Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

more pre-draft musings and ramblings. . . .

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Dream
    ...
    which is why Paul Soliai, a great physical specimen with good upside, is being considered a second-rounder even though he has only a true year of D-I experience.
    ...
    When it's possible for the Broncos to get a veteran like Kris Jenkins, outside his injury history which seems over for a second or third-round pick, you definitely have to consider it.
    ...
    If we're looking at DT at 56, then most mocks have DeMarcus Tyler, Turk McBride, Marcus Thomas, Paul Soliai and Brandon Mebane available. If we could get Jenkins for 56, would you rather have one of those draft picks or Jenkins? To me, it's an easy choice - I would take Jenkins over anybody other than Branch or Okoye. Here's hoping that DT is a Javon Walker trade Take Two.

    Comment


    • #17
      I think we will trade down and get more picks. From everything that Kiper says, from the mid first through the second round, the talent just isn't very far apart. So we would be better off to trade DOWN from our 21st spot and getting more picks. That used to be Shanahan's style. HOWEVER. He hasn't done that the last couple of years, and has had two of his better drafts. But considering the talent available later, it would make sense to grab more picks. Shanahan usually likes to have as many picks as possible. So i expect that to continue this year.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Dream
        The Broncos also ordered quite a few tape on defensive backs, whether it's a safety or a cornerback, Denver will bolster their defensive backfield. It's all about creating mistmatches, and I think you'll see a pick on the first day in that area. Safety seems more logical, because with Champ, Bailey and Foxworth Denver has a great three corner package, Curome Cox and Karl Paymah are fine as depth behind them. I think a safety somewhere on the first-day makes a lot of sense. The Broncos loved Donte Whitner last year, so the position has been on their mind for some time now. Michael Griffin makes a lot of sense. Denver needs a player who can come in and contribute on special teams and someone who can challenge as a starter now or next year. #21 might be too high, but he'd be worth it.

        Linebacker will get considered strongly as well, I know that Denver loves Patrick Willis. They did not hide this at the Senior Bowl. If Willis somehow slips past the top twelve picks, I expect a big jump on the board to occur. Wilson will not be a Bronco next year, and this kid can come in and contribute right away. I also think that the Broncos will like guys like Florida State backers, and Miami's Beason. Unlike Cugel, I do not believe that drafting a 'backer early shows disappointment in DJ, it was made clear by John Clayton from his Dove Valley report at the end of the season that Ian and Al did not live up to expectations. Shanahan meets with every player from the all-stars to the scrubs at the end of the year, and I'm guessing the reports on Al and Ian weren't that good.

        Anyways, I'm prepared for the unpredictable. I think Denver's in too good of a position to really mess up this draft. I think you'll see a lot of people being pissed because they have the hopes of defensive line in their mind right away, and if it isn't address in round one, they'll just say what we did sucks. I do not place much merit in these people's opinions, because you do not judge a draft on what you don't do, it's who you get and how they perform down the road. You have to analyze the draft beyond face value to appreciate and understand how a team performed or didn't, and I think you'll see a lot of people on this forum missing that key concept come draft day.

        My thoughts. Good thread.

        this leads perfectly into my next series of ramblings. . . .


        i was reading on the mane the other day, and saw some interesting info that had been copied from a dolphins fan-- taught me a bit more about bates' scheme. . . we know that the DTs are responsible for the A and B gaps-- we also know that the ends are allowed to line up wide, and that their primary job is to get upfield, pressure the Qb and be disruptive in the backfield. . . this quote explained that the safeties are often given outside contain responsibilities to free up the ends, and that at least one safety has outside contain to his side on the majority of the plays. . . this means that both safeties must be solid filling against the run-- given that bates likes to play man and isn't afraid to leave his corners on an island, this indicates to me that run stopping may be more important in his safeties than coverage skills. . . of course every DC would love to have guys who can do both, but what superstar safeties did bates ever have on those tough miami defenses? if we do look at a safety early, this just strengthens my belief that it'll be griffin, and not nelson or merriweather (apologies to those who are set on one of them). . .


        as for willis-- the thought just keeps growing on me that shanahan must be in love with the kid. . . he fits our mold PERFECTLY! not only is he an explosively fast and versatile linebacker, but he is reportedly a tremendous character who is absolutely dedicated to football. . . people may think i'm crazy for suggesting it, but i won't be the slightest bit surprised if shanahan tries to move up to get him. . . may not be what people around here want, but we know that mike isn't concerned with that the tiniest little bit. . .

