PDA

View Full Version : Potential reasons for not drafting a FS


Pages : 1 [2]

steelbtexan
05-06-2010, 11:19 AM
2006 (also, KWalter trade)
1. Mario
2. Demeco
3. Winston
4. OD

2007 (also,1/2 Matt Schaub trade)
1. Okoye (like it or not, he's starting)
2. JJ (probably) or Bennett in '07 or Studdard in '09
3. Zac Diles

2008 (also, 1/2 Matt Schaub trade... also, Chris Myers trade)
1. Duane Brown
2. Steve Slaton

2009
1. Cushing
2. Caldwell
3. Quin

I don't neccessarily agree with your philosophy on how to judge a draft. But, Smithiak has been pretty successful using your measurement. It's also worth noting what the Texans have done on the final day of drafting. It seems those picks are more value than you think (at least to the Texans)

Acquired with 4th-7th rounds
2006: OD, D.Anderson, KWalter
2007: Studdard, ZDiles
2008: D.Barber, C.Myers
2009: Quin, McCain, J.Casey

now, I don't think all of that list is "A" talent. But, getting guys like OD, Quin, and ZDiles late in the draft are good reasons not to be so eager to trade those picks in order to move up into the 2nd and 3rd rounds.

2007 was a horrible draft. No I dont like Okoye starting. In fact banking on Okoye ever becoming a playmaker is misguided. IMHO

The only starting caliber guy that was drafted is Diles and he was picked in the 7th rd. That tells me how bad the 07 draft really was.

2008 Brown is the only guy drafted that is starter level quality. That includes Myers and Barber. IMHO

2009 Cushing covers up a rather ordinary draft. Quin was a steal. The last 3 drafts have only netted 1 starter level guy. That's why Smithiak are 7-9,9-7.

This year I believe Smithiak drafted 2 starters Jackson and Tate. All of the other guys hopefully can help the ST's. That's why I would've traded the rest of the draft to trade back into the 2nd rd and make sure I got 3 day one starters out of ths draft.

dalemurphy
05-06-2010, 11:31 AM
2007 was a horrible draft. No I dont like Okoye starting. In fact banking on Okoye ever becoming a playmaker is misguided. IMHO

The only starting caliber guy that was drafted is Diles and he was picked in the 7th rd. That tells me how bad the 07 draft really was.

2008 Brown is the only guy drafted that is starter level quality. That includes Myers and Barber. IMHO

2009 Cushing covers up a rather ordinary draft. Quin was a steal. The last 3 drafts have only netted 1 starter level guy. That's why Smithiak are 7-9,9-7.

This year I believe Smithiak drafted 2 starters Jackson and Tate. All of the other guys hopefully can help the ST's. That's why I would've traded the rest of the draft to trade back into the 2nd rd and make sure I got 3 day one starters out of ths draft.



2007, 2008, 2009 (only one starter-level guy?): Zac Diles, J. Jones, D. Brown, Slaton, Cushing, Caldwell, Quin. Wow! That's SteelbTexan for you... that list of players = 1!

so, according to SteelbTexan ( I want this on record ), here are some bad Texan draft picks:

Steve Slaton
Jacoby Jones
D. Barber
A. Molden
Connor Barwin
Caldwell
James Casey
Graham
Sharpton
McManus
Holliday
Earl Mitchell
Dickerson

JB
05-06-2010, 11:38 AM
Don't leave the Schaub out of that list!

Ole Miss Texan
05-06-2010, 12:14 PM
2007 was a horrible draft. No I dont like Okoye starting. In fact banking on Okoye ever becoming a playmaker is misguided. IMHO

The only starting caliber guy that was drafted is Diles and he was picked in the 7th rd. That tells me how bad the 07 draft really was.

2008 Brown is the only guy drafted that is starter level quality. That includes Myers and Barber. IMHO

2009 Cushing covers up a rather ordinary draft. Quin was a steal. The last 3 drafts have only netted 1 starter level guy. That's why Smithiak are 7-9,9-7.

This year I believe Smithiak drafted 2 starters Jackson and Tate. All of the other guys hopefully can help the ST's. That's why I would've traded the rest of the draft to trade back into the 2nd rd and make sure I got 3 day one starters out of ths draft.
Well I disagree with this but others have argued why.

I'd also like to add that we don't just need starters. I could care less who gets the official start. Situational guys and rotational guys are vital to the success of this team. Connor Barwin is a good example of a guy that's probably never going to "start" for us but could be invaluable to the success of this team.

Same goes for Tate/Slaton. Slaton may not be the "starter" going forward but having 2 running backs (or more) that can carry the rock is vitally important for us.

Drafting guys like Glover Quin, Antoine Caldwell, etc. are extremely important. Quin was drafted with a specific position in mind, nickle corner. Kubiak/Smith felt he could immediately contribute in that role. All the fans want a #1 shutdown corner, but coaches that do it right fill specific roles on their team that are needed for success. Quin ends up starting. Caldwell and other guys like that are so important to get and develop... if you do this successfully, your not forced to fill "need" picks early in the draft because if you lose a starter to FA/injury, their backup may be ready to take over and you can take the absolute stud BPA in the 1st that's not at a need area.

I just don't understand the concept that if they draft pick isn't a starter, it's a failed draft pick. Consistently trading picks away to move up and take "starter" guys will result in a team that has ZERO depth and sub-quality backups that probably won't develop.

Goldensilence
05-06-2010, 01:06 PM
2007, 2008, 2009 (only one starter-level guy?): Zac Diles, J. Jones, D. Brown, Slaton, Cushing, Caldwell, Quin. Wow! That's SteelbTexan for you... that list of players = 1!

so, according to SteelbTexan ( I want this on record ), here are some bad Texan draft picks:

Steve Slaton Good pick

Jacoby Jones Took him a while to come around but, finally looks like he's got his head in the game. Good pick.

D. Barber Not sure If I cal lthis a good pick but, he's made the and at times hasn't looked lost. Decent pick.

A. Molden Hasn't seen the field much, before the injury he was great on ST. IMO at this point looks like a wasted pick

Connor Barwin Thought we could've gotten a starter instead, but decent impact on his rookie year. Wasn't high on the pick, right now the pick looks
good.

Caldwell Have big hopes he can continue to solidify the interior of the OL. Really wish they'd give him a shot at Center. Good pick.

James Casey Saw time his rookie season but, didn't impress. Where's his true position? Not a good pick IMO

Graham All these cats here haven't even played a down of NFL football. Let's see what they can do on the field before we call them good or bad picks.
Sharpton
McManus
Holliday
Earl Mitchell
Dickerson

Bolded is JMO.

I dunno the past two years it seems like when 4th and 5th round comes around Gary and Rick pull a WTF, then recover to get what at least looks like good value in the 6th and 7th.

I would guess what SteelB is trying to get to is we all have positions that we think you build parts of your team around.

On the the OL IMO having a quality center is just as important as a LT. IMO for you to have a good secondary you should have good FS play.

We just haven't gotten decent or great play at both really ever.

dalemurphy
05-06-2010, 01:09 PM
Bolded is JMO.

I dunno the past two years it seems like when 4th and 5th round comes around Gary and Rick pull a WTF, then recover to get what at least looks like good value in the 6th and 7th.

I would guess what SteelB is trying to get to is we all have positions that we think you build parts of your team around.

On the the OL IMO having a quality center is just as important as a LT. IMO for you to have a good secondary you should have good FS play.

We just haven't gotten decent or great play at both really ever.

I get that. However, simply drafting a Center or a FS high in the draft doesn't mean you get a good player. Perhaps they didn't like the players available at those positions. That's a distinct possibility. I would hate for them to start drafting players they don't believe in simply because they feel a need to address the position.

Ole Miss Texan
05-06-2010, 01:33 PM
I get that. However, simply drafting a Center or a FS high in the draft doesn't mean you get a good player. Perhaps they didn't like the players available at those positions. That's a distinct possibility. I would hate for them to start drafting players they don't believe in simply because they feel a need to address the position simply to appease the fanbase.

fix it. ;)

steelbtexan
05-06-2010, 01:35 PM
Bolded is JMO.

I dunno the past two years it seems like when 4th and 5th round comes around Gary and Rick pull a WTF, then recover to get what at least looks like good value in the 6th and 7th.

I would guess what SteelB is trying to get to is we all have positions that we think you build parts of your team around.

On the the OL IMO having a quality center is just as important as a LT. IMO for you to have a good secondary you should have good FS play.

We just haven't gotten decent or great play at both really ever.

This is what I'm saying. Thanks GS

The last 3 yrs have yielded Diles,Brown,Quin and Cushing as draft picks that will be starting next season. (I'm not counting AO because he shouldn't be starting) Barwin is a useful player with a high upside so you can count him too if you wish.

This years draft should yield 2 starters (Jackson and Tate) So maybe this is a better draft than the last 3 yrs. But it wont be enough to catch up with the Colts. IMHO

When you're rebuilding a team you have to do better than drafting 1 starter per year over a 3 yr period or you haven't done a good job. IMHO

dalemurphy
05-06-2010, 01:40 PM
This is what I'm saying. Thanks GS

The last 3 yrs have yielded Diles,Brown,Quin and Cushing as draft picks that will be starting next season. (I'm not counting AO because he shouldn't be starting) Barwin is a useful player with a high upside so you can count him too if you wish.

This years draft should yield 2 starters (Jackson and Tate) So maybe this is a better draft than the last 3 yrs. But it wont be enough to catch up with the Colts. IMHO

When you're rebuilding a team you have to do better than drafting 1 starter per year over a 3 yr period or you haven't done a good job. IMHO

Here's the drafted starters of the Superbowl champs the pas 3 years:

'07: Bushrod
'08: Sed. Ellis
'09: Malcolm Jenkins

that's it, unless you want to count the punter... any thoughts?

steelbtexan
05-06-2010, 01:43 PM
I get that. However, simply drafting a Center or a FS high in the draft doesn't mean you get a good player. Perhaps they didn't like the players available at those positions. That's a distinct possibility. I would hate for them to start drafting players they don't believe in simply because they feel a need to address the position.

You dont know if your going to get a good player at any position. By your theory they should never draft a FS or C because they aren't the BPA at the time of the pick.

I really like Burnett and Walton and would've traded future draft picks to get them. Smithiak didn't do this and time will tell if they were right.

So far looking back at past drafts 2007-2009 Smithiaks draft strategy should be questioned. IMHO

steelbtexan
05-06-2010, 01:45 PM
Here's the drafted starters of the Superbowl champs the pas 3 years:

'07: Bushrod
'08: Sed. Ellis
'09: Malcolm Jenkins

that's it, unless you want to count the punter... any thoughts?

How about Colston,Evans,Harper,and Thomas?

dalemurphy
05-06-2010, 01:49 PM
How about Colston,Evans,Harper,and Thomas?

Thomas was an UDFA.

Colston, Evans, and Harper were drafted in 2006 just like: OD, Winston, Demeco, Mario.

steelbtexan
05-06-2010, 01:50 PM
Or the Colts, Practically the whole secondary, Muir, Garcon,Collie,Clark,their LT Johnson ETC......

See what I'm getting at?

infantrycak
05-06-2010, 01:51 PM
How about Colston,Evans,Harper,and Thomas?

Evans was 2006.
Thomas wasn't drafted.
Colston nobody saw coming but sure it worked out and also 2006.
Harper was 2006.

Edit - beat to the punch.

Or the Colts, Practically the whole secondary, Muir, Garcon,Collie,Clark,their LT Johnson ETC......

See what I'm getting at?

Collie and Garcon aren't starters unless you want to consider Gonzalez a bust.
Johnson was 2006 and again starting because of the problems Ugoh had.
Clark is 2003.
Muir was undrafted and originally picked up by Green Bay rather than Indy.

dalemurphy
05-06-2010, 01:52 PM
You dont know if your going to get a good player at any position. By your theory they should never draft a FS or C because they aren't the BPA at the time of the pick.

