Dont'a Hightower: What's the story?

[Chopper0080]

Obviously, I very much agree with you. The guy is not only a 3 down player but can switch between ILB, and OLB at the drop of a hat.

Between

Acho - OLB
Schofield - OLB

Bradley - ILB/OLB
Hightower - ILB/OLB

Washington - ILB
Lenon - ILB

Walker - Special teams

You have a pretty solid, and versitile linebacking core.

But, the current question is, Is Hightower the #13 BPA in the draft at that time ?

I don't know. I am trying to get a top 20 players together, and it has been rough.

If we traded back with Cleve or Cincy, I would totally be on board with taking Hightower because of his versatility, but I can't see it at #13.

 

[Chopper0080]

this.

The Ravens have a ton of needs, many more critical than ILB. Their secondary is bad, they need another OLB, they might need another OG, and also need an OT.

I'm not saying that they won't take him, but they have far more pressing needs at this point in time.

Pats won't take him, and the Giants might, but I have them tabbed to take Kuechly.

 

[Chopper0080]

I'm not sure we have a huge need at OLB anymore--and I'm not sure that's where the draft value will be at 13. Could we get better? Hell yes. But, I think the draft projects for better intersections of need and value than OLB.

Acho and Scho look to be growing into at least servicable starters and I think Haggans will be back as an effective spot player.

I think there's a very good chance that our selection at 13 is one of these guys:

OG -DeCastro
OT - Martin, Reiff
ILB - Keuchly

Reports are coming in that Kuechly is a 4-3 MLB only. Does not fit in a 3-4 due to his size, and struggles to get off blocks. I haven't seen enough games to say this is for sure, but that is the talk.

In regards to Kuechly, I think that this board over values the ILB position in general, and is projecting a very good 4-3 player into a poor fit in a 3-4 system. Just my opinion.

 

[Chopper0080]

My favorite LB in the draft. He is a team leader and leader of one of the best collegiate D’s of all time. His D line while would have been good without him made them even more dominate because he was the one putting them in place during pre-snap reads to be their most successful. Same goes for his LB’s around him. I like guys that make their teammates around them better. He made guys around him better because of his pre-snap instincts and leadership. Comes out of the box already knowing how to play in a 3-4 D and how others around him will play in a 3-4 D. It’s something that will take a normal rookie a few years to learn. An inside LB thumper that can also rush the passer, second on the team in Sacks plus QB Hurries. Not a guy that gets by in coverage because of his athletic ability but because of his smarts and technique. Watch him on tape and the while the pass rush sure did help him in coverage, coaches were still comfortable with having him cover slot receivers, of which did a pretty good job of manning up on them and playing in zone. Because of this kid’s ability to rush the passer from inside or out and his smart play in dropping off into coverage he is definitely more than just a 2 down LB IMO.

I Agree which is why I prefer him to Kuechly, but still do not think that either is top 15 in this draft.

 

[Duckjake]

If we traded back with Cleve or Cincy, I would totally be on board with taking Hightower because of his versatility, but I can't see it at #13.

Question: If he's solid talent what difference does it make if you take him at 13 or 22 with the new CBA Rookie contracts?

Is the talent drop off really that huge over those 9-15 picks?

In looking back at past drafts in some cases it is in others its not.

 

[kerouac9]

Question: If he's solid talent what difference does it make if you take him at 13 or 22 with the new CBA Rookie contracts?

Is the talent drop off really that huge over those 9-15 picks?

In looking back at past drafts in some cases it is in others its not.

This. You have to make the argument not that a player is worthy of the investment (because it's not really an investment because of the new CBA), but more because there are 4-5 more players that you'd have ahead of him.

I think that the new CBA has really changed the idea of "value" at the top of the draft. Do I want to invest $12 million a year in a Top 5 guard or inside linebacker? Of course not. But because of the new CBA, I don't really have to worry about squandering a whole bunch of money at a limited-impact position high in the draft.

This frees teams to draft BPA, and what will color the selection is the need for a player (in our case, a desperate need for help at left tackle once Levi Brown signs with the... let's say Bills.).

 

[Monty]

Question: If he's solid talent what difference does it make if you take him at 13 or 22 with the new CBA Rookie contracts?

Is the talent drop off really that huge over those 9-15 picks?

In looking back at past drafts in some cases it is in others its not.

For me its a matter of whether I think that he is the 13th best player in the draft. That's where value comes in. I dont think Hightower is the 13th best player and therefore I think better players will be available when we pick. So if a Michael Brockers or a Trent Richardson is available there (not saying they will be just saying they may be) I'd think taking Hightower would be a mistake.

Some would argue you take the BPA (i.e. Brockers or Richardson) there but in such a situation I would probably trade back with a team that wants those two players more and take Hightower a bit later where he will be available, thereby picking up a few more picks hence getting better value out of the #13 pick.

 

[Duckjake]

For me its a matter of whether I think that he is the 13th best player in the draft. That's where value comes in. I dont think Hightower is the 13th best player and therefore I think better players will be available when we pick. So if a Michael Brockers or a Trent Richardson is available there (not saying they will be just saying they may be) I'd think taking Hightower would be a mistake.

Some would argue you take the BPA (i.e. Brockers or Richardson) there but in such a situation I would probably trade back and take Hightower a bit later where he will be available and pick up a few more picks hence getting better value out of the #13 pick.

That of course brings in the risk that he won't be available. A very important and intriguing aspect of draft planning. What team is there that might take the guy we want and when?

I can see the value in trading back to take a guy especially now that I think there will be more trades as teams won't be as hesitant to move up into the higher levels and the huge dollars that formerly accompanied them to get a guy they really want.

This is a really good situation for teams with higher draft picks. They can try to trade out and if they don't get the offer they feel is right can simply take the guy they were targeting without breaking the bank.

 

[Monty]

That of course brings in the risk that he won't be available. A very important and intriguing aspect of draft planning. What team is there that might take the guy we want and when?

I can see the value in trading back to take a guy especially now that I think there will be more trades as teams won't be as hesitant to move up into the higher levels and the huge dollars that formerly accompanied them to get a guy they really want.

This is a really good situation for teams with higher draft picks. They can try to trade out and if they don't get the offer they feel is right can simply take the guy they were targeting without breaking the bank.

You are right that you are taking that risk. Of course there is no knowing what other teams are thinking (even for front offices who at best can have educated guesses about other teams intentions).

The draft of course is fraught with risk. Even in taking the best player in the whole draft it is a gamble as several other players taken may turn out to be better than him as has regularly proven to the case. Every team has to weigh up the risk and rewards that will come with the decisions they make and evaluate what their best strategy is and that counts for trading back and sticking to BPA as well.

 

[Pariah]

Question: If he's solid talent what difference does it make if you take him at 13 or 22 with the new CBA Rookie contracts?

Is the talent drop off really that huge over those 9-15 picks?

In looking back at past drafts in some cases it is in others its not.

I think the reason you don't take a player significantly before they're projected is because you could then trade out of your spot with a team that wants a player projected to go where you currently sit.

JMHO

 

[kerouac9]

That of course brings in the risk that he won't be available. A very important and intriguing aspect of draft planning. What team is there that might take the guy we want and when?

I can see the value in trading back to take a guy especially now that I think there will be more trades as teams won't be as hesitant to move up into the higher levels and the huge dollars that formerly accompanied them to get a guy they really want.

This is a really good situation for teams with higher draft picks. They can try to trade out and if they don't get the offer they feel is right can simply take the guy they were targeting without breaking the bank.

I don't think that you can do this. Otherwise you end up with Calvin Pace and Bryant Johnson when you expect to get Jerome McDougle. I think that you look at your draft board at #13 and see eight guys that you'd be happy to pick, but no one with a pressing argument is above the others.

Then you trade down seven picks, knowing that you're going to get one of the guys that you really want, but also knowing that you pick up a--say--third-round pick in the process.

You can't say, "Well, we're going to trade down from 13 to 22 and get Cordy Glenn" when you know that some team could easily trade to 20 knowing that you have a gaping need (I think this is why the Cards chose Levi Brown #5 overall--because they had a dire need for an LT and couldn't get a deal that would keep them close enough not to have to choose Joe Staley also too high).

I get the allure of trading down, and the allure of trading up, but you can't fall in love with a guy and say, "Only if we find ourselves at 16 overall." If he's a guy you love at 16th overall but not three spots before, then you don't love him THAT much.

 

[Monty]

The issue with Hightower isn’t that I think he is only worthy of a #22 pick, rather it is that there will be players available at #13 that I rate higher than him. e.g. I rate Richardson higher than Hightower so if both are available at the #13 pick (and knowing that RB is not an area of need) I would look to see if there teams that need a player like Richardson and try to play them off against each other in order to trade down.

If we were to trade back to say #20 I would then reassess my board again and I take Hightower there if I think he is the best player on the board at that point.

 

[splitsecond]

soooooo slllloooooowwwww

 

[Buckybird]

I think the reason you don't take a player significantly before they're projected is because you could then trade out of your spot with a team that wants a player projected to go where you currently sit.

JMHO

And then you probably lose the player you want or feel is the best for your team, it's a catch 22. Every teams boards are stacked differantly based on what they perceive & how they fit that teams scheme & of course need. Bellicheat, the Cards, the Gmen, CBS sportsline & Mel Kipers boards are probably dramatically differant in how they view BPA.

 

[Pariah]

And then you probably lose the player you want or feel is the best for your team, it's a catch 22.

Why "probably"? It's a risk, sure, but if you don't think the player you want will be there, then you don't do it.

 

[Chopper0080]

Question: If he's solid talent what difference does it make if you take him at 13 or 22 with the new CBA Rookie contracts?

Is the talent drop off really that huge over those 9-15 picks?

In looking back at past drafts in some cases it is in others its not.

The reason I wouldn't take him at #13 is there are 13 players that I would prefer over him. That being said, if we placed more of a priority in trading back and acquiring picks, I would be comfortable taking him in the 20's. Would he be there if we traded back? Maybe, maybe not. The trick is to not get focused too much on one player when trading back. IF we did trade back, you would target a group of players ala Hightower, Mark Barron, Mercilus, Cordy Glenn and Kendall Wright and hope one of those players is still around. I could see Hightower being one of the best options given this scenario.

 

[Chopper0080]

And then you probably lose the player you want or feel is the best for your team, it's a catch 22. Every teams boards are stacked differantly based on what they perceive & how they fit that teams scheme & of course need. Bellicheat, the Cards, the Gmen, CBS sportsline & Mel Kipers boards are probably dramatically differant in how they view BPA.

That is why you target a handful of players rather than just one guy. Or, if you did target one guy and he is gone, trade back again. You just can't afford to get stuck at a spot you don't want to be at.

Keep in mind the Cardinals do not have a history of doing this.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

The reason I wouldn't take him at #13 is there are 13 players that I would prefer over him. That being said, if we placed more of a priority in trading back and acquiring picks, I would be comfortable taking him in the 20's. Would he be there if we traded back? Maybe, maybe not. The trick is to not get focused too much on one player when trading back. IF we did trade back, you would target a group of players ala Hightower, Mark Barron, Mercilus, Cordy Glenn and Kendall Wright and hope one of those players is still around. I could see Hightower being one of the best options given this scenario.

Just noted a Tweet that Coach Grimm is going to Cordy Glenn's Pro Day.

 

[Buckybird]

Just noted a Tweet that Coach Grimm is going to Cordy Glenn's Pro Day.

Ohhhhh my...not again!!! Leonard Brown Part III

If they take him at #13 Michael & his daddy should just close down shop & push the stadium into the Grand Canyon.

 

[Buckybird]

Ohhhhh my...not again!!! Leonard Brown Part III

If they take him at #13 Michael & his daddy should just close down shop & push the stadium into the Grand Canyon.

Like Mitch said yesterday, he knew the Cards might want him given his size & athleticism

 

[Crazy Canuck]

Like Mitch said yesterday, he knew the Cards might want him given his size & athleticism

1. He's a highly regarded guard/tackle on the right side and we need one.

2. He may be a target if we have an opportunity to move down slightly on draft day and grab another pick.

 

[Buckybird]

1. He's a highly regarded guard/tackle on the right side and we need one.

2. He may be a target if we have an opportunity to move down slightly on draft day and grab another pick.

You're right, but IMO if we've got a chance to have an impact player at #13 we've got to take him. I wouldn't think we would get more than a 3rd at the most. Guess we won't know how it shapes up until the draft in April.

 

[kerouac9]

You're right, but IMO if we've got a chance to have an impact player at #13 we've got to take him. I wouldn't think we would get more than a 3rd at the most. Guess we won't know how it shapes up until the draft in April.

We won't know until draft day, but do you really think that an impact player is going to get all the way to #13? Assuming that Luck, RG3, and Tannehill all go in the Top 12, along with IMO locks like Kalil, Blackmon, Claiborne, and Couples, the best game-changing prospect that possibly falls to us is Michael Brockers.

I salivate over that possibility, but with the impact that a guy like Suh is having, I don't see it happening. Then we're looking at the 2nd or maybe 3rd best OT on the board in Reiff and/or Martin, plus top-tier prospects and secondary positions like DeCastro and/or Keuchley. We'll be stuck in a red-chip muddle.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

You're right, but IMO if we've got a chance to have an impact player at #13 we've got to take him. I wouldn't think we would get more than a 3rd at the most. Guess we won't know how it shapes up until the draft in April.

At this point, I think that this draft is going to be wild with trades.

Effectively under the new CBA there is no real cost prohibition to making football driven deals, and the old trade chart is no longer applicable.

You trade want you want and get what you can.

While, as in past years, one can guess and be reasonably accurate as to the top players off the board, it will be near impossible to get the right order given the likelihood of multiple trades.

Versatility (as in the ability to play more than one position) is of real value and impact. Someone like Glenn could help allow a team to dress just seven 0-lineman on game day.

 

[football karma]

We won't know until draft day, but do you really think that an impact player is going to get all the way to #13? Assuming that Luck, RG3, and Tannehill all go in the Top 12, along with IMO locks like Kalil, Blackmon, Claiborne, and Couples, the best game-changing prospect that possibly falls to us is Michael Brockers.

the draft is whacky

Nick Fairley at this time last year was looking like a top 5 kinda guy

he went #13.

Robert Quinn was being projected in the top 10 or so. He went #14.


I get in retrospect that the draft probably got it right: both were good rookies, but neither had an "impact" rookie season. But relative to expectations ( again, amateur produced expectations) they slipped farther than expected.