        something else that interests me-- we've been sniffing around hartwell, and one of the denver papers mentioned that we were "targeting" david harris (like shanny tells the freakin' newspaper who he wants! since when??) those guys are two-down run pluggers that don't fit our traditional mold of LBs-- are we really interested in getting a player like that? it would make sense-- they would make us stouter up the middle, and we already have our nickel 'backers. . . also, the reported interest in moving dj to MIKE. . . this could all be 100% legitimate info. . . OR it could be a major smokescreen to conceal who we REALLY want!

        i continue to believe that we'll push hard to move up, and here's an intersting coincidence. . . #21, #56 and #86 add up to exactly 1300 points-- the precise value of houston's #10 pick. . . hmmmm. . . the connections between shanny and kubes barely need mentioned, and it runs even deeper with sundquist's former assistant rick smith now the texans GM. . . and they need to recoup some picks after giving up a lot of value to get matt shcaub-- could they have done so already knowing they we would be interested in offering them a package? wouldn't particularly surprise me. . .

        the question becomes, who would we take if we got to #10? obviously most posters (including myself, most probably) would just automatically assume that we were after a DL if landry is off the board. . . but taking willis would certainly be more in line with shanahan's previous drafting patterns. . .

        before anyone bites my head off, understand that i'm not necessarily advocating this-- just discussing some potential scenarios that i can see. . . as for the impact of that move on dj. . . for one thing, willis can play any of the three LB positions, so it's a non-issue IMO. . . also, dj is a free agent after this coming year, and ian gold isn't getting any younger, any bigger or any better. . .

        IF we did make that trade and take willis, i would fully expect that a trade had also been worked out in advance to send #70 to carolina for jenkins (it's a higher 3rd than either KC or st. louis can offer). . . people around here would be jumping off bridges if we traded a package of picks for another linebacker, and came out of the 1st day without addressing safety OR defensive end. . . but i do think it's possible. . . it would certainly make our D a lot tougher up the middle, no question there at all. . .

        alternately, i could even see us offering our 1st next year along with #21 to move up to #10 (BTW, anyone know for sure how they assign the value when trading a future pick?). . . i do think that this is a major longshot, as shanahan is a notorious bargain shopper who's much more likely to do a deal if he thinks he's paying less than normal value-- AND, once again i am not advocating this. . . merely discussing some possibilities. . . honestly though, i have to admit that this is a rare instance when i might be okay with trading that future first, if we could get willis and jenkins and still have two 1st day picks to address DE, S, OT or WR. . . ultimately i can't see that happening, but i do think that offering a package of picks to get to #10 for willis is more possible than most people may realize. . .

        clearly it's all speculation, and come draft day we may "surprise" everyone by doing exactly what's expected of us, and taking griffin at 21 and a DE at 56. . . but one thing we all know FOR SURE-- with shanahan, you can NEVER feel too comfortable thinking you know what he's going to do. . .
        Last edited by dogfish; 04-16-2007, 03:44 AM.
        Officially Objectified by the GPA

        rest in peace, darrent williams and damien nash-- you will be missed!!

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Ravage!!!
          I think we will trade down and get more picks. From everything that Kiper says, from the mid first through the second round, the talent just isn't very far apart. So we would be better off to trade DOWN from our 21st spot and getting more picks. That used to be Shanahan's style. HOWEVER. He hasn't done that the last couple of years, and has had two of his better drafts. But considering the talent available later, it would make sense to grab more picks. Shanahan usually likes to have as many picks as possible. So i expect that to continue this year.

          i can understand the sense in trading down, but i will be truly surprised if we actually do it-- we have reports from major newspapers that shanahan has already tried to work trades with detroit, washington AND houston to move UP. . . i know that cugel will scream about how those trades didn't go through and are now dead, but he's only half right-- they didn't go through, and those particular versions are dead, but that doesn't mean that we won't make new offers to those teams, or to other teams. . . i firmly believe that we are intent on moving uop this year, not down-- whether we'll be successful or not is another story, but on draft day i will be glued to the TV, waiting for us to suddenly appear on the clock sooner than expected (just like last year). . . don't try just tuning in for our pick at #21, folks-- you might miss it!


          oh, the drama. . . .
          Officially Objectified by the GPA

          rest in peace, darrent williams and damien nash-- you will be missed!!

