Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts

The Goat · 02-10-2010, 12:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Saints drafted Jamaal Brown 13th overall in 2005. He didn't play at all this year, which supports the notion that the left tackle position is overvalued compared to the other positions on the OL, particularly RT. But the Saints got where they are by investing a first and a second round pick in tackles over the last seven drafts, but more directly, by digging up the very best lineman available in the middle rounds, at positions where the draft value system dictates that great players are available if you look in places like Bloomsburg, and Towson State.

Even though the backup LT, Bushrod, was undrafted, the Saints didn't try to live off the middle rounds in the building of the OL. The fact that their interior line actually IS built of middle rounders, which it is, is possible in part because they were able to take college OTs and work them at a new position because they had already developed the two bookends.

In essence, when we had an effective Samuels and Jansen for the forseeable future, the line was our strength. We chose to invest heavily in Randy Thomas back in 2003 because we were working with a crappy interior OL at the time, which was a fine start, and then Dockery and Rabach worked because they were functional pieces in a strong unit that hadn't been skimped on. Kendall, to an extent, was the same principle. But once the cornerstones of our line began to decline, those interior players were exposed.

I don't think that's perfectly analogous to the Saints, because Nicks and Goodwin are strong players in their own right, certainly better than Rabach and Dockery, and helped solve the issue of having a replacement LT this year. But if the Saints OL success is sustainable, I'd imagine that Jamaal Brown is going to be a big part of it.

Excellent post. If I understand you correctly Brown is basically being groomed to start at LT?

Per the Schefter article, well, he's ignoring the fact the Saints, and more so the Colts, are exceptional in their oline compilation. The best lines in football, including the Jets, Vikes, and Giants are mostly comprised of high draft choices. I see a lot of wisdom in drafting lineman high as well as looking for the underrated talent in the middle rounds. Research aside, my ocular assessment

is the bust risk is significantly lower for high-drafted offensive lineman than compared to most other positions, especially WR and QB.

I also find it interesting DT seems like a fairly solid high draft choice while defensive ends seems to bust maybe half the time.

Dirtbag59 · 02-10-2010, 12:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Goat

Excellent post. If I understand you correctly Brown is basically being groomed to start at LT?

Groomed? The guy is a 28 year old with two pro bowls under his belt. He's been a mainstay on their line since his rookie year in 2005. If anything he's there, no further grooming required. Tripp was pointing out that if the Saints were going to start a dynasty that he would expect Brown being a big part of the teams long term success.

GTripp0012 · 02-10-2010, 01:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Goat

Excellent post. If I understand you correctly Brown is basically being groomed to start at LT?

I was more pointing out that the Saints have all of their OL salary invested in their two tackles. Brown was the guy who was hurt and couldn't play this year.

The interior of the line includes two guys on their rookie contract at guards, and a center on a very modest second contract who was picked up from the Jets and moved inside. He was signed as a backup actually, and New Orleans let both of their two other Centers (Bentley, then Faine) walk before handing the job to Goodwin in 2008. He appears to have been groomed by the team.

It's due to good drafting, primarily, that NO was able to play Bushrod at LT this year and still win the super bowl. He's not a different player than Stephon Heyer is for us. He would have been a complete disaster here forced into the same role. But the Saints were strong across the board at OL due to good recent drafting, and because they are getting Brown back next year (even though his contract situation starts to become an issue), they don't really have to "build" the lines, or try Carl Nicks at left tackle (and then play an inferior LG).

They treated Bushrod all year like an undrafted replacement player, the very same guy that the Redskins wouldn't have been caught dead playing in the Gibbs era, and won the super bowl with him, and not only that, let their offensive line lead them there.

We have salary locked up in the tackle position still, but it's mostly dead salary, especially if Samuels is indeed done. Restructuring that position so that the guaranteed $ there goes towards paying for future talent instead of past talent has to be priority #1.

tryfuhl · 02-10-2010, 01:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

The NFL is a QB league, if we can get a franchise QB, we've got to get him. If we look at the Conference championships, who are the QBs; Manning, Brees, Favre, Sanchez (#1 D, #1 Rushing O). Look at the division round; Warner, Rivers, Flacco (excellent D, excellent run game), Romo (Cowpuke, he just sucks and is the exception). So unless a team can build a dominant defense and develop a dominant running game, a franchise-type QB is needed to win in the playoffs.

