Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍
...just curious
- Thread starter tsip
- Start date
hollywood_texan
All Pro
I think it was kind of both. They probably wanted an offensive lineman but no one was there that they wanted. Probably why they traded down a few spots.
Then picked a player on the second need list, defensive line.
Interesting though, we traded down and New Orleans took a tackle from Oklahoma, Jammal Brown.
If I remember last year correctly, offensive line was a little light.
Then picked a player on the second need list, defensive line.
Interesting though, we traded down and New Orleans took a tackle from Oklahoma, Jammal Brown.
If I remember last year correctly, offensive line was a little light.
hollywood_texan
All Pro
tiger06 said:
I hear that thrown out at as fact and I don't understand why. If a guy doesn't fit a need and/or your system, what is the point? For example, Detriot has picked a WR for three years in a row in the top 10. I am sure all three of them were the BPA.
Maybe that is where the reason part comes in that you mention.
Please explain this though as you understand it because this statement is just throw out there and I have never heard why it is so important.
My opinion, is it better to build a proven system that allows interchangeable parts on talent that is readily available. Look at Pittsburgh, New England, and Denver. They don't seem to get caught up in the BPA arguement. They draft to their system.
hollywood_texan said:
Those guys haven't really drafted very high in the first round over the years, so I would agree that they draft according to their needs. I think in the top 10 or less of the 1st round those guys are going to look at the BPA first and needs second.
I would agree that we need defense first, but if you compare our need to BPA with the #1 pick overall. BPA wins out. If the Texans could have gotten a great deal they would have traded out of the #1 pick, IMO.
Everyone has a different philosophy with the draft, and it depends on the talent levels year by year. Al Davis has always said you never pass up someone who can score touchdowns regardless of BPA or Need. If the Raiders had the #1 pick, who do you think they would go after this year?
Texas_Thrill
Veteran
I think when you're drafting in the top 5 or 10 even most folks are assuming BPA b/c you're so bad any body you pick will help.
At bottom end where there are playoff teams they have weaknesses they want to shore up so they can pick more for need.
That's always been my logic behind the thinking.
Detroit is a very SPECIAL case of stupidity HOWEVER if you look at C. Rogers who has been pretty much MIA that pick of M. Williams could turn out to be alright especially if C Rog can never get his ish together.
At bottom end where there are playoff teams they have weaknesses they want to shore up so they can pick more for need.
That's always been my logic behind the thinking.
Detroit is a very SPECIAL case of stupidity HOWEVER if you look at C. Rogers who has been pretty much MIA that pick of M. Williams could turn out to be alright especially if C Rog can never get his ish together.
hollywood_texan
All Pro
Texas_Thrill said:
Thanks, that makes sense.
"I think when you're drafting in the top 5 or 10 even most folks are assuming BPA b/c you're so bad any body you pick will help."
I believe there is another point to make here--true, you may have many needs, so why would you take a player that does not fill a need? Too, there may be a player that is a 'once in a lifetime' player at a need position, so why would you not take him? I think the first round pick is for a 'critical' need position, a player that can offer a major immediate upgrade to that position. IMO, this thought is particularly true with the 1st pick of the draft!! How often does a team get one of those?
Two yrs ago, DD had almost 1800 all purpose yds and 10 tds. Is Bush going to be a major upgrade at that position?
I believe there is another point to make here--true, you may have many needs, so why would you take a player that does not fill a need? Too, there may be a player that is a 'once in a lifetime' player at a need position, so why would you not take him? I think the first round pick is for a 'critical' need position, a player that can offer a major immediate upgrade to that position. IMO, this thought is particularly true with the 1st pick of the draft!! How often does a team get one of those?
Two yrs ago, DD had almost 1800 all purpose yds and 10 tds. Is Bush going to be a major upgrade at that position?
tsip said:
We only have one #1 pick. Great DE's came around every other year or so. Guy's like Bush have the potential to be a player that comes along every 10 years maybe.. We signed Weaver which is hopefully an upgrade. We'll have to address pass rusher in the later rounds, FA, or trade. Of course it would be nice if someone presently on the team steps up in the new system.
threetoedpete
Hall of Fame
Sarg01 said:
I'm kinda of like this but different. You never pass up a franchise quarterback.
