Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

We must figure out a way to trade down


jarhead

Recommended Posts

After the next few months of speculation, with the combine and other workouts. I honestly think teams will start getting draft fever and the number one spot will be worth more again.

I think we can pull a package deal for our #1 pick. possibly getting a 2nd + 3rd round in 2011 and a 1st + 3rd(2nd?) in 2012

Nope, that is not what recent history shows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly I think the best option is Bowers. Even though we have more prospects at DE than DT. Under no circumstances do you take needs into consideration with the number 1 pick.

Unless you have a gaping hole at DT and 1 of the top 2 prospects is a DT. Let's be honest when Nick Hayden and Derek Landri are your starting DT's you have a gaping hole at DT. We've got talent at DE in Charles Johnson, Tyler Brayton, Greg Hardy and Everette Brown. We have NO talent at DT.

Draft Fairley.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless you have a gaping hole at DT and 1 of the top 2 prospects is a DT. Let's be honest when Nick Hayden and Derek Landri are your starting DT's you have a gaping hole at DT. We've got talent at DE in Charles Johnson, Tyler Brayton, Greg Hardy and Everette Brown. We have NO talent at DT.

Draft Fairley.

Fair enough. I'm just not sure I'd refer to brown hardy and brayton as talent. To me Bowers looks like courtney brown was supposed to be. DT's are a higher busting position and have generally shorter careers than ends. So I guess I'd feel more comfortable with giving a huge contract to a DE than DT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair enough. I'm just not sure I'd refer to brown hardy and brayton as talent. To me Bowers looks like courtney brown was supposed to be. DT's are a higher busting position and have generally shorter careers than ends. So I guess I'd feel more comfortable with giving a huge contract to a DE than DT.

You don't think Greg Hardy is talented? He made plays when he was on the field, most of them in the running game. Brown is looking like a bust but he's a hell of a lot more talented that Nick Hayden and Derek Landri. We need DT's and if you can get the best DT in the draft without reaching I say do it. I believe in drafting what you need but also not reaching. You don't go to the grocery store and get a whole gallon of milk because it's on sale if you just got a gallon the day before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't think Greg Hardy is talented? He made plays when he was on the field, most of them in the running game. Brown is looking like a bust but he's a hell of a lot more talented that Nick Hayden and Derek Landri. We need DT's and if you can get the best DT in the draft without reaching I say do it. I believe in drafting what you need but also not reaching. You don't go to the grocery store and get a whole gallon of milk because it's on sale if you just got a gallon the day before.

I'd agree and say yes Greg hardy is talented but he is not someone I'm certain will play in a probowl. The only way I'd say we were truly loaded at a position would be having at least one perennial pro bowler there. We have none at DE. The reality is DT are not a position you put a lot faith in long term. They bust as much if not more than any other position and they usually fall off from injuries or age way way faster than an end or wide out. Sure it would be great to get Suh level play with our pick but it's not realistic. And to top it off he has character issues. Don't want to throw a big contract at that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd agree and say yes Greg hardy is talented but he is not someone I'm certain will play in a probowl. The only way I'd say we were truly loaded at a position would be having at least one perennial pro bowler there. We have none at DE. The reality is DT are not a position you put a lot faith in long term. They bust as much if not more than any other position and they usually fall off from injuries or age way way faster than an end or wide out. Sure it would be great to get Suh level play with our pick but it's not realistic. And to top it off he has character issues. Don't want to throw a big contract at that.

The best way to help a DE is to get a dominating DT that the other team's O-line has to double team. I honestly think I could block Nick Hayden.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you don't just trade down for the hell of it. you trade down because you have someone specific in mind you want to get with the lower pick.

if we're just trading down to fill the roster with random mid-round scrubs, then f**k no.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still say If I was the FO I would call New England (they need a young dominate DT/DE) and offer them the number one pick for:

Pick 17

Pick 28

Pick 33

Pick 74

Of course the point value is lower than the number 1 point value, but as everyone has said this year pick is not very valuable.

NE would still have picks in each round.

We would have 5 picks (including comp pick) in the top 100 thats enough picks to build around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...