with his ability to squeeze down passing downs in Pittsburgh’s zone-heavy scheme and gives them some versatility to play press-man into the boundary, if you have a safety clouding over the top. Wisconsin interior D-lineman Keeanu Benton (49th overall) has the ability to actually turn himself into a Cam Heyward-esque player and now gets to learn from the man himself. And Georgia tight-end Darnell Washington (93rd) received some first-round buzz at times thanks to his profile to turn into a dominant blocker, his massive frame and the speed he can move at for being 265 pounds, to rumble through defenses.
With their three picks on day three, they took advantage of another undersized outside linebacker from Wisconsin falling in Nick Herbig (132nd overall), who shows very active hands and understands how to finish his rushes, now getting him paired up with a fellow Badger in T.J. Watt. Purdue cornerback Corey Trice (241st) was on the top-100 board for many draft analysts with tremendous length and athletic tools, along with already being an excellent tackler. And finally, they take a stab at a physically talented offensive lineman in Maryland’s Spencer Anderson (251st) with starting experience at guard, center and tackle.
​

Kicking specialists & Mid-round quarterbacks

This one is pretty insane. Let’s start with the specialists, because we saw three kickers and punters each selected in this draft. In 2022, we actually saw four punters go, but only one kicker. We didn’t have any long-snappers selected, but just looking at “kicking” specialists, over the last 20 years, we’ve only seen six guys hear their names called three other times – 2004, 2012 and 2018. Even more glaring to me was how early those guys went. We didn’t have somebody like a Roberto Aguayo, who was a second-round pick in 2016 – and look how that turned out – but the 49ers used a top-100 pick on Michigan’s Jake Moody (99th overall), the Patriots picked Maryland’s Chad Ryland (112th) early on day three and the Packers took Auburn’s Daniel Carlson (203rd) in the sixth round. In terms of the punters, New England came back and took another specialist just inside the top-200 in Michigan State’s Bryce Baringer (192nd) and then we had two more with the second Michigan guy here in Brad Robbins (217th) going to Cincinnati and Ethan Evans (223rd) from Wingate joining the Rams.
Meanwhile, we had an unprecedented run on quarterbacks in the middle rounds. We started the draft with three QBs inside the first four picks, while Will Levis from Kentucky had to wait until the top of day two for the Titans to make the move up for him. After that, there was a break for 35 spots until we saw Tennessee’s Hendon Hooker (68th overall) come off the board – a range I thought was much more appropriate than some first-round buzz he received, considering he’s a 25-year old who will miss his at least most of his rookie season with a torn ACL and is coming from an offensive system that shows very little resemblance to what he will be asked to do in the pros. Things really started to pick up from 127th overall on, as over the next 72 selection, we saw eight(!) signal-callers come off the board – Fresno State’s Jake Haener, Georgia’s Stetson Bennett, Purdue’s Aidan O’Connell, UCLA’s Dorian Thompson-Robinson, Houston’s Clayton Tune, Penn State’s Sean FREAKING Clifford, BYU’s Jaren Hall and Stanford’s Tanner McKee in that order. And it’s not even that I don’t like those guys. Half of them actually went where I thought it was appropriate for them. Yet, you can absolute tell that there was a Brock Purdy effect, considering how many teams took a stab on these guys in the middle rounds, when better football players were available – 12 selected within the first five round actually set a new record. We’ll have to see how that strategy turns out, but good for all the guys that benefitted from it already.
​

Monti Ossenfort

The final name I wanted to give credit to here is the new general manager of the Arizona Cardinals. Because after just one draft, I’m a bigger fan of what he was able to accomplish than really any of the DECADE Steve Keim had to turn the Birds into a contender, other than maybe 2015. And it’s not just the players he selected individually, but rather the positions he targeted in those ranges and he process behind it all and most impressively, the way they maneuvered around the board throughout the weekend.
Now, first and foremost, it feels like Monti and company probably got a little bit lucky at the top, with the Texans apparently having a generational-type grade on Alabama edge defender Will Anderson Jr. and being willing to invest as much draft capital to move up for him, after already grabbing their QB of the future in C.J. Stroud second overall. Otherwise, it appeared that Arizona might ultimately be stuck at number three, but they were able to package that with an early fourth-rounder (105th overall) for a massive haul – pick 12 and a quasi-first-rounder with 33, along with the Texans’ first and third next year. Yet, then after the Lions probably were scrambling a little bit considering the guy heavily favored to be their choice at sixth overall in Illinois cornerback Devon Witherspoon was taken by the Seahawks a spot earlier, the Cardinals decided to move back up six spots, in exchange for a much smaller return – pick 34 and 168, while getting pick 81 back – and they still got the guy that was really picking up steam for them being the choice at third overall – the consensus top-ranked left tackle Paris Johnson Jr.
However, that’s not where things stopped for Arizona. In the second round, they moved down eight spots with the Titans having eyes on the falling Kentucky QB Will Levis, in exchange for moving up nine spots in the third round and another three next year. With those selections they brought in my fifth-ranked edge defender in LSU’s B.J. Ojulari and a top-ten corner not taking injury into account with Syracuse’s Garrett Williams, who is now projected to return from the torn ACL in July already. Plus, then the best trade they pulled off in my opinion – going back to the well with the Lions – they traded pick 96, which Detroit used on a barely drafted D-tackle in my opinion (Brodric Martin from Western Kentucky) for picks 122, 139 and 168. They went on to turn those into a guard who put up elite testing numbers at the combine in UCLA’s Jon Gaines II, a developmental quarterback with great arm and movement talent in Houston’s Clayton Tune and run-and-hit linebacker with 4.39 speed in Auburn’s Owen Pappoe. That’s along with selecting one of the most refined route-runners in Stanford WR Michael Wilson (94th), a feisty nickel in Louisville’s Kei’Trel Clark (180th) and an interior D-lineman I had inside my top-100 overall prospects late in the sixth round with West Virginia’s Dante Stills (213th).
​
​
Others draft classes I liked: Buffalo Bills, Cleveland Browns, Indianapolis Colts, New York Giants & Seattle Seahawks
​
​

Losers:

​
https://preview.redd.it/q4qpue997nxa1.jpg?width=900&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=95d6a05ac09c5f4487ff9978ff0e70bcf12d3a0a
​

