Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why Some Picks Are Worth Top 10 Money And Others NOT!

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

  • Why Some Picks Are Worth Top 10 Money And Others NOT!

    There's been a lot of "Fox and the Grapes" thinking going around here since Denver traded their #1 pick next season for a 2nd rounder THIS year. The homers are all on board (for now) based on the idea that Smith will be a great CB.

    The more realistic think that Denver NOT having a top 10 pick next year is actually a good thing!

    Herein, I argue the opposite, that it's NEVER a good idea to trade your top pick next season for a 2nd rounder THIS year and that contrary to popular opinion SOME picks ARE worth paying top 10 money to.

    First, top ten picks ARE expensive. The #1 overall is hideously so:

    Matt Stafford, Detroit Lions: Signed a six-year, $72 million contract. The deal includes $41.75 million guaranteed. Another $6 million is available through incentives based on Stafford playing 35% of the offensive snaps as a rookie and 45% throughout the life of the deal. 2009-2014: Under Contract, 2015: Free Agent
    The #10 pick is still expensive. In 2008:

    Jerod Meyo, N.E. Patriots: 7/24/2008: Signed a five-year, $18.9 million contract. The deal includes $13.8 million guaranteed. 2009: $2.25 million, 2010: $2.7 million, 2011: $3.15 million, 2012: $3.6 million, 2013: Free Agent
    Mayo was the rookie of they year and probably worth the money. Stafford will only be worth it if he becomes a long-term elite QB.

    SO: Is it really worth trading a pick that will likely be a top 10 pick next season and then drafting a CB in the 2nd round? What about the cost factor?

    ARGUMENT: It is hard to find elite talent at QB, LT or NT outside the top 10, therefore it's worth drafting such a player and paying them.

    First, ONE reason you want all you draft picks next season is that DON'T KNOW WHAT YOUR NEEDS WILL BE NEXT SEASON!

    There are several possibilities.

    1. Orton may be good or he may suck.
    2. The team may improve or it may suck.

    A. IF Orton is good but the team sucks, then they will need a top pick to grab a NT, the way they should have taken BJ Raji by trading their #3rd round pick to move up to #8 and get him, instead of wasting it on a TE who's caught 12 passes in college, while they have Sheffler and Graham already on the roster.

    B. If Orton sucks then they will need a franchise QB. Sam Bradford and Tim Tebow will be available in the top 10. Both could be great QBs. Neither will last till the Broncos pick from the Bears which will probably be in the mid-20's.

    C. If BOTH Orton and the team suck, which you have to admit is the most likely scenario, then they REALLY need every single draft pick they can get. They'll need more defensive help, PLUS a franchise QB.
    SO, no matter what happens, having that pick would be key to fixing what's wrong with the team next year.

    BUT ARE TOP 10 PICKS WORTH THE MONEY?

    As for top 10 picks taking too much money, that depends on what you need and whether you can easily find it outside the top 10! If so, then it's not money well spent, even if the player is good. If not then it's smart because you're paying what you need to secure the talent you need to win.


    A franchise QB is worth the money, and you can hardly find one outside the top 1/2 of the first round. Most elite QBs in the NFL today were top 10 picks (Both Mannings, Phillip Rivers, Drew Brees, Ben Roethlisberger was #13. Cutler was #11; Donovan McNabb was #3 -- to name just a few. Tom Brady and Kurt Warner were 6th round and undrafted, but you'll notice it hasn't happened again in the last 10 years. If you need a franchise QB you pretty much have to draft one in the top 15 picks.

    Last year both rookie QBs were very successful: Matt Ryan #3, and Joe Flacco, who fell slightly out of the top 15 to #18. This year the top 2 QBs were both gone in the top 4.

    There are busts of course, (Vince Young perhaps, and Alex Smith certainly) but if you need a starting QB and the good ones are all drafted in the top 15 picks you have to take one with a high first round draft pick and risk it!


    A starting LT is worth the money. (Jake Long, Ryan Clady, Joe Thomas are recent examples).

    You can certainly find a LT outside the top 15 sometimes, but it's not easy, and teams are reaching more and more for LTs. Notice that once again in 2009 3 OTs were taken in the top 10, more than any other position.