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by dogfish
            i can understand the sense in trading down, but i will be truly surprised if we actually do it-- we have reports from major newspapers that shanahan has already tried to work trades with detroit, washington AND houston to move UP. . . i know that cugel will scream about how those trades didn't go through and are now dead, but he's only half right-- they didn't go through, and those particular versions are dead, but that doesn't mean that we won't make new offers to those teams, or to other teams. . . i firmly believe that we are intent on moving uop this year, not down-- whether we'll be successful or not is another story, but on draft day i will be glued to the TV, waiting for us to suddenly appear on the clock sooner than expected (just like last year). . . don't try just tuning in for our pick at #21, folks-- you might miss it!


            oh, the drama. . . .

            I know that feeling. I have been feeling that way most of this offseason. BUT.... I now think we'll be moving down. I WANT to move up. I LOVE it when we move up.... but I just don't have my hopes high for it any longer. I still think something will happen on draft day to get either Rodgers or Jenkins. I wouldn't be surprised if we move down in the draft, get an extra pick, adn then trade that extra pick to Detroit or Carolina for one of the DTs to add to the depth that we draft.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Brongo
              If we're looking at DT at 56, then most mocks have DeMarcus Tyler, Turk McBride, Marcus Thomas, Paul Soliai and Brandon Mebane available. If we could get Jenkins for 56, would you rather have one of those draft picks or Jenkins? To me, it's an easy choice - I would take Jenkins over anybody other than Branch or Okoye. Here's hoping that DT is a Javon Walker trade Take Two.
              I'd take Jenkins easily. He's an elite talent and he's still only 27 years old. He could play in my opinion five more years at an elite level. However, if another one of those kids (preferably Tyler or Soliai as far as system fit, even Thomas) were there at #70 - you could consider getting another one. However, I doubt that'll be the case.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by dogfish
                [COLOR=Yellow]this leads perfectly into my next series of ramblings. . . .


                i was reading on the mane the other day, and saw some interesting info that had been copied from a dolphins fan-- taught me a bit more about bates' scheme. . . we know that the DTs are responsible for the A and B gaps-- we also know that the ends are allowed to line up wide, and that their primary job is to get upfield, pressure the Qb and be disruptive in the backfield. . . this quote explained that the safeties are often given outside contain responsibilities to free up the ends, and that at least one safety has outside contain to his side on the majority of the plays. . . this means that both safeties must be solid filling against the run-- given that bates likes to play man and isn't afraid to leave his corners on an island, this indicates to me that run stopping may be more important in his safeties than coverage skills. . . of course every DC would love to have guys who can do both, but what superstar safeties did bates ever have on those tough miami defenses? if we do look at a safety early, this just strengthens my belief that it'll be griffin, and not nelson or merriweather (apologies to those who are set on one of them).
                You're right on this, and that's why I've been a big Griffin fan for the system too. He's solid in run support and good in coverage. I just never bothered to explain everything that in depth.

                as for willis-- the thought just keeps growing on me that shanahan must be in love with the kid. . . he fits our mold PERFECTLY! not only is he an explosively fast and versatile linebacker, but he is reportedly a tremendous character who is absolutely dedicated to football. . . people may think i'm crazy for suggesting it, but i won't be the slightest bit surprised if shanahan tries to move up to get him. . . may not be what people around here want, but we know that mike isn't concerned with that the tiniest little bit. . .
                Willis is a great person and a great football player. We'd have to go up pretty high to get him, but I think in the end he could be worth it. You talked about a good scenario below, and that'd help us get him.

                something else that interests me-- we've been sniffing around hartwell, and one of the denver papers mentioned that we were "targeting" david harris (like shanny tells the freakin' newspaper who he wants! since when??) those guys are two-down run pluggers that don't fit our traditional mold of LBs-- are we really interested in getting a player like that? it would make sense-- they would make us stouter up the middle, and we already have our nickel 'backers. . . also, the reported interest in moving dj to MIKE. . . this could all be 100% legitimate info. . . OR it could be a major smokescreen to conceal who we REALLY want!
                You might underestimate Harris though. Harris is a great team leader, nice intangibles and an overall good player. As far as those articles go, I think they were just speculating. Perhaps Harris had been in for a private workout or an interview the media knew about, but we didn't. Harris' big question marks where his speed and pursuit movement and after posting good 10, 20 shuttle and 40 yard dash times, I think those have been erased. He's more fast than quick though. Seeing almost every Michigan game over the past several years, I think he's a baller. However I was the first to disagree when they said (RMN/DP) he was a potential first-round pick. I think he'll go in that #40 to #60 range.

