PDA

View Full Version : Paea & Powe...worth moving up?


footstepsfrom#27
01-02-2011, 09:40 PM
All the buzz is on D-line guys rated in the top 10...what about Stephen Paea or Jerrell Powe? They go 311 and 328 respectively. As I understand it right now the projections have Paea creping into the first round somewhere and Powe should be drafted not long after.

If we stay at #2 and take Peterson, should we try to make a move back into the 1st round for Paea if necessary? Sit tight and hope he falls to us in the 2nd round...or is there another D-line guy whose a better fit near the bottom of the first/top of the 2nd? We can draft at least two D-line guys...three if we really want to.

Who would you like other than a top 5 D-line guy if we go after the next level player at that position?

That One Guy
01-02-2011, 09:46 PM
Something I've always disliked about the "build through the draft" people is that you don't just take a player and make him awesome at the position. If we're going to build through the draft, you have to expect those players to need to learn the NFL level techniques. It works for teams like GB and NYG who have very good players and also have depth. Not many of their positions are as shallow as ours are. For the Broncos, an area where talent has always been there has been corner. We've developed great depth. It could be analogous to NYG and their DL talent. They can draft nobodies and poof! they're very solid. We don't have that talent to mentor younger talent at the positions when all of our starters are borderline quality anyways.

Unless we're going to concede a few years of terrible records and commit to the players, building through the draft for a talent bankrupt team doesn't seem to work. Judging by McD being gone halfway through his 2nd season, I don't foresee anyone being willing to commit to such terrible teams in the near future.

footstepsfrom#27
01-02-2011, 09:54 PM
Something I've always disliked about the "build through the draft" people is that you don't just take a player and make him awesome at the position. If we're going to build through the draft, you have to expect those players to need to learn the NFL level techniques. It works for teams like GB and NYG who have very good players and also have depth. Not many of their positions are as shallow as ours are. For the Broncos, an area where talent has always been there has been corner. We've developed great depth. It could be analogous to NYG and their DL talent. They can draft nobodies and poof! they're very solid. We don't have that talent to mentor younger talent at the positions when all of our starters are borderline quality anyways.

Unless we're going to concede a few years of terrible records and commit to the players, building through the draft for a talent bankrupt team doesn't seem to work. Judging by McD being gone halfway through his 2nd season, I don't foresee anyone being willing to commit to such terrible teams in the near future.
Any comments on the question posed?

Agamemnon
01-02-2011, 09:57 PM
Something I've always disliked about the "build through the draft" people is that you don't just take a player and make him awesome at the position. If we're going to build through the draft, you have to expect those players to need to learn the NFL level techniques. It works for teams like GB and NYG who have very good players and also have depth. Not many of their positions are as shallow as ours are. For the Broncos, an area where talent has always been there has been corner. We've developed great depth. It could be analogous to NYG and their DL talent. They can draft nobodies and poof! they're very solid. We don't have that talent to mentor younger talent at the positions when all of our starters are borderline quality anyways.

Unless we're going to concede a few years of terrible records and commit to the players, building through the draft for a talent bankrupt team doesn't seem to work. Judging by McD being gone halfway through his 2nd season, I don't foresee anyone being willing to commit to such terrible teams in the near future.

Silly me, I thought it was called drafting well. I guess we should just draft nobodies and coach them up...

OrangeSe7en
01-02-2011, 09:58 PM
All the buzz is on D-line guys rated in the top 10...what about Stephen Paea or Jerrell Powe? They go 311 and 328 respectively. As I understand it right now the projections have Paea creping into the first round somewhere and Powe should be drafted not long after.

If we stay at #2 and take Peterson, should we try to make a move back into the 1st round for Paea if necessary? Sit tight and hope he falls to us in the 2nd round...or is there another D-line guy whose a better fit near the bottom of the first/top of the 2nd? We can draft at least two D-line guys...three if we really want to.

Who would you like other than a top 5 D-line guy if we go after the next level player at that position?

If we could get a starting Nose Tackle and a defensive end like Fairley, that would be great.

Wes Mantooth
01-02-2011, 09:59 PM
Pea is going to break a combine record on the bench press. Amazing guy at Oregon State.

Agamemnon
01-02-2011, 10:00 PM
All the buzz is on D-line guys rated in the top 10...what about Stephen Paea or Jerrell Powe? They go 311 and 328 respectively. As I understand it right now the projections have Paea creping into the first round somewhere and Powe should be drafted not long after.

If we stay at #2 and take Peterson, should we try to make a move back into the 1st round for Paea if necessary? Sit tight and hope he falls to us in the 2nd round...or is there another D-line guy whose a better fit near the bottom of the first/top of the 2nd? We can draft at least two D-line guys...three if we really want to.

Who would you like other than a top 5 D-line guy if we go after the next level player at that position?

I don't think Paea is a good fit for a 3-4. If we switch to a 4-3 he's obviously a great prospect. Powe could very well be available with our first pick in the 2nd. If not we should just go with the best defensive player available that fits. There are good 3-4 DEs and OLBs that will be around in the 2nd.

Personally I expect Paea to go between 10-15. He's just too much of a physical specimen to last for long.

Hamrob
01-02-2011, 10:01 PM
All the buzz is on D-line guys rated in the top 10...what about Stephen Paea or Jerrell Powe? They go 311 and 328 respectively. As I understand it right now the projections have Paea creping into the first round somewhere and Powe should be drafted not long after.

If we stay at #2 and take Peterson, should we try to make a move back into the 1st round for Paea if necessary? Sit tight and hope he falls to us in the 2nd round...or is there another D-line guy whose a better fit near the bottom of the first/top of the 2nd? We can draft at least two D-line guys...three if we really want to.

Who would you like other than a top 5 D-line guy if we go after the next level player at that position?

I think that we should only trade up for a guy who will be a difference maker right away.

I think Powe will be there for us in the 3rd if we want him. But, if we go back to a 4-3...we don't want him.

I think we should draft all defense...but, find a way to get this kid:

http://www.und.com/sports/m-footbl/mtt/rudolph_kyle00.html

He will become our version of Jason Witten and be a safety blanket for Tim Tebow for years to come.

Agamemnon
01-02-2011, 10:03 PM
I think that we should only trade up for a guy who will be a difference maker right away.

I think Powe will be there for us in the 3rd if we want him. But, if we go back to a 4-3...we don't want him.

I think we should draft all defense...but, find a way to get this kid:

http://www.und.com/sports/m-footbl/mtt/rudolph_kyle00.html

He will become our version of Jason Witten and be a safety blanket for Tim Tebow for years to come.

I would like us to adopt a trade-down-only policy in the upcoming draft, but that's likely a pipe-dream...

Oh and there's no way that Powe last until the 3rd round. No way.

cutthemdown
01-02-2011, 10:03 PM
Well who knows but for sure with 2 2nd rounders and a high value 3rd rounder we have ammo to move back into first round. If we trade down from the 2 hole we would have even more ammo.

Still Elway unproven, im worried about who the team will have calling the shots. I love Elway though I would never not support him coming back to the team.

OrangeSe7en
01-02-2011, 10:05 PM
I don't think Paea is a good fit for a 3-4. If we switch to a 4-3 he's obviously a great prospect. Powe could very well be available with our first pick in the 2nd. If not we should just go with the best defensive player available that fits. There are good 3-4 DEs and OLBs that will be around in the 2nd.

Personally I expect Paea to go between 10-15. He's just too much of a physical specimen to last for long.

Yeah, once he does 50 reps at the combine, he will be solidified around where youre talking.

ayjackson
01-02-2011, 10:06 PM
I would like us to adopt a trade-down-only policy in the upcoming draft, but that's likely a pipe-dream...

Oh and there's no way that Powe last until the 3rd round. No way.

