On the Hole(s)...
 

I don't know about you guys, but I'm stressed out. I've accepted the fact that no one knows for sure who we'll draft come draft day. Would someone please tell me at what positions could we use added depth or upgrade? Some will say we have very few holes and we just need that one player who could start and make a difference. Others vow to believe that we need more lower round picks solely for backup roles. Which is it? I feel like writing a letter to dear Abbey. From Sulking 'Skinsfan... :oink:

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

I think if you have a top 10 pick you pick talent. If DJ fell to us at 9, I would consider them trying to pick him up. Even though we're loaded at LB he's probably the best player in the draft. That said for a team in the state we are it may be better to go WR or CB whichever is best available. Whoever we draft we shouldn't expect to make a difference right away. I say if we keep what we have we go WR, CB in 1/3 then just look for backup D/O line, blocking TE. Those are really the only holes I see. WR, CB, TE, Dline in that order. I say we stay put and get the best player we can, who might be Mike Williams/Pac Man.

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

TRADE away the pick and get more!!!!!!

Youll find more Gibbs type players later on.

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

Too bad all those "Gibbs type players" will ride the bench or get cut before the season starts. Remember, we have a lot of core guys already and only a 53 man roster come the season.

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

just so long as we dump the rotting pile of elephant dung that is Gardner before draft day .........that would be an exceptional draft in and of itself

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

we have the 9th pick, we have the opportunity to pick an immediate starter. Id be very surprised if we didnt take Rolle if he was available, and he would be nickel corner during preseason while he earns his stripes. I dont see us picking a receiverr unless Williams falls.

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

our first pick is probably williams or jones, but we don't have any gaping holes... Our WR corp is still weak on the #1 spot, though its very strong from 2-5 or so... CB isnt a real need other than the fact that we don't have a 4th high level CB for injury insurance (maybe lott or brown will prove to be that guy), but the real reason to get a CB would be that our #1 and 2 are past 30 now....

LB is deep, though a playmaker for the middle could prove usesful... but we could honestly use playmakers anywhere but FS and OLB (and RB and on the Oline minus guard) right now, though none are really needed (except williams ;))

the only real hole is blocking TE, but you can get those in the 5th round if you want... though finding a great one may be hard since there aren't nearly as many in college as there were in the 80s, we could still find a decent quality one...

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

Who says they will ride the bench? With Gibbs the competition is always open. I feel comfortable with our DB's now, and we could even pick up one later in the draft like Bartell. Then get depth for our O-Line and D-Line.

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

Always open eh? Someone didn't watch the first 8 games of the season and who we had quarterbacking.

Don't you think that late round talent was more the genius of the personel director than Gibbs? He was able to plug them into an already succesfull team, which is all they needed to shine!

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

I'd have to say CB & DE/DT. WR is a need for depth, but I'm willing to live with a later round pick.

CB - Antrel Rolle SR 6-1/202/- Miami (Fl) or Adam Jones JR 5-11/185/4.50 West Virginia (One of these guys will be available at #9.)

DE/DT - Travis Johnson SR 6-5/286/- Florida State, Shaun Cody SR 6-3.5/290/- USC, Erasmus James SR 6-4/270/- Wisconsin, or Dan Cody SR 6-5/265/- Oklahoma

WR - Reggie Brown SR 6-2/197/- Georgia, J.R. Russell SR 6-3/205/4.55 Louisville, or Chauncey Stovall SR 6-2/215/4.55 Florida State

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

That's the thing. If we just have to sit back and draft the best player available what if let's say Aaron Rodgers or Alex Smith is available at #9 do we pick him? For those who are quick to say 'no' because we have young gun Ramsey and Brunell aren't we equally deep at other positions? Why draft another LB, OL, DB, or WR? :oink:

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

[QUOTE=Island Boy]TRADE away the pick and get more!!!!!!

Youll find more Gibbs type players later on.[/QUOTE]

Tell that to Lavar, Portis, & company that is counting on the front office to draft some talent to help now!!!

