Page 1 of 10 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 139
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    1,390

    Cook/ McCaffery are both looking better at #20 IMO

    For months I've been thinking we have to go LT with our 1st pick, unless we got a good one in free agency. Then after it appeared we would make a move for a LT prior to the draft, like most I have questions about each of the potential OL I hear us linked to in the draft (Robinson, Ramczyk, and Boyles). There's no guarantees with draft picks, but honestly we haven't drafted well with O lineman recently, so I'm not so sure about using #20 on a lineman.

    It's true our O line was horrible last year, which hurt the offense, but looking at the threatening offenses in the league, they all have 1 and sometimes two versatile, elusive, and fast RBs. NE has White and Lewis, Atlanta has a two headed monster that went for about 200 on us in the air, Oakland has versatile RBs, Pittsburgh has an incredible elusive and pass catching RB (you get my point). Neither Cook or McCaffery are promises to be great or even available at #20, but in the case where they are, I'm leaning towards them being our first pick.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    6,341
    All those teams you mentioned also got their stuff together in terms of blocking. Their running backs were not first round picks. It doesn't matter who we get if he can't make it to the line of scrimmage without contact and it doesn't matter if the running back goes out for a pass if a defender is smothering our QB seconds after the snap. Because of the talent drop off we wont get nearly the same skill level of o-line if we wait until the second.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    1,390
    Quote Originally Posted by shawinkerpoppin View Post
    All those teams you mentioned also got their stuff together in terms of blocking. Their running backs were not first round picks. It doesn't matter who we get if he can't make it to the line of scrimmage without contact and it doesn't matter if the running back goes out for a pass if a defender is smothering our QB seconds after the snap. Because of the talent drop off we wont get nearly the same skill level of o-line if we wait until the second.
    I hear you and I agree, but my point is based off the fact that I feel much better about the two RBs being impact players in the NFL than either of those LTs. They all have question marks, not to mention we haven't had a good record of drafting O lineman recently. Taking a RB in the later rounds is a big risk to me. We haven't had a playmaking elusive RB that we could depend on in a while (Hillman had flashes, but we see how that turned out).

    Just my opinion.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Daytona Beach, FL
    Posts
    5,068
    As long as we dont draft Bolles or Ramczyk, Ill be happy.
    Denver Broncos
    New York Yankees
    New York Knicks
    Colorado Avalanche



  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    B-more, not less
    Posts
    4,711
    It wouldn't shock me if we looked at getting another dominant Dlineman to pair with Wolfe on the front. Malik McDowell could be an option if we decide not to go OT.

    The only OT I would hope we target that early is Cam Robinson. If not him at 20 I would prefer Roderick Johnson in the 2nd or 3rd round.

    I can see the merits of taking either Cook or McCaffery in the 1st round, but I think we really need to improve the trenches on both sides in this draft.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,131
    A couple things.

    1. Cmac is going to go top 10. He will not fall to 20.
    2. Rumor is that we have an agreement in place with the saints at 11.....For guess who???? Cmac. We are DROP DEAD IN LOVE WITH HIM!
    For now....
    1. Reuben Badass LB; 2. Joe Mixon RB; 3. Jake Butt TE; 3B Sid Jones DB; 4. Bucky Hoges TE; 6. Ryan Switzer WR. Trade for Sheldon Richardson.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    18,000
    Quote Originally Posted by champ&dreallday View Post
    For months I've been thinking we have to go LT with our 1st pick, unless we got a good one in free agency. Then after it appeared we would make a move for a LT prior to the draft, like most I have questions about each of the potential OL I hear us linked to in the draft (Robinson, Ramczyk, and Boyles). There's no guarantees with draft picks, but honestly we haven't drafted well with O lineman recently, so I'm not so sure about using #20 on a lineman.

    It's true our O line was horrible last year, which hurt the offense, but looking at the threatening offenses in the league, they all have 1 and sometimes two versatile, elusive, and fast RBs. NE has White and Lewis, Atlanta has a two headed monster that went for about 200 on us in the air, Oakland has versatile RBs, Pittsburgh has an incredible elusive and pass catching RB (you get my point). Neither Cook or McCaffery are promises to be great or even available at #20, but in the case where they are, I'm leaning towards them being our first pick.
    They won't take Cook, im o. Maybe McCaffrey.


    CP bet with NVthosebroncos that Forrest Lamp will be a solid day 1 starter, barring injury

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Las Manzanitas, NM
    Posts
    27,707
    It's possible Dalvin Cook and Christian McCaffrey will have already been drafted by the time Denver gets to pick at #20 unless they move up. Ramczyk might be there, but I doubt it. The only O-Lineman I would be comfortable with at #20 is Forrest Lamp. Offensive skill guys who might be there could be John Ross, David Njoku and Mike Williams. If Denver ended up with Malik McDowell, I'd be fine with that. A Left Tackle prospect at #51 might be Dion Dawkins. Antonio Garcia is another and he might even be there at #82. Denver needs to find an Inside Backer earlier rather than later. Decent RB prospects should be available later.
    "Stultum est timere quod vitare non potes." ~ Publilius Syrus

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Winnipeg
    Posts
    24,260
    I sure see a lot of Bolles in the mocks, but that means nothing until the big night. CMac would be so nice, but I agree with some others, he will probably be long gone before that. As for a Saints deal, interesting!!! But we would have to give up a fair amount to move up those slots.