I really like Burnett and Walton and would've traded future draft picks to get them. Smithiak didn't do this and time will tell if they were right.

So far looking back at past drafts 2007-2009 Smithiaks draft strategy should be questioned. IMHO

No, I'm saying that some years the Texans may find certain positions in the draft to be weak. I don't want them drafting a FS that they don't like, simply because they have a need there. I think that's what free agency is for. In that regard, they really blew it last season by ignoring the position. Due to the addition of Pollard and emergence of Barber, I don't feel that way this year. But, I'm still concerned about the position if we have injuries.

dalemurphy
05-06-2010, 01:55 PM
Or the Colts, Practically the whole secondary, Muir, Garcon,Collie,Clark,their LT Johnson ETC......

See what I'm getting at?

Winston, Caldwell, D.Brown, AJ, JJ, Slaton, OD, Mario, Demeco, Cushing, Diles, Quin ETC....

Ole Miss Texan
05-06-2010, 01:59 PM
You dont know if your going to get a good player at any position. By your theory they should never draft a FS or C because they aren't the BPA at the time of the pick.

I really like Burnett and Walton and would've traded future draft picks to get them. Smithiak didn't do this and time will tell if they were right.

So far looking back at past drafts 2007-2009 Smithiaks draft strategy should be questioned. IMHO

Kubiak and Smith are drafting the guys they feel will have the biggest impact on the team or will be able to make the team better than another prospect would. Your right, you never know if your going to get a good player or not... that's what makes trading several and/or future picks to get one so risky. Who's to say that Burnett or Walton would even be great fits for our scheme and what Kubiak wants to do? To be honest I think Eric Olsen may have been a better fit for us than JD Walton, even though Walton was generally rated higher.

badboy
05-06-2010, 02:01 PM
No, I'm saying that some years the Texans may find certain positions in the draft to be weak. I don't want them drafting a FS that they don't like, simply because they have a need there. I think that's what free agency is for. In that regard, they really blew it last season by ignoring the position. Due to the addition of Pollard and emergence of Barber, I don't feel that way this year. But, I'm still concerned about the position if we have injuries.What if there was not a FS in free agency that they liked?

Honoring Earl 34
05-06-2010, 02:01 PM
Below is the rankings of centers from 02-05 . Let's play ... who's starting . Of course you can do the same for FS .

http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/players.php?genpos=C&draftyear=2002&sortorder=tsxpos&order=ASC

http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/players.php?genpos=C&draftyear=2003&sortorder=tsxpos&order=ASC

http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/players.php?genpos=C&draftyear=2004&sortorder=tsxpos&order=ASC

http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/players.php?genpos=C&draftyear=2005&sortorder=tsxpos&order=ASC

steelbtexan
05-06-2010, 02:04 PM
Thomas was an UDFA.

Colston, Evans, and Harper were drafted in 2006 just like: OD, Winston, Demeco, Mario.

The point is that the Saints got Thomas. The Texans didn't. The Texans didn't have a reiable RB last year and the did have 2 reliable RB's that were UDFA's. The UDFA's were better than any RB's the Texans trotted on to the field last year. The Saints have done a better job scouting than the Texans over the last 4 yrs.

The Saints lost J.Brown their starting LT before last season started and because of their great drafting they were able to plug Bushrod in and not miss a beat. They won the SB with Bushrod as the starting LT. Can you imagine if D.Brown were to get hurt and miss the season. The excuses would run pampant all over this MB.

Honoring Earl 34
05-06-2010, 02:12 PM
The point is that the Saints got Thomas. The Texans didn't. The Texans didn't have a reiable RB last year and the did have 2 reliable RB's that were UDFA's. The UDFA's were better than any RB's the Texans trotted on to the field last year. The Saints have done a better job scouting than the Texans over the last 4 yrs.

The Saints lost J.Brown their starting LT before last season started and because of their great drafting they were able to plug Bushrod in and not miss a beat. They won the SB with Bushrod as the starting LT. Can you imagine if D.Brown were to get hurt and miss the season. The excuses would run pampant all over this MB.

IMO ... the Saints best moves were Brees and Greg Williams . Their best draft pick was Colston in the 7th .

dalemurphy
05-06-2010, 02:14 PM
The point is that the Saints got Thomas. The Texans didn't. The Texans didn't have a reiable RB last year and the did have 2 reliable RB's that were UDFA's. The UDFA's were better than any RB's the Texans trotted on to the field last year. The Saints have done a better job scouting than the Texans over the last 4 yrs.

The Saints lost J.Brown their starting LT before last season started and because of their great drafting they were able to plug Bushrod in and not miss a beat. They won the SB with Bushrod as the starting LT. Can you imagine if D.Brown were to get hurt and miss the season. The excuses would run pampant all over this MB.

I can imagine Charles Spencer getting hurt. Let's not forget that piece of the 2006 draft.

The Saints have had poor LB play the past few years and yet they passed on Zac Diles in '07, while we got him in the 7th round. Every team in the NFL passed up Pierre Thomas throughout the draft. I'm sure all 32 teams regret that. You don't expect the Texans to accurately assess every single longshot in the draft, do you?

The Texans did lose both starting OGs in week two of last season and still had a pretty good offense. By the way, Pitts and Briesel (UDFA) were replaced by two mid to late round draft picks. Also, our 4th round all-pro TE was injured in mid-season and was replaced with Joel Dressen (UDFA), and the Texans offense continued to perform well.

steelbtexan
05-06-2010, 02:18 PM
No, I'm saying that some years the Texans may find certain positions in the draft to be weak. I don't want them drafting a FS that they don't like, simply because they have a need there. I think that's what free agency is for. In that regard, they really blew it last season by ignoring the position. Due to the addition of Pollard and emergence of Barber, I don't feel that way this year. But, I'm still concerned about the position if we have injuries.

Apparently the FS and C positions have been weak all 9 yrs of the Texans existance.

They had a great draft in 2006 and gave me hope that thing were changing in the war room. Since then Smithiak have regressed in the war room. IMHO

This years talent was similar to the 2006 draft. IMHO

They should've been able to walk away with more than 2 starters and some special teamers. IMHO And maybe they did time will tell but I remain skeptical.

dalemurphy
05-06-2010, 02:20 PM
What if there was not a FS in free agency that they liked?

Free Agency is different than the draft. In the draft, you have a specific and finite amount of resources. In Free Agency, you can sign as many or as few players as you like. After '08, the Texans could've grabbed one or two relatively inexpensive veteran FAs without it damaging any other plans they had, and simply let them compete for a roster spot. That was a mistake. In the draft, you are taking guys that you hope to have on your team for at least 4 years. So, reaching for a player the organization doesn't believe in doesn't make sense. Giving Sean Jones a 1 yr and $2 million contract last season, even if you don't love him, would have insulated them against playing someone like Busing for 1/2 the season.

The Pencil Neck
05-06-2010, 02:22 PM
The biggest reason they didn't trade up and draft a FS is Smithiak dont place the value on the S position that we on the MB do.

Smithiak should be able to pick 3 starters out of each draft. If they cant they are falling behind the rest of the NFL.

That's why I think trading up and getting a no.1 and two no.2's each draft. That way you are almost assured of getting 3 impact players from each draft.

That's just my philosopy on the draft.

I don't think that's true. As your team gets better, higher and higher round picks end up not starting.

Back in the day (50s-70s), rookies weren't expected to start. Not even 1st rounders. Over time with the increase in rookie salaries, there's more pressure to start your 1st and 2nd rounders but that's not necessarily the best thing for the team. And a rookie that doesn't start isn't necessarily a fail, either.

As I said, as your team gets better, higher and higher round picks end up starting. If your team sucks, then you can get lots of starters from a draft and those starters could all be serious upgrades from what you were starting the year before. But you want to move away from that. And as you get better and get better depth, you can move away from drafting purely for need to drafting best player available. And if you're drafting BPA, there's an even better chance that your rookie isn't going to start.

Honoring Earl 34
05-06-2010, 02:25 PM
Apparently the FS and C positions have been weak all 9 yrs of the Texans existance.

They had a great draft in 2006 and gave me hope that thing were changing in the war room. Since then Smithiak have regressed in the war room. IMHO

This years talent was similar to the 2006 draft. IMHO

They should've been able to walk away with more than 2 starters and some special teamers. IMHO And maybe they did time will tell but I remain skeptical.

Dude ... that's your opinion ... that's it . If you were talking CC , that's another story but because they didn't draft who you wanted or trade how you wanted , doesn't mean they're wrong .

The fact is , the road is littered with bust in each round . One year the crowd screamed for Thomas Davis , S , Georgia ... and we passed ... I think for Travis J . Some fans on this board squealed for vengence , until the Panthers made him an OLB .

infantrycak
05-06-2010, 02:25 PM
The point is that the Saints got Thomas.

And so what? How does that lead to the conclusion the Saints are sooo much better at scouting?

Rookie seasons:

Pierre Thomas 52 carries, 252 yards, 4.8 ypc, 1 TD, 17 receptions, 151 yds, 1 TD
Arian Foster 54 carries, 257 yards, 4.8 ypc, 3 TDs, 8 receptions, 93 yds.

The fact is , the road is littered with bust in each round . One year the crowd screamed for Thomas Davis , S , Georgia ... and we passed ... I think for Travis J . Some fans on this board squealed for vengence , until the Panthers made him an OLB .

Or how about Ko Simpson who some folks wanted drafted in the 2nd round of 2006 and howled when they took Owen Daniels. Now Simpson is a special teams player on his 2nd team.

The Pencil Neck
05-06-2010, 02:25 PM
Apparently the FS and C positions have been weak all 9 yrs of the Texans existance.

They had a great draft in 2006 and gave me hope that thing were changing in the war room. Since then Smithiak have regressed in the war room. IMHO

This years talent was similar to the 2006 draft. IMHO

They should've been able to walk away with more than 2 starters and some special teamers. IMHO And maybe they did time will tell but I remain skeptical.

I think we walked way with as many as 4 starters from this draft although they may not start this year:

Kareem - Starts this year.
Tate - Starts this year.
Sharpton - May start this year in place of Diles.
Shelley - May start this year in place of Studdard.

dalemurphy
05-06-2010, 02:27 PM
Apparently the FS and C positions have been weak all 9 yrs of the Texans existance.

They had a great draft in 2006 and gave me hope that thing were changing in the war room. Since then Smithiak have regressed in the war room. IMHO

This years talent was similar to the 2006 draft. IMHO

They should've been able to walk away with more than 2 starters and some special teamers. IMHO And maybe they did time will tell but I remain skeptical.

I thought we were talking about Smithiak? what does 9 years have to do with anything?

By the way, they drafted a center in round 3 last year and he was starting at RG midway thru the season. Perhaps you thought we didn't need Cushing or a pass rushing? Or, in 2008, maybe you thought we didn't need a LT(1st)? or CB(3rd) or RB(3rd)? Or, in 2007, perhaps we didn't need a DT? Better yet, maybe we shouldn't have wasted two 2nd round picks on Matt Schaub. After all, I bet you were one of the Sage Rosenfels supporters. Yeah, we could've spent those 2nd round picks on a safety and a center and Sage could've taken us to the Superbowl by now!

Ole Miss Texan
05-06-2010, 02:30 PM
The Saints lost J.Brown their starting LT before last season started and because of their great drafting they were able to plug Bushrod in and not miss a beat. They won the SB with Bushrod as the starting LT. Can you imagine if D.Brown were to get hurt and miss the season. The excuses would run pampant all over this MB.

You just completely made my point with this post. Rewind to 2005: Saints select Jammal Brown in the 1st round. Brown starts 28 of a possible 32 games going into the 2007 draft. He then starts 30 of a possible 32 starts during '07 and '08 season. So is it safe to say they didn't need Jermon Bushrod?

2007 - Jermon Bushrod gets drafted in the 4th round. Plays in 3 games during '07 and '08 with Zero starts. Injury to Brown places him starting in 2009 where he starts in 14 of 15 games played.

