jahnyc Posted August 21, 2004 Posted August 21, 2004 1. Whatever cap money we have remaining for this year must be used. If none of Jennings, Schobel or Williams will sign before their contracts expire then use the cap space on a veteran cut by another team (i.e., o-line) or extend another player (i.e., Clements). Failure to use our remaining cap funds for this year would constitute gross mismanagement. 2. Strongly support Bledsoe. The more I see of the o-line the more I think that Drew got a raw deal last year. He shares in the responsibility for the poor performance of the offense last year, but between the play of the o-line and the play-calling, his problems were inevitable. Bledsoe really wants to win, plays hard and seems like a team guy. He clearly has talent (I remember the excitement he generated in 2002). I really hope he has more success this year. 3. Draft or sign some players for the o-line next year. We have some guys who probalby shouldn't be starting and we have no depth. If Jennings leaves, I don't want to see McFarland or Teague playing left tackle. 4. Please explain to me again why we drafted McGahee. Even if he starts next year and we get a pick for Henry, would we have been better off drafting a guard who could have been starting from day one in the 2003 season? In this day of free agency and caps, did we have the luxury of mothballing a guy for one year and then watching him, at best, split duty in his second year? I hope these rumors are not true about him requesting a trade, but it looks like one of them will have to go next year. By the way, won't we need to draft another rb next year since we have no depth after McGahee and Henry. Still makes no sense to me.
ajzepp Posted August 21, 2004 Posted August 21, 2004 4. Please explain to me again why we drafted McGahee. Even if he starts next year and we get a pick for Henry, would we have been better off drafting a guard who could have been starting from day one in the 2003 season? In this day of free agency and caps, did we have the luxury of mothballing a guy for one year and then watching him, at best, split duty in his second year? I hope these rumors are not true about him requesting a trade, but it looks like one of them will have to go next year. By the way, won't we need to draft another rb next year since we have no depth after McGahee and Henry. Still makes no sense to me. 1774[/snapback] There are two main ways we get value for the McGahee pick: First, if he completes his recovery and reagains 100% of his ability and becomes an improvement over Henry, it was a great pick. Second, if his trade value earns us a higher #1 pick than where he was drafted, it was a good pick. I'm thinking TD had the first scenario in mind moreso than the second, so I would expect to see WM given every opportunity to become our feature back, with TH eventually being moved elsewhere. Of course, that's only if they shut their pie holes long enough to actually play some football.
jahnyc Posted August 21, 2004 Author Posted August 21, 2004 I hear you, but there many obstacles to reaching the best case scenario. 1. McGahee must recover. 2. He must recover to 100% of where he was prior to injury. 3. At 100%, he must show he is a worthy starter in the NFL. 4. If he is worthy starter, he must be better than Henry (a near all-pro talent) 5. Can he stay healthy? Regarding Henry, I wonder what kind of trade value he will have next year. Maybe we will get a number one, but there are no guarantees. Plus, can Henry and McGahee coexist this year both knowing that they need carries to show their value?
Adam Posted August 21, 2004 Posted August 21, 2004 1. Whatever cap money we have remaining for this year must be used. If none of Jennings, Schobel or Williams will sign before their contracts expire then use the cap space on a veteran cut by another team (i.e., o-line) or extend another player (i.e., Clements). Failure to use our remaining cap funds for this year would constitute gross mismanagement. 1774[/snapback] You cant use all your cap room- you need some left over in case of injuries in the season
MDH Posted August 21, 2004 Posted August 21, 2004 Second, if his trade value earns us a higher #1 pick than where he was drafted, it was a good pick. 1781[/snapback] So you think trading WM for, let's say, the #10 pick in the draft next year would make the pick a "good" one? Waiting two years, thats TWO YEARS, to move up 11 spots in the draft? I'm not critiquing the pick but its only a good pick if Willis ends up being a top 5 back in the league (or by some miracle we can get a top 1 or 2 pick in next year's draft). Simply moving up in the first round doesn't warrent the 2 years we had to wait to get value out of the pick.
ajzepp Posted August 21, 2004 Posted August 21, 2004 So you think trading WM for, let's say, the #10 pick in the draft next year would make the pick a "good" one? Waiting two years, thats TWO YEARS, to move up 11 spots in the draft? I'm not critiquing the pick but its only a good pick if Willis ends up being a top 5 back in the league (or by some miracle we can get a top 1 or 2 pick in next year's draft). Simply moving up in the first round doesn't warrent the 2 years we had to wait to get value out of the pick. 1883[/snapback] Hmmmm.....I see what you are saying. I think that the other thing you have to consider is this: Who else would we have drafted at that spot that would have done anything more for us these past two years anyway? It's not like we passed on some great prospect to pick Willis, and just blow off two years for nothing. We had some good free agent signings and could afford to take a shot with Willis. We still got Kelsay (yeah, I know it's a tired argument), who is showing some potential. So I think all things considered, if we end up getting a top ten pick in the next draft for Willis, I still think we came out ahead. As for being a top 5 back, I don't think he's going to be with us long enough to prove that. I think it's most likely that someone will have to make an offer for him based on what he shows in limited duty this year.
jahnyc Posted August 21, 2004 Author Posted August 21, 2004 I don't think we will get a top ten pick for Henry. I remember that Faulk and others at the rb position were traded for much less. As far as getting a contributor right away, I think a pick for the o-line could have contributed immediately (i.e., Steinbach now playing for the Bengals). I would rather have drafted a guy like that which would have improved our o-line without the current rb controversy with Willis.
macaroni Posted August 21, 2004 Posted August 21, 2004 Hmmmm.....I see what you are saying. I think that the other thing you have to consider is this: Who else would we have drafted at that spot that would have done anything more for us these past two years anyway? It's not like we passed on some great prospect to pick Willis, and just blow off two years for nothing. We had some good free agent signings and could afford to take a shot with Willis. We still got Kelsay (yeah, I know it's a tired argument), who is showing some potential. So I think all things considered, if we end up getting a top ten pick in the next draft for Willis, I still think we came out ahead. As for being a top 5 back, I don't think he's going to be with us long enough to prove that. I think it's most likely that someone will have to make an offer for him based on what he shows in limited duty this year. 1891[/snapback] How about drafting a Center or Guard??? don't want to spend a first rounder on a Center or Guard??? How about parlaying your #21 pick into additional picks in the lower rounds and get a Center AND a Guard???? Sounds simple to me. We didn't need help at RB .............. but we were desperate on the O-Line.
ajzepp Posted August 21, 2004 Posted August 21, 2004 How about drafting a Center or Guard??? don't want to spend a first rounder on a Center or Guard??? How about parlaying your #21 pick into additional picks in the lower rounds and get a Center AND a Guard???? Sounds simple to me.We didn't need help at RB .............. but we were desperate on the O-Line. 2386[/snapback] And to think that Ralph actually went with Tom Donahoe when you were available......this is why our organization has been in shambles the past few years
macaroni Posted August 21, 2004 Posted August 21, 2004 And to think that Ralph actually went with Tom Donahoe when you were available......this is why our organization has been in shambles the past few years 2389[/snapback] And I'd work realllllllllll cheap too
Ed_Formerly_of_Roch Posted August 21, 2004 Posted August 21, 2004 In April 2003, we didn't necessarily need a guard. We had just come off an 8-8 season with a young and what looked to be an improving offensive line. Our guards were R Brown who still appeared to have a couple of seasons left in him and an upcoming guy in Marques Sullivan. We had two young tackles in Jennings and Williams who also had good upside. I had stated at the time we had four young guys who in 2 or 3 years could all be in the Pro Bowl, or could end up being out of football. At this point, excluding Jennings, looks like closer to out of football, but back then, you just didn't know. Didn't seem to make sense to use a #1 pick on a backup position. The only position at that point I felt we needed a better starter at was def end. Between the 23rd pick and our next pick at #46, there was I believe only one other def end taken by I think Oakland, so essentially we got the guy with the #46 pick who we would have likely also taken at #23. Considering we got out #1 pick as a result of the Price deal, that kind of made this pick like found money anyway, so seemed to be more worth a gamble. I stated earlier not to use a #1 pick on a backup. What's W McGahee? (or Henry) At this point a backup! However the possbile upside of WM made it worthwhile to me to take the pick. If he regains his pre-injury form, it's a steal. If not there wasn't any other position I likely would have used that pick for anyway other than D end (and I got the guy I would have taken anyway) I also think there were many more D ends taken with earlier picks in that draft than thought prior to draft. So there really wasn't any better choices at that point. In hind sight, would taken a guard been a better move, probably yes, though if WM does regain his form still likely a btter move then. 4. Please explain to me again why we drafted McGahee. Even if he starts next year and we get a pick for Henry, would we have been better off drafting a guard who could have been starting from day one in the 2003 season? In this day of free agency and caps, did we have the luxury of mothballing a guy for one year and then watching him, at best, split duty in his second year? I hope these rumors are not true about him requesting a trade, but it looks like one of them will have to go next year. By the way, won't we need to draft another rb next year since we have no depth after McGahee and Henry. Still makes no sense to me. 1774[/snapback]
ajzepp Posted August 21, 2004 Posted August 21, 2004 TD is a poker player. Just like in poker, one of the things you do is calculate the number of "outs" you have on a given hand. The more outs you have, the more attractive it is to play the hand. TD had a lot of outs as it pertains to WM. And I, for one, am glad that our GM rolls the dice one in a while. I know the TD naysayers always chime in with our record or whatever, but when you look at the quality of our roster combined with the status of our payroll, I say TD gets more than a passing grade.
JimBob2232 Posted August 21, 2004 Posted August 21, 2004 Faulk and others at the rb position were traded for much less. Except for hershell walker...DOH
Tom Posted August 21, 2004 Posted August 21, 2004 Plus wasn't Faulk older? Curtis Martin commanded 2 #1's.
Guest Guest_dan_* Posted August 21, 2004 Posted August 21, 2004 I still don't see why we have to trade TH or WM. Both will be under contract. If they don't like being #2, so f'in what. Unlike the QB position, the running back does not provide the offensive cohesion and leadership. If they're unhappy, tell them to suck it up and play hard for free agency.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.