PDA

View Full Version : I think Kubiak may want to trade down


BuffSoldier
01-25-2006, 10:15 PM
He said our strenghts on offense were at QB with Carr, of course Andre is a strength at WR, and most importantly he said

" Dominique Davis, I think has run the ball as well as anyone in football the last couple of years."

"We surround those guys wtih people.... get better up front."

He may just be blowing smoke and trying not to say who he is going to draft, but it really seemed like he wasnt looking for anyone to replace any of our big three, but more find the pieces to go along with them.

One can only hope...:drool:

HoustonFrog
01-25-2006, 10:34 PM
Bob Allen just had him on the news and asked him Reggie or VY and he just said they were working on it but they were going to get a really good player and that they were both good kids. He had a big smile like a kid in a candy store. He also said they were going to hit free agency to get better.

edo783
01-25-2006, 10:47 PM
He also said they were going to hit free agency to get better.

That is interesting and a positive IMO.

bdiddy
01-25-2006, 10:56 PM
Pure Speculation.

I am hearing from sources that Kubiak is initially in the trade down camp. However, he is also said to think Bush is a very special player. I think that the Texans are trying to continue the talk of drafting a player with the number 1 pick to play up the pick's value.

Casserly is said to be exploring various trades, in one situation involving the Broncos: Broncos trade one of their two first round picks and their third round pick to move up to the 4-9 range in the first round. Texans then trade the number one pick for the new pick (4-9 range) and the Broncos remaining number one pick towards the bottom of the first round. In essence the Broncos would be giving up their two first round picks and a third round pick for the number one pick, w/ the Texans getting a top 10 (possibly 5) pick and an additional first rounder.

Is Bush better than D'Brick and a later first rounder? Tough call, I probably make the move.

Also, Kubiak wants to pay out the butt to try to get Nalen. He has little interest in Lepsis.

He is also said to LOVE Jabar Gaffney, thinks the guy runs great routes and has good hands. Although he lacks speed, Kubes wants him back badly.

McKinney is likely gone unless he significantly restructures his deal.

I am not sure what is going to happen, because neither is anyone else, but it will be interesting. This is a very fluid situation, so it is likely to change frequently.

Mario Williams
01-25-2006, 11:34 PM
Someone tell me whats so good about it, it just wouldn't please me and it's not exciting at all. It's not that fun watching a stud guy like Brick, instead of a stud guy QB/RB.

infantrycak
01-25-2006, 11:40 PM
Someone tell me whats so good about it, it just wouldn't please me and it's not exciting at all. It's not that fun watching a stud guy like Brick, instead of a stud guy QB/RB.

Because it is more exciting winning so if the team is better built to win by trading down then that is the more exciting option. Not that you are likely to accept any explanation for your question given your screen name.

Mario Williams
01-25-2006, 11:43 PM
Because it is more exciting winning so if the team is better built to win by trading down then that is the more exciting option. Not that you are likely to accept any explanation for your question given your screen name.

Ah, please don't judge me by my screen name, that is just extremely rude/ not nice. I will support the Texans by whoever they draft, but currently the trading down thing just doesn't sound appealing to me.

TexHorns
01-25-2006, 11:44 PM
Winning is exciting! If the Texans trade down and pick up enough good players to be competitive then it would be worth it. The debate is a matter of what is the best course of action that will produce wins.

ArlingtonTexan
01-25-2006, 11:47 PM
Just for the record, I did not notice any hints of Kubiak showing his hand towards trading down or Bush or anythng else.

WILLIEG
01-26-2006, 12:04 AM
I agree with you Arlingtontexan about the Texan franchise including GK not stating which way they were going. Until draft day or someone high up in the organization states who exactly they going to take I guess we will all have to wait a few more months.

CoastalTexan
01-26-2006, 12:51 AM
I think watching Walter Jones (who D'brick is compared too) make every DE look stupid is pretty exciting. And if I remember correctly his team is still playing.

BuffSoldier
01-26-2006, 07:13 AM
Someone tell me whats so good about it, it just wouldn't please me and it's not exciting at all. It's not that fun watching a stud guy like Brick, instead of a stud guy QB/RB.

From what Ive seen these past 4 years. Watching Carr stay on his feet is exciting enough for me.