This is NO different than what the Texans are doing in the 4th round on. Instead of drafting for immediate need this late, they are going with players that they feel are better. Ones that either might make an impact right away or ones that might develop into good players. That's what the Saints did with Bushrod and it paid dividends for them this year. The Saints drafted for depth with Bushrod (2007 4th round) and now your praising that but discarding what the Texans are doing.

If Cushing goes down in 2011, in steps 4th rounder Darryl Sharpton and we don't miss a beat. That's why that pick was made just like Bushrod was picked in '07.

dalemurphy
05-06-2010, 02:32 PM
You just completely made my point with this post. Rewind to 2005: Saints select Jammal Brown in the 1st round. Brown starts 28 of a possible 32 games going into the 2007 draft. He then starts 30 of a possible 32 starts during '07 and '08 season. So is it safe to say they didn't need Jermon Bushrod?
2007 - Jermon Bushrod gets drafted in the 4th round. Plays in 3 games during '07 and '08 with Zero starts. Injury to Brown places him starting in 2009 where he starts in 14 of 15 games played.

This is NO different than what the Texans are doing in the 4th round on. Instead of drafting for immediate need this late, they are going with players that they feel are better. Ones that either might make an impact right away or ones that might develop into good players. That's what the Saints did with Bushrod and it paid dividends for them this year. The Saints drafted for depth with Bushrod (2007 4th round) and now your praising that but discarding what the Texans are doing.

If Cushing goes down in 2011, in steps 4th rounder Darryl Sharpton and we don't miss a beat. That's why that pick was made just like Bushrod was picked in '07.


What Ole Miss said! (can't rep you)

steelbtexan
05-06-2010, 02:34 PM
And so what? How does that lead to the conclusion the Saints are sooo much better at scouting?

Rookie seasons:

Pierre Thomas 52 carries, 252 yards, 4.8 ypc, 1 TD, 17 receptions, 151 yds, 1 TD
Arian Foster 54 carries, 257 yards, 4.8 ypc, 3 TDs, 8 receptions, 93 yds.



Or how about Ko Simpson who some folks wanted drafted in the 2nd round of 2006 and howled when they took Owen Daniels. Now Simpson is a special teams player on his 2nd team.

The Super Bowl rings that were won with a 2nd year 3/4th rd starting LT,(Bushrod) a UDFA RB (Thomas) starting for them and a 7th rd WR (Colston) as their no.1 WR tell me they've done a better job scouting than the Texans.

This is comparing apples to apples too. Both the Saints and the Texans regimes have been in place for four yrs. The Saints have the rings to prove it.

Honoring Earl 34
05-06-2010, 02:37 PM
The Super Bowl rings that were won with a 2nd year 3/4th rd starting LT,(Bushrod) a UDFA RB (Thomas) starting for them and a 7th rd WR (Colston) as their no.1 WR tell me they've done a better job scouting than the Texans.

This is comparing apples to apples too. Both the Saints and the Texans regimes have been in place for four yrs. The Saints have the rings to prove it.

How many rings would they have if they didn't have Brees ? Do you think that makes Thomas , Bushrod , and Colston look much better

steelbtexan
05-06-2010, 02:37 PM
I think we walked way with as many as 4 starters from this draft although they may not start this year:

Kareem - Starts this year.
Tate - Starts this year.
Sharpton - May start this year in place of Diles.
Shelley - May start this year in place of Studdard.

I hope you're right.

Ther's a chance you maybe. I'm very high on Shelley Smith. Not so much on Sharpton.

dalemurphy
05-06-2010, 02:41 PM
The Super Bowl rings that were won with a 2nd year 3/4th rd starting LT,(Bushrod) a UDFA RB (Thomas) starting for them and a 7th rd WR (Colston) as their no.1 WR tell me they've done a better job scouting than the Texans.
This is comparing apples to apples too. Both the Saints and the Texans regimes have been in place for four yrs. The Saints have the rings to prove it.

The Saints' haven't done a better job scouting than the Texans.

Biggest difference (other than the division they play in)... The Texans had to trade two 2nd round picks to get their probowl level QB. The Saints gave nothing away and got an all-pro QB. The Saints made a huge gamble that DBrees' shoulder would heal. They were only able to even make that gamble because Miami passes on Brees and decided to trade their 2nd for Culpepper.

Good job by the Saints! It was a gamble that worked but it certainly can't be attributed to the scouting. Even Dr. Andrews was unsure if Brees could recover fully.

steelbtexan
05-06-2010, 02:43 PM
How many rings would they have if they didn't have Brees ? Do you think that makes Thomas , Bushrod , and Colston look much better

We have Schaub are you saying that Brees is that much better than Schaub?

If not how come Schaub could couldn't make Moats or C.Brown look as good as Thomas did? It could be that Thomas had more talent than C.Brown or Moats put together. Same with Bushrod or Colston, would they be starting on the Texans? It all goes back to scouting and being a little lucky.

infantrycak
05-06-2010, 02:44 PM
The Super Bowl rings that were won with a 2nd year 3/4th rd starting LT,(Bushrod) a UDFA RB (Thomas) starting for them and a 7th rd WR (Colston) as their no.1 WR tell me they've done a better job scouting than the Texans.

This is comparing apples to apples too. Both the Saints and the Texans regimes have been in place for four yrs. The Saints have the rings to prove it.

I'm unaware of the Saints having won multiple Super Bowls and it is naive at best to think the biggest thing to benefit the Saints wasn't Drew Brees, that and they didn't suck near as bad to begin with.

By the way, Thomas started 6 games for them last year and acting like he is what drove that team with his under 800 yard season is unrealistic. There is zero reason to believe Arian Foster couldn't have done the same thing for them last year. Ole Miss addressed Bushrod and how he proves exactly the opposite of what you are asserting. And sorry but Colston was a blind hog finding a truffle.

And again you are fascinated by position. Would the Texans have been better off drafting Ko Simpson than Owen Daniels? Clearly not.

Biggest difference (other than the division they play in)... The Texans had to trade two 2nd round picks to get their probowl level QB. The Saints gave nothing away and got an all-pro QB. The Saints made a huge gamble that DBrees' shoulder would heal. They were only able to even make that gamble because Miami passes on Brees and decided to trade their 2nd for Culpepper.

Spot on.

steelbtexan
05-06-2010, 02:48 PM
The Saints' haven't done a better job scouting than the Texans.

Biggest difference (other than the division they play in)... The Texans had to trade two 2nd round picks to get their probowl level QB. The Saints gave nothing away and got an all-pro QB. The Saints made a huge gamble that DBrees' shoulder would heal. They were only able to even make that gamble because Miami passes on Brees and decided to trade their 2nd for Culpepper.

Good job by the Saints! It was a gamble that worked but it certainly can't be attributed to the scouting. Even Dr. Andrews was unsure if Brees could recover fully.

Now we are on to something Dale.

The Saints are willing to take gambles on guys with injury histories drug charges etc.... The Texans aren't. The result is the Saints are reigning SB champs and the Texans are still hoping to make the playoffs.

Smithiak had the same ability to get Brees as the Saints did and they passed.

Willing to take chances > conservatism.

The division arguement is weak. After next year you may have a case but Carolina and Atlanta are the = of the Tacks and Jags. IMHO

Honoring Earl 34
05-06-2010, 02:51 PM
We have Schaub are you saying that Brees is that much better than Schaub?

If not how come Schaub could couldn't make Moats or C.Brown look as good as Thomas did? It could be that Thomas had more talent than C.Brown or Moats put together. Same with Bushrod or Colston, would they be starting on the Texans? It all goes back to scouting and being a little lucky.

Brees is every bit as important as P Manning to his team . Manning made some rookie WR look good as they were playing musical LTs .

dalemurphy
05-06-2010, 02:53 PM
We have Schaub are you saying that Brees is that much better than Schaub?

If not how come Schaub could couldn't make Moats or C.Brown look as good as Thomas did? It could be that Thomas had more talent than C.Brown or Moats put together. Same with Bushrod or Colston, would they be starting on the Texans? It all goes back to scouting and being a little lucky.

Brees is somewhat better than Schaub. But, the key is the cost of the two 2nd round picks that we spent to get Matt while the Saints spent nothing.

Regarding Pierre Thomas: you are right. He's very good and we missed him. But, the Saints have missed players we took very late that they could've improved their team with: Zac Diles, OD, Quin.

However, Chris Brown was a UFA while Pierre Thomas was a 2007 UDFA. They aren't the same thing nor were they acquired in the same off-season.

Goldensilence
05-06-2010, 02:53 PM
I think we walked way with as many as 4 starters from this draft although they may not start this year:

Kareem - Starts this year.
Tate - Starts this year.
Sharpton - May start this year in place of Diles.
Shelley - May start this year in place of Studdard.


I think Kareem starts and Tate might not but, he'll likely be so heavy in the RB rotation that he'll essentially be one.

Maybe people are more high on Sharpton than myself. I think he might make the roster,but his big contribution will likely be made on ST. From what I recall Sharption has similar measureables as Diles. Only way I would think Sharptopn would get the edge is if he physically just blows Diles out of the water. I don't see it happening this year. Again I just thought it was an odd pick.

Hard to say about Shelly as well. I think he'll get a shot at trying to take one of the guard spots. I doubt as well Studdard gets the starting nod at either spot unless he just blows people away at camp. I just don't see that happening.

I think it's fine to question the FO because outside looking in the past few years at times their strategy has looked IMHO a bit haphazard.

It's also concerning to me that we've had a bunch of turnaround in the secondary for younger players. I like the addition of talent but, the lack of experience is a source of concern for me at the same time. Guess it's a bit of a paradox atm.

Goldensilence
05-06-2010, 02:56 PM
Brees is somewhat better than Schaub. But, the key is the cost of the two 2nd round picks that we spent to get Matt while the Saints spent nothing.

Regarding Pierre Thomas: you are right. He's very good and we missed him. But, the Saints have missed players we took very late that they could've improved their team with: Zac Diles, OD, Quin.

However, Chris Brown was a UFA while Pierre Thomas was a 2007 UDFA. They aren't the same thing nor were they acquired in the same off-season.

Umm sorry dude there's no somewhat better. Brees is clear cut and above better.

dalemurphy
05-06-2010, 03:01 PM
Now we are on to something Dale.

The Saints are willing to take gambles on guys with injury histories drug charges etc.... The Texans aren't. The result is the Saints are reigning SB champs and the Texans are still hoping to make the playoffs.

Smithiak had the same ability to get Brees as the Saints did and they passed.

Willing to take chances > conservatism.

The division arguement is weak. After next year you may have a case but Carolina and Atlanta are the = of the Tacks and Jags. IMHO

Plenty of teams take those risks without success. Similarly, there are teams with similar methodology to the Texans who are successful: Indy and Pittsburgh, for instance.

Lots of teams passed on Drew Brees and Matt Schaub... and they still need a QB. Are you really going to be critical of the Texans for getting Matt Schaub instead of Brees? You act as if the Texans are failures when they miss on Brees, or Pierre Thomas. So are 31 other teams... By the way, the Saints passed on Brian Cushing in the draft and took a CB that has to be converted to FS. Good pick?

let me rephrase.. which is better: MJenkins and Scott Fujita? or Cushing and Quin?

dalemurphy
05-06-2010, 03:03 PM
Umm sorry dude there's no somewhat better. Brees is clear cut and above better.

huh? I didn't say I was unsure about it. But, Matt Schaub certainly belongs in the conversation of great QBs in the NFL right now.

Ole Miss Texan
05-06-2010, 03:05 PM
I think Brees is more polished. Some of that may be he's been in the league 3 extra years than Schaub and Matt's only been starting for season. Let's come back and visit this comparison when they both have the same amount of experience.

I think the main point, which has been alluded to, is that we traded two 2nd round draft picks for Schaub in 2007. The Saints got Brees in free agency in 2006. It was really risky, but the Saints hit a homerun. As good as Brees is and the cost to get him > Schaub - two 2nd rounders. There's definitely a high risk element to both... and both have panned out. I'm not sad we have Schaub at all though - I loved it since Day 1. Both are success and make their respective team/offenses what they are.

steelbtexan
05-06-2010, 03:10 PM
I'm unaware of the Saints having won multiple Super Bowls and it is naive at best to think the biggest thing to benefit the Saints wasn't Drew Brees, that and they didn't suck near as bad to begin with.

By the way, Thomas started 6 games for them last year and acting like he is what drove that team with his under 800 yard season is unrealistic. There is zero reason to believe Arian Foster couldn't have done the same thing for them last year. Ole Miss addressed Bushrod and how he proves exactly the opposite of what you are asserting. And sorry but Colston was a blind hog finding a truffle.

And again you are fascinated by position. Would the Texans have been better off drafting Ko Simpson than Owen Daniels? Clearly not.


They won one. While the Texans are still dreaming about the playoffs. The Texans had the same shot at Brees as the Texans did (probably better since Brees grew up in Austin) and passed.

Thomas,Hamilton (another UDFA) Bell (Cheap FA) and Bush shared the load. None of the Saints RB's should have great stats. But they were all more productive and held onto the ball better than the Texans RB's did. Fster had a chance to prove your point but Kubes was content to let Slaton (Fumbles) and C.Brown (Suckage) run the team into the ground.

Apparently Smithiak disagree with you on Foster being able to get the job done. Or they wouldn't have spent a 2nd rd choice on Tate. You can debate Bushrod if you want but the Facts are this 3/4th rd pick was the starting LT on a SB winning team. This points to the Saints doing a great job of scouting.

I'm not fixated on position. But Smithiak appear to be. TE's for $1000 Alex.

Yes I would've been wrong taking Simpson over Daniels. You dont get every pick right. That's why the draft is a crapshoot.

I just happen to think that the Saints have done a better job of scouting over the last 4 yrs and they've got the rings to prove it.

steelbtexan
05-06-2010, 03:17 PM
Plenty of teams take those risks without success. Similarly, there are teams with similar methodology to the Texans who are successful: Indy and Pittsburgh, for instance.

Lots of teams passed on Drew Brees and Matt Schaub... and they still need a QB. Are you really going to be critical of the Texans for getting Matt Schaub instead of Brees? You act as if the Texans are failures when they miss on Brees, or Pierre Thomas. So are 31 other teams... By the way, the Saints passed on Brian Cushing in the draft and took a CB that has to be converted to FS. Good pick?

let me rephrase.. which is better: MJenkins and Scott Fujita? or Cushing and Quin?

Point Dale is the Texans were unwilling to take a chance on Brees and the Saints were. Risk takers > Conservatism.

Goldensilence
05-06-2010, 03:25 PM
huh? I didn't say I was unsure about it. But, Matt Schaub certainly belongs in the conversation of great QBs in the NFL right now.

IMO Matt had a big break out year and finally managed to stay healthy.

In terms of yards Matt's in that discussion. But Brees takes over games. Manning takes over games. Brady in the past has taken over games.

IMO, and maybe it's unfair, but I think it's hard to tel lif Matt's taking over games of if AJ is.

I think Brees is more polished. Some of that may be he's been in the league 3 extra years than Schaub and Matt's only been starting for season. Let's come back and visit this comparison when they both have the same amount of experience.

I think the main point, which has been alluded to, is that we traded two 2nd round draft picks for Schaub in 2007. The Saints got Brees in free agency in 2006. It was really risky, but the Saints hit a homerun. As good as Brees is and the cost to get him > Schaub - two 2nd rounders. There's definitely a high risk element to both... and both have panned out. I'm not sad we have Schaub at all though - I loved it since Day 1. Both are success and make their respective team/offenses what they are.

No I get the fact what we gave up to get Schaub. I don't have a problem with it. I'm just saying I think we should slow down about putting Schaub in that category until we gt more than one healthy year.

infantrycak
05-06-2010, 03:37 PM
No I get the fact what we gave up to get Schaub. I don't have a problem with it. I'm just saying I think we should slow down about putting Schaub in that category until we gt more than one healthy year.

His skill level is there regardless of injuries. It would just be a tragedy if that skill gets lost due to injury.

Let's let this develop a little as well. QB ratings first three years as starters:

Brees - 76.9, 67.5 and 104.8
Schaub - 87.2, 92.7 and 98.6

Mr teX
05-06-2010, 03:44 PM
Point Dale is the Texans were unwilling to take a chance on Brees and the Saints were. Risk takers > Conservatism.


Tell this to:

The Detroit Lions after Scott Mitchell

The Buffalo Bills after Rob Johnson

& coming soon:

Tennessee Titans after VY

Kansas City Chiefs after Matt Cassell.

& every other team who selected a qb #1 overall only to waste time & effort on developing "potential".

You can say the above bolded statement when it works out as it did in this case, but when it doesn't work out (as it doesn't more often than not with FA qb's) you set your franchise back half a decade.

Furthermore as it was, there were only 2 teams willing to take the Ginormous gamble on Brees & another 2 who didn't need to (NE & Indy). With this in mind, why is it you're singling out the texans when just about every other team pretty much passed on him?

Let's just call it what it was....Luck, scouting pretty much had nothing to do with it when it came to the main guy responsible for the team's success.

infantrycak
05-06-2010, 03:49 PM
You can say the above bolded statement when it works out as it did in this case, but when it doesn't work out (as it doesn't more often than not with FA qb's) you set your franchise back half a decade.

Let's just call it what it was....Luck, scouting pretty much had nothing to do with it when it came to the main guy responsible for the team's success.

Or there is an even closer comparison. Daunte Culpepper had been more successful than Drew Brees prior to that off-season. Miami got first choice and took Culpepper.

Ole Miss Texan
05-06-2010, 03:53 PM
Good points above. There are more failures than success when playing around with risk. It's when that risk pays off, you get rewarded for it.

In the point with New Orleans... I think they were a team that was in a position, or a need, to take that risk. Other teams maybe not so much, but I think in N.O.'s case, right after Katrina and all... it was probably a risk that was warranted. Hindsight of course, it looks brilliant. They HAD to get an new QB over the 5 years of terrible Aaron Brooks play.

steelbtexan
05-06-2010, 03:58 PM
Tell this to:

The Detroit Lions after Scott Mitchell

The Buffalo Bills after Rob Johnson

& coming soon:

Tennessee Titans after VY

Kansas City Chiefs after Matt Cassell.

& every other team who selected a qb #1 overall only to waste time & effort on developing "potential".

You can say the above bolded statement when it works out as it did in this case, but when it doesn't work out (as it doesn't more often than not with FA qb's) you set your franchise back half a decade.

Furthermore as it was, there were only 2 teams willing to take the Ginormous gamble on Brees & another 2 who didn't need to (NE & Indy). With this in mind, why is it you're singling out the texans when just about every other team pretty much passed on him?

Let's just call it what it was....Luck, scouting pretty much had nothing to do with it when it came to the main guy responsible for the team's success.

I'm just using this to point out the difference between the two organizations and the success the Saints success. Until the Saints put the pieces by drafting well. Brees coudn't do it by himself. So yes scouying has also played a large part in the Saints success.


Ask Minny how they feel about taking a chace on a 40 yr old Favre. You can point out successes and failures on both sides of this argument.

steelbtexan
05-06-2010, 04:02 PM
To all that think the Texans have done a bang up job in scouting/draftin, which teams would you say have done a better job than Smithiak.

Honest opinions not homer opinions, and if Smithiak are at the top of your list why is it that the Texans are still dreaming about making the playoffs?

dalemurphy
05-06-2010, 04:03 PM
I'm just using this to point out the difference between the two organizations and the success the Saints success. Until the Saints put the pieces by drafting well. Brees coudn't do it by himself. So yes scouying has also played a large part in the Saints success.


Ask Minny how they feel about taking a chace on a 40 yr old Favre. You can point out successes and failures on both sides of this argument.

That's our point. If your last sentence is true, then don't criticize the Texans for minimizing risk. You just said that philosophy also has successes, just as the risk-taking philosophy has failures.

If you notice, I don't argue with you about the Texans mismanagement of the safety position or the poor play on the interior line, or issues at DT, etc... the difference is that I realize all teams have those kind of problems. And, from what I've seen, the Texans are building a team that will be successful for much of the next 10 years. You seem to get frustrated with one disappointment and then allow it to color everything else you see.

steelbtexan
05-06-2010, 04:08 PM
That's our point. If your last sentence is true, then don't criticize the Texans for minimizing risk. You just said that philosophy also has successes, just as the risk-taking philosophy has failures.

If you notice, I don't argue with you about the Texans mismanagement of the safety position or the poor play on the interior line, or issues at DT, etc... the difference is that I realize all teams have those kind of problems. And, from what I've seen, the Texans are building a team that will be successful for much of the next 10 years. You seem to get frustrated with one disappointment and then allow it to color everything else you see.

Not really, I just dont think that Smithiak's philosopy is going to bring a SB trophy to Houston.

Yes , I believe that taking risks have to be done if you want to win a SB.

All teams have not been poor on the OL and S positions for 2 regimes and 9 yrs running.

dalemurphy
05-06-2010, 04:10 PM
To all that think the Texans have done a bang up job in scouting/draftin, which teams would you say have done a better job than Smithiak.

Honest opinions not homer opinions, and if Smithiak are at the top of your list why is it that the Texans are still dreaming about making the playoffs?


The Texans have been among the best in drafing/scouting since 2006. The Texans have missed out on the playoffs because of the talent deficit they had after Capers/Casserly + Manning's Colts + a couple of blown games midseason last year + being unprepared for the Jets on openning day last year.

That would be my answer.

I can't find a team that has done more to turn over a roster in the last 4 years. I know for a fact that you can't find another team as young as the Texans... We'll have a better answer to just how talented these players are in the next year or two.

Mr teX
05-06-2010, 04:12 PM
I'm just using this to point out the difference between the two organizations and the success the Saints success. Until the Saints put the pieces by drafting well. Brees coudn't do it by himself. So yes scouying has also played a large part in the Saints success.


Ask Minny how they feel about taking a chace on a 40 yr old Favre. You can point out successes and failures on both sides of this argument.

But i bet you could point WAY more failures than successes.

Bottom line is you take away all that Brees brings to that team & insert Brunell or Daniels & they're 7-9, tops & the only reason the win total is that high is b/c the spread offense they run lends some help.

So yeah, while he literally couldn't do it by himself, the stud factor he brings to the table puts that team in another stratosphere. The players around him are really inconsequential honestly.

You think that defense would be pinning there ears back every down if they didn't know Brees & that offense weren't putting up 50 pts a game?

Honoring Earl 34
05-06-2010, 04:17 PM
The deepest most talented team IMO in the last 20 years , is the Cowboys of the JJ era . Jimmy said that the way he built the Cowboys is getting a bunch of picks and hitting on some . If you look at the Cowboys draft form 89-94 ... you'll see a few giant hits but mostly misses .

http://www.nfl.com/draft/history/fulldraft?teamId=1200&type=team

Ole Miss Texan
05-06-2010, 04:20 PM
To all that think the Texans have done a bang up job in scouting/draftin, which teams would you say have done a better job than Smithiak.

Honest opinions not homer opinions, and if Smithiak are at the top of your list why is it that the Texans are still dreaming about making the playoffs?

I can honestly say that I can't name a single team that has done a better job at drafting than the Texans. I think a lot of it is obviously I've become more familiar with our guys than others but nonetheless find me a team that you think has drafted better than us since 2006 and I'll tell you why we're better.:) There's been several teams close to us, but none that are hands down better.

They're all chalked full of busts with the occasional good pick.

Mr teX
05-06-2010, 04:21 PM
The deepest most talented team IMO in the last 20 years , is the Cowboys of the JJ era . Jimmy said that the way he built the Cowboys is getting a bunch of picks and hitting on some . If you look at the Cowboys draft form 89-94 ... you'll see a few giant hits but mostly misses .

http://www.nfl.com/draft/history/fulldraft?teamId=1200&type=team

This has been the case for every major dynasty for the last umpteen years sans the patriots.

Cowboys & Bills of the 90's
49ers of the 80's
steelers of the 70's
Colts of the 2000's

all built primarily in the draft.

Ole Miss Texan
05-06-2010, 04:24 PM
This has been the case for every major dynasty for the last umpteen years sans the patriots.

Cowboys & Bills of the 90's
49ers of the 80's
steelers of the 70's
Colts of the 2000's

all built primarily in the draft.

And the Texans of the '10's :evil:

Goldensilence
05-06-2010, 04:26 PM
I can honestly say that I can't name a single team that has done a better job at drafting than the Texans. I think a lot of it is obviously I've become more familiar with our guys than others but nonetheless find me a team that you think has drafted better than us since 2006 and I'll tell you why we're better.:) There's been several teams close to us, but none that are hands down better.

They're all chalked full of busts with the occasional good pick.

Two of the better drafting teams are the Eagles and Colts IMO. Ravens draft pretty well too.

beerlover
05-06-2010, 04:28 PM
The deepest most talented team IMO in the last 20 years , is the Cowboys of the JJ era . Jimmy said that the way he built the Cowboys is getting a bunch of picks and hitting on some . If you look at the Cowboys draft form 89-94 ... you'll see a few giant hits but mostly misses .

http://www.nfl.com/draft/history/fulldraft?teamId=1200&type=team

I've been debating this with HoustonFrog (http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=71571) seems like they are continuing in this tradition, your spot on. However its not 89-94 era teams do a much better job in research & development. To me the Patriots have replaced the Cowboys as superior system of talent aquistion, they continue to work the draft better than anybody. its a number game but not so much in amount of players brought in as how they fit under the salary cap moving forward. they made their killing being first to embody the 3-4, pulverized teams with hybrid, later round OLB's & rode the wave until the rest of the league could catch up & premium players moved on.

Ole Miss Texan
05-06-2010, 04:34 PM
Two of the better drafting teams are the Eagles and Colts IMO. Ravens draft pretty well too.

Those are the ones that have stuck out to me. I'd say the Eagles, Ravens and even the Jets would be in competition with us. Colts have done really well relative to their system - and that's what it's specific to anyways. They know who they are and what the need in a prospect. Definitely a team to copy. I see Kubiak/Smith picking in this way: Kareem Jackson over the other CB's we though, Glove Quin, the TE's, etc.

It's just when you add up the guys we've taken, it's hard to find another group that is hands down better. Mario Williams, Demeco Ryans, Eric Winston, Owen Daniels, Zac Diles, Duane Brown, Steve Slaton, Brian Cushing, Glover Quin. After next season you may be able to add Antoine Caldwell, Connor Barwin and Jacoby Jones. This doesn't even bring the new guys like Kareem Jackson and Ben Tate that we're pretty high on and should have a huge impact.

steelbtexan
05-06-2010, 04:42 PM
This has been the case for every major dynasty for the last umpteen years sans the patriots.

Cowboys & Bills of the 90's
49ers of the 80's
steelers of the 70's
Colts of the 2000's

all built primarily in the draft.

All of these teams have done a better job of drafting than the Texans have in the years since Smith has been here. (2007-2009) 1 starter per year is unacceptable. IMHO

Ole Miss

The Pats,Ravens,Jets,Saints,SD,Packers Colts, Eagles and Mia have done a better job drafting. IMHO

I could be wrong because I haven't done an in depth study of those teams drafts from yrs 2007-2009. I would love to have your imput as to what the Texans have done better than the teams I listed.

That's 9 teams that have done as well as the Texans. IMHO

Almost a third of the league.

Ole Miss Texan
05-06-2010, 05:30 PM
All of these teams have done a better job of drafting than the Texans have in the years since Smith has been here. (2007-2009) 1 starter per year is unacceptable. IMHO

Ole Miss

The Pats,Ravens,Jets,Saints,SD,Packers Colts, Eagles and Mia have done a better job drafting. IMHO

I could be wrong because I haven't done an in depth study of those teams drafts from yrs 2007-2009. I would love to have your imput as to what the Texans have done better than the teams I listed.

That's 9 teams that have done as well as the Texans. IMHO

Almost a third of the league.
Fair enough. My opinion differs slightly but I think yours is definitely valid. I'm going off 2006-2009 drafts (4 years). '06 is the turning point in our franchise. I understand Smith joined shortly after that draft but '06 was the start of a new era. 2010 draft I didn't include because we're just speculating with them.

I would not put the Patriots, Saints, Packers, Chargers and definitely not the Dolphins ahead of us. Patriots have an unfair advantage b/c they go with older veterans and have a TON of draft picks that never make the team. The usually get 1 or 2 guys to maybe make the team each year. The other 3 teams have way more misses than we do and not much in the way of better picks than us. Definitely some good picks here and there but not overly better than ours.

Ravens, Jets, Colts, Eagles have drafted well. I can see the arguement with these but I still wouldn't say the Texans draft poorly in relation to these teams. You say we're top 10, I say we're Top 5 and probably 1-3.

Just looking back at the drafts and seeing what the players have or havn't done is pretty interesting. There's defnitely some that make it but all in all none of the teams you listed consistently have more than 2 big time contributers per draft. Then you compare those players to the Texans' contributors and I think we win.

Sometimes we just have to agree to disagree though! :fingergun:

Ole Miss Texan
05-06-2010, 05:32 PM
To recap: I think we get more players to contribute on our team and at a higher level, at that.

dalemurphy
05-06-2010, 05:33 PM
All of these teams have done a better job of drafting than the Texans have in the years since Smith has been here. (2007-2009) 1 starter per year is unacceptable. IMHO

Ole Miss

The Pats,Ravens,Jets,Saints,SD,Packers Colts, Eagles and Mia have done a better job drafting. IMHO

I could be wrong because I haven't done an in depth study of those teams drafts from yrs 2007-2009. I would love to have your imput as to what the Texans have done better than the teams I listed.

That's 9 teams that have done as well as the Texans. IMHO

Almost a third of the league.


No way! I just went and looked. Check out pro-football-reference.com and you can get a complete list of any team's draft picks along with their stats, going back to the 1930s.

Anyway, the only team that did as well or better than us was : GB Packers. But, they also had 2 picks in rounds 2, 3, 4, 5 of the '06 draft.

Here's the NE Patriots from 2006-2009:
2006
Gostkowski - K
Maroney - part time RB... not great for 1st round
*rest of the draft had crap like Chad Jackson

2007
Brandon Meriweather in the 1st
** no starters or heavy contributors after that

2008
Jared Mayo 1st (overrated!)
** crap after that

2009
Edelman
D.Butler
R. Brace
P. Chung all have contributed and could be good picks.




EDIT!!!: Okay, the NYJETS have had excellent drafts during that time. WOW!

steelbtexan
05-06-2010, 05:35 PM
Fair enough. My opinion differs slightly but I think yours is definitely valid. I'm going off 2006-2009 drafts (4 years). '06 is the turning point in our franchise. I understand Smith joined shortly after that draft but '06 was the start of a new era. 2010 draft I didn't include because we're just speculating with them.

I would not put the Patriots, Saints, Packers, Chargers and definitely not the Dolphins ahead of us. Patriots have an unfair advantage b/c they go with older veterans and have a TON of draft picks that never make the team. The usually get 1 or 2 guys to maybe make the team each year. The other 3 teams have way more misses than we do and not much in the way of better picks than us. Definitely some good picks here and there but not overly better than ours.

Ravens, Jets, Colts, Eagles have drafted well. I can see the arguement with these but I still wouldn't say the Texans draft poorly in relation to these teams. You say we're top 10, I say we're Top 5 and probably 1-3.

Just looking back at the drafts and seeing what the players have or havn't done is pretty interesting. There's defnitely some that make it but all in all none of the teams you listed consistently have more than 2 big time contributers per draft. Then you compare those players to the Texans' contributors and I think we win.

Sometimes we just have to agree to disagree though! :fingergun:

Thanks for the info. I know you do alot more research than I do.

Would rep you if I could.

We will have to agree to disagree on this one.

dalemurphy
05-06-2010, 05:41 PM
Here's NE 2009-2006:

Rk Year Rnd Pick Pos Tm From To AP1 PB St CarAV G Cmp Att Yds TD Int Att Yds TD Rec Yds TD Int Sk College/Univ
1 2009 2 34 Patrick Chung DB NWE 2009 2009 0 0 0 2 16 1 2.0 Oregon
2 2009 2 40 Ron Brace DT NWE 2009 2009 0 0 0 2 9 Boston College
3 2009 2 41 Darius Butler DB NWE 2009 2009 0 0 0 3 14 3 Connecticut
4 2009 2 58 Sebastian Vollmer T NWE 0 0 0 Houston
5 2009 3 83 Brandon Tate WR NWE 2009 2009 0 0 0 0 2 1 11 0 North Carolina
6 2009 3 97 Tyrone McKenzie LB NWE 0 0 0 South Florida
7 2009 4 123 Rich Ohrnberger G NWE 0 0 0 Penn State
8 2009 5 170 George Bussey T NWE 0 0 0 Louisville 9 2009 6 198 Jake Ingram LS NWE 2009 2009 0 0 0 0 16 Hawaii
10 2009 6 207 Myron Pryor DT NWE 2009 2009 0 0 0 2 13 Kentucky
11 2009 7 232 Julian Edelman WR NWE 2009 2009 0 0 0 4 11 2 5 0 37 359 1 Kent State
12 2009 7 234 Darryl Richard DT NWE 0 0 0 Georgia Tech
13 2008 1 10 Jerod Mayo LB NWE 2008 2009 0 0 2 16 29 1.5 Tennessee
14 2008 2 62 Terrence Wheatley DB NWE 2008 2009 0 0 0 1 11 Colorado
15 2008 3 78 Shawn Crable LB NWE 0 0 0 Michigan
16 2008 3 94 Kevin O'Connell QB NWE 2008 2008 0 0 0 0 2 4 6 23 0 0 3 -6 0 San Diego State
17 2008 4 129 Jonathan Wilhite DB NWE 2008 2009 0 0 0 7 30 3 Auburn
18 2008 5 153 Matt Slater WR NWE 2008 2009 0 0 0 0 28 1 6 0 UCLA
19 2008 6 197 Bo Ruud LB NWE 0 0 0 Nebraska
20 2007 1 24 Brandon Meriweather DB NWE 2007 2009 0 1 2 17 48 9 2.0 Miami (FL)
21 2007 4 127 Kareem Brown DT NWE 2007 2007 0 0 0 0 1 Miami (FL)
22 2007 5 171 Clint Oldenburg T NWE 2007 2007 0 0 0 0 2 Colorado State
23 2007 6 180 Justin Rogers LB NWE 2007 2009 0 0 0 2 32 SMU
24 2007 6 202 Mike Richardson DB NWE 0 0 0 Notre Dame
25 2007 6 208 Justise Hairston RB NWE 0 0 0 Connecticut State
26 2007 6 209 Corey Hilliard T NWE 2007 2008 0 0 0 0 5 Oklahoma State
27 2007 7 211 Oscar Lua LB NWE 0 0 0 USC
28 2007 7 247 Mike Elgin G NWE 0 0 0 Iowa 29 2006 1 21 Laurence Maroney RB NWE 2006 2009 0 0 0 25 45 582 2430 21 40 409 1 Minnesota
Passing Rushing Receiving
Rk Year Rnd Pick Pos Tm From To AP1 PB St CarAV G Cmp Att Yds TD Int Att Yds TD Rec Yds TD Int Sk College/Univ
30 2006 2 36 Chad Jackson WR NWE 2006 2008 0 0 0 2 18 4 22 0 14 171 3 Florida
31 2006 3 86 David Thomas TE NWE 2006 2009 0 0 1 11 47 56 617 2 Texas
32 2006 4 106 Garrett Mills FB NWE 2007 2008 0 0 0 1 9 7 91 0 Tulsa
33 2006 4 118 Stephen Gostkowski K NWE 2006 2009 1 1 4 0 64 Memphis
34 2006 5 136 Ryan O'Callaghan T NWE 2006 2009 0 0 1 11 40 California
35 2006 6 191 Jeremy Mincey DE NWE 2007 2008 0 0 0 1 9 2.0 Florida
36 2006 6 205 Dan Stevenson G NWE 0 0 0 Notre Dame
37 2006 6 206 LeKevin Smith DT NWE 2006 2009 0 0 0 5 44 1.0 Nebraska
38 2006 7 229 Willie Andrews DB NWE 2006 2007 0 0 0 3 30



BOLDed players aren't on the team!

Lucky
05-06-2010, 06:24 PM
6 2009 3 97 Tyrone McKenzie LB NWE 0 0 0 South Florida
7 2009 4 123 Rich Ohrnberger G NWE 0 0 0 Penn State
8 2009 5 170 George Bussey T NWE 0 0 0 Louisville
15 2008 3 78 Shawn Crable LB NWE 0 0 0 Michigan
19 2008 6 197 Bo Ruud LB NWE 0 0 0 Nebraska
23 2007 6 180 Justin Rogers LB NWE 2007 2009 0 0 0 2 32 SMU
31 2006 3 86 David Thomas TE NWE 2006 2009 0 0 1 11 47 56 617 2 Texas
37 2006 6 206 LeKevin Smith DT NWE 2006 2009 0 0 0 5 44 1.0 Nebraska

BOLDed players aren't on the team!
McKenzie, Ohrnberger, Bussey, Crable, and Ruud are shown to be on the current roster. David Thomas is a Saint. Smith is with the Broncos. Rogers may be out of football.

Trying to compare who has drafted better than whom is a tough thing to do. I would point out that it's tougher for a draft choice to make a winning team, like the Pats, than a .500 team, like the Texans.

dalemurphy
05-06-2010, 06:31 PM
McKenzie, Ohrnberger, Bussey, Crable, and Ruud are shown to be on the current roster. David Thomas is a Saint. Smith is with the Broncos. Rogers may be out of football.

Trying to compare who has drafted better than whom is a tough thing to do. I would point out that it's tougher for a draft choice to make a winning team, like the Pats, than a .500 team, like the Texans.

Sure it is. However, they also have a lot more picks and many of these players that have been cut (chad jackson) or moved on, haven't been lighting the world on fire for Detroit, Cleveland, or KC either.

beerlover
05-07-2010, 12:39 AM
Here's NE 2009-2006:

Rk Year Rnd Pick Pos Tm From To AP1 PB St CarAV G Cmp Att Yds TD Int Att Yds TD Rec Yds TD Int Sk College/Univ
1 2009 2 34 Patrick Chung DB NWE 2009 2009 0 0 0 2 16 1 2.0 Oregon
2 2009 2 40 Ron Brace DT NWE 2009 2009 0 0 0 2 9 Boston College
3 2009 2 41 Darius Butler DB NWE 2009 2009 0 0 0 3 14 3 Connecticut
4 2009 2 58 Sebastian Vollmer T NWE 0 0 0 Houston
5 2009 3 83 Brandon Tate WR NWE 2009 2009 0 0 0 0 2 1 11 0 North Carolina
6 2009 3 97 Tyrone McKenzie LB NWE 0 0 0 South Florida
7 2009 4 123 Rich Ohrnberger G NWE 0 0 0 Penn State
8 2009 5 170 George Bussey T NWE 0 0 0 Louisville 9 2009 6 198 Jake Ingram LS NWE 2009 2009 0 0 0 0 16 Hawaii
10 2009 6 207 Myron Pryor DT NWE 2009 2009 0 0 0 2 13 Kentucky
11 2009 7 232 Julian Edelman WR NWE 2009 2009 0 0 0 4 11 2 5 0 37 359 1 Kent State
12 2009 7 234 Darryl Richard DT NWE 0 0 0 Georgia Tech
13 2008 1 10 Jerod Mayo LB NWE 2008 2009 0 0 2 16 29 1.5 Tennessee
14 2008 2 62 Terrence Wheatley DB NWE 2008 2009 0 0 0 1 11 Colorado
15 2008 3 78 Shawn Crable LB NWE 0 0 0 Michigan
16 2008 3 94 Kevin O'Connell QB NWE 2008 2008 0 0 0 0 2 4 6 23 0 0 3 -6 0 San Diego State
17 2008 4 129 Jonathan Wilhite DB NWE 2008 2009 0 0 0 7 30 3 Auburn
18 2008 5 153 Matt Slater WR NWE 2008 2009 0 0 0 0 28 1 6 0 UCLA
19 2008 6 197 Bo Ruud LB NWE 0 0 0 Nebraska
20 2007 1 24 Brandon Meriweather DB NWE 2007 2009 0 1 2 17 48 9 2.0 Miami (FL)
21 2007 4 127 Kareem Brown DT NWE 2007 2007 0 0 0 0 1 Miami (FL)
22 2007 5 171 Clint Oldenburg T NWE 2007 2007 0 0 0 0 2 Colorado State
23 2007 6 180 Justin Rogers LB NWE 2007 2009 0 0 0 2 32 SMU
24 2007 6 202 Mike Richardson DB NWE 0 0 0 Notre Dame
25 2007 6 208 Justise Hairston RB NWE 0 0 0 Connecticut State
26 2007 6 209 Corey Hilliard T NWE 2007 2008 0 0 0 0 5 Oklahoma State
27 2007 7 211 Oscar Lua LB NWE 0 0 0 USC
28 2007 7 247 Mike Elgin G NWE 0 0 0 Iowa 29 2006 1 21 Laurence Maroney RB NWE 2006 2009 0 0 0 25 45 582 2430 21 40 409 1 Minnesota
Passing Rushing Receiving
Rk Year Rnd Pick Pos Tm From To AP1 PB St CarAV G Cmp Att Yds TD Int Att Yds TD Rec Yds TD Int Sk College/Univ
30 2006 2 36 Chad Jackson WR NWE 2006 2008 0 0 0 2 18 4 22 0 14 171 3 Florida
31 2006 3 86 David Thomas TE NWE 2006 2009 0 0 1 11 47 56 617 2 Texas
32 2006 4 106 Garrett Mills FB NWE 2007 2008 0 0 0 1 9 7 91 0 Tulsa
33 2006 4 118 Stephen Gostkowski K NWE 2006 2009 1 1 4 0 64 Memphis
34 2006 5 136 Ryan O'Callaghan T NWE 2006 2009 0 0 1 11 40 California
35 2006 6 191 Jeremy Mincey DE NWE 2007 2008 0 0 0 1 9 2.0 Florida
36 2006 6 205 Dan Stevenson G NWE 0 0 0 Notre Dame
37 2006 6 206 LeKevin Smith DT NWE 2006 2009 0 0 0 5 44 1.0 Nebraska
38 2006 7 229 Willie Andrews DB NWE 2006 2007 0 0 0 3 30



BOLDed players aren't on the team!

they pulled Sebastian Vollmer (4th rd.) right from under the Texans noses (UH) he started several games & will probably win position outright this coming season. excellent pick!

Patrick Chung was injured alot otherwise started early on.
Brace is a talented nose tackle but sits behind pro-bowler Vince Wilfork.
Butler is a CB I really liked, not physical enough for Texans but excellent in coverage.
Brandon Tate was a bit of a surprise, tore his acl mid way through last season @ North Carolina, but very dynamic returner/slot WR.
Several others are solid depth players 2nd or 3rd string, they re-tooled a major chunk of positions, along with this years are well on their way back up. To make matters worse for the rest of the NFL I beleive they have two #1's & two #2's next draft. thats exceptional manuvering & utiliztion of resouces :vinny:

thunderkyss
05-07-2010, 08:46 AM
Not really, I just dont think that Smithiak's philosopy is going to bring a SB trophy to Houston.

Yes , I believe that taking risks have to be done if you want to win a SB.

All teams have not been poor on the OL and S positions for 2 regimes and 9 yrs running.

Honestly, I don't see this. I think we need to wait and see.

IMHO, the FO is trying to lay a foundation, which I think we can safely say we will be moving beyond that phase in the near future. After that foundation is built, after their system is in place, then it would be the appropriate time to bring in big names, and take risks...

I struggle with the same thing at work. I don't have any control over who they bring into, and take from my team. I've got to deal with whatever. I know my job would be easier, and we would work better, and more efficiently, if certain people weren't brought on to my team, and if others weren't taken away.

Smithiak have complete control, and I think they are doing a fine job. I don't agree with everything they have done. But I can understand why they are doing what they are doing.


Honest opinions not homer opinions, and if Smithiak are at the top of your list why is it that the Texans are still dreaming about making the playoffs?

My honest opinion, is if everyone thought we would be a play-off team after 4 years, I don't understand the "they'll never get it done" attitude, when they looked like a play-off team more times than not in 2009. There were definitely times they didn't, when they should have... I'm not denying that. But I feel they are close enough, that it will happen in year 5.

If it does happen in year 5 (& I don't mean back-dooring into the play-offs, I'm talking about a serious run at a championship, which is the goal), what's the big deal about being a year off?

thunderkyss
05-07-2010, 08:50 AM
Bottom line is you take away all that Brees brings to that team & insert Brunell or Daniels & they're 7-9, tops & the only reason the win total is that high is b/c the spread offense they run lends some help.


don't forget an equal dosage of playing in the weaker conference, in one of the weaker divisions. I don't think any team in that division has had back to back successful seasons in quite some time. The leader one year, is usually in the cellar the next year, for one reason or another.

Year in, and year out, the AFC South is usually beating up on the rest of the NFL.

Blake
05-07-2010, 08:56 AM
they pulled Sebastian Vollmer (4th rd.) right from under the Texans noses (UH) he started several games & will probably win position outright this coming season. excellent pick!


NFL Draft (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NFL_Draft): 2009 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_NFL_Draft) / Round: 2 / Pick: 58

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sebastian_Vollmer

Honoring Earl 34
05-07-2010, 09:01 AM
Honestly, I don't see this. I think we need to wait and see.

IMHO, the FO is trying to lay a foundation, which I think we can safely say we will be moving beyond that phase in the near future. After that foundation is built, after their system is in place, then it would be the appropriate time to bring in big names, and take risks...

I struggle with the same thing at work. I don't have any control over who they bring into, and take from my team. I've got to deal with whatever. I know my job would be easier, and we would work better, and more efficiently, if certain people weren't brought on to my team, and if others weren't taken away.

Smithiak have complete control, and I think they are doing a fine job. I don't agree with everything they have done. But I can understand why they are doing what they are doing.



My honest opinion, is if everyone thought we would be a play-off team after 4 years, I don't understand the "they'll never get it done" attitude, when they looked like a play-off team more times than not in 2009. There were definitely times they didn't, when they should have... I'm not denying that. But I feel they are close enough, that it will happen in year 5.

If it does happen in year 5 (& I don't mean back-dooring into the play-offs, I'm talking about a serious run at a championship, which is the goal), what's the big deal about being a year off?

I agree , and part of that foundation needs ... IMO ... to be All Pro players who are the first there and some of the last to leave . This is how you get to be a perennial playoff contender . Then you add a piece or two as needed . To me it helps if the pro bowl guys are a QB , LT , CB , pass rusher supreme .


While you are prospering and picking late , you add a guy who may have fallen but he's easily the best player on the board . Then in two years when he's hitting his stride and you dump the vet that was in front of him , folks will be wondering how he fell that far .

Goldensilence
05-07-2010, 09:05 AM
I agree , and part of that foundation needs ... IMO ... to be All Pro players who are the first there and some of the last to leave . This is how you get to be a perennial playoff contender . Then you add a piece or two as needed . To me it helps if the pro bowl guys are a QB , LT , CB , pass rusher supreme .


