#451
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
A starting O-Line of 'Stanzo / Mewhort / Kelly / Slauson / Howard with depth of Haeg / Good / Bond / Clark / Vujnovich is really pretty darn solid. That is replacing 3 of our "starters" from last year with upgrades and if they can stay healthy, represents a really solid potential line. That said, the only potential long-term starter of the "new" group is Mewhort if he can stay healthy and get back to being a quality starter like he was early. Both Slauson and Howard are 1 year rentals whom let the team get to next year's draft for long-term replacements or allows them to pick guys this year who need a year of maturity / seasoning in the 3rd / 4th rounds to hopefully slide into starting spots next year. Walk Worthy,
__________________
============== Thad The future is so bright; I gotta triple up! |
#452
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
And some run blocking will keep the other O off the field. If the plan is to rebuild around Luck, you best invest in his well being, plus with the D they've built in Jackoffville you best get some offense on the field. |
#453
|
||||
|
||||
I am a big fan of improving the front 7. Mostly edge and LB with the current roster.
|
#454
|
||||
|
||||
If Chubb is not there at #6, I am hoping that Ballard can do one more trade down to #8, #9 or #10, pick up one more 2nd round pick for the compensation and then pick one of (in order of preference):
LB Termaine Edmunds LB RoquanSmith CB Denzel Ward SS Derwin James That would give us, say we traded with CHI, the following picks in the 2nd round: #36 overall (4th in 2nd round) #37 overall (5th in 2nd round) #39 overall (7th in 2nd round) #49 overall (17th in 2nd round) 5 guys in the top 50, if picked well, would definantely give a jump start to our youth re-build. Chubb is worth the #6 pick but otherwise? I would love to trade down one more time for one of these "2nd tier" guys (i.e. not Chubb, Nelson or Barkley). Walk Worthy
__________________
============== Thad The future is so bright; I gotta triple up! |
The Following User Says Thank You to sherck For This Useful Post: | ||
VeveJones007 (04-16-2018) |
#455
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#456
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#457
|
||||
|
||||
That would be pretty nice, I would want at least a future 2 and some change.
|
#458
|
||||
|
||||
From an NFL.com article published on the 16th written by Daniel Jeremaih and Bucky Brooks (located here):
Quote:
A. The only one of the "elite 3" non-QBs left on the board after pick 5 is Nelson. B. If Colts trade out and someone picks up the last of the 4 big QBs with the #6 pick, then Nelson, Edmunds and Smith could be the next 3 picks off the board at 7/8/9. C. Secondary should then go from 10 to the early teens with Fitzpatrick, James, and Ward probably being the best defensive players left on the board. D. OT McGlincy should be somewhere in the mess of the top 15. E. DT Vea should be somewhere in the mess of the top 15. I think this all means that dropping to #12 means we will be "settling" for a Tier 1B players like Vea, McGlincey, Davenport, Alexander, Payne or LVE. After Barkley, I don't feel like there are any offensive skill players in high demand until the late teens. I think it will be QB and defense in the top 15 except for Nelson (and Barkley). Walk Worthy,
__________________
============== Thad The future is so bright; I gotta triple up! |
#459
|
||||
|
||||
Seems crazy to me that two MLB/ILBs could go in the top 10. Especially in a draft with so many QB prospects. I was ok trading w/Buffalo because I figured then we'd get at least a top defensive front 7 player and then a good starter prospect in the 20s. But we can't devalue talent for quantity. We need difference-makers.
|
#460
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|