    A monster pass-rushing DE (for a 4-3) defense is worth the money (Ex: Mario Williams). BUT ONLY if you play a 4-3! Two way DEs who can both penetrate and get sacks, PLUS stuff the run are incredibly rare, which is why teams are switching to the 3-4. But, you'd better be sure he's going to be a double-digit sack man.

    For 3-4 teams an elite NT who can penetrate and dominate 2 blockers and still cause havoc up the middle is a must. Think Haloti Ngata or Vince Wilfork. With more and more teams switching to the 3-4 such players are moving up into the top 10 as Raji did this year (#9).

    That's it though! RBs, WRs, LBs, RTs, S, CBs are all BAD picks for the top 10! DE for a 3-4 is a wildly overpaid player to take in the top 10 (Tyson Jackson You're overpaid!)

    WHY? Because teams can often find great players at those positions OUTSIDE of the top 10. There are LOTs of RB prospects, lots of LBs and CBs and S's and Gs and RTs and especially WRs you can find without wasting a top 10 pick on one!

    The problem is that what do you do if you're in the top 10 3 years in a row like the Lions or Chiefs or Bengals or Browns or Raiders? You already HAVE a QB and LT and maybe there's NO monster pass-rushing 4-3 DEs available when you pick? (There were NONE at all this year for instance).

    Now what? Now you're screwed!

    You're stuck picking and paying a huge salary to a RB, WR, or CB who might turn out to be Calvin Johnson, but who might also turn out to be Roy Williams!

    Or you draft a RB who might turn out to be Adrian Peterson, but who might wind up being Reggie Bush!

    Since you can find great players OUTSIDE of the first round at those positions, (and CB, S, LB, RT, C, G, and 3-4 DE) it's a bad deal to draft one in the top 10 and pay them $15-35 million guaranteed.

    Exs: Brandon Marshall and Vincent Jackson were taken in the 4th round.

    RB Frank Gore was a 3rd rounder #65, while Ronnie Brown, Cedrick Benson and Cadillac Williams were all wasted top 5 picks!

    Carlos Rogers and Packman Jones were top 10 picks, while Nnamdi Asomugha was #31. You can easily find DBs in the later 1st, second or even 3rd rounds (Foxworth is now a starter and was a 3rd round pick for instance).

    All these examples give the top 10 a bad reputation. Fans have come to actually believe that it's a disadvantage to have a top ten pick!

    WRONG! It's a clear advantage, but only IF you are able to draft a player you could not expect to find outside the top 10-15 picks!

    Thus, take a OT ONLY if you need a franchise LT you can plug in and start for 8-10 seasons. Never take a RT, a safety or a guard. Rarely take a CB or LB. Avoid RBs if at all possible because everybody thinks that prospect will be the next L.T. (#7), but he's just as likely to become the next Ronnie Brown #2. Avoid WRs like the plague no matter how good they look.

    Take a franchise QB.

    Take a NT or DT if there's an elite one and you don't have one. (Don't take TWO such players in a row like the Chiefs though).

    Take a DE, but only if you have a 4-3 Defense and ONLY if he projects as a monster pass rusher.

    But, anything outside that is probably a reach and is certainly a VERY EXPENSIVE pick for a player who might not be much (if any) better than some guy you could find in the later first or 2nd round.

    With this in mind, the BRONCOS TRADE:

    First of all that pick will likely be a top 10 pick. For the reasons outlined above, Smith is certainly NOT a top 10 talent, even if he becomes a starting CB and does well. (Under this theory, NO CB is worth taking in the top 10)!

    In fact NO CB has been taken in the top 10 since the Pacman Jones fiasco of 2005.

    CONCLUSION: If Smith works out to be a starting #2 CB (likely) that does NOT justify this trade! Far from it!

    The trade would be a good one IF the Broncos already were set at QB, NT and LT -- and thus would be wasting top 10 money at some other position. They are not. Rather, they will need a NT and probably a QB next season.

