First four picks?

[IDEXAN]

I say get a lineman, either D or O, the BPA on our Board who plays in the offensive line at tackle or plays in the defensive line (to include OLB prospects since we run the 3-4) with our first round pick. Then with the second-rounder get a WR and after that look for depth.

[badboy]

Originally Posted by mussop

Short is anything but a "plugger". The best one word description of him would be, penetrator. He reminds me alot of Mitchell when he was coming out except that he has a way better anchor.

Purdue DT Kawann Short posted three tackles in the Senior Bowl, and was consistently penetrating the backfield. However, some NFL scouts have their concerns about Short despite what appears to be immense talent. "He doesn't play as hard as you would like, not regularly," the scout said. "Now, there in the Senior Bowl, he played his ass off. Why did he play hard? Maybe it goes back to mentality. Are you that guy? You are rolling the dice with this kid but let me tell you, he is talented, real talented. He can play defensive end in a 3-4 and he can play three technique or nose in a 4-3. Not many guys you can make that statement about."

Read more: http://www.kffl.com/player/27690/nfl/kawann-short#ixzz2KQL4x9ma

I disagree with him not playing hard. At least I didn't see that in games I watched. Oh and by the way, he weighed in at 315 lbs at the senior bowl.

"He is better than Cody but how much better (1st versus 2nd round) than Brandon Williams or Sylvester?"

IMO alot better. Especially at getting pressure on the QB. In that sense there is no comparison.

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/...es.html&page=2

308 lbs. I watched Short at Senior Bowl and was very impressed, don't remember seeing him at the Nose. It is like watching a corner and projecting he should be good at safety because he plays hard. You could hit jackpot but depending on player most will choose a player who has played safety. An example would be Quin who was drafted to play corner but was rated #7 safety coming out of college when drafted. He played CB but is much better safety.

As for as his taking plays off, he would do much better on a team where he has something to strive for (SB) and fiery teammates.

Appreciate all comments and views but for now I'm sticking with ILB and a Nose in second.

[mussop]

Originally Posted by IDEXAN

I say get a lineman, either D or O, the BPA on our Board who plays in the offensive line at tackle or plays in the defensive line (to include OLB prospects since we run the 3-4) with our first round pick. Then with the second-rounder get a WR and after that look for depth.

Im always a build the trenches first guy. The only OT that I could see available at 27 that would be worth taking would be Lane Johnson. I doubt if he last till 27 but I would not be unhappy at all if we drafted him at 27.

On the other hand there are several DT's who could fall to 27 that are easily worth picking. Short, Hankins and Jenkins. I prefer Short but wouldn't mind any of them.

[badboy]

Originally Posted by IDEXAN

I say get a lineman, either D or O, the BPA on our Board who plays in the offensive line at tackle or plays in the defensive line (to include OLB prospects since we run the 3-4) with our first round pick. Then with the second-rounder get a WR and after that look for depth.

Convince me we need an OT in first.

[mussop]

Originally Posted by badboy

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/...es.html&page=2

308 lbs. I watched Short at Senior Bowl and was very impressed, don't remember seeing him at the Nose. It is like watching a corner and projecting he should be good at safety because he plays hard. You could hit jackpot but depending on player most will choose a player who has played safety. An example would be Quin who was drafted to play corner but was rated #7 safety coming out of college when drafted. He played CB but is much better safety.

As for as his taking plays off, he would do much better on a team where he has something to strive for (SB) and fiery teammates.

Appreciate all comments and views but for now I'm sticking with ILB and a Nose in second.

I have no problem with that at all. Give me Minter in the first and Williams in the second and I'm a happy camper. Those are my two positions I want filled in the first and second round. I see them as our biggest needs and from what I have gathered researching the draft up until now, should be depleted after two rounds of solid talent.

In other words the drop off of talent after the second round at either position is severe.

I still don't understand your hang up with labels. Just because its called NT in our defensive scheme doesn't mean its required to have traditional NT responsibilities. Go back and watch some or our games. The "NT" really plays more like a 4/3 DT in Wades system.

[mussop]

Originally Posted by badboy

Convince me we need an OT in first.

Sometimes talent trumps need.