Brad Holmes believers (in the analytics community)

I just talked about the Cardinals kind of fleecing the Lions in a couple of trades during the draft and mentioned that they sent a veteran running back to Philly at some point, so let’s just continue with them here. They got some really good football players – don’t get me wrong here. However, the way they approached the weekend in terms of when and where they moved, how they tried to maximize value and the overall strategy, I would certainly question.
Since I just said that the Cardinals might have gotten a little bit lucky with the Texans being hell-bent on picking two and three, in order to get their cornerstone pieces on either side of the ball, let me take some heat off Brad Holmes and the rest of the Lions brass. I’m pretty sure they did not expect the Seahawks to take what probably was the guy they targeted all along in Illinois’ Devon Witherspoon. He was a minus-favorite for going sixth overall in terms of betting odds at the start of the calendar week already and I think throughout the process I maybe saw two mock drafts that lined Seattle to him. With that being said, when the Cardinals called – and I obviously don’t know if that was the only team interested – they barely gained surplus based on draft value charts by moving back six spots to 12 (in exchange for 34 and 168, whilst getting back pick 81) and drafted the number two running back Jahmyr Gibbs from Alabama. I absolutely love him and probably had him as high as anybody at 17th overall on my big board, but even for me that is pretty rich. More importantly, they could have had who people legitimately considered a generational prospect in Texas’ Bijan Robinson if they just stuck at six. And the result of picking a running back there was them ultimately trading away a high second-rounder from a couple of years ago with a very similar skill-set in D’Andre Swift for a 2025 fourth-rounder by the Eagles.
With their other first-round pick (18th) overall, they selected Iowa linebacker Jack Campbell, who was my LB1 and is wrongly portrayed as just this inside thumper. I really like the player, but once again – it’s too high for me and more importantly, even if you see a major drop-off after him, the next legit off-ball linebacker to come off the board was Arkansas’ Drew Sanders early in the third round – and he actually has legit rush upside. Then after targeting the two lowest-value positions, I did like Iowa tight-end Sam LaPorta (34th overall) and Alabama nickelback/safety Brian Branch (45th) in the second round, which I think do make a lot of sense. I’ve heard people saying that if you switched some of those names, that’s actually a solid group, which I agree with – but that’s not how this thing works! I get the Hendon Hooker pick (68th) in the third, even though I would have felt much better if they had made sure to get Will Levis at the top of the second, since that would seem like more of a clear direction for them, but then what really annoyed me is them picks 122, 139 and 168 for a selection just inside the top-100 that was used on a developmental nose-tackle in Western Kentucky’s Brodric Martin, who based on my and consensus rankings was a seventh-round prospect. That’s just a poor understanding of the board and allocation of resources all-around and I think all the analytics services will end up grading their class extremely low.
​

Ryan Tannehill

Assuming nobody expected Andy Dalton, Davis Mills or Gardner Minshew to start this year – at last for the full season – Ryan Tannehill would be the one on the opposite end of the spectrum to Geno Smith, who I mentioned earlier as a winner. There was some discussion around him last year already, when the Titans drafted Malik Willis and he receiving some (unwarranted) criticism for saying at a press conference that he wasn’t “here to mentor” the rookie, but that guy fell to them in the third round and even though I had him as QB1 in a much weaker class, I didn’t expect Willis to start that year. He didn’t until Tannehill’s foot got hurt initially and when that guy was placed on injured reserve, Tennessee actually signed Josh Dobbs in hopes of still winning a weak AFC South – who ended up starting the final two weeks. Now however, they actively traded to 33rd overall, moving up eight spots in exchange for a pick-swap in the third round and another three next year, in order to select Kentucky QB Will Levis.
So while it seems that Tannehill was able to fend off Willis, who I still believe has a lot of talent and isn’t really getting a fair shot, considering he got thrown in on very short notice and had basically no pass-catching options around him to help him out, as somebody that I believed shouldn’t see the field until late into his rookie season, now there’s another challenger in the room. Now, the two positive angles for the veteran signal-caller are that the Titans could have already secured themselves Levis at 11th overall but passes on him initially, playing the board and taking a gamble to some degree, and then I look at the rookie as somebody who is on a similar developmental arc as Willis last year.
Now, the difference with Levis is that he actually operated in a pro-style offense in 2021, with extensive experience working from under-center and being asked to make NFL-type of reads. I believe if Liam Coen doesn’t become the Rams offensive coordinator for the ’22 season, before returning to Kentucky, we look at the Wildcat QB as less of a project, because his decision-making and inconsistent footwork are paid closer attention to and worked on, while having a play-caller capable of overcoming lesser pieces on the O-line and in terms of receiving talent. So while there are things on tape that you wouldn’t expect from a redshirt senior with 26 career starts, there’s also a lot to like in terms of the way the ball jumps off his hand, the arm strength to take shots down the field off play-action, the running threat he presents without the foot injury and the toughness overall. I think all parties involved would benefit from Levis sitting until late in the year, if Tennessee is eliminated from playoff contention potentially, but I wouldn’t rule out Tannehill being moved during the offseason or ahead of the trade deadline, if the Titans don’t get off to a good start.
​

The safety class

Now let’s talk about the players in this draft actually and a position group received no love. Depending on if you count Alabama’s Brian Branch and Illinois’ Jartavius Martin as safeties, since they primarily lined up at nickel and that’s where they’ll likely be deployed by the Lions and Commanders respectively, you can argue no legit safety came off the board until Martin’s former teammates Sydney Brown going to the Eagles at the top of the third round (66th overall). Only two others were selected for the rest of the day – Penn State’s Ji’Ayir Brown (87th) going to the 49ers and Alabama’s Jordan Battle (95th) going to the Bengals. Two more were selected in the fourth round, before we finally saw 13 combined over the final three rounds of the weekend.
Generally, I wouldn’t pay too much attention and many people have called this a weaker safety class. While I don’t consider it one of the stronger groups we’ve seen in recent years and we lack any type of blue-chip players among it, I do disagree with the sentiment about the class as a whole. I had eight guys inside my personal top-100 big board (including Branch and Martin, who I mentioned at the top) and six more among the “next 30 names” I listed below it – so basically 14 inside my top-130. I know that I was personally higher on the group than consensus, but even looking at where some of these names were projected to go – Texas A&M’s Antonio Johnson (160th) ended up being a fifth- instead of a fringe second-/third-rounder, Florida State’s Jammie Robinson (145th) went about 50 picks later than expected, Georgia’s Chris Smith II (170th) waited nearly 100 picks longer. Altogether 19 safeties were inside the top 259 prospect, based on consensus board provided by MockDraftDatabase.com
Now, what does this tell us? Well, first of all there may be some medical issues with these guys that we’re not aware of. I can’t speak to any of that. However, my theory revolves more around the schematic changes the meta of defensive football has experienced recently. With more NFL teams adapting split-safety principles, the profiles of guys they’re now looking for on the back-end has changed. Sure, there are teams who still value free safety types who can make plays on the ball-numbers-to-numbers and rangy players will always be desirable, but it’s not as much about finding those high-level athletes all the time. Many teams are looking for more well-rounded skill-sets, where they can roll somebody in the deep post, but also drive on routes in quarters to their side, basically play off-man against slot receivers with extra cushion and maybe most importantly, charge up the alley against the run, in order to even out negative box counts. Those player profiles are currently easier to find in the later rounds still – which was apparent with how much this class got pushed down – and that’s a trend I’ll be following closely going forward.
​

New York Jets

I didn’t want to badmouth too many teams here as a whole, because like I said at the very start – everybody got better over the weekend and each team selected players that I really enjoyed watching on tape. There were a couple of others that I’d put in the same bucket as the Jets (listed below the next paragraph), but they kind of stuck out to me, because I’m not sure how much better they get right now, considering they’ve now consciously entered a window, in which they need to take full advantage of having a defense that finished last season top-five according to several metrics (points per game, DVOA, success rate, etc.), two Offensive Rookie of the Year candidates (if Breece Hall had stayed healthy) and now Aaron Rodgers dropped into the mix. You combine all those factors and you understand that with a head coach entering year three and a general manager now in his fifth year, they have to win this season.
Two things I didn’t want let my standpoint influence too much here – as tired everybody is of Zach Wilson, I really believe that the Jets failed him at least as much as he has done so far as a second overall pick, when they pulled him really because of a simple “No” at a press conference, when he was 4-and-2 as a starter at that point. So I’m not going to give them a ton of credit for making Aaron Rodgers come out of his darkness retreat with a switched mindset and wanting to join their team, especially when considering that they gave up way more than I expected to acquire him from the Packers, who had already moved on to their young QB on the roster. With that being said, now having just two picks each of the first two days, they really started to nail it. And while I think they got good value with Wisconsin center Joe Tippman 52nd overall, there’s a really everybody had them taking a tackle at pick number 15. Instead, they watched the top three names come off the board within the first eleven selections and didn’t feel the urgency to secure that spot for them. The division-rival Patriots gladly helped out the Steelers in jumping New York for Georgia’s Broderick Jones and there they were 15th overall, taking another defensive end, when they already had at least four legit guys as part of the rotation. And I get that they love keeping those bodies fresh an that they denied being locked in on OT, but I’m just not buying it.
Gang Green came back on day three and did ultimately invest into that position with Pittsburgh’s Carter Warren (120th overall), who I believe is a long, well-coordinated athlete with the potential to turn into a starter down the road, but he’s coming off a torn meniscus, only ever started at left tackle and had serious issues producing penalties in college. I certainly like Izzy Abanikanda as a big-play threat from the backfield out of Pitt (143rd overall), but I think recouping depth in the back-seven should have been higher on the priority list and of their final three picks, only one had a draftable grade on – Old Dominion tight-end Zack Kuntz, who shockingly lasted until the seventh round despite a historically great combine, probably due to injury concerns – and all of them mainly even got selected due to elite athletic testing. It’s just not close to the standard GM Joe Douglas has set in recent years.
​

Dawand Jones

For the final one here, I considered “Kenneth Walker dynasty owners”, since the Seahawks drafted another running back I really like in the second round and a passing down specialist in the seventh, to take away opportunities for fantasy production. However, I haven’t discussed an individual draft prospect yet and one I thought needed to be mentioned here is “the other” Ohio State offensive tackle. After being projected to be a top-50 pick and seeing his name frequently mentioned in mock drafts, the monstrous lineman waited all the way until day three, when the Browns finally ended the slide at 111th overall. That was after seeing his fellow Buckeye left tackle being selected sixth overall and nine total OTs coming off the board first.
The obvious concern with Jones, just looking at how giganteus is, is if he can keep himself in football shape. When we last got measurements on him at the combine, the Ohio State OT was 6’8” and 374 pounds. He ran as expected, with a 5.35 in the 40 and the worst ten-yard split of the event (1.92). Neither in Indy nor at the Buckeye pro day, he decided to do the jumps or agility drills, along with refusing another weigh-in in Columbus. However, what apparently really didn’t sit well with NFL evaluators was the fact that after one dominant practice at the Senior Bowl, he decided – or his agent told him – to sit out the rest of the week with no apparent injury. His lack of willingness to commit himself fully to the process and maybe not having appropriate answers in the meetings when asked about, are what I believe might have caused him to drop this far. Since contract numbers are basically locked in due to where players get selected, that’s most likely more than 1.5 times less money on his contract than he would have received had he gone around pick 50.
Not only did going this late hurt Jones financially, but he also will have a tough time seeing the field anytime soon in Cleveland – unless they use him as a jumbo tight-end in certain short-yardage packages. The Browns recently picked up Jedrick Wills Jr.’s fifth-year option, keeping him at left tackle for the next two seasons at least, and guy on the right side in Jack Conklin just signed a more back-loaded four-year, 60-million-dollar extension in December. And for people considering if they could move him to guard – I have a tough seeing any scenario where they’ll try taking the potential outs in the either of Joel Bitonio or Wyatt’s deals, since those are Pro Bowl/All-Pro level players. They also just re-signed center Ethan Pocic by the way. The one bright spot for Jones is that he’ll get to work under one of the top O-line coaches in Bill Callahan, to develop a kick-set necessary to make it in the pros.
​
​
Other questionable draft classes: Atlanta Falcons, Chicago Bears, Kansas City Chiefs & San Francisco 49ers
​
​