    But, the Broncos will have given away the flexibility they will need to respond to whatever happens this season, and will very probably be looking for a NT or franchise QB in NEXT years' draft -- but won't have the ability to take one, because they gave away their pick!
    Last edited by Cugel; 05-03-2009, 12:21 PM.
    sigpic

  • #2
    Good points, but I got one argument in it all for you. I can't find the article that stated it, but from a purely economic sense we were a big winner this draft.


    Why?


    First of all, picking inside the top 10 is just like you said, very expensive, and while that may be worth it (may) if your player ends up being an absolute stud, the player needs to be for the pick to be even sorta worth the money.


    Why again?


    The Salary Cap, as we all know keeps a team from being able to Yankee their way to wins (not that that has done well for them lately). You can't just pay every player on your team 10 mil. and be done with it, you have to be able to get depth and stars at a decent price. The trick to that is having 2nd rounder's or 3rds, and not the high priced top ten as of now.


    This is why it's thought that the Pats traded so many picks into the 2nd, cuz next year they will start needing to get some more impact rookies as their current roster ages, and the 2nd round tends to have some "first round talent" that just randomly fell, or a player that has everything you need, but lacks one thing to be a star.

    Anyways, from the salary prospective, if you get a "stud" in the 2nd, you have that player for 4 years at a way reduced cost, now they may very well want a raise after so many, but your still not stuck paying some quarterback 71 million.


    And the Nose Tackle argument?


    While I agree they are much much harder to find outside the top half of the first round: there has been Kris Jenkins, Casey Hampton and Shaun Rodgers, all falling into the 2nd, although that was a few years ago.


    My guess is if we do need a NT next year, or a QB, we could likely trade our mid 1st (my guess at the bears first) and something else to get up a few picks, as some team that wants out of that kinda money will be selling it off, much like the Browns did this year (I think this will start to become a thing to do until a rookie cap is in place)


    So, if the staff thought Smith was a 1st round grade, and he does pan out, and we kinda suck this year, then we likely did do quite well, unless our pick ends up at say 11, then we kinda lost out.



    Not as precise as your's Cug, but those are my thoughts.
    Bronco fan from Packer Land.
    Lefty Writer on The Sports Show with Woody Paige and Les Shapiro
    Tweet me @JoRo_5551

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Cugel View Post
      There's been a lot of "Fox and the Grapes" thinking going around here since Denver traded their #1 pick next season for a 2nd rounder THIS year. The homers are all on board (for now) based on the idea that Smith will be a great CB.

      The more realistic think that Denver NOT having a top 10 pick next year is actually a good thing!

      Herein, I argue the opposite, that it's NEVER a good idea to trade your top pick next season for a 2nd rounder THIS year and that contrary to popular opinion SOME picks ARE worth paying top 10 money to.

      First, top ten picks ARE expensive. The #1 overall is hideously so:



      The #10 pick is still expensive. In 2008:

      Mayo was the rookie of they year and probably worth the money. Stafford will only be worth it if he becomes a long-term elite QB.

      SO: Is it really worth trading a pick that will likely be a top 10 pick next season and then drafting a CB in the 2nd round? What about the cost factor?

      ARGUMENT: It is hard to find elite talent at QB, LT or NT outside the top 10, therefore it's worth drafting such a player and paying them.

      First, ONE reason you want all you draft picks next season is that DON'T KNOW WHAT YOUR NEEDS WILL BE NEXT SEASON!

      There are several possibilities.

      1. Orton may be good or he may suck.
      2. The team may improve or it may suck.



      SO, no matter what happens, having that pick would be key to fixing what's wrong with the team next year.

      BUT ARE TOP 10 PICKS WORTH THE MONEY?

      As for top 10 picks taking too much money, that depends on what you need and whether you can easily find it outside the top 10! If so, then it's not money well spent, even if the player is good. If not then it's smart because you're paying what you need to secure the talent you need to win.


      A franchise QB is worth the money, and you can hardly find one outside the top 1/2 of the first round. Most elite QBs in the NFL today were top 10 picks (Both Mannings, Phillip Rivers, Drew Brees, Ben Roethlisberger was #13. Cutler was #11; Donovan McNabb was #3 -- to name just a few. Tom Brady and Kurt Warner were 6th round and undrafted, but you'll notice it hasn't happened again in the last 10 years. If you need a franchise QB you pretty much have to draft one in the top 15 picks.