As much as I like flexibility, I`d sure feel more comfortable if we had this policy.

rugbythug
01-02-2011, 10:06 PM
If you look at draft history you will see a history of NT falling in the draft. GM's Value qb Preassures and NT's do not give you much of that. I think Powe could fall to the 3rd. Pea will go much earlier because he is more versital. 20'ish guy. Our best bet is to fall back to 5 or so and Take Marcel Darious Best Risk reward player on the DL.

How many teams need to switch to a 3-4 before it makes more sense to go to a 4-3. Part of the 3-4 value was the abundance of OLB'ers that 3/4 of the league had no spot for. Now those guys are First rounders. At some point the 4-3 becomes more valuable as one gapping DT's fall in value.

Agamemnon
01-02-2011, 10:10 PM
Yeah, once he does 50 reps at the combine, he will be solidified around where youre talking.

And there's the unbelievable physicality of his play on the field. The guy is just as great a 4-3 DT prospect as Fairley if you ask me. He just didn't have quite the same statistical season.

footstepsfrom#27
01-02-2011, 10:12 PM
If we could get a starting Nose Tackle and a defensive end like Fairley, that would be great.
Read the OP again please.

OrangeSe7en
01-02-2011, 10:15 PM
And there's the unbelievable physicality of his play on the field. The guy is just as great a 4-3 DT prospect as Fairley if you ask me. He just didn't have quite the same statistical season.

I like him. Not as much as Fairley though. Maybe we should get both?

footstepsfrom#27
01-02-2011, 10:16 PM
Pea is going to break a combine record on the bench press. Amazing guy at Oregon State.
Larry Allen? ???

Paea has notched 44 reps on the bench so far...he's a solid rock of a run stuffer with some upfield push as well.

HAT
01-02-2011, 10:18 PM
Powe will fall to the 3rd. ****ty year for NT and ILB.

As many have mentioned, Denver ain't gonna fix the entire D in one draft/FA so why reach?

Draft BPA on D in the 1st two rounds, consider a speed back, TE or O-Line depth in round 3 if somebody slips and concentrate more on the front 7 in 2012 when there will be multiple first rounders at ILB.

cutthemdown
01-02-2011, 10:19 PM
I really like rudolph from notre dame at TE Hat

Agamemnon
01-02-2011, 10:19 PM
If you look at draft history you will see a history of NT falling in the draft. GM's Value qb Preassures and NT's do not give you much of that. I think Powe could fall to the 3rd. Pea will go much earlier because he is more versital. 20'ish guy. Our best bet is to fall back to 5 or so and Take Marcel Darious Best Risk reward player on the DL.

How many teams need to switch to a 3-4 before it makes more sense to go to a 4-3. Part of the 3-4 value was the abundance of OLB'ers that 3/4 of the league had no spot for. Now those guys are First rounders. At some point the 4-3 becomes more valuable as one gapping DT's fall in value.

NTs fall when there are significant number of them. Powe is about it in this draft. If he falls to the 3rd and we can get him there, awesome, but I'm highly doubtful.

And I don't disagree on the 4-3 front. There are other advantages with a 3-4, but the supply and demand is starting to become less than ideal. If we want to swap back to a 4-3 there's nothing stopping us. In fact, the talent available in the draft seems ideal for it. We can trade down to the 4th or 5th (possibly with a QB hungry team wanting Newton or Locker), grab Fairley, use the extra picks from that trade to trade back up to grab Paea, then address our other needs accordingly. Honestly if we could get Fairley and Paea we could wipeout much of our defensive woes in one fell swoop.

A d-line of Ayers-Fairley-Paea-Dumervil would eat QBs alive...and RBs too (except for Dumervil that is). :gimme:

footstepsfrom#27
01-02-2011, 10:20 PM
I like him. Not as much as Fairley though. Maybe we should get both?
The question is about what we do if we sit pat at #2 and take Peterson. If we take Fairley that high I'll be dissapointed, but if we trade down and get him, we probably don't need to look at Powe or Paea. I want to know who we should look at if we don't take a D-line guy with a pick in the top 10.

OrangeSe7en
01-02-2011, 10:21 PM
Larry Allen? ???

Paea has notched 44 reps on the bench so far...he's a solid rock of a run stuffer with some upfield push as well.

Theres a youtube video of him doing 44 reps after an upper body workout.

footstepsfrom#27
01-02-2011, 10:24 PM
If you look at draft history you will see a history of NT falling in the draft. GM's Value qb Preassures and NT's do not give you much of that. I think Powe could fall to the 3rd. Pea will go much earlier because he is more versital. 20'ish guy. Our best bet is to fall back to 5 or so and Take Marcel Darious Best Risk reward player on the DL.
Yes...I know there are many of you that want to draft a D-line guy in the top 5...as I said, this thread's question is about what we do if we DON'T do that. If we take Peterson at #2 who do you want to target later, at what draft spot, and would you consider moving up?

OrangeSe7en
01-02-2011, 10:24 PM
NTs fall when there are significant number of them. Powe is about it in this draft. If he falls to the 3rd and we can get him there, awesome, but I'm highly doubtful.

And I don't disagree on the 4-3 front. There are other advantages with a 3-4, but the supply and demand is starting to become less than ideal. If we want to swap back to a 4-3 there's nothing stopping us. In fact, the talent available in the draft seems ideal for it. We can trade down to the 4th or 5th (possibly with a QB hungry team wanting Newton or Locker), grab Fairley, use the extra picks from that trade to trade back up to grab Paea, then address our other needs accordingly. Honestly if we could get Fairley and Paea we could wipeout much of our defensive woes in one fell swoop.

A d-line of Ayers-Fairley-Paea-Dumervil would eat QBs alive...and RBs too (except for Dumervil that is). :gimme:

Brilliant thinking. I wouldnt dismiss Paea or Fairley playing in the 3-4 but going with your idea:

Ayers Paea Fairley Doom
Woodyard Haggan Williams

Isnt too bad. And thats even before you touch free agents.

footstepsfrom#27
01-02-2011, 10:24 PM
Theres a youtube video of him doing 44 reps after an upper body workout.
See it...pretty cool.

ayjackson
01-02-2011, 10:32 PM
Brilliant thinking. I wouldnt dismiss Paea or Fairley playing in the 3-4 but going with your idea:

Ayers Paea Fairley Doom
Woodyard Haggan Williams

Isnt too bad. And thats even before you touch free agents.

Haggan is definitely not a sideline to sideline guy. We do not have the horses for 4-3. (not that we have any horses at all) With similar personal I think we`d be better off...

Bannan Paea Fairley
Ayers Williams Haggan Doom

or some reasonable facsimile.

rugbythug
01-02-2011, 10:32 PM
Yes...I know there are many of you that want to draft a D-line guy in the top 5...as I said, this thread's question is about what we do if we DON'T do that. If we take Peterson at #2 who do you want to target later, at what draft spot, and would you consider moving up?

We can't get high enough to take Pea. With out Moving Back from 2. We need player's in multiples. Half of the guys we draft are going to wash out any way. No sense Cutting the multiples down from the beginning.

OrangeSe7en
01-02-2011, 10:36 PM
Haggan is definitely not a sideline to sideline guy. We do not have the horses for 4-3. (not that we have any horses at all) With similar personal I think we`d be better off...

Bannan Paea Fairley
Ayers Williams Haggan Doom

or some reasonable facsimile.

I like your 3-4 idea. When you think about it, why wouldnt Paea be a good nose tackle?

epicSocialism4tw
01-02-2011, 10:40 PM
Is Paea Samoan? If so, we should draft 10 of him.

OrangeSe7en
01-02-2011, 10:42 PM
Is Paea Samoan? If so, we should draft 10 of him.

Yeah, and he's an ex Rugby player.

ScottXray
01-02-2011, 10:58 PM
Yes...I know there are many of you that want to draft a D-line guy in the top 5...as I said, this thread's question is about what we do if we DON'T do that. If we take Peterson at #2 who do you want to target later, at what draft spot, and would you consider moving up?

