Barron bait?

[pinetopred]

Now that was funny I read 3 paragraphs talking about how good our defense could be if we keep building it, I agree with that. But then you throw out WR as a position we should draft, after basically saying we shouldn't draft a G because our QB situation is unsettled. I don't understand that at all why would a WR help our QB's and a G won't. I don't think you can have that both ways, you want us to draft Floyd our D just say that. I would hate it if we draft Floyd, because I don't see a need there with the QB play we have, a G would help both our QB's more then any WR could at this point but thats just my opinion.

 

[JeffGollin]

I would hate it if we draft Floyd, because I don't see a need there with the QB play we have, a G would help both our QB's more then any WR could at this point but thats just my opinion.

The logic behind drafting Floyd (assuming he's that good) has merit but is not an end-all.

The three biggest variables that determine a QB's survival behind the LOS are:

1. Pass blocking

2. How well receivers separate and get open (& then catch the freakin' ball)

3. The QB himself.

Therefore - The right offensive lineman or wide receiver in the draft would presumably make our QB's play better. It then becomes a value judgment within the Cardinal War Room.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

Id rather bust out on a skill position than busting out with a guard. Lets be real, BPA's are not created equal. If the next Janikowski was sitting there would you take him? Guy can drill field goals his own 60. Of course not. Thats exactly how I feel about "Top guards" because thats a ridiculous notion.

The fact that pro bowl, best in the game, guards can be found in late round is just a testament to good draft homework. Thats why whiz and company get paid the way they do to find those guys, not just take the easy to find, obvious ones like David, who come at a very steep price (a 1st round pick).

Having a solid pocket is fun, do we really have use for one? We barely even need to have a Oline out there at all with Kolb. Guy snaps and boogies. Skelton, yes, itd be good for but as long as theres this question of "who's our QB?" we shouldnt invest so many resources into protecting that unknown.

Next, windows. We have an elite D in position right now. We are a few pieces away from Ravens status playoffs bound defense. We went 7 out of our last 9 games because of defense. 100%. We cant be wasting time messing with our insignificant Guard postitions right now, we are within reach of greatness. Maybe this year we take David in the 1st. Maybe next year DWash walks and we have need at LB. Then Adrian retires. Then PP blows out his ACL. Then Kerry Rhodes becomes a full time interior decorator. My point is RIGHT NOW, 2012 season, we can add a player in this draft thatll make us contenders with this group we have right now.

Dont believe me, look at the Phoenix Suns and tell me windows dont close. We were within reach of multiple (MULTIPLE) titles at one point, but couldnt get past the Spurs and Lakers. Why? not enough defensive talent.

G is not a major need. We have the ability to built something elite THIS year by taking a WR or CB or LB, or whatever. Someone who makes a major, visible impact. The 2nd half of last year showed a team that was a legit contender. No homer. Im serious. Superbowl quality play in that 2nd half. We beat the nearly undefeated 49ers, dont forget. A Michael Floyd, or Melvin Ingram or, hell, even a Richardson, might be the final piece to making a push for it.

Win NOW mentality. Because we have a window right now, believe it or not. If we pass it up to "invest in our future", thatll be what weve been doing for the entire history of this team. Its always "next year". Yeah well next year we have new needs and variables change. I like David, I would take him any other time, but not THIS year.

Well, the emergence of our 'D' had to do with inculcating a new scheme, and the emergence of players who were in many cases not selected in the first round. So, given your premise, quality contributors in every role can be found at any point in the draft.

As such, I will go with BPA (at a position of need) in the first round, if DeCastro or Glenn are available. If not, then I'll go with a pure BPA based on the Cards draft board. If it's a Olb, Corner, Safety, Wideout - I'll be fine with the odds of having a year one contributor.

If it's O-line, we will have all of our projected starters on 4 or 5 year deals; not insignificant in the grand scheme IMO.

 

[Bodha]

Well, the emergence of our 'D' had to do with inculcating a new scheme, and the emergence of players who were in many cases not selected in the first round. So, given your premise, quality contributors in every role can be found at any point in the draft.

Just think how first round talent could add to it since non-1st rounders were able to dominate with it. See what I mean, potentially elite D.

And I already said WRs, CBs, OLB, are found in the 1st. Guards and kickers are the only position where you can find pro bowlers in the 5th.

Hoenstly tell me you can find a shut down revis-island like CB in the 4th round?

How about the same scenario but a guard? Easy, I already listed about 5 of them earlier, some of which were undrafted altogether. Show me another position where that happens that often.

Now that was funny I read 3 paragraphs talking about how good our defense could be if we keep building it, I agree with that. But then you throw out WR as a position we should draft, after basically saying we shouldn't draft a G because our QB situation is unsettled. I don't understand that at all why would a WR help our QB's and a G won't. I don't think you can have that both ways, you want us to draft Floyd our D just say that. I would hate it if we draft Floyd, because I don't see a need there with the QB play we have, a G would help both our QB's more then any WR could at this point but thats just my opinion.

A WR would help the QB situation because (in floyd) you have a giant target. Despite the QB issues, Larry still puts up numbers and wins us games. A WR would help alot on offense.

