PDA

View Full Version : From MHR a Must Read


rugbythug
04-27-2009, 01:26 PM
http://www.milehighreport.com/2009/4/27/855605/mhr-university-special-report-a

I could not do it justice. Read it and be thankful we have Denver Broncos Fans this smart.

DrFate
04-27-2009, 01:40 PM
That mumbo jumbo does nothing to justify the VALUE of these players. Trading a #1 for Smith or two #3s for Quinn.

rugbythug
04-27-2009, 01:41 PM
That mumbo jumbo does nothing to justify the VALUE of these players. Trading a #1 for Smith or two #3s for Quinn.

A future number one for Smith. And Quinn came back with a 4.

socalorado
04-27-2009, 01:50 PM
Still kinda a homer piece. I and a # of posters noted by the mid 2nd round that this was what MCD was doing.
We'll see i guess.

Pseudofool
04-27-2009, 01:52 PM
Wow, convincing read.

Drek
04-27-2009, 01:53 PM
That mumbo jumbo does nothing to justify the VALUE of these players. Trading a #1 for Smith or two #3s for Quinn.

A lot of analysts think Smith was a mid to late 1st rounder.

If they'd traded up to grab a name guy like Brace or Maualuga would that make you feel better about it? The FO thinks he was worth a 1st this year, they're far from the only ones. So trying to affix arbitrary value to him based on a slight slide out of the first round is bringing a slanted view to the move.

Also, it was two middle 3rds for a late 2nd and late 4th. Its pretty reasonable return. They traded two thirds for Quinn and David Bruton, not just Quinn alone.

barryr
04-27-2009, 01:53 PM
There are bozos that do not get it because they do not WANT to get it. They are determined to hate everything.

broncosteven
04-27-2009, 01:56 PM
Good read.

I am just glad that McStalin had targeted players and he got the players he targeted. They were not racing around scrambling to find the 2nd option.

I will feel better about the team once I see them play. There are still a lot of things that scare me about McStalin but I am trying to hold off until I see the product he puts on the field.

broncobum6162
04-27-2009, 01:57 PM
Hmmmm...... very good read. Changes my thinking!

barryr
04-27-2009, 01:58 PM
Good read.

I am just glad that McStalin had targeted players and he got the players he targeted. They were not racing around scrambling to find the 2nd option.

I will feel better about the team once I see them play. There are still a lot of things that scare me about McStalin but I am trying to hold off until I see the product he puts on the field.


If you're going to call the coach that kind of stuff, then one can see you already have an opinion, so stop the B.S

crush17
04-27-2009, 01:59 PM
Great read. That guy knows what he's talking about...

Pseudofool
04-27-2009, 02:02 PM
There are bozos that do not get it because they do not WANT to get it. They are determined to hate everything.Yup. It's like the anti-team fan. I don't really get it.

DenverBrit
04-27-2009, 02:02 PM
A lot of analysts think Smith was a mid to late 1st rounder.

If they'd traded up to grab a name guy like Brace or Maualuga would that make you feel better about it? The FO thinks he was worth a 1st this year, they're far from the only ones. So trying to affix arbitrary value to him based on a slight slide out of the first round is bringing a slanted view to the move.

Also, it was two middle 3rds for a late 2nd and late 4th. Its pretty reasonable return. They traded two thirds for Quinn and David Bruton, not just Quinn alone.

Better yet, they get a 1st round talent and pay 2nd round money.....and use a 1st round pick from next (uncapped) year. Smoooooth! ;D

Mediator12
04-27-2009, 02:03 PM
That mumbo jumbo does nothing to justify the VALUE of these players. Trading a #1 for Smith or two #3s for Quinn.

Whose value, the league's or the TEAM's? Why wait for a first round player next year, when you can get a first round value player a year before that a future position of need?

Seriously, if you can not understand the strategy, then so be it. However, to call it mumbo jumbo is simply to try and discredit it by name calling. The draft is a tool that each team uses differently. Do you agree with the simple draft the highest rated player at the most glaring position of need strategy? Or, why is this consfusing to you?

socalorado
04-27-2009, 02:04 PM
In regards to Moreno
They also denied that player to the one team that really wanted him - SD (division rival). Denver now has that player for (likely) a decade

I do really,really like this!!
I wonder if SD took Ayers who DEN would have taken there.
L.English was my pick.

DrFate
04-27-2009, 02:13 PM
A lot of analysts think Smith was a mid to late 1st rounder.

That's the point. Did we trade a midto late 1st rounder? Or did we trade a top 5 pick? I don't know. You don't know. But NEITHER DOES MCDANIELS.

To simply roll the dice with the future of this franchise is downright frightening to me. If the team plays well and the '10 pick is later in the draft and if Smith has a nice career - everyone is happy. Yay team.

And I realize that every pick is a gamble. Every time you put in the card you are, essentially, pulling the lever on the slot machine. And that's fine. But no one can convince me the Broncos couldn't have traded their 09 #2 plus a 3rd or 4th round pick and gotten Smith. Or am I supposed to believe that not only is Smith a HOF player, but so is McBath?

The potential value traded versus the player recieved was not a great move. What is the potential upside on a 5'9" corner? I mean, is this kid Darrell Green? There is a big potential for this to be a real egg on the face and a small chance it works in our favor.