If we use our pick on Peterson I don't think we will move up at all. We need a LOT of help and trading away picks to move up to get ONE guy should NOT be on the table, as we can get TWO guys in the second with those picks. If Luck comes out and we have a chance to take him at #2 ( Not happening), then we should MAYBE take him as trade bait ONLY , but I 'd rather NOT take him as he really only has one good year, and I'm not sold on him as sure fire ,can't fail. If someone offers us two #1s this year for our #1 as long as one of them is top 7-8, then I 'd take that deal.
I don't think we should take Peterson at 2, although he rates that high, as CB is a lesser need than D front 7

As to WHO to take....has to be best player availalble on DL, ILB, DE with our first 3 picks, period. As is, that is 3 picks in the top 50 at 2-34-and 48. If we trade Orton (must be at least a 2nd) we will have 4 in the top 60.

If we shift back to a 4-3 then we can bulk up the D line and get a true impact MLB also with one of the 2nds. Frankly we need more speed in the front 7, especially at LB. Dumerville returning will help with the Pass rush , but he is still a liability against the run, and our LBs can't cover TE's or RBs once they get to the second level.

Agamemnon
01-02-2011, 11:03 PM
Yes...I know there are many of you that want to draft a D-line guy in the top 5...as I said, this thread's question is about what we do if we DON'T do that. If we take Peterson at #2 who do you want to target later, at what draft spot, and would you consider moving up?

The answer to that is that I wouldn't want to trade up for anyone. If we stay with the #2 pick then we won't have enough ammo to trade back into the 1st without blowing our draft. So I would say we should just sit and grab the best players that come to us in the 2nd.

Requiem
01-02-2011, 11:03 PM
Paea isn't a 3-4 NT, IMHO.

misturanderson
01-02-2011, 11:15 PM
Paea isn't a 3-4 NT, IMHO.

I agree. He's incredibly strong, but he isn't really as bulky as you'd prefer in that position.

SonOfLe-loLang
01-02-2011, 11:20 PM
Paea isn't a 3-4 NT, IMHO.

I dont even think he's 300 lbs, but strong as ****. Not sure what he projects best as, but my guess is a 4-3 DT. I like the idea of Paea and Fairley in the middle, but i doubt Paea drops far enough where we can trade up for him.

footstepsfrom#27
01-02-2011, 11:29 PM
We can't get high enough to take Pea. With out Moving Back from 2.
So far everything I've read on him shows him going somewhere around the late 1st/early 2nd. We have the 35th (?) pick so we're almost there anyway. If we moved Orton for a 3rd, combine that with the 35th pick it would move us up enough for him I think.

footstepsfrom#27
01-02-2011, 11:30 PM
I dont even think he's 300 lbs, but strong as ****. Not sure what he projects best as, but my guess is a 4-3 DT. I like the idea of Paea and Fairley in the middle, but i doubt Paea drops far enough where we can trade up for him.
Where do you expect him to go? He's listed at 311 btw...not sure if that's accurate but he' probably over 300.

footstepsfrom#27
01-02-2011, 11:33 PM
Personally I expect Paea to go between 10-15. He's just too much of a physical specimen to last for long.
You think he's going to go that early? I've not seen anything projecting that is there anyone of note saying he goes that high?

Kaylore
01-02-2011, 11:34 PM
Paea isn't a 3-4 NT, IMHO.

Jay Ratliff wasn't supposed to be either.

Requiem
01-02-2011, 11:39 PM
Jay Ratliff wasn't supposed to be either.

And Jason Ferguson's injury was a blessing in disguise for Ratliff.

Agamemnon
01-02-2011, 11:39 PM
Where do you expect him to go? He's listed at 311 btw...not sure if that's accurate but he' probably over 300.

He's solid muscle and therefore appears more compact than other linemen. I have no trouble believing he's 310 or so.

footstepsfrom#27
01-02-2011, 11:41 PM
I see Paea listed as 311 lbs, and as mobile as he is, I could see him at the NT spot in the 3-4. Check this out...seems like a great kid:

<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/D_Ftcdl-VRI?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/D_Ftcdl-VRI?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>

Agamemnon
01-02-2011, 11:41 PM
Jay Ratliff wasn't supposed to be either.

Personally I think Paea could be a 3-4 NT fine, he's strong as can be and has a low center of gravity. That said it's a complete waste of his talents and he's really not worth where we'd have to pick him at that point. The guy belongs in a 4-3 and only a 4-3.

KipCorrington25
01-02-2011, 11:42 PM
We should trade 1st for 2nds!

footstepsfrom#27
01-02-2011, 11:44 PM
He's solid muscle and therefore appears more compact than other linemen. I have no trouble believing he's 310 or so.
He's an x-rugby player who didn't take up football till his senior year in HS. He sounds like he's nowhere near his ceiling yet.

Jekyll15Hyde
01-02-2011, 11:44 PM
Brilliant thinking. I wouldnt dismiss Paea or Fairley playing in the 3-4 but going with your idea:

Ayers Paea Fairley Doom
Woodyard Haggan Williams

Isnt too bad. And thats even before you touch free agents.

We already know that Doom is better in 3-4. And Ayers is no 4-3 DE. They were tweeners and lock you into 3-4 if you are committed to it.

BTW, nice work... You have suggested to have one of the worst starting LB corp in the whole league

Agamemnon
01-02-2011, 11:48 PM
You think he's going to go that early? I've not seen anything projecting that is there anyone of note saying he goes that high?

I just see his insane combine numbers boosting his already impressive play to that level. The guy is the strongest DL in the draft, and he's got great athleticism as well. This far out draft order is very fluid, but by draft day I think he'll have solidified himself as a top 15 pick.

Actually Walter Football has him at 12 at the moment, so they seem to agree with me. http://walterfootball.com/draft2011.php

Requiem
01-02-2011, 11:51 PM
There are quite a few sites that have Paea ~ 15.

Agamemnon
01-02-2011, 11:51 PM
We already know that Doom is better in 3-4. And Ayers is no 4-3 DE. They were tweeners and lock you into 3-4 if you are committed to it.

BTW, nice work... You have suggested to have one of the worst starting LB corp in the whole league

Ayers would make a much better 4-3 DE in my opinion--he's far more strength than speed and so fits a strong-side DE quite well. Dumervil is another matter, though he can do alright as he's proven in the past. In either scheme he's a liability against the rush.

And by the way our linebacking corps isn't good either way, so get over it. We could acquire more players in the draft or free agency to supplement. The transition would be much smoother than the one we went through from 4-3 to 3-4, and our defense would be far better overall with such dominant forces inside.

serious hops
01-02-2011, 11:57 PM
If we stay at #2 and take Peterson, should we try to make a move back into the 1st round for Paea if necessary? Sit tight and hope he falls to us in the 2nd round...or is there another D-line guy whose a better fit near the bottom of the first/top of the 2nd? We can draft at least two D-line guys...three if we really want to.



I'd love to see us target Paea and go after him aggressively regardless of who we take at #2. IMO we really need two if not three new starters on the DL-- this year is a bumper crop for first-level defensive players, and given the time it generally takes to develop those guys, I absolutely want at least two legitimately GOOD prospects.

Ideally I'd love to see us move back and get Dareus in the 5-10 range, or maybe Watt somewhere between 10-20 (not sure exactly where he's projected, but projection before the combine etc only has so much value anyway), and acquire more picks-- some of which might then be flipped if we need to move back into the first for Paea. We have a lot of ammo to move around, especially if we're going to dangle Orton as trade bait as well.

Should be interesting, anyway.

Jekyll15Hyde
01-02-2011, 11:57 PM
Ayers would make a much better 4-3 DE in my opinion--he's far more strength than speed and so fits a strong-side DE quite well. Dumervil is another matter, though he can do alright as he's proven in the past. In either scheme he's a liability against the rush.