      Last year both rookie QBs were very successful: Matt Ryan #3, and Joe Flacco, who fell slightly out of the top 15 to #18. This year the top 2 QBs were both gone in the top 4.

      There are busts of course, (Vince Young perhaps, and Alex Smith certainly) but if you need a starting QB and the good ones are all drafted in the top 15 picks you have to take one with a high first round draft pick and risk it!


      A starting LT is worth the money. (Jake Long, Ryan Clady, Joe Thomas are recent examples).

      You can certainly find a LT outside the top 15 sometimes, but it's not easy, and teams are reaching more and more for LTs. Notice that once again in 2009 3 OTs were taken in the top 10, more than any other position.

      A monster pass-rushing DE (for a 4-3) defense is worth the money (Ex: Mario Williams). BUT ONLY if you play a 4-3! Two way DEs who can both penetrate and get sacks, PLUS stuff the run are incredibly rare, which is why teams are switching to the 3-4. But, you'd better be sure he's going to be a double-digit sack man.

      For 3-4 teams an elite NT who can penetrate and dominate 2 blockers and still cause havoc up the middle is a must. Think Haloti Ngata or Vince Wilfork. With more and more teams switching to the 3-4 such players are moving up into the top 10 as Raji did this year (#9).

      That's it though! RBs, WRs, LBs, RTs, S, CBs are all BAD picks for the top 10! DE for a 3-4 is a wildly overpaid player to take in the top 10 (Tyson Jackson You're overpaid!)

      WHY? Because teams can often find great players at those positions OUTSIDE of the top 10. There are LOTs of RB prospects, lots of LBs and CBs and S's and Gs and RTs and especially WRs you can find without wasting a top 10 pick on one!

      The problem is that what do you do if you're in the top 10 3 years in a row like the Lions or Chiefs or Bengals or Browns or Raiders? You already HAVE a QB and LT and maybe there's NO monster pass-rushing 4-3 DEs available when you pick? (There were NONE at all this year for instance).

      Now what? Now you're screwed!

      You're stuck picking and paying a huge salary to a RB, WR, or CB who might turn out to be Calvin Johnson, but who might also turn out to be Roy Williams!

      Or you draft a RB who might turn out to be Adrian Peterson, but who might wind up being Reggie Bush!

      Since you can find great players OUTSIDE of the first round at those positions, (and CB, S, LB, RT, C, G, and 3-4 DE) it's a bad deal to draft one in the top 10 and pay them $15-35 million guaranteed.

      Exs: Brandon Marshall and Vincent Jackson were taken in the 4th round.

      RB Frank Gore was a 3rd rounder #65, while Ronnie Brown, Cedrick Benson and Cadillac Williams were all wasted top 5 picks!

      Carlos Rogers and Packman Jones were top 10 picks, while Nnamdi Asomugha was #31. You can easily find DBs in the later 1st, second or even 3rd rounds (Foxworth is now a starter and was a 3rd round pick for instance).

      All these examples give the top 10 a bad reputation. Fans have come to actually believe that it's a disadvantage to have a top ten pick!

      WRONG! It's a clear advantage, but only IF you are able to draft a player you could not expect to find outside the top 10-15 picks!

      Thus, take a OT ONLY if you need a franchise LT you can plug in and start for 8-10 seasons. Never take a RT, a safety or a guard. Rarely take a CB or LB. Avoid RBs if at all possible because everybody thinks that prospect will be the next L.T. (#7), but he's just as likely to become the next Ronnie Brown #2. Avoid WRs like the plague no matter how good they look.

      Take a franchise QB.

      Take a NT or DT if there's an elite one and you don't have one. (Don't take TWO such players in a row like the Chiefs though).

      Take a DE, but only if you have a 4-3 Defense and ONLY if he projects as a monster pass rusher.

      But, anything outside that is probably a reach and is certainly a VERY EXPENSIVE pick for a player who might not be much (if any) better than some guy you could find in the later first or 2nd round.

      With this in mind, the BRONCOS TRADE:

      First of all that pick will likely be a top 10 pick. For the reasons outlined above, Smith is certainly NOT a top 10 talent, even if he becomes a starting CB and does well. (Under this theory, NO CB is worth taking in the top 10)!

      In fact NO CB has been taken in the top 10 since the Pacman Jones fiasco of 2005.

      CONCLUSION: If Smith works out to be a starting #2 CB (likely) that does NOT justify this trade! Far from it!

      The trade would be a good one IF the Broncos already were set at QB, NT and LT -- and thus would be wasting top 10 money at some other position. They are not. Rather, they will need a NT and probably a QB next season.

      But, the Broncos will have given away the flexibility they will need to respond to whatever happens this season, and will very probably be looking for a NT or franchise QB in NEXT years' draft -- but won't have the ability to take one, because they gave away their pick!
      Excellent post. I could not agree more. Trading that pick was not a good decision. All experts seem to agree. The only people I have seen agreeing with McDaniels on this is a few on this board. Even if Smith is a All Pro this was a horrible decision (we could have easily moved up to get him without trading the first next year)....

      I agree with most of the experts that have reviewed the draft. Love the player... Overpaid big time.

      If you look at the players that were available when we made the trade for Smith; he was not going to go in the next 3 or 4 picks. We could have easily traded for pick 40 or 42 and drafted him. The cost for that pick would have been our 48 and at the most our second third rounder; but more likely our 4th rounder. Take a look at what New England paid to move up to that slot. In this draft we seemed to be the only ones paying more to move up. Almost every other trade in the draft favored the team moving up; because teams wanted to move down.... We trade up multiple times and in all cases we lost value in the trade.

      If your the argument was that we wanted to keep 48 as well then why would we use our 48 to take a player that would have been available in the third round..... No sense whatsoever...

      Just a horrible waste of next year's first round pick. As you have stated there are positions worth paying; QB, NT, and a pass rusher could very well be needs of ours next year.


      This decision does not make sense on many fronts. I actually think we paid a price for McDaniels inexperience in this draft. I think he paniced because he went into the draft focused on too few players. This caused him to make some ill advised trades and cost us additional players / picks..

      Comment


      • #4
        Jesus cugel, we get it, you didn't like the trade. What will come from all this complaining? Nothing. The trade happened. It's done. Time to move on.
        1. LB Arthur Brown Kansas State
        2. SS Dj Swearinger South Carolina

        Comment


        • #5
          Alphonso Smith was going to go on the very next pick to the Bengals, You could see it on their faces at the draft. They then selected Rey Maualuga the next best player on their board.
          2016 GM for the Buffalo Bills.

          Comment


          • #6
            My Opinion:

            1) I liked the trade. I've explained it in depth in many other threads. The synopsis is this:


            A. I don't believe we need a Franchise QB. We have a guru that turned Matt Cassell into a Franchise QB. That's ridiculous to hire a guy who's M.O. is QB development and then pay top dollar for a QB as well. A complete waste of resources. I believe McD's *system* can create a dominant QB from talented guys like Simms and Orton.

            B. We don't need an OT, WR, RB or CB (now), nor a franchise QB in my opinion. Therefore, whom are we going to use a Top 10 selection on next year? And, if the answer is to trade back, I say that's a lot harder to do and never a given (See: KC, Draft circa 2009).

            C. CB was one of our dire team needs. Champ's injury and a complete lack of depth sunk us last season. Now, we actually have an NFL calibur starter in the event of injury. Our depth still is weak, but its a lot better. And now, when we try and make a Playoff push in 2010, Alphonso Smith will have a year's experience and be ready to start if need be.

            D. 2010's draft will be the last draft with the ridiculous rookie salaries due to a likely cap in 2011. This has numerous significant fallouts. First, a ton of rookie talent will enter this draft, probably a record number of Juniors hoping to hit the last jackpot. That means a ton of talent in Round 1. Which means, a Top 10 selection will likely be equal talent-wise to a Top 32 selection (or so). Which means teams are not going to be willing to trade up if they can get an equivalent player later in the round for less money. Also, this means we will likely be well placed in the Mid-20s (most likely) to get a NT or DE of choice, Why? Because next year's draft is going to be overflowing with DT talent, and a Top talent will slip simply because of the sheer number of Juniors and DT talent that will be coming out. DT is the only position that might be worth a Top 10 investment.


            2. I believe in Alphonso Smith. I think we have a Top 20 CB talent for a bargain basement price. I also respectfully disagree with MYoung that Smith would have been available much longer.




            So, that's my stance. And we'll be able to rehash this debate a year from now when we know what selection we would have been looking at and what talent we were not able to acquire, as well as how Alphonso Smith plays.

            Comment


            • #7
              It's way easier to trade a pick in the 5-10 range than #3 which is what the Chiefs had. And of course it was hard for the Chiefs to trade it in 2009, there was nobody worth trading up to at #3. 2010 is a stronger draft, there will be MULTIPLE franchise QBs that teams would LOVE to trade up around 5-10 and grab. We could easily have gotten a mid-late 1st rounder plus a second rounder plus potentially some middle/late round picks. That trade will haunt us for the next decade.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by BRINGBAKPLUMMER View Post
                It's way easier to trade a pick in the 5-10 range than #3 which is what the Chiefs had. And of course it was hard for the Chiefs to trade it in 2009, there was nobody worth trading up to at #3. 2010 is a stronger draft, there will be MULTIPLE franchise QBs that teams would LOVE to trade up around 5-10 and grab. We could easily have gotten a mid-late 1st rounder plus a second rounder plus potentially some middle/late round picks. That trade will haunt us for the next decade.
                so now broncomania's crystal balls have narrowed it down to 5-10, as oppose to just top 10 in general?

                the more franchise QBs there are, the more there are going to be available later in the first round. the only time when teams would want to trade up that badly is when theres one or two rated very high and no depth for the rest of the draft (as was the case with NTs this draft) which i don't think is the case for next year.

                but to be fair, we DID give up alot of value regardless. i personally think alphonso smith was well worth the pick and i would have done the trade over in a heart beat, but common sense tells you to take what you can and i think we could have at least gotten a 3-4 round pick next year.
                disclaimer: if the above post appears to contain outrageously illogical content, ITS PROBABLY SARCASM

                Comment


                • #9
                  Why don't you cry a little more? That should help get you through what must be some extremely tough times in your life. I mean your favorite professional football team just did something you find absurd and ridiculous. How will you ever make it through this?

                  Let the tears fall mate, we won't judge...


                  sigpic

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Which top 10 pick can dance like that?!?

                    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qyiQxgS1Cyw&feature=fvsr

                    Alphonso Smith owns!
                    sigpic

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Mat'hir Uth Gan View Post
                      My Opinion:

                      2. I believe in Alphonso Smith. I think we have a Top 20 CB talent for a bargain basement price. I also respectfully disagree with MYoung that Smith would have been available much longer.

                      Don't read too much into what I said. I am only arguing he would have been there 3-5 picks later. With the teams coming up and the players on the board, I think this is not only reasonable but likely.

                      From the other boards I belong to (other teams) and the best information that I can gather. Most teams moved Darius Butler above Smith due to athleticism. When you factor Butler in with Britton, Brown, Rey Rey, and Brace I have no doubts Smith would have been available at 40.... I can also admit I was completely wrong about our draft. So my opinion may not mean anything.

                      We can be clear about 1 thing. No other team had him rated as top 15 because most teams had an opportunity to take him from 15 down. Teams all either passed or traded out. I think we had him rated higher than anyone else. you can argue he is a top 15 talent but the rest of the league does not seem to agree..

                      I do agree with you that there is no way he would have lasted until 48.

                      Believe me I like the player... I am just concerned about the way we over paid. I think McDaniels first three picks were very high quality players and I like that. I also think he went into this draft way way too thin. If the reports of the small number of players on his board are accurate that is a concern. There will undoubtably be more quality players come out of this draft than the number he had listed. Very unfortunate. I think this caused him to overpay for the picks he wanted to make. In the end it cost us a player or two.

