Gettlemen continues to get criticism for not bringing in a WR

[CRA]

I mean sure, position comparison is subjective, but it's far easier to choose when you're in love with a player. No one was talking about Hopkins like everyone is in this thread is pre-draft. Hopkins (not a must have) is great but I am elated that Star was there at 14. It was a no brainer pick, you take the best available and unfortunately we weren't sitting way back at the 27th slot to take Hopkins. Everyone's just butt hurt that a WR wasn't drafted and that's ok.

BPA is much more subjective than some people imply....

But again, I am not unhappy with either DT....just doubling down in a draft deep at positions we are in need of.

Hopkins going at 27 doesn't mean he would have been a reach earlier. If we didnt draft Star he easily could of gone in the 20s. Austin went at 8....you telling me some boards didnt have Hopkins ahead of him at WR? Our franchise admitted to considering a TE drafted in the 20s. I just think those trying to laugh of drafting Hopkins are going a bit overboard

[PantherFeez]

BPA is much more subjective than some people imply....

But again, I am not unhappy with either DT....just doubling down in a draft deep at positions we are in need of.

Hopkins going at 27 doesn't mean he would have been a reach earlier. If we didnt draft Star he easily could of gone in the 20s. Austin went at 8....you telling me some boards didnt have Hopkins ahead of him at WR? Our franchise admitted to considering a TE drafted in the 20s. I just think those trying to laugh of drafting Hopkins are going a bit overboard

I would have gladly taken Hopkins, like without question. I was hardcore banging the drum for him over at an inferior site. Eifert would have been a great selection as well since Hartsock is 32 and useless other than blocking (if any position has weakness it's TE because the depth there is unproven behind Olsen). But on Hopkins, yeah it sucks that he was a steal at 27, and that he will be a solid WR for years to come, but Star was a for sure thing so the entire argument has to look at the 44th pick and what WR's were available.

[MHS831]

So after 40 pages this is what I have learned.  Most folks think Star was a good pick but some want to elevate receivers which were picked much later in the draft to superstar status and figure they would be better than a guy who was at some point considered the best player in the draft who fell to us because of a false medical report.  Somehow replacing a receiver was more important than finding a nose tackle which we didn't have.

 

Some folks didn't like KK at 44 feeling it wasn't a big need to find a replacement for a 32 year old DT who has had one breakout year in his career.  These same folks though wanted a receiver who would be the 3 or 4th best receiver on the team at that point because they think we need to replace a 32 year multiple probowl receiver who showed little sign of slowing down.

 

And that no matter the argument on either side, no one has changed anyone else's mind just like this post won't either and the same people will take this to task as well with the same arguments they made on page 2 or 3.

 

Lastly, the huddle is rarely the place to debate and change minds, it is more an opportunity to show one upmanship and argue relentlessly about something that is usually a moot point.

Everything about this--especially the last paragraph--is SPOT ON!!! People, Star should have gone 3rd overall--It would have cost us our entire draft to move up that far.  We got a steal at a need position.  The rest of the draft was gravy, and we got some players who will be on our roster in 4 years--the length of the contract.

 

About KK--he plays a different position than Star plays.  "Another DT????"  Yes.  A Nose and an undertackle positions Marty ignored until his desperation attempt to fill the spot in the third round in 2011 and that did not work out well.  Bottom line:  We turned a weakness into a strength by drafting a top 5 pick at 14 and a player AT A DIFFERENT POSITION who had a first round grade in the second round.

 

55 is right (it hurts to say it)--Did we need another slot or (at best) #2 WR?  We need a player who has the skill set to become a #1.  Austin?  he was gone and, if you ask me, a reach.  Patterson? A boom or bust pick. 

 

If we are not stopping the run or rushing the passer, then we are going to lose.  A WR is a weapon who touches the ball 7 times a game. 

 

Wide Receivers take some time to develop.  Most take a year or two to develop---IF they are getting on the field.  We have drafted WRs in the third (Lafell, Edwards), fourth (Adams), fifth (Pilares) and sixth (Gettis) rounds in the past four years.  Since this draft did not have any Julio Joneses or Calvin Johnsons in it, and we had such huge needs at BOTH DT positions and RG, Gettlemen did the only thing he could have done.

 

Gettlemen drafted people on day 3 who could be key players in the future.  In a year, I expect to see Kugbila as a solid RG, Klein as a starting LB (or solid depth at any LB position and a key special teamer), and Barner a contributing change of pace back.

 

Of course, another developmental WR to bury the development of our other developmental WRs is what some wanted.  Go figure.

[CRA]

I would have gladly taken Hopkins, like without question. I was hardcore banging the drum for him over at an inferior site. Eifert would have been a great selection as well since Hartsock is 32 and useless other than blocking (if any position has weakness it's TE because the depth there is unproven behind Olsen). But on Hopkins, yeah it sucks that he was a steal at 27, and that he will be a solid WR for years to come, but Star was a for sure thing so the entire argument has to look at the 44th pick and what WR's were available.

But again, the draft is a gamble....and if Star was such a lock then we wouldn't of bad the chance to draft him. I personally think Star will be very good but I don't expect a Luke Kuechly type immediate emergence.

I do think the 44th pick has decent odds of Gettlemen having predetermined Short was the guy if there. Based on pre draft workouts....I'm thinking the other players considered at 14 are the ones we thought we would be choosing from and then Star fell.