Not a wise choice if you ask me. Take the best available player at #9 that will best impact the team now & draft later picks to add depth in years to come.

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

I doubt we'll get either, but you have to look at the direction of your team. Ramsey has had too much drama, let him feel comfortable going into a season. I feel you have to take the top available talent in whatever poistions you have any sort of need. If you have Peyton, Harrison, and Wayne, you probably aren't going to draft a QB or a WR even if they're great. Simply because it doesn't help your team. The draft is where you accumulate talent, this is true. However at any given time nearly every team has 3-5 holes. Take the best player available at those positions unless there's a huge gap between that player and a player at another position. No player seems like a top round lock to me like last year. Williams maybe. DB we have two old starters, WRs we don't have a clear #1, LB we're fine at I only used DJ because he's probably the best player in the draft, and OL most people agree we're fine at.

You have to draft for talent but use your head a little bit. Don't draft a talented guy to sit on your bench for five years.

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

Oh I saw noodle arms stink up the joint the first 8 games!!! But it didnt take him to long after that to pull him. And some of the cuts and decisions he has made since then has shown that he only wants to find those quality Gibbs type players on his team.

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

I am in the camp that believes there are no immediate needs, no gaping holes in the roster as it is currently comprised.

At CB, I love Springs and I like Walt Harris a lot. Harris was a former 1st round pick and started in this league for like 6 or 7 years, so he's fine. Springs was healthy all last year, but we must remember that he has been injury prone during his career, and we would be wise to grab some talent at CB. Plus, these two starters are getting older, and we'll need to replace them someday. I think priority one for that 9th selection has to be Rolle or Pac Man. The rookie wouldn't start, he'd probably be nickel. But he'd be there if we need him this year, and he'll be ready when the old guys fade away.

Other than that, I don't see pressing needs, so my second choice for the 9th selection is to trade it down for more picks.

My third choice would be to select Mike Williams or Troy Williamson at #9. I don't think we need a WR real bad, but I'm really really high on both of these guys. It's important to remember that rookie WRs rarely make an impact and usually need 3 years to develop. But Patten is 30, and Jacobs looks like he could develop into a nice player but I don't see him becoming a star. Drafting one of these WRs wouldn't help us in the near term, but we might have a star on our hands in the longer term, so I'd be fine with this scenario.

Other needs that I see are a blocking TE, hopefully with the added ability to catch passes. If they trade down, I'd love to see Heath Miller. I know a number of people disagree with me there, but I think speedy WRs on the outside, Cooley settling into zones as a safety valve, and Miller threatening the deeper middle would be a well-balanced attack. But if we don't get Miller, we at least need a bulldozing blocker at TE.

I think Lemar Marshall or Mike Barrow will come through at LB, no need there in my opinion.

Timmy H may not be back, so a 3rd string QB is a need.

Other than that, I think we're free to take best players available.

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

[QUOTE]You have to draft for talent but use your head a little bit. Don't draft a talented guy to sit on your bench for five years.[/QUOTE] Why is a later first round pick and two 2nd or 3rd round picks gonna sit the bench for five years?

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

[QUOTE=Island Boy]Why is a later first round pick and two 2nd or 3rd round picks gonna sit the bench for five years?[/QUOTE]

He was talking about drafting one of the top QBs at 9. It's a moot point anyway, neither Rodgers or Smith have a chance to make it to our spot.

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

[QUOTE=Schneed10]He was talking about drafting one of the top QBs at 9. It's a moot point anyway, neither Rodgers or Smith have a chance to make it to our spot.[/QUOTE]


Ohh OK I agree with that. I see NO way Gibbs drafts a QB if they fall (maybe a 6th or 7th pick).

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

[QUOTE=Daseal]I doubt we'll get either, but you have to look at the direction of your team...I feel you have to take the top available talent in whatever poistions you have any sort of need... DB we have two old starters, WRs we don't have a clear #1, LB we're fine at I only used DJ because he's probably the best player in the draft, and OL most people agree we're fine at.