[badboy]

Mussop, not so much hung up on labels as how I see things playing out. I think Phillips would play our NT more like a true 3-4 IF he had the talent there. He has adapted as he did when he moved Quin into a LB role. I feel as if I appear to be denigrating Short but just want to compare apples to apples. In a PM with my draft mock partners, we discuss same issues. I see Short as someone who could replace Antoine very quickly allowing GM to use that money for FA WR. I was blasted for suggesting Short & Williams, lol.

1. Short DT (Smith) 2. B. Williams NT 3a Steadman Bailey WR 3b.Darrius Slay S/CB 4. Kiko Alonzo ILB (five spots)with that Dline I would not be concerned with starting Alonzo next to Cushing.

[badboy]

Originally Posted by mussop

Sometimes talent trumps need.

Agreed but not when we have so many other needs..now if Lane Johnson fell..maybe. No other OT interests me.

[steelbtexan]

Originally Posted by beerlover

Short is a fast twitch type of prospect. every position has them. to find that in a 300 pounder + with those type of movement skills will drive his draft stock higher. Senior Bowl measurements 6'3" 315. He could also play DE in the 3-4. This versatility to play multiple positions as a front line starter should all but lock his grade into 1st. Grade = Value = Need = Slot = #27.

This is why Short will be gone by 27.

Hankins and Jenkins scare me to death. All of these NT's havelarge bust potential. Give me a later rd NT like Gaethers/Arby Jones/Hughes. They all have ability and the risk factor goes down.

If I were the Texans I would bring Casey Hampton home and draft Montori Hughes in the 5/6th rd. My DT rotation would be Hampton/Mitchell/Hughes.

A vet, a great depth guy and a guy with potential to be great but has time to learn theins and outs of the NFL. Hughes learning under Hampton would be an ideal situation.

BTW, if I had to pick a NT in the 1st rd it would be Short. Even ahead of Star.

[badboy]

Originally Posted by steelbtexan

This is why Short will be gone by 27.

Hankins and Jenkins scare me to death. All of these NT's havelarge bust potential. Give me a later rd NT like Gaethers/Arby Jones/Hughes. They all have ability and the risk factor goes down.If I were the Texans I would bring Casey Hampton home and draft Montori Hughes in the 5/6th rd. My DT rotation would be Hampton/Mitchell/Hughes.

A vet, a great depth guy and a guy with potential to be great but has time to learn theins and outs of the NFL. Hughes learning under Hampton would be an ideal situation.

BTW, if I had to pick a NT in the 1st rd it would be Short. Even ahead of Star.

The risk factor goes down? Isn't it known that the lower the round the greater risk factor goes up that player will make team? Did you figure that in your choice?

[mussop]

Originally Posted by badboy

Agreed but not when we have so many other needs..now if Lane Johnson fell..maybe. No other OT interests me.

This was my point'

Originally Posted by badboy

Mussop, not so much hung up on labels as how I see things playing out. I think Phillips would play our NT more like a true 3-4 IF he had the talent there. He has adapted as he did when he moved Quin into a LB role. I feel as if I appear to be denigrating Short but just want to compare apples to apples. In a PM with my draft mock partners, we discuss same issues. I see Short as someone who could replace Antoine very quickly allowing GM to use that money for FA WR. I was blasted for suggesting Short & Williams, lol.

1. Short DT (Smith) 2. B. Williams NT 3a Steadman Bailey WR 3b.Darrius Slay S/CB 4. Kiko Alonzo ILB (five spots)with that Dline I would not be concerned with starting Alonzo next to Cushing.

I would faint if we had that draft. In a good way!!! People can blast you all they want but that would be a great draft and improve both the defense and the offense.

Short is a lot like Smith and would be a solid replacement.

Williams is more than a step up over Cody.

Bailey gives us the slot WR we have never had. Someone with the ability to get separation and someone who is really good after the catch.

Need to research Slay more.

I really like what Alonzo brings to the table. Good match next to Cushing.

Not to mention what the money save by letting go of Smith could allow us to do in FA. Im a big fan of Smith's but sometimes you have to make these type of decisions. Last year for example.

[badboy]

Originally Posted by mussop

This was my point'




I would faint if we had that draft. In a good way!!! People can blast you all they want but that would be a great draft and improve both the defense and the offense.

Short is a lot like Smith and would be a solid replacement.

Williams is more than a step up over Cody.

Bailey gives us the slot WR we have never had. Someone with the ability to get separation and someone who is really good after the catch.

Need to research Slay more.

I really like what Alonzo brings to the table. Good match next to Cushing.

