Would your prefer one top 5 draft pick or several lower 1st and 2nd rounders?

[Javalon]

The following question in another thread got me wondering how most people felt about this. And since I enjoy creating the occasional poll...

...but when was the last time the Broncos got a top ten pick?

In 1991 we picked Mike Croel with the 4th pick in the draft. He played well for a couple seasons then faded away.

In 1983 we drafted Chris Hinton with the 4th pick in the draft and traded him away for John Elway.

Those are the only two times in the past 30 years that we've had a top 10 pick. I'd say we've done alright without them considering we probably have the best overall record in the entire NFL over that same period, or at least the most winning seasons.

In my opinion, high picks are not worth the risk. You spend a lot more money on them than untested rookies should get paid. Then, even if they perform well, you're still not getting good value for your money. Lower first round picks cost a lot less than the top ones and are still usually very talented but you'll generally get a lot more bang for your buck on their rookie contracts.

If we get a top 5 pick (probably top 10 now, lucky Redskins), then I firmly believe we should trade down for a number of lower first round and second round picks.

Then again, we would not have gotten John Elway without our #4 overall pick to trade for him.

What do you prefer? One very high pick or several lower 1st and 2nd rounders?

[LordTrychon]

The following question in another thread got me wondering how most people felt about this. And since I enjoy creating the occasional poll...

In 1991 we picked Mike Croel with the 4th pick in the draft. He played well for a couple seasons then faded away.

In 1983 we drafted Chris Hinton with the 4th pick in the draft and traded him away for John Elway.

Those are the only two times in the past 30 years that we've had a top 10 pick. I'd say we've done alright without them considering we probably have the best overall record in the entire NFL over that same period, or at least the most winning seasons.

In my opinion, high picks are not worth the risk. You spend a lot more money on them than untested rookies should get paid. Then, even if they perform well, you're still not getting good value for your money. Lower first round picks cost a lot less than the top ones and are still usually very talented but you'll generally get a lot more bang for your buck on their rookie contracts.

If we get a top 5 pick (probably top 10 now, lucky Redskins), then I firmly believe we should trade down for a number of lower first round and second round picks.

Then again, we would not have gotten John Elway without our #4 overall pick to trade for him.

What do you prefer? One very high pick or several lower 1st and 2nd rounders?

A great point, Javalon... I personally would prefer several late first round picks... Top 5 picks and even top 10 picks cost too much guaranteed money for rookies... there are still great players even in the second round (Darrent).

But it is still a fun prospect to think about, getting one of the top names in the draft. Mostly I am just happy that we have 2 first round picks. I honestly would love to get a high pick from the Redskins if we could trade down for a later first round pick and a second or third. I would not be surprised to see Shanny do that at all.

[Jared]

I'll take depth and value for the talent over a #1 pick just about anyday.

But it really comes down to who's available and how desperate the need at a certain position is.

[LordTrychon]

That's true too... didn't we move up for DJ?

[BroncoFanCam]

It really just depends on who is available (at least for me). I like the 10-15 area of the first. TONS of great players come from there, at a slightly reduced wage. We have JUST MISSED on so many in the 17-25 spot that we normally are. Like Freeny for instance a couple years ago, taken by the Colts 1 pick before us.

If we can get a 10-15 out of the skins pick I will be satisfied, since our pick will be #32 (here's to wishful thinking )

[Calif. Bronco]

Normally I prefer depth, but if there is an apparent game-breaker out there than I think we should try to trade up to get him.

[Interpol]

Trade down. No point taking the top pick, they cost too much and any team could ALWAYS use the depth.

Only exception would be a quarterback who could be a franchise quarterback. Jake isn't a spring chicken anymore.

[Mat'hir Uth Gan]

I like picks in the 10-20 range in the first round. I'll take those.

[MilitantDBFan]

Call me crazy, and you all know that i am. But i would trade both of our first rounders for proven veterans that might be able to either help us now mid season or for next year. Not taking salary cap into account here are some ideas.

Just from things around the league lately.

Would the Chiefs trade the disgruntled Tony Gonzalez inside their own division for Jeb Putzier and our First Round Pick.

Could Lenny Walls and a 7th round pick be traded to the 49ers for Fred Beasley

Could we trade Washingtons first round pick to Atlanta for TJ Duckett

Could we trade 2 first rounders for Jamal Lewis during the draft next year. Maybe Edgerin James or Shaun Alexander.

Could we trade a first rounder for Will Smith DE of the Saints.

Lavar Arrington is unhappy. Maybe we ship two first rounders to Washington and secure his services for the Ultimate 3-4 defense.

Hell, Could we trade for Brett Favre.

Although all scenarios are unlikely, what the broncos do have are options. We could be looking at a revamped offense next season to go with a hell of a defense. Mike has done a great job putting us in a position to be successful for years to come. Just my mind though.

[Zanataki]

I would try to get a steal and get Brad Smith for a backup QB and maybe later our Starting QB. He would fit perfectly with the misdirection and bootlegs we run. Plus he is built like a RB with an arm to match.

[rogue719]

Two Words

Ryan Leaf.

That should strike fear in the hearts of anyone wanting that top five pick.

Seriously, you never know when you sign these guys if you get the great player or a good player or, in some rare cases, a bust. I would rather minimize my risk. I want the younger players rather than trying to sign all veterans through FA though, because you need both to build your team, IMO. It gives you more to work with in the long run than simply going to build your team out of all veterans.

[Broncoballa2684]

That's true too... didn't we move up for DJ?

no we traded down for him.....and if we have a top 5 or 10 pick we could use that to get that Safety out of USC or a playing TE. the biggest need in the draft next yr is SS, WR, TE, OL

[Javalon]

no we traded down for him.....and if we have a top 5 or 10 pick we could use that to get that Safety out of USC or a playing TE. the biggest need in the draft next yr is SS, WR, TE, OL

Actually, we traded up about 5 or 6 spots to the 17th overall pick. We gave up Deltha O'Neal and a lower draft pick to make the swap.

But the 17th pick isn't the same as a top 5 pick. It's still minimal financial risk in comparison.

[Javalon]

Ryan Leaf.

That should strike fear in the hearts of anyone wanting that top five pick.

Seriously, you never know when you sign these guys if you get the great player or a good player or, in some rare cases, a bust. I would rather minimize my risk. I want the younger players rather than trying to sign all veterans through FA though, because you need both to build your team, IMO. It gives you more to work with in the long run than simply going to build your team out of all veterans.

Yep, he's a prime example. Look at the all the money the Chargers wasted on that guy.

[LordTrychon]

Yep, he's a prime example. Look at the all the money the Chargers wasted on that guy.

Yeah... I feel so bad for them...

At least they've done real well since their last first round pick... even if he's still riding the bench. Good thing he held out for more money.