[CRA]

Everything about this--especially the last paragraph--is SPOT ON!!! People, Star should have gone 3rd overall--It would have cost us our entire draft to move up that far. We got a steal at a need position. The rest of the draft was gravy, and we got some players who will be on our roster in 4 years--the length of the contract.

About KK--he plays a different position than Star plays. "Another DT????" Yes. A Nose and an undertackle positions Marty ignored until his desperation attempt to fill the spot in the third round in 2011 and that did not work out well. Bottom line: We turned a weakness into a strength by drafting a top 5 pick at 14 and a player AT A DIFFERENT POSITION who had a first round grade in the second round.

55 is right (it hurts to say it)--Did we need another slot or (at best) #2 WR? We need a player who has the skill set to become a #1. Austin? he was gone and, if you ask me, a reach. Patterson? A boom or bust pick.

If we are not stopping the run or rushing the passer, then we are going to lose. A WR is a weapon who touches the ball 7 times a game.

Wide Receivers take some time to develop. Most take a year or two to develop---IF they are getting on the field. We have drafted WRs in the third (Lafell, Edwards), fourth (Adams), fifth (Pilares) and sixth (Gettis) rounds in the past four years. Since this draft did not have any Julio Joneses or Calvin Johnsons in it, and we had such huge needs at BOTH DT positions and RG, Gettlemen did the only thing he could have done.

Gettlemen drafted people on day 3 who could be key players in the future. In a year, I expect to see Kugbila as a solid RG, Klein as a starting LB (or solid depth at any LB position and a key special teamer), and Barner a contributing change of pace back.

Of course, another developmental WR to bury the development of our other developmental WRs is what some wanted. Go figure.

How are the WRs in this draft at best #2s?

This draft easily could of had Steve Smiths, Mike Wallaces or Greg Jennings in it. Most drafts do an this was a talented class.

We have a bunch of rentals, bandaids, guys at the end of their rope battling out for what should be bottom of the depth chart.

Smitty's lack of YAC, ability to find the endzone, and his usage in routes changing all concerns me.

[rayzor]

it's amazing the amount of energy some use to argue a what they consider a moot point that they think shouldn't be argued further acting as if they are on some higher plane of thought and maturity.

 

i love people who act like they are better than other people. it makes life fun.

 

so people aren't happy with what we've done with WR and think the team is in a bad spot. what's it to you?

 

if you don't think it should be or needs to be argued/discussed further, then don't. it's that simple. just don't engage in conversations that you don't think need to exist.

[DaCityKats]

it's amazing the amount of energy some use to argue a what they consider a moot point that they think shouldn't be argued further acting as if they are on some higher plane of thought and maturity.

 

i love people who act like they are better than other people. it makes life fun.

 

so people aren't happy with what we've done with WR and think the team is in a bad spot. what's it to you?

 

if you don't think it should be or needs to be argued/discussed further, then don't. it's that simple. just don't engage in conversations that you don't think need to exist.

 

no rayzor be mad/butthurt because we didnt draft a WR. lets just keep ignoring the facts presented over the last 5 years.

[CRA]

no rayzor be mad/butthurt because we didnt draft a WR. lets just keep ignoring the facts presented over the last 5 years.

I like how everyone is "butthurt" bc they choose to engage in discussions. That is my favorite.

I think everyone realized all needs can't be fixed overnight. Discussions on a sports message board about how we would like to see them addressed....is the norm and function of a board like this. It isn't being "butt hurt".

If pre draft you were told we were drafting...

DT

DT

G

LB

RB

Most would have preferred something that looks different IMO. Probably a lot of Hurney jokes as well. In fact, whoever proposed such would have been blasted as crazy. So what is wrong with people commenting on it post draft? That isn't butthurt

[PantherFeez]

But again, the draft is a gamble....and if Star was such a lock then we wouldn't of bad the chance to draft him. I personally think Star will be very good but I don't expect a Luke Kuechly type immediate emergence.

I do think the 44th pick has decent odds of Gettlemen having predetermined Short was the guy if there. Based on pre draft workouts....I'm thinking the other players considered at 14 are the ones we thought we would be choosing from and then Star fell.

Dead on

 

No one thought Star would be there. It's clear Carolina wanted him as they were reportedly in talks with Arizona to move up at 7 to take him. Eifert and Rhodes were the other 2 being talked about if Star wasn't there. Again, i'm high on Hopkins too, I didn't think he'd be a reach at 14 tbh. If Star wasn't in the picture you wouldn't hear me complaining that we picked him up. The reason I think NT was a good pick is because we had no starter or depth there. Fua is a laugh and Cole isn't a sure thing. He isn't going to light stats up, but he becomes the weapon to allow everyone around him to do their job. No stat can show that. 

 

I'm sure we'll be seeing everyone talk about Star's lack of stats, and don't expect another DROY.. but he's lining us up to make for a better defense.

[TheRed]

"I'm going to speak my mind, but get insulted when others dare to question my flawed arguments."

[CRA]

"I'm going to speak my mind, but get insulted when others dare to question my flawed arguments."

Funny how that can apply to both sides of an arguement/discussion...

[TheRed]

Funny how that can apply to both sides of an arguement/discussion...

Well that was the point. It's the huddle in a nutshell.

Some take it less seriously than others.

[rayzor]

"I'm going to speak my mind, but get insulted when others dare to question my flawed arguments."

 

"i'm going to make some smarmy comment that makes me sound like i'm better than everyone else"

[Ricky Spanish]

the big question:

 

How the hell is this thread still going?