                      I believe the Smith trade is more defensible than the Quinn trade. That trade to me was ridiculous. Completely unexcusable.

                      as far as the Smith trade...

                      The Patriots paid a 4th and 6th to move up from 47. We could have done the same and moved up from 48. I get nervous that most teams wanted to trade down and in reviewing most of the trades the values seemed to favor the team moving up..... Not in our case (I think the 49ers trade of next years the other big exception I see)....

                      Regardless I have said my peace. It is time to move on with the players we have. We added some quality talent and I am happy with that...

                      I want to move on and discuss the future instead of the past.
                      Last edited by myoung; 05-03-2009, 05:38 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I'm gonna go out on a limb: BUt, I imagine that Champ, Dawkins, Weigmann and the rest of our vets (who raised their eyebrows when Cutler was traded) are VERY HAPPY we dealt for a 1st round talent, who'll help them win in 2009, then sit back and wait for some guy in 2010.

                        When Favre decides to return to Minny.... CHI is no lock to be a playoff team. So, who knows if our pick will be higher than theirs?

                        If we end end trading away a 17-32 range pick.... We made a sweet deal. If not, it'll blow up in our face.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Mat'hir Uth Gan View Post
                          My Opinion:

                          1) I liked the trade. I've explained it in depth in many other threads. The synopsis is this:

                          A. I don't believe we need a Franchise QB. We have a guru that turned Matt Cassell into a Franchise QB. That's ridiculous to hire a guy who's M.O. is QB development and then pay top dollar for a QB as well. A complete waste of resources. I believe McD's *system* can create a dominant QB from talented guys like Simms and Orton.
                          That's a huge reach IMO! We'll see. Personally, I think Orton is the next Brian Griese: a guy who's an accurate passer out to about 15 yards and then gets progressively more inaccurate with long passes. He doesn't have a great arm. He's not mobile or very athletic. He can't make anything out of a broken play and he's not going to make many first-downs with his feet.

                          That's not horrible, because Brian Griese went to a pro-bowl after all. But, in the playoffs and Jake Plummer were simply outmatched by Peyton Manning, Tom Brady and Ben Roethlisberger and in the division by Drew Brees and then Phillip Rivers.

                          I think that if the Broncos get to the playoffs they're going to find that Orton can't compete with the elite QBs in the AFC. We'll see.

                          We'll see how this shakes out. I agree with NOT drafting a franchise QB like Sanchez this season in order to see how Orton does. After all, they gave up HUGE draft position to take Chicago's picks rather than the Redskins, Lions or some other team. They should find out what he can do!

                          B. We don't need an OT, WR, RB or CB (now), nor a franchise QB in my opinion. Therefore, whom are we going to use a Top 10 selection on next year? And, if the answer is to trade back, I say that's a lot harder to do and never a given (See: KC, Draft circa 2009).
                          I would say NT or franchise QB. I don't agree that McDaniels necessarily will stick with Orton. After all they considered taking Mark Sanchez if he were available, despite throwing away considerable draft position to get Orton. In fact, I think they would have drafted him if he fell to #12, they just felt it wasn't worth the price to move up like the Jets did. They were probably right too.

                          Trading down out of the top 5 is hard, admittedly. In fact, it's flat impossible unless some team wants a franchise QB. Even then they almost certainly don't want to draft one #1 or #2 overall, because of that $40 million guarantee they have to give him.

                          But, with Bradford, Tebow and McCoy all likely to be top 10 picks next year there could be a LOT of teams wanting to trade for one of them -- if the team wanted to trade down. And after all, the team might well win 5 games next year, in which case they would very probably NOT have a top 5 pick anyway (the Raiders and Jaguars both won 5 games and were the #7 and #8 pick), while the Packers who won 6 were only #9!

                          The Broncos draft position would hopefully be around #6-10, not #1-5, unless they are just so completely horrible that they win 4 games or so -- and in that case they are likely to need a franchise QB anyway.

