Offseason Focus: Defensive Line

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by Bangee7

Keim is spot on...we cannot over look our d-line again this year.

I'd love to get 2 through FA (counting Baker as one of them). I really believe we could afford an upagred at ILB & FS possibly too.

If all that happens, then yes, go wild on BPA in the draft.

But if we sit on our hands in F/A, then we cannot ignore needed upgrades in the draft.

Man I want a serious ILB draft pick...if we went DT/DE and ILB with our first 2 picks I'm gonna be all smiles. This is my ideal start to the draft cause we need to improve up the middle of the defense to stop the run. Im penciling in Cravens as our starting SS too.

[punch it in]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

Man I want a serious ILB draft pick...if we went DT/DE and ILB with our first 2 picks I'm gonna be a smiles. This is my ideal start to the draft cause we need to improve up the middle of the defense to stop the run. Im penciling in Cravens as our starting SS too.

We absolutely have to make ilb and Dline our first two picks. I dont care how good the wide receiver is that is sitting there!

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by punch it in

We absolutely have to make ilb and Dline our first two picks. I dont care how good the wide receiver is that is sitting there!

Don't get sucked into need based drafting. We have problems at ILB, all DL spots, free safety, left guard, tailback. I would also suggest that if you think you have a dynamite edge rusher or CB on the board you should never pass that up.

And if you think the next great QB is available at that spot, you can't say no.

The only thing we can say for sure is we don't need tackles.

[mooby]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Don't get sucked into need based drafting. We have problems at ILB, all DL spots, free safety, left guard, tailback. I would also suggest that if you think you have a dynamite edge rusher or CB on the board you should never pass that up.

And if you think the next great QB is available at that spot, you can't say no.

The only thing we can say for sure is we don't need tackles.

Man I remember the days when we weren't set at either tackle. Why can't we just be good at every position again? It's always something, we got a good defense but crap offense. Now it's a good offense but a crap defense. Eventually something's gotta give.

[FrenchSkin]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Don't get sucked into need based drafting. We have problems at ILB, all DL spots, free safety, left guard, tailback. I would also suggest that if you think you have a dynamite edge rusher or CB on the board you should never pass that up.

And if you think the next great QB is available at that spot, you can't say no.

The only thing we can say for sure is we don't need tackles.

Sometimes I feel (this is more of a feeling than an analyzed reasoning) like we over evaluate NFL pros' skills to predict what a college player will become in the NFL.

I mean, I understand the reasoning behind BPA drafting, but there's always a 50/50 chance the most promising guy will turn out to be a complete bust...

And then you end up not having filled up gaping holes in your team to draft an unneeded bad (or even average) player at a position you already have depth...

I say we have too many holes to fill on D to hope that'll be fix through FA only, filling those holes should be a priority in the offseason, including the draft.

And if you make another team's day by not drafting a really good WR, well good for them but we saw how far a GREAT offense could get us with a bad defense... Not very far.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by FrenchSkin

Sometimes I feel (this is more of a feeling than an analyzed reasoning) like we over evaluate NFL pros' skills to predict what a college player will become in the NFL.

I mean, I understand the reasoning behind BPA drafting, but there's always a 50/50 chance the most promising guy will turn out to be a complete bust...

And then you end up not having filled up gaping holes in your team to draft an unneeded bad (or even average) player at a position you already have depth...

I say we have too many holes to fill on D to hope that'll be fix through FA only, filling those holes should be a priority in the offseason, including the draft.

And if you make another team's day by not drafting a really good WR, well good for them but we saw how far a GREAT offense could get us with a bad defense... Not very far.

But you have just as much of a chance of whiffing on the player who fills a need as you do on the best guy on your board regardless of position.

You're right, we see that if a GM hits on more than 50% of his picks then he's doing really well. But you can whiff on a lineman you need just as much as you can whiff on a WR that would be a depth guy. This thinking doesn't make an argument in favor of drafting for need.

You're going to miss on your share of guys. Just get the best guys you possibly can on those nice cheap rookie deals and let the chips fall where they may. Use free agency to fill needs - you have to pay through the nose but at least you have a better idea of what you're getting as opposed to the 50/50 crapshoot of the draft.

[FrenchSkin]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

But you have just as much of a chance of whiffing on the player who fills a need as you do on the best guy on your board regardless of position.

You're right, we see that if a GM hits on more than 50% of his picks then he's doing really well. But you can whiff on a lineman you need just as much as you can whiff on a WR that would be a depth guy. This thinking doesn't make an argument in favor of drafting for need.

You're going to miss on your share of guys. Just get the best guys you possibly can on those nice cheap rookie deals and let the chips fall where they may. Use free agency to fill needs - you have to pay through the nose but at least you have a better idea of what you're getting as opposed to the 50/50 crapshoot of the draft.

Agreed.

Honestly I don't have a strong argument against the BPA strategy, I just feel like you have to have an open mind, and if you can choose between a high ranked guy at a position you don't need and a guy ranked just a few spots behind the first one but playing a position you need, drafting the second guy seems smarter to me.

We also tend to forget that part of how these young players will develop depends on how they'll be coached, what team will be around them etc... It's not Madden where you can definitely say "this guy is an 84 overall while that one is only a 77 overall".

The point could also be made that considering you have a 50/50 chance of drafting a bust, if you use 2 of your first 4 picks on a position you need, you dramatically improve your chances of filling a hole on your team.

[DYoungJelly]

Originally Posted by schneed10

don't get sucked into need based drafting. We have problems at ilb, all dl spots, free safety, left guard, tailback. I would also suggest that if you think you have a dynamite edge rusher or cb on the board you should never pass that up.

And if you think the next great qb is available at that spot, you can't say no.

The only thing we can say for sure is we don't need tackles.

+1.