Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

post-draft musings and ramblings, plus grades. . .

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

  • dogfish
    replied
    thanks for the responses, guys. . .






    a few more points. . . if you re-read my initial post, i never said that we gave up too much for marcus thomas, nor did i intend to imply that. . . that pick was actually my favorite of our whole draft! however i will stick by my opinion that we gave up a lot-- IMO 3 picks is always a high price to pay for one, especially when one of them will end up being a higher pick than the one we received. . . thomas' value really doesn't change the equation IMO. . .

    also. . . though i've got as much homer in me as the next guy, i at least TRY to be objective when writing analysis, and i just don't think that any discussion of marcus thomas is complete or entirely accurate without mention of his supposed character concerns. . . every single team passed on this guy with 1st round talent at least 2-3 times, so it's tough for me to think that there isn't some legit cause for concern. . . remember, thomas was kicked off of his college team, and was actually out of football for most of the year! as i said before, you sometimes have to take risks to get the big payoff, and i'm definitely glad that we did-- but i'm not willing to simply sweep his past problems under the rug and pretend that they never happened. . . he's gotten his second chance, now it's up to him to make the most of it. . . but i won't call him a steal until he proves it. . . given that teams can now be held accountable for the actions of "bad" characters whom they draft, i think this is the most prudent course of action. . . if he gets busted again and is cut before training camp, no one will be celebrating what a great value pick he was. . . every pick has a level of risk of course, but thomas clearly brings a higher level of risk than your typical player-- hopefully it will work out. . .


    i wondered whether anyone would take issue with the term "saturation". . . fan in exile makes some good point, and i definitely see where he's coming from. . . of course, if you want to get technical, you could also say that drafting three corners wasn't saturation, either-- teams can have as many as four or even five of them on the field at one time! you could easily argue that we were hoping to get one starting corner plus a nickel back and a dime back/return specialist. . .

    ultimately, it's just semantics. . . i'm looking at it in terms of units rather than individual positions, and can just as easily see where others would take the other view. . . as to the underlying point i was getting at-- i hope that in the future, we are more pro-active and effective with our drafting, and that we don't ignore one unit to the point where we HAVE to spend most of our draft there. . .

    for example. . . i'm not particularly unhappy that we didn't draft a safety (past the top four, i really don't think any of the available guys would have been much of an upgrade over what we've got), but i sure hope that we get one next year. . . as opposed to, say, waiting until 2009, and suddenly you're in a position where lynch and ferguson have both retired, and brandon is at the end of his contract-- then you're desperate, and you have to draft 2-3 safeties, whether they be free safeties or strong safeties. . . IMO it's just NOT the best way to approach it. . . i'd rather look ahead a little bit, draft for needs BEFORE they become desperate when at all possible, and give the young guys a year or so to learn before they're tossed in the fire as our only options at the position. . . that also tends to save you money because you're not looking for quick fixes in free agency all the time. . . we've generally done a good job of keeping the OL stocked this way-- hopefully we can do so with more positions in the future. . .


    broncosinindy also makes a good point about thomas. . . i was remiss to use the term "run-stuffer"-- i should have stuck to calling him a big body, and it was indeed something we needed badly. . . it's correct that he's supposed to be at his best as a penetrator rather than a space-eater, although i have seen a fair bit of discrepency as to whether he's CAPABLE of being a nosetackle. . . he does project best as an undertackle, but with a 6'3" 315 pound frame, he certainly has the bulk to play NT if he can continue to build his strength. . . PFW says that he's a solid weight-room worker who needs to play with a broader base to translate his strength to the field (i know he didn't impress with his bench press reps, but upper-body strength probably isn't AS important as core strength). . .

    no doubt rushing the passer is thomas' game, but i have to wonder. . . did we go after him merely to play in our nickel and dime packages? maybe, but i suspect that they think he can be developed into an effective two-gapper with some work on his strength and technique. . . it's certainly not impossible, but it's a bit tough for me to think we gave up three picks for a guy who we don't envision as an eventual starter. . . after going after dre bly and jarvis moss (ideal fits for bates scheme), it seems that he is intending to play the same type of D he has in the past, and thomas won't start if he can't learn to control two gaps. . . we'll see what happens, but as someone previously pointed out, he will be quite valuable just adding some badly needed interior push to collapse the pocket. . .



    my ultimate sentiments regarding this draft. . .





    draft defensive linemen?