And by the way our linebacking corps isn't good either way, so get over it. We could acquire more players in the draft or free agency to supplement. The transition would be much smoother than the one we went through from 4-3 to 3-4, and our defense would be far better overall with such dominant forces inside.

If I had the picks, I would love to really try to nail LBs with all 3 of the first picks and trade DJ in the process. At DLine continue to play the largest human beings you can find for next season.

Agamemnon
01-03-2011, 12:04 AM
Haggan is definitely not a sideline to sideline guy. We do not have the horses for 4-3. (not that we have any horses at all) With similar personal I think we`d be better off...

Bannan Paea Fairley
Ayers Williams Haggan Doom

or some reasonable facsimile.

Haggan would move back to a backup DE role. We could also easily run a hybrid with this lineup. But honestly there's no doubt in my mind that Fairley and Paea would be much more game changing in a 4-3. After the rookie jitters got worked out we might seriously have one of the nastiest d-lines in the NFL. Fairley's and Paea's strength and run stopping would help offset Dumervil's weakness in that area. Ayers would bring steady pressure from the other side and stuff the run as he's shown he can. All four have decent to great pass rush ability. It would be hell for opposing teams to handle. Assuming Paea and Fairley play to their potential that is.

The LB corps would need work, though we could grab some decent guys with later picks or through FA. The thing is that we aren't going to fix everything on this defense overnight. The line needs to come first, and this draft is loaded with good linemen to switch back to a 4-3. To me this solves much of our problems in both pass rushing and run defense all at once.

Agamemnon
01-03-2011, 12:06 AM
If I had the picks, I would love to really try to nail LBs with all 3 of the first picks and trade DJ in the process. At DLine continue to play the largest human beings you can find for next season.

Trading DJ at this point makes no sense to me. He doesn't have that much value, and he's a solid veteran starter. In the long run he's certainly replaceable, but short-term I don't see much benefit.

Jekyll15Hyde
01-03-2011, 12:19 AM
Trading DJ at this point makes no sense to me. He doesn't have that much value, and he's a solid veteran starter. In the long run he's certainly replaceable, but short-term I don't see much benefit.

We need a much stronger ILB game than what we have now. OLB are half set. Not sure what to make of Ayers at this stage. Probably just a depth guy but not the long term answer.

If there was a place in the draft where they saw someone who they think isnt much of a falloff from DJ or and had a taker for him, I think you look to do that.

Agamemnon
01-03-2011, 12:59 AM
We need a much stronger ILB game than what we have now. OLB are half set. Not sure what to make of Ayers at this stage. Probably just a depth guy but not the long term answer.

If there was a place in the draft where they saw someone who they think isnt much of a falloff from DJ or and had a taker for him, I think you look to do that.

We have bigger issues than ILB play. Much bigger issues.

footstepsfrom#27
01-03-2011, 01:33 AM
I just see his insane combine numbers boosting his already impressive play to that level. The guy is the strongest DL in the draft, and he's got great athleticism as well. This far out draft order is very fluid, but by draft day I think he'll have solidified himself as a top 15 pick.

Actually Walter Football has him at 12 at the moment, so they seem to agree with me. http://walterfootball.com/draft2011.php
I guess it would take both 2nd rounders to move up that high. If the guy plays in the NFL at 315, that's about Casey Hampton's size. With that kind of strength he could probably play either the 3-4 NT or a 4-3 DT position. We could probably get solid D-line guys in round 2, so it depends if you want the guy whose rated higher or you try to fill two spots. This is considered a deep draft for DT's from what I understand.

Doggcow
01-03-2011, 02:08 AM
I'm not sold on Paea honestly.

Doggcow
01-03-2011, 02:21 AM
For the record Id LOVE that Walter Football Draft

1) Patrick Peterson
2) Raheem Moore
2) Jared Crick
3) Jarrell Powe

Omg that would be a SICK haul for our defense.

elsid13
01-03-2011, 03:27 AM
Where do you expect him to go? He's listed at 311 btw...not sure if that's accurate but he' probably over 300.

Paea (great player) is most likely a very late late 1st round or early 2nd rounder. I wouldn't be surprised if Powe didn't fall to the 4th.

Agamemnon
01-03-2011, 03:31 AM
I guess it would take both 2nd rounders to move up that high. If the guy plays in the NFL at 315, that's about Casey Hampton's size. With that kind of strength he could probably play either the 3-4 NT or a 4-3 DT position. We could probably get solid D-line guys in round 2, so it depends if you want the guy whose rated higher or you try to fill two spots. This is considered a deep draft for DT's from what I understand.

No, you trade down from #2 to #5 getting a 2nd and a 3rd (with a roster depth player or the like tacked on). Then you have the ammo to trade back up to #12. In that scenario I go for Fairley and Paea in one go, and set the foundation for a return to the 4-3. You could go other routes as well, Dareus and Paea if you think that'll work in a 3-4. We really have the resources to make some major strides towards fixing this defense if we can find some willing partners. And if the Luck-craze doesn't take over and destroy this franchise for years to come. I don't know what to expect out of our new and inexperienced FO, and that worries me to no end.

Agamemnon
01-03-2011, 03:32 AM
For the record Id LOVE that Walter Football Draft

1) Patrick Peterson
2) Raheem Moore
2) Jared Crick
3) Jarrell Powe

Omg that would be a SICK haul for our defense.

Except that the position priorities are backwards. All the same I could live with it.

Agamemnon
01-03-2011, 03:35 AM
I'm not sold on Paea honestly.

In general? Or in the 3-4?

As far as the 3-4 goes, neither am I. But in a 4-3 the guy is going to be nasty.

Jekyll15Hyde
01-03-2011, 08:09 AM
We have bigger issues than ILB play. Much bigger issues.

You think? I'm simply saying that we get the most bang for our buck with upgrade here and assuming Doom is back. Would really like to see Champ back as well but soon at FS.

Man-Goblin
01-03-2011, 08:15 AM
This team needs to move down, not up, especially if the consensus 2nd best player in the draft is a freaking DB. 6 picks just ain't gonna cut it.

Old Dude
01-03-2011, 08:20 AM
In response to the original question, it depends on a couple of unknowns. (1) Will the new staff stick with the 3-4? (2) What kinds of movement are we going to see after all of the bowl games (including the senior bowl) and the combine? (3) What kinds of options will Denver have in free agency?

If we assume, according to the original question, that Denver takes Peterson at #2, and if Paea should slide into the late 20s, and if Denver sticks with the 3-4 ....

then it might not be that bad of an idea, depending on how you diagnose Denver's defensive woes.

My impression is that the starting D-Line of J. Williams, Bannon and Vickerson usually plays well against the run early in the game. They don't get any significant penetration or pressure on passing downs, but that was supposed to mainly be the job of the OLBs. Of course, we lost our best pass rusher in Dumervil and the development of Ayers, which wasn't that fast to start with, was slowed even more by his injury.

But where we seemed to get killed was when the backup line came in. Fields (as we learned last year) was just too small to hold the NT position. McBean cost us dearly with stupid penalties. Thomas did little if anything. We seemed to have a huge dropoff in our run defense when these guys came in and, as a result, I think there was a reluctance to rotate the starters. They got worn down as the game progressed - particularly Williams - who is no spring chicken.

So there is at least an argument that one of the weakest links on the whole team is NT. Getting an impact starter there - or a rookie who can at least challenge for the starting position - would hep out Williams and bounce Fields off the squad.

Sure, we need tons of help on defense and every pick counts. But it's usually a good draft if you can get two starters and two role players and expecting more than that may not be reasonable - even with Denver's position.

If (and this is a huge if) ... if Paea graded out as starting material and substantially better than the other NT alternatives - and if he dropped to just the right spot where we could make a play for him without wrecking the rest of the draft - then that pick might turn out to be a very nice bang for the buck.

