| Author |
Message |
KazooSkinsFan
kazoo
Joined: 05 Sep 2004
Posts: 10021
Location: Kazmania
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2012 1:07 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| SkinsJock wrote: | I just don't see this FO taking a WR or RB with a top 10 pick
We are not exactly a player or two away from having the luxury of fine tuning - which is what those positions are
I really think that we'll see these guys trade down - there are teams that will want a player badly enough at the #6 spot |
You win by drafting talent, not for need |
|
| Back to top |
|
SkinsJock
08 Champ
Joined: 24 Feb 2004
Posts: 11522
Location: New England
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2012 1:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'd agree with that Kaz - my point was more that we need a lot of talented players - there are many franchises that just need a few
Most of the top 100 players taken are talented - we need as many as we can get |
|
| Back to top |
|
brad7686
B-rad
Joined: 26 Nov 2006
Posts: 2991
Location: De La War
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2012 1:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SkinsJock wrote: | I just don't see this FO taking a WR or RB with a top 10 pick
We are not exactly a player or two away from having the luxury of fine tuning - which is what those positions are
I really think that we'll see these guys trade down - there are teams that will want a player badly enough at the #6 spot |
I disagree that WR is fine tuning. There are some good teams that would be crap without their WR's. Detroit, GB, Pittsburgh, NYG, for example.
I recognize immediately that this is going to turn into a qb discussion, so let me just say that Big Ben and Eli have a history of mediocrity without their current receivers. Calvin Johnson is the only person Stafford throws to. And well, Rogers would make due without really good receivers but that group makes them explosive. |
|
| Back to top |
|
KazooSkinsFan
kazoo
Joined: 05 Sep 2004
Posts: 10021
Location: Kazmania
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2012 3:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| brad7686 wrote: | | SkinsJock wrote: | I just don't see this FO taking a WR or RB with a top 10 pick
We are not exactly a player or two away from having the luxury of fine tuning - which is what those positions are
I really think that we'll see these guys trade down - there are teams that will want a player badly enough at the #6 spot |
I disagree that WR is fine tuning. There are some good teams that would be crap without their WR's. Detroit, GB, Pittsburgh, NYG, for example.
I recognize immediately that this is going to turn into a qb discussion, so let me just say that Big Ben and Eli have a history of mediocrity without their current receivers. Calvin Johnson is the only person Stafford throws to. And well, Rogers would make due without really good receivers but that group makes them explosive. |
I agree. I could totally see us taking a receiver with our top pick if that was the best player available. |
|
| Back to top |
|
SkinsJock
08 Champ
Joined: 24 Feb 2004
Posts: 11522
Location: New England
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2012 6:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sorry guys - can not agree with you
good teams are not good teams because of a few good players - good teams need good play from players playing together
The Giants are not a good team because of their receivers - their defense is finally playing together
We beat the Giants twice because they did not have the type of play from their defense that they got last week - can u imagine Rex against that group - hell loook at what they did to A Rogers and that offense
Detroit would be a good team without Calvin - maybe not as good but they would still be a good team
this applies to all good teams
we are close, no question but drafting a great WR will help this team down the road - we need to continue to build on what has been started
WR and RB are luxuries - we will not be doing that
I have nothing against taking Blackmon - we're just not taking a WR or RB at the #6 spot IF we have to take a player at this spot |
|
| Back to top |
|
Link
|
|
 |
brad7686
B-rad
Joined: 26 Nov 2006
Posts: 2991
Location: De La War
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2012 7:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SkinsJock wrote: | Sorry guys - can not agree with you
good teams are not good teams because of a few good players - good teams need good play from players playing together
The Giants are not a good team because of their receivers - their defense is finally playing together
