| Author |
Message |
Irn-Bru
FanFromAnnapolis
Joined: 20 Mar 2004
Posts: 10627
Location: on the bandwagon
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 2:06 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| KazooSkinsFan wrote: | | Irn-Bru wrote: | | I think Polumbus gets replaced at RT this offseason |
I hope so, but I'm not so sure. We haven't wanted to put big bucks on the right side, and a lot of other teams don't either. |
I'm actually thinking draft pick there. We still have a 2nd, right? |
|
| Back to top |
|
KazooSkinsFan
kazoo
Joined: 05 Sep 2004
Posts: 10021
Location: Kazmania
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 2:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Irn-Bru wrote: | | KazooSkinsFan wrote: | | Irn-Bru wrote: | | I think Polumbus gets replaced at RT this offseason |
I hope so, but I'm not so sure. We haven't wanted to put big bucks on the right side, and a lot of other teams don't either. |
I'm actually thinking draft pick there. We still have a 2nd, right? |
If that worked out, then it would be great. It's hard to count on a certain position being worth a particular pick, but it could be a good spot to get a decent RT. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Deadskins
JSPB22
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
Posts: 14713
Location: Location, LOCATION!
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 3:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| KazooSkinsFan wrote: | | Irn-Bru wrote: | | KazooSkinsFan wrote: | | Irn-Bru wrote: | | I think Polumbus gets replaced at RT this offseason |
I hope so, but I'm not so sure. We haven't wanted to put big bucks on the right side, and a lot of other teams don't either. |
I'm actually thinking draft pick there. We still have a 2nd, right? |
If that worked out, then it would be great. It's hard to count on a certain position being worth a particular pick, but it could be a good spot to get a decent RT. |
There also has to be a player at that position valued high enough when we pick. That's a lot of convergence of ifs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Irn-Bru
FanFromAnnapolis
Joined: 20 Mar 2004
Posts: 10627
Location: on the bandwagon
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 3:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Deadskins wrote: | | There also has to be a player at that position valued high enough when we pick. That's a lot of convergence of ifs. |
It doesn't seem like much of a stretch at all to me. Looking at recent drafts, there have been more than a few OTs (especially right tackles) taken in the first half of the second round, several of whom are starters — though I admit knowing nothing about how good they are.
I advocate not drafting solely for position, but I think we are likely to be in a place where we can grab an OL starter with our highest pick. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Deadskins
JSPB22
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
Posts: 14713
Location: Location, LOCATION!
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 3:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah, but what I meant was that I think the OT would have to be #1 left on our draft board when our pick in the second round came along. BTW, I notice you have us picking in the first half of the 2nd (Booooooo  ) |
|
| Back to top |
|
Link
|
|
 |
Irn-Bru
FanFromAnnapolis
Joined: 20 Mar 2004
Posts: 10627
Location: on the bandwagon
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 4:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Deadskins wrote: | | Yeah, but what I meant was that I think the OT would have to be #1 left on our draft board when our pick in the second round came along. |
That's only a problem if our draft strategy is 100% to pick the best player available. Otherwise as long as one of the RTs ranks among the top names on the list — and I have to believe we'll be giving those prospects extra scrutinty — then we could bite.
As for a pure best player available strategy, I think there are problems with that way of doing things, and in practice no coach follows it because teams almost always select a player that happens to fill a need (and that can't just be coincidence).
| Quote: | | BTW, I notice you have us picking in the first half of the 2nd (Booooooo ) |
Well if the season ended today . . . 
I guess one never knows. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Deadskins
JSPB22
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
Posts: 14713
Location: Location, LOCATION!
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 4:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Irn-Bru wrote: | | As for a pure best player available strategy, I think there are problems with that way of doing things, and in practice no coach follows it because teams almost always select a player that happens to fill a need (and that can't just be coincidence). |
Don't know that I agree with that. That's how we wound up with Cousins in the first place.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
DarthMonk
DarthMonk
Joined: 16 Nov 2005
Posts: 3204
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 6:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| yupchagee wrote: | | Anybody know how/if Brown is rehabbing? |
Yoga, Pilates, Transcendental Meditation ... 
DarthMonk |
|
| Back to top |
|
Countertrey
the 'mudge
Joined: 09 Jan 2004
Posts: 12768
Location: Curmudgeon Corner, Maine
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 6:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Deadskins wrote: | | Yeah, but what I meant was that I think the OT would have to be #1 left on our draft board when our pick in the second round came along. BTW, I notice you have us picking in the first half of the 2nd (Booooooo ) |
And, if the #One OT on our board at that time in the 2nd round is rated as a bottom fourth round pick? |
|
| Back to top |
|
Deadskins
JSPB22
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
Posts: 14713
Location: Location, LOCATION!
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 6:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Countertrey wrote: | | Deadskins wrote: | | Yeah, but what I meant was that I think the OT would have to be #1 left on our draft board when our pick in the second round came along. BTW, I notice you have us picking in the first half of the 2nd (Booooooo ) |
And, if the #One OT on our board at that time in the 2nd round is rated as a bottom fourth round pick? |
Then no OT for you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Link
|
|
|
skinsfan#33
#33
Joined: 24 Jul 2004
Posts: 3875
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 6:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think you have to go into the draft with RT and CB position improved via FA. You can't sey yourself up for having to use a 2nd on a player that you really don't value that high.
Worse you don't end up addressing it in either the 2nd, 3rd, our FA.
The team has to many positions of need to not take the BPA in the draft. That is why you have to fill them before the draft. That is also why I douglas like to see the draft happen before FA, but that isn't going to change any time soon. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Countertrey
the 'mudge
Joined: 09 Jan 2004
Posts: 12768
Location: Curmudgeon Corner, Maine
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 9:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Deadskins wrote: | | Countertrey wrote: | | Deadskins wrote: | | Yeah, but what I meant was that I think the OT would have to be #1 left on our draft board when our pick in the second round came along. BTW, I notice you have us picking in the first half of the 2nd (Booooooo ) |
And, if the #One OT on our board at that time in the 2nd round is rated as a bottom fourth round pick? |
Then no OT for you. |
Correct... the importance of OT, and our clear need for one, probably means that we will be doing something to generate a pick that is adequate to get a quality starter. With a commodity as valuable as Bob clearly is, they will work to reduce the hits he takes when operating in or near the pocket. That will be their top priority, followed by DB help. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Page 2 of 2 | All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