    I would love CMac. I would also prefer a high pick at ILB. Shore up the middle of our D. Lots of depth in key positions in this draft, especially D, and even at RB. In the end, when the rubber hits the road, the safe route might be Oline, but I am not overly excited about it.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    1,390
    Quote Originally Posted by underrated29 View Post
    A couple things.

    1. Cmac is going to go top 10. He will not fall to 20.
    2. Rumor is that we have an agreement in place with the saints at 11.....For guess who???? Cmac. We are DROP DEAD IN LOVE WITH HIM!
    I'm a fan of CMAC, but there's no way I'm a fan of giving up whatever it's gonna take to get the 11th pick. And not sure I'd draft a RB that high, unless he was a lock like Ezekiel Elliott last year. There was no way you'd miss with that guy. I'm not so sure about Fournette, but he's close.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,131
    I happen to agree, Id rather we do something closer to what I have in my mock in my sig.

    As for compensation, who knows, have heard 2 -2nd rd picks and #20 of course or #20, shaq, and a day 3 pick....


    HOnestly, for me, Cmac is great, but id rather draft Tarik Cohen, Ryan Ramicyk or the Curtis kid from Ohio. That said, Elway will do what he wants do to.

    In my ideal world we drop back with Cleveland or San fran- they get another 1st rdr and we get their early day 2 pick plus extras. Could grab a lot of really good players who drop.
    For now....
    1. Reuben Badass LB; 2. Joe Mixon RB; 3. Jake Butt TE; 3B Sid Jones DB; 4. Bucky Hoges TE; 6. Ryan Switzer WR. Trade for Sheldon Richardson.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    96
    To be Honest CMAC will not be there at 20. So I would so do what ever it takes to move up and draft this kid because the sky is the limit for CMAC and he is an automatic weapon that can be added to our offense so to me CMAC is a can't miss type of player.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    8,228
    Quote Originally Posted by underrated29 View Post
    A couple things.

    1. Cmac is going to go top 10. He will not fall to 20.
    2. Rumor is that we have an agreement in place with the saints at 11.....For guess who???? Cmac. We are DROP DEAD IN LOVE WITH HIM!
    I can't see McCaffrey going in the top 10, he's a good player but he's not top 10 good. Even if he ends up being Reggie Bush 2.0 (a long and very good career and Super Bowl winner) spending a top 10 pick on him is a big mistake. If he does go that high it means that a top 10 talent is falling, which is why I don't believe the deal in place rumour either, because you never know who falls nor which teams will covet those falling players more, having a deal in place with Denver now when a team who wants to trade up during the draft and will offer more would be a massive mistake by the Saints.

    Not to mention that trading up (especially with that they'd have to give up) for a player who doesn't fill themes pressing needs and who's skill set is available in other players later in the draft, is a massive blunder.
    "I never lose, I either win or I learn."

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,131
    Quote Originally Posted by Butler By'Note View Post
    I can't see McCaffrey going in the top 10, he's a good player but he's not top 10 good. Even if he ends up being Reggie Bush 2.0 (a long and very good career and Super Bowl winner) spending a top 10 pick on him is a big mistake. If he does go that high it means that a top 10 talent is falling, which is why I don't believe the deal in place rumour either, because you never know who falls nor which teams will covet those falling players more, having a deal in place with Denver now when a team who wants to trade up during the draft and will offer more would be a massive mistake by the Saints.

    Not to mention that trading up (especially with that they'd have to give up) for a player who doesn't fill themes pressing needs and who's skill set is available in other players later in the draft, is a massive blunder.


    MOst around the league believe Mac is going top 10. I think its been reported on a few draft sites too that many believe he goes top 10. A deal in place does not mean its done. Im sure the saints have tons of deals in place. Teams have discussed compensation and agreed if the chips fall right that the deal would be acceptable to both. Does not mean both teams will still pull the trigger. This is not like Shannys deal with the redskins and browns for RG3.

    He fills the need for what elways wants. A receiver a RB and a PR/KR. I can tell you, no rumor, we are head over heals for Mac! They obviously, think he fills a position of high need because they really really really covet him.
    For now....
    1. Reuben Badass LB; 2. Joe Mixon RB; 3. Jake Butt TE; 3B Sid Jones DB; 4. Bucky Hoges TE; 6. Ryan Switzer WR. Trade for Sheldon Richardson.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    6,341
    Another point worth noting is that most of these running backs have the ability but just weren't asked to do it in college. Sproles was simply a running back in college he was not a receiving threat or return man Coleman averaged like 5 yards a catch in college with less than 200 yards same for leveon bell. You can find players and coach them and place them into the roles you are looking for. Bad enough we were looking at an RB at #20 but trading up to #11 for a gadget player would probably seal the deal on missing the playoffs in back to back seasons.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •