PDA

View Full Version : Maximizing the Draft.


no-pseudo-fan
04-14-2009, 09:21 AM
I have really been thinking about how we can best use the picks that we have to be better next year. Do we take all defense? Should we get projects or 1st year starters? What is the best way for Denver to be successful in the shortest about of time?

Then I remembered watching something about the 90's Cowboys and their attitude after the Hershall Walker trade. They went into the draft figuring that they were playing with the house's money, they got players that they wouldn't have picked if they didn't have the extra picks. They were able to be aggressive.

We have 2 additional picks in the first 3 rounds this year, and I say that we do the same thing. Stir the pot. Take Defensive front 7 with "our" 1st 3 picks like everyone expects, but with the other 2 go the other way. Draft a RB or CB at 18, draft a OL or WR in the 3rd. Take a player that you love that doesn't fit the most pressing need, but is an upgrade to what you got.

I know everyone wants NT, OLB and DE with our 1st 3 picks, and that is fine. Just what I think we should do. How would you maximize this year's draft?

Where's Plummer???
04-14-2009, 09:24 AM
i believe a DL is the biggest thing. but after that go with a QB or RB who can sit back and learn for a few yrs. and dont make th mistake that was made w/ plummer where 1/2 way through the season when hes taking you to the playoffs bench him for the new guy.

TheDave
04-14-2009, 09:27 AM
The Cowboys also got 7 draft picks over 3 years and 5 players... We didn't do nearly that well.

IMO... Don't over think this, pick the best player at an area of need for each selection and hope for the best.

no-pseudo-fan
04-14-2009, 09:48 AM
What if the best player on our board is not at a "NEED" area? Should we pass on talent?

tsiguy96
04-14-2009, 09:52 AM
What if the best player on our board is not at a "NEED" area? Should we pass on talent?

depends. no OL, WR, TE, QB, CB in first 3 rounds. when a team has as many holes on defense as this one, you dont waste picks on luxury players.

WolfpackGuy
04-14-2009, 09:53 AM
Get as many defensive starters/rotation contributors as possible.

LonghornBronco
04-14-2009, 10:04 AM
Pick the best player period! Any position on the team could be upgraded except maybe OT.

no-pseudo-fan
04-14-2009, 10:06 AM
depends. no OL, WR, TE, QB, CB in first 3 rounds. when a team has as many holes on defense as this one, you dont waste picks on luxury players.

I think we are going to be surprised day 1 with at least one of the picks. I could easily see us going RB in the first or even CB in the first if a Malcolm Jenkins is still there. I almost for certain see us drafting a OG in the 3rd. We don't know how McD thinks. He is going to draft a certain way, and sense nobody knows, it could be anyone.

no-pseudo-fan
04-14-2009, 10:08 AM
Pick the best player period! Any position on the team could be upgraded except maybe OT.

Exactly. OT is the only position I really don't expect to see any action at.

Where's Plummer???
04-14-2009, 10:09 AM
Pick the best player period! Any position on the team could be upgraded except maybe OT.


Idk... the entire OL is pretty solid... id leave it be... but a TE would be nice... but deffinately pick up DL first, after that talent :lombardi:

snowspot66
04-14-2009, 10:12 AM
I'm fine with taking an OL if that's where the talent is at when our number comes up. You can never have enough good OL. Of course I would prefer something else but I will never again be mad if we take OL or DL.

ZONA
04-14-2009, 10:14 AM
There is NO SUCH THING as the best player. Why so many people believe in that philosophy befuddles me. None of these players have proved anything at the PRO level and all are legitimate risks. You evaluate many players and try to rank them on your own big board but I highly doubt it's as cut and paste as many think. You do draft based on need and rank both. There is no such thing as player A must be picked because he has a higher rank over player B.

tsiguy96
04-14-2009, 10:19 AM
I'm fine with taking an OL if that's where the talent is at when our number comes up. You can never have enough good OL. Of course I would prefer something else but I will never again be mad if we take OL or DL.

the team is not so bad that we need to take BPA regardless of position. very few if any teams draft like that. we have a good OL, good TE, good WR so we dont take them if we can fill a real position of need. tahts what the draft is for, getting players to fill holes not just collect really good players in a few positions especially if you dont need them.

snowspot66
04-14-2009, 10:40 AM
Put it this way. If the talent available at the spot says you go for a lineman then go for the lineman. Why reach for a CB or a safety, etc? If the lineman works out you can trade him, or the other excess talent, for far more than the pick was ever worth and get a proven guy for the other position you really need. You can't trade for a lineman. I'm not advocating reaching for linemen either but if it's a wash and you don't know who to pick or the talent isn't there for a need position I will always take the lineman. If you hit your picks with lineman you can't fail. You will be at the very least semi competitive.

Br0nc0Buster
04-14-2009, 10:42 AM
What if the best player on our board is not at a "NEED" area? Should we pass on talent?

Well luckily for us we have needs for any position on the defense

no-pseudo-fan
04-14-2009, 10:44 AM
Well luckily for us we have needs for any position on the defense

I am saying for example if we have a RB as the top player on our board at 18. Do we take him? Or Malcolm Jenkins at 18?

Bronco Boy
04-14-2009, 10:46 AM
There is NO SUCH THING as the best player. Why so many people believe in that philosophy befuddles me. None of these players have proved anything at the PRO level and all are legitimate risks. You evaluate many players and try to rank them on your own big board but I highly doubt it's as cut and paste as many think. You do draft based on need and rank both. There is no such thing as player A must be picked because he has a higher rank over player B.

It's the difference between the Lions taking Stafford and taking Curry.

Hercules Rockefeller
04-14-2009, 10:57 AM
What if the best player on our board is not at a "NEED" area? Should we pass on talent?

So if the best player on the board is an offensive tackle, the Broncos should take him simply because they shouldn't pass on talent?

snowspot66
04-14-2009, 10:59 AM
Hamilton isn't getting any younger. Our line is solid now. Will it be solid in a year or two?

Hercules Rockefeller
04-14-2009, 11:04 AM
Hamilton isn't getting any younger. Our line is solid now. Will it be solid in a year or two?

Clady could blow out his knee the first day of training camp, affecting the rest of his career, should Denver pass on a tackle because something might happen to him?

no-pseudo-fan
04-14-2009, 11:07 AM
So if the best player on the board is an offensive tackle, the Broncos should take him simply because they shouldn't pass on talent?

Do you think that the OT is going to be an upgrade?

Ok say the top of the list looks like this at #18

OT
RB
WR
CB
RB
DE

What I am saying is do we take the DE because it is our biggest need? The first round and the draft in general is such a crap shoot that I would take the player I felt best about at that spot.

snowspot66
04-14-2009, 11:14 AM
Clady could blow out his knee the first day of training camp, affecting the rest of his career, should Denver pass on a tackle because something might happen to him?

Something could happen to any of the guys on the line. Why not take a preventative measure if there isn't somebody else worthy of the selection and you can't move the pick to somebody else?

tsiguy96
04-14-2009, 11:20 AM
Something could happen to any of the guys on the line. Why not take a preventative measure if there isn't somebody else worthy of the selection and you can't move the pick to somebody else?

now you are just saying **** to try and prove your point. under no circumstance do we ignore defense in the first 2 rounds just because offensive talent is projected to be marginally better. its a team sport, you pick the players to best help the team, not best back up the people helping the team.

Where's Plummer???
04-14-2009, 11:23 AM
now you are just saying **** to try and prove your point. under no circumstance do we ignore defense in the first 2 rounds just because offensive talent is projected to be marginally better. its a team sport, you pick the players to best help the team, not best back up the people helping the team.

lemme ask you if someone like sanchez just happens to be there when its our turn do we take him or stuill strictly D?

WolfpackGuy
04-14-2009, 11:30 AM
They better not take Mark Sanchez.
That will make the draft an F- no matter what happens afterwards.

tsiguy96
04-14-2009, 11:31 AM
lemme ask you if someone like sanchez just happens to be there when its our turn do we take him or stuill strictly D?

QB is not OT, our offensive line depth is amazing. however, no they wont take him because someone in front of us will, and mcdaniels took orton over campbell even though he lost 5 spots in the draft from the pick, so he likes orton.

when going into the draft you have to look at the positions of weakness on the team and what players will make the best impact on us winning games. sanchez may be that guy, an OT is not considering the depth and skill we have at the position. you dont take it just because hes too talented to pass up even though he will make little to no difference on the team. if tahts the case find a suitor and trade back.

snowspot66
04-14-2009, 11:31 AM
now you are just saying **** to try and prove your point. under no circumstance do we ignore defense in the first 2 rounds just because offensive talent is projected to be marginally better. its a team sport, you pick the players to best help the team, not best back up the people helping the team.

Who said anything about ignoring defense in the first two rounds? Now your saying ****.

I was speaking in general and about both defensive and offensive lines. You'll notice I never said offensive or defensive until you guys started talking about the offensive lines. I'd be fine taking tons of defensive lineman too. You will never convince me that it would be better to take a CB or a safety as a reach because of it being a need when there are good talented linemen available.

tsiguy96
04-14-2009, 11:37 AM
Who said anything about ignoring defense in the first two rounds? Now your saying ****.

I was speaking in general and about both defensive and offensive lines. You'll notice I never said offensive or defensive until you guys started talking about the offensive lines. I'd be fine taking tons of defensive lineman too. You will never convince me that it would be better to take a CB or a safety as a reach because of it being a need when there are good talented linemen available.

on this team, we need CB and safety far more then offensive lineman (NOT defensive linemen), so if the first-4th rounds come and we have to make that choice, its pretty obvious. however i doubt we will ever be put in the situation of OT/OG vs CB/S, there are always a lot of options available especially later in the draft when its more about skillset to fit your team and motor then pure talent.

snowspot66
04-14-2009, 11:46 AM
It probably is a pretty rare occurrence. Mainly because there will almost always be either a clear distinction in talent in the first few rounds or you'll have a clear need on the lines that forces your hand.

tsiguy96
04-14-2009, 11:57 AM
another thing that bugs me is the concept of "reaching"

if you see a player that you think will be great on your team, contribute early and a lot, theres no point in not taking him when you are up, especially because some draftnicks think he could last another 10 spots without being picked. big deal, if you want him, take him.

Rabb
04-14-2009, 12:30 PM
take the best player that the team NEEDS, not the best on the board

the take the best player logic drives me crazy

P.S. - Shonn Greene in the 3rd round please, kthx

cutthemdown
04-14-2009, 01:01 PM
depends. no OL, WR, TE, QB, CB in first 3 rounds. when a team has as many holes on defense as this one, you dont waste picks on luxury players.

I disagree because IMO center is a need and there are 3-4 good prospects that will go within first 3 rounds.

Also CB IMO is always a need spot. QB of course we might take one.

All that matters is to get good starting NFL players. You don't pass a potential 10 yr starters at Center to take a chance on a DE or OLB, especially in the 2nd, 3rd round.

Where's Plummer???
04-14-2009, 01:03 PM
I disagree because IMO center is a need and there are 3-4 good prospects that will go within first 3 rounds.

Also CB IMO is always a need spot. QB of course we might take one.

All that matters is to get good starting NFL players. You don't pass a potential 10 yr starters at Center to take a chance on a DE or OLB, especially in the 2nd, 3rd round.

Excellent Point!! :thumbs:

no-pseudo-fan
04-14-2009, 01:03 PM
I am sorry. If we need DL and the DL class is weak, why grab a guy that might not make your team or will be out of the league in 4 years? If you pass on talent, it usually comes back to bite you. DL is the easiest position to miss on.

cutthemdown
04-14-2009, 01:06 PM
take the best player that the team NEEDS, not the best on the board

the take the best player logic drives me crazy

P.S. - Shonn Greene in the 3rd round please, kthx

Taking the best football players you can find each yr in draft is what makes good teams. You don't pass on a player you feel is a sure thing at guard in the NFL to take a player you aren't sure about because you need that position.

That would be stupid.

If the spot you want to fill isn't available oh well you can't fix rome in a day.

I am a firm believer that if you add talent each yr in draft you will eventually have a really strong team. True you may not find a stud DT this yr that you really need, but by finding a stud something else the team will be better then it was for when you do find that DT later on.

Didn't you ever hear the saying you cant force a square peg into a round hole? Drafting football players is the same thing. Just because you need a pass rusher doesn't mean the best pass rusher you can draft will solve that problem.

cutthemdown
04-14-2009, 01:09 PM
I am sorry. If we need DL and the DL class is weak, why grab a guy that might not make your team or will be out of the league in 4 years? If you pass on talent, it usually comes back to bite you. DL is the easiest position to miss on.

There would be no reason. In fact grabbing players you waste coaching on that don't work out hurt that position even more. I am confident Broncos will take who they think will be the best football players.

I am also confident they have scoured all the need postions to see what talent is out there and will grab a few in those spots.

Broncos IMO will be going for linebackers. We need them, and the draft seems deep at the linebacker spot.

DL IMO not so much. We may not find the stud DT in this draft.

Rabb
04-14-2009, 02:10 PM
Taking the best football players you can find each yr in draft is what makes good teams. You don't pass on a player you feel is a sure thing at guard in the NFL to take a player you aren't sure about because you need that position.

That would be stupid.

If the spot you want to fill isn't available oh well you can't fix rome in a day.

I am a firm believer that if you add talent each yr in draft you will eventually have a really strong team. True you may not find a stud DT this yr that you really need, but by finding a stud something else the team will be better then it was for when you do find that DT later on.

Didn't you ever hear the saying you cant force a square peg into a round hole? Drafting football players is the same thing. Just because you need a pass rusher doesn't mean the best pass rusher you can draft will solve that problem.

I definitely see your point but what if every year the best player at your spot was a WR

do you stack up on them for 2 or 3 years?