You have to draft for talent but use your head a little bit. Don't draft a talented guy to sit on your bench for five years.[/QUOTE]

Yeah. I also believe that Derrick Johnson is probably the safest pick of the draft. There's little doubt that he'll have a productive NFL career as long as the injury bug doesn't bite him often. We don't need him. With only picks in the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 6th, and 7th (as of right now) it seems critical that our day one selections pan out to be legit talent. I'm comfortable with drafting a TE, DT, and if necessary, OL in the later rounds, but drafting a 3rd round or lower CB or WR is not going to make us a better team. :oink:

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

I don't think we have enough depth holes to make us trade down. If the right deal comes along I think it is possible but our options at 9 would have to limited. Williams, Jones, Edwards and Rolle would defintily all have to be gone it would seem. At that point I think you start targeting specific players and move back to get them like we did with Ramsey a couple years ago. I'd loev to move back to about 20 and get a 2nd rounder but I don't think value wise that is possible.

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

I think we need to stick to the offensive side of the ball. That was our problem last year so lets look at our offence and see where our needs are the greatest. I feel we need a fast WR with good hands to help open up the offense and allowing Portis more room to run. I do not follow college ball so I can't comment on who we pick.

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

I'm with Schneed on this one. I don't feel as though anything is "gaping", I just feel like I'd be HAPPY with a WR with our first round pick. The more I think about our corners, the more I think age is an issue, but hey, isn't that why we have a rookie CB in Wilds?

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

the only problem we have we trading down is that we could use a WR or DE, but ONLY if they're going to be good (yeah yeah, no gaurantees)... we have a huge pool of average DEs, WRs, LBs, Ss, etc already... if we do trade down, we'll probably go for a CB, since we'll need an extra backup and eventually both our starters will be gone, so finding the eventual #2 now wouldn't be a horrible idea.

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

Most definitely. If our "top 2" WR picks are gone, I could see trading down for a CB and some picks. We could just leave the WR core "as is" and see how the season goes.

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

[QUOTE=FRPLG]I don't think we have enough depth holes to make us trade down. If the right deal comes along I think it is possible but our options at 9 would have to limited. Williams, Jones, Edwards and Rolle would defintily all have to be gone it would seem. At that point I think you start targeting specific players and move back to get them like we did with Ramsey a couple years ago. I'd loev to move back to about 20 and get a 2nd rounder but I don't think value wise that is possible.[/QUOTE]

That does clear things up a bit. However, I did read in Sporting News' Draft publication how PHI has five day one picks and could possibly trade up to draft Mike Williams or Mark Clayton. PHI has selections at #31 in the first round and #35, and #63 in the second round. Would that satisfy anyone? Our #9 overall for PHI's #31 or #35 and #63? :oink:

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

I would doubt we'll ever make a deal of that magnitude with Philly. I might go into serious depression if we traded Philly our pick and they took someone who ended up beign a pro bowler.

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

[QUOTE=FRPLG]I would doubt we'll ever make a deal of that magnitude with Philly.[/QUOTE]

Are you serious? Division rivals don't trade picks? :oink:

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

Well we did it already...*cough* Trotter *cough*...if Williams didn't land in our laps at #1, I would welcome that kind of trade. It's not like the Eagles are empty of Pro Bowlers and that if they drafted another it would make them unbeatable.

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

We didn't trade Trotter. We released him. We did trade for Thrash though. Thats a low level deal in comparison though.

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

Although value wise it is close it may not be enough. I think the general rule of thumb is that to move up into the top ten the lower team has to pay a premium in terms of value. Simply looking at the value chart(which is of course not the only factor but oh well) it ends up being 1426 for us vs. 1350 for them. I think to move up we'd need to get close to 1500 in value. What the hell do I know though!?

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

Sorry, I was re-reading that and completely misunderstood the question.