    BRILLIANT!!

    Leave a comment:


  • pipes
    replied
    Originally posted by Cugel
    I have to agree with this.

    How can anybody say that trading a 3rd round pick next year is giving up too much for a 4th rounder this year? The 6th and 7th round picks don't count!

    Sundquist has said that they didn't even have their 6th round guy making the team!

    It's just ridiculous to expect to draft a T.D. or Tom Brady in the 6th round. That might happen once a decade. If you went over all the 6th round picks of the entire 1980's how many Hall of Fame or even pro-bowl players would you find?

    There's T.D. in the 80's and Tom Brady in the 90's and that's it. Don't hold your breath.

    The only reason other GMs didn't take Thomas in the 2nd or 3rd round was that they were afraid to. They were afraid to take a chance and have their team criticized for taking a player with "off-field issues."
    Umm...TD-90's and Brady-00's

    Leave a comment:


  • stnzed
    replied
    Originally posted by Cugel
    I have to agree with this.

    How can anybody say that trading a 3rd round pick next year is giving up too much for a 4th rounder this year? The 6th and 7th round picks don't count!

    Sundquist has said that they didn't even have their 6th round guy making the team!

    It's just ridiculous to expect to draft a T.D. or Tom Brady in the 6th round. That might happen once a decade. If you went over all the 6th round picks of the entire 1980's how many Hall of Fame or even pro-bowl players would you find?

    There's T.D. in the 80's and Tom Brady in the 90's and that's it. Don't hold your breath.

    The only reason other GMs didn't take Thomas in the 2nd or 3rd round was that they were afraid to. They were afraid to take a chance and have their team criticized for taking a player with "off-field issues."
    Heck! The Broncos 2nd and 3rd round picks have a hard time sticking around for very long........

    Leave a comment:


  • TXBRONC
    replied
    Originally posted by Cugel
    I have to agree with this.

    How can anybody say that trading a 3rd round pick next year is giving up too much for a 4th rounder this year? The 6th and 7th round picks don't count!

    Sundquist has said that they didn't even have their 6th round guy making the team!

    It's just ridiculous to expect to draft a T.D. or Tom Brady in the 6th round. That might happen once a decade. If you went over all the 6th round picks of the entire 1980's how many Hall of Fame or even pro-bowl players would you find?

    There's T.D. in the 80's and Tom Brady in the 90's and that's it. Don't hold your breath.

    The only reason other GMs didn't take Thomas in the 2nd or 3rd round was that they were afraid to. They were afraid to take a chance and have their team criticized for taking a player with "off-field issues."
    I'm in agreement that the price wasn't to high. Although we don't know how he'll turn out it still looks like Shanahan was will give up quanity for quality.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cugel
    replied
    Originally posted by ydave77
    Dogfish, as always great post. But I have to disagree with you, and all the others thinking the price we paid for Thomas is too great. I am not sure why everyone thinks we traded so much for him. I dont know if its bc it was 3 picks or what But in reality, we bascially traded a future 3rd pick, for a current 4th rd pck. Yes we added in a 6th and 7th, but they would likely end up camp fodder, with Sundquist already saying they were trying to trade away their late round picks bc there isnt room on the roster. Yes I know TD was a 6th rd pick, so I dont need to be reminded, but he is one of the exceptions. Not much of a change in talent between those late rds and UDFA. SO look at it as basically a future 3rd for a present 4th. Which I think at the very least is a very fair deal. No way would you be able to give up less.

    Then, evaluating what we did with our 4th rd pick. We got Marcus Thomas. Thomas in the 4th rd is a huge steal. He has so much potential, and as many have said if not for his disciplinary problems he would have been the 2nd DT off the board. I love the upside of this pick. If he ends up being a bust, so be it, he wont be the first. But at least we will go down swinging, being aggessive, trying to get a player with pro-bowl potential.
    I have to agree with this.

    How can anybody say that trading a 3rd round pick next year is giving up too much for a 4th rounder this year? The 6th and 7th round picks don't count!