HoustonFrog
01-26-2006, 08:29 AM
Someone tell me whats so good about it, it just wouldn't please me and it's not exciting at all. It's not that fun watching a stud guy like Brick, instead of a stud guy QB/RB.

Hey we agree on something. If you take Bush, a gamebreaker that we don't have in DD, then you can still get lineman to fit the system in the 3 picks left that you have in the top 66. Considering that Kubiak and Denver have found starting lineman in lower rounds for their scheme makes me think this is the best option. Sorry but IMO how will Brick be the difference int he long run when we still don't have anyone in the backfield that strikes fear. Also, is everyone that wants to trade down for Brick not worried about his injured and inconsistent senior year?Why not put him under the microscope like Bush and VY?

Huge
01-26-2006, 08:36 AM
RB's w/o solid OL's don't strike fear in anybody either.

HoustonFrog
01-26-2006, 08:47 AM
RB's w/o solid OL's don't strike fear in anybody either.

Again, some people are forgetting, we don't have just one pick in this draft. Considering the Broncos built almost their whole line on lower picks and undrafted guys how would one big tackle with a bunch medicore skill guys help?The point being, you can get the best of both worlds. You take Bush, you take tackles and guards with 3 of the other 66 picks. You take a TE to help out the QB and you hit FA. Why wouldn't you want the skill and the line instead of passing up on one of the most talent rich 1st rounds just to get a lineman?

TheOgre
01-26-2006, 09:22 AM
Again, some people are forgetting, we don't have just one pick in this draft. Considering the Broncos built almost their whole line on lower picks and undrafted guys how would one big tackle with a bunch medicore skill guys help?The point being, you can get the best of both worlds. You take Bush, you take tackles and guards with 3 of the other 66 picks. You take a TE to help out the QB and you hit FA. Why wouldn't you want the skill and the line instead of passing up on one of the most talent rich 1st rounds just to get a lineman?

Around 18 of the starting LT's in the league were taken in the 1st round. Most of the stud LT's in the league were taken top 10 overall. If you want to avoid having DE's and OLB's like Dwight Freeney, Kyle Vanden Bosch, and Joey Porter owning your QB, then you really have to take an OLT early.

This year is special because there are several OLT prospects that have potential to be that franchise LT. We might be able to get one with the 33rd overall pick, and we could definitely get one if we traded back into the 1st a bit. If we don't take a LT with one of our first two picks, then I don't think we should draft one at all this year.

jerek
01-26-2006, 09:34 AM
Because it is more exciting winning so if the team is better built to win by trading down then that is the more exciting option. Not that you are likely to accept any explanation for your question given your screen name.

:rofl:

True dat.

jerek
01-26-2006, 09:43 AM
Again, some people are forgetting, we don't have just one pick in this draft. Considering the Broncos built almost their whole line on lower picks and undrafted guys how would one big tackle with a bunch medicore skill guys help?The point being, you can get the best of both worlds. You take Bush, you take tackles and guards with 3 of the other 66 picks. You take a TE to help out the QB and you hit FA. Why wouldn't you want the skill and the line instead of passing up on one of the most talent rich 1st rounds just to get a lineman?

As much as I don't usually like the "we have more than one pick in the draft" bit - because it is usually some crappy VY/RB-at-all-costs thread - I agree with your logic. As much as there are a lot of stud OL that did go in the first round, you can find successful teams (e.g. Patriots) that drafted their O-line low.

At this point, I feel Davis is still a great back (not particularly fast but consistently makes great cuts and reads and pulls yardage out of every play), and even though Wells/Morency are not particularly bad backs, our production still dropped off when Davis was out of the game. Obviously, a burner like Bush is going to give us additional options and looks that we are not used to having, but a part of me still questions the overall utility of a $50M part-time back, even if we can line him up at WR (and don't tell me he will return for us: at his price tag and considering we have a Pro-Bowl KR in Mathis, he won't.)

If we can get the right deal, there is a lot to be said for trading down. We are right to entertain offers, at any rate. However, if we can look forward to trading down only to acquire more guys that we could have waited until the second to get - the Jason Babins and Travis Johnsons - then to hell with it: make the simple choice and draft Bush (or was it Young? depends on who you are asking I guess, but I say Bush).