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

My respect for you is lost forever! ;)

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

No doubt about it. One of the top three WRs (whichever ones you choose) will be available at #9. Besides TO, name another WR on the Eagles roster not wearing a clown suit. Oh yeah, PHI's five day one picks didn't even include the latest reward of compensatory picks. :oink:

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

I know, I'm just going to leave and never come back! :(:(:(

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

Not that I truly garnered any respect with my heavy-drinkin', alcohol fueled, St. Patrick's Day posts... :)

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

[QUOTE=Daseal]I think if you have a top 10 pick you pick talent. If DJ fell to us at 9, I would consider them trying to pick him up. Even though we're loaded at LB he's probably the best player in the draft. That said for a team in the state we are it may be better to go WR or CB whichever is best available. Whoever we draft we shouldn't expect to make a difference right away. I say if we keep what we have we go WR, CB in 1/3 then just look for backup D/O line, blocking TE. Those are really the only holes I see. WR, CB, TE, Dline in that order. I say we stay put and get the best player we can, who might be Mike Williams/Pac Man.[/QUOTE]


I know the kid is a player but I am not a proponate of drafting LB's that early unless Lawerence Taylor is avail. especially with Williams at the helm you need athletes there but you don't need superstar's, DJ is not really an inside guy and probably moving him inside would limit his abilities some, we just signed Clemon's who probably is as fast if not faster than DJ so I wouldn't be picking a LB in the first rd, but I would be looking for a MLB later in the draft.

My draft strategy would be to trade down a few spot's if possible and draft Rolle I think he will still be avail. around 15 or so, then do what I have to do to make sure I get Vincent Jackson in the second, I still feel we need a real #1 possession type reciever and I think this kid will be it, so much so that I am willing to let William's go if he's avail. when we pick, this strategy will net us 2 player's instead of 1 and fill 2 need's and save us some much needed cap room.


Besides Daseal what would we do with big time Lavar if we drafted DJ? :biggthump

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

[QUOTE=FRPLG]Although value wise it is close it may not be enough. I think the general rule of thumb is that to move up into the top ten the lower team has to pay a premium in terms of value. Simply looking at the value chart(which is of course not the only factor but oh well) it ends up being 1426 for us vs. 1350 for them. I think to move up we'd need to get close to 1500 in value. What the hell do I know though!?[/QUOTE]

You may have thought I said something else. I'm saying that we could trade our #9 for PHIs #31, [B]OR[/B] #35, [B]AND[/B] #63. That would give PHI 1350 vs our 876 (#31 and #63) or 856 (#35 and #63). :oink:

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

[QUOTE=BossHog]You may have thought I said something else. I'm saying that we could trade our #9 for PHIs #31, [B]OR[/B] #35, [B]AND[/B] #63. That would give PHI 1350 vs our 876 (#31 and #63) or 856 (#35 and #63). :oink:[/QUOTE]
That'll never happen. OUr pick(valued at 1350) would need to get more than 1350 in value for us trade it is what I understand. So they'd have to give us all 3 picks to make it even close. They'd have to REALLY like someone for that.

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

[QUOTE=offiss]... My draft strategy would be to trade down a few spot's if possible and draft Rolle I think he will still be avail. around 15 or so, then do what I have to do to make sure I get Vincent Jackson in the second, I still feel we need a real #1 possession type reciever and I think this kid will be it, so much so that I am willing to let William's go if he's avail. when we pick, this strategy will net us 2 player's instead of 1 and fill 2 need's and save us some much needed cap room.[/QUOTE]

I was with you until you threw in Jackson being picked in the second round. Why are you so fond of him? He could fall as low as the fourth round. There's a possibility SD would want to trade up (for those who believe it's not competitively logical for division rivals to trade) from 12th overall to draft a guy they really like. They also have another selection at 28th and a second rounder at #61. So it seems likely a deal would be able to be worked out if that was the case. :oink:

Re: On the Hole(s)...
 

[QUOTE=FRPLG]That'll never happen. OUr pick(valued at 1350) would need to get more than 1350 in value for us trade it is what I understand. So they'd have to give us all 3 picks to make it even close. They'd have to REALLY like someone for that.[/QUOTE]

Dude. Forget it. :oink: