My Draft Availability

[Stout]

Do you think there is another edge player maybe a notch below Anderson that would also garner us a guard, cb and DT?

A notch or two below, sure, but then we're moving away from the stud which, IMO, is a terrible idea. You draft the stud when he's there, especially at a position of need, 10 times out of 10. Don't Suggs it.

Is it possible, though? Sure. I just don't like the odds. Is it possible to trade back far enough so we can get a top edge, a C, a guard, a CB, and a DT? Yeah, to trade back far enough to get an additional 3 top picks this year means we ain't getting a good edge.

 

[Solar7]

My availability for the draft: too drunk to care before pick #3 rolls around so I don't have to feel bad about whatever we end up doing.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

My availability for the draft: too drunk to care before pick #3 rolls around so I don't have to feel bad about whatever we end up doing.

Too drunk at pick 3? Gangsta.

 

[Stout]

My availability for the draft: too drunk to care before pick #3 rolls around so I don't have to feel bad about whatever we end up doing.

My availability for the draft: Already sleepy when we pick but then will wake up with anger if we trade back past #4.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

I hear you. However we don’t know how the draft will unfold. We have some cap space and there are still some good free agents out there to fill in some holes after the draft. There will also be some players cut come June and prior to the season.


For instance( example only) let’s say after the draft we still need a cb. Griffin, Ya Sin and Callahan are still out there. If we don’t get a guard that we need a guy like Dalton Risner is still available. If we don’t get the edge player maybe a guy like Leonard Floyd or Ingram could fill in for a year.

Realize I’m not saying this is the plan but it makes some kind of sense.

Sigh

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

The old keeping the powder dry approach lol Not lol-ing at you, just at our same old, same old approach.

…that never pans out.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

My two big things is getting the top guy at a position of need--clearly, without sensible argument, Anderson, to me--and getting stud young starting C. If we can't get a C in this draft, we never will. Do that, do those two simple things well within their power to do, and MO will have gotten a solid start to their first draft.

Right. And there’s a guy at each position in the range of our picks to fulfill those goals.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

Do you think there is another edge player maybe a notch below Anderson that would also garner us a guard, cb and DT?

No. Particularly when you consider the odds. Lesser player means lesser chance of success. Additional players raises the chance of at least one of them hitting but the overall odds of draft picks busting makes the pupu platter less likely to make an impact than the guy who is closer to a sure thing.

 

[WisconsinCard]

A notch or two below, sure, but then we're moving away from the stud which, IMO, is a terrible idea. You draft the stud when he's there, especially at a position of need, 10 times out of 10. Don't Suggs it.

Is it possible, though? Sure. I just don't like the odds. Is it possible to trade back far enough so we can get a top edge, a C, a guard, a CB, and a DT? Yeah, to trade back far enough to get an additional 3 top picks this year means we ain't getting a good edge.

The thing is if we drafted Suggs he most likely doesn't become the Suggs we know from Baltimore. We played a 4-3 back in those days. He would have been a more athletic Calvin Pace. IMO

The thing about Anderson that you have not addressed is do you believe he is not scheme dependent? Because I do, I believe he'll be a stud in an odd man front, but I don't believe he is the guy is your going to run and even front.