Steals:

​
https://preview.redd.it/6fhymimb7nxa1.jpg?width=900&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=36ac39494f25744b5e7065c05c928b10d8ad9cd2
​

Christian Gonzalez, CB, Oregon – 17th overall to Patriots

To signal how shocked I was that Gonzo lasted as long as he did – once Seattle drafted Illinois cornerback Devon Witherspoon fifth overall, I thought the Lions might draft the order corner I had inside my top-ten overall prospects. The Oregon DB has prototype size and length, 4.38 speed, is very fluid and a reliable tackler – plus, he hasn’t even turned 21 years old. Those guys typically don’t make it outside the first half of round one. The only reason I can imagine he made it this far is that people see him as more of an athlete and hasn’t shown “that dawg” you like to see from that position, which is a bit silly. Considering the Patriots were able to pick up an extra fourth-rounder by moving back three spots with the Steelers and that the Commanders picked another corner I had way further down the board in Mississippi State’s Emmanuel Forbes, this was a great value pick for them.
​

O’Cyrus Torrence, IOL, Florida – 59th overall to Bills

Whenever you’re able to get the best player at his position in the draft at the end of the second round, you’re doing something right. After the Bills had already secured themselves my TE1 Dalton Kincaid 25th overall (having moved up two spots), they got the massive Gator guard a full round later – when I thought they could have easily gone that way late in the first. Torrence looks like he was built in the lab for that position, with massive hands to take control and a lot of power in his lower half to move bodies in the run game, along with the sturdy anchor to absorb force and once he fits those hands inside the frame of rushers, they’re typically not getting away anymore. The two players he reminded me were Brandon Brooks and Mike Iupati – and he was drafted right in-between where those guys went. He’s a perfect addition for a Bills interior O-line that needed an ass-kicker.
​

Daiyan Henley, LB, Washington State – 85th overall to Chargers

Even though Henley wasn’t quite my number one linebacker, I did have him on my top tier at the position – along with Iowa’s Jack Campbell and Arkansas’ Drew Sanders. All three are pretty different player profiles and I understand him being the last one taken among those, but considering Henley went 67(!) spots later than Campbell, that’s pretty wild. To me, there wasn’t a backer in this class with the type off easy movement skills like this young man from Wazzu, where his ability to gain depth, change directions and drive on routes still looks more like a safety, which is what he originally started as, along with playing some wide receiver, after being recruited as a quarterback. However, he doesn’t only have the suddenness to evade blockers but is also willing to charge into them and missed only five of 111 tackling attempts this past season. I think what shows us that he went later than expected is that after him going as the third true off-ball linebacker (depending on if you count Sacramento State’s Marte Mapu as a big nickel/safety instead), we saw three more come off the board across the next six picks – teams were sort of just waiting on the position.
​

Adetomiwa Adebawore, IDL, Northwestern – 110th overall to Colts

I still haven’t heard any real medical concerns far Ade. So I’m just going to have to assume the NFL either didn’t like him in meetings or they’re just kind of hypocritical. Remember that guy Travon Walker, who blew up the combine and ended up ascending all the way to being the first overall pick in last year’s draft out of Georgia? Well, here we have somebody who actually slightly bested him in every single category – despite packing an extra ten pounds! I get that Adebawore’s athleticism is a lot more impressive than his production – once again kind of reminiscent of Walker, but I think even purely based on tape, there’s no way he should have made it out of day two. I actually had him going late in the first round in my last few mock drafts. He’s more than just an athlete – he packs a ton of shock in his hands, despite only being 6’2” he does have 34-inch arms to lock out in the run game, he can play strong-side D-end or three-technique in an even front and during Senior Bowl week, he showed a great combination of winning with power and cornering his rushes. Unless there’s some factor I’m not aware of, this is just teams not knowing exactly where to line him up.
​
​

The rest of the analysis can be found here!

​
​

Kyu Blu Kelly, CB, Stanford – 157th overall to Ravens

​

Antonio Johnson, SAF/NB, Texas A&M – 160th overall to Jaguars

​

A.T. Perry, WR, Wake Forest – 195th overall to Saints & Xavier Hutchinson, WR, Iowa State – 205th overall to Texans

​

Dante Stills, IDL, West Virginia – 213th overall to Cardinals

​

Zach Evans, RB, Ole Miss – 215th overall to Rams

​

Anthony Johnson Jr., SAF, Iowa State – 242nd overall to Packers

Other steals:

Dalton Kincaid, TE, Utah – 25th overall to Bills
Brian Branch, SAF, Alabama – 45th overall to Lions
John Michael Schmitz, IOL, Minnesota – 57th overall to Giants
Sydney Brown, SAF, Illinois – 66th overall to Eagles
Kelee Ringo, CB, Georgia – 105th overall to Eagles
Nick Herbig, EDGE/LB, Wisconsin – 132nd overall to Steelers
Jammie Robinson, SAF, Florida State – 145th overall to Panthers
Henry To’o To’o, LB, Alabama – 167th overall to Texans
Chris Smith II, SAF, Georgia – 170th overall to Raiders
Jaelyn Duncan, OT, Maryland – 186th overall to Titans
Luke Wypler, IOL, Ohio State – 190th overall to Browns
Zack Kuntz, TE, Old Dominion – 220th overall to Jets
Jason Taylor II, SAF, Oklahoma State – 234th overall to Rams
Cory Trice Jr., CB, Purdue – 241st overall to Steelers
Desjuan Johnson, EDGE/IDL, Toledo – 259th overall to Rams
​
​

Reaches:

​
https://preview.redd.it/lgmze5bd7nxa1.jpg?width=900&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d2651f93feea7f2a661af37690d76bed6da56cb3
​

Emmanuel Forbes, CB, Mississippi State – 16th overall to Commanders

​

Gervon Dexter, IDL, Florida – 53rd overall to Bears

​

Rashee Rice, WR, SMU – 55th overall to Chiefs

​

Juice Scruggs, IOL, Penn State – 62nd overall to Texans

​

Kendre Miller, RB, TCU – 71st overall to Saints & Tank Bigsby, RB, Auburn – 88th overall to Jaguars