TonyR
04-27-2009, 02:13 PM
I could not do it justice. Read it and be thankful we have Denver Broncos Fans this smart.

Really good read, thanks for posting. Well done by hoosierteacher. Still not thrilled with the move up costs and the lack of defensive front 7 improvement but I'm down with most of the picks.

telluride
04-27-2009, 02:14 PM
This was an excellent article.

Rohirrim
04-27-2009, 02:14 PM
Excellent read. Well thought out argument. I still don't see how going to the secondary first over the Dline is going to work, but at least this guy comes up with a rational explanation. Hell, I even got a little inspired reading it. Unfortunately, I've been around too long to believe in pipe dreams. The best laid plans of mice and men... I'm still left with the gaping hole, who plays DT? I can see the offensive layout. Moreno's strength is running up the middle. Putting Graham and Quinn in a 2TE set will pretty much shut down the outside rush. The strength of our receivers is YAC. That's all good. But I don't care how good your secondary is, without the Dline putting pressure up front, you're going to get burned. We have the best CB in football and he can shut down his side of the field, but he spends so much of his time running down backs that get through our porous line. I still go back to the basics. If you can't stop the run, all the rest of this stuff is just theoretical. This coach has written a convincing take, but I want to know where the run stopping is going to come from. Just Ayers?

Vegas_Bronco
04-27-2009, 02:16 PM
I love the MHR! If nothing else, you better know your stuff before you post and I really like that aspect of that site.

This site is a blast for the same exact reason....but there is a lot of waste and emotion on this site that makes it a great environment also.

titan
04-27-2009, 02:17 PM
In regards to Moreno
They also denied that player to the one team that really wanted him - SD (division rival). Denver now has that player for (likely) a decade


On NFL Network they had a pre-draft report from San Diego. The female reporter was going over #1 pick possibilities by the Chargers and she reported "San Diego has said they will NOT pick a running back in round one"

I thought that was a curious statement to make at the time. I wonder if it was a smokescreen by the Chargers, and that they really did want Moreno.

On the MH Report article - excellent read. Thanks rugbythug for posting the link.

uplink
04-27-2009, 02:17 PM
Sorry folks I can't even force myself to read much of that article.
I tried since I was curious why a number of people though it was good
but failed.

I could be wrong since I find my mind wandering to other things when
I try to get through reading it.

Could someone give me a summary what about that article is good.

ZONA
04-27-2009, 02:20 PM
That mumbo jumbo does nothing to justify the VALUE of these players. Trading a #1 for Smith or two #3s for Quinn.

Maybe and maybe not. If he turns out to be a total stud in a few years, it would be hard to argue it wasn't worth the trade. I think you can't say one way or the other until a few years go by and you see how the player develops.

DenverBrit
04-27-2009, 02:22 PM
Sorry folks I can't even force myself to read much of that article.
I tried since I was curious why a number of people though it was good
but failed.

I could be wrong since I find my mind wandering to other things when
I try to get through reading it.

Could someone give me a summary what about that article is good.

Just read it and form your own opinion.

NYBronco
04-27-2009, 02:24 PM
That is a good read and reinforces my desire to have patience with what McDaniels is trying to accomplish here in Denver.

Kaylore
04-27-2009, 02:25 PM
I have a lot of issues with how he tries to make his point. For example he points out that Smith is one three people "this century" to have 20 or more interceptions in a career. I'm sorry, but "this century" is only eight years and four months old. Just say in the last ten years.

The other issue is he lists the other two guys: Jim Leonhard of Wisconsin (21, 2001-04) and Mitch Meeuwsen of Oregon State. Meeuwsen and Leonard were both undrafted because of phyiscal issues. Mitch isn't in the league anymore. Leonard is a starter. After bouncing around he clawed his way up to a starter for the Ravens and just signed a nice deal with the Jets even though we were looking at him. So that worked out, but his size and pedigree made him undraftable. Bottom line is the gaudy production doesn't mean everything when evaluating if someone can play in the pros.

Then he goes on to say Darrent Williams was going to be the next Champ Bailey. I'm sorry, but that's ridiculous. Darrent wasn't having a good year. He was getting worked over on the comeback and hook n' go routes. He would have been a solid number 2, which is what I expect from Smith. This guy's point is literally "we like Darrent Williams and Smith reminds me us of him and D-Wil would have been the next Champ Bailey, ergo Alphonso Smith is awesome." Please. I like Alphonso Smith, but lets make our point using logic and not reasoning like this.

SoCal pointed out that Darcel McBath got three of his seven interceptions against the Jayhawks, which skews his numbers a bit. He did return a pick six in the cotton bowl, so he can make plays in the clutch.

Bottom line is the Alphonso pick is just not the FO and coach at their best. I chalk it up to rookie mistake.

He also doesn't like the Iowa lineman pick because he's not a zone guy. Has no one told this guy we're going to run less zone and more man this year?

I agree with him on McKinley, though. That guy is a sleeper waiting to happen.

socalorado
04-27-2009, 02:31 PM
On NFL Network they had a pre-draft report from San Diego. The female reporter was going over #1 pick possibilities by the Chargers and she reported "San Diego has said they will NOT pick a running back in round one"

I thought that was a curious statement to make at the time. I wonder if it was a smokescreen by the Chargers, and that they really did want Moreno.

