How would you feel if we draft a WR , RB, or TE with pick 24?

[iamhubby1]

4 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

I think we need talent infusion badly at both WR and CB. I'm fine with going either direction at #24. Ideally, give me WR, CB, TE, and S with those first four picks. I wish it was a better DE class because I think we really need some young talent at DE too, but it's just not a good 4-3 DE class at all.

 

    My personal feeling is Safety is the position that needs that #1 pick. Get a top talent back there, and let's get it on.

 

    That said, I could see a draft where we spend our 1st 4 picks on Defense. CB, DE, S, CB. Or some variation on the theme. I just see this year as a developmental year for our Offense. Give Norv a year to see who he has, what he can/can't do, where we need to improve kind of year.

 

    Sooo.... Screw all this analytics and such. Just go Defense. Defense wins Championships. And with Cam, that kinda makes sense.

[WOW!!]

11 minutes ago, iamhubby1 said:

 

    You sure seem to be going out of your way to downplay the talents of a Ridley, or Moore. Even in a "Weak class", the top talent can still be really good. There is a reason these guys are slotted at the top of the WR boards. They are good.

 

    Listen, I am not advocating for either one really. I just feel like you are downplaying the talent of some of these guys.

 

   

I'm just looking at the landscape reading what teams are doing and trying to figure out why things are happening...

If they are as good as you think they are we won't have a chance at them anyway.. 

Teams went out of their way to get okay vet Wr..

Paul Richardson in no way is worth 9mil unless you are desperate.. Allen Robinson coming off a acl gets Julio money from a team that can get Ridely easily in the top 10.. I'm just reading the signs..

[Trill OG]

9 minutes ago, WOW!! said:

 Luckily this draft is full of day 1 starters in the secondary... It would be smart to get full advantage of this. 

If the draft is full of "day 1 starters" in the secondary doesn't it make sense to use our 1st pick on offense then use the 2nd and 3rd round on those "full day 1 starters in the secondary" as you mentioned?

[iamhubby1]

Just now, WOW!! said:

That is one reason but all those teams have scouting staffs to.. Maybe they are seeing what you have already said.. There maybe some good potential players in this draft.. But not having a top 10 talent might mean you don't have a day 1 starter.. And most teams want a day 1 starter out of their 1st round pick.. So teams paid more for vets feeling they have a guy that can have instant impact instead of waiting on a prospect they know needs development...

 

    Most rookie WRs, but most certainly not all, usually need time to develop. But that does not mean you can automatically ignore the position in the 1st. You cannot let fear of the past sway your thinking.

 

    Yeah, I think the money being thrown at WRs this year was for 2 reasons. 1. Teams wanting an instant starter. Whether it is the WRs in this draft or not, teams went nuts. 2. A lot of teams had to spend money. And, it is an Offensive driven league. So WRs are valued more than they were in the past.

 

    Actually, almost every rookie needs time to develop. Defending on the talent, and football IQ, on how long that development takes. So...I say, draft the kid if you like him. And let the chips fall where the may.

[WOW!!]

Just now, Trill OG said:

If the draft is full of "day 1 starters" in the secondary doesn't it make sense to use our 1st pick on offense then use the 2nd and 3rd round on those "full day 1 starters in the secondary" as you mentioned?

Better chance at getting that starter early .. You're taking more of a risk later... Plus like I said with the number of good QB in this draft and a lot of QB hungry teams .. A sure fire too 15 prospect might drop to us...

[WOW!!]

8 minutes ago, iamhubby1 said:

 

    Most rookie WRs, but most certainly not all, usually need time to develop. But that does not mean you can automatically ignore the position in the 1st. You cannot let fear of the past sway your thinking.

 

    Yeah, I think the money being thrown at WRs this year was for 2 reasons. 1. Teams wanting an instant starter. Whether it is the WRs in this draft or not, teams went nuts. 2. A lot of teams had to spend money. And, it is an Offensive driven league. So WRs are valued more than they were in the past.

 

    Actually, almost every rookie needs time to develop. Defending on the talent, and football IQ, on how long that development takes. So...I say, draft the kid if you like him. And let the chips fall where the may.

Yes you can .. If you have equally pressing needs and a better or equal prospect you can for go  a position.. Especially if you are looking for a day one starter with your 1st pick...

Question.. Who has a better chance at beating out the starter already on the roster?

Ridely or Moore beating out Smith or Wright..

Jackson, Hughes, or  Alexander Beating out Cockrell

Or 

Reid,  or Harrison beating out Sercey ..

Oh and some positions are easier to transition to...

RB, OG DT, and LB have easier transition than other positions...

[Trill OG]

2 minutes ago, WOW!! said:

Better chance at getting that starter early .. You're taking more of a risk later... Plus like I said with the number of good QB in this draft and a lot of QB hungry teams .. A sure fire too 15 prospect might drop to us...

But you just said the draft is "full" of day 1 starters at secondary.

Not every team is going to draft secondary players in the 1st round, which means those "day 1 starters"  will be available in later rounds.

Again I ask why not use the 1st round pick on offense and focus on the secondary in rounds 2 and 3 with those "day 1 starters" in the secondary?

