Page 5 of 174 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 15 55 105 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 2600

Thread: NFL Draft

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Calgary, AB
    Posts
    994
    Don't like the idea of trading up in the 1st round.

    I've done a plethora of mock draft simulations with trades. If we trade up even 4 or 5 spots to take Ruggs for example we give up two 3rd round picks. Trading up to San Fran 2 spots we give up our best 3rd rounder.

    The 3rd round is loaded with talent in this years draft. I don't really want to depart with these assets. The Broncos need to think Ruggs or an OT are hall of fame capable game changers to make this move.

    I want to stay put and add 4 or 5 day 1 starters to our lineup in the first 3 rounds.

    Is Reagor, Hamler etc that far removed from Ruggs to give up 2 potential starters to our lineup?

    If we trade down we could collect an extra 2nd and 3rd...a possible 6 or 7 day 1 starters.

    Scenario 1: Trade up for Ruggs give up 2 third rounders.


    Scenario 2: Trade down to 28 for example and get an extra 2nd and 3rd.

    That's potentially a 4 pick swing of day 1 starters (one 2nd rounder and three 3rd rounders).

    Ruggs would need to be better than a collective sample of lets say
    Reagor/Sims WR
    Jackson OT
    Hall CB
    Burgess S
    Claypool WR

    Does anyone think Ruggs is worth this? Is there any player in the draft that we could get at pick 9 that would be worth this haul?
    Last edited by MarshallMoss; 04-05-2020 at 11:54 AM.
    "He's going to be the #1 receiver, and is going to be a star in this league for a long time" Todd Mcshay on Jerry Jeudy

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Winnipeg
    Posts
    36,508
    Quote Originally Posted by MarshallMoss View Post
    Don't like the idea of trading up in the 1st round.

    I've done a plethora of mock draft simulations with trades. If we trade up even 4 or 5 spots to take Ruggs for example we give up two 3rd round picks. Trading up to San Fran 2 spots we give up our best 3rd rounder.

    The 3rd round is loaded with talent in this years draft. I don't really want to depart with these assets. The Broncos need to think Ruggs or an OT are hall of fame capable game changers to make this move.

    I want to stay put and add 4 or 5 day 1 starters to our lineup in the first 3 rounds.

    Is Reagor, Hamler etc that far removed from Ruggs to give up 2 potential starters to our lineup?

    If we trade down we could collect an extra 2nd and 3rd...a possible 6 or 7 day 1 starters.

    Scenario 1: Trade up for Ruggs give up 2 third rounders.


    Scenario 2: Trade down to 28 for example and get an extra 2nd and 3rd.

    That's potentially a 4 pick swing of day 1 starters (one 2nd rounder and three 3rd rounders).

    Ruggs would need to be better than a collective sample of lets say
    Reagor/Sims WR
    Jackson OT
    Hall CB
    Burgess S
    Claypool WR

    Does anyone think Ruggs is worth this? Is there any player in the draft that we could get at pick 9 that would be worth this haul?
    I have made it pretty clear that my preference is to trade back, though I am good with the 15 pick or a tiny move up, if one of the top 3 WRs is going to be gone.

    But this trade back concept, this year, makes the most sense to me otherwise, because you are correct, we will get extra top heavy draft picks, and we can solve multiple needs, often with good quality players, AND the key factor as I see it, if you need a WR, you should not panic this year....there will be a quality receiver as far down as our 3rd rounders, though I prefer we go late one or two in a trade back scenario. We can nab 2 WRs in this draft, and feel really good about the position.

    And I repeat, trading back is not about adding more picks, it's about having more currency to make the maneuvers you want, including packaging them and moving up, maybe more than once. And we all know, somewhere in late one, or two, or even as far back as the mid rounds, there will be players we really want that we would not acquire because of position. The added currency allows for some sweet deals. And the more we do, the more starters and STers we will end up with.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    5,402
    I see the value in trading back. Getting a pick or two more in the top 60 picks. Just not my favorite strategy.

    I keep seeing this sentiment that the WRs' in the 2nd/3rd are "almost as good". In reality they may be really good quality WRs but not elite. The elite picks are those top 3 maybe 4 if you include Jefferson.