    Sundquist has said that they didn't even have their 6th round guy making the team!

    It's just ridiculous to expect to draft a T.D. or Tom Brady in the 6th round. That might happen once a decade. If you went over all the 6th round picks of the entire 1980's how many Hall of Fame or even pro-bowl players would you find?

    There's T.D. in the 80's and Tom Brady in the 90's and that's it. Don't hold your breath.

    The only reason other GMs didn't take Thomas in the 2nd or 3rd round was that they were afraid to. They were afraid to take a chance and have their team criticized for taking a player with "off-field issues."

    Leave a comment:


  • TXBRONC
    replied
    Originally posted by topscribe
    Thanks, Dogfish. Your assessment was well thought out and a great effort. The only
    place where I would differ is that I would give the Thomas selection a solid "A."
    When you consider that he was regarded a top 15 prospect before his now well
    publicized troubles, the combination of what we gave up plus the 4th round choice
    did not match his true first-round value. Truly, were it not for Thomas' off-field
    problems, it seems Moss would have been selected after him. The bottom line is,
    Denver got away in essence with two first-round draft choices.

    As one who has been critical of Shanny's Drafting, I am highly pleased this year.

    -----
    I think Dogfish gave Thomas' drafting a B because of what we had to give up to get him.

    I do agree with you Top that we in essence got two first round picks. If Thomas had not made mistakes he did there is no way we get to draft him.

    Leave a comment:


  • Morambar
    replied
    Yeah, unfortunately DE doesn't equal DT

    Originally posted by Fan in exile
    I know this is kind of a pointless discussion and I probably won't change anyone's mind, but I don't think that he used a saturation technique with this draft.

    I believe that we drafted to address four different needs. The DT, and OT are pretty obvious even if the DT gets lumped in with the two DE's as D-line. There is a huge difference between end and tackle.

    Even in your analysis Crowder and Moss have two different skill sets. Moss is a pass rusher and Crowder is more versatile. It would really not surprise me to see both starting down the line Crowder as LDE and Moss as RDE. I think he identified two different skill sets that he wanted the DE's to have and got one guy for each skill set.

    This is quite different from the CB's that we drafted where they were backing each other up.
    I'm hoping for Crowder, Thomas, Warren, Ekuban as the starters, but I really would've felt better with 2 DTs and a DE rather than the reverse. We had three good ends and only one DT worthy of the name, so I'm hoping Thomas keeps his nose clean and lives up to his hype. I still have concerns about depth though, in part because we wisely rotate linemen in the middle as well as the ends. Mainly though it's because to have a solid middle all year we need all but one of the following:

    1) Thomas to justify his pick,

    2) McKinley to justify his signing,

    3) Harris (Steven, that is) to justify HIS signing or

    4) Burton, Gordon or Veal to justify keeping them.

    Otherwise we may have Warren and a couple good undertackles, and while they can spell each other, they can't help Warren much. It was asking him to be an every down dominator I think hurt us so badly last year.

    After our LB issues with D.J. moving to Defensive QB for the first time in his pro career and the need for a SLB who can cover and run stop this is my biggest concern. I'd like to have seen us draft another DT and a good MLB prospect, but the front office seemed to think DE was our biggest need. Hopefully they're basing that on more than complaints from the fan base and putting DT and LB second will be OK. A lot depends on how Holdman and Lewis perform; the front office seems to like Holdman, so fingers crossed. I like a lot of what we've done, even if I feel like they caved a little picking DE twice off the top.

    Again, hoping for Crowder, Thomas, Warren and Ekuban, with Moss and Dumervil taking turns coming in on DE (OK, your LT doesn't suck; how's your RT...?) Unless Crowder really can be a killer pass rusher and run stopper, in which case Ekuban gives us some scary run stoppers and Dumervil a scary pass rush. Where that leaves Lang and Moss I'm not sure; like I said, I would've drafted 2 DTs and an end, if I drafted any ends at all. Hopefully McKinley can back Warren and Harris (the DT, not the OT) can back Thomas or we still have depth issues inside, despite the explosion of talent at end. I thought our ends were good last year, but with only one decent tackle and him hurt a lot as a result there were blockers free to deal with them. Things look better now, but that and LB remain concerns (though they're my only real concerns).
    Last edited by Morambar; 05-10-2007, 07:10 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • ydave77
    replied
    Originally posted by dogfish
    now for the grades. . . .

