Gettleman's 1st round options

[ctrcat]

14 minutes ago, beastson said:

After the SB, I want O-Line so bad. The last tackle we drafted in the 1st was Otah. The last one that worked longevity wise, was Gross

Ifedi is the only one that we've brought in that would even remotely get playing time in year 1 in theory.  An immediate upgrade on the line involves calling Cleveland or San Fran and working out a deal for Joe Thomas or Joe Staley.  Not impossible at all but simply unlikely.  The draft, as it pertains to OL, is 2017 and beyond thinking.

[The Lone Panther]

I've been predicting Hunter Henry for a while, but the fact that we haven't even met with him makes me think we're not interested.  We've also looked at a few TE's in the FA, so it's possible that G-Man isn't impressed with the TE class.

 

At this point, I think it will be either Dodd, Ogbah or Derrick Henry, since those are the most likely candidates to be there at #30, and are players we have an interest in. 

[ctrcat]

6 minutes ago, The Lone Panther said:

I've been predicting Hunter Henry for a while, but the fact that we haven't even met with him makes me think we're not interested.  We've also looked at a few TE's in the FA, so it's possible that G-Man isn't impressed with the TE class.

 

At this point, I think it will be either Dodd, Ogbah or Derrick Henry, since those are the most likely candidates to be there at #30, and are players we have an interest in. 

As is the fact we gave Dickson a THREE year deal last year.  GMan likes Ed.

[iamhubby1]

1 hour ago, Bartin said:

And a 6th to move 16 spots from 57 to 41.

I'd really prefer if we didn't trade up again this year. Low volume drafting is generally a very bad long term strategy.

 

I understand not wanting to give up picks and all that. But say we still had all 7 of our picks? How many of those guys have a realistic shot at making the team?

 

If a guy you like is there, and you can live with the cost to go get him, why not? Now this is just me personally. But I would rather draft 3-4 guys with a reasonable shot at making the team. Than drafting 7 guys, and not knowing how many of them have a shot at making the team.

 

Moving up to get the guys you want makes more sense to me. Than waiting your turn and taking a guy you are not truly thrilled about. Especially after the 1st round.

[ctrcat]

40 minutes ago, iamhubby1 said:

 

I understand not wanting to give up picks and all that. But say we still had all 7 of our picks? How many of those guys have a realistic shot at making the team?

 

If a guy you like is there, and you can live with the cost to go get him, why not? Now this is just me personally. But I would rather draft 3-4 guys with a reasonable shot at making the team. Than drafting 7 guys, and not knowing how many of them have a shot at making the team.

 

Moving up to get the guys you want makes more sense to me. Than waiting your turn and taking a guy you are not truly thrilled about. Especially after the 1st round.

Don't disagree, but if we're going to draft 4 guys, I think the smarter, more prudent play would be to move up in the 3rd for a guy that inevitably slips.  A guy that's clearly 2nd round or higher value on our board.  Our 7th, pick 252, is nearly untradable with such little value, but would give us a chance to take a flyer on someone.  That said, would you rather have...

picks 30, 62, 79, and 252

or

picks 30, 46, 159, and 252

the former is trading our 3rd, 4th, and 5th to move up in the 3rd

the latter is trading our 2nd, 3rd, and 4th to move up in the 2nd

I'm taking option A every time to give us 3 players in the top 80 picks.  All according to the aforementioned value chart.

 

 

[Swaggasaurus]

1 hour ago, The Lone Panther said:

I've been predicting Hunter Henry for a while, but the fact that we haven't even met with him makes me think we're not interested.  We've also looked at a few TE's in the FA, so it's possible that G-Man isn't impressed with the TE class.

 

At this point, I think it will be either Dodd, Ogbah or Derrick Henry, since those are the most likely candidates to be there at #30, and are players we have an interest in. 

Ding, ding, ding. Looking at meetings and obvious positions where we need big time players those are the guys. I would also throw in Butler there too, just because we have spent a lot of time with him. I just don't think Butler meets a need.

[Bartin]

1 hour ago, iamhubby1 said:

 

I understand not wanting to give up picks and all that. But say we still had all 7 of our picks? How many of those guys have a realistic shot at making the team?

 

If a guy you like is there, and you can live with the cost to go get him, why not? Now this is just me personally. But I would rather draft 3-4 guys with a reasonable shot at making the team. Than drafting 7 guys, and not knowing how many of them have a shot at making the team.

 

Moving up to get the guys you want makes more sense to me. Than waiting your turn and taking a guy you are not truly thrilled about. Especially after the 1st round.

Teddy Williams, Brain Folkerts/Fernando Velasco, Brandon Williams/Scott Simonson, Ben Jacobs, Dean Marlowe, Brandon Wegher, Wes Horton/Ryan Delaire and Brenton Bersin are players and positions that could have been upgraded with draft picks particularly the 3rd and 5th round picks.

I'm happy with Funchess and Williams but low volume drafting is not a sustainable strategy.

[iamhubby1]

27 minutes ago, ctrcat said:

Don't disagree, but if we're going to draft 4 guys, I think the smarter, more prudent play would be to move up in the 3rd for a guy that inevitably slips.  A guy that's clearly 2nd round or higher value on our board.  Our 7th, pick 252, is nearly untradable with such little value, but would give us a chance to take a flyer on someone.  That said, would you rather have...

picks 30, 62, 79, and 252

or

picks 30, 46, 159, and 252

the former is trading our 3rd, 4th, and 5th to move up in the 3rd

the latter is trading our 2nd, 3rd, and 4th to move up in the 2nd

I'm taking option A every time to give us 3 players in the top 80 picks.  All according to the aforementioned value chart.

 

 

 

Oh I agree. I would defiantly take option A. You have a better chance of your top 3 picks actually making the roster.

 

Now...don't take this the wrong way. But, all you did was take my idea and tweak it. So I should get some of the credit. lol

 

With the way Gman uses Free Agency, it is getting really tough for later round picks, and those UDFA to make the team. So to me, and you I guess, it just makes sense to move your picks around to get more bang for the buck. Thus, increasing the odds that the players you do draft, have the best possible chance of making the team.

 

But yeah. Like I said, I would rather invest in 3-4 players you really want. Maybe insuring that those players actually have a good shot at helping the team. Instead of standing pat, and hoping you can add talent that can help. Pick who you want. Not who you get. Sort of dealio.

[iamhubby1]

2 minutes ago, Bartin said:

Teddy Williams, Brain Folkerts/Fernando Velasco, Brandon Williams/Scott Simonson, Ben Jacobs, Dean Marlowe, Brandon Wegher, Wes Horton/Ryan Delaire and Brenton Bersin are players and positions that could have been upgraded with draft picks particularly the 3rd and 5th round picks.

I'm happy with Funchess and Williams but low volume drafting is not a sustainable strategy.

 

I don't get your "Low volume" meaning. It is getting to the point with this team that anyone drafted outside the 3rd has an uphill battle to even make the team. If you are only going to get a few players every year. Why not make sure you are getting the players you truly want?

 

Package those later round picks and get as many picks as you can in the first 3 rounds. It isn't "Low volume". It is quality drafting. Use your picks to get who you want. Because you are not going to help the team with many of those later round guys. Or even the UDFA guys either.

 

If you can get 3 guys every year that can help your team. You should be able to stay ahead of the curve.

 

And I do realize that not every player you draft is going to be a star. But if Gman can continue to draft well. Enough of those draft picks should be long term players. Or maybe even wind up being stars. You don't need 7 draft picks, cuz most aren't making the team anyway. 3-4 players you want could wind up helping more in the long run.

 

Sure, when Gman got here we needed an influx of talent. But those days are long gone.

[Swaggasaurus]

58 minutes ago, Bartin said:

Teddy Williams, Brain Folkerts/Fernando Velasco, Brandon Williams/Scott Simonson, Ben Jacobs, Dean Marlowe, Brandon Wegher, Wes Horton/Ryan Delaire and Brenton Bersin are players and positions that could have been upgraded with draft picks particularly the 3rd and 5th round picks.

I'm happy with Funchess and Williams but low volume drafting is not a sustainable strategy.

7. DJ Campbell- garbage can

6. Brad Nortman- avg punter

5.Cameron Artis Payne- like no snaps

5.Mayo- like nah snaps

5. Josh Norman- Pro bowler this year

6.Gaffney- Somewhere else

6.Barner- Somewhere else

5.Bene- He dat deal....ohhhh wee mayne 

4.Kugbila- Disabled, never played a game.