On the MH Report article - excellent read. Thanks rugbythug for posting the link.

Dude. Seriously. Of course Moreno was their guy. Smokescreen!?!? No need it was obvoius! LT is toast.
They took Gatrell Johnson, who is slow as hell, but a solid late pick, but he might have been for the FB position! he is a converted FB. He'll have to carry some of the load this year cause hester isnt! and that little scat back crap only works for so long! Sproles wont last all year, so oddly enough it is looking like SD wil have to resort to the RB by commitee approach, while DEN has the new superstar!

TonyR
04-27-2009, 02:31 PM
I could be wrong since I find my mind wandering to other things when I try to get through reading it.


Is this because you hated it or because you have adult attention deficit disorder? Or some other reason?

As a very high level summary, the author provides a detailed rationale for each pick. He is supportive about most of the picks, only disagreeing with Bruton and Olsen. Overall he makes a strong case. Here's his closing statement:

If you were hoping for certain players or certain positions, this clearly wasn't your draft.

If you wanted very sound players, leaders and playmakers, with every pick...

If you wanted players that match a system and not just a roster spot...

If you wanted hope for a long term dynasty instead of a few quick fixes...

This was your draft.

400HZ
04-27-2009, 02:34 PM
On NFL Network they had a pre-draft report from San Diego. The female reporter was going over #1 pick possibilities by the Chargers and she reported "San Diego has said they will NOT pick a running back in round one"

I thought that was a curious statement to make at the time. I wonder if it was a smokescreen by the Chargers, and that they really did want Moreno.

On the MH Report article - excellent read. Thanks rugbythug for posting the link.

A GM would never admit that. That being said, based on the direction that San Diego's entire draft went there is no chance that runningback was ever a first round consideration.

uplink
04-27-2009, 02:41 PM
Player overview/bios interesting. Overview is obvious even McD stated this stuff in his presser (looked for people who could make the roster and where high character). Nothing wrong with that but given the build up to the ending overview I expected a life changing lesson or something.

Don't like all the magic stuff in the article especially in the beginning.

Kaylore
04-27-2009, 02:41 PM
Don't like all the magic stuff in the article especially in the beginning.

Yeah that was silly and it didn't really fit.

"The draft is like a magic show!"

Um, so it's about fooling the audience?::)

socalorado
04-27-2009, 02:52 PM
A GM would never admit that. That being said, based on the direction that San Diego's entire draft went there is no chance that runningback was ever a first round consideration.

Right. Sure. Keep telling youself that. Ha!

Ambiguous
04-27-2009, 02:54 PM
Could someone give me a summary what about that article is good.

Just that we went BPA in the draft which I think was true for the most part.

Other than that it, it reeked of homerism.

400HZ
04-27-2009, 03:08 PM
Right. Sure. Keep telling youself that. Ha!

$14 million dollars at the running back position was already too much. He wasn't going to make it $20. The focus this year was on badass types to rectify the pussiness of last year. Drafting another runningback who would get maybe 3 carries a game would do nothing to fix that.

barryr
04-27-2009, 03:12 PM
A GM would never admit that. That being said, based on the direction that San Diego's entire draft went there is no chance that runningback was ever a first round consideration.

Why? Because the Chargers should have also picked a RB they may not have liked later in the draft? Looks like the Chargers went with who they thought was the BPA at that spot, which wow, is just what the Broncos spent the draft doing. So I guess the Chargers are also stupid for following that strategy.

400HZ
04-27-2009, 03:17 PM
Why? Because the Chargers should have also picked a RB they may not have liked later in the draft? Looks like the Chargers went with who they thought was the BPA at that spot, which wow, is just what the Broncos spent the draft doing. So I guess the Chargers are also stupid for following that strategy.

It was need plus value for San Diego. The lack of pass rush last year was disturbing and it was pretty well established last season that none of the pass rushers on San Diego's roster were worth a crap except Merriman. And he's coming off knee surgury. It was also a deep area of the draft this year.

Paladin
04-27-2009, 03:18 PM
I thought this was a compelling statement:

So folks will take several paths. Many will complain that the need wasn't met. That's okay. Many will complain that the player they penciled in wasn't taken. That's okay, too. Many will declare the draft a failure. That's okay. Some will result to name calling. That's okay, if you are on a low-class message board. It won't fly at MHR. But many will say, "This player is more of a sure thing, even if he wasn't the pick that was expected".

LOL!!!!!

SonOfLe-loLang
04-27-2009, 03:28 PM
I have a lot of issues with how he tries to make his point. For example he points out that Smith is one three people "this century" to have 20 or more interceptions in a career. I'm sorry, but "this century" is only eight years and four months old. Just say in the last ten years.

The other issue is he lists the other two guys: Jim Leonhard of Wisconsin (21, 2001-04) and Mitch Meeuwsen of Oregon State. Meeuwsen and Leonard were both undrafted because of phyiscal issues. Mitch isn't in the league anymore. Leonard is a starter. After bouncing around he clawed his way up to a starter for the Ravens and just signed a nice deal with the Jets even though we were looking at him. So that worked out, but his size and pedigree made him undraftable. Bottom line is the gaudy production doesn't mean everything when evaluating if someone can play in the pros.

Then he goes on to say Darrent Williams was going to be the next Champ Bailey. I'm sorry, but that's ridiculous. Darrent wasn't having a good year. He was getting worked over on the comeback and hook n' go routes. He would have been a solid number 2, which is what I expect from Smith. This guy's point is literally "we like Darrent Williams and Smith reminds me us of him and D-Wil would have been the next Champ Bailey, ergo Alphonso Smith is awesome." Please. I like Alphonso Smith, but lets make our point using logic and not reasoning like this.

SoCal pointed out that Darcel McBath got three of his seven interceptions against the Jayhawks, which skews his numbers a bit. He did return a pick six in the cotton bowl, so he can make plays in the clutch.

Bottom line is the Alphonso pick is just not the FO and coach at their best. I chalk it up to rookie mistake.

He also doesn't like the Iowa lineman pick because he's not a zone guy. Has no one told this guy we're going to run less zone and more man this year?

I agree with him on McKinley, though. That guy is a sleeper waiting to happen.

Yeah, i thought his points about cornerback/ints were curious since once the subjects was Mitch Meeuwsen, who i either never heard of or just don't remember.

I think its silly to discuss whether or not trading a first for Alphonso Smith was smart until we see what Smith becomes. If he becomes Antione Winfield, how can anyone complain. In fact, people will be singing mcDaniel's praises. You know who smith reminds me of? Terrell Buckley...cept maybe Smith is a more aggressive tackler. But similar size, similar instincts, both good ballhawks, both real confident.

Also agree that people have some serious revisionist history on Darrent Williams. He was on his way to being a good 2, but was pretty inconsistent. Perhaps the crap denver pass rush didnt help though.

Beantown Bronco
04-27-2009, 03:28 PM
The Prestige was a GREAT movie.

Paladin
04-27-2009, 03:34 PM
I wonder if you miss the point of the article? I thought the point was that the draft was the product of a planned system. Guys were drafted to meld into the projected system. The rational for the picks made sense. I buy that.

You can always question the way the information is presented, but I think he was pointing out that any effort to analyze a draft requires that the observer actually knows what he/she/it is talking about in the context of the planned system. The fact is, most of his remarks about players were documented with references to other sources. That is a bit more impressive than to toss off the piece as an example of "homerism".

The piece is well worth the read. 78% of the people who voted at the end of the piece thought the Broncos' draft was a good one. I happen to think he's more right than many hereon.....

Paladin
04-27-2009, 03:35 PM
Yeah, i thought his points about cornerback/ints were curious since once the subjects was Mitch Meeuwsen, who i either never heard of or just don't remember.

I think its silly to discuss whether or not trading a first for Alphonso Smith was smart until we see what Smith becomes. If he becomes Antione Winfield, how can anyone complain. In fact, people will be singing mcDaniel's praises. You know who smith reminds me of? Terrell Buckley...cept maybe Smith is a more aggressive tackler. But similar size, similar instincts, both good ballhawks, both real confident.

Also agree that people have some serious revisionist history on Darrent Williams. He was on his way to being a good 2, but was pretty inconsistent. Perhaps the crap denver pass rush didnt help though.

Agree. Good points.

barryr
04-27-2009, 03:52 PM
It was need plus value for San Diego. The lack of pass rush last year was disturbing and it was pretty well established last season that none of the pass rushers on San Diego's roster were worth a crap except Merriman. And he's coming off knee surgury. It was also a deep area of the draft this year.

Bull. They have Phillips on the other side who is just fine. Speculation is they are worried about Merriman staying heathly than anything to do with Phillips.

BroncoLifer
04-27-2009, 03:55 PM
It was need plus value for San Diego. The lack of pass rush last year was disturbing and it was pretty well established last season that none of the pass rushers on San Diego's roster were worth a crap except Merriman. And he's coming off knee surgury. It was also a deep area of the draft this year.

Knee surgery isn't the only thing he's coming off of......

Garcia Bronco
04-27-2009, 03:58 PM
Great read

TheReverend
04-27-2009, 04:04 PM
The Prestige was a GREAT movie.

OMG THEY'RE TWINS?!?!

400HZ
04-27-2009, 04:05 PM
Bull. They have Phillips on the other side who is just fine. Speculation is they are worried about Merriman staying heathly than anything to do with Phillips.

A pass rusher who will be on the field for 50% of the defensive snaps versus a running back who will get 2 or 3 carries a game. This was argued ad nauseam by Chargers fans leading up to the draft and I knew all along that AJ wouldn't be retarded enough to go for the 2 carries a game option.

Merriman, English, and Phillips going after the quarterback on 3rd downs is 10x better than Phillips and scrubs like Jyles Tucker and Antwon Applewhite. Maybe McD will pick them up for your D after they get cut in San Diego.

English was a need as well as a value.

400HZ
04-27-2009, 04:06 PM
Knee surgery isn't the only thing he's coming off of......

^5

Beantown Bronco
04-27-2009, 04:09 PM
OMG THEY'RE TWINS?!?!

That's something I find myself saying at one point during every Scarlett Johansen movie. Somewhat shockingly, this time it was for a different reason.

TheReverend
04-27-2009, 04:11 PM
That's something I find myself saying at one point during every Scarlett Johansen movie. Somewhat shockingly, this time it was for a different reason.