If Denver does wind up trading Orton - which seems likely in view of the Tebow situation - maybe the compensation received there would be enough to swing the deal without sacrificing our other 2d and 3rd round picks.

footstepsfrom#27
01-03-2011, 08:32 AM
No, you trade down from #2 to #5 getting a 2nd and a 3rd (with a roster depth player or the like tacked on). Then you have the ammo to trade back up to #12. In that scenario I go for Fairley and Paea in one go, and set the foundation for a return to the 4-3. You could go other routes as well, Dareus and Paea if you think that'll work in a 3-4. We really have the resources to make some major strides towards fixing this defense if we can find some willing partners. And if the Luck-craze doesn't take over and destroy this franchise for years to come. I don't know what to expect out of our new and inexperienced FO, and that worries me to no end.
NEVER NEVER NEVER pass on a guy who has All Pro...I said ALL PRO not pro bowl...talent, especically at a position as difficult to fill as Corner. The NFL is full of guys who succeed in the line who were drafted in the 2nd round. How many superstar corners aren't drafted at the top of the draft? This is a D-line rich draft and we can fill three spots if we want to, but you do not pass on Petersen, a guy who is half Deon Sanders and half Dennis Smith.

If the want to get back up high enough for Paea, they can do it with the ammo they have in that extra 2nd rounder. That would still leave a 3rd, actually two if we get another one for Orton. Powe is a possibility there. We could even trade two thirds for a chance to move back into the second and take someone like Jared Crick. The possibilities are numerous, but they shouldn't include turning down a once in a decade shut down corner who can cover any receiver in the NFL one-on-one and has the size and disposition to be a nasty run support intimidator as well.

Old Dude
01-03-2011, 08:39 AM
Not to mention the fact that our secondary is in serious trouble. Cox has been getting torched all year and he may not even be around next year depending on his legal issues. Bailey may be gone. Goodman is getting old. It's something that is going to have to be addressed one way or another.

bendog
01-03-2011, 10:17 AM
If they trade the Peterson pick it's over money. That guy is like Atwater only faster and with better cover skills. Powe has weight issues that kept him off the field for two years, along with an academic record that gave even the SEC pause. I don't think there's any thug in him, just stupid. Paea probably will grade out even higher than now at the combine because he has the work ethic to be in shape. But I'm not really sure he's a NT. He'd fit perfectly if they went to a 4-3 with Ayers at RDE and Doom back to LDE and M. Thomas as an undertackle, which is his natl position. But it might take both two picks to get him.

oubronco
01-03-2011, 11:05 AM
Draft Dareus with our first then draft more D-line with our other picks

Fix the damn D-line for a change!!!!

misturanderson
01-03-2011, 11:14 AM
If they trade the Peterson pick it's over money. That guy is like Atwater only faster and with better cover skills. Powe has weight issues that kept him off the field for two years, along with an academic record that gave even the SEC pause. I don't think there's any thug in him, just stupid. Paea probably will grade out even higher than now at the combine because he has the work ethic to be in shape. But I'm not really sure he's a NT. He'd fit perfectly if they went to a 4-3 with Ayers at RDE and Doom back to LDE and M. Thomas as an undertackle, which is his natl position. But it might take both two picks to get him.

Please for the love of god stop saying this. There will never again be a money issue when it comes to drafting players. If there is one single thing that is guaranteed to happen by the time the next draft class is signed it is a rookie wage slotting system that will ensure that the top 10 picks aren't making more than their veteran counterparts.

bendog
01-03-2011, 01:11 PM
Please for the love of god stop saying this. There will never again be a money issue when it comes to drafting players. If there is one single thing that is guaranteed to happen by the time the next draft class is signed it is a rookie wage slotting system that will ensure that the top 10 picks aren't making more than their veteran counterparts.

Yes, but there is nothign suggesting Bowlen would pay as much for trading down to the middle of the first and getting an extra second or whatever as he would pay for whoever is in the two slot. I really don't see the broncos trading down though, because the talent level drops off quickly in this draft. After Luck, Peters and Bowers ... and I don't think anyone considers Bowers to be as good a prospect as the first two.

epicSocialism4tw
01-03-2011, 02:09 PM
Not to mention the fact that our secondary is in serious trouble. Cox has been getting torched all year and he may not even be around next year depending on his legal issues. Bailey may be gone. Goodman is getting old. It's something that is going to have to be addressed one way or another.

The defensive line should be addressed first. A defensive line who can dictate terms in the trenches makes every defender on your team look better.

footstepsfrom#27
01-03-2011, 02:20 PM
If they trade the Peterson pick it's over money. That guy is like Atwater only faster and with better cover skills. Powe has weight issues that kept him off the field for two years, along with an academic record that gave even the SEC pause. I don't think there's any thug in him, just stupid
I don't think he's stupid. He's just the product of a school system that had no interest and probably little capability in providing a quality education. He took online or correspondance courses like he was supposed to do but the NCAA had some kind of issue with some of his coursework, saying it wouldnt' receive credit. He did what he was supposed to do in regaining his academic eligibility and if you watch him on some of those interviews he sounds like a pretty hard working decent guy now...what he was before I'm not sure. I hope he's there in the 3rd for us.

bendog
01-03-2011, 02:27 PM
I think he'll go before the third round. He'd be a bargain there. His weight had to have gotten close to 400 pounds, and it took him an entire year to get into shape just to safely get on the football field. When he was in shape, he physically dominated anyone blocking him. If he wants it, imo, he can be a probowl NT. I'm not sure how much he wants it though

rugbythug
01-03-2011, 02:55 PM
I think he'll go before the third round. He'd be a bargain there. His weight had to have gotten close to 400 pounds, and it took him an entire year to get into shape just to safely get on the football field. When he was in shape, he physically dominated anyone blocking him. If he wants it, imo, he can be a probowl NT. I'm not sure how much he wants it though

Being tftp is a huge red flag. This guy is not nearly as good as mt cody who went in the third

Old Dude
01-03-2011, 03:01 PM
The defensive line should be addressed first. A defensive line who can dictate terms in the trenches makes every defender on your team look better.

All other things being equal, I agree with that.

But if Peterson is really a once-a-generation talent and if the DL crop is deeper with a more gradual drop-off, it would make sense to grab the superstar while we can get him and do what we can with the DL in the 2d round.

Not everyone agrees that Peterson is all that. Not everyone agrees that we can find DL talent in round 2.

Personally, I don't know.

epicSocialism4tw
01-03-2011, 03:21 PM
All other things being equal, I agree with that.

But if Peterson is really a once-a-generation talent and if the DL crop is deeper with a more gradual drop-off, it would make sense to grab the superstar while we can get him and do what we can with the DL in the 2d round.

Not everyone agrees that Peterson is all that. Not everyone agrees that we can find DL talent in round 2.

Personally, I don't know.

If Bailey and Goodman are able to leave, I'm quite confident that they'll find starting jobs elsewhere. Those positions are fine.

Safety? Thats a different issue.

However, a defensive line that causes the opposing quarterback trouble is better than having the best defensive back in the game (Champ Bailey), another solid starter and some other decent players in the secondary. Thats what the Broncos have thrown out there for years. At its best, it beat the Patriots in the AFC divisional round of the playoffs. At its worst, it has been the worst run defense in Broncos history.

The talent is there in the secondary. The talent is NOT there in any real capacity on the D-line.

Doggcow
01-03-2011, 03:33 PM
In general? Or in the 3-4?

As far as the 3-4 goes, neither am I. But in a 4-3 the guy is going to be nasty.

