Trade down puzzle piece just completed

[infantrycak]

The fact that you had to go back 17 years to find an offensive tackle who was a huge bust when taken in the top few draft picks helps to prove this point......

A little more recent would be Mike Williams taken #4 overall in 2002 to play LT, now about to be cut by the Bills from his back up role as a LG. Over time LT's have been taken high and have been safer maybe, but during the existence of the Texans the record has been miserable with not one of the top drafted LT prospects actually playing LT at this point--Williams #4 (about to be cut), Jordan Gross #8 (back at RT), Robert Gallery #2 (at RT), Alex Barron #16 (at RT). Not saying any or all of them are bad players or that several wouldn't have improved the quality of the Texans OL, but so far none has been the dominant franchise LT folks advertised.

 

[killeentexan]

What about Robert Gallery and Mike Williams?They were just recently. Look at the Denver roster I posted above and even the NE one. Heck, look at the Steelers one above. 3 1st rounders yet all at the bottom of the draft. We have the #1 pick in the 2nd round and 2 Top 3rd rounders. With the blocking scheme we are implementing, using a pick in the Top 5 on Brick just isn't necessary.

Gallery hasn't played long enough to be considered a bust and from the info I have, Williams has gotten mixed reviews. If you want to look at the numbers then I'll copy what I posted on this subject a while ago.....

I have been of the opinion for quite awhile that we should trade down and take Brick to anchor our O-Line for the next 10 years or so. With all the differing opinions here, I figured I would do a little research. I looked at the draft starting in 2003 and went back 10 years (don't have enough info on players drafted in 2004 & 2005 to determine success or failure). I looked for skill players drafted in the top 3 vs OT's drafted in the top 10.

There were 19 skill players (QB, RB, WR) drafted in the top 3 in that 10 year span - in other words they were considered "can't miss" prospects. 9 of them can be considered complete busts - Rick Mirer, Garrison Hearst, Heath Schuler, Ki-Jana Carter, Ryan Leaf, Akili Smith, Tim Couch, Joey Harrington & Charles Rogers. 3 are good players but have not reached the level expected as a top 3 pick - Drew Bledsoe, Keyshawn Johnson & David Carr. 7 have acheived superstar status or at least have begun living up to the expectations - Carson Palmer, Andre Johnson, Michael Vick, Donovan McNabb, Peyton Manning, Steve McNair & Marshall Faulk. That's 7 out of 19 that have played at the level of a top 3 draft pick. Obviously, drafting a skill player is hit or miss.

On the flip side, looking at the tackles who were selected in the top 10 (I wouldn't want us to drop any lower then 10th) none have been a complete bust, while the list reads like a who's who of all pro/pro bowl tackles. There were 14 tackles selected in the top 10 - Orlando Pace, Jonathen Ogden, Tony Boselli, Willie Anderson, Walter Jones, Jordan Gross, Mike Williams, Bryant McKinnie, Levi Jones, Leonard Davis, Chris Samuels, Kyle Turley, Willie Roaf & Lincoln Kennedy. I have heard in the past that there is a much higher success rate when selecting "big men" with 1st round picks......This info seems to agree with that statement.

Both Reggie Bush and VY have a ton of potential....but then again so did Akili Smith, Ryan Leaf, Ki-Jana Carter, Rick Mirer etc. As bad as those guys were, remember - they were considered can't miss prospects who were going to turn their respective frachises around.

Trade down and take Brick!

Even if you want to consider Williams a bust, that's 1 bust out of 14 top 10 OT's selected. So in other words 13 out of 14 OT's selected in the top 10 worked out to be deserving picks vs 7 out of 19 skill players selected in the top 3. The odds are staggering in favor of taking a big man! And as far as other teams having success in taking linemen in the later stages of the 1st round (Pittsburgh with 3 late 1st round linemen) we don't have 3 picks in the 1st round to improve our OL...we have 1 pick at the top of the draft where history has shown that taking a big man gives the highest success rate.

 

[killeentexan]

A little more recent would be Mike Williams taken #4 overall in 2002 to play LT, now about to be cut by the Bills from his back up role as a LG. Over time LT's have been taken high and have been safer maybe, but during the existence of the Texans the record has been miserable with not one of the top drafted LT prospects actually playing LT at this point--Williams #4 (about to be cut), Jordan Gross #8 (back at RT), Robert Gallery #2 (at RT), Alex Barron #16 (at RT). Not saying any or all of them are bad players or that several wouldn't have improved the quality of the Texans OL, but so far none has been the dominant franchise LT folks advertised.

They've certainly been better then Rick Mirer, Garrison Hearst, Heath Schuler, Ki-Jana Carter, Ryan Leaf, Akili Smith, Tim Couch, Joey Harrington & Charles Rogers haven't they? I'm not saying Bush will be a bust, just that he is not the sure thing can't miss lock that everyone is making him out to be. With the fact that I think Davis has shown top 10 RB ability, I think it's pointless to take a chance on Bush when we have such great needs elsewhere and the success rate when taking OT's is so much higher.

 

[HoustonFrog]

They've certainly been better then Rick Mirer, Garrison Hearst, Heath Schuler, Ki-Jana Carter, Ryan Leaf, Akili Smith, Tim Couch, Joey Harrington & Charles Rogers haven't they? I'm not saying Bush will be a bust, just that he is not the sure thing can't miss lock that everyone is making him out to be. With the fact that I think Davis has shown top 10 RB ability, I think it's pointless to take a chance on Bush when we have such great needs elsewhere and the success rate when taking OT's is so much higher.

But again you have to look at our new scheme and what the team, the Broncos, did with it. The coaches already said they take smaller, scrappy guys who love to play and fit them into the zone type players. No one is saying that Bush or anyone else can't be a bust. However we have 4 picks in the Top 66 and we can accomplish both goals....upgrading at skill while still taking an O-lineman in a deep draft for O-lineman. There is no reason to take the O-lineman there in the Top 5 when you can cover both bases with high picks. Again, look at the lines from the Pats, Denver and the Steelers and when the guys were taken.

 

[HJam72]

A lot of the players you guys are talking about (on both sides) are not in their primes yet. A 7 year player is a world away from what he was at say 3 yrs. in many cases. I think a lot of people expect too much too soon.

I do tend to side with the "take a big man" guys here in some respects, but I wouldn't use a #1 pick for it. It's cliche for a reason: games are won in the trenches.

 

[FILO_girl]

and wasnt everyone pissed off when we got a DT last year? i see very little consistency on this message board.

I don't think it was that the collective board was pissed over getting TJ, it is more that they were pissed that it wasn't DJ. The shock factor on Cass' choice was huge.

Wait until April 29th and VY or RB is not on our roster, then you will see some pissed posters 'round these parts.

 

[HJam72]

i see very little consistency on this message board.

Take Bush with the #1 pick. If he doesn't get at least 200 yds. in the first regular season game, trade him for a bag of peanuts. Carr sucks. I miss Capers, Fangio, and especially Pendry. We need to spend big, big, bucks on free agents--especially skills players, like a new QB and somebody to replace AJ. Make absolutely sure that McKinney starts at center and sign Peek and G-Funk for as long as possible. They're both built exactly like what we need in a DE.

What was I saying earlier? Oh, yeah, P-Buch is awesome, but he costs too much. Let him go. We need serious skills players, especially on offense, because your strongest link is all that matters and who cares about trenches anyway? :