Lost In Translation had me saying, "Who's the 14 year old boy...?" Then they tripled in size...

TonyR
04-27-2009, 04:37 PM
...and scrubs like Jyles Tucker...

Wait, the same Jyles Tucker who was the second coming of Lawrence Taylor coming into last season? The same Jyles Tucker who got a big contract extension before last season? That Jyles Tucker? And now you think A.J.'s judgement is just as sound with English? Good luck!

Binkythefrog
04-27-2009, 04:45 PM
Excellent read. Well thought out argument. I still don't see how going to the secondary first over the Dline is going to work, but at least this guy comes up with a rational explanation. Hell, I even got a little inspired reading it. Unfortunately, I've been around too long to believe in pipe dreams. The best laid plans of mice and men... I'm still left with the gaping hole, who plays DT? I can see the offensive layout. Moreno's strength is running up the middle. Putting Graham and Quinn in a 2TE set will pretty much shut down the outside rush. The strength of our receivers is YAC. That's all good. But I don't care how good your secondary is, without the Dline putting pressure up front, you're going to get burned. We have the best CB in football and he can shut down his side of the field, but he spends so much of his time running down backs that get through our porous line. I still go back to the basics. If you can't stop the run, all the rest of this stuff is just theoretical. This coach has written a convincing take, but I want to know where the run stopping is going to come from. Just Ayers?

Well Im not a big x's and o's guy. But if Denver does go to a 3-4, most of the run stopping and qb pressures should come from the LBs right? In the run game, the 3 DL aren't supposed to penetrate, they are supposed to keep their spacing and muck up everything.

I think to the Steelers defense. Heard a lot about Hampton and how he was a good plug, but the stars were LB's (Harrison) and Polumalu. So it seems that Nolan is ok with the line being able to do the job of holding their ground. They shouldn't have to penetrate and make sacks, but free up linebackers and safeties to make plays regarding pressure and the run game. With Woodyard, Williams, Larsen (maybe), Bailey (big maybe) and Ayers, I think Denver has a good enough group of LB to make the d competitive. We have Dawkins, who isn't close to Polumalu in terms of speed and downfield ability, but probably similar in terms of run support.

I am intrigued with the draft, but I will try to wait to make conclusions although it is hard. We could of picked all the players we wanted, but the bottom line is that its the draft, and the NFL is totally different from college and its really hard to know who will succeed. Who knows if Raji or Orakpo will be good? I don't think anyone here can definitively say if they will be stars or better than Ayers yet. Future picks are even more of a crapshoot.

Pseudofool
04-27-2009, 05:00 PM
I have a lot of issues with how he tries to make his point. For example he points out that Smith is one three people "this century" to have 20 or more interceptions in a career. I'm sorry, but "this century" is only eight years and four months old. Just say in the last ten years.

The other issue is he lists the other two guys: Jim Leonhard of Wisconsin (21, 2001-04) and Mitch Meeuwsen of Oregon State. Meeuwsen and Leonard were both undrafted because of phyiscal issues. Mitch isn't in the league anymore. Leonard is a starter. After bouncing around he clawed his way up to a starter for the Ravens and just signed a nice deal with the Jets even though we were looking at him. So that worked out, but his size and pedigree made him undraftable. Bottom line is the gaudy production doesn't mean everything when evaluating if someone can play in the pros.

Then he goes on to say Darrent Williams was going to be the next Champ Bailey. I'm sorry, but that's ridiculous. Darrent wasn't having a good year. He was getting worked over on the comeback and hook n' go routes. He would have been a solid number 2, which is what I expect from Smith. This guy's point is literally "we like Darrent Williams and Smith reminds me us of him and D-Wil would have been the next Champ Bailey, ergo Alphonso Smith is awesome." Please. I like Alphonso Smith, but lets make our point using logic and not reasoning like this.

SoCal pointed out that Darcel McBath got three of his seven interceptions against the Jayhawks, which skews his numbers a bit. He did return a pick six in the cotton bowl, so he can make plays in the clutch.

Bottom line is the Alphonso pick is just not the FO and coach at their best. I chalk it up to rookie mistake.

He also doesn't like the Iowa lineman pick because he's not a zone guy. Has no one told this guy we're going to run less zone and more man this year?

I agree with him on McKinley, though. That guy is a sleeper waiting to happen.That's pretty small fry stuff. The tone and reasoning are right on, exaggerating (or misframing) some supplemental detail pretty hokey (like the magic thing) but it hardly dissuades me from his overall argument.

Broncoman13
04-27-2009, 05:08 PM
That mumbo jumbo does nothing to justify the VALUE of these players. Trading a #1 for Smith or two #3s for Quinn.

http://www.denverbroncos.com/page.php?id=349&videoID=3274&type=broncosTV&year=&month=

Click on the 4th video down and listen to what he has to say. I'm not a fan of the trade... but this kid is a good ball player and person. Love the pick, just not how we acquired it. When you get done, listen to the other ones. All good character guys.

USMCBladerunner
04-27-2009, 05:09 PM
I didn't really care for this article. I don't understand the "The Prestige" analogy at all. Granted, this could be because I'm stupid, but it might be because it is a false analogy. Either way, I don't like it.