Not to mention what the money save by letting go of Smith could allow us to do in FA. Im a big fan of Smith's but sometimes you have to make these type of decisions. Last year for example.

If we drafted Stedman Bailey and signed a FA WR for #2 spot, we could cut Walter saving $3.5m. (Since his $5m bonus was a first year roster rather than signing bonus, I'm not sure if it was prorated for cap.)

[steelbtexan]

Originally Posted by badboy

The risk factor goes down? Isn't it known that the lower the round the greater risk factor goes up that player will make team? Did you figure that in your choice?

Hampton would be the starter and is a proven guy= less risk than picking an unproven draft pick. The late rd pick (Hughes) wouldn't be forced to be a day 1 contributor.

BTW, I love the Short/Williams/Bailey draft. But Alonso is going to go to a Tampa 2 team by rd 3, rd 2 probably, Alonso is a perfect fit in the Tampa 2. I know all of the draft sites have Alonso in the 4th rd range. There's no way Alonso reahes the 27th pick of the 4th rd. IMHO

If you cant tell I love alonso and the way he plays the game. He's a 3 down LB.

[Lucky]

Originally Posted by badboy

If we drafted Stedman Bailey and signed a FA WR for #2 spot, we could cut Walter saving $3.5m. (Since his $5m bonus was a first year roster rather than signing bonus, I'm not sure if it was prorated for cap.)

Walter's contract still has $2 million left of his bonus to amortize. Cutting him saves $2.5 million off the cap. But if he were to accept a salary reduction again to $2 million, that would save $1.5 million. Thus you could keep Walter for an additional $1 million. Don't be surprised if this occurs. Kubiak likes having Walter around.

[Corrosion]

Originally Posted by badboy

Appreciate all comments and views but for now I'm sticking with ILB and a Nose in second.

I just dont think there is value in drafting an ILB in the late first when there are several who will be available in the 3rd round with the same type of potential as any taken in rounds 1-2.

I'd take a WR , NT/DT or RT (Possibly a safety) in those first two rounds and look to fill the ILB spot in the third. The talent doesnt drop off .... none of these guys are really the complete package and all have different skillsets.

Originally Posted by Lucky

Walter's contract still has $2 million left of his bonus to amortize. Cutting him saves $2.5 million off the cap. But if he were to accept a salary reduction again to $2 million, that would save $1.5 million. Thus you could keep Walter for an additional $1 million. Don't be surprised if this occurs. Kubiak likes having Walter around.

I could see that happening especially with Posey being out for who knows how long , possibly the entire season. Keeping Walter at a reduced rate means you dont have to replace two WR's .... Just one , you can let him walk in the following offseason when Posey is able to return (maybe).

[drs23]

Originally Posted by skenney_11

3. Robert Lester, S. Whoever selects Lester will be one lucky team. I believe he is at least a 2nd round talent but isn't due to his lack of production. When teams were throwing at him, he was a intercepting machine. Lester will play the role of what Demps and Keo did as the S who played when Quin moved to the LB spot. I really think Lester will shine due to playing against pass heavy teams and having many opportunities to pick off QB's

I'm not following here. These statements seem to me to be contradictory. I'm sure it makes perfect sense and I'm just a little slow on the uptake. Please explain so an idgit like me can understand please. :

[skenney_11]

Originally Posted by drs23

I'm not following here. These statements seem to me to be contradictory. I'm sure it makes perfect sense and I'm just a little slow on the uptake. Please explain so an idgit like me can understand please. :

You must be a little slow because what I meant was when teams didn't gameplan against him, he had a bunch of interceptions.

[drs23]

Originally Posted by skenney_11

You must be a little slow because what I meant was when teams didn't gameplan against him, he had a bunch of interceptions.

Thank you.

[skenney_11]

You're welcome

[badboy]

Originally Posted by Lucky

Walter's contract still has $2 million left of his bonus to amortize. Cutting him saves $2.5 million off the cap. But if he were to accept a salary reduction again to $2 million, that would save $1.5 million. Thus you could keep Walter for an additional $1 million. Don't be surprised if this occurs. Kubiak likes having Walter around.

That's why I qualified that statement; think we discussed his contract earlier. Wasn't sure his "roster" bonus would be prorated. $3.5m base +1 prorated= $4.5 cap. I agree I'd rather have him if he reduces.