We beat the Giants twice because they did not have the type of play from their defense that they got last week - can u imagine Rex against that group - hell loook at what they did to A Rogers and that offense
Detroit would be a good team without Calvin - maybe not as good but they would still be a good team
this applies to all good teams
we are close, no question but drafting a great WR will help this team down the road - we need to continue to build on what has been started
WR and RB are luxuries - we will not be doing that
I have nothing against taking Blackmon - we're just not taking a WR or RB at the #6 spot IF we have to take a player at this spot |
I can agree with not going WR early if there's a better or equal player. I find it highly doubtful that there will be an equal player to Blackmon if he is there at 6. Maybe a defensive player, but at some point they have to go offense. |
|
| Back to top |
|
KazooSkinsFan
kazoo
Joined: 05 Sep 2004
Posts: 10021
Location: Kazmania
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2012 9:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| SkinsJock wrote: | | Sorry guys - can not agree with you |
You don't know what you're talking about. A good receiver is actually a glaring need that we have. There's no way we pass taking Blackmon because he's a receiver. If we can't get Luck or Griffin and he's there, he'd be an excellent choice. With that high a pick, you have to take a player with talent. We can address needs later in the draft and with free agency and it makes a lot more sense then drafting to fill a need with that high a pick. You pass on the best players and you end up with wash outs who don't fill the need at all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
DarthMonk
DarthMonk
Joined: 16 Nov 2005
Posts: 3210
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2012 10:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| KazooSkinsFan wrote: | | SkinsJock wrote: | | Sorry guys - can not agree with you |
You don't know what you're talking about. A good receiver is actually a glaring need that we have. There's no way we pass taking Blackmon because he's a receiver. If we can't get Luck or Griffin and he's there, he'd be an excellent choice. With that high a pick, you have to take a player with talent. We can address needs later in the draft and with free agency and it makes a lot more sense then drafting to fill a need with that high a pick. You pass on the best players and you end up with wash outs who don't fill the need at all. |
I'll go overboard:
| DarthMonk wrote: | | Quote: |
Suppose your philosophy is "Best availible player"... If best availible grades out at 2 selections better than the best player at a position of severe need, what do you do? Ignore your need? |
Yes. Either that or you trade down.
| Quote: | | Suppose you are intent on picking only players of need... |
Generally a bad idea but trade down. Grab the best player but if you have greats already at that position and don't want another trade down. Don't waste the pick on an inferior player just because you "need" that position.
I've said it once and I'll say it again:
Here's the best example I ever heard - from the book America's Game - Page 337:
The 1979 draft found the Dallas Cowboys preparing for the beginning of a new era, with Roger Staubach nearing the end of his career. His understudy Danny White, who'd come over after the demise of the WFL, was the heir apparent, and the young Glenn Carano, an unpolished but physically gifted thrower form the University of Nevada-Las Vegas was seen as a potential diamond in the rough. In the 3rd round, as the Cowboys' selection came up, Tom Landry looked at the Cowboys' master list, and did something he had rarely done in his 19 years of drafting. Instead of taking the top player on the Cowboys' chart, he went "against the board" and selected not the highest-rated player but the next-highest-ranked one, a rangy tight end named Doug Cosbie, who would go on to enjoy a productive career and provide further evidence that the Cowboys were able to find a diamond in the rough.
On the next selection, the 82nd, San Francisco chose the very player who had been on the top of the Cowboys' board, the player Dallas had passed on because, in Landry's words, "We don't really need another quarterback."
His name was Joe Montana.
Thank God they blew that one!
I'll go so far as to say ALWAYS TAKE TALENT OVER NEED IN THE DRAFT. AMASS ALL THE YOUNG TALENT YOU CAN. YOUR SO-CALLED NEEDS CAN BE FILLED BY GUYS WHO WANT TO COME PLAY WITH YOUR TALENT.
This is especially true for the 'Skins since we have SO MANY HOLES TO FILL.