[iamhubby1]

2 minutes ago, Trill OG said:

If the draft is full of "day 1 starters" in the secondary doesn't it make sense to use our 1st pick on offense then use the 2nd and 3rd round on those "full day 1 starters in the secondary" as you mentioned?

 

    IF, you want a WR in this draft to come in a challenge for playing time. You had better take him early. Because, IMO, there are only 2, maybe 3 WR worth a 1st round grade. Now if you want one to develop, one you think has "It", and you can get him in the 5th? Then have at it. But in this draft, it is either early, or not at all for me.

 

    CB, and S? 2nd, and 3rd round can get you some really good talent. We can defiantly upgrade our back end within those two rounds.

 

    Again, to me, it all comes down to preference, and team evaluation at #24. Hellz bellz, for that matter every draft pick should be made with an eye towards BPA, and team evaluation. Revolutionary thought right?

[WOW!!]

1 minute ago, Trill OG said:

But you just said the draft is "full" of day 1 starters at secondary.

Not every team is going to draft secondary players in the 1st round, which means those "day 1 starters"  will be available in later rounds.

Again I ask why not use the 1st round pick on offense and focus on the secondary in rounds 2 and 3 with those "day 1 starters" in the secondary?

And Again you get a sure fire prospect earlier than later... You can get a WR with the same impact and development time later...

[LinvilleGorge]

23 minutes ago, iamhubby1 said:

 

    My personal feeling is Safety is the position that needs that #1 pick. Get a top talent back there, and let's get it on.

 

    That said, I could see a draft where we spend our 1st 4 picks on Defense. CB, DE, S, CB. Or some variation on the theme. I just see this year as a developmental year for our Offense. Give Norv a year to see who he has, what he can/can't do, where we need to improve kind of year.

 

    Sooo.... Screw all this analytics and such. Just go Defense. Defense wins Championships. And with Cam, that kinda makes sense.

I just don't think this organization values the safety positions enough to pick one in the 1st round.

[iamhubby1]

3 minutes ago, WOW!! said:

Yes you can .. If you have equally pressing needs and a better or equal prospect you can for go  a position.. Especially if you are looking for a day one starter with your 1st pick...

Question.. Who has a better chance at beating out the starter already on the roster?

Ridely or Moore beating out Smith or Wright..

Jackson, Hughes, or  Alexander Beating out Cockrell

Or 

Reid,  or Harrison beating out Sercey ..

Oh and some positions are easier to transition to...

RB, OG DT, and LB have easier transition than other positions...

 

    Personally? I wouldn't even take a WR in this draft. But I do believe that either Ridley, or Moore could challenge for playing time. They don't have to start, they just have to contribute.

 

    CB? I don't expect the kid to come in and win a starting job, and I don't expect may folks to disagree. Give me solid reps, learn and grow, and then challenge for that starting spot. It could happen sooner than later. But it won't happen right away.

 

    Same with any rookie. Even our 1st pick should have a tough time starting right out of the gate. Anywhere but S anywho.

 

    If it is my pick. And I like 2 guys. I believe I take the guy I believe will have the best career. At least I hope I take the best talent. I love me some talent, as long as he has smarts that is. Hubby don't draft no idiots.

[WOW!!]

5 minutes ago, iamhubby1 said:

 

    Personally? I wouldn't even take a WR in this draft. But I do believe that either Ridley, or Moore could challenge for playing time. They don't have to start, they just have to contribute.

 

    CB? I don't expect the kid to come in and win a starting job, and I don't expect may folks to disagree. Give me solid reps, learn and grow, and then challenge for that starting spot. It could happen sooner than later. But it won't happen right away.

 

    Same with any rookie. Even our 1st pick should have a tough time starting right out of the gate. Anywhere but S anywho.

 

    If it is my pick. And I like 2 guys. I believe I take the guy I believe will have the best career. At least I hope I take the best talent. I love me some talent, as long as he has smarts that is. Hubby don't draft no idiots.

I disagree..

Any of the 1st round CB can beat out Cockrell.. And since we really don't have a FS on the roster (Adam's and Searcy are SS) that person can come in day one and start...

If you're not getting trying to get day 1 starters with your 1st and 2nd round pick... Especially when you have as many needs as us... You failed...

[iamhubby1]

13 minutes ago, WOW!! said:

And Again you get a sure fire prospect earlier than later... You can get a WR with the same impact and development time later...

 

    But that's the rub. You cannot get a "WR with the same impact and development time later". But you can get a CB that does.

 

    IMO, there are only 2, maybe 3 WRs in this class that could make an impact. But there are literally 100s of CBs that could.

 

   

[iamhubby1]

16 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

I just don't think this organization values the safety positions enough to pick one in the 1st round.

 

    Unless you absolutely believe in your heart of hearts that the kid is a sure fire, first ballot, HOFer. I wouldn't either. But man, c'mon. Would it kill ya to draft a kid who is actually capable of playing the position well? Maybe in round 2? A kid with talent? That is not impossible is it? Hubby don't ask for much. Give me this one. lol