ndirish1978 Posted April 24, 2006 Posted April 24, 2006 teams looking to trade up for OL help might overlook us. I wouldnt mind getting Reyes, drafting a 3rd rd G and letting him push Villarial for the starting spot. Personally I'd like ot go G in the 2nd and take Deuce, he's a massive man.
ndirish1978 Posted April 24, 2006 Author Posted April 24, 2006 I mean wouldnt you rather save a pick we WOULD have spent on the OL to get someone who started games already on a pretty decent line?
MadBuffaloDisease Posted April 24, 2006 Posted April 24, 2006 If they signed Reyes, that would do it for me for OG's. I'd then focus on an OT in the draft.
Ozymandius Posted April 24, 2006 Posted April 24, 2006 Reyes is a mediocre-to-bad starting guard and would make a good backup, nothing more. He's a poor run blocker, which we need like a hole in the head. Signing him would add depth, which we do need, but should not really affect our goal of getting two future starting guards from this draft. Reyes = Panos.
Mark VI Posted April 24, 2006 Posted April 24, 2006 Reyes is a mediocre-to-bad starting guard and would make a good backup, nothing more. He's a poor run blocker, which we need like a hole in the head. Signing him would add depth, which we do need, but should not really affect our goal of getting two future starting guards from this draft. Reyes = Panos. 668670[/snapback] Spot on.
Dibs Posted April 24, 2006 Posted April 24, 2006 Reyes is a mediocre-to-bad starting guard and would make a good backup, nothing more. He's a poor run blocker, which we need like a hole in the head. Signing him would add depth, which we do need, but should not really affect our goal of getting two future starting guards from this draft. Reyes = Panos. 668670[/snapback] Can't argue with that.....though I'm sure sombody will
Recommended Posts