DarthMonk (call me Vinny if you want - good philosophy horribly implemented by him) |
Now this is a year or two old and the man I was going back-and-forth with was Countertrey and he made a good point I left out about how "rigidly adhering to any philosophy is stupid" and it is hard to disagree with that but as a rule I strongly feel talent is the way to go. Yet I am saying we need a QB. So what I have to ask myself is how big a talent is RGIII and with regards to this #6, how talented is Blackmon in relation to the other guys who will be available? (regardless of position) If we end up on the clock at #6 I hope we will have already signed a guy like Bowe and then trade down. We showed last year that this is not as difficult to do as some might think. |
|
| Back to top |
|
KazooSkinsFan
kazoo
Joined: 05 Sep 2004
Posts: 10021
Location: Kazmania
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2012 10:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| DarthMonk wrote: | | If we end up on the clock at #6 I hope we will have already signed a guy like Bowe and then trade down. We showed last year that this is not as difficult to do as some might think. |
It's not easy or difficult, it's opportunistic. Someone has to WANT your pick enough to give you value for it. You should always be open to it, you should never count on it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
SkinsJock
08 Champ
Joined: 24 Feb 2004
Posts: 11522
Location: New England
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2012 8:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'd love to be able to take the best available player at #6 even if that happens to be a WR or a player at a position of need - we have many
IF I'm the FO, I'd do anything possible to trade out of this pick
This FO WILL find a way to trade down from this pick - unless it's for Luck or RGIII |
|
| Back to top |
|
Link
|
|
|
Countertrey
the 'mudge
Joined: 09 Jan 2004
Posts: 12771
Location: Curmudgeon Corner, Maine
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2012 9:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| KazooSkinsFan wrote: | | DarthMonk wrote: | | If we end up on the clock at #6 I hope we will have already signed a guy like Bowe and then trade down. We showed last year that this is not as difficult to do as some might think. |
It's not easy or difficult, it's opportunistic. Someone has to WANT your pick enough to give you value for it. You should always be open to it, you should never count on it. |
Perfectly stated... I have been trying to frame this for a year... and you did it for me. People talk about trading down as though it's as easy as shopping at Staples. It's not. You MUST own a pick that someone else wants badly enough to give you value for it.
Sometimes it happens... sometimes it doesnt. We do know that, unless the player that MS wants is there, he is open to a value offer for the pick.
I'm good with that... seems he knew what he was doing last year... |
|
| Back to top |
|
Chris Luva Luva
---
Joined: 28 Jul 2003
Posts: 17810
Location: AJT
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2012 10:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| KazooSkinsFan wrote: | | It's not easy or difficult, it's opportunistic. Someone has to WANT your pick enough to give you value for it. You should always be open to it, you should never count on it. |
Perfectly stated. |
|
| Back to top |
|
riggofan
Hog
Joined: 13 Jan 2004
Posts: 2949
Location: Montclair, Virginia
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2012 12:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| One other point about that #6 pick: if you can trade down and pick up some more picks that is awesome. But if you have to stay at 6, I think the new rookie pay scale changes your options. I think you can "reach" on a player because the money involved isn't so outlandish anymore. |
|
| Back to top |
|
SkinsJock
08 Champ
Joined: 24 Feb 2004
Posts: 11522
Location: New England
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2012 1:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Chris Luva Luva wrote: | | KazooSkinsFan wrote: | | It's not easy or difficult, it's opportunistic. Someone has to WANT your pick enough to give you value for it. You should always be open to it, you should never count on it. |
Perfectly stated. |
totally agree also
the FO will have a player available at the #6 spot that will help them complete a trade deal
I'm not against using the pick - HOPEFULLY, this FO only trades down NOT up |
|
| Back to top |
|
SkinsJock
08 Champ
Joined: 24 Feb 2004
Posts: 11522
Location: New England
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2012 4:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| KazooSkinsFan wrote: | | You don't know what you're talking about. A good receiver is actually a glaring need that we have. There's no way we pass taking Blackmon because he's a receiver. If we can't get Luck or Griffin and he's there, he'd be an excellent choice. With that high a pick, you have to take a player with talent.. |
Maybe I don't know what I'm talking about 
Be interesting to see this 'glaring need' at WR explained AFTER we bring in at least 1 and possibly 2 WR thru free agency
last I heard we will have the opportunity to bring in free agents BEFORE the draft
I'd expect a number of offensive glaring needs to be addressed through free agency
maybe Blackmon is there at #6 - gotta be a number of teams that will want him 
we're NOT taking him because we've either traded down OR do not see him as the incredible player that you do  |
|
| Back to top |
|
Link
|
|
|
| Page 2 of 3 | All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