And actually, we have a pretty decent catching TE in Rivers, we've just never seen him before because Pendry and Co. didn't believe in using TE's for anything other than blocking (hence Bruener). I don't think we use a pick this year on TE: put Rivers in a system and get Carr to look at him and we will be doing well.

Huge
01-26-2006, 09:43 AM
Again, some people are forgetting, we don't have just one pick in this draft. Considering the Broncos built almost their whole line on lower picks and undrafted guys how would one big tackle with a bunch medicore skill guys help?The point being, you can get the best of both worlds. You take Bush, you take tackles and guards with 3 of the other 66 picks. You take a TE to help out the QB and you hit FA. Why wouldn't you want the skill and the line instead of passing up on one of the most talent rich 1st rounds just to get a lineman?
Take a look at the RBs the Broncos have used and then look at their draft positions.

Terrell Davis - 6th Round
Olandis Gary - 4th Round
Mike Anderson - 6th Round
Clinton Portis - 2nd Round
Tatum Bell - 2nd Round

One of the reasons this 1st round is talent rich is because of the linemen.

HoustonFrog
01-26-2006, 09:59 AM
Take a look at the RBs the Broncos have used and then look at their draft positions.

Terrell Davis - 6th Round
Olandis Gary - 4th Round
Mike Anderson - 6th Round
Clinton Portis - 2nd Round
Tatum Bell - 2nd Round

One of the reasons this 1st round is talent rich is because of the linemen.

Well look at their O-line. They have one guy, their LT, who was taken with the 20th pick in the 1st round. Lepsis, the other tackle is a undrafted Free agent ROOKIE. Nalen was the 7th round from 1994. Cooper Carlisle is the 4th round in 2000. Ben Hamilton is the 4th round 2001. So the 20th pick is the highest they had on one of the best lines in football and people want to take a guy with a Top 5 pick? If anything the above post represents a reason to take VY, something I don't think we should do. If we trade down I'd much rather take a Defensive playmaker after seeing the Steelers.

MojoX
01-26-2006, 10:27 AM
One thing to remember is that its not like Denver has had much opportunity to draft high in the draft. I'm sure that if Denver had a chance to draft a guy like Cadillac, Bush or even DeAngelo Williams they would. (Isn't Shannahan rumored to be fawning over Bush?) Likewise, I don't see them passing on a talent like Brick just because they put together a line using low drafted talent.

It seems for every example of a winning team who built position X from low in the draft you can find another winning team who built the same position from high in the draft.

Daonly
01-26-2006, 02:20 PM
I keep hearing people keep talking about trading down? Well, folks, The Texans can trade down and it doesn't necessary mean it will be the 1st overall pick. Chances are they're going to be a top rated 1st round player who falls to us at 33rd pick. We can move down still within the top 20 in the second round and pick up an extra 3rd round pick. Giving us the top 2 picks in the 3rd round a late 3 rounder and the top of the 4th round. We can find GOLD in the 3 rounders (Late 1st rounders and legitimate 2 rounders). This is a deep draft; and I look for the Texans to do that. While watching the championship games this wee, makes me think that you do need another running back to help do the dirty work. Look at Carolina, Pittsburgh, even Seattle when Shaun Alexander got knock out in their first playoff game. I do in fact see us drafting Reggie Bush 1st overall. and getting all that good pub with having the first pick by doing so.

MikeMc
01-26-2006, 02:28 PM
Denver doesn't necessarily have the best OL in the NFL, just the best scheme.

Look at OL's like SEA, KC, STL..... and tell me if the results are the same (low drafted OL)!

The fact is that if Carr is given time to throw, and use his strengths to help the passing game excel, then Defenses will not be able to load up the box against DD. They will have to actually respect the run and pass, thus causing HOU to have a solid Offense!

Carr, DD & AJ have the skills needed. The OL is a bunch of over-priced, injury-plagued players. Trimming the fat should help with the team's success. I'm sure the OL will be addressed in the draft, whether 1st, 2nd or 3rd rd is beyond my knowledge.

The foundation of any offense is the OL.....our's has some settlement problems and has multiple cracks. I think it is Kube's job to fix the holes in the OL, which will provide stability to the offense. Drafting Bush or VY (while having OL problems) is like ignoring your house's foundation problems, but still adding that shiny new Movie Room. You don't really need it now, but you're willing to ignore the rest of the problems for that glamourous room!