The only franchise QB in this draft IMO is Clausen. If STL grabs him, then we definitely go OL or trade down and get even more OL and help elsewhere.

Yep; QB is the one spot it's okay to reach a bit. If you hesitate to draft one because the spot is too high you'll rarely draft one.. and you'll have high draft picks quite a bit most likely. Unless you really see enough intangibles out of a later pick that you know that you can groom him, you might as well take one of the big boys it seems, unless you're fairly certain you'll be in place to draft someone you're more interested in the next year and are certain you can land him. There are always busts but that's just the risk you have to take. Either that or you can just stay forever satisfied with questionable QB play, something I'd rather put behind us.

GTripp0012 · 02-10-2010, 01:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tryfuhl

Yep; QB is the one spot it's okay to reach a bit. If you hesitate to draft one because the spot is too high you'll rarely draft one.. and you'll have high draft picks quite a bit most likely. Unless you really see enough intangibles out of a later pick that you know that you can groom him, you might as well take one of the big boys it seems, unless you're fairly certain you'll be in place to draft someone you're more interested in the next year and are certain you can land him. There are always busts but that's just the risk you have to take. Either that or you can just stay forever satisfied with questionable QB play, something I'd rather put behind us.

Devil's Advocate:

If you're at No. 4, and you're reaching for a QB prospect who is value-wise, in the 11-20 range on a big board...what exactly is the pick designed to net you.

I mean, if you're getting a top five type, that's not a reach at all. If you're not getting a top ten type...it's hardly an ambitious move. It seems foolhardy.

But what about that grey area in between. In five years, what if one of the guys who will be available at No. 4 is going to be a top ten quarterback. Which is to say, he's not better than Campbell now, but in four seasons (assuming there is still football), he's good enough to net some pro bowls if a guy drops out. Like say, Matt Schaub or Carson Palmer. Would that be a reach, or a pick at value? And furthermore, would it be worth it (if a crystal ball could confirm that you weren't getting a player who would ever be top five at his position).

Essentially though, there are 25ish franchise quarterbacks in this league, and a lot of them do a lot of losing. So, perhaps it's not a quarterback league after all.

53Fan · 02-10-2010, 02:55 AM

I found this interesting. Especially since only 2 QB's were sacked more than JC last year, (Thanks Vinny), and our DC the last couple of years didn't consider sacks very important.

NFL: Sack differential growing in importance - ESPN

I'm really happy we've made some changes in the way this team will be run this year. HTTR!!!

BigHairedAristocrat · 02-10-2010, 10:36 AM

hopefully we can find a trading partner to trade down. theres not that great a difference between the top OL in the draft and ones that will be available in the bottom of round 1 and the top of round 2. None of the OL in this draft strike me as top 5 material. Also, as many have noted, neither of the "top" QBs in this draft are top 10 material. If we're stuck at 4, we'd be much better off in the long run drafting BPA than reaching for Bradford or Clausen. Atleast, thats how things look now. Alot can - and will - change over the next 2 months to affect players draft stock.

r08kessl · 02-10-2010, 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dirtbag359

If we do go the "develop a prospect" route at QB I see Zac Robinson as a great fit. Apparently the rumor is that Shanahan would want someone who took a hit to their draft stock, but was originally projected much higher during preseason. Robinson has the zip on his throws to get the ball downfield, accurate, mobile, played under center, and he's played against strong competition.

Personally I don't see the appeal in McCoy. His arm is way to weak, especially on throws like deep outs and he has a tendency to leave receivers high and dry. Maybe the Shanahan's, especially Kyle, will see something and take a flyer but personally I don't see it, in fact I think he's way to similar to Colt Brenan, who obviously is already on our roster.

Pike doesn't have the worlds greatest production but his numbers are solid. He also has the type of build that reminds me of Matt Schuab. Still the lack of experience under center is a pretty big concern.

LeFevoure is a personal favorite, given that he's a MAC QB with great numbers.

How about Jevan Snead. A lot of people were predicting he would be the first qb taken in this draft, he has all the prototypical pocket passer attributes, and if there's anyone who could rebuild his confidence and work on his decision making skills its Mike Shanahan (see Jay Cutler). If he's around in the 4th round (which he very well could be) he could end up being the steal of this draft.