4.Boston- Prominent back up

4. Frank Alexander- hmmmmm

4. Joe Adams- Ohhhhh

 

you see we don't actually do a great job drafting after round 3, in fact nobody does, other teams cuts, and UDFA can fill out the bottom of your roster and even start in some cases. Guys like Norwell and Philly have outperformed oh 70% of our draft picks after the 3rd Rd. The guys that you listed that could have been upgraded is laughable. Your #6 DE Delaire had 3 sacks. TE 3's don't get playing time, we can get a better gunner than Teddy, I'll give you that. Wegher and Marlowe? Also no jersey, you gonna upgrade a guy who stands on the sideline? He look better in sweats?

[top dawg]

1 hour ago, iamhubby1 said:

 

I don't get your "Low volume" meaning. It is getting to the point with this team that anyone drafted outside the 3rd has an uphill battle to even make the team. If you are only going to get a few players every year. Why not make sure you are getting the players you truly want?

 

Package those later round picks and get as many picks as you can in the first 3 rounds. It isn't "Low volume". It is quality drafting. Use your picks to get who you want. Because you are not going to help the team with many of those later round guys. Or even the UDFA guys either.

 

If you can get 3 guys every year that can help your team. You should be able to stay ahead of the curve.

 

And I do realize that not every player you draft is going to be a star. But if Gman can continue to draft well. Enough of those draft picks should be long term players. Or maybe even wind up being stars. You don't need 7 draft picks, cuz most aren't making the team anyway. 3-4 players you want could wind up helping more in the long run.

 

Sure, when Gman got here we needed an influx of talent. But those days are long gone.

Yeah, Bartin isn't the only one that is saying that, but the more that time goes on, Getty seems to be disproving that hypothesis. Even some GMs are of the thinking that if you can get three good players per draft you are staying ahead of the curve. When you add in the relative gold that Getty mines via UDFAS and practice squads, this further mitigates the need to draft guys who are of similar probability to make the team as the ones who have fallen in between the cracks.

[iamhubby1]

2 minutes ago, top dawg said:

Yeah, Bartin isn't the only one that is saying that, but the more that time goes on, Getty seems to be disproving that hypothesis. Even some GMs are of the thinking that if you can get three good players per draft you are staying ahead of the curve. When you add in the relative gold that Getty mines via UDFAS and practice squads, this further mitigates the need to draft guys who are of similar probability to make the team as the ones who have fallen in between the cracks.

 

I guess I see where he is coming from. Cuz when Gman got here that is how things were done. Bring in as much talent as you can, cuz we needed it. Nowadays. Not so much.

 

With teams needing 90 guys to go to camp. There is still an opportunity for those "Other" guys to make an impact. But those opportunities are growing less every year. But that is one of the ways that Gman has earned his stripes. By finding those diamond in the rough kids.  Find a few of those, add in the right FAs, and we are going to be good to go for as long as Gman is here.

 

Quality drafting, with a few "Others" thrown in is how we got where we are. I see no reason to change the formula now.

[AU-panther]

Option A

You can draft 7 players and hope to find 3 good ones.

Option B

You can trade up with some of those picks and draft 4 players and hope to find 3 good ones.

With option A you give yourself more chances to be right.

With option B you increase your odds with the the chances you do have.

Statistically speaking I would guess option A would be better over the long term.  Falling in love with certain players is a dangerous habit to get into.  Even if you are correct on your scouting, which nobody is 100% of the time, you still can't account for injuries.  Look at some of the past trading up that this franchise has done.

I really don't see DG trading up in the early rounds on a regular basis.  I think last year we chased some needs because the board didn't fall like we wanted.  

 

 

[iamhubby1]

2 minutes ago, AU-panther said:

Option A

You can draft 7 players and hope to find 3 good ones.

Option B

You can trade up with some of those picks and draft 4 players and hope to find 3 good ones.

With option A you give yourself more chances to be right.

With option B you increase your odds with the the chances you do have.

Statistically speaking I would guess option A would be better over the long term.  Falling in love with certain players is a dangerous habit to get into.  Even if you are correct on your scouting, which nobody is 100% of the time, you still can't account for injuries.  Look at some of the past trading up that this franchise has done.

I really don't see DG trading up in the early rounds on a regular basis.  I think last year we chased some needs because the board didn't fall like we wanted.  

 

 

 

Yuppers. Pretty much how some of us look at it. Trust your talent evaluator.

 

Every year is different. But as a general rule. I like going after players you actually want more than taking what comes your way. Especially with a talent evaluator like Gman doing the drafting. 1st round take the pick you like. After that, use your picks to get who you like.