​

D.J. Johnson, EDGE, Oregon – 80th overall to Panthers

​

Brodric Martin, IDL, Western Kentucky – 96th overall to Lions

​

Tre Tucker, WR, Cincinnati – 100th overall to Raiders

​

Chad Ryland, K, Maryland – 112th overall to Patriots

​

Sean Clifford, QB, Penn State – 149th overall to Packers

​
​
​

Other reaches:

Will McDonald IV, EDGE, Iowa State – 15th overall to Jets
Jonathan Mingo, WR, Ole Miss – 39th overall to Panthers
Isaiah Foskey, EDGE, Notre Dame – 40th overall to Saints
Luke Musgrave, TE, Oregon State – 42nd overall to Packers
Brenton Strange, TE, Penn State – 61st overall to Jaguars
Jake Moody, K, Michigan – 99th overall to 49ers
Jake Andrews, IOL, Troy – 107th overall to Patriots
Tavius Robinson, EDGE, Ole Miss – 124th overall to Ravens
Derius Davis, WR, TCU – 125th overall to Chargers
Colby Sorsdal, OT, William & Mary – 152nd overall to Lions
​
​
If you enjoyed this breakdown, please consider checking out the original piece and feel free to check out all my other video content here!
Twitter: @ halilsfbtalk Instagram: @ halilsrealfootballtalk

https://preview.redd.it/aozwpm4hu2wa1.png?width=3500&format=png&auto=webp&s=dc5cfafad94b6212b49dbc98f3ea65b6eafc4ace
TORONTO, April 25, 2023 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- White Gold Corp. (TSX.V: WGO, OTCQX: WHGOF, FRA: 29W ) (the "Company") is pleased to announce an updated Mineral Resource Estimate (“MRE”) for its flagship White Gold project located approximately 95 km south of Dawson City in west-central Yukon, Canada. The White Gold project now comprises 16 million tonnes averaging 2.23 g/t Au for 1,152,900 ounces of gold in the Indicated Resource category and 19 million tonnes averaging 1.54 g/t Au for 942,400 ounces of gold in the Inferred Resource category. Exploration programs supporting the MRE have been backed by partners Agnico Eagle Mines Limited and Kinross Gold Corporation.
Highlights:

• Updated MRE includes four gold deposits – Golden Saddle, Arc, Ryan’s Surprise and VG, within 12km of each other, and comprises:
  • 16.11 million tonnes of Indicated Resources averaging 2.23 grams per tonne gold for 1.153 million ounces of gold, representing 55% of total resources.
  • 18.99 million tonnes of Inferred Resources averaging 1.54 grams per tonne gold for 0.942 million ounces of gold, representing 45% of total resources.
• Updated MRE includes a maiden resource estimate for the Ryan’s Surprise deposit with an Inferred Resource of 227,700 ounces of gold averaging 1.97 grams per tonne gold.
• The Ryan’s Surprise deposit is located 1.5 km west of the Golden Saddle and Arc deposits, and along the Ryan’s Trend, a 6.5 km long gold-arsenic geochemical anomaly which hosts additional prospective gold targets.
• Inferred Mineral Resources have increased by 41% compared to previous MRE’s for the Golden Saddle and Arc deposits (

in 2020 and the VG deposit (2) in 2021.

• 94% of the resources are near surface, with open-pittable Indicated Resources of 1.125 million ounces of gold averaging 2.20 grams per tonne gold and open-pittable Inferred Resources of 0.853 million ounces of gold averaging 1.46 grams per tonne gold.
• Mineralization at the Golden Saddle, Arc, Ryan’s Surprise and VG deposits all remain open along strike and down dip, with opportunities to further expand and upgrade resources in addition to multiple underexplored targets in close proximity to the deposits.
• The Company is currently planning its fully funded 2023 exploration program, focusing on recent high-grade gold discoveries and undrilled targets with details to be announced in due course.

“We are very pleased with the significant increase in our mineral resources. In a relatively short period of time, we have delineated a very large gold resource, with significant opportunity for continued expansion. The White Gold project now ranks amongst the largest primarily open pit deposits at such high grades in Canada owned by an exploration company. The updated and increased resource is a testament to the success of our technical team, our systematic data driven exploration methodologies and the expansiveness of gold mineralization in the White Gold District. The Company’s efficient and scalable exploration methodology clearly demonstrates the vast potential within the property and the district to efficiently add high-quality gold ounces. We would like to thank all our partners and stakeholders for their continued support in what we believe is the early days for the development of the White Gold District into a significant new Canadian Mining Camp,” stated David D’Onofrio, CEO.
Maps accompanying this news release can be found at https://whitegoldcorp.ca/investors/exploration-highlights/
Figure 1 FINAL
White Gold District – White Gold Project Overview
Figure 2 FINAL
White Gold Property – Arc, Golden Saddle, Ryan’s Surprise Deposits
Figure 3 FINAL
White Gold Property – Golden Saddle and Arc Deposits
Figure 4 FINAL
White Gold Property – Ryan’s Surprise Deposit
Figure 5 FINAL
QV Property – VG Deposit
Mineral Resource Estimate Details
Table 1. White Gold Project, Yukon Territory, Mineral Resource Statement, ACS April 15, 2023.
https://preview.redd.it/vu0iuoehu2wa1.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=1b9c6893fad141ed5b1cc27a24e063983325b57c

Mineral Resources which are not Mineral Reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.
2) The estimate of Mineral Resources may be materially affected by environmental, permitting, legal, title, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues.
3) The Inferred Mineral Resource in this estimate has a lower level of confidence than that applied to an Indicated Mineral Resource and must not be converted to a Mineral Reserve. It is reasonably expected that the majority of the Inferred Mineral Resource could be upgraded to an Indicated Mineral Resource with continued exploration.
4) The Mineral Resources in this report were estimated using the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM), CIM Standards on Mineral Resources and Reserves, Definitions and Guidelines prepared by the CIM Standing Committee on Reserve Definitions and adopted by the CIM Council.
5) Open pittable resources are constrained by GEOVIA Whittle optimized pit shells using a 0.4 g/t Au cut-of grade and are considered to have reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction, assuming a gold price of US$1,800 per ounce, a C$:US$ exchange rate of 0.75. an open pit mining cost of CDN$3.25 per tonne, a processing and G&A cost of CDN$27.50 per tonne milled, and gold recoveries of 92% for Golden Saddle, and VG, along with 85% for Arc and Ryan’s Surprise. Underground resources assume a mining cost of CDN$120/tonne.
6) The following bulk density values for mineralized material were used: Golden Saddle (2.62 – 2.65 t/m 3 ), Arc (2.55 t/m 3 ), Ryan’s Surprise (2.63 t/m 3 ) and VG (2.65 t/m 3 ).
7) High-grade gold assay values have been capped as follows: Golden Saddle and Arc (8 – 18 g/t Au), Ryan’s Surprise (9 g/t Au) and VG (3 – 10 g/t Au).
8) The Statement of Estimates of Mineral Resources has been compiled by Mr. Gilles Arseneau, Ph.D.,P.Geo, of ARSENEAU Consulting Services (“ACS”). Mr. Arseneau has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralization and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity that he has undertaken to qualify as a Qualified Person as defined in the CIM Standards of Disclosure.
9) All numbers are rounded. Overall numbers may not be exact due to rounding.
The current MRE for the White Gold project was carried out by Arseneau Consulting Services (“ACS”) of Vancouver, B.C. and is reported in accordance with the guidelines of the Canadian Securities Administrators National Instrument 43-101 (“NI 43-101”) and has been estimated in conformity with generally accepted Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (“CIM”) “Estimation and Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve Best Practices” guidelines. Mineral resources are not mineral reserves and do not have demonstrated economic viability.
The MRE presents updated estimates for the Golden Saddle and Arc deposits ( 1) and the VG deposit (2) , and a maiden estimate for the Ryan’s Surprise deposit. The MRE incorporates all diamond and reverse circulation (“RC”) drilling data completed by White Gold Corp. and previous property owners.
The updated MRE was prepared using a block model approach using ordinary kriging interpolation for the Golden Saddle, Arc and VG deposits and inverse distance squared (“ID 2 ”) interpolation for the Ryan’s Surprise deposit. Block model sizes varied between deposits as follows: Golden Saddle and Arc (10 m); Ryan’s Surprise (5 – 10 m); and VG (10 – 20 m). GEMS 6.8.4 software was used for generating gold mineralization solids, a topography surface, and resource estimation. Statistical analysis and resource validations were performed using non-commercial software and with Sage2001. Near surface resources were constrained using GEOVIA Whittle pit optimization software. Pit slopes in rock were assumed at 50° and the MRE assumes a long-term gold price of US$1,800 per ounce. Gold recoveries used were 92% for the Golden Saddle and VG deposits, and 85% for the Arc and Ryan’s Surprise deposits. Gold recoveries are based on metallurgical testwork results for the Golden Saddle and Arc deposits and are assumed for the Ryan’s Surprise and VG deposits based on their close similarities to the Arc and Golden Saddle deposits, respectively.
Mineralization on portions of both the Golden Saddle and Arc deposits is known to extend beyond the limits of the current resource estimate, however, the mineralization in these areas does not currently meet the criteria to be classified as Mineral Resources. Based on drilling at Golden Saddle and current geologic models, there is an estimated 10 – 12 million additional tonnes grading between 1 – 2 g/t Au of material classified as a Target for Further Exploration (“TFFE”). The reader should be cautioned that the potential quantity and grade of the TFFE is conceptual in nature. There has been insufficient drilling to define a mineral resource and it is uncertain if further exploration will result in the target being advanced to a mineral resource.
A technical report to support the MRE for the White Gold project, prepared in accordance with NI 43-101, will be filed on SEDAR ( https://www.sedar.com/ ) and the Company’s website ( https://www.whitegoldcorp.ca/ ) within 45 days of the issuance of this news release.
White Gold District
West-central Yukon is host to several highly prospective mineral districts, including the White Gold, Dawson Range, Klondike and Sixtymile districts. The Klondike was the epicentre of the historic Klondike Gold Rush in 1896 with over 20 million ounces of placer gold production having occurred in the region since that time. The Company’s property portfolio (Figure 1) which covers large portions of the White Gold District, was assembled by renowned prospector Shawn Ryan, and represents the largest claim package in the region, consisting of 17,584 claims across 30 properties and covering approximately 350,000 hectares. Two significant advanced projects border the Company’s claims in the south including the Coffee project owned by Newmont Corporation with Indicated Resources of 2.14 Moz at 1.23 g/t Au, and Inferred Resources of 0.23 Moz at 1.01 g/t Au (3) , and Western Copper and Gold Corporation’s Casino project, which has Measured and Indicated Resources of 7.6 Blb Cu and 14.5 Moz Au and Inferred Resources of 3.3 Blb Cu and 6.6 Moz Au (4)
The Golden Saddle and Arc deposits were originally discovered by Underworld Resources Inc. (“Underworld”) and shortly thereafter acquired by Kinross in a deal valued at approximately C$139 million. In mid-2017, the Company acquired Kinross’s Yukon gold properties (see Company news release dated June 14, 2017) which included the Golden Saddle and Arc deposits and has significantly increased the size of these deposits since that time, in addition to discovering and delineating new zones in close proximity including the GS West and Ryan’s Surprise. The Company has advanced the Ryan’s Surprise target since 2018, and the resource estimate reported herein represents the maiden MRE for this deposit. The VG deposit was discovered by Comstock Metals Ltd. (“Comstock”) in 2012, and in early-2019 the Company acquired the property from Comstock given its close proximity and similarities to the Golden Saddle deposit. All four near-surface deposits are interpreted to represent structurally-controlled orogenic gold deposits, collectively form the Company’s gold resource base in the heart of its large land package, and remain open for expansion.
Golden Saddle Deposit
The Golden Saddle deposit is located 95 km south of Dawson City on the Company’s White Gold property (Figure 2), which is supported by the fully operational Thistle exploration camp with airstrip and barge access, and up to 100-person capacity. The deposit consists of the GS Main, GS Footwall and GS West zones and together the zones define mineralization over a 1,500 m strike length and up to 725 m down dip. Currently, the GS Main is the most significant zone in terms of estimated ounces and overall grade; containing approximately 95% of the Indicated ounces within the overall Golden Saddle deposit.
Gold mineralization at the Golden Saddle deposit (Figure 2 & 3) is hosted in a meta-volcanic and meta-intrusive assemblage broadly consisting of felsic orthogneiss, amphibolite, and ultramafic units. Gold generally occurs as micron-scale blebs along fractures or encapsulated by pyrite, and as visible gold (less than 5 mm in size) located as free grains in quartz. Mineralization is present in quartz veins and stockwork or breccia with disseminated pyrite. Drill hole intersected gold mineralization is spatially co-incident with structures, and structures or faults which are interpreted to be the primary conduits for hydrothermal fluids responsible for gold deposition. The thicknesses of the mineralization and breccia zones are variable from 5 m to over 50 m, and they pinch and swell along strike. A consistent higher-grade core (> 3 g/t Au) occurs within the main zone at Golden Saddle. Gold mineralization at the Golden Saddle deposit remains open in all directions and is known to extend beyond the limits of the current resource estimate, however, the mineralization in these areas does not currently meet the criteria to be classified as Mineral Resources.
Arc Deposit
The Arc deposit (Figures 2 & 3) is located approximately 400 m south of the Golden Saddle and consists of two zones, the Arc Main and Arc Footwall zones, both trending E-NE and dipping to the north at approximately 50 degrees. Mineralization at the Arc has been defined over 1,200 m in strike length and up to 450 m down dip with mineralization open along strike and down dip. Gold mineralization at the Arc deposit is less well understood than the Golden Saddle, which is partially a function of drilling at the Arc deposit being more widely spaced. Gold mineralization is hosted within a meta-sedimentary sequence dominated by banded (graphitic) quartzite and interbedded pelitic biotite schist that is cross-cut by numerous felsic to intermediate dikes and sills.
Gold mineralization appears to be focused within breccia and shear zones that have been affected by hydrothermal alteration and sulphide mineralization. Drilling has defined an upper main zone as well as a lower footwall zone of anomalous gold but of lesser tenure than the main upper zone. Mineralization remains open to the east, west and at depth. The occurrence of gold at Arc is not well understood but appears to be associated with disseminated and veined pyrite, arsenopyrite and graphite.
Ryan’s Surprise Deposit
Ryan’s Surprise (Figures 2 & 4) is located 1.5 km west of the Golden Saddle deposit, along a 6.5 km long x 1 km wide north-northwest trend of anomalous gold and arsenic in soils (“Ryan’s Trend”), which also hosts several other prospective early-stage targets in close proximity with significant surface gold mineralization and represent further potential for expansion of this project. Gold mineralization at the Ryan’s Surprise deposit is primarily hosted within a meta-sedimentary sequence dominated by banded (graphitic) quartzite and interbedded pelitic biotite schist cross-cut by numerous felsic – intermediate dikes and sills.
Gold mineralization appears to be focused within breccia and shear zones that have been affected by hydrothermal alteration and sulphide mineralization. Recent drilling has defined multiple subparallel zones that are host to gold-bearing sulphide mineralization including arsenopyrite and pyrite, and range in true width from < 1 m to in some instances, > 10 m. The mineralization footprint at the Ryan’s Surprise deposit measures approximately 550 m north-south by 500 m east-west to a vertical depth of 650 m remains open along strike and at depth. The occurrence of gold at Ryan’s Surprise has not been evaluated, and no metallurgical test work has been undertaken to understand the possible gold deportment. However, the host rocks, alteration and sulphide mineralization display many similarities to the Arc deposit.
VG Deposit
The VG deposit (Figure 5) is located approximately 85km south of Dawson City and 11km north of the Golden Saddle deposit. Gold mineralization at the VG deposit is hosted in quartz ± carbonate veins, stockwork and breccia zones, and pyrite veinlets, including cubic pyrite and visible gold, associated with intense-quartz-carbonate-sericite alteration, pervasive K-spar and hematite emplaced along en-echelon faults or shear zones. Visually, the style of gold mineralization and alteration appears identical to the Golden Saddle deposit, along with similar dominant host rocks of biotite-feldspar (± augen)-quartz gneisses. To date, no metallurgical testwork has been performed on the VG mineralization, however given its close similarities to Golden Saddle, gold recoveries are assumed to be similar. Opportunities exist at the VG deposit to quickly upgrade a significant portion of Inferred Resources to Indicated, as well as for expansion of gold mineralization at depth and along strike. There are also several other prospective targets on the property which have received limited exploration work and offer potential for additional discoveries.
Qualified Persons, Technical Information and Quality Control
The MRE for the White Gold Project was prepared by Dr. Gilles Arseneau of Arseneau Consulting Services (ACS), an Independent Qualified Person (“QP”) as defined under NI 43-101, who has reviewed and approved the contents of this news release. The technical content of this news release has also been reviewed and approved by Terry Brace, P.Geo. and Vice President of Exploration for the Company who is also a QP as defined under NI 43-101 – Standards of Disclosure of Mineral Projects.
QA/QC
White Gold’s drill core sampling consisted of collecting samples over 0.50 m to 2.50 m intervals (depending on lithology and style of mineralization) over the entire hole length. RC samples were collected at continuous 1.5 m intervals. All drill core was cut in half using a diamond saw, with half of the core placed in sample bags and the other half returned to the core box. Standard, blank, and duplicate samples were inserted into both the drill core and RC sample streams at regular intervals to meet a designated QA/QC sample insertion rate. All samples were organized into batches, flown via fixed-wing aircraft from camp, and transported via courier to an ISO-certified laboratory for analysis.
About White Gold Corp.
The Company owns a portfolio of 17,584 quartz claims across 30 properties covering approximately 350,000 hectares representing over 40% of the Yukon’s emerging White Gold District. The Company’s flagship White Gold project hosts four near-surface gold deposits which collectively contain an estimated 1,152,900 ounces of gold in Indicated Resources and 942,400 ounces of gold in Inferred Resources (this news release). Regional exploration work has also produced several other new discoveries and prospective targets on the Company’s claim packages which border sizable gold discoveries including the Coffee project owned by Newmont Corporation with Indicated Resources of 2.14 Moz at 1.23 g/t Au, and Inferred Resources of 0.23 Moz at 1.01 g/t Au (3) , and Western Copper and Gold Corporation’s Casino project which has Measured and Indicated Resources of 7.6 Blb Cu and 14.5 Moz Au and Inferred Resources of 3.3 Blb Cu and 6.6 Moz Au (4)