A first rounder should be in the running for the probowl every year. 2nd rounder should be a starter and respected around the league as a blue chip player. 3rd rounder should have a 60 % chance of sticking on the team and be a substaintial contributer with in two years. 4th rounder, 50 % chance of making the team . 5th rounder 40 % chance of sticking on the roaster out of summer camp. You hit anything after the fourth round, give the scouts a bump. Also, each position is weighted. DE's are worth more than OLB's. Corners are worth more than safteis. OLT's are worth far more than the other offensive line postions. You're right about Bush, and let the record show, everyone in the national media has crownded him a can't miss super star. We're two deep at starting running backs, currently. When we draft prince reggie we'lll be three deep in starting RB's. He's projected to be such a major offensive power, they feel although there isn't a major need at running back,that RB creates such match up problems, he will elevate the overall play of the offense.
You can bet they will come away with a young MLB (who doesn't have to start right away), a corner who can play nickle/dime, and saftey in a pinich and a good prospect to shore up Peek & Babin at DE befor the draft is over. Those three postions are major needs for '06 season. Judging by the moves, someone believes that we're close to making a push for a wild card next season with Reggie. So after the second, they will look for the BPA for those three back up spots.
I have a different take, one that hasn't been expressed publicly on the Travis Johnson deal by the Texan's. And that is they targeted Derrick Johnson, got a deal to move down and still have a shot at Derrick Johnson and ended up having to take the BPA that filled a need after DJ went off the board. Travis Johnson will never be a pro-bowl player. At best he will be a jouneyman DT who will be a servicable player. In other words, he was drafted ten to twenty spots too soon. The star on that line at FSU at the DT position, Broderick Bunkley, will go about the same slot or higher this draft. It will be very interesting from here on out to compare the careers of the two. My book says Bunkley has the chance to be something very special.
Personally, and I have stated this since January, in Reggie Bush we're getting Freeman McNiel , not Gale Sayers, Tony Dorsette, ( pick your Icon). I think it is a mistake. But as stated earliy, everyone in the national media assures us that Bush is a lock for the HOF. We'll see. He's the BPA.
4Texans said:
and the league has been doing fine without that one player every 10 years or so. Denver especially. If we were Arizona, the Jets, or Philadelphia(imagine Reggie in Philly), then I can understand this "once in a lifetime" runner argument. But we're not..... Good team, bad team, we've been in the upper half of the league as far as the running game is concerned.
But........ the first thing you need to look at, going into the draft, is need. If you've got alot of needs, chances are pretty good, that BPA will be a fit. However, two areas I thought we were strongest in, before FA, was runningback, and WR....OF course FA kind of ate into our depth at both position..... creating the need.
We still had too many needs, to consider BPA @ #1 overall. Which, is the main reason we had so many "trade down" guys.
One by one, Kubiak filled those needs. I say Kubiak, because our FA acquisitions have been unlike any before, and the money(with the exception of Weaver) hasn't been the same as past acquisitions.
So now, we still have needs, but our needs aren't anyworse, than the best teams in the leagu.... we are in prime position to take BPA.
Mario Williams......... whether he was BPA or not 1 month ago, doesn't matter. He'd give us an identity on Defense, give us a playmaker to match the bunch we have on offense. & you don't know what N.O. is going to do. which makes our pick more valuable than it was when we "knew" they were going to take a quarterback.
1 month ago, Reggie was definitely, according to many, the BPA. It made sense to trade away the rights to that pick, and get MArio, D'Brick, AJ, or Vernon Davis plus additional picks. No one would have traded down to get Mario @ the three/four spot without additional compensation. Taking him #1 IMHO, is pretty much the same. So I can see that argument.
But going into next season, I can look at our backfield right now, and gaurantee we'll be competitive. We will not be one dimensional, and we'll be in the upper 50% of the league....... With Kubiak in calling the shots, I feel like we'd be fine, if we didn't pick a running back until the second day, or with one of our 3rd round picks. I know we can win with our running game. I've got more faith in our running game than I do our QB. I also have more faith in our stable of runningbacks than I do our defensive line.
Sure, Babin will most likely improve going back to a 4-3........ he'll probably get more than 4 sacks. Peek should get more than 8. Weaver should get more than 2, Robaire Smith should get more than 8(??) But we don't know that. it's speculation at this point. All of our guys, with the exception of N.D. Kalu was playing in a 3-4 last year....... sure we can theorize that they will be better, but we're already doing that with the offensive line. I'd hate to go into next season, and it will be disastrous for Kubiak/Casserly/McNair, if we have the same problems we had last year, offensive line, and weak pass rush.
Personally, I'd much rather trade down lower, and get us a defensive field general. A true MLB, that will cause major Havok. I think we're pretty stout at Defensive end, even though it's only on paper right now. We have a bunch of linebackers too, but no one to really get your hair standing on end.
Reggie Bush may very well still be BPA, but Mario is sooo close, and is needed more.