Spoda
01-26-2006, 02:29 PM
but........................................vince is from houston....i mean................................he's from here........................................we have to pick him....he went to high school here

MikeMc
01-26-2006, 02:37 PM
While watching the championship games this wee, makes me think that you do need another running back to help do the dirty work. Look at Carolina, Pittsburgh, even Seattle when Shaun Alexander got knock out in their first playoff game. I do in fact see us drafting Reggie Bush 1st overall. and getting all that good pub with having the first pick by doing so.

Hmmm...let's see. PIT and SEA have two of the best OLs in the NFL. PIT's RBs are Bettis and Parker. Bettis was a highly drafted player, and Parker was a scat back RB who was undrafted.

SEA has solid depth with Morris at RB, but they have a solid passing offense (which is protected by a top 5 OL).

CAR has Foster and Goings (undrafted FA rookie) and their team is built on a strong DEF with a balanced Offense. They also have a solid OL.

HOU has a weak OL, but has solid RBs with Davis & Wells. Morency is the scat-back that could be solid in the future given a stronger OL.

So what is the theme?? Good OL gives you playoff team. Poor OL gives you top 10 draft pick!

Which would you rather have?? A team that goes to the Playoffs, or one that gets to make the sexy picks with top 10 draft picks every year? The Playoff teams usually look to the draft to develop depth and replace the starters. Non-Playoff teams look to the draft to get immediate help and starters that are 50/50.

Would you rather build your team with 50/50 players, or have a solid team and just draft for depth (most of the time)??

Spoda
01-26-2006, 02:44 PM
Hmmm...let's see. PIT and SEA have two of the best OLs in the NFL. PIT's RBs are Bettis and Parker. Bettis was a highly drafted player, and Parker was a scat back RB who was undrafted.

SEA has solid depth with Morris at RB, but they have a solid passing offense (which is protected by a top 5 OL).

CAR has Foster and Goings (undrafted FA rookie) and their team is built on a strong DEF with a balanced Offense. They also have a solid OL.

HOU has a weak OL, but has solid RBs with Davis & Wells. Morency is the scat-back that could be solid in the future given a stronger OL.

So what is the theme?? Good OL gives you playoff team. Poor OL gives you top 10 draft pick!

Which would you rather have?? A team that goes to the Playoffs, or one that gets to make the sexy picks with top 10 draft picks every year? The Playoff teams usually look to the draft to develop depth and replace the starters. Non-Playoff teams look to the draft to get immediate help and starters that are 50/50.

Would you rather build your team with 50/50 players, or have a solid team and just draft for depth (most of the time)??


they want vince young or else....he is from houston ya know

MikeMc
01-26-2006, 09:22 PM
My question wasn't which player.....Bush or VY...it was which type of team...playoff or one that picks top 10 all the time.

Keep reading past that question you highlighted.

TEXANFAN23435
01-26-2006, 09:55 PM
My two cents. I say if Kubes wants Nalen, then I'm all for it. Nalen would fill a very big need and offer tremendous tutoring to a young backup Center. Nalen could be a "Line General" cut from the same cloth as Bruce Mathews and be invaluable on the field educator for this new scheme. Kubes zone blocking scheme might salvage a few of our OL but I'm still all for drafting a stud OT in R1 or R2. The R1 pick is only good for an OT, provided we have traded down.

We still have 4 RB's and 1 has to go. I know Kubes likes DD but I see him getting us a R2 pick. Wells is the other and he probably gets us a R4 at best. The 3 remaining RB's should be able to get the job done in this new system. Since the Broncos were so successful finding RB's in the later rounds then our 3 remaining RB's should represent a windfall. Either way, I'd like to have 10 picks this year. This is a deep draft, we should find a way to take advantage of it.

edo783
01-26-2006, 10:37 PM
My question wasn't which player.....Bush or VY...it was which type of team...playoff or one that picks top 10 all the time.

Keep reading past that question you highlighted.

I think he got it Mike, he was just saying there is a certain faction to whom it doesn't matter where they pick in the future or how disasterouse a pick might be as long as they get their guy. One even said "Wouldn't matter if the Texans would be winning or not as long as he got to watch him play". Yup, their good fans and true supporters of the Texans.