The author is purposefully portraying the picks in the most positive light, but, like Kaylor, I found him to be a little too rosy. Darrent Williams was not in my fav 5 cornerback list. I didn't hate him, but he had real leaks in his game.

The biggest issue I have is that the author lays out his claim to be an educator of the draft and incorrectly uses the lottery as an analogy for teaching his point. He asserts that taking the best players available increases the probablity of success. This is fine as he is right that drafting lower rated players to address a need results in a lower probablilty of finding a successful player. However, his analogy isn't totally correct. The draft can be thought of as a game of chance, but, unlike the lottery, there isn't a fixed payoff for a team finding a successful player. There are positions in the NFL which are proven to be more valuable than others in terms of correlation with team success. Furthermore, when there is a true need for a position, the payoff for finding a successful player is greater than finding one in a position without need. When drafting for need, the statistical odds of a hit might be lower, but the "pot odds" could be equal or even greater.

I'm not saying that I disagree with the drafting BPA philosophy, I'm just saying that the draft:lottery analogy is overly simplistic. When presented in an article with the "instructional" tone as it was, color me unimpressed.

footstepsfrom#27
04-27-2009, 05:10 PM
OK I just actually read that entire thing, which I still can't believe I did.

A few thoughts...

First of all...I don't know who this dude is, but I found his attempt at "educating" the poor unwashed as to the purpose and function of a draft to be a pile of horse manure. It was very condescending for starters, as if the entire need vs. talent question was some new concept we're finally hearing from him. All this stupid "they're coaches and we're not" BS is also ridiculous, and it ignores that OTHER NFL TEAMS in many cases followed a route favored by fans who don't like this approach. I'm amazed at how many fans think NFL coaches are some kind of geniuses because they spend hundreds of hours on this stuff. Guess what? If you can be a brain surgeon or a rocket scientist, you're probably not going to be a coach. Most of these geniuses couldn't do whatever job half of you are doing. Given the same time spent on this, many people on this board could achieve similar results as pro scouts when it comes to analyzing talent. Contrary to opinion...this is NOT that tough to do it just takes spending time at it...like most other things....it's time most of us don't have. That's why we Google those who do, and if you read enough you should have a pretty clear idea whose going to have a good shot at success and who isn't.

Second, his takes on these players reads laughably like a promo written for a team rah rah function. Reading this, you'd be convinced they're all future HOFer's.

Let's recall that virtually every voice of intelligence on this draft considered this talent pool to have ZERO sure things...that's right...NONE. "None" would include those we took as well.

His logic is flawed on several fronts, and in the interest of avoiding an even more lengthy post (despite how much I know you all love to read them ;D ) I'll address just three.

He makes a big deal out of Moreno being the first RB in Denver history who was truly drafted as the best talent in the draft, justifying this by representing guys like TD and Portis as less than steller but productive because of our system. This is pure bunk.

It doesn't make two ***** worth of difference whether a guy is drafted high or low if he can play. His anallysis ignores a vital point; namely that since the Broncos for years were essentially one of only two teams (Atlanta) running a stretch zone blocking scheme, that the type of RB we were looking for had entirely different skills than those other teams were looking for. Hence, the late picks like Davis and Anderson, Portis and Gary...while not drawing the attention at the top of the draft, WERE TALENTED BUT THEIR TALENT WAS BUILT FOR OUR SYSTEM. People miss this all the time. Systems don't win games, players do. But players can be in the right system to take advantage of their skills. Joe Montana would not have won the way he did outside Walsh's system. Peyton Manning running the wishbone wouldn't be worth a crap. Anyone who thinks Davis was not the best but only a system back is just not that bright...sorry but that's the truth. Mike Anderson was a stud and his 1500 yards and 5.0 ROY honors were not just because he was a minimally talented hack in the right system.

Second...this BS about how the passing game will now flourish since we have a runner to take care of business and remove the pressure...ignores the fact that we HAD EXACTLY THAT when Plummer was here. We had a top flight running game with both Portis and later with Mike Anderson and Tatum eating yards and clock. What we didnt' have was a guy who could stretch defenses and go downfield with authority, thus loosening up the defense and avoiding the safety cheating to the line. We DID have that until the recent disaster...now we don't. It may take years to find it again, if we ever do.

Finally, the rest of this clap-trap is pure fantasy land, especially the part about how every player picked is the best at what he does. Newsflash for those who agree...if this opinion were held by even one team picking above us, all these guys would be gone before we got them. You can try to convince me that a slow, small CB with college ball hawking skills is the best in the draft if you wish, but the fact that he was hanging around at 37 and may have gone even later if we hadn't taken him is proof that nobody else in the NFL seemed to feel that way. Telling me that Ayers was the best defensive player in the draft based on one guys' thoughts on that...again, how come he was there at 18? Are all these teams just idiots except us? Why didn't he play worth a damn till halfway through his senior year? Cripes this guy is to small for DE in the 3-4 and to slow for OLB...if he makes it as a starter I'll be happy but he was drafted where most people thought he should be.

Comparing Smith's college INT totals to other nameless wonders who were stat kings didnt' do anything for me either, nor did the nonsense about "pressure is better than sacks"...more idiocy...generally if you get pressure...you also get sacks. Funny how that works.

Bottom line...you can talk all you want about need vs. talent but somebody sure as hell has to stop the run and rush the passer or we're going to get the holy hell stomped out of us again just like last year.

bronco_diesel
04-27-2009, 05:24 PM
Sorry folks I can't even force myself to read much of that article.
I tried since I was curious why a number of people though it was good
but failed.

I could be wrong since I find my mind wandering to other things when
I try to get through reading it.

Could someone give me a summary what about that article is good.

can someone summarize this post? i started reading up got my mind wandered off...

skpac1001
04-27-2009, 05:35 PM
Personally, I liked this article over there better, although it overdoes it a little bit.
http://www.milehighreport.com/2009/4/27/855963/long-term-value-short-term-fix-the

fdf
04-27-2009, 05:43 PM
That's the point. Did we trade a midto late 1st rounder? Or did we trade a top 5 pick? I don't know. You don't know. But NEITHER DOES MCDANIELS.

To simply roll the dice with the future of this franchise is downright frightening to me. If the team plays well and the '10 pick is later in the draft and if Smith has a nice career - everyone is happy. Yay

Well, you roll the dice if you don't make the trade too. The pick that was traded may turn out to be low first round next year. That's worth only a low second round this year. The risk really washes out because you don't really know where it lies, either way. In any event, we got a high second out of it, which is the trading equivalent of a high first next year.

Whether it was a good pick really depends on whether management was right that this guy is going to be a good cornerback for a second round pick.

goldengopher1976
04-27-2009, 07:42 PM
Fantastic article! As someone who has consistently chosen to trust our new regime, despite the fact that things looked discombobulated at times, I am encouraged to see their strategy so articulately described. Count me as one of a growing number of excited Denver fans who see us becoming again what we once were: one of the best and most consistently good franchises in the NFL.

footstepsfrom#27
04-27-2009, 08:03 PM
can someone summarize this post? i started reading up got my mind wandered off...
Here ya go...

1) Only the "pros" know squat about the draft so admit your stupidity
2) Half our picks are destined for Canton

That about covers it.

broncosteven
04-27-2009, 08:15 PM
If you're going to call the coach that kind of stuff, then one can see you already have an opinion, so stop the B.S

Sorry I am not enamored with McStalin until I see his product on the field executing.

I really thought with 2 1st round picks they might try to get the best RB available, you can dig through all my posts if you want I think I posted it about 3 weeks ago, after we traded Cutler. I thought they could have waited until at least 18 to do it.

If they really had Ayers targeted and knew he would be there at 18 then fine.

I really hoped they would target the players that would make this team better. Sounds like they got the guys they wanted.

Now I want to see execution on the field. I doubt half of these new guys start. Lot of people think Ayers is a project but should be good in 2 years.
a lot of people thought the same thing about Jarvis Moss also.

I am telling the truth, unlike the Broncos owner and FO. I want to see them put it together and EARN my respect.

broncosteven
04-27-2009, 08:31 PM
OK I just actually read that entire thing, which I still can't believe I did.

A few thoughts...

First of all...I don't know who this dude is, but I found his attempt at "educating" the poor unwashed as to the purpose and function of a draft to be a pile of horse manure. It was very condescending for starters, as if the entire need vs. talent question was some new concept we're finally hearing from him. All this stupid "they're coaches and we're not" BS is also ridiculous, and it ignores that OTHER NFL TEAMS in many cases followed a route favored by fans who don't like this approach. I'm amazed at how many fans think NFL coaches are some kind of geniuses because they spend hundreds of hours on this stuff. Guess what? If you can be a brain surgeon or a rocket scientist, you're probably not going to be a coach. Most of these geniuses couldn't do whatever job half of you are doing. Given the same time spent on this, many people on this board could achieve similar results as pro scouts when it comes to analyzing talent. Contrary to opinion...this is NOT that tough to do it just takes spending time at it...like most other things....it's time most of us don't have. That's why we Google those who do, and if you read enough you should have a pretty clear idea whose going to have a good shot at success and who isn't.

Second, his takes on these players reads laughably like a promo written for a team rah rah function. Reading this, you'd be convinced they're all future HOFer's.

I agree it got pretty condecending.

Let's recall that virtually every voice of intelligence on this draft considered this talent pool to have ZERO sure things...that's right...NONE. "None" would include those we took as well.

His logic is flawed on several fronts, and in the interest of avoiding an even more lengthy post (despite how much I know you all love to read them ;D ) I'll address just three.

He makes a big deal out of Moreno being the first RB in Denver history who was truly drafted as the best talent in the draft, justifying this by representing guys like TD and Portis as less than steller but productive because of our system. This is pure bunk.

Add that to the fact that an RB wasn't taken until 9 slots later I thought they could have waited until 18 or moved down a couple picks to get him. I guess they didn't need or want the extra picks which is fine because they got the guys they wanted, I guess where they got them is less important. Still I would have got the Ayers 1st then the RB.

Second...this BS about how the passing game will now flourish since we have a runner to take care of business and remove the pressure...ignores the fact that we HAD EXACTLY THAT when Plummer was here. We had a top flight running game with both Portis and later with Mike Anderson and Tatum eating yards and clock. What we didnt' have was a guy who could stretch defenses and go downfield with authority, thus loosening up the defense and avoiding the safety cheating to the line. We DID have that until the recent disaster...now we don't. It may take years to find it again, if we ever do.

