Go for depth or make a splash?

[Clockwork Orange]

Looking ahead, the Broncos are going to have a lot of picks in the coming draft.

Between the picks they already have (2 1sts, a 2nd, a 3rd, 2 4ths, a 5th, a 6th & a 7th) and the comp picks they should receive for the loss of Hayward & Kennedy via free agency, they're going to be busy on draft day.

If things break the same way they did a year ago and the Broncos are awarded two 3rd round comp picks (keep your fingers crossed), day 1 is going to be very interesting. So should they go for depth across the board and use all these picks? Or should they package some of them to move up and make a splash?

If it were up to you, what would happen?

[OrangeShadow]

Id like to see us stay where we are and get depth. of course it kind of depends how the deadskins do

[Hercules Rockefeller]

Stay put, the team has never had 2 1sts in the same draft before, use them both.

[SpringStein]

A small technicality, C-O, we don't have a 7th rounder in '06. That was traded to the Panthers for Sauerbrun.

[Clockwork Orange]

A small technicality, C-O, we don't have a 7th rounder in '06. That was traded to the Panthers for Sauerbrun.

You are correct sir, I overlooked that.

Ah well, if we've got to be missing a pick, I'm glad it's that one. :thumbsup:

[llayne]

I' am hoping that the Broncos go for quality depth and not just what upside the player has. No more Dealta's who take four years to develop and we then trade them. With the high cap number we have for next year, and unless there are some players taking major paycuts, I' am guessing we will have to cut some players like Nalan and Lepsis. Adding quality O-line depth would be nice. Maybe Champ will take a paycut. Ideally, I would like us to get an top 3 pick from the Skins(still possible but unlikly) and trade down so we have even more draft picks.

[Billy Clyde Puckett]

I' am hoping that the Broncos go for quality depth and not just what upside the player has. No more Dealta's who take four years to develop and we then trade them. With the high cap number we have for next year, and unless there are some players taking major paycuts, I' am guessing we will have to cut some players like Nalan and Lepsis. Adding quality O-line depth would be nice. Maybe Champ will take a paycut. Ideally, I would like us to get an top 3 pick from the Skins(still possible but unlikly) and trade down so we have even more draft picks.

All these picks will give the Broncs the flexibility to move around and grab guys they really want.

I hear all this talk about Lepsis leaving and don't believe it. Why send him away just when he is getting comfortable - he'll renegotiate. I'm not convinced this is Nalen's last year. He'll come back as long as he feels he is contributing and healthy.

That being said, my opinion is that Broncs need OL, WR and DL early. Would not be surprised to see a RB on the first day.

[llayne]

I hope it isn't Nalons last year, but if Hamilton moves over and they insert Mayer then they and draft someone for a year or two till Lepsis is slwoing down and then insert that person. know on some levels it dosn't make sense, but I would love to see us grab Reggie Bush somehow. He could be a dynamic player in this offense. I think the Broncos will go O line

[Mr. Trout]

Nalen will retire. Hamilton will move to center. Draft a stud guard and pick up a solid one in free agency. Kick Carlisle to the curb.

[Mr. Trout]

I would like to see us grab a franchise runningback because I don't think Tater is the guy. He absolutely can not pick up any tough yards inside. Anderson will be another year older. I would like Deangelo Williams from Memphis, Lendale White, or Laurence Maroney. Bush will be way gone before we pick. Williams could fall which would be f'ing great with me. White and Maroney would be great in the back half of the first round.

[FantomForce]

What we need is to bring in a great college quaterback and start grooming him, Plummer has some great years ahead don't get me wrong. But right now he is not pressured into fighting for his job, no stabs at Van Pelt I watched him terrioze my Buffs for years but his main talent will always lie in being an option quaterback. Bring some one new in that will not have memory lapses that deal with whether or not he is right or left handed, Bommer from espn put it best Plummer is at times Van Goh and at other times a finger painter, and I really feel the reason why is because he knows that he won't lose his starting job any time soon. With our other picks we definatly need to help out our depth at wide reciever Rod Smith is the Energizer bunny but please tell that everyone knows that one day Rod will be done. I also agree with Mr. Trout, but here is another name for you to look up Patrick Cobbs who decided at the last moment not to enter the draft. He did lead the nation in rushing in 2003 and I think could be the next diamond in the sixth round for ol' Shannie.

[Mr. Trout]

A lot of people are on the Brian Brohm train in the 07 draft as our future QB. Right now I agree with them.

[Billy Clyde Puckett]

What we need is to bring in a great college quaterback and start grooming him, Plummer has some great years ahead don't get me wrong. But right now he is not pressured into fighting for his job, no stabs at Van Pelt I watched him terrioze my Buffs for years but his main talent will always lie in being an option quaterback. Bring some one new in that will not have memory lapses that deal with whether or not he is right or left handed, Bommer from espn put it best Plummer is at times Van Goh and at other times a finger painter, and I really feel the reason why is because he knows that he won't lose his starting job any time soon. With our other picks we definatly need to help out our depth at wide reciever Rod Smith is the Energizer bunny but please tell that everyone knows that one day Rod will be done. I also agree with Mr. Trout, but here is another name for you to look up Patrick Cobbs who decided at the last moment not to enter the draft. He did lead the nation in rushing in 2003 and I think could be the next diamond in the sixth round for ol' Shannie.

First - Wecome to the Mane

Second - There appears to be only one sure first round QB in the April draft - Leinart and he will go with the first pick - Broncs have no shot. All of the other QBs in the draft have serious holes in their games. However, the 2007 draft could have as many as 5-6 first round QBs like Young, Brohm, Stanton, etc. In my opinion, the Broncs should take their chances on getting the QB in 2007 and use the wealth of picks this year to build the team around him rather than wasting a high pick on a questionable QB.

Third - I absolutely agree with the need for a WR, however, 2006 is a down year for senior WRs with only a couple with first round talent and they are marginal. With luck a couple of underclassmen will come out to increase the chances of getting a decent one.

This years draft will be very strong on the OL, DL, RB and DB. With a probable seven picks in the first four rounds, I would expect to end up with some quality big guys, a running back and hopefully a couple of receivers. If they take a QB, I would bet it is a mid round guy they think thye can get on the Practice Squad.

Have fun with the Mane

[llayne]

What I would really like is for Macus Vick to come out. I think he could be better than his brother, and I would love to see him in this offense and under a good coach like Mike. There are no wide recivers who I feel are sure things like Mike WIlliams and Roy Williams. I might trade one of my draft picks to the lions to grab one of those guys, otherwise I would wait and see what develops with the guys we already have.

[Billy Clyde Puckett]

With his history, I don't think it would be a good decision for vick to come out this year with only one year of history after all of his troubles.

[llayne]

I would still take a chance on him with a upper mid first rounder. Too much to pass up on. He has impressed me with his play on the field. His off-field, while he isn't that much worse that BVP. As far as tose girls, man, girls younger and younger are looking older and older. I know girls who are 16 who look older than girls I know who are 23.

[Billy Clyde Puckett]

I would still take a chance on him with a upper mid first rounder. Too much to pass up on. He has impressed me with his play on the field. His off-field, while he isn't that much worse that BVP. As far as tose girls, man, girls younger and younger are looking older and older. I know girls who are 16 who look older than girls I know who are 23.

He is going to have to prove he is not another Clarett

[RocBronc]

I don't want them to go into the draft with either philosopy in mind... IMO, you need to flexible and go with what the draft gives you... If you're first round pick comes around and the value isn't good, then you trade down. If there's a steal at your pick, you take it. Also, our team situation will change alot between now and the draft with free agency/retirement so it's way to early to predict what our needs will be.

That being said, The only position I'd say we would use one of our first round picks on is a WR... If we don't sign Lepsis than add OT to that list. We do need help at C/OG but I don't think they'll be a player worth a high first round pick at that position. So maybe we'll trade down with one of our first rounders to get the best G or C in the draft. I really don't think that RB will be a huge need for us... Even though Anderson is getting older, I think next year we'll have Bell as the starter with Anderson coming off the bench as a great short yardage guy.

For those that are in love with Brohm in '07, how can you assume that your even going to get a shot at drafting him, if he's as good as you say he is. I do think that Shanny will be looking at drafting a QB fairly high this year. He didn't draft a QB last year and Plummer is getting up there in age. Right now my choice would be to draft Brodie Croyle in the 2nd round.

[Billy Clyde Puckett]

I like Croyle, but I think he is a second day pick with his injury history.

[Workhorse]

I doubt the Broncos will draft a QB; the team already has a talented, young developing QB in BVP, and if you doubt this, you are kidding yourselves. The team realy likes him. So, at QB, it's Jake and BVP for the forseeable future, which should be at least the next three years, and personally I expect BVP to get the first crack at replacing Plummer when the time comes.

I have no idea at this point who we will Draft, but I know what we SHOULD Draft.

The second of the two first-rounders should be spent on a RB, unless Tater really comes along the second-half of this season....but to me, he is DeShaun Foster, Part II. A nice, speedy complementary back that can't carry the load as a No.1 back.....and with MA being 32, and Dayne here on a one-yr deal, that means we need new blood (and also why Clarett was such a glaring mistake).

My choices at the moment would be between Gerald Riggs, Jr. (Tennessee), and DeAngelo Williams of Memphis.

I would also be willing to bet we Draft Minnesota LG Mark Setterstrom.
Typical Bronco-type O-lineman from a similar, zone-blocking system, which is where we also got Ben Hamilton. Knowitall

[Workhorse]

Nalen will retire. Hamilton will move to center. Draft a stud guard and pick up a solid one in free agency. Kick Carlisle to the curb.

My money is on Chris Meyers to take his spot next year in Camp. :militia:

[Hercules Rockefeller]

I doubt the Broncos will draft a QB; the team already has a talented, young developing QB in BVP, and if you doubt this, you are kidding yourselves. The team realy likes him.

If you actually believe that you're kidding yourself. Shanahan is not going to pass up someone he thinks is a true QB talent because a project like BVP is on the roster. That's all BVP is at this time, a project. He's sure as hell not the QBOTF at this point simply because he was kept as the backup.

[llayne]

BVP, is a bit more than a project and a lot less the the QBOTF. Does anyone have a good assesment about the safties on this team behind the starter. Chris Young, was suppose to be a dimand in the rough(still on team?) Sam Brandon is playing. I think this team could use an impact saftey like Sean Taylor or Roy Williams. Right now, I wouldn't mind a running back but I think we should give Dayne and Bell a chance here soon to see if they can carry the load. IF Dayne can go, he is a young 27 or however old he is back. Just not that many carries. That gives us the opportunity to draft players we know can pan out and not make reaches like we have in other drafts. Of course it might also let us make one or two big reaches too, but I woul like to a mostly solid B to A type draft.

[elsid13]

BVP, is a bit more than a project and a lot less the the QBOTF. Does anyone have a good assesment about the safties on this team behind the starter. Chris Young, was suppose to be a dimand in the rough(still on team?) Sam Brandon is playing. I think this team could use an impact saftey like Sean Taylor or Roy Williams. Right now, I wouldn't mind a running back but I think we should give Dayne and Bell a chance here soon to see if they can carry the load. IF Dayne can go, he is a young 27 or however old he is back. Just not that many carries. That gives us the opportunity to draft players we know can pan out and not make reaches like we have in other drafts. Of course it might also let us make one or two big reaches too, but I woul like to a mostly solid B to A type draft.

I Browner is going to be the safety of the future, the injury hurt but might give him time to learn the pro game Brandon might be finally figuring it out, but a safety is not hard requirement at this time. WE need another stud WR in 3 round

[llayne]

The lack of stud recivers in the draft makes me thing we would be better trading for a reciver like Roy or Mike Williams. Maybe the Lions wouldn't do it, maybe they will. But, that is the type of reciver I want on the team, a big possesion reciver with speed.

[Play2win]

The lack of stud recivers in the draft makes me thing we would be better trading for a reciver like Roy or Mike Williams. Maybe the Lions wouldn't do it, maybe they will. But, that is the type of reciver I want on the team, a big possesion reciver with speed.
Don't get me started on Mike Williams...

...AGAIN!!!!! ;D

I will just say this, over the course of the last 5 or so years the TWO Player I want to be BRONCOS more than anything else, would be Mike Williams and Phillip Rivers...

[SoCalBronco]

It really depends on who is there. I like a modified Needs approach. You always ask what will the guy bring to the position over what you have now. Its not a pure needs analysis because you dont want to reach in Round 3 for a say OG, whose value is around Round 5 just because he is the next best available OG. Yeah you picked toward your need but with a 5th round caliber player you didnt really add a whole hell of alot over what you had. But Best Overall Player Available Theory (BAP) is worse. Thats just total garbage. If a really good LB drops to us at say 1B we would be forced to go after him just because he may be the BPA. The Broncos dont need anymore friggin LBs. Its a garbage concept. There is a middle ground analysis that helps eliminate both flaws, it tends to be closer to a Needs analysis than a BPA, but it still does a decent job of eliminating the basic flaws with each approach. The question is simple enough to state, just what does each player add to the position in terms of talent and depth over what you had. At some point you are going to have to create a scale and attempt to quantify (admittedly this is where it gets hard) where on the scale you stand at each position. You could break it down say 1-10 with 10 being the best taking into account talent, depth, versatility (are the guys you have at that position not only skilled but have well rounded games) contractual status, age, current youth with upside and off field issues. And then when we get to a certain pick in the draft, youve got your Top 5 guys and now the analysis is position by position, if I added this guy how much would he add to that position. In the second step of the analysis, you gotta look at personal factors unique to that player such as about how long will it take this guy to get ready to see the field, what's his ceiling, what's his floor, does his skill set match with the things we want that particular position to do in our system, are we in need of guys with higher floors-low ceiling guys as opposed to the latter, or does the opposite apply, i.e. a situation where a team already has smart LBs who get in position well but they just arent as athletic as you need to finish the plays etc, so your more likely to go for a more raw but athletic type. Its factors like these at the second step that help you get to a conclusion of well...he adds 1 point to the ranking we had at that position, or 2 points or whatever. Its hard to turn your analysis of these factors into mathematical points but you gotta do it.

That quantification of what the person adds mathematically is really key and really exposes the flaws of the Best Player Available theory. The Colts have a rating of 10 at QB, if Aaron Rodgers slipped a little bit more last year he undoubtedly would have been the BPA for them at their slot, yet they could not increase on their 10 rating at that position, so there would be no benefit. So this system helps to eliminate the flaws with BPA. Its just a framework though....the tricky part is still in evaluation, nothing is new there, you have to accurately evaluate what you have and accurately project about how good this prospect is going to be, but I think this provides a better framework than just saying, ok here are our needs and lets just drill that the whole draft, or saying, lets just take the big name guys, the best overall ranked prospect every time we come up to bat no matter what. Its a balance. Inevitably there would be situations where the increase between two players would be the same, i.e. taking player A would increase our RB position from say a 6 to an 8, and taking player B instead would increase our CB position from 7 to 9 or something like that. Its still 2. But we can still resolve the difficulties here by extending the analysis to a third stage looking at a set of tie-breaking factors, such as considering the various levels of the jump, i.e. 3 to 5 puts us from well below average to average as opposed to 6 to 8 puts us from above average to very good, here generally speaking its better to pull up whats really bad to make it average as opposed to making something decent become great. No one wants to have glaring weaknesses. Strengths are fine, but generally speaking its better to have a team that is solid but not stellar in any aspects than to have a team with some great strengths but also with really huge gaping weaknesses as well. So one factor would be seeing as between the two choices which one at least partially remedies the worse situation. This factor is driven by Needs theory alot obviously. Another factor is how well has the team previously been able to hide the particular weaknesses/shortfalls of the position being debated to be upgraded. Maybe the team doesnt have a great DL, but the DC has been very good at using various tricks like unique blitzes from different angles from other players to get pressure. Yet another factor would be the amount of young, but as of yet non productive players who can be reasonably said to have decent upside at the position looking to be upgraded with the pick. So there are ways of "breaking the tie" so to speak when the amount to be gained at a position is equal, assuming the quantification you have produced on each side is roughly the same.

Applying this either two or in the case of relative ties, three stage framework of analysis to a hypothetical for our Broncos, lets say the Redskins pick we get is #14 and lets say Reggie Bush is still there and was ranked on the Broncos board as the #6 overall prospect. The Broncos are also considering his teammate Strong Safety Darnell Bing, who the Broncos rank as the #17 player in the draft. The first step is to use the initial set of factors to determine what we would rank our RBs unit and our Safety Unit. The depth factor certainly favors the RBs as probably does the overall talent. There is upside with Bell, and there is upside with Browner, although Bell has more explosive upside. So that factor resides with the RBs as well. Overall talent at the position also goes to RBs. Age is a wash, Lynch is old and so is MA. Contractual status doesnt change much on either side but it slightly tilts in favor of the RBs as well, Brandon is a FA pretty soon and Lynch has only 1 more year left on his deal. Tatum still has 2 more years and I believe MA has a couple as well. I would say RBs is a 6.5 while the safeties are a 5. Its all a fact driven analysis. Just plug those facts into each factor and weigh each. Here, I want to briefly comment on the weight of each factor. Its unnecessarily mechanical and would create rigid inaccuracies to say that, when 3 factors favor position A, and 2 factors favor position B, position A's grade has to be better. Obviously one considers which position has more factors in their favor, but in addition to that quantitative sense, we look at it qualitatively. Look at the depth of the variation. If, when we are determing where we stand at position A and B, A has 3 factors in favor of it, and B has 2, perhaps the 2 B are ahead in are by a huge margin and the 3 which they are behind in are only by a smaller amount. Additionally on the qualitative side, we have to remember that not all factors are the same. Some might be more important. For example if Position A has the advantage in the factors of well roundedness of the talent and overall talent level, and Position B has the advantage in the factors of age and off field issues, while we certainly care about the latter 2 alot, one might be able to argue successfully, based on the unique facts of the situation, that the factors of well roundedness of the talent and overall talent level are more important so that we cant say "ok, thats two points for A and two points for B".

Getting back to applying this framework to the hypothetical, what does Darnell Bing add to the 5? What does Reggie Bush add to the 6.5? We now are squarely in Stage 2 and we are compelled to look at the applicable factors here, the personal factors unique to the player and the system on that side of the ball set forth above. I dont want to get into another factual analysis because this post is already long winded. But its sufficient to say that I think Bing would raise our safety status from 5 to around 7 or 7.5 Bush would raise the 6.5 to say 8.5 or 9. So it seems relatively equal. So now we would go to Stage 3, the three tie breaking set of factors since the gain both players would bring would be relatively equal. The fact that Bing would be bringing us up from a lower position counts in his favor on the "better to make us all around solid/ eliminate big weaknesses than to have clear strengths and weaknesses" theory, although since we were already about average and not clearly bad at safety, the concern about limiting glaring weaknesses is reduced. Still a small advantage for Bing there.The second factor, that of the coaching staff finding ways to minimize the weaknesses of that position/ get the most out of it, as listed above clearly weighs in favor of Bing over Bush since we have been able to have good running games with average players. So Bing has a very small advantage on the first factor, and a bigger advantage on the second factor. The third factor would be future talent with upside already at the position is again somewhat even, with Browner looking like he could be something, but Bell has the bigger upside as between the two, so that would be in favor of Bing again. Balancing these three factors (which are not meant to be exhaustive, they are just the only three I can think of right now) seems to lead us to the clear conclusion that Bing would be better. Now a caveat to this analysis would be that it is based on my somewhat arbitrary quantification of where our RBs start out at (6.5) and how much each of them would increase the position (roughly equal 2 or 2.5 points),....now this isnt to say they are the same caliber of player, I think Bush is superior, and the fact that I have them both increasing the positions by relatively the same amount is deceptive because it makes the players appear roughly equal, but thats not true, since Bush is required to make a decent stable of backs great (8.5 or 9) whereas Bing just has to make an average group, good/above average (7 or 7.5), thus one player is (perhaps significantly) better than just a good NFL player, while the other is just good or a little better than good. But obviously, where one disagrees with the spot I start the position at, or by how much a player would improve the position, it may very well mean that we dont have to get to the third set of tie breaking factors. So alot of this is how each individual views the draft prospect and the current position's players, the assessment can vary widely, two people can use the exact framework debating the same two players and same two positions and come out with vastly different conclusions, but as I said earlier this is just to create a better framework and structure for analysis as opposed to just going with Needs/Depth, or Best Player Available.

[-Slap-]

I would definitely like to use both first round picks. I'm agreeable to sacrificing a couple lower round picks to move up a few spots in the first round if there's player we love who starts sliding, though.

[Hercules Rockefeller]

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/broncos/article/0,1299,DRMN_17_4142763,00.html

Win might go a long way
Long-term advantage for Broncos could be reflected come draft day

By Lee Rasizer, Rocky Mountain News
October 8, 2005

ENGLEWOOD - The Denver Broncos could double dip Sunday.

Beat Washington and they'll retain their spot atop the AFC West with a 4-1 record. At the same time, a side benefit is that one of the No. 1 picks they've stockpiled for next spring also would increase in value.

Denver traded the 25th overall selection to the Redskins on April 19 in a predraft deal that netted Washington's first- and fourth-round picks in 2006 and a third-round pick this year.

Washington ended up taking Auburn quarterback Jason Campbell with the pick it acquired.

For the Broncos, the trade went beyond numbers. It morphed into a long-term fiscal plan to create something of a perfect storm this off-season.

[Mr. Trout]

LenDale White train....Hop on

[llayne]

SoCal,
great breakdown. How do you feel about Omar Jacobs? Are you against the Broncos drafting Plumers replacment or are you on the BVP trian? I think idealy I would like to see the Broncos get an high draft pick from the skins and trade down and get a second rounder and another future first rounder.

[Billy Clyde Puckett]

I'll Hijack that question and give you my opinion of Omar. I have seen him three time this year. He throws a nice ball, seems football intelligent and seems to be a good decision maker. However, he does not move around well and he does not handle the ball well. He is in a system that pretty much never runs the ball, so he has not learned that part of the game. I think with a couple of good QB's coming out of the MAC in the last couple of years, the press and the draftniks are looking for the "next big thing" to come out of the MAC which has added to his desirability among the general public. I think he has a chnace to be a good NFL QB, but it will take time. I don't see him starting at least until his third year. First round choice for a mature team like the Broncs, I don't see it. Third round, maybe. Fourth round and patience, he might be a bargain.

[elsid13]

I'll Hijack that question and give you my opinion of Omar. I have seen him three time this year. He throws a nice ball, seems football intelligent and seems to be a good decision maker. However, he does not move around well and he does not handle the ball well. He is in a system that pretty much never runs the ball, so he has not learned that part of the game. I think with a couple of good QB's coming out of the MAC in the last couple of years, the press and the draftniks are looking for the "next big thing" to come out of the MAC which has added to his desirability among the general public. I think he has a chnace to be a good NFL QB, but it will take time. I don't see him starting at least until his third year. First round choice for a mature team like the Broncs, I don't see it. Third round, maybe. Fourth round and patience, he might be a bargain.


Good Analysis, Look at Alex Smith and that what you're getting with Omar. And here comes the flames.

[longtimer]

My picks for the first round
Haloti Ngata Oregon 6-5 338
Marcus McNeill Auburn 6-9 337 4.97
Games are won in the trenches and our OL is weak our DL needs another stud DT. But the likelyhood of us get either one is slim. But I can dream!

[RocBronc]

I love Ngata... as long as his knee is o.k.

[Billy Clyde Puckett]

Good Analysis, Look at Alex Smith and that what you're getting with Omar. And here comes the flames.

I like Smith. Hope they don't kill him before he has a chance to develop.