                          C. CB was one of our dire team needs. Champ's injury and a complete lack of depth sunk us last season. Now, we actually have an NFL calibur starter in the event of injury. Our depth still is weak, but its a lot better. And now, when we try and make a Playoff push in 2010, Alphonso Smith will have a year's experience and be ready to start if need be.
                          True. No question. But, the Broncos could have traded up for Smith using their own 2nd round pick, and giving up a 3rd rounder (or even 2) to do it. They certainly didn't desperately need a TE so losing the ability to draft one in the 2nd round would have been no loss!

                          D. 2010's draft will be the last draft with the ridiculous rookie salaries due to a likely cap in 2011. This has numerous significant fallouts. First, a ton of rookie talent will enter this draft, probably a record number of Juniors hoping to hit the last jackpot. That means a ton of talent in Round 1. Which means, a Top 10 selection will likely be equal talent-wise to a Top 32 selection (or so). Which means teams are not going to be willing to trade up if they can get an equivalent player later in the round for less money. Also, this means we will likely be well placed in the Mid-20s (most likely) to get a NT or DE of choice, Why? Because next year's draft is going to be overflowing with DT talent, and a Top talent will slip simply because of the sheer number of Juniors and DT talent that will be coming out. DT is the only position that might be worth a Top 10 investment.
                          This is an ingenious argument and might even be right. However, it presumes a LOT. First of all, it presumes that the rookie pool is going to be adjusted radically, which the players union will fight and which there is no consensus for doing among the owners. They are much more interested in limiting the amount of money going to players overall, which will be the main fight in the CBO negotiations.

                          As for next year, I doubt that the Bears win fewer than 10 games though, so that pick is very probably going to be a mid-20's pick. IF all your expectations are met, then getting a NT with the #25 pick or so might be possible. I seriously doubt it though.

                          With all the teams moving to the 3-4 NT is becoming the new "reach" player. Vince Wilfork went at #18. Haloti Ngata a few years later went at #12, and this year BJ Raji, who is NOT by any means a better prospect than Ngata went at #9.

                          What happened? NT became more and more valuable because more and more teams are moving to the 3-4 because of how difficult it is to find 2 elite quality DEs (or even one) like Mario Williams, Jared Allen or John Abraham. Two-way DEs are so rare that teams are saying "screw it!" We'll go to a 3-4 because there a LOT more elite pass-rushers who are 245-260 lbs and can play OLB, than 275-290 lbs. DEs who can BOTH pass-rush and stuff the run.

                          2. I believe in Alphonso Smith. I think we have a Top 20 CB talent for a bargain basement price. I also respectfully disagree with MYoung that Smith would have been available much longer.
                          Well, I see another Dre Bly. Bly was good for a few years too, making the pro-bowl with Detroit, and he could probably still be good for a team with a decent pass-rush and a great cover S. But, I remember those damn fade routes in the end-zone to Vincent Jackson where he just out jumped Bly too vividly to think that a 5'9" CB is ever going to be a great #1 CB.

                          I think he's going to be a permanent #2 and probably a good one. But, that doesn't justify this trade IMO.

                          So, that's my stance. And we'll be able to rehash this debate a year from now when we know what selection we would have been looking at and what talent we were not able to acquire, as well as how Alphonso Smith plays.
                          I agree! I don't mind going out on a limb and making predictions and then seeing if I'm right or wrong! That's what makes football interesting. If everything could be predicted ahead of time, what would be the fun of that?
                          sigpic

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            There was ZERO chance we were getting Sanchez. ZERO, zilch, nada, wasn't going to happen. DEN discussed moving up to 8, but even that was costly. The only reason the Jets were able to do so.... was b/c Mangenius was appeased with getting some of his former players, whom he had valued and adored. He got his guys, along with two Day-1 picks. He wasn't making that deal with us.

                            As for Orton, at least he's proven to play well in the "big" game- see his bowl performances. Chris Simms even won a playoff game. Pinch me when Cutler can claim such a feat.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              BTW MUG. By saying that you think Smith is top 20 talent you are basically saying that he's the top CB in the draft -- because that's historically usually where the top CB has usually been taken -- somewhere between 11 and 20 (between Leodis McKelvin #11 and Antonio Cromartie #19).

                              Well, we'll see.
                              sigpic

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X