I doubt we ever see the days of 1600-1800 RBs in Denver during McStalins tenure -Knowwatever will be getting a lot of dumpoffs in the flat rather than pounding between the tackles 30 times a game.

Finally, the rest of this clap-trap is pure fantasy land, especially the part about how every player picked is the best at what he does. Newsflash for those who agree...if this opinion were held by even one team picking above us, all these guys would be gone before we got them. ...

Jerry Angleo always seems to be tied to drafting players by need not ability. I am cool with a GM and HC targeting a couple players they believe will contribute and make the team. Jerry has been burned by drafting for need, he went after Curtis Busten after Cadillac was taken, he grabbed 2 LT's at #1 over last 4-5 years because he needed a LT, so far neither has panned out, looks like Williams will be moved to RT because of his back issues and they got Pace in FA.

It is OK to draft BPA as long as you have a plan to shore up the positions of need some other way.

Comparing Smith's college INT totals to other nameless wonders who were stat kings didnt' do anything for me either, nor did the nonsense about "pressure is better than sacks"...more idiocy...generally if you get pressure...you also get sacks. Funny how that works.

I love how this guy was compared to Bly considering we cut Bly this year. Then people here and there are justifying the Bly comparisons because Bly was older and not as good when we got him and because now we have 3 CB's that will make our Nickle package ice! Again I am fine with getting the guy if he was a target and they thought he would help the team. Not happy with giving up a 1st round pick for him but they got the guy they wanted.

Bottom line...you can talk all you want about need vs. talent but somebody sure as hell has to stop the run and rush the passer or we're going to get the holy hell stomped out of us again just like last year.

I am guessing they love Thomas and Peterson or are willing to live with them one year until they can land the BPA at NT/DT next year.

Hulamau
04-27-2009, 10:13 PM
That mumbo jumbo does nothing to justify the VALUE of these players. Trading a #1 for Smith or two #3s for Quinn.

Smith IS a #1 in talent hands down. Wait and watch ...lets talk about it at the end of the season.

Quinn is going to play a more vital role than many suspect in this particular system ... and it wasn't two 3's for Quinn straight up. We got a 4th in return so the net cost was about 20 points. Not so bad for the best blocking TE in the draft, a guy with very good and soft hands and a smart hard worker as well.

If McD & Xanders keep drafting like this next year and in 2011 as I suspect they will, we're going to be brimming with talent at every position, be stocked with very solid depth and have dedicated team players all around ..in short winners! Club Med days are over ...

uplink
04-27-2009, 10:36 PM
Here ya go...

1) Only the "pros" know squat about the draft so admit your stupidity
2) Half our picks are destined for Canton

That about covers it.

Thanks.

400HZ
04-27-2009, 10:53 PM
Wait, the same Jyles Tucker who was the second coming of Lawrence Taylor coming into last season? The same Jyles Tucker who got a big contract extension before last season? That Jyles Tucker? And now you think A.J.'s judgement is just as sound with English? Good luck!

Yes, third year undrafted free agent Jyles Tucker. He's still better than Jarvis Moss and his contract is el cheapo.

penguintheory
04-28-2009, 12:38 AM
He's still better than Jarvis Moss.


Sadly, qft.

Popps
04-28-2009, 01:16 AM
Well Im not a big x's and o's guy. But if Denver does go to a 3-4, most of the run stopping and qb pressures should come from the LBs right? In the run game, the 3 DL aren't supposed to penetrate, they are supposed to keep their spacing and muck up everything.

I think to the Steelers defense. Heard a lot about Hampton and how he was a good plug, but the stars were LB's (Harrison) and Polumalu. So it seems that Nolan is ok with the line being able to do the job of holding their ground. They shouldn't have to penetrate and make sacks, but free up linebackers and safeties to make plays regarding pressure and the run game. With Woodyard, Williams, Larsen (maybe), Bailey (big maybe) and Ayers, I think Denver has a good enough group of LB to make the d competitive. We have Dawkins, who isn't close to Polumalu in terms of speed and downfield ability, but probably similar in terms of run support.

I am intrigued with the draft, but I will try to wait to make conclusions although it is hard. We could of picked all the players we wanted, but the bottom line is that its the draft, and the NFL is totally different from college and its really hard to know who will succeed. Who knows if Raji or Orakpo will be good? I don't think anyone here can definitively say if they will be stars or better than Ayers yet. Future picks are even more of a crapshoot.

Great post... particularly with regards to the 3-4. Nolan apparently likes Fields' ability to be a clogger in the middle, and you're also correct that the ILBs have to be able to bring some pop against the running game.

Davis was also brought in because of a history of being a good, experienced run-stopper. I do worry about the other spot, though. DJ Williams has no business at middle linebacker. But, he's a decent tackler when he can figure out where to be. I'm still pissed at that guy for flat out quitting against San Diego last year, though. Hopefully the new staff is 100% true to their word, and the other guys will get a shot to compete for his job.

footstepsfrom#27
04-28-2009, 01:25 AM
Nolan apparently likes Fields' ability to be a clogger in the middle...
Fields looks pretty underwhelming. I think it's going to be NTBC.

Cool Breeze
04-28-2009, 09:09 AM
This article is a very good read!