                i continue to believe that we'll push hard to move up, and here's an intersting coincidence. . . #21, #56 and #86 add up to exactly 1300 points-- the precise value of houston's #10 pick. . . hmmmm. . . the connections between shanny and kubes barely need mentioned, and it runs even deeper with sundquist's former assistant rick smith now the texans GM. . . and they need to recoup some picks after giving up a lot of value to get matt shcaub-- could they have done so already knowing they we would be interested in offering them a package? wouldn't particularly surprise me. . .
                It's a good idea, but can you convince them to move down 11 spots and potentially miss out on an elite caliber player. . . do the picks become enough in this scenario, and does the bond between Kubiak and Shanahan strengthen the ability to complete a trade? I can see the Broncos giving up all that to move up, but I stated a while ago if they were going to make a move up the boards, they would have done it already. Few teams can go 11 spots up in just one series of trades. That'd be in the area where Alan Branch or Patrick Willis would be, perhaps an elite end. So it's be worth it.

                the question becomes, who would we take if we got to #10? obviously most posters (including myself, most probably) would just automatically assume that we were after a DL if landry is off the board. . . but taking willis would certainly be more in line with shanahan's previous drafting patterns. . .

                before anyone bites my head off, understand that i'm not necessarily advocating this-- just discussing some potential scenarios that i can see. . . as for the impact of that move on dj. . . for one thing, willis can play any of the three LB positions, so it's a non-issue IMO. . . also, dj is a free agent after this coming year, and ian gold isn't getting any younger, any bigger or any better. . .

                IF we did make that trade and take willis, i would fully expect that a trade had also been worked out in advance to send #70 to carolina for jenkins (it's a higher 3rd than either KC or st. louis can offer). . . people around here would be jumping off bridges if we traded a package of picks for another linebacker, and came out of the 1st day without addressing safety OR defensive end. . . but i do think it's possible. . . it would certainly make our D a lot tougher up the middle, no question there at all. . .

                alternately, i could even see us offering our 1st next year along with #21 to move up to #10 (BTW, anyone know for sure how they assign the value when trading a future pick?). . . i do think that this is a major longshot, as shanahan is a notorious bargain shopper who's much more likely to do a deal if he thinks he's paying less than normal value-- AND, once again i am not advocating this. . . merely discussing some possibilities. . . honestly though, i have to admit that this is a rare instance when i might be okay with trading that future first, if we could get willis and jenkins and still have two 1st day picks to address DE, S, OT or WR. . . ultimately i can't see that happening, but i do think that offering a package of picks to get to #10 for willis is more possible than most people may realize. . .

                clearly it's all speculation, and come draft day we may "surprise" everyone by doing exactly what's expected of us, and taking griffin at 21 and a DE at 56. . . but one thing we all know FOR SURE-- with shanahan, you can NEVER feel too comfortable thinking you know what he's going to do. . .
                That's just it. According the Sundquist, the Broncos moved up just for better position and didn't have a target in mind. Obviously, I feel that was a lie.

                I think it's completely possible the Broncos will ignore some aspect of the line, whether it's DT or DE on the first day. However, they did order a bunch of tape on them, Goodman has said it's a great class and they do have needs at end. We'll see though, I have no idea how everything will turn out.

                I'm with you on the DT, S, OT and WR possibilities on the first day. I'm one of the few here calling for an additional receiving threat.

                Either way, I think the Broncos are set draft-wise. What I'm actually hoping for, is a team like the 49ers or Saints who have multiple fourth-rounders to send two or three of them (potentially based on value) to the Broncos for either of their third-round picks, so we have something to work with on Day 2 as well. I think at the positions we've been discussing, there will be just as good of value at those selections than at #86 or so.

                Anyways, I have to run of to my Law class, I'm not sure if today is a test day or not, but I might be posting during class.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by dogfish
                  this quote explained that the safeties are often given outside contain responsibilities to free up the ends, and that at least one safety has outside contain to his side on the majority of the plays. . . this means that both safeties must be solid filling against the run-- given that bates likes to play man and isn't afraid to leave his corners on an island...if we do look at a safety early, this just strengthens my belief that it'll be griffin, and not nelson or merriweather (apologies to those who are set on one of them). . .
                  Great information and very interesting. If the scheme doesn't put a lot of coverage responsibilities on safety, I think our need in this area drops dramatically. In that case I would hope we wouldn't go after safety at all and instead focus on DL, OT and LB.

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X