BuffaloBaumer Posted April 15, 2012 Posted April 15, 2012 Why not pick Decastro who people are saying is the best guard to come out in a while. When I hear comparisons to Steve Hutchison, I build up the line with someone like that......
jjmac Posted April 15, 2012 Posted April 15, 2012 Why not pick Decastro who people are saying is the best guard to come out in a while. When I hear comparisons to Steve Hutchison, I build up the line with someone like that...... Reaching would be bad enough. Reaching for a position that is not a need would be worse.
shibuya Posted April 15, 2012 Posted April 15, 2012 Reaching would be bad enough. Reaching for a position that is not a need would be worse. if DeCastro is as good as said, and is BPA at #10 then it would not be a reach.. Urbik can become depth, and our OL lacks depth.
JM57 Posted April 15, 2012 Posted April 15, 2012 Rinehart is good depth. What they need is a backup center and anther tackle
Zulu Cthulhu Posted April 15, 2012 Posted April 15, 2012 A draft "reach" is largely an invented term by people like Kiper and McShay in an attempt to justify themselves when actual teams don't follow their opinions.
biggerdaddynj Posted April 15, 2012 Posted April 15, 2012 While it would be nice to have DeCastro, OG is not a position of need and he is also not the BPA at 10. We can hit both BPA and need by going WR, CB or OT at 10 (not going to re-hash the whole Reiff/Martin value debate if we take either at 10).
Malazan Posted April 15, 2012 Posted April 15, 2012 people say it is a reach to wipe your ass, but you still do it. Stop worrying about what people paid to talk keep saying is a reach.
sharebear Posted April 15, 2012 Posted April 15, 2012 people say it is a reach to wipe your ass, but you still do it. Stop worrying about what people paid to talk keep saying is a reach. That made my day
dayman Posted April 15, 2012 Posted April 15, 2012 A draft "reach" is largely an invented term by people like Kiper and McShay in an attempt to justify themselves when actual teams don't follow their opinions. Agreed. It's those "experts" giving themselves reach-arounds when someone destroys their picks. If that guy is some all start guard take him. We've had a lot of injuries on the interior lately.
smuvtalker Posted April 15, 2012 Posted April 15, 2012 Agreed. It's those "experts" giving themselves reach-arounds when someone destroys their picks. If that guy is some all start guard take him. We've had a lot of injuries on the interior lately. Agreed. Outside of kicker and punter, if the BPA is someone who can start from day 1, then I'm all for it. DeCastro may not be a "need" right now, but I would not at all be upset if he was the pick.
jjmac Posted April 15, 2012 Posted April 15, 2012 if DeCastro is as good as said, and is BPA at #10 then it would not be a reach.. Urbik can become depth, and our OL lacks depth. It lacks depth more at T than the interior.
BuffaloBaumer Posted April 16, 2012 Author Posted April 16, 2012 It lacks depth more at T than the interior. [/quote I would still have no problem with Decastro as the pick if they thought highly enough of him. I will never complain about an oline addition if said person is a staple for 10 plus years....
Maddog69 Posted April 16, 2012 Posted April 16, 2012 [/quote I would still have no problem with Decastro as the pick if they thought highly enough of him. I will never complain about an oline addition if said person is a staple for 10 plus years.... but you have now way of knowing that when he is picked. We have solid starters at OG. We do not have a solid starter at LT. We have a mid round pick from last year who was not horrible.
jjmac Posted April 16, 2012 Posted April 16, 2012 It lacks depth more at T than the interior. I would still have no problem with Decastro as the pick if they thought highly enough of him. I will never complain about an oline addition if said person is a staple for 10 plus years.... From a talent standpoint, I wouldn't complain too much, but I'd rather they take a position of need, if a decent fit is available.
sharebear Posted April 16, 2012 Posted April 16, 2012 For all we know harriston is gonna be our starting LT, with wood always getting injured, and most of our oline at that I wouldnt mind having an elite guard/center if need be
The Cincinnati Kid Posted April 16, 2012 Posted April 16, 2012 I want the best play on the board. Back when TD was running things, I hated that philosophy because he and his goons didn't know who the best player on the board was. I believe that Nix and his guys do. If its Decastro, then I'm all for it. (Like Frilly toothpicks on club sandwiches.)
BuffaloBaumer Posted April 16, 2012 Author Posted April 16, 2012 From Walter football - tough call I guess.... Buffalo Bills: Riley Reiff, OT, Iowa After signing Mario Williams and Mark Anderson, the Bills' biggest need is at offensive tackle. Buffalo has to find a left tackle to protect Ryan Fitzpatrick. Reiff was a solid left tackle for the Hawkeyes. At 6-foot-5, 313-pounds, he has the frame to add some more power. Reiff is a technician who was well-coached at Iowa. The junior looks like he has the ability to switch to right tackle, and possibly guard if needed. His natural position is left tackle, and Reiff could turn into a quality left tackle in the NFL. Some believe he would be a better fit on the right side. Reiff had a very good game this year against Pittsburgh defensive end Brandon Lindsey. The rest of Reiff's schedule this season was very manageable. He had no issues with Michigan's defenders and played well against Nebraska. Reiff didn't allow a sack to Oklahoma's Frank Alexander in the Bowl game, but did surrender a sack to R.J. Washington on a bull rush. Kansas City Chiefs: David DeCastro, G, Stanford After signing Eric Winston to upgrade their right tackle, the Chiefs can look to bolster the interior of their line with the best guard available. Kansas City could still consider a tackle since Brandon Albert could play guard, but he's in the final year of his contract. The Chiefs might also consider Dontari Poe to play nose tackle, but he is not nearly as safe a prospect as DeCastro. Kansas City may also think of trading up with Jacksonville to land Ryan Tannehill. DeCastro is so dominant that he is worth a top-15 pick. The 6-foot-5, 310-pounder is an experienced starter who was a Second-Team All-American in 2010 and a First-Team All-American this season. The Cardinal averaged 213.8 rush yards per game with DeCastro paving the way at right guard in 2010. He was an overwhelming force for the Stanford this year. You could make a strong argument for DeCastro being one of the safest picks in this draft class. He is a powerful run blocker who is phenomenal at pulling and hitting blocks on the move. DeCastro is also very good at getting to the second level of the defense and blasting linebackers. He will quickly become a run-blocking asset in the NFL. Addtionally, there is no drawback with DeCastro as a pass blocker. He has a strong base and stonewalls bull rushes, including from larger defensive tackles. DeCastro saw his best competition of 2011 when facing the University of Washington. Unfortunately, he rarely went against Huskies standout defensive tackle Alameda Ta'amu, but when DeCastro did, he beat Ta'amu on every rep. Stanford ran for 446 yards against Washington. DeCastro also had good performances against USC, Oregon and Oklahoma State.
tennesseeboy Posted April 16, 2012 Posted April 16, 2012 If we didn't have a glaring weakness at LT I might agree that DeCastro (or Floyd, or perhaps a cb or Kuechly) would be a good choice. We will get the second best tackle in the draft at 10 which will allow us to open the season with a chance to post a winning record. No one else on the board can do that imhop.
DC Tom Posted April 16, 2012 Posted April 16, 2012 I'd suggest trading down...maybe a later first and a third for the #10 pick. But that would probably be reaching as well.
billsfan_34 Posted April 16, 2012 Posted April 16, 2012 A draft "reach" is largely an invented term by people like Kiper and McShay in an attempt to justify themselves when actual teams don't follow their opinions. Well said!
Recommended Posts