(1) See White Gold Corp. technical report titled “Technical Report for the White Gold Project, Dawson Range, Yukon Canada”, Effective Date May 15, 2020, Report Date July 10, 2020, prepared by Dr. Gilles Arseneau, P.Geo., and Andrew Hamilton, P.Geo., available on SEDAR.
(2) See White Gold Corp. technical report titled “Technical Report for the QV Project, Yukon, Canada”, Effective Date October 15, 2021, Report Date November 15, 2021, available on SEDAR.
(3) See Newmont Corporation news release titled “Newmont Announces Increased 2022 Mineral Reserves of 96 Million Gold Ounces and 68 Million Gold Equivalent Ounces”, dated February 23, 2023: https://www.newmont.com/investors/news-release/default.aspx
(4) See Western Copper and Gold Corporation technical report titled “Casino project, Form 43-101F1 Technical Report Feasibility Study, Yukon Canada”, Effective Date June 13, 2022, Issue Date August 8, 2022, prepared by Daniel Roth, PE, P.Eng., Mike Hester, F Aus IMM, John M. Marek, P.E., Laurie M. Tahija, MMSA-QP, Carl Schulze, P.Geo., Daniel Friedman, P.Eng., Scott Weston, P.Geo., available on SEDAR.
Cautionary Note Regarding Forward Looking Information
This news release contains "forward-looking information" and "forward-looking statements" (collectively, "forward-looking statements") within the meaning of the applicable Canadian securities legislation. All statements, other than statements of historical fact, are forward-looking statements and are based on expectations, estimates and projections as at the date of this news release. Any statement that involves discussions with respect to predictions, expectations, beliefs, plans, projections, objectives, assumptions, future events or performance (often but not always using phrases such as "expects", or "does not expect", "is expected", "anticipates" or "does not anticipate", "plans", “proposed”, "budget", "scheduled", "forecasts", "estimates", "believes" or "intends" or variations of such words and phrases or stating that certain actions, events or results "may" or "could", "would", "might" or "will" be taken to occur or be achieved) are not statements of historical fact and may be forward-looking statements. In this news release, forward-looking statements relate, among other things, the Company’s objectives, goals and exploration activities conducted and proposed to be conducted at the Company’s properties; future growth potential of the Company, including whether any proposed exploration programs at any of the Company’s properties will be successful; exploration results; and future exploration plans and costs and financing availability.
These forward-looking statements are based on reasonable assumptions and estimates of management of the Company at the time such statements were made. Actual future results may differ materially as forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause the actual results, performance or achievements of the Company to materially differ from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Such factors, among other things, include: the expected benefits to the Company relating to the exploration conducted and proposed to be conducted at the White Gold properties; the receipt of all applicable regulatory approvals for the Offering; failure to identify any additional mineral resources or significant mineralization; the preliminary nature of metallurgical test results; uncertainties relating to the availability and costs of financing needed in the future, including to fund any exploration programs on the Company’s properties; business integration risks; fluctuations in general macroeconomic conditions; fluctuations in securities markets; fluctuations in spot and forward prices of gold, silver, base metals or certain other commodities; fluctuations in currency markets (such as the Canadian dollar to United States dollar exchange rate); change in national and local government, legislation, taxation, controls, regulations and political or economic developments; risks and hazards associated with the business of mineral exploration, development and mining (including environmental hazards, industrial accidents, unusual or unexpected formations pressures, cave-ins and flooding); inability to obtain adequate insurance to cover risks and hazards; the presence of laws and regulations that may impose restrictions on mining and mineral exploration; employee relations; relationships with and claims by local communities and indigenous populations; availability of increasing costs associated with mining inputs and labour; the speculative nature of mineral exploration and development (including the risks of obtaining necessary licenses, permits and approvals from government authorities); the unlikelihood that properties that are explored are ultimately developed into producing mines; geological factors; actual results of current and future exploration; changes in project parameters as plans continue to be evaluated; soil sampling results being preliminary in nature and are not conclusive evidence of the likelihood of a mineral deposit; title to properties; ongoing uncertainties relating to the COVID-19 pandemic; and those factors described under the heading "Risks Factors" in the Company's annual information form dated July 29, 2020 available on SEDAR. Although the forward-looking statements contained in this news release are based upon what management of the Company believes, or believed at the time, to be reasonable assumptions, the Company cannot assure shareholders that actual results will be consistent with such forward-looking statements, as there may be other factors that cause results not to be as anticipated, estimated or intended. Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements and information. There can be no assurance that forward-looking information, or the material factors or assumptions used to develop such forward-looking information, will prove to be accurate. The Company does not undertake to release publicly any revisions for updating any voluntary forward-looking statements, except as required by applicable securities law.
Neither the TSXV nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSXV) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this news release.
For Further Information, Please Contact:
Contact Information:
David D’Onofrio
Chief Executive Officer
White Gold Corp.
(647) 930-1880
[[email protected]](mailto:[email protected])
To Book a Meeting with Management: https://whitegoldcorp.ca/contact/request-information/
Photos accompanying this announcement are available at
https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/bbd3f478-cb55-42a7-a1f3-7dcf41959a38
https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/4adf48eb-5a78-4917-b717-f3ea27e633a0
https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/f580968b-96ad-4657-bd4f-665355ef573c
https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/cb36af3f-4321-41f5-bd6e-fed30c6d6505
https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/958f0c04-ed2c-4faa-9a9b-eab7d2638aa1
​
https://preview.redd.it/uwf2upohu2wa1.png?width=150&format=png&auto=webp&s=b59c1587b87337d25d2c0f6b46696bb193b50b26
https://preview.redd.it/b54kin0iu2wa1.png?width=4000&format=png&auto=webp&s=b8e2066cfc4c49747bf6518d53c8f4beec9471bd

Universal Site Links
WHITE GOLD CORP
STOCK METAL DATABASE
ADD TICKER TO THE DATABASE
www.reddit.com/Treaty_Creek
REPORT AN ERROR