While you are prospering and picking late , you add a guy who may have fallen but he's easily the best player on the board . Then in two years when he's hitting his stride and you dump the vet that was in front of him , folks will be wondering how he fell that far .

I have a bad feeling in my gut we're going to be saying that about Jerry Hughes whom the Colts drafted.

Then again they didn't get the production I thought they would from Donald Brown.

Honoring Earl 34
05-07-2010, 09:09 AM
I have a bad feeling in my gut we're going to be saying that about Jerry Hughes whom the Colts drafted.

Then again they didn't get the production I thought they would from Donald Brown.

Yep ... Hughes will step in for Mathis and they won't miss a beat .

The Colts OL , really isn't that good , to me anyways . Manning makes a read and gets the ball out of there . That's why you have to go get him up the gut . I think Brown is like a Texan RB , no where to run .

thunderkyss
05-07-2010, 09:15 AM
Sure it is. However, they also have a lot more picks and many of these players that have been cut (chad jackson) or moved on, haven't been lighting the world on fire for Detroit, Cleveland, or KC either.

In the case of the Patriots, I would say hands down, we've drafted better than them. I understand it is harder to make the team, when the team is winning. But I would also think they would be in a better position when it's time for those old guys to move on, and they are clearly not. FA is the way they've kept that team winning. Not only do their draft picks not make the team immediately, but they seldom ever do.

Like they aren't being developed to one day take over.

Honoring Earl 34
05-07-2010, 09:40 AM
In the case of the Patriots, I would say hands down, we've drafted better than them. I understand it is harder to make the team, when the team is winning. But I would also think they would be in a better position when it's time for those old guys to move on, and they are clearly not. FA is the way they've kept that team winning. Not only do their draft picks not make the team immediately, but they seldom ever do.

Like they aren't being developed to one day take over.

I think the whole " everybody picks better than us " couldn't stand up to myth busters . It's simply a case of the grass is greener on the other side of the hill .

Goldensilence
05-07-2010, 09:54 AM
Yep ... Hughes will step in for Mathis and they won't miss a beat .

The Colts OL , really isn't that good , to me anyways . Manning makes a read and gets the ball out of there . That's why you have to go get him up the gut . I think Brown is like a Texan RB , no where to run .

Agreed on their Ol not being very good, but from my understanding Caldwell is wanting to get bigger up front.

Picking McClendon from Tenn was a start in that direction.

drs23
05-07-2010, 01:29 PM
I hope you're right.

Ther's a chance you maybe. I'm very high on Shelley Smith. Not so much on Sharpton.

Regarding DC Bush's' comment on "letting him (Shelly Smith) soak" for a while. Do folks here take that to mean in a backup role on the roster or more likely on the practice squad?

JB
05-07-2010, 01:35 PM
Regarding DC Bush's' comment on "letting him (Shelly Smith) soak" for a while. Do folks here take that to mean in a backup role on the roster or more likely on the practice squad?

Why was Bush talking about Shelley Smith?

steelbtexan
05-07-2010, 01:51 PM
Honestly, I don't see this. I think we need to wait and see.

IMHO, the FO is trying to lay a foundation, which I think we can safely say we will be moving beyond that phase in the near future. After that foundation is built, after their system is in place, then it would be the appropriate time to bring in big names, and take risks...

I struggle with the same thing at work. I don't have any control over who they bring into, and take from my team. I've got to deal with whatever. I know my job would be easier, and we would work better, and more efficiently, if certain people weren't brought on to my team, and if others weren't taken away.

Smithiak have complete control, and I think they are doing a fine job. I don't agree with everything they have done. But I can understand why they are doing what they are doing.



My honest opinion, is if everyone thought we would be a play-off team after 4 years, I don't understand the "they'll never get it done" attitude, when they looked like a play-off team more times than not in 2009. There were definitely times they didn't, when they should have... I'm not denying that. But I feel they are close enough, that it will happen in year 5.

If it does happen in year 5 (& I don't mean back-dooring into the play-offs, I'm talking about a serious run at a championship, which is the goal), what's the big deal about being a year off?

Fair enough,

Atleast you have a set period of time for Smithiak to get the job done. If they aren't serious contenders next year. There will be built in excuses, injuries,turnovers,bad calls, etc...

I'm glad that you have set a time period for success.

It really bothers me that for the last 2 yrs McNair said in 2008 they were a playoff caliber team. In 2009 McNair said it was playoffs or bust. Then he reupped Kubes. It makes me think McNair is more of a salesman than Uncle Drayton. LOL

Second Honeymoon
05-07-2010, 02:06 PM
Mcnair isn't anywhere near as bad an owner as Drayton is. Bob needs to grow a pair and take a risk but Drayton is a brutally incompetent owner

that is what happens when you build statues of playoff chokejobs

badboy
05-07-2010, 02:16 PM
I've been debating this with HoustonFrog (http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=71571) seems like they are continuing in this tradition, your spot on. However its not 89-94 era teams do a much better job in research & development. To me the Patriots have replaced the Cowboys as superior system of talent aquistion, they continue to work the draft better than anybody. its a number game but not so much in amount of players brought in as how they fit under the salary cap moving forward. they made their killing being first to embody the 3-4, pulverized teams with hybrid, later round OLB's & rode the wave until the rest of the league could catch up & premium players moved on.
I think the new CBA with reductions in $ for first round picks will greatly change this. Three seconds and two thirds may be better than a high first now but not necessarily so every draft. This last one was very deep which benefitted teams this year. Probably not that way next season.

infantrycak
05-07-2010, 02:26 PM
If they aren't serious contenders next year.


I guess that's the difference in perspective. Last year I saw a team that with the exception of one game, the first, was in every game contending. 50 different missed kicks, fumbles, coaching decisions, couple poor officiating calls, other teams laying down had to happen for them not to make the playoffs. Examine championship teams and often you will find the ball bounced their way that season in addition to being good.

steelbtexan
05-07-2010, 08:55 PM
Now we know why Sharpton was drafted. Hopefully he can come up big.

But I dont want any excuses. It's time to make the playoffs.

Mr teX
05-12-2010, 08:53 AM
I guess that's the difference in perspective. Last year I saw a team that with the exception of one game, the first, was in every game contending. 50 different missed kicks, fumbles, coaching decisions, couple poor officiating calls, other teams laying down had to happen for them not to make the playoffs. Examine championship teams and often you will find the ball bounced their way that season in addition to being good.

exactly. the "luck" factor is the thing people most often overlook when they look back on championship teams & there are few teams where you can say "they were just that good" & you just knew they were going to win the championship from day 1; the 72-10 chicago bulls come to mind.

Whether it's a season of generating an exceptional amount of timely turnovers like the saints just had or the year tom brady & the patriots found out about the tuck rule, luck is a big part of why a particular team wins the championship from year to year.

thunderkyss
05-12-2010, 08:06 PM
exactly. the "luck" factor is the thing people most often overlook when they look back on championship teams & there are few teams where you can say "they were just that good" & you just knew they were going to win the championship from day 1; the 72-10 chicago bulls come to mind.

Whether it's a season of generating an exceptional amount of timely turnovers like the saints just had or the year tom brady & the patriots found out about the tuck rule, luck is a big part of why a particular team wins the championship from year to year.

I think the thing we missed the most, and hopefully have found, is that those teams also understand most games are decided by a handful of plays. When it is time to make those plays, you've got to step it up... regardless how good, or how hard you've been playing... you've got to step it up and make that play. Whether it's a kick, completing a catch in the end zone, holding on to the ball at the goal line, or making the right call from the sideline.

Good teams make their own luck.

JB
05-12-2010, 08:11 PM
I think the thing we missed the most, and hopefully have found, is that those teams also understand most games are decided by a handful of plays. When it is time to make those plays, you've got to step it up... regardless how good, or how hard you've been playing... you've got to step it up and make that play. Whether it's a kick, completing a catch in the end zone, holding on to the ball at the goal line, or making the right call from the sideline.

Good teams make their own luck.

The thing is, you never know which play might be the game deciding. You have to play each play like it is the most important play of the game.

thunderkyss
05-12-2010, 08:26 PM
The thing is, you never know which play might be the game deiding. You have to play each play like it is the most important play of the game.

exactly.

When people say you've got to dig deep to be a champion... I believe that's what they are talking about. You might have thought that last play was the one, need to dig deeper for the next play.

Honoring Earl 34
05-12-2010, 08:45 PM
exactly.

When people say you've got to dig deep to be a champion... I believe that's what they are talking about. You might have thought that last play was the one, need to dig deeper for the next play.

Digging down deep starts in the offseason and goes into the season . The more you invest the more you expect and the less likely you are to retreat .

I think you look for guys who have been on winning teams or guys on bad teams that play all out no matter what . I think the Texans look for guys who've been a captain .

You show me a winning team and I'll show you a group of star players who are driven . Show me a bad team and I'll show you the guys who are supposed to be the lead dogs , not giving much and collecting paycheck . Show me an average team and I'll show you a group who doesn't quite have that major influence one way or the other .

JB
05-12-2010, 08:52 PM
Digging down deep starts in the offseason and goes into the season . The more you invest the more you expect and the less likely you are to retreat .

I think you look for guys who have been on winning teams or guys on bad teams that play all out no matter what . I think the Texans look for guys who've been a captain .

You show me a winning team and I'll show you a group of star players who are driven . Show me a bad team and I'll show you the guys who are supposed to be the lead dogs , not giving much and collecting paycheck . Show me an average team and I'll show you a group who doesn't quite have that major influence one way or the other .

I think this is a very valid point, though I might put it differently. I like what Antonio Smith brings to the table; and I think that Danny Clark will be big for us this year. This team is so very close, all they need is a boost of confidence. If they can pull out a win against Indy in week 1 without Cushing, I believe that would propel them to a stellar season.

Honoring Earl 34
05-12-2010, 09:01 PM
I think this is a very valid point, though I might put it differently. I like what Antonio Smith brings to the table; and I think that Danny Clark will be big for us this year. This team is so very close, all they need is a boost of confidence. If they can pull out a win against Indy in week 1 without Cushing, I believe that would propel them to a stellar season.

That's what Cushing brings because like it or not , that guy would do anything to be good and win . The Texans haven't had many guys like that in their history .

The guys who influence ... IMO .

Defense

Smith , Pollard , Ryans , Cushing , maybe Diles .

Offense

AJ , Schaub , Daniels , Winston .

drs23
05-12-2010, 11:00 PM
That's what Cushing brings because like it or not , that guy would do anything to be good and win . The Texans haven't had many guys like that in their history .

The guys who influence ... IMO .

Defense

Smith , Pollard , Ryans , Cushing , maybe Diles .

Offense

AJ , Schaub , Daniels , Winston .

^^^^^This. Would rep if I could.

Goldensilence
05-13-2010, 12:36 PM
http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8180f45e&template=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true

Atogwe looks to beheaded towards FA.

Dutchrudder
05-13-2010, 12:43 PM
http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8180f45e&template=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true

Atogwe looks to beheaded towards FA.

Holy crap! Did he name his dog Muhammad???

drs23
06-02-2010, 12:57 PM
As others have mentioned, the coaching staff has a lot better handle on what's going on with personel than the unwashed masses (us)do. I've been pondering the lack of urgency as well. I did go back and watch quite a few Troy Nolan highlights and he looked really good to these untrained eyes.

Also these Day 9 OTA quotes, to me, sounded very encouraging:

(on how SS Troy Nolan looks) "He's way ahead. You can tell he paid attention to what he was doing last year, and just didn't take an I.R. year and do nothing. He was into what was going on, into game plans and into meetings, and because of that he's got a chance to be very competitive real early."

(on if SS Troy Nolan is mentally and physically ready) "Mentally, like I said, he's done all of his homework and has done what he needs to do, so we'll see. It's hard to tell until you put the pads on right now, but obviously he's kept up and is doing a good job."