Well, as a Washington State Alum... We dominated Paea, and we ****ing suck... lol

Like, took him completely out of the game, and our Center is absolute trash, our Guards aren't much better.

bendog
01-03-2011, 03:43 PM
Being tftp is a huge red flag. This guy is not nearly as good as mt cody who went in the third

Well, it's a serious question mark. However, HOW he got toftp is very unusual. He was a prize recruit of Ogeron. He was ruled ineligible to play because of inconsistencies that showed up in correspondence courses he took during the summer before he entered ole miss. And, it wasn't bogus. The kid had a LOT of correspondence courses over a summer. He spent an entire year fighting the NCAA, and during that year Ogeron was fired, Nutt replaced him, and Powe couldn't have ANY contact with the football program. He was an 18 year old kid with little do but eat, and he can eat alot. Then Nutt went ballistic when he showed up tftop. But to his credit, he kept working and had to lose 70 pounds and then emerged as a force in his jr year. It's not like Ayers, who only really started for one year. You know what you got. They list his playing weight at around 315, but he looks bigger than that. He's just really strong and surprisingly quick. They used him as a blocking back on the goaline. It was a gimmick to be sure, but he destroyed whatever he ran into. Whoever takes him will have to make a judgment on his desire to be good. There aren't any cox like character issues in the kid though.

Agamemnon
01-03-2011, 04:29 PM
Well, as a Washington State Alum... We dominated Paea, and we ****ing suck... lol

Like, took him completely out of the game, and our Center is absolute trash, our Guards aren't much better.

The game where he had 8 tackles and a sack? Yeah you really dominated him...

That One Guy
01-03-2011, 04:31 PM
Any comments on the question posed?

I guess I didn't state my point clearly enough.

The point was that the team dictates the player moreso than the player does. Players fail in one system then switch teams and take off. See Alphonso in Detroit or any DL in Baltimore. So whatever player we gamble on, we ideally have a solid base there in the first place. We don't need to blow our wad assuming somebody is so good, they'll fix a position by themselves. No DL is going to fix the line by himself and it definitely wont be a rookie that makes a difference. You need a solid base and we don't currently have that.

You're shooting for the stars and trying to bang the prom queen when we still need to be practicing on the chubby girls. We need quantity over quality at this point. Once you have a solid foundation for new players to learn from, aim for the fences by betting the draft on once in a lifetime talent.

bendog
01-03-2011, 04:33 PM
I'm torn on Paea. He's listed as a bust because he's maxed out his physical ability, and can't play a NT in the nfl and is too slow for a 3-4. But Orakapo was a workout warrior too. Workouts can show desire. But generally unless it's McCoy, Suh, Mario Williams type ability, dline has the huge bust potential of WR.

Agamemnon
01-03-2011, 04:52 PM
I'm torn on Paea. He's listed as a bust because he's maxed out his physical ability, and can't play a NT in the nfl and is too slow for a 3-4. But Orakapo was a workout warrior too. Workouts can show desire. But generally unless it's McCoy, Suh, Mario Williams type ability, dline has the huge bust potential of WR.

I gotta laugh at the notion that he's maxed out his physical ability. He's maxed out his strength, but there's a lot more to football than strength. His technique can use a lot of work seeing as he's only been playing football a few years. Paea has a lot of room for development and growth.

Doggcow
01-03-2011, 05:12 PM
The game where he had 8 tackles and a sack? Yeah you really dominated him...

One sack? Against maybe the worst Oline I've ever seen?

Ok you have a hard on for this kid. That's cool. He was irrelevant in the game.

We ran the ball up the middle over and over, I'm glad he could slap Mitz's thigh a couple times and get credit for taking him down on 2nd and 1's.

Agamemnon
01-03-2011, 05:14 PM
One sack? Against maybe the worst Oline I've ever seen?

Ok you have a hard on for this kid. That's cool. He was irrelevant in the game.

We ran the ball up the middle over and over, I'm glad he could slap Mitz's thigh a couple times and get credit for taking him down on 2nd and 1's.

Irrational post is irrational...

Requiem
01-03-2011, 05:19 PM
Irrational post is irrational...

Well, did you actually watch the game or are you just going to reference his stat line and assume he did a good job?

Doggcow
01-03-2011, 05:20 PM
Irrational post is irrational...

Washington State: 118th Ranked Rush Offense... RUSHED FOR 221 YARDS. Most of which were up the gut... That's pretty bad.

Requiem
01-03-2011, 05:26 PM
Washington State: 118th Ranked Rush Offense... RUSHED FOR 221 YARDS. Most of which were up the gut... That's pretty bad.

Congratulations. You have slapped Lex or one of many other banned posters down with one swift stroke of the keyboard. It is clear that the Gods do favor you! :strong: :notworthy

Doggcow
01-03-2011, 05:40 PM
Congratulations. You have slapped Lex or one of many other banned posters down with one swift stroke of the keyboard. It is clear that the Gods do favor you! :strong: :notworthy

I remember the game clearly. It was a magnificent day.

It was our first PAC-10 win in 2 years! 3 years if you don't count beating 0-12 UW... (Part of the reason I'm also not sold on Locker... lol)

Agamemnon
01-03-2011, 05:40 PM
Washington State: 118th Ranked Rush Offense... RUSHED FOR 221 YARDS. Most of which were up the gut... That's pretty bad.

And? I'm really failing to see your point. Paea is one guy on a pretty bad defense. Is this seriously your argument for why Paea isn't good?

Doggcow
01-03-2011, 05:42 PM
And? I'm really failing to see your point. Paea is one guy on a pretty bad defense. Is this seriously your argument for why Paea isn't good?

No. I'm arguing that he failed, against one of the weakest rush offenses in the nation, when we attacked him directly for about 40 minutes of the game.

I still have the game on Tivo if you want to check. He really did get moved around easily, and was a non factor in the game at best, a weakness at worst.

Agamemnon
01-03-2011, 05:42 PM
Well, did you actually watch the game or are you just going to reference his stat line and assume he did a good job?

Well I can trust the stat line or one poster spouting hyperbole. Obviously I'd rather watch it myself but I can't. So stats > hyperbolic poster in such cases.

Agamemnon
01-03-2011, 05:43 PM
No. I'm arguing that he failed, against one of the weakest rush offenses in the nation, when we attacked him directly for about 40 minutes of the game.

I still have the game on Tivo if you want to check. He really did get moved around easily, and was a non factor in the game at best, a weakness at worst.

You have it on tivo? What are you expecting me to come to your house and watch it?

And for argument's sake, let's say you are right. Are players only good prospects if they've never had a bad game? If that's the case there aren't very many good prospects.

Doggcow
01-03-2011, 05:44 PM
Well I can trust the stat line or one poster spouting hyperbole. Obviously I'd rather watch it myself but I can't. So stats > hyperbolic poster in such cases.

Go check the stats for WSU, and how ****ty we were all year then too.

To put his stat line into perspective.

Agamemnon
01-03-2011, 05:47 PM
Go check the stats for WSU, and how ****ty we were all year then too.

To put his stat line into perspective.

What I prefer to do is go off what I've personally seen of the guy (a few games) and what scouts think of him. That seems better than using one isolated game to decide one way or the other.

Requiem
01-03-2011, 06:35 PM
What I prefer to do is go off what I've personally seen of the guy (a few games) and what scouts think of him. That seems better than using one isolated game to decide one way or the other.

Well if you didn't see the game, using a stat line you cannot put into perspective isn't a good way about trying to come up with an argument.

Oregon State's defense was shredded that game, all game long.

Getting 8 tackles and a sack when the team ran 61 times and for over 200 yards isn't a ringing endorsement for Paea's play that game. He is a good prospect, but that wouldn't be a "great game" for him. It certainly wasn't.

Agamemnon
01-03-2011, 06:42 PM
Well if you didn't see the game, using a stat line you cannot put into perspective isn't a good way about trying to come up with an argument.

Oregon State's defense was shredded that game, all game long.

Getting 8 tackles and a sack when the team ran 61 times and for over 200 yards isn't a ringing endorsement for Paea's play that game. He is a good prospect, but that wouldn't be a "great game" for him. It certainly wasn't.

And again, I can't really say. I do know that people are very bad at assessing DT play when watching games so I'm not inclined to believe he was terrible just because the defense was as a whole. Maybe he was, maybe he wasn't. I'm not inclined to believe one way or the other just based off someone's word.

Stats can definitely be misleading. Eyewitness accounts even more so.

Requiem
01-03-2011, 06:51 PM
Well, the guy is an alum, watch the game and other people here (including myself) happened to see the game too. Any time a defense gets shredded for over 200 yards on the ground is pretty indicative that the DL was getting abused all game long.

If Paea had actually mustered up a good amount of TFL in the game, it could have been an indicator that he may have been better than the advertised defense, however, that wasn't the case.

Getting 8 tackles when you are ran against 61 times is nothing to be stoked about, nor does it mean he had a good game. Doggcow helped put things in perspective, which was quite unfortunate for you

As seen here, yes, stats can be misleading. And eyewitness accounts, sure. But for this game, you don't even have witness to it. So pretty much, you tried using misleading stats to counter real life observation of the game. Too bad for you.

Hamrob
01-03-2011, 06:55 PM
Draft Dareus with our first then draft more D-line with our other picks

Fix the damn D-line for a change!!!!Ditto. Dareus or Fairley with our #1. Although I hope we can trade back a couple slots.

Agamemnon
01-03-2011, 07:02 PM
Well, the guy is an alum, watch the game and other people here (including myself) happened to see the game too. Any time a defense gets shredded for over 200 yards on the ground is pretty indicative that the DL was getting abused all game long.

If Paea had actually mustered up a good amount of TFL in the game, it could have been an indicator that he may have been better than the advertised defense, however, that wasn't the case.

Getting 8 tackles when you are ran against 61 times is nothing to be stoked about, nor does it mean he had a good game. Doggcow helped put things in perspective, which was quite unfortunate for you

As seen here, yes, stats can be misleading. And eyewitness accounts, sure. But for this game, you don't even have witness to it. So pretty much, you tried using misleading stats to counter real life observation of the game. Too bad for you.

Too bad for me? The more you guys go on about it, the more I tend to think you're full of it. His stats are what they are. Your and his opinion are just that, and to be blunt, come across as B.S. I can think of many, many reasons a team could run on Oregon State that wouldn't in any way mean that Paea had a bad game. While the two of you keep harping on a fact that is neither here, nor there: the total yards they rushed for. The Ducks' defense is terrible outside of Paea and gave up tons of yards to a lot of people. That is proof of nothing save the fact that one defender does not a defense make.

Requiem
01-03-2011, 07:08 PM
Yeah, and you just stated Paea played for the Ducks.

Sounds like you have watched him play, but I doubt it.

In short: You are full of ****, but we already knew that.

We also can deduce that you are a recently banned poster, given your posting habits.

What creative name will you think of next?

Agamemnon
01-03-2011, 07:25 PM
Yeah, and you just stated Paea played for the Ducks.

Sounds like you have watched him play, but I doubt it.

In short: You are full of ****, but we already knew that.

We also can deduce that you are a recently banned poster, given your posting habits.

What creative name will you think of next?

It was a typo. But hey keep being classy.

And no I wasn't banned. But think what you like.

Requiem
01-03-2011, 07:26 PM
It was a typo. But hey keep being classy.

Pretty big difference between Beavers and Ducks. Sorry, that isn't gonna fly. Too bad for you, TWICE.

Agamemnon
01-03-2011, 07:29 PM
Meh, two Oregon teams with weird mascots. I get them crossed in my head all the time. But if you want to keep acting like a child, feel free. I'm done with this.

Requiem
01-03-2011, 07:36 PM
Meh, two Oregon teams with weird mascots. I get them crossed in my head all the time. But if you want to keep acting like a child, feel free. I'm done with this.

Cool story, bro!

footstepsfrom#27
01-03-2011, 10:30 PM
I guess I didn't state my point clearly enough.

The point was that the team dictates the player moreso than the player does. Players fail in one system then switch teams and take off. See Alphonso in Detroit or any DL in Baltimore. So whatever player we gamble on, we ideally have a solid base there in the first place. We don't need to blow our wad assuming somebody is so good, they'll fix a position by themselves. No DL is going to fix the line by himself and it definitely wont be a rookie that makes a difference. You need a solid base and we don't currently have that.

You're shooting for the stars and trying to bang the prom queen when we still need to be practicing on the chubby girls. We need quantity over quality at this point. Once you have a solid foundation for new players to learn from, aim for the fences by betting the draft on once in a lifetime talent.
I fundamentally disagree on this point. We do NOT need to focus on quantity, we need to focus on quality. Quantity is going to happen anyway because team's inevitably make moves, pick up guys through free agency, trades or waivers that work out when they hadn't before...etc. Teams that win chamnpionships have elite talent. I said ELITE talent, not a guy who happened to get some pro bowl votes but playmakers....superstars if you wish. We have no superstars, and we won't have another opportunity this good to draft one, perhaps for years. People keep trying to make the point that if we take Petersen 2nd, we can't address the D-line but that's silly. Two #2's and Orton as trade bait give us enough flexibility to draft an entiely new D-line if we wish to. This draft is strong and deep with D-line guys and we could sit pat and grab 3 guys who wind up as starters for us. I see a much larger possibility that any of the D-line guys considered top 10 prospects fails than I do for Petersen. Those guys will come into the NFL as very talented but not so much more so than players taken a round lower that they'd qualify as guaranteed studs or even immediate starters. Petersen on the other hand, will instantly be the NFL's most talented cornerback the day he's drafted.

There's another thing about taking a superstar talent like that. Having an elite talent anywhere on your defense typically allows a DC to gameplan in ways and do things he couldn't otherwise do. The Giants with Lawrence Taylor, the Cowboys with Deon Sanders, the Steelers with Troy...all examples of defensive advantages coaches gained through game planning with those guys to do things they couldn't do otherwise. Two years from now you may not recognize much difference between a guy like Fairley and someone like Paea, and Peterson could be an All Pro with 10 years of HOF level play in front of him.

I think that you almost always take the most talented player. Unless it's at a position you're just so strong at it would be silly. This team absolutely needs CB help with Champ probably moving on, uncertaiinty about Cox and who knows what happens with some of the other guys. We need a building block we can build around, not a bunch more bodies that are good but not great players.

Doggcow
01-04-2011, 12:16 AM
Btw I am NOT against moving up for a Dlineman, I'd just rather not Paea. I am fully aware we are in desperate need of a Dlineman and considering what the scouts and stuff think about Paea, I wouldn't be floored if we picked him, I'd rather someone else, but I wouldn't be surprised if he was just a mediocre player for a few years, or a great one.

I do not consider myself an expert, I am judging this purely from 2 games I have watched of Paea. I understand that is NOT the best way to do it. But I am also assuming if WSU can effectively take Paea out of a game, most NFL teams probably can too.

cutthemdown
01-04-2011, 12:18 AM
I like Crick from Nebraska. He will be a mid 2nd to top of 3rd I guess on most mocks? Those things can be way off though Crick came on strong end of year from what I read.

Doggcow
01-04-2011, 12:20 AM
I like Crick from Nebraska. He will be a mid 2nd to top of 3rd I guess on most mocks? Those things can be way off though Crick came on strong end of year from what I read.

I'd rather wait for Crick too :)

footstepsfrom#27
01-04-2011, 12:34 AM
Crick may very well be there at #36. He needs to add a little weight but he looks like a guy who could play the DE spot in either the 34 or the 43.

Requiem
01-04-2011, 12:39 AM
I like Crick from Nebraska. He will be a mid 2nd to top of 3rd I guess on most mocks? Those things can be way off though Crick came on strong end of year from what I read.

Right now Crick's value is as an early second round pick, there is no way he lasts until the third round. The more likely scenario is that he moves up draft boards for teams looking for a versatile lineman such as himself. I really would not be surprised to see him end up being a Top 25 selection when it is all said and done.

Wes Mantooth
01-04-2011, 08:40 AM
For everyone never seeing an Oregon State Football game and looking at Defensive stats. Remember they had the toughest schedule probably in the country (included at TCU, at Boise State, Oregon and Standford)

Yeah they lost to Washington State, but they are a team improving. They put the Ducks to task too.

Paea gets constant double teams or like in the Civil War, almost every play was away from him by design.

Liquid Courage
01-04-2011, 08:57 AM
For everyone never seeing an Oregon State Football game and looking at Defensive stats. Remember they had the toughest schedule probably in the country (included at TCU, at Boise State, Oregon and Standford)

Yeah they lost to Washington State, but they are a team improving. They put the Ducks to task too.

Paea gets constant double teams or like in the Civil War, almost every play was away from him by design.

this . . . all you need to do is watch the Civil War game and note down which player drew the holding penalty from Oregon's OL . . . by my count Paea drew 3 against constant double teams. the kid is a monster despite being relatively new to the game and has a lot of upside. Take him if we can and double down on another talented young stud DL or two! :strong:

Old Dude
01-04-2011, 10:13 AM
So much is going to depend on whether the new coach goes to a 4-3 or stays with a 3-4 or goofs around with some sort of hybrid.

And the key, it seems to me, is Dumervil. In the 3-4, he's the NFL sack leader. And he's being paid like a superstar.

But as a 4-3 defensive end, he'll almost certainly have to put some weight back on. And even then, he'll be undersized and probably be used more as a passing down specialist than an every down lineman. The fact is that he just wasn't as effective in that role.

And I can't see his salary for a mere role-player.

If we go to a 4-3, I think we have to trade him, and his value would be diminished since he's been out for a year.

If we're stuck in a 3-4, that is going to say a lot about who we can draft for that scheme and who won't fit.

bendog
01-04-2011, 12:20 PM
So much is going to depend on whether the new coach goes to a 4-3 or stays with a 3-4 or goofs around with some sort of hybrid.

And the key, it seems to me, is Dumervil. In the 3-4, he's the NFL sack leader. And he's being paid like a superstar.

But as a 4-3 defensive end, he'll almost certainly have to put some weight back on. And even then, he'll be undersized and probably be used more as a passing down specialist than an every down lineman. The fact is that he just wasn't as effective in that role.

And I can't see his salary for a mere role-player.

If we go to a 4-3, I think we have to trade him, and his value would be diminished since he's been out for a year.

If we're stuck in a 3-4, that is going to say a lot about who we can draft for that scheme and who won't fit.

yeah, and there's a question is Paea can be a NT or is fast enough to be a 3-4 DE. But doom was effective in the 4-3. He was surprisingly stout against the run.

Old Dude
01-04-2011, 12:31 PM
yeah, and there's a question is Paea can be a NT or is fast enough to be a 3-4 DE. But doom was effective in the 4-3. He was surprisingly stout against the run.

But Doom was far more effective as an OLB. 5 more sacks and twice the number of forced fumbles. That's why he got the big contract.

Remembering the good times:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=garber_greg&id=4546254

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/peter_king/10/09/week.5/index.html

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/broncos/2009-12-10-elvis-dumervil_N.htm

bendog
01-04-2011, 12:36 PM
Absolutely, and as you pointed out, as a DE he's greatly overpaid. Ayers has huge bust potential, but imo he's a better fit at 3-4 too. They traded a probowl qb who in in the playoffs and got Ayers and D.Thomas. I think they've got too much invested to shift now. So, if the new HC is a defense guy, I think he'll have to be a 3-4 devotee, or a guy like Nolan who is good with either scheme depending upon what players he's got. And if the HC is an offense guy, he's got to be a QB type guru like Harbaugh or Kubes, because they have no choice but to see how good Tebow can be. Doing anything else is like 5 year rebuild, and the fans don't have the patience, not after ten years of post Elway 9 win seasons and the McD fiasco.

Mediator12
01-04-2011, 12:51 PM
yeah, and there's a question is Paea can be a NT or is fast enough to be a 3-4 DE. But doom was effective in the 4-3. He was surprisingly stout against the run.

Dumervil is a far better 3-4 LB. However, to say he did even ok against the run in the 4-3 DE spot makes me Laugh. His average run stop was 4.9 yards down field for 2 years! ROFL!

Oh, and Paea can be both a NT and a DE in the 3-4. Kid is a natural 2 gapper and has the mentality and physicality to play it.

bendog
01-04-2011, 12:59 PM
Dumervil is a far better 3-4 LB. However, to say he did even ok against the run in the 4-3 DE spot makes me Laugh. His average run stop was 4.9 yards down field for 2 years! ROFL!

Oh, and Paea can be both a NT and a DE in the 3-4. Kid is a natural 2 gapper and has the mentality and physicality to play it.

The draft rap was he couldn't even play run defense in the nfl. Doom did occupy the tackle, but you may have noticed OUR LINEBACKERS SUCK. With Paea he's 312 pounds and has physically dominated in college, but he's not going to get stronger or bigger. He's a prototypical two gap DT.

Old Dude
01-04-2011, 01:45 PM
It wasn't so long ago that this defense (now playing at an almost historically poor level) was the talk of the NFL, and frequently referred to as "aggressive,", "tough" and even "dominating."

6 games into 2009, we were 6-0 including victories over Dallas, New England, and on the road at San Diego.

The defense had given up only 70 points through 6 games. It was leading the NFL in multiple categories.

So how do you go from there to rock bottom in a season and a half?

First thing to look at is what happened after the 6-0 start.

They were beaten by Baltimore 30-7. The defense wasn't great that game, but the score was mostly the result of an offense that was completely unable to move the ball. We had to punt 8 times. The D held Baltimore to under 300 yards total offense. 7 of Baltimore's points came on a long kickoff return. One of the Baltimore scores came after Moreno fumbled at Denver's own 23.

Denver's D also played well in the first half of the Pittsburgh game the following week - giving up only 23 rushing yards at the half. The Steelers could not move the chains on the ground. The collapse was mostly the fault of our offense. Except for the opening drive that got a FG, every offensive drive ended in a punt or an interception. Our only TD was by Ayers on a fumble return.

Our run defense collapsed in the second half when the the Steelers made some adjustments and we were simply worn down by the pounding.

We had a similar situation the following week when our defense wilted against the Redskin running game late in the contest.

They rebounded against the Giants but then faded as the season went on - - mostly as a result of the rush defense. We were too small and soft in the middle and by season's end we were getting gashed the same way, week after week.

That's why the main free agency moves in 2010 were aimed at toughening up the middle of the line. Bannon wasn't bad this year. Jamal Williams was off and on. The other guy was a bust, but Vickerson helped out a little bit once he got here.

But with Dumervil sidelined and with Dawkins losing a lot of his game (and missing multiple contests) and with Goodman out for half the season and no pass rush to help the rookie CBs... well, there you go.

Most of the rushing damage was accomplished on the perimeter or when the D-Line subs were in. Not all of it, but a disproportionate amount of it.

Assuming we stay in a 3-4, Dumervil's return would be huge. But we definitely need help - depth if nothing else - on the D-Line. And, of course, Champ may be gone. Goodman is getting old and banged up. Dawkins is just a shell of what he was a year ago. I think time has run out on this secondary.

Rohirrim
01-04-2011, 01:56 PM
Which is the best argument I've heard yet for taking Dareus, and beefing up the running game.

bendog
01-04-2011, 02:07 PM
I'm willing to agree with anyone that moving back to the 4-3 now would be a very difficult thing to to. Using the second on Dareus isn't value, imo. But the combines are a long way away

Old Dude
01-04-2011, 02:21 PM
I think that a lot of the people who want Dareus think we can slide back to the 5th or 6th slot, maybe picking up an extra 2d or 3d rounder in the process. I'm not sure how the value charts will be affected by the rookie cap.

And you can never just assume the guy you want will be there. If the Broncos do trade back, they'll have to be prepared to take whoever is still around at that point.

So is Dareus really worth the #2 pick? Damned if I know.