We cant just forget about our offense. Ill stick with my Ravens example because it fits the best - They get to the playoffs every year on defense alone. (Comparative to how our D got us 7 wins). But they fail because they have a weak offense. So do we. However, with Larry and Floyd, they could be the difference makers. They could be that little extra who does keep us winning when the Ravens would get bounced.

Our D is courrently VERY good. Thats enough to win us alot of games. We have a chance to make it elite, which is virtually guaranteed playoffs.

Look at the 49ers last year. Defense. Got them to the playoffs behind Alex smith and no WRs. What could we do with no QB and elite WRs? They did pretty well (we beat them once, dont forget), I think we could too.

and no a Guard will not help our QB this year. Because look at the line. Levi and undetermined (proabaly Snyder) RT. You think 1 interior lineman is going to make the slightest difference (THIS YEAR)? Of course not. Maybe in 2-3 when we replace our tackles. But like I said, by then the Windown will be closed. Maybe this awesome D is gone because certain players are gone. David might help get an extra 20 yards per game for Beanie. He might prevent 1 more sack per game. Thats inconsequential. A CB causes a turnover, a OLB a sack in a critical situation, a WR can put up 100 yards and 2 TD's.

With our D preventing the other team from ever scoring, we need some offensive firepower. A kickass #2 WR would be great. Remember Q and Larry did pretty well PRe-Warner. now combine them with an elite defense. Tell me youd pass that up for a guard who might contribute in 3 years only after we add 2 or 3 more players around him.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

Id rather bust out on a skill position than busting out with a guard. Lets be real, BPA's are not created equal. If the next Janikowski was sitting there would you take him? Guy can drill field goals his own 60. Of course not. Thats exactly how I feel about "Top guards" because thats a ridiculous notion.

I'd have to strongly consider it. The kicker is probably the 2nd most important player on the team after QB. They can be directly responsible for 2 or 3 games per year, if not more. Janikowski was one of the best picks the Raiders have made in the past 15 years.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

Just think how first round talent could add to it since non-1st rounders were able to dominate with it. See what I mean, potentially elite D.
.

May come as a surprise to you, but this site has more than its fair share of people whose brain pans are not half full. We can follow your simple linear thinking without the condescending prodd, and we don't need a moderator who both asks and answers his own questions.

Told you what I thought, and how I'd approach the first round.

 

[Chopper0080]

Id rather bust out on a skill position than busting out with a guard. Lets be real, BPA's are not created equal. If the next Janikowski was sitting there would you take him? Guy can drill field goals his own 60. Of course not. Thats exactly how I feel about "Top guards" because thats a ridiculous notion.

But kickers are specialty players while OGs play and contribute to every offensive snap. Players that play the majority of the units snaps are more impactful than players who play less.

And yes OGs can be found later in the draft, but there are several other positions where that holds true as well. In my opinion, if you can identify a once in a decade talent in the first round, you almost have to take that player because he has a better chance of helping your team for a longer period of time than a player who has been graded as average.

 

[kerouac9]

Don't discount the Pats using their plethora of high picks to trade UP for a pass rusher, S like Barron, or a DL player like Fletcher Cox, and then trading their other 1st for a 2nd/3rd and future 1. Hybrid guys like Ingram and Upshaw might be on their radar as they look to be off the board by the time they pick. Same goes if a solid vertical threat is still around at WR or OT help as Matt Light might retire.

I'm going to go ahead and discount that possibility until the Pats--you know--actually trade up in the first round to select someone.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

I'm going to go ahead and discount that possibility until the Pats--you know--actually trade up in the first round to select someone.

Did it with Mayo, if I remember correctly.

 

[kerouac9]

Did it with Mayo, if I remember correctly.

I believe they actually traded BACK to get Mayo.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_NFL_Draft

No. 7: Patriots to Saints. New England traded its first- and fifth-round selections (No. 7 and 164) to New Orleans for New Orleans' first- and third-round selections (No. 10 and 78).

They trade DOWN to get Mayo.

 

[joeshmo]

Patriots haven't trade up in the first round for a while. I think they did it for Ty Warren but that was almost a decade ago.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

I believe they actually traded BACK to get Mayo.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_NFL_Draft



They trade DOWN to get Mayo.

Well, that worked out!

 

[kerouac9]

Patriots haven't trade up in the first round for a while. I think they did it for Ty Warren but that was almost a decade ago.

Yup. Traded up one spot with a sixth-round pick. That 13th overall pick went through a lot of hands--who would've thought that it'd be a good idea to give up a first-round pick to sign Laverneus Coles to an RFA tender?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_NFL_Draft

 

[Bodha]

I'd have to strongly consider it. The kicker is probably the 2nd most important player on the team after QB. They can be directly responsible for 2 or 3 games per year, if not more. Janikowski was one of the best picks the Raiders have made in the past 15 years.

Not gonna lie, Id consider it too. lol

May come as a surprise to you, but this site has more than its fair share of people whose brain pans are not half full. We can follow your simple linear thinking without the condescending prodd, and we don't need a moderator who both asks and answers his own questions.

Told you what I thought, and how I'd approach the first round.

Where did this come from. Thought we were having a civil conversation now youre acting like youre on your period.

Dont get your feelings hurt. Youre all mad because we have different opinions, I never once attacked yours. What is this condescending prod? "See what i mean" is a figure of speech like "You know?" Dont be so got damn sensitive.

 

[Big Deal]