I would love to see this guy light it up this year.

Second Honeymoon
06-02-2010, 01:00 PM
potential reasons for not drafting a FS?

because they don't know s**t from shinola?

well Smithiak-bashing aside, we could sign Atogwe. more of a hybrid safety but better than any FS we have on the roster aside from an aging and perhaps still-injured Wilson. Atogwe would cost some money, probably around $5million per, so that pretty much rules him out.

we wouldn't even spend $3million per to get a decent veteran running back.

Tate better be good and he better be healthy or Smithiak look worse than they already do this offseason.

JB
06-02-2010, 01:16 PM
http://www.backwater-productions.net/data_archive/images/funny/chat_board_humor/Ah%20Jeez...Not%20This%20Shit%20Again.jpg

drs23
06-02-2010, 03:05 PM
http://www.backwater-productions.net/data_archive/images/funny/chat_board_humor/ah%20jeez...not%20this%20shit%20again.jpg

ditto

Second Honeymoon
06-02-2010, 03:38 PM
truth hurts. 6-10 here we come.

but at least we were 9-7 last year...that was an awesome 'victory' parade

but yeah, God forbid a fan want their team to sign a player to improve the team

i am soooo off-base here. what a horrible fan I am for wanting the team to address the safety position

God forbid the team improve the team by spending $. what a horrible thing to say.

when we are sucking the tailpipe next year, don't tell me I didn't warn you...

just like I warned a lot of you before...no one listened then so why should I be surprised now.

but then again, most people will act like they saw it coming all along like they did with Carr
its funny how the same people that act like 9-7 was a success and that Kubiak is a good coach and that this was a good offseason are the same clueless homers that thought Carr was the cat's meow.

you know who you are, i won't point any fingers

awtysst
06-02-2010, 03:56 PM
potential reasons for not drafting a FS?

because they don't know s**t from shinola?

well Smithiak-bashing aside, we could sign Atogwe. more of a hybrid safety but better than any FS we have on the roster aside from an aging and perhaps still-injured Wilson. Atogwe would cost some money, probably around $5million per, so that pretty much rules him out.

we wouldn't even spend $3million per to get a decent veteran running back.

Tate better be good and he better be healthy or Smithiak look worse than they already do this offseason.

So you think a player 1)who missed the last four games with a major shoulder surgery, 2) apparently has a sports hernia, and 3) is not even a FS is a better FS than anyone we have on roster?

Really? Wow. I think your hatred of Kubiak is affecitng your thinking.

eriadoc
06-02-2010, 04:03 PM
truth hurts. 6-10 here we come.

but at least we were 9-7 last year...that was an awesome 'victory' parade

but yeah, God forbid a fan want their team to sign a player to improve the team

i am soooo off-base here. what a horrible fan I am for wanting the team to address the safety position

God forbid the team improve the team by spending $. what a horrible thing to say.

when we are sucking the tailpipe next year, don't tell me I didn't warn you...

just like I warned a lot of you before...no one listened then so why should I be surprised now.

but then again, most people will act like they saw it coming all along like they did with Carr
its funny how the same people that act like 9-7 was a success and that Kubiak is a good coach and that this was a good offseason are the same clueless homers that thought Carr was the cat's meow.

you know who you are, i won't point any fingers

I don't know why I'm bothering to respond, but I'll try and spell it out for you.

Many of us agree with your general assessment that the Texans need a FS. But your assertion that McNair won't spend the money on one is off base. Atogwe is not likely going to be signed by anyone for a real contract, because of injury issues. If the Texans can sign him to an incentive-laden deal, hinged upon his health, I'd be ecstatic with that. But to just go out and spend money because there's no cap is pretty ****ing stupid.

Most of your "Bob is cheap" bashing comes off as one petulant fan ranting just to hear himself rant because you don't actually come up with real, honest, solid and productive ways to spend money. I want a DT that eats up space next to one of our ten freakin' 3-tech DTs, but if I don't have a specific target in mind that isn't a waste of money, then I'm not going to bash McNair for not spending. I wanted a FS, like you, but Sharper never planned on letting us entertain the idea. Atogwe is damaged goods until proven otherwise.

You're still chapped about DRob .... OK, I get that. But the dude isn't worth the money, and I'll go a step further and say he just flat isn't any good any more - certainly no better than average. Factor in his attitude, and there's no way he should have been signed.

Now, I could be wrong about that, I admit. That's the difference between you and most of the other posters here. You insist that you're right, and there's no other possibility. If DRob has a horrible year and our secondary holds its own, are you willing to back off that stance? There's nothing wrong with wanting your team to be better, but you come off like a petulant child most of the time. And I'm not saying that to be harsh or anything, because like I alluded to above, I do find value in many of your posts, but you go too far. You don't know any more than anyone else how the money should best be spent.

Goldensilence
06-02-2010, 04:34 PM
As others have mentioned, the coaching staff has a lot better handle on what's going on with personel than the unwashed masses (us)do. I've been pondering the lack of urgency as well. I did go back and watch quite a few Troy Nolan highlights and he looked really good to these untrained eyes.

Also these Day 9 OTA quotes, to me, sounded very encouraging:

(on how SS Troy Nolan looks) "He's way ahead. You can tell he paid attention to what he was doing last year, and just didn't take an I.R. year and do nothing. He was into what was going on, into game plans and into meetings, and because of that he's got a chance to be very competitive real early."

(on if SS Troy Nolan is mentally and physically ready) "Mentally, like I said, he's done all of his homework and has done what he needs to do, so we'll see. It's hard to tell until you put the pads on right now, but obviously he's kept up and is doing a good job."

I would love to see this guy light it up this year.

Really and honestly I hope he does too, but I'm in no way counting on it. I'd would've felt a lot better had they gone after someone who has a track record at FS and can stay healthy.

Unfortunately we boxed ourselves in early the early rounds of the draft and couldn't address it then.

JB
06-02-2010, 04:39 PM
SH, it finally dawned on me as to why you are always on McNair about being cheap...

You are a big Uncle Drayton fan. You won't be satisfied until Bob makes a great Signing like the Carlos Lee deal. See how that worked out?

The signing of big name talent does not often lead to success. How has Washington done?

Goldensilence
06-02-2010, 04:53 PM
SH, it finally dawned on me as to why you are always on McNair about being cheap...

You are a big Uncle Drayton fan. You won't be satisfied until Bob makes a great Signing like the Carlos Lee deal. See how that worked out?

The signing of big name talent does not often lead to success. How has Washington done?

Agree on the Washington part.

I might get hosed on this but, I don't think the Lee signing has been as turrible as some people. Past couple of season's he's been one of the few consistent hitters in the lineup. I will agree that he is a defensive liability in the outfield. It's just too bad we've got a guy like Berkman who has generally been consistent (when healthy) at both spots.

The move I think that has hosed this team is the Tejada trade.

RipTraxx
06-02-2010, 05:57 PM
Im probably way late...but Otagwe from the Rams didnt sign his tender/resign with them.

Otagwe and Pollard? ill take it.

JB
06-02-2010, 06:25 PM
Agree on the Washington part.

I might get hosed on this but, I don't think the Lee signing has been as turrible as some people. Past couple of season's he's been one of the few consistent hitters in the lineup. I will agree that he is a defensive liability in the outfield. It's just too bad we've got a guy like Berkman who has generally been consistent (when healthy) at both spots.

The move I think that has hosed this team is the Tejada trade.

I think the move that hosed this team is the trade for that pitcher from Colorado that was injured all year. We gave up way too much for him. Thanks Pupu. Lee was ok the first couple of years, but that deal was ludicrous even at the time from a value standpoint.

awtysst
06-02-2010, 06:37 PM
I think the move that hosed this team is the trade for that pitcher from Colorado that was injured all year. We gave up way too much for him. Thanks Pupu. Lee was ok the first couple of years, but that deal was ludicrous even at the time from a value standpoint.

We did not really give up much for Jennings. All we gave up was Taylor Bucholtz, Jason Hirsh, and Willy taveras for Jason Jennings and Miguel Ascascio.

Taveras: defensive specialist at best. bounced around from Colorado to CIncy to the Reds and Nationals. I think he was given his release this year and is unsigned.

Hirsh:never panned out. Got injured in Colorado and was traded to the Yankees in a player to be named later situation. Is currently at AAA Scranton and is 4-5 3.92 ERA in 11 games.

Bucholtz: struggled initially as a starter. Did great as a setup man and then missed all of 2009 with tommy john surgery and is still not back. May be out half of 2010.

Jennings: NADA for Htown

Ascencio: FA.

What killed the Stros was a combination of:
1. Poor drafting
2. spending big bucks on declining FAs(Lee, Tejada, Matsui, etc) rather than investing in rookies
3. trying to "reload" rather than rebuild with a small budget. If you want to reload like the Yankees/Red Sox you must spend close to 150+mill you cannot do it for less than 100.

JB
06-02-2010, 06:47 PM
We did not really give up much for Jennings. All we gave up was Taylor Bucholtz, Jason Hirsh, and Willy taveras for Jason Jennings and Miguel Ascascio.

Taveras: defensive specialist at best. bounced around from Colorado to CIncy to the Reds and Nationals. I think he was given his release this year and is unsigned.

Hirsh:never panned out. Got injured in Colorado and was traded to the Yankees in a player to be named later situation. Is currently at AAA Scranton and is 4-5 3.92 ERA in 11 games.

Bucholtz: struggled initially as a starter. Did great as a setup man and then missed all of 2009 with tommy john surgery and is still not back. May be out half of 2010.

Jennings: NADA for Htown

Ascencio: FA.

What killed the Stros was a combination of:
1. Poor drafting
2. spending big bucks on declining FAs(Lee, Tejada, Matsui, etc) rather than investing in rookies
3. trying to "reload" rather than rebuild with a small budget. If you want to reload like the Yankees/Red Sox you must spend close to 150+mill you cannot do it for less than 100.

I agree with you, but at the time, Buchholtz & Hirsh were top level prospects. You could not forsee their future. At the time it was awfully bright. And Taveras could have been our Bourne. His hitting was not terrible here.

I am not saying that any of the three would be good, just at that time it was way too much to give up for a pitcher that had one good year.

That was the move that started the depletion of our minor league system.

Goldensilence
06-02-2010, 07:26 PM
I think the move that hosed this team is the trade for that pitcher from Colorado that was injured all year. We gave up way too much for him. Thanks Pupu. Lee was ok the first couple of years, but that deal was ludicrous even at the time from a value standpoint.

True on Jennings. Jeeze I must've erased it from my mind. Can you blame me?

Now that I remember I thought there was a lot of speculation even prior to the trade about his health.


Btw you spelt poo poo wrong. :)

JB
06-02-2010, 08:32 PM
True on Jennings. Jeeze I must've erased it from my mind. Can you blame me?

Now that I remember I thought there was a lot of speculation even prior to the trade about his health.


Btw you spelt poo poo wrong. :)

Just wanted to make sure everyone knew which Pupu I was talking about...

Goldensilence
06-02-2010, 08:52 PM
Just wanted to make sure everyone knew which Pupu I was talking about...

True it is hard to tell...both of them stink.

drs23
06-02-2010, 09:31 PM
True it is hard to tell...both of them stink.

Are the 'stros playin' FS this year? One of 'em or all of 'em??? :kitten:

thunderkyss
06-02-2010, 10:19 PM
but then again, most people will act like they saw it coming all along like they did with Carr
its funny how the same people that act like 9-7 was a success and that Kubiak is a good coach and that this was a good offseason are the same clueless homers that thought Carr was the cat's meow.

you know who you are, i won't point any fingers

For the record, I'd like to point out, I was on the anti-Carr wagon waaaayyyy back, but I think Kubiak is the bees-knees.

Goldensilence
06-02-2010, 10:42 PM
Are the 'stros playin' FS this year? One of 'em or all of 'em??? :kitten:

Stros's playing FS..... I think I'd rather have Matt Stevens at FS.