GridIron26 · 02-10-2010, 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by r08kessl

How about Jevan Snead. A lot of people were predicting he would be the first qb taken in this draft, he has all the prototypical pocket passer attributes, and if there's anyone who could rebuild his confidence and work on his decision making skills its Mike Shanahan (see Jay Cutler). If he's around in the 4th round (which he very well could be) he could end up being the steal of this draft.

Where did you get this info? I believe whole lot of people are predicting that either Bradford or Clausen will be the first QB to be taken..

GMScud · 02-10-2010, 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GridIron26

Where did you get this info? I believe whole lot of people are predicting that either Bradford or Clausen will be the first QB to be taken..

Going into the 2009 season, a lot of people thought Snead was in a position to play himself into the #1 overall pick. He was very underwhelming though, and I think he made a mistake going pro this year.

Chico23231 · 02-10-2010, 02:16 PM

Before this year Snead was considered easily a first round pick....

SmootSmack · 02-10-2010, 02:19 PM

Snead had a terrible year. But he's got a low of raw talent. Someone will take a chance on him somewhere between the 3rd and 5th round. That someone could could be Shanallenahan.

When he year started Snead was projected much higher, first round even

WaldSkins · 02-10-2010, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GridIron26

Where did you get this info? I believe whole lot of people are predicting that either Bradford or Clausen will be the first QB to be taken..

He was projected to be a first round QB before the ncaa college football season had begun.

GridIron26 · 02-10-2010, 03:49 PM

I see.. Well, I don't usually look into those kind of stuff because many things can happen through out a season..

Dirtbag59 · 02-10-2010, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Snead had a terrible year. But he's got a low of raw talent. Someone will take a chance on him somewhere between the 3rd and 5th round. That someone could could be Shanallenahan.

When he year started Snead was projected much higher, first round even

Snead scares me. Sure he has a lot of great physical tools, and the poor mechanics make you think that maybe if you improve the mechanics you can improve everything else, but I keep on hearing that he has a lot of trouble reading defenses and that is a deal breaker in my mind.

Personally I would much rather have Zac Robinson. However then again why go after a QB half cocked? Why not go after the best prospects available in the first round?

02-10-2010, 02:55 AM	#141
53Fan Pro Bowl Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Kill Devil Hills, N.C. Posts: 7,354	Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts I found this interesting. Especially since only 2 QB's were sacked more than JC last year, (Thanks Vinny), and our DC the last couple of years didn't consider sacks very important. NFL: Sack differential growing in importance - ESPN I'm really happy we've made some changes in the way this team will be run this year. HTTR!!! __________________ "Cautiously And Optimistically... Looking Forward To Change" Last edited by 53Fan; 02-10-2010 at 09:54 AM.

02-10-2010, 10:36 AM	#142
BigHairedAristocrat Playmaker Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 3,812	Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts hopefully we can find a trading partner to trade down. theres not that great a difference between the top OL in the draft and ones that will be available in the bottom of round 1 and the top of round 2. None of the OL in this draft strike me as top 5 material. Also, as many have noted, neither of the "top" QBs in this draft are top 10 material. If we're stuck at 4, we'd be much better off in the long run drafting BPA than reaching for Bradford or Clausen. Atleast, thats how things look now. Alot can - and will - change over the next 2 months to affect players draft stock. __________________ Dolphins get good press for saving drowning humans.But we only hear about the swimmers theyve pushed ashore.You know who we havent heard from: all the people theyve pushed out to sea.Dolphins dont know what theyre doing-they just like pushing things.

02-10-2010, 02:16 PM	#146
Chico23231 Franchise Player Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Richmond, VA Age: 36 Posts: 7,774	Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts Before this year Snead was considered easily a first round pick.... __________________ Ready for the Draft.

02-10-2010, 02:19 PM	#147
SmootSmack Mad Men Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 43,095	Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts Snead had a terrible year. But he's got a low of raw talent. Someone will take a chance on him somewhere between the 3rd and 5th round. That someone could could be Shanallenahan. When he year started Snead was projected much higher, first round even __________________ You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You

02-10-2010, 03:49 PM	#149
GridIron26 The Starter Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 1,542	Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts I see.. Well, I don't usually look into those kind of stuff because many things can happen through out a season..

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts

NFL Draft Central