    Using that same "almost as good " theory, why pick an elite OT at 15? Those quality guys in the 2nd and 3rd are "almost as good". Or DL or CB? Or why take Simmons? There are LBs with just as good instincts and speed. Or to take an argument used against Ruggs. "If Simmons wasn't so fast no one would be paying attention to him". But he is and that is a part of the equation.

    IMO they should stay at #15 and see who is setting there. I prefer Ruggs. But any of Jeudy, Lamb or even Jefferson chosen there are a different cat. Same as I would expect if they took Thomas, Wiirfs or Bechton being "just a little better and ready to plug in then Jackson, Cleveland, Niang or Peart.

    Expectations are different. Nature of the business that there will be a couple early rounders at any position that disappoint or a couple later players that exceed their draft expectations. Key is finding the difference and choosing correctly on draft day. Tough job!

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    15,587
    If you trade up it's because you think you have the perfect guy for your team. Let's for example say that in our mind Ruggs is that guy. Fits everything we want, and has the potential to be a game changer for us. Then go get your guy. One perfect fit, is IMO worth more than an extra one or two okay developmental fits. I understand getting more talent on the roster, but if you have a guy that you think can add one or two wins a season for your team you get him.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    15,587
    Quote Originally Posted by FR Tim View Post
    I see the value in trading back. Getting a pick or two more in the top 60 picks. Just not my favorite strategy.

    I keep seeing this sentiment that the WRs' in the 2nd/3rd are "almost as good". In reality they may be really good quality WRs but not elite. The elite picks are those top 3 maybe 4 if you include Jefferson.

    Using that same "almost as good " theory, why pick an elite OT at 15? Those quality guys in the 2nd and 3rd are "almost as good". Or DL or CB? Or why take Simmons? There are LBs with just as good instincts and speed. Or to take an argument used against Ruggs. "If Simmons wasn't so fast no one would be paying attention to him". But he is and that is a part of the equation.

    IMO they should stay at #15 and see who is setting there. I prefer Ruggs. But any of Jeudy, Lamb or even Jefferson chosen there are a different cat. Same as I would expect if they took Thomas, Wiirfs or Bechton being "just a little better and ready to plug in then Jackson, Cleveland, Niang or Peart.

    Expectations are different. Nature of the business that there will be a couple early rounders at any position that disappoint or a couple later players that exceed their draft expectations. Key is finding the difference and choosing correctly on draft day. Tough job!
    Adding talent all over the roster isn't a bad thing IMO. If we don't absolutely love a guy then I think trading back is the way to go.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    5,402
    Quote Originally Posted by the0rangecrush View Post
    Adding talent all over the roster isn't a bad thing IMO. If we don't absolutely love a guy then I think trading back is the way to go.
    Not arguing the strategy, just not my preference, Primarily because this is not an exact science and "loving that guy" is subjective by nature. "

    When we discuss "elite talent" or quality talent" it is subjective and biased. Not just by fans but by scouts, coaches and GMs across the league.

    Even in free agency there is a distinct difference from the coveted elite free agent and then the trickle down to " one man's trash is another man's treasure ".

    Just me but I tend to believe that the player sitting at #15 this year is going to be pretty damn good. Or in essence an A instead of B+ player.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    15,587
    Quote Originally Posted by FR Tim View Post
    Not arguing the strategy, just not my preference, Primarily because this is not an exact science and "loving that guy" is subjective by nature. "

    When we discuss "elite talent" or quality talent" it is subjective and biased. Not just by fans but by scouts, coaches and GMs across the league.

    Even in free agency there is a distinct difference from the coveted elite free agent and then the trickle down to " one man's trash is another man's treasure ".

    Just me but I tend to believe that the player sitting at #15 this year is going to be pretty damn good. Or in essence an A instead of B+ player.
    It comes down to fit as well. Now good coaches fit scheme to players, but 2 or 3 B players that can excel in your system may outweigh a single A- player that's there at 15. If we were in the top 5 for example I'm all about taking the A+ talent and designing around them as a centerpiece. However, if a centerpiece isn't there at 15 then add talent throughout the roster. Again it just depends who is there tbh.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    934
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl...cid=spartandhp

    Virtual Format ? Either way.... I CANNOT WAIT !!!!!