    marcus thomas: B+

    this pick would get an A+ from me if we hadn't given up so much. . . regardless, i still love it! this is the pick that made the draft for me-- after being cautiously optimistic following the 1st day, this was the choice that got me excited. . . the risk is obvious, but well worth it IMO. . . again, you don't get big payoffs without taking some chances, and it's widely agreed that thomas was a top-twenty pick based on talent alone. . . i feel that there's a big difference between bad people, and people who make bad choices, and for now i'm putting thomas in the latter category. . . i make a distiction between college kids who like to party a little too much and guys who have a history of violence (hello, pacman!). . .

    coaches and teammates have both said that thomas is generally a good-hearted guy who played hard, and i've heard several times that he was the most naturally talented player on that awesome florida D-line. . . given the scarcity of Dt in this draft class combined with our huge need at the position, and i think the risk is more than justified. . . obviously thomas will have to keep his nose clean, but if he does this pick can bring tremendous returns. . . hopefully he'll come in understanding the situation he's in (zero tolerance), and will work hard to reward shanahan for sticking his neck out for thomas. . . he's exactly the type of big body we needed, and should be used heavily in the rotation right away-- with the RBs we have in this division, you can never have too many run-stuffers! his familiarity with jarvis moss is another plus, and hopefully the presence of his former teeammate will help him settle in and stay out of trouble (also, denver's nightlife is HARDLY a match for south beach or new orleans!). . .
    Dogfish, as always great post. But I have to disagree with you, and all the others thinking the price we paid for Thomas is too great. I am not sure why everyone thinks we traded so much for him. I dont know if its bc it was 3 picks or what But in reality, we bascially traded a future 3rd pick, for a current 4th rd pck. Yes we added in a 6th and 7th, but they would likely end up camp fodder, with Sundquist already saying they were trying to trade away their late round picks bc there isnt room on the roster. Yes I know TD was a 6th rd pick, so I dont need to be reminded, but he is one of the exceptions. Not much of a change in talent between those late rds and UDFA. SO look at it as basically a future 3rd for a present 4th. Which I think at the very least is a very fair deal. No way would you be able to give up less.

    Then, evaluating what we did with our 4th rd pick. We got Marcus Thomas. Thomas in the 4th rd is a huge steal. He has so much potential, and as many have said if not for his disciplinary problems he would have been the 2nd DT off the board. I love the upside of this pick. If he ends up being a bust, so be it, he wont be the first. But at least we will go down swinging, being aggessive, trying to get a player with pro-bowl potential.

    Leave a comment:


  • Broncosinindy
    replied
    I cant find much i dissaggree about this post. but i'll try.

    Marcus Thomas is NOT a space eating tackle. He is in the mold of UT. and could possibly be a very good one. He doesnt fit the scheme well but i like the pick a year or so ago. Mardcus thomas as i understand it is not a guy that is good agasint the run but does get in the back field and dissrupt great. he is a good one gap tackle. Why get a guy that does not fit the scheme. i mean we know he is a good undertackle. I feel that we will need a Power end on the next to him.
    ..He does not have good leg strength and only had 26 reps i think at the combine. hes gonna need to work on his strength.

    Jarvis Moss. Great Potential. but i thought we had good production out of Dumervil/Ekhban last year together they registered 13 sacks between the two. I mean what does that mean for Dumervil. heck even Lang. we know lang cannot play Strong Side. so that means essitally we are gonna have four right Ends?

    Steven Harris. i dont have alot of numbers on him but do you think he can play LDE he is only 285 lbs. i mean i dont think he can start but

    Tim Crowder. I think he is gonna be one of the highlights from this draft he can play strong side. and has good quickness and speed. was only .06 slower then moss in the forty. he might need to add ten or so lbs.

    Ryan Harris. i think he is gonna be good in denver is not a good pass protector has a problem with the strong ends. but is pretty good going agasint the speed rushers it is said he can beat most to the corner to drive the DE past the QB. and has great lateral quickness. is said he will be a good fit for the ZBS.

    I am glad denver went after guys that will play and potentially be great over a few guys that might or might not pan out.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cugel
    replied
    marcus thomas: B+

    this pick would get an A+ from me if we hadn't given up so much. . . regardless, i still love it! this is the pick that made the draft for me-- after being cautiously optimistic following the 1st day, this was the choice that got me excited. . . the risk is obvious, but well worth it IMO. . . again, you don't get big payoffs without taking some chances, and it's widely agreed that thomas was a top-twenty pick based on talent alone. . . i feel that there's a big difference between bad people, and people who make bad choices, and for now i'm putting thomas in the latter category. . . i make a distiction between college kids who like to party a little too much and guys who have a history of violence (hello, pacman!). . .

    coaches and teammates have both said that thomas is generally a good-hearted guy who played hard, and i've heard several times that he was the most naturally talented player on that awesome florida D-line. . . given the scarcity of Dt in this draft class combined with our huge need at the position, and i think the risk is more than justified. . . obviously thomas will have to keep his nose clean, but if he does this pick can bring tremendous returns. . . hopefully he'll come in understanding the situation he's in (zero tolerance), and will work hard to reward shanahan for sticking his neck out for thomas. . . he's exactly the type of big body we needed, and should be used heavily in the rotation right away-- with the RBs we have in this division, you can never have too many run-stuffers! his familiarity with jarvis moss is another plus, and hopefully the presence of his former teeammate will help him settle in and stay out of trouble (also, denver's nightlife is HARDLY a match for south beach or new orleans!). . .
    I would say that Marcus Thomas was definitely the steal of the draft. I don't think they gave up "too much" for him at all! The Broncos were never going to have room on the roster for more than 4 draft picks -- Sundquist has already stated that in his interview on this site.

    They always intended to trade away the 2nd day picks to move back up and get earlier picks. The move up for Moss cost them a 3rd rounder essentially. You can question the need to move up but Shanahan was convinced the Titans would grab Moss and they might well have, we don't know. Seems unlikely the Giants would take him since they needed help at CB and LT and Arron Ross (their pick) and OT Joe Staley were on the board. But the Titans took S Michael Griffin, who doesn't appear to have been their top choice.

    If anyone would have grabbed Moss they would have. Jacksonville made out like a bandit because their guy was Reggie Nelson and they got him anyway!

    I don't know enough about college football prospects to rate them myself for the most part, but Moss made a believer out of me in the championship game against Ohio State where he was just dominating against supposedly the nation's best team. I think he's definitely an elite prospect and will ultimately make a good pass rusher and adequate defender. Yes, he's a bit of a liability against the run, but lots of DEs are these days and it doesn't stop them. You wouldn't exactly call Dwight Freeney a great run defender, but he does alright. Moss can too and Crowder will compete to start at LDE.

    Thomas just fills a HUGE hole on the team though and that's key. I was NOT looking forward to starting the season relying on Warren and Alvin McKinley as the only starting DTs! Now at least there's some depth, and Thomas should be starting at least by mid-season. By next year he should be a force and within 3 or 4 years a pro-bowl player.

    That's a nice change from the Mike Myers' and Chukwurahs of the DL!

    "Wave goodbye to the nice Browncos, Billy! :wave:

    Leave a comment:


  • CSU_stat
    replied
    Originally posted by Fan in exile
    I know this is kind of a pointless discussion and I probably won't change anyone's mind, but I don't think that he used a saturation technique with this draft.

    I believe that we drafted to address four different needs. The DT, and OT are pretty obvious even if the DT gets lumped in with the two DE's as D-line. There is a huge difference between end and tackle.

    Even in your analysis Crowder and Moss have two different skill sets. Moss is a pass rusher and Crowder is more versatile. It would really not surprise me to see both starting down the line Crowder as LDE and Moss as RDE. I think he identified two different skill sets that he wanted the DE's to have and got one guy for each skill set.

    This is quite different from the CB's that we drafted where they were backing each other up.

    I agree completely: this was NOT a saturation draft! If all three defensive lineman had been DEs with similar skill sets, than yes, it would be a saturation draft. But drafting a prototypical RDE, a prototypical LDE, and a DT means filling three separate positions and hoping ALL of them pan out, rather than drafting three REDs and hoping ONE of them pans out.

    I can see Crowder and Thomas starting this year (if not game #1, than by mid-season.) Moss will probably be situation this year...but he may surprise us. Overall: I'll give this draft an A-, for the impact that a vastly improved defensive line will have on the ENTIRE defense.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cutler2007
    replied
    Dog, Good post and I agree with most of it with just a few exceptions.

    EE is a RDE and I doubt that Crowder will be competing with him for the LDE spot. Lang manned the LDE spot last year (which is why we got handed our ass a couple times against running teams). I see Crowder starting form day one at LDE while EE is at RDE. This will give us much better play against the run than EE and Lang did last year.

    People may not like the Harris pick as much, but I see him as a can't miss guy to take in the third round. He will compete for LT but in the case he is not good enough, I think he will make a fine LG. It is this kind of versatility that makes the pick better than most think. Also, if he had not had his back worked on before his Senior year, he would have most likely been a 2nd round pick at worst. tremendous value.

    Without the flags for Thomas' character he would have been a 1st rounder, early 2nd at worst. As mentioned Harris was recovering, but was graded a 1st rounder after his junior year.

    This draft produced 2 1st round and 2 2nd round talents IMO. They will need to prove it on the field, but I think all 4 are starting 3 years from now, and 4 starters from any draft is a great draft.

    Leave a comment:


  • JoRo
    replied
    Originally posted by Fan in exile
    I know this is kind of a pointless discussion and I probably won't change anyone's mind, but I don't think that he used a saturation technique with this draft.

    I believe that we drafted to address four different needs. The DT, and OT are pretty obvious even if the DT gets lumped in with the two DE's as D-line. There is a huge difference between end and tackle.

    Even in your analysis Crowder and Moss have two different skill sets. Moss is a pass rusher and Crowder is more versatile. It would really not surprise me to see both starting down the line Crowder as LDE and Moss as RDE. I think he identified two different skill sets that he wanted the DE's to have and got one guy for each skill set.

    This is quite different from the CB's that we drafted where they were backing each other up.
    I think you got it down, and I think that your views Dog were very good and was a good well thought out read. I gave you a cp already.

    Here is hoping all four pan out, that would make me very happy I for one have been very happy wit Shannys last few drafts
    Last edited by JoRo; 05-10-2007, 07:56 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • socalorado1
    replied
    Nice post.
    I agree with everything including
    quote
    know a lot of people are disappointed that we didn't get a safety, and while i certainly wouldn't have minded, i think the positions we did address are far more important and necessary. . . we could indeed use some quality young talent at the position, but past the top four i wasn't as enamored with this class of safeties as a lot of other people seemed to be-- and i would have been pissed if we'd taken a safety in the 1st round, at least depending on how the rest of the draft went. . .
    This statement should be read by all who thought or still think that a safety was #1 priority in the draft. Could not have said it better myself!
    I still do not understand how people cannot understand the concept of a pass rush solely generates the results of the secondary's success.

    having quality coverage DBs is nice, but even the best secondary can be picked apart when the QB has time to sit back and read war and peace before deciding where to go with the ball. . . besides possibly champ, no DB can consistently maintain coverage for 5 and 6 seconds, and it only takes one guy letting his man get free to give up a big completion. . . adding a top coverage safety would have still left us passively waiting to be dissected, sitting back in coverage and letting the offense dictate to us-- personally, i prefer an aggressive defense that can force the issue and put pressure on the offense. . .

    I wanted a safety in the later rounds but when the Broncos got Thomas i was totally OK with not getting 1. Wendling would of still benn a cool 6th round pick though....oh well!!
    I agree that Thomas WILL be the steal of the draft!

    Leave a comment:


  • silkamilkamonic
    replied
    I'm superstoked about the Moss pick. He is a boom or bust player, but the kid is an extremely hard worker and had to overcome numerous obstacles.

    What do they say about sports? "It doesn't build character, it reveals it." I'd take my chance on a hard working player with endless potential anyday.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X