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Winnipeg
    Posts
    36,508
    Quote Originally Posted by skeeter01 View Post
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl...cid=spartandhp

    Virtual Format ? Either way.... I CANNOT WAIT !!!!!
    The onus will be on GMs to have the best IT/Telecom technical folks involved. Think of the criticality of having a good, solid connection. And then think of how important communications will be, if a trade is discussed. And there will be trades. If a person is not technically sound, they could mess this up for themselves. This will require expertise and know how that some may not be used to.

    But I have a hunch that experts will be very, very closeby!

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    land of the firebird
    Posts
    8,176
    cbssports did a mock show where not only did we trade up with the jets for andrew thomas, we also traded back into the first for xavier mckinney

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    5,402
    Quote Originally Posted by the0rangecrush View Post
    It comes down to fit as well. Now good coaches fit scheme to players, but 2 or 3 B players that can excel in your system may outweigh a single A- player that's there at 15. If we were in the top 5 for example I'm all about taking the A+ talent and designing around them as a centerpiece. However, if a centerpiece isn't there at 15 then add talent throughout the roster. Again it just depends who is there tbh.
    And that is a solid strategy to have the players fit the scheme until you have coaching changes and the scheme changes with it.

    Absolutely agree that it is preferred if the drafted players are better fits then a BPA player that is an odd fit.

    For the Broncos there is a great example of it. C. Harris was a better at man coverage. He arguably struggled a bit in more zone based concepts run by Fangio. Now we have Bouye, with more zone based strengths.

    That is why I find it surprising with some of the most coveted and mentioned mock draft picks who don’t fit the current system. Specifically high CB picks that are more man coverage and weak tacklers. Neither Fangio traits.

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Las Manzanitas, NM
    Posts
    31,721
    Quote Originally Posted by armedequation View Post
    cbssports did a mock show where not only did we trade up with the jets for andrew thomas, we also traded back into the first for xavier mckinney
    They must have cabin fever.
    "Stultum est timere quod vitare non potes." ~ Publilius Syrus

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    5,402
    Quote Originally Posted by armedequation View Post
    cbssports did a mock show where not only did we trade up with the jets for andrew thomas, we also traded back into the first for xavier mckinney
    Not sure I see the “need” for a safety this early in this draft. Not sure that would be my goal if acquiring another first.

    Depth? One of Simmons or Jackson moving outside to CB?

    Question for those that have a better understanding of draft pick values. What would it take to acquire another 2nd rd pick?

    Basically keeping #15 and #47 and trading for a mid/ late rd 2nd?

    Would Broncos first 3rd and 4th be enough? A later 3rd?

  14. #74
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    915
    Quote Originally Posted by FR Tim View Post
    Not sure I see the “need” for a safety this early in this draft. Not sure that would be my goal if acquiring another first.

    Depth? One of Simmons or Jackson moving outside to CB?

    Question for those that have a better understanding of draft pick values. What would it take to acquire another 2nd rd pick?

    Basically keeping #15 and #47 and trading for a mid/ late rd 2nd?

    Would Broncos first 3rd and 4th be enough? A later 3rd?
    Can McKinney cover a TE in the AFC West division?

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    land of the firebird
    Posts
    8,176
    Quote Originally Posted by FR Tim View Post
    Not sure I see the “need” for a safety this early in this draft. Not sure that would be my goal if acquiring another first.

    Depth? One of Simmons or Jackson moving outside to CB?

    Question for those that have a better understanding of draft pick values. What would it take to acquire another 2nd rd pick?

    Basically keeping #15 and #47 and trading for a mid/ late rd 2nd?

    Would Broncos first 3rd and 4th be enough? A later 3rd?
    Sam~ i dont remember what they added to trade up to get thomas but i do remember royce being part of it

    yeah i dont know much about mckinney other than hes got a high footbal iq and is versatile enough to cover everyone and be up in the box. cb is more of the pressing need but i do see the need for a safety thats multifaceted. im not sure about the cost to move back into the first vs somehow getting him or chinn in the 2nd/3rd.

Posting Permissions

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