PDA

View Full Version : North's observations for the 2011 Bronco draft



Northman
04-30-2011, 01:42 PM
Still have the last of the draft to go but here is my summary on what has transpired so far.

Yes, i did my mocks all offseason with the hope and intention of us taking a DT. And i would of loved to build from front to back considering our history but after much thought and seeing the players taken (2 of which i had totally forgotten about but loved) i feel a bit better about our picks. Also, we have FA and "maybe" a possible trade with teams for future draft picks who knows. Obviously, this is all based upon a new CBA being reached but if and when it is that is another area that can help in areas of need.

While i have some caution with guys like Moore, Franklin, and Thomas. Im sold on Miller, Irving, and Carter. Ive liked Irving and Carter for a while now so i expect them to be big contributors to this team for years to come. The promise of the other three is very positive and all hit needs for this team. Sure, we can all dwell on the lack of DT help at this moment but we are dealing with a different FO, and a different HC. One who understands the defensive side of the ball so lets not throw in the towel already.

Ive seen guys like Nolan come in and do wonders with guys worse than we just drafted so imagine what could happen with a HC who knows what his doing in that regard. If you want to cry in your wheaties right now without knowing the end result feel free, but im going to wait and see how the rest of the draft and year progresses. I have some high hope right now for the players we have already taken.

SpringsBroncoFan
04-30-2011, 01:59 PM
I'm sold on Miller, Franklin, Irving, & Carter...

Will wait & see on Moore, good value pick though... Same for Thomas...

I had Carpenter & Gilbert as my other 46's and knew all 3 would be good bruisers for us that can protect the QB...

I whiffed on Irving, a few guys had talked him up a month ago and when I went to redo my mock I had forgotten about all the shoulder injuries for McCarthy... :tsk:

I'm happy if we sign a good FA DT and get a RB in these later rounds...

HORSEPOWER 56
04-30-2011, 02:07 PM
I don't particularly care for the draft but I do understand some of the picks.

Von Miller - Not who I would've drafted at 2, but I know why they did. The dude is a baller with sustained performance in the past. Hard to miss on a guy at #2 and Von will start day 1.

Rahim Moore - I love this guys attitude and emotion. I hope he can be a long time solid player for us. He's no Ed Reed, Troy Polamalu, or Steve Atwater, but he's one of the best this draft had to offer so I understand the pick. I'd have gone DT here.

Orlando Franklin - I don't know much about him but he projects well at either G or T. He's big and strong and mean and that's what you want O-linemen to be. This is where I'd have drafted a Safety or another DL if it had been me. I understand that with Harris leaving, we had a hole to fill, but isn't that why we drafted Beadles last year in the 2nd along with Olsen and Walton? The second round is still a little high to draft a Guard, especailly two years in a row.

Nate Irving - A high motor guy who will hopefully earn a starting spot. Lot's of folks are pretty high on him and I admit to not knowing a ton about him. Is he really any better than Joe Mays? If that's not a definite yes, it's another pick I would've spent on D-line.

Quentin Carter - A good value pick and a guy who was solid, but not spectacular in college. I don't have any problems with this pick. he's proabably better than both McBath and Bruton.

Julius Thomas - Biggest reach and worst pick of the draft so far. 4th round on a guy who is a complete project player. Another basketball player masquerading as a TE. Sure, he could be Antonio Gates - or he could be Marquez Branson. This is a guy we probably could've waited until the 6th or 7th for and kept our 5th round pick.

So far, this draft gets a solid C from me. Lots of players who maight start right away (Good) but our team is horrible so it's not saying much (Bad).

I'm still in shock at the complete disregard for the D-line in the most D-line heavy draft in a decade. I just don't get it. None of the guys above will be successful at their jobs (except maybe Franklin and Thomas) until we fix the D-line. Knowing that makes it extremely hard to get excited about any of the guys above. I've seen Champ Bailey waste his whole career here because we refused to help him and it saddens me that it will continue.

BroncoAV06
04-30-2011, 02:11 PM
Sure the safety class is not elite but when you get two of the top 3-4 ranked in the draft have to feel good, both if not starters should contribute on special teams from the get go.

Franklin 3-yr starter at The U. Read that he could also slide to G, has long arms/bigs hands, 6'5. I'll take more size up front all day.

Miller enough said. Irving talked up by a few as a good pick, 21.5 TFL, 7 sacks last year, boom 2 out of 3 starters at LB solved then!

Thomas classic basketball player with one year of football under his belt, athlete that just needs to learn the game more.

Obviously DT stands out but when your picking 2nd overall you need players at every position.

atwater27
04-30-2011, 02:14 PM
My initial draft grade is B-....only because of who we left on the board. OLB's are much easier to find than good DT's, and this draft had at least 4 very good ones. Had we picked Dareus or Fairley at 2 and everything else stayed the same I would say A+. If we drafted Von at 2 and then got Austin or Paea or both in the second (and kept every other pick the same) I would say A+. Hope that makes sense... I am not capping the players drafted, just the players not drafted.

HORSEPOWER 56
04-30-2011, 02:18 PM
My initial draft grade is B-....only because of who we left on the board. OLB's are much easier to find than good DT's, and this draft had at least 4 very good ones. Had we picked Dareus or Fairley at 2 and everything else stayed the same I would say A+. If we drafted Von at 2 and then got Austin or Paea or both in the second (and kept every other pick the same) I would say A+. Hope that makes sense... I am not capping the players drafted, just the players not drafted.

My feelings exactly.

SpringsBroncoFan
04-30-2011, 02:21 PM
I don't particularly care for the draft but I do understand some of the picks.

Von Miller - Not who I would've drafted at 2, but I know why they did. The dude is a baller with sustained performance in the past. Hard to miss on a guy at #2 and Von will start day 1.

Rahim Moore - I love this guys attitude and emotion. I hope he can be a long time solid player for us. He's no Ed Reed, Troy Polamalu, or Steve Atwater, but he's one of the best this draft had to offer so I understand the pick. I'd have gone DT here.

Orlando Franklin - I don't know much about him but he projects well at either G or T. He's big and strong and mean and that's what you want O-linemen to be. This is where I'd have drafted a Safety or another DL if it had been me. I understand that with Harris leaving, we had a hole to fill, but isn't that why we drafted Beadles last year in the 2nd along with Olsen and Walton? The second round is still a little high to draft a Guard, especailly two years in a row.

Nate Irving - A high motor guy who will hopefully earn a starting spot. Lot's of folks are pretty high on him and I admit to not knowing a ton about him. Is he really any better than Joe Mays? If that's not a definite yes, it's another pick I would've spent on D-line.

Quentin Carter - A good value pick and a guy who was solid, but not spectacular in college. I don't have any problems with this pick. he's proabably better than both McBath and Bruton.

Julius Thomas - Biggest reach and worst pick of the draft so far. 4th round on a guy who is a complete project player. Another basketball player masquerading as a TE. Sure, he could be Antonio Gates - or he could be Marquez Branson. This is a guy we probably could've waited until the 6th or 7th for and kept our 5th round pick.

So far, this draft gets a solid C from me. Lots of players who maight start right away (Good) but our team is horrible so it's not saying much (Bad).

I'm still in shock at the complete disregard for the D-line in the most D-line heavy draft in a decade. I just don't get it. None of the guys above will be successful at their jobs (except maybe Franklin and Thomas) until we fix the D-line. Knowing that makes it extremely hard to get excited about any of the guys above. I've seen Champ Bailey waste his whole career here because we refused to help him and it saddens me that it will continue.

Those picks last year were OG's, with Olsen being a valuable OG/C, sure Beadles did OK at OT but he's not a tackle! The few OT bruisers that can protect the QB & play ZBS were NOT going to last past 46...

What good does it do to rebuild the defense and then have all our QB's get knocked out of games all the time?

In regards to drafting the same positions two years in a row, first they aren't the same positions, second, as the TV's guys love to say, "if he's YOUR guy, you have to get him."

As for Irving, at that point, if he's your guy at MLB, do it... the DT's on the board weren't going to be as good as the FA DT's on the market...

You're going to be surprised by Thomas... he's a sleeper that the word got out on...

SpringsBroncoFan
04-30-2011, 02:25 PM
My initial draft grade is B-....only because of who we left on the board. OLB's are much easier to find than good DT's, and this draft had at least 4 very good ones. Had we picked Dareus or Fairley at 2 and everything else stayed the same I would say A+. If we drafted Von at 2 and then got Austin or Paea or both in the second (and kept every other pick the same) I would say A+. Hope that makes sense... I am not capping the players drafted, just the players not drafted.

I don't have a problem with drafting Moore over Paea, just Austin.

But... apparently there was some really bad stuff on Austin so if that's the case ok....

HORSEPOWER 56
04-30-2011, 02:40 PM
Those picks last year were OG's, with Olsen being a valuable OG/C, sure Beadles did OK at OT but he's not a tackle! The few OT bruisers that can protect the QB & play ZBS were NOT going to last past 46...

What good does it do to rebuild the defense and then have all our QB's get knocked out of games all the time?

In regards to drafting the same positions two years in a row, first they aren't the same positions, second, as the TV's guys love to say, "if he's YOUR guy, you have to get him."

As for Irving, at that point, if he's your guy at MLB, do it... the DT's on the board weren't going to be as good as the FA DT's on the market...

You're going to be surprised by Thomas... he's a sleeper that the word got out on...


We're talking about the draft. Unlike other years, you can't even bring player trades or FA (which we don't know if it will even happen in time to do anything before the season starts) into this conversation. If our FO went into this draft not believing this was all the help we were going to get then they screwed up.

You do know that FA is an even bigger crapshoot than the draft, right? In the draft all you have to do is turn in your card when a player falls to you and you've got him. In FA you have to wine and dine players and outbid other teams (something we normally suck at). What makes you think that we're going to be not only willing, but able to sign a DT in FA that will actually be any better than the scrubs we just cut loose?

If the fall back plan is to re-sign Bannan's sorry ass I'll be pissed. The dude sucked here. He couldn't even eat blocks and keep O-linemen off our LBs properly or stop a RB when give the opportunity.

Free Agency is a JOKE and it's the whole reason we're in the predicament we're in in the first place on defense. Free Agency is for playoff caliber teams looking for that one particular guy to get them over the hump or to "flesh out" your roster with a decent STer/backup or two. It's too damned expensive to try to actually build a D-line from (especially from scratch).

SpringsBroncoFan
04-30-2011, 02:55 PM
We're talking about the draft. Unlike other years, you can't even bring player trades or FA (which we don't know if it will even happen in time to do anything before the season starts) into this conversation. If our FO went into this draft not believing this was all the help we were going to get then they screwed up.

You do know that FA is an even bigger crapshoot than the draft, right? In the draft all you have to do is turn in your card when a player falls to you and you've got him. In FA you have to wine and dine players and outbid other teams (something we normally suck at). What makes you think that we're going to be not only willing, but able to sign a DT in FA that will actually be any better than the scrubs we just cut loose?

If the fall back plan is to re-sign Bannan's sorry ass I'll be pissed. The dude sucked here. He couldn't even eat blocks and keep O-linemen off our LBs properly or stop a RB when give the opportunity.

Free Agency is a JOKE and it's the whole reason we're in the predicament we're in in the first place on defense. Free Agency is for playoff caliber teams looking for that one particular guy to get them over the hump or to "flesh out" your roster with a decent STer/backup or two. It's too damned expensive to try to actually build a D-line from (especially from scratch).

They did say the DT they wanted was gone...

I'm guessing that was Wilkerson at 36...

They also missed on Ellis at 67...

I'm sure they grab a b/u DT with one of the last picks...

Sure they might strike out on DT in FA but since when was this a one year fix???

Now if they don't sign a starting DT in FA or draft one in the 1st round next year then yes, hammer away on them...

WARHORSE
04-30-2011, 04:20 PM
Still have the last of the draft to go but here is my summary on what has transpired so far.

Yes, i did my mocks all offseason with the hope and intention of us taking a DT. And i would of loved to build from front to back considering our history but after much thought and seeing the players taken (2 of which i had totally forgotten about but loved) i feel a bit better about our picks. Also, we have FA and "maybe" a possible trade with teams for future draft picks who knows. Obviously, this is all based upon a new CBA being reached but if and when it is that is another area that can help in areas of need.

While i have some caution with guys like Moore, Franklin, and Thomas. Im sold on Miller, Irving, and Carter. Ive liked Irving and Carter for a while now so i expect them to be big contributors to this team for years to come. The promise of the other three is very positive and all hit needs for this team. Sure, we can all dwell on the lack of DT help at this moment but we are dealing with a different FO, and a different HC. One who understands the defensive side of the ball so lets not throw in the towel already.

Ive seen guys like Nolan come in and do wonders with guys worse than we just drafted so imagine what could happen with a HC who knows what his doing in that regard. If you want to cry in your wheaties right now without knowing the end result feel free, but im going to wait and see how the rest of the draft and year progresses. I have some high hope right now for the players we have already taken.


Not only do I agree.....but this entire draft has been almost all defense.

If we get four defensive starters out of this bunch, we're on the path of building a great D.

These LBers and safeties have "QB killers" written all over them.

All of these LBers play in the backfield, can cover, and tackle. High production. Did I mention high production?


Ayers has already shown himself to be a solid run defender on the edge. I think hes going to be a far better 43 DE than an OLB in the 34.

Cloggers. We need cloggers in the middle and this d will be here to please, serving up the ball to our offense.

I AM EXCITED ABOUT OUR FUTURE D!

We may not kill it this year, but next year, we will see some real change.

Agent of Orange
04-30-2011, 04:28 PM
Still have the last of the draft to go but here is my summary on what has transpired so far.

Yes, i did my mocks all offseason with the hope and intention of us taking a DT. And i would of loved to build from front to back considering our history but after much thought and seeing the players taken (2 of which i had totally forgotten about but loved) i feel a bit better about our picks. Also, we have FA and "maybe" a possible trade with teams for future draft picks who knows. Obviously, this is all based upon a new CBA being reached but if and when it is that is another area that can help in areas of need.

While i have some caution with guys like Moore, Franklin, and Thomas. Im sold on Miller, Irving, and Carter. Ive liked Irving and Carter for a while now so i expect them to be big contributors to this team for years to come. The promise of the other three is very positive and all hit needs for this team. Sure, we can all dwell on the lack of DT help at this moment but we are dealing with a different FO, and a different HC. One who understands the defensive side of the ball so lets not throw in the towel already.

Ive seen guys like Nolan come in and do wonders with guys worse than we just drafted so imagine what could happen with a HC who knows what his doing in that regard. If you want to cry in your wheaties right now without knowing the end result feel free, but im going to wait and see how the rest of the draft and year progresses. I have some high hope right now for the players we have already taken.

I feel much the same way on the DT issue and coming to terms with what we drafted vs what we didnt draft. People keep harping on not stopping the run because we didnt draft DTs. But a lot of rushing yards come after converting 3rd downs. The addition of Miller to go with Doom helps the problem of getting off the field on third downs. The other thing it helps with is turnovers. And its turnovers where someone like Moore comes into play.

Does anyone remember when Coyer used to blitz and force a bad pass only to see someone like Ian Gold drop a sure INT? Well, taking advantage of those opportunities is huge and thats where someone like Moore can be so valuable. Ballhawks and pass rushers work well together.

TXBRONC
04-30-2011, 04:39 PM
Still have the last of the draft to go but here is my summary on what has transpired so far.

Yes, i did my mocks all offseason with the hope and intention of us taking a DT. And i would of loved to build from front to back considering our history but after much thought and seeing the players taken (2 of which i had totally forgotten about but loved) i feel a bit better about our picks. Also, we have FA and "maybe" a possible trade with teams for future draft picks who knows. Obviously, this is all based upon a new CBA being reached but if and when it is that is another area that can help in areas of need.

While i have some caution with guys like Moore, Franklin, and Thomas. Im sold on Miller, Irving, and Carter. Ive liked Irving and Carter for a while now so i expect them to be big contributors to this team for years to come. The promise of the other three is very positive and all hit needs for this team. Sure, we can all dwell on the lack of DT help at this moment but we are dealing with a different FO, and a different HC. One who understands the defensive side of the ball so lets not throw in the towel already.

Ive seen guys like Nolan come in and do wonders with guys worse than we just drafted so imagine what could happen with a HC who knows what his doing in that regard. If you want to cry in your wheaties right now without knowing the end result feel free, but im going to wait and see how the rest of the draft and year progresses. I have some high hope right now for the players we have already taken.

North I give mega props for your thoughts. I'm disappointed we didn't take any defensive tackles but like you I do understand why we made the picks we made. My hope is that Denver indeed found the 4 starters that they were looking for. I'm curious to know if Fox believes that we have sufficient talent at defensive tackle. :2thumbs:

shank
04-30-2011, 04:41 PM
it's not the way i would have drafted, but every player we've taken will contribute either early or often or both. like has been said, signing a guy like mebane will make this draft look pretty great.

Ziggy
04-30-2011, 04:45 PM
Not only do I agree.....but this entire draft has been almost all defense.

If we get four defensive starters out of this bunch, we're on the path of building a great D.

These LBers and safeties have "QB killers" written all over them.

All of these LBers play in the backfield, can cover, and tackle. High production. Did I mention high production?


Ayers has already shown himself to be a solid run defender on the edge. I think hes going to be a far better 43 DE than an OLB in the 34.

Cloggers. We need cloggers in the middle and this d will be here to please, serving up the ball to our offense.

I AM EXCITED ABOUT OUR FUTURE D!

We may not kill it this year, but next year, we will see some real change.


Warhorse, I believe that Elway could have drafted 8 tight ends and then stabbed you in the eye and you would find a way to put a positive spin on it. I hope you never leave this forum.

Mike
04-30-2011, 04:52 PM
I think that this weekend Denver began the process of rebuilding a solid foundation. Nothing flashy (except Miller), but solid drafting. We are rebuilding so it will take more than just this one draft...but I like what they did.

I am really looking forward to seeing what DT they pick up in FA though. And I have to think they are looking at RB too.

TXBRONC
04-30-2011, 05:06 PM
I think that this weekend Denver began the process of rebuilding a solid foundation. Nothing flashy (except Miller), but solid drafting. We are rebuilding so it will take more than just this one draft...but I like what they did.

I am really looking forward to seeing what DT they pick up in FA though. And I have to think they are looking at RB too.

What makes it solid Mike?

shank
04-30-2011, 05:32 PM
What makes it solid Mike?

what makes is not solid TXBRONC?

TXBRONC
04-30-2011, 05:57 PM
what makes is not solid TXBRONC?

Other than not getting a defensive tackle nothing from what I've read so far. I'm just curious to know why others feel that way.

Northman
04-30-2011, 08:30 PM
Other than not getting a defensive tackle nothing from what I've read so far. I'm just curious to know why others feel that way.

We needed some safeties, also our LB corps was not the best and with Miller and Irving i think we got two future pro bowl calibur guys there. I think Irving will be a Ray Lewis/Brian Urlacher type of guy who not only is physical but a emotional leader as well. Carter is the prototype safety that you want if your a guy who likes Dawkins and Lynch. Having B-dawk around to mentor him and Moore is an added bonus in my eyes. Not sure why we took another LB and TE late in the draft but for most of it i cant complain. Just have to see how FA pans out to really assess what they are doing.

broncofaninfla
04-30-2011, 08:51 PM
We entered the draft with the worst defensive line in football and left the draft the same way, can't say I like that at all.
I do like that we seem to have drafted 3 possibly 4 instant starters, all at other postions of need. Kinda conflicted on how to feel just kep coming back to being hugely disappointed that we didn't get any big young bucks in to improve the worst DL in football. I'm getting so tired of watching our DL getting dominated week in and week out.

Nomad
04-30-2011, 09:01 PM
We entered the draft with the worst defensive line in football and left the draft the same way, can't say I like that at all.
I do like that we seem to have drafted 3 possibly 4 instant starters, all at other postions of need. Kinda conflicted on how to feel just kep coming back to being hugely disappointed that we didn't get any big young bucks in to improve the worst DL in football. I'm getting so tired of watching our DL getting dominated week in and week out.

I would like to have seen a different approach to rebuilding by the BRONCOS besides the same ol' thing which is treating the dline like a stepchild. Sure you could use the cliche "Rome wasn't built in a Day" but they were smart enough to build the foundations first.

dunk7
04-30-2011, 09:12 PM
We entered the draft with the worst defensive line in football and left the draft the same way, can't say I like that at all.
I do like that we seem to have drafted 3 possibly 4 instant starters, all at other postions of need. Kinda conflicted on how to feel just kep coming back to being hugely disappointed that we didn't get any big young bucks in to improve the worst DL in football. I'm getting so tired of watching our DL getting dominated week in and week out.

Agreed...what perplexes me is that 2 (Oakland, KC) if not all 3 opponents in our division cannot win unless they run the ball effectively. I just don't get why we wouldn't address that need.

My only other major beef was with drafting Thomas, a total project TE. I had a horrible flashback to Dick Quinn. A lot of people on this board defended that pick too ;-).

Agent of Orange
04-30-2011, 10:44 PM
We entered the draft with the worst defensive line in football and left the draft the same way, can't say I like that at all.
I do like that we seem to have drafted 3 possibly 4 instant starters, all at other postions of need. Kinda conflicted on how to feel just kep coming back to being hugely disappointed that we didn't get any big young bucks in to improve the worst DL in football. I'm getting so tired of watching our DL getting dominated week in and week out.

Why would the following not be starters?

Von Miller
Rahim Moore
Nate Irving
Julius Thomas
Orlando Franklin
Quinton Carter

I count 6 as potential starters. It might be more if DJ gets cut.

topscribe
05-01-2011, 12:14 AM
Nice job, North.

I might add that I regard Irving as the steal of this draft. No one will ever make
us forget Al Wilson, but I'm willing to wager Irving will give it a dang good try . . .

-----

GEM
05-01-2011, 12:30 AM
I am good with who we got. Thus isnt a one year turnaround. When your d has been as atrocious as ours foras long as ours, its going to take time. I am hoping in a couple years, they are talking about an elite lber crew and denver is who they are talkung about.

tomjonesrocks
05-01-2011, 01:08 AM
I am good with who we got. Thus isnt a one year turnaround. When your d has been as atrocious as ours foras long as ours, its going to take time. I am hoping in a couple years, they are talking about an elite lber crew and denver is who they are talkung about.

Though I'm with the "we could drafted BPA AND gotten a DT in this draft" crowd, it is truly amazing how many holes there are/were on this roster. Swiss cheese--certainly in the top 5 least talented rosters in football.

Though I'm annoyed, I am trying to tell myself that it's kind of hard to declare the sky falling on a team that's this bad. I do think by defying conventional wisdom they've put more pressure on themselves, however. Had they drafted one or two DTs and they were busts there's no arguing why the selection was made. But if these picks turn out to be busts--namely the OT selection for me--and Austin and whomever blow up--it is going to be very discouraging indeed.

Softskull
05-01-2011, 03:42 AM
Nice job, North.

I might add that I regard Irving as the steal of this draft. No one will ever make
us forget Al Wilson, but I'm willing to wager Irving will give it a dang good try . . .

-----

Top, I completely agree. Irving will be a fan favorite soon. He's tough as nails and his tackles are bone crushing. He was a good pick.

WARHORSE
05-01-2011, 09:13 AM
In listening to the post draft presser, Foxy and the boys were happy because they said one thing they set out to do, and recognized that needed to happen, was for us to get faster on defense.


While leaving room for the field to determine what, initially theyre looking at Raheem Moore at FS and Carter at SS.

While Miller will line up at SLB with Ayers and Doom at DE, in passing downs, Ayers will move inside, and Miller will drop down to the edge.

I think with Vick or even if we get Thomas back, thats one helluva pass rushing threat.

DJ Williams, Irving and Miller. The potential has my mouth watering.

Sooner or later, Miller will move to WLB, and either Mohammed will move to SLB, or DJ will.

Because Doom plays on the right, Miller will play SLB initially. But I know if Miller shows the range and punch he has the ability for at WLB, we will see Doom and him rage on both sides, and sometimes off the same side in a fire drill rush.


If we can be so lucky to see this front seven, with the new FA additions, gel quickly, Champ Bailey and the boys are going to have a field day this year.

SmilinAssasSin27
05-01-2011, 09:32 AM
I like that DJ can FINALLY get back to WILL and Woodyard won't be counted on as a starter. Sorry, but I'm in the minority about WW being THAT important to the defense.

So if all are correct, our LB corps has been fixed. No longer a need, except for depth, in upcoming drafts. Same w/ the Safety position. So as much as I wanted a DT or 3, we have at least "cured" all else that ails us.

Dean
05-01-2011, 09:35 AM
Why would the following not be starters?

Von Miller
Rahim Moore
Nate Irving
Julius Thomas
Orlando Franklin
Quinton Carter

I count 6 as potential starters. It might be more if DJ gets cut.

I think that JGod @ Broncocounty (or whatever it's called now) illustrates why it is unlikely better than any post I have seen.

http://forums.denverbroncos.com/showthread.php?t=187207

Any one of them is likely to be a starter but any 4 much less six would be a long, long, long shot.

WARHORSE
05-01-2011, 09:42 AM
Warhorse, I believe that Elway could have drafted 8 tight ends and then stabbed you in the eye and you would find a way to put a positive spin on it. I hope you never leave this forum.


Ok, stabbed in the eye I can take, but EIGHT TEs???? Nobody could spin that.;)



Thanks for the encouragement. Broncos!:salute:

Agent of Orange
05-01-2011, 09:52 AM
I think that JGod @ Broncocounty (or whatever it's called now) illustrates why it is unlikely better than any post I have seen.

http://forums.denverbroncos.com/showthread.php?t=187207

Any one of them is likely to be a starter but any 4 much less six would be a long, long, long shot.

Where that analysis falls short is that it homogenizes all teams...it kind of puts all teams in a blender and assumes an average for all teams. But when you're a bad team on defense, you have a greater chance to be a starter.

Another factor that this analysis doesnt address is the fact that scheme change increases the likelihood that rookies will play, since the rookies, essentially are replacements for guys suited for the previous scheme. So the scheme change also increases the likelihood that guys will play.

Its also worth pointing out that a run on DTs, QBs, and OTs, kind of cleared the runway for us to take other players. While it may not be the deepest safety class, we did get the two best safeties and being a weak safety class doesnt mean Moore and/or Carter won't help out quickly.

And then there's micro-level analysis vs. macro-level analysis. Anytime you look at really top level analysis, like jgod did, you have to step back and understand that it is a result of a lot of moving pieces on a smaller level and therefore prone to error. A good example of micro-level analysis is Bill Parcells endorsement of Nate Irving. Bill Parcells called him a first round player. Bill Parcells knows a little something about linebackers. If you're getting a player like that in the 3rd round, there's reason for optomism. Again, just analyzing the draft in a top level way is flawed...even if you're impressed by the presentation of data.

Agent of Orange
05-01-2011, 09:53 AM
I like that DJ can FINALLY get back to WILL and Woodyard won't be counted on as a starter. Sorry, but I'm in the minority about WW being THAT important to the defense.

So if all are correct, our LB corps has been fixed. No longer a need, except for depth, in upcoming drafts. Same w/ the Safety position. So as much as I wanted a DT or 3, we have at least "cured" all else that ails us.

Im wondering if DJ will be released at some point.

Dean
05-01-2011, 09:56 AM
Where that analysis falls short is that it homogenizes all teams...it kind of puts all teams in a blender and assumes an average for all teams. But when you're a bad team on defense, you have a greater chance to be a starter.

Another factor that this analysis doesnt address is the fact that scheme change increases the likelihood that rookies will play, since the rookies, essentially are replacements for guys suited for the previous scheme. So the scheme change also increases the likelihood that guys will play.

Its also worth pointing out that a run on DTs, QBs, and OTs, kind of cleared the runway for us to take other players. While it may not be the deepest safety class, we did get the two best safeties and being a weak safety class doesnt mean Moore and/or Carter won't help out quickly.

And then there's micro-level analysis vs. macro-level analysis. Anytime you look at really top level analysis, like jgod did, you have to step back and understand that it is a result of a lot of moving pieces on a smaller level and therefore prone to error. A good example of micro-level analysis is Bill Parcells endorsement of Nate Irving. Bill Parcells called him a first round player. Bill Parcells knows a little something about linebackers. If you're getting a player like that in the 3rd round, there's reason for optomism. Again, just analyzing the draft in a top level way is flawed...even if you're impressed by the presentation of data.

Get real Orange! No matter how you spin it the chances are slim and none. Let's not kid ourselves.

SmilinAssasSin27
05-01-2011, 09:57 AM
Im wondering if DJ will be released at some point.

I doubt it. His contract is higher than Woodyard's, but I still don't love WW as a starter.

HORSEPOWER 56
05-01-2011, 09:59 AM
Im wondering if DJ will be released at some point.

We still owe him a good chunk of change. I'm hoping we trade him for a player(s) for the D-line and lock up Woodyard long term to play WLB.

LTC Pain
05-01-2011, 10:20 AM
We still owe him a good chunk of change. I'm hoping we trade him for a player(s) for the D-line and lock up Woodyard long term to play WLB.

Orton and DJ to the Cardinals for D. Willliams and a 2nd round pick in 2012?

Northman
05-01-2011, 10:26 AM
Get real Orange! No matter how you spin it the chances are slim and none. Let's not kid ourselves.

Well, if anything the fact that Miller has an 86% chance to succeed is good enough for me. But since there is no real science to any of that because ive seen teams like NE and Bmore have plenty of success with late round picks. Will Denver be that successful? Who knows, but until we see what happens there's no reason to be a debbie downer about it.

Agent of Orange
05-01-2011, 10:29 AM
Get real Orange! No matter how you spin it the chances are slim and none. Let's not kid ourselves.

I am getting real. You should learn to scrutinize data for what it is.

G_Money
05-01-2011, 11:32 AM
Individually I quite like some of the players we drafted. Von has to learn how to drop back into pass coverage. Moore needs to learn how to tackle. Franklin needs to be an OT and not an OG, though I think he'd be a better guard than Beadles.

What I'm finding fascinating is how we drafted. We added two LBs as probable starters, which either makes DJ expendable or puts Woodyard back to a special teams captain. DJ at the Will makes the most sense for him, but IMO Woodyard at the Will makes the most sense for us. We'll see how that goes over the next 18 months. Either way, DJ being back to the only position he's ever excelled at would be good regardless - if Irving can do his job.

I think he can. VERY under-rated. Irving is gonna be the most fun guy to watch if we ever get a pre-season, even more than Miller probably. I love that the defenders we got are all team captains and good people to go along with their athletic skills. It'll help them give their all even if they wind up more on special teams for a bit.

We also hated our safeties. With Dawkins being on his last, LAST leg, we have a year to get his replacement ready, and Moore can cover well in the meantime as a roamer. PleasepleasePLEASE have Dawkins teach him how to hit and have Champ teach him how to tackle. Moore's a little soft for me, but as a cornerback-at-safety, Braxton type, we'll see how he does. Hopefully he's more mini Ed Reed and let "I'm gonna scream like a girl if I have to support in the run game." I shouldn't say that - he's WILLING, but watching him get dragged downfield by guys he passively attempts to get to the ground is likely to piss me off. Hopefully our coaches are better than UCLA's.

And I'm not a McBath guy. Quinton Carter was drafted specifically to push him and to bolster special teams, and I think he can do both. I actually like Carter quite a bit, and his slow combine time doesn't reflect his on-field time AT ALL, to my mind. I wouldn't be shocked if Carter's the better safety over Moore 2 years from now, but I'd love both of them to be capable. And Carter would be a handful on safety blitzes of the sort that Moore will never be, IMO - I'd love Quinton to bring his lunchpail, show up for work, and earn the job. Dawkins is far more his sort of safety to learn from as well, so that might give him a leg up.

Franklin SHOULD start, replacing our multiple-back-surgery Notre Dame alum with a player who can be nastier. In reality, I think he's a guard. Maybe that frees up Beadles to go play RT, or Kuper. I'd rather it was Kuper, since we're paying him a ton of cash and I don't like Beadles for the role. I think Franklin needs bookends to take advantage of his gifts and that leaving him in space on the corner is a good way to get Tebow killed. I'm curious as to whether we're gonna switch Clady to RT since that's Tebow's blind side, but regardless we have some OL work to do. I don't see Franklin as the tackle answer, which is why although I understand the pick I don't think it's gonna work out the way we'd hope. Hopefully our new OL coach can coach him up.

I don't think Ayers is anybody either, so grabbing long-shots to try to provide more pressure in a rotating front is okay with me.

And adding receiving tight ends of the sort we just finished flushing is all right with me too. One's gonna be a practice squad guy, IMO, but it's not a bad idea.

The DL is gonna be patchwork with some of our less-atrocious DL brought back, and we'll see what we can scrounge up in FA. The running game needs some help too, but we'll see if we bring in a Cadillac or something to assist.

Fox likes the run game and he likes the DL, so it's not like he would advocate skimping at those positions. With our lack of attention to them, I have to believe we have our Stage Two of the rebuilding plan that will help patch those holes.

The Broncos kept putting the message out that they wanted 4 starters. I don't see how we DON'T get 4 starters out of this. Strong-side LB, Middle LB, safety and at least guard should be met. Situational TE should also work out for a year or two at least.

I can't be angry at that draft. I'm not thrilled by it at first blush because I thought there were DTs worth taking, but the Broncos didn't and they stuck to their board.

Good for them.

It'll help me figure out if their board is worth anything in future years, and in the meantime we have a lot of back 7 help.

Sending out smoke signals (or the bat signal) for front four assistance should be the next thing addressed, however. Fox loves the DL. LOVES it. So I'm not as worried as I'd be with McDaniels at the helm.

I'm only at a minor panic level. Adding Derrick Thomas, Al Wilson, Tony Jones and Tyrone Braxton would make me feel better, so let's hope we've done that. I think it's a bit funny that after many, many years where we couldn't find ONE decent player in the draft we might have found 4 or 5 and a few folks are completely bent that they might not be at the "right" positions. It's too long an offseason to hate and despair when this particular front office hasn't done anything yet to prove they're clueless imbeciles.

I wasn't stoked about skipping the DTs. It pissed me off on day two of the draft something fierce, especially since I don't think Franklin is all that and a bag of chips. But I believe in Irving and Miller, and I think Moore, Carter and Franklin can plug holes for at least a few seasons and give us a chance to get our feet under us.

When you're drowning in lack of talent you take it wherever you can get it. I'll take it, and hope we can mold it into the impact players we need instead of just random starters who should be replaced at the first opportunity.

Show me whatcha got, Broncos - I'm willing to be patient, if you show you can recognize talent without a neon sign and some GPS coordinates, and then actually get something out of it.

:salute:

Bring on the season.

~G

TXBRONC
05-01-2011, 11:33 AM
I think that JGod @ Broncocounty (or whatever it's called now) illustrates why it is unlikely better than any post I have seen.

http://forums.denverbroncos.com/showthread.php?t=187207

Any one of them is likely to be a starter but any 4 much less six would be a long, long, long shot.

Anyone that thinks we got six potential starters out of this draft is not being realistic. If they get the four like they hope they will be doing good. If they hit just two or three of them I will be elated.

jhildebrand
05-01-2011, 11:45 AM
DJ will have worth on the trade market. I haven't liked him for a while and find him to be overrated. Much of it will depend on his suspension/discipline.

Mike
05-01-2011, 02:00 PM
What makes it solid Mike?

Because I think that by the middle/end of the season we will have 4-5 of these guys starting and making impacts. Doesn't say much about what they replaced, but we all know what they are replacing.

I liked that they stayed true to their decision to draft the BPA and not reach on a DT. John Fox knows defense and I put value in his decision not to draft any of the DTs. Denver has been burned by reaching on DL just because it was a bigger need and I was hoping they wouldn't do it again.

At this point I think Denver has so many holes to fill on defense and had to take BPA. I also think that Fox maybe passed on the DT/RB positions because he has some FAs in mind. Add a big DT and a solid RB from FA and this will have to be considered a solid offseason. I am also curious to see if any of our younger players perform better in a 4-3 verses the 3-4. And hope that real coaching at the positions will help them too.

Course I usually have my orange colored glasses on. :cool:

Dean
05-01-2011, 02:15 PM
I am getting real. You should learn to scrutinize data for what it is.

Okay. . .if that data is invalid, give us the actual numbers.:rolleyes:

Montana Battlin Bear
05-01-2011, 02:30 PM
DJ is going nowhere. Yesterday in the Post Draft Press Conference Fox was asked if DJ could be moved down the line and Fox immediately said "no, DJ is the least of my worries".

Please debunk that thought finally

topscribe
05-01-2011, 02:36 PM
I think that JGod @ Broncocounty (or whatever it's called now) illustrates why it is unlikely better than any post I have seen.

http://forums.denverbroncos.com/showthread.php?t=187207

Any one of them is likely to be a starter but any 4 much less six would be a long, long, long shot.

Except that he has Irving rated way, way too low, IMO . . .

-----

horsepig
05-01-2011, 02:52 PM
Orton and DJ to the Cardinals for D. Willliams and a 2nd round pick in 2012?

I'd jump on that like a wild dog on a raw porkchop, baby!

topscribe
05-01-2011, 03:47 PM
DJ is going nowhere. Yesterday in the Post Draft Press Conference Fox was asked if DJ could be moved down the line and Fox immediately said "no, DJ is the least of my worries".

Please debunk that thought finally

I'm sure Fox sees DJ for what he can be. DJ showed in his rookie year he may
be one of the better Wills in the league, and then they ripped him out of there.
Now he's back in the position for which they drafted him in the first place, and,
among him, Miller, and Irving, they just may end up with one of the best
linebacking corps in the league.

I wouldn't trade him.

-----

Agent of Orange
05-01-2011, 04:08 PM
Okay. . .if that data is invalid, give us the actual numbers.:rolleyes:

When did I say it was invalid? This response just confirms my initial impression that my previous response was over your head.

Dean
05-01-2011, 05:40 PM
Where that analysis falls short is that it homogenizes all teams...it kind of puts all teams in a blender and assumes an average for all teams. But when you're a bad team on defense, you have a greater chance to be a starter.

Corect me if this is not your post. You are saying that the average failure rate from previous drafts for all teams is not representative.



Another factor that this analysis doesnt address is the fact that scheme change increases the likelihood that rookies will play, since the rookies, essentially are replacements for guys suited for the previous scheme. So the scheme change also increases the likelihood that guys will play.

From another angle, you are saying that the statistics do not represent the situation. However, even if you use one standard deviation on each round of the draft there is little change in the percentages.


Its also worth pointing out that a run on DTs, QBs, and OTs, kind of cleared the runway for us to take other players. While it may not be the deepest safety class, we did get the two best safeties and being a weak safety class doesnt mean Moore and/or Carter won't help out quickly.

And then there's micro-level analysis vs. macro-level analysis. Anytime you look at really top level analysis, like jgod did, you have to step back and understand that it is a result of a lot of moving pieces on a smaller level and therefore prone to error.

. . .and I asked for you to correct that error.


A good example of micro-level analysis is Bill Parcells endorsement of Nate Irving. Bill Parcells called him a first round player. Bill Parcells knows a little something about linebackers. If you're getting a player like that in the 3rd round, there's reason for optomism. Again, just analyzing the draft in a top level way is flawed...even if you're impressed by the presentation of data.

Invalid 1. not valid; without force of foundation; indefensible. 2. deficient in substance and cogency; weak. 3. void or without legal force.

Yes, you said it was without validity and so I asked for what you felt were the accurate numbers to represent the present situation such that when you performed a permutation or combination of the percentages you could show there was a likelihood that this draft would produce 6 starters.

You are starting to wear on me. Later.:coffee:

Agent of Orange
05-01-2011, 05:46 PM
Coorect me if this is not your post. You are saying that the average failure rate from previous drafts for all teams is not representative.




From another angle, you are saying that the statistics do not represent the situation. However, even if you use one standard deviation on each round of the draft there is little change in the percentages.



. . .and I asked for you to correct that error.



Invalid 1. not valid; without force of foundation; indefensible. 2. deficient in substance and cogency; weak. 3. void or without legal force.

Yes, you said it was without validity and so I asked for what you felt were the accurate numbers to represent the present situation such that when you performed a permutation or combination of the percentages you could show there was a likelihood that this draft would produce 6 starters.

You are starting to wear on me. Later.:coffee:


Like I said, it seems like it went over your head. I listed about four bulletpoints that poke holes in this analysis and in everyone, I explained why/how it is flawed. But more to what you seem to be fixated on, I addressed focusing only on top level data as flawed when you don't also look at its underlying components. You have to look at the underlying components. The top level projection is derived from some average of many teams when the worse you are, at least in theory, the better you your odds of starting. The average isnt an accurate reflection of bad teams since an average is also including top level data from good teams. But again, you also have to look at its components.

Superchop 7
05-01-2011, 06:26 PM
Ya know guys.....theres a bit of a learning curve to D Line.....if you think we just walk into the draft next year and button up the hole?

Thats why we needed to draft DT "this" year.

Dean
09-04-2011, 07:29 AM
Like I said, it seems like it went over your head. I listed about four bulletpoints that poke holes in this analysis and in everyone, I explained why/how it is flawed. But more to what you seem to be fixated on, I addressed focusing only on top level data as flawed when you don't also look at its underlying components. You have to look at the underlying components. The top level projection is derived from some average of many teams when the worse you are, at least in theory, the better you your odds of starting. The average isnt an accurate reflection of bad teams since an average is also including top level data from good teams. But again, you also have to look at its components.

Where are the six rookie starters your "bulletpoints and underlying components" indicates will be starting? ;)

Sorry, I couldn't help myself.

Agent of Orange
09-04-2011, 11:23 AM
Why would the following not be starters?

Von Miller
Rahim Moore
Nate Irving
Julius Thomas
Orlando Franklin
Quinton Carter

I count 6 as potential starters. It might be more if DJ gets cut.


Where are the six rookie starters your "bulletpoints and underlying components" indicates will be starting? ;)

Sorry, I couldn't help myself.

Except you didn't help your self. In fact, you just made yourself look silly on top of looking petty. I find it funny that you made it a point to remember this and circle back to this but you didn't even know what I originally said. FAIL.

Tned
09-04-2011, 11:30 AM
Except you didn't help your self. In fact, you just made yourself look silly on top of looking petty. I find it funny that you made it a point to remember this and circle back to this but you didn't even know what I originally said. FAIL.

Did you really post that DJ Williams might get cut? :confused:

Agent of Orange
09-04-2011, 11:44 AM
Did you really post that DJ Williams might get cut? :confused:

Yeah, because he has the DUI hanging over his head. I think he's also played better in PS than he did last year.

Tned
09-04-2011, 11:46 AM
Yeah, because he has the DUI hanging over his head. I think he's also played better in PS than he did last year.

Short of getting suspended for a year, you don't cut one of the better defenders on your team. While he's a popular message board target, DJ has been one of the most consistant defenders we've had. Cutting DJ wasn't going to happen.

Agent of Orange
09-04-2011, 11:48 AM
Short of getting suspended for a year, you don't cut one of the better defenders on your team. While he's a popular message board target, DJ has been one of the most consistant defenders we've had. Cutting DJ wasn't going to happen.

Well, considering they drafted 3 LBs, it wasn't unreasonable to think that they agreed with many in saying that our LBs have left a lot to be desired.

atwater27
09-04-2011, 11:50 AM
Well, considering they drafted 3 LBs, it wasn't unreasonable to think that they agreed with many in saying that our LBs have left a lot to be desired.

DJ wasn't one of them.

He has been one of only a few solid players on D.

G_Money
09-04-2011, 11:57 AM
*frowns* Love your football knowledge, Dean...but we did get 4 rookie starters out of the draft, and if Dawkins had moved on would have had a 5th.

Franklin, Julius (in two TE sets), Von Miller and Rahim Moore are all starting. Quinton Carter isn't starting, but he's a Brian Dawkins injury away from seeing the field. Nate Irving had the chance (Mays is a special teams guy) but he's not ready to start. He might not even be ready to back Mays up at this point, which sucks because there are many things I love about Irving. He's just got work to do - I hope he can do it.

But out of the 6 guys he listed (not being positive at the time whether Dawkins was gonna be a cap casualty coming out of the lockout) 4 ARE starting, Carter would probably be starting if Dawkins had left, and Irving was just too raw to do everything we need a MLB to do - no shame in that with having no OTAs.

Other than AoO having an aggravating posting style, what's the argument about? He was right that 6 guys could have started, 4 are starting, and two more might be as soon as next year. I don't think that's a surprise - just more of an indictment of Josh's inability to properly identify talent, since we're redrafting most of the positions he tried to address in his 2 drafts.

And these rookies are starting over those 2nd and 3rd year players. That's bad news...but ya gotta do what ya gotta do.

The Broncos wanted 4 starters, and they got em. I hope they're good ones. I'm looking at you, Franklin - don't make me slide you to guard and draft Matt Khalil next year to protect Tebow's blind side...

~G

Agent of Orange
09-04-2011, 11:58 AM
DJ wasn't one of them.

He has been one of only a few solid players on D.

He hasn't been that great, especially for what he makes. Plus he has the DUI hanging over his head.

Northman
09-04-2011, 12:00 PM
To be fair to Agent, considering the off the field problems it wouldnt of been THAT much of a stretch had DJ got cut or traded. I mean, thats kind of nitpicky to come back and give him a rash of shit for something like that.

G_Money
09-04-2011, 12:08 PM
I could see Kuper and Williams both going away next year, depending on what we need to do with the salary cap. I like Franklin but think he might be a better guard, and he's much cheaper than Kuper. I think he might push Beadles instead, but Kuper makes a good chunk of change. And Woodyard and DJ duplicate the position, with Woodyard being a UFA next year.

No way do we re-sign Woodyard AND keep DJ. DJ has the DUI and is turning 30 - If we keep him, Woodyard is gone and maybe Irving slides to the Will to back him up. Or we could stay with Woodyard. Welsey has his chance to make an impression with the new staff now - if he'd had one in OTAs I could have seen us moving DJ before the season.

We didn't draft a ton of LBs because we were happy with the position, that's for sure.

~G

HORSEPOWER 56
09-04-2011, 12:16 PM
I could see Kuper and Williams both going away next year, depending on what we need to do with the salary cap. I like Franklin but think he might be a better guard, and he's much cheaper than Kuper. I think he might push Beadles instead, but Kuper makes a good chunk of change. And Woodyard and DJ duplicate the position, with Woodyard being a UFA next year.

No way do we re-sign Woodyard AND keep DJ. DJ has the DUI and is turning 30 - If we keep him, Woodyard is gone and maybe Irving slides to the Will to back him up. Or we could stay with Woodyard. Welsey has his chance to make an impression with the new staff now - if he'd had one in OTAs I could have seen us moving DJ before the season.

We didn't draft a ton of LBs because we were happy with the position, that's for sure.

~G

DJ has 2 DUIs. Lucky for him his trial doesn't start until January. As for Kuper, I really hope we keep him around. He was a machine vs Branch and Mebane (you know, the guy we all wanted 4 weeks ago) and basically made them irrelevant. He's been doing that all preseason to opposing teams' DTs.

Seeing as how Beadles is a natural tackle who's better in space against smaller, faster guys and Franklin is a natural inline blocking Guard who struggles in space, I was surprised we didn't try to switch them this season. Beadles is probably a better tackle (doesn't hold up well vs big, strong DTs) and Frankin is a MUCH better Guard.

Agent of Orange
09-04-2011, 12:28 PM
DJ has 2 DUIs. Lucky for him his trial doesn't start until January. As for Kuper, I really hope we keep him around. He was a machine vs Mebane (you know, the guy we all wanted 4 weeks ago) and basically made him irrelevant. He's been doing that all preseason to opposing teams' DTs.

Seeing as how Beadles is a natural tackle who's better in space against smaller, faster guys and Franklin is a natural inline blocking Guard who struggles in space, I was surprised we didn't try to switch them this season. Beadles is probably a better tackle (doesn't hold up well vs big, strong DTs) and Frankin is a MUCH better Guard.

I agree with most all of this. Still, it's worth pointing out that Jeff Otah was a high draft pick with Carolina who was extremely effective in running the football...at least he was in his first year at Carolina. I think he's had injuries though. So, Franklin could represent a Jeff Otah fixation (notice how I've bolded the word "could" in case Dean wants to bump this in 4 months). Secondly, it almost seems like they want pass protectors on the left side and run blockers on the right side. It seems like we will be running at the right side a lot, which is not that unusual. So that would be the value of having Franklin, a better runblocker, on the right side.

But I agree with you overall. Beadles is in a bad place to be getting pushed back, especially when Walton also has a lot to prove. The guards are where a lot of running is done in short yardage and its also where a lot of running plays are blown up in short yardage (even when offtackle) by defensive penetration.

G_Money
09-04-2011, 12:32 PM
DJ has 2 DUIs. Lucky for him his trial doesn't start until January. As for Kuper, I really hope we keep him around. He was a machine vs Mebane (you know, the guy we all wanted 4 weeks ago) and basically made him irrelevant. He's been doing that all preseason to opposing teams' DTs.

Seeing as how Beadles is a natural tackle who's better in space against smaller, faster guys and Franklin is a natural inline blocking Guard who struggles in space, I was surprised we didn't try to switch them this season. Beadles is probably a better tackle (doesn't hold up well vs big, strong DTs) and Frankin is a MUCH better Guard.

Right - I meant to say DJ had ANOTHER DUI, which doesn't do him any favors at all.

And Beadles might be a natural tackle, but I don't think that makes him a good one. I'd rather have him as a T/G backup (especially seeing the utterly worthless performance of the guys who ARE the backups in that last pre-season game), move Franklin to G where he can be a road grader of epic proportions, and get a better true tackle, ESPECIALLY if we wind up going with Tebow and we need better blindside protection.

I wasn't kidding about looking at Khalil in the draft if we don't go QB. We'd have to be bad this year...but there's a good chance of that. :coffee:

And I thought we might need to move Kuper to find cash to extend Clady (FA in 2013) but I looked at Kuper's salary cap figures for the next few years and they're fine. This is the expensive year. I like Chris a lot - no problem with him staying if we can afford him. With our next top-10 draftpick coming under the new salary cap conditions, we should be able to. :beer:

~G

Tned
09-04-2011, 12:45 PM
To be fair to Agent, considering the off the field problems it wouldnt of been THAT much of a stretch had DJ got cut or traded. I mean, thats kind of nitpicky to come back and give him a rash of shit for something like that.

Traded? Maybe. Cut for having a DUI? I don't think so.

Northman
09-04-2011, 12:51 PM
Traded? Maybe. Cut for having a DUI? I don't think so.

Stranger things have happened. This is the Broncos we are talking about.

Tned
09-04-2011, 12:51 PM
*frowns* Love your football knowledge, Dean...but we did get 4 rookie starters out of the draft, and if Dawkins had moved on would have had a 5th.

Franklin, Julius (in two TE sets), Von Miller and Rahim Moore are all starting. Quinton Carter isn't starting, but he's a Brian Dawkins injury away from seeing the field. Nate Irving had the chance (Mays is a special teams guy) but he's not ready to start. He might not even be ready to back Mays up at this point, which sucks because there are many things I love about Irving. He's just got work to do - I hope he can do it.

But out of the 6 guys he listed (not being positive at the time whether Dawkins was gonna be a cap casualty coming out of the lockout) 4 ARE starting, Carter would probably be starting if Dawkins had left, and Irving was just too raw to do everything we need a MLB to do - no shame in that with having no OTAs.

Other than AoO having an aggravating posting style, what's the argument about? He was right that 6 guys could have started, 4 are starting, and two more might be as soon as next year. I don't think that's a surprise - just more of an indictment of Josh's inability to properly identify talent, since we're redrafting most of the positions he tried to address in his 2 drafts.

And these rookies are starting over those 2nd and 3rd year players. That's bad news...but ya gotta do what ya gotta do.

The Broncos wanted 4 starters, and they got em. I hope they're good ones. I'm looking at you, Franklin - don't make me slide you to guard and draft Matt Khalil next year to protect Tebow's blind side...

~G

I agree with most of what you are saying, and even the point you are trying to make with J. Thomas, but I still don't think you can call him a starter. Using that logic, that he will be the 2nd TE when using a two TE set, is like saying that the nickel DB is a starter, because he's the first DB in when the team uses 5 DBs.

Now, I know the counter argument could be "teams sometimes start the game in two TE sets, but rarely start the game in a nickel package." It might be true that two TE sets are more common, but it is still convention not to list 12 or 13 starters on a unit.

FWIW, the Broncos don't consider JT a starter, because Saccomano has been Tweeting about how the Broncos are starting three rookies.

Tned
09-04-2011, 12:56 PM
Stranger things have happened. This is the Broncos we are talking about.

Yes, but it's the Broncos post McDaniels. Rarely does a team release their leading tackler for the last four or five years and leading sack guy from the year before.

Anyway, now we are getting into going back and forth about how likely it would be that a team does something idiotic and completely surprising, which is not possible to prove either way.

Agent of Orange
09-04-2011, 12:56 PM
I agree with most of what you are saying, and even the point you are trying to make with J. Thomas, but I still don't think you can call him a starter. Using that logic, that he will be the 2nd TE when using a two TE set, is like saying that the nickel DB is a starter, because he's the first DB in when the team uses 5 DBs.

Now, I know the counter argument could be "teams sometimes start the game in two TE sets, but rarely start the game in a nickel package." It might be true that two TE sets are more common, but it is still convention not to list 12 or 13 starters on a unit.

FWIW, the Broncos don't consider JT a starter, because Saccomano has been Tweeting about how the Broncos are starting three rookies.

As it stands right now, we only have 4 healthy WRs, do we not?

Agent of Orange
09-04-2011, 12:59 PM
Yes, but it's the Broncos post McDaniels. Rarely does a team release their leading tackler for the last four or five years and leading sack guy from the year before.

Anyway, now we are getting into going back and forth about how likely it would be that a team does something idiotic and completely surprising, which is not possible to prove either way.

These decisions don't take place in a vacuum. There is also the issue of value and DJ makes a lot of money. Doesn't he only have a couple of years left? The FO might feel like it's far enough into his contract to take the hit by dumping his salary given his production relative to what he's making and risk of him doing something stupid and getting suspended.

Tned
09-04-2011, 01:15 PM
As it stands right now, we only have 4 healthy WRs, do we not?

Yes, but I'm not sure what your point is. Do you think that means they won't be running four WR sets? I'm not sure the point of the question as it relates to listing JT as a starter, which the Broncos VP of PR, Sacco, is not doing when he's touting the three rookies (Franklin, Miller and Moore) that are starting.


These decisions don't take place in a vacuum. There is also the issue of value and DJ makes a lot of money. Doesn't he only have a couple of years left? The FO might feel like it's far enough into his contract to take the hit by dumping his salary given his production relative to what he's making and risk of him doing something stupid and getting suspended.

He's under contract for three years, including this year, and nobody but a small segment of Broncos fans seem to believe he's not a productive LB.

HORSEPOWER 56
09-04-2011, 01:15 PM
These decisions don't take place in a vacuum. There is also the issue of value and DJ makes a lot of money. Doesn't he only have a couple of years left? The FO might feel like it's far enough into his contract to take the hit by dumping his salary given his production relative to what he's making and risk of him doing something stupid and getting suspended.

I have a feeling that if Woodyard shines at WLB while DJ is out (supposedly he's going to miss the first 4 games), that's exactly what will happen.

Tned
09-04-2011, 01:18 PM
I have a feeling that if Woodyard shines at WLB while DJ is out (supposedly he's going to miss the first 4 games), that's exactly what will happen.

We'll see, I doubt it very much. I know Woodyard is a fan favorite, while DJ isn't, but to date, Woodyard has not been able to win a starting job, even when at times, like his rookie year, there were some weak linebackers on the field. I like Woodyard, and he's had a couple big games, but DJ has been a consistent producer for the Broncos on defense, even when playing out of his natural weak side position (I think we even had him at SLB one year).

Agent of Orange
09-04-2011, 01:23 PM
Yes, but I'm not sure what your point is. Do you think that means they won't be running for WR sets? I'm not sure the point of the question as it relates to listing JT as a starter, which the Broncos VP of PR, Sacco, is not doing when he's touting the three rookies (Franklin, Miller and Moore) that are starting.

What this means is that since the WR depth is thin, it would make sense that they would run more two TE sets than normal. They might run 4 WR sets but they know they're an injury away at WR from not being able to rely on running that formation. For that reason, it would be stupid to have a lot of 4 WR sets in the game plan because if a WR goes down on your first play, now what?



He's under contract for three years, including this year, and nobody but a small segment of Broncos fans seem to believe he's not a productive LB.
I don't have every players contract memorized. I thought it was two years. It's not even necessarily that relevant if they knew they werent going to spend a lot of money on payroll this year. The acceleration of salary is a theoretical calculation and not what is actually something the Broncos are really paying. If they knew in the bigger picture they werent going to have a big payroll, they could have been in OK shape to dump DJ (in terms of salary acceleration) so they don't really have to pay him (as opposed to acceleration which is just a theoretical calculation).

Agent of Orange
09-04-2011, 01:28 PM
I have a feeling that if Woodyard shines at WLB while DJ is out (supposedly he's going to miss the first 4 games), that's exactly what will happen.

The thing about this is that Fox really seems to have a strong preference to veterans. I'd like to believe an honest assessment weighing value takes place but I'm not so sure the FO won't give into Fox on this one.

And while DJ might be better than Woodyard (Im not even sure that's true), it's not so much better and considering Woodyard makes a lot less and has no DUIs...

Tned
09-04-2011, 01:31 PM
What this means is that since the WR depth is thin, it would make sense that they would run more two TE sets than normal. They might run 4 WR sets but they know they're an injury away at WR from not being able to rely on running that formation. For that reason, it would be stupid to have a lot of 4 WR sets in the game plan because if a WR goes down on your first play, now what?

Not sure what the 4 WR set has to do with anything, as the Broncos "starting" lineup will likely be a 21.

Anyway, why not go debate with the Broncos VP of Public Relations, since I'm sure he would rather claim four rookies and would love for you to help him make that claim.


RT @broncos_sacco: Three rookies currently set to start season opener for Broncos, most in 38 years. #fb

He seems to think we only have 3 rookies starting.


I don't have every players contract memorized. I thought it was two years. It's not even necessarily that relevant if they knew they werent going to spend a lot of money on payroll this year. The acceleration of salary is a theoretical calculation and not what is actually something the Broncos are really paying. If they knew in the bigger picture they werent going to have a big payroll, they could have been in OK shape to dump DJ (in terms of salary acceleration) so they don't really have to pay him (as opposed to acceleration which is just a theoretical calculation).

So, with all of that said, I guess we can agree that it was within the realm of 'possibility' that DJ could have been cut, but that now that reality has played out, he's the starting Will backer. Fair enough?

HORSEPOWER 56
09-04-2011, 01:37 PM
We'll see, I doubt it very much. I know Woodyard is a fan favorite, while DJ isn't, but to date, Woodyard has not been able to win a starting job, even when at times, like his rookie year, there were some weak linebackers on the field. I like Woodyard, and he's had a couple big games, but DJ has been a consistent producer for the Broncos on defense, even when playing out of his natural weak side position (I think we even had him at SLB one year).

True, but DJ has already drunk his way out of his captaincy and is being paid like a guy who should be a regular at the pro-bowl and in discussions for DPOY.

He doesn't even make the impact plays that average LBs do. When was the last time he picked off a pass or forced a fumble? How often does he shed blocks and stuff RBs in the hole for no gain or a loss? He had a couple of sacks last year, but how many came off jailbreak-type blitzes where he was unabated to the QB vice him just being an effective blitzer and beating a blocker? The fact that our defense has been poor and he's had to make a lot of tackles 5 yards downfield which inflates his tackle stats, just doesn't win me over.

Remember, he's the centerpiece of our front seven and has been schemed as such since Al Wilson left. Everything is funneled to him to make the plays. He's expected, based on his physical attributes and his salary, to be a leader - which he's not, and a playmaker - which he's not.

DJ is a solid LB, he's just not anything more. Right now, I'd rather pay money to watch Joe Mays play than DJ because he plays with more heart and leadership. DJ always seems like the talented guy who is disinterested and "plays when he wants to" and has been coddled in Denver because he's one of our few 1st round picks who didn't bust over the past decade. It's not personal toward him, it's just how I feel.

It will also be interesting to see if Goodell takes any action toward DJ because of his 2nd DUI. He could be facing a suspension, too. Probably not because his first one was not on Goodell's watch, but it's still possible. The league hasn't handed down any real suspensions yet, and DJ's did happen during the regular season last year.

Agent of Orange
09-04-2011, 01:40 PM
Not sure what the 4 WR set has to do with anything, as the Broncos "starting" lineup will likely be a 21.

You said something about 4 WR formations.


Anyway, why not go debate with the Broncos VP of Public Relations, since I'm sure he would rather claim four rookies and would love for you to help him make that claim.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here.



He seems to think we only have 3 rookies starting.

What about it?



So, with all of that said, I guess we can agree that it was within the realm of 'possibility' that DJ could have been cut, but that now that reality has played out, he's the starting Will backer. Fair enough?

No, possibility should not have quotes in the sense of being facetious. And I wouldnt look at the fact that he's a starter as some endorsement that you're right. I think what happens is that the front office moves along doing their own assessments and calculate value. Then at a certain point during that timeline, they hire a head coach and end up making compromises. They listen to a head coach and keep players the FO might have otherwise cut or traded. The FO is in a position to give ground because and keep some players the coach wants because they just hired Fox and want to be able to say they're supporting him.

Tned
09-04-2011, 01:43 PM
True, but DJ has already drunk his way out of his captaincy and is being paid like a guy who should be a regular at the pro-bowl and in discussions for DPOY.

He doesn't even make the impact plays that average LBs do. When was the last time he picked off a pass or forced a fumble? How often does he shed blocks and stuff RBs in the hole for no gain or a loss? He had a couple of sacks last year, but how many came off jailbreak-type blitzes where he was unabated to the QB vice him just being an effective blitzer and beating a blocker? The fact that our defense has been poor and he's had to make a lot of tackles 5 yards downfield which inflates his tackle stats, just doesn't win me over.

Remember, he's the centerpiece of our front seven and has been schemed as such since Al Wilson left. Everything is funneled to him to make the plays. He's expected, based on his physical attributes and his salary, to be a leader - which he's not, and a playmaker - which he's not.

DJ is a solid LB, he's just not anything more. Right now, I'd rather pay money to watch Joe Mays play than DJ because he plays with more heart and leadership. DJ always seems like the talented guy who is disinterested and "plays when he wants to" and has been coddled in Denver because he's one of our few 1st round picks who didn't bust over the past decade. It's not personal toward him, it's just how I feel.

It will also be interesting to see if Goodell takes any action toward DJ because of his 2nd DUI. He could be facing a suspension, too. Probably not because his first one was not on Goodell's watch, but it's still possible. The league hasn't handed down any real suspensions yet, and DJ's did happen during the regular season last year.

I think that's a big reach on the Mays vs. DJ, but obviously since you were saying you would rather pay to see Mays, that's a personal opinion and valid.

The rest, who knows. You bring up some solid points, but it doesn't reach the level of him being cut. Like it or not, he's been one of the better defenders on this team the last few years.

I'm some what alone, because it's become fashionable in the last couple years to bash DJ, but I have been looking forward to moving him to WLB, which is his more natural position.

Whether or not he's being overpaid is open for debate, and I wouldn't take a position on either side of that, but I still think it was very far fetched to think there was any likelihood he would be cut. If you have the Packers, Steelers or Pats defense, maybe you have the luxury to cut a player like DJ. When you have the Broncos defense, it's not going to happen unless the front office actually buys into the "loose for luck" mantra.

Agent of Orange
09-04-2011, 01:44 PM
True, but DJ has already drunk his way out of his captaincy and is being paid like a guy who should be a regular at the pro-bowl and in discussions for DPOY.

He doesn't even make the impact plays that average LBs do. When was the last time he picked off a pass or forced a fumble? How often does he shed blocks and stuff RBs in the hole for no gain or a loss? He had a couple of sacks last year, but how many came off jailbreak-type blitzes where he was unabated to the QB vice him just being an effective blitzer and beating a blocker? The fact that our defense has been poor and he's had to make a lot of tackles 5 yards downfield which inflates his tackle stats, just doesn't win me over.

Remember, he's the centerpiece of our front seven and has been schemed as such since Al Wilson left. Everything is funneled to him to make the plays. He's expected, based on his physical attributes and his salary, to be a leader - which he's not, and a playmaker - which he's not.

DJ is a solid LB, he's just not anything more. Right now, I'd rather pay money to watch Joe Mays play than DJ because he plays with more heart and leadership. DJ always seems like the talented guy who is disinterested and "plays when he wants to" and has been coddled in Denver because he's one of our few 1st round picks who didn't bust over the past decade. It's not personal toward him, it's just how I feel.

It will also be interesting to see if Goodell takes any action toward DJ because of his 2nd DUI. He could be facing a suspension, too. Probably not because his first one was not on Goodell's watch, but it's still possible. The league hasn't handed down any real suspensions yet, and DJ's did happen during the regular season last year.

hammer/nail

Northman
09-04-2011, 01:49 PM
I dont have a problem with DJ, he's a consistent tackler but thats about where it ends. I like my linebackers to be playmakers and have leadership qualities. I have a feeling that will be Miller in the long run.

Tned
09-04-2011, 01:53 PM
I'm not sure what you're trying to say here.

What about it?


The Broncos public relations department, which is touting how great their draft was, is NOT listing Julius Thomas as a starter from that class. That's "what about it."

It's hard to argue that JT is really a starter, when the Broncos PR guys are saying he isn't.


No, possibility should not have quotes in the sense of being facetious. And I wouldnt look at the fact that he's a starter as some endorsement that you're right. I think what happens is that the front office moves along doing their own assessments and calculate value. Then at a certain point during that timeline, they hire a head coach and end up making compromises. They listen to a head coach and keep players the FO might have otherwise cut or traded. The FO is in a position to give ground because and keep some players the coach wants because they just hired Fox and want to be able to say they're supporting him.

Ok, there were so many what if's and what could have beens, that there is really no way to respond directly. Yes, if another head coach had been hired they might have released DJ, Doom and Champ. If the front office had had it's way, they might have released Orton and Quinn and started Tebow.

It's impossible to respond or have a valid discussion about what might have happened if a different HC had been hired, or to speculate on what the front office might have wanted to do with a player, but were strong armed by a new HC not to do.

Agent of Orange
09-04-2011, 01:56 PM
I dont have a problem with DJ, he's a consistent tackler but thats about where it ends. I like my linebackers to be playmakers and have leadership qualities. I have a feeling that will be Miller in the long run.

Yeah, but value has to be considered. For what you're paying DJ, is he doing enough? Is he even better than Woodyard and is he so much better considering what he's paid?

Tned
09-04-2011, 02:02 PM
Yeah, but value has to be considered. For what you're paying DJ, is he doing enough? Is he even better than Woodyard and is he so much better considering what he's paid?

The Broncos had something like a $3 million roster bonus they had to pay DJ, which I don't think was guaranteed, so I guess they think he is worth it.

They had the option of playing Woodyard and paying him peanuts, or giving DJ a $3 million roster bonus + his salary, and they chose DJ and all that case.

Case closed.

Northman
09-04-2011, 02:08 PM
Yeah, but value has to be considered. For what you're paying DJ, is he doing enough? Is he even better than Woodyard and is he so much better considering what he's paid?

He's better than Woodyard but one could argue its only because of actual experience on the field. So no, i agree with you that you dont pay a guy a ton of money to be just a tackler. I will also point out though that in preseason (yes i know its only preseason) he did manage to see DJ intercept a pass so if he can step up his game in that area than he may just earn all that change he is making.

Agent of Orange
09-04-2011, 02:09 PM
The Broncos public relations department, which is touting how great their draft was, is NOT listing Julius Thomas as a starter from that class. That's "what about it."

If he plays half the time because Denver runs 2 TE sets a significant % of their plays, would you call him a back up? Russ Hochstein is a back up.

And, once again, I said 6 possible starters.


It's hard to argue that JT is really a starter, when the Broncos PR guys are saying he isn't.

Its also hard to argue that he's the same as Russ Hochstein, who is a backup.



Ok, there were so many what if's and what could have beens, that there is really no way to respond directly. Yes, if another head coach had been hired they might have released DJ, Doom and Champ. If the front office had had it's way, they might have released Orton and Quinn and started Tebow.

So then why are you making such a big deal of this. Again, I said 6 possible starters. I said, "if" they cut DJ. As you can see, a lot of people wouldn't have been shocked to see that happen. It was hardly an unreasonable though.

I also find its interesting that you seem to know a lot about DJ's contract but you stop short of assessing this using the concept of value. And then you argue with those who do. Sorry but value counts for a lot. I don't even know why someone would argue this.


It's impossible to respond or have a valid discussion about what might have happened if a different HC had been hired, or to speculate on what the front office might have wanted to do with a player, but were strong armed by a new HC not to do.

I actually wasn't talking about what might have happened if a new head coach would have been hired. Again, it's more about the FO doing its own on going assessments during a timeline and then hiring any coach, at which point they might have to make compromises or adjustments based on input from that coach. A head coach doesnt always have significant input but sometimes he does. But another head coach might have done the same thing as Fox. It has more to do with how a coach and FO don't always have the same agendas, when working independently of one another.

Agent of Orange
09-04-2011, 02:18 PM
He's better than Woodyard but one could argue its only because of actual experience on the field. So no, i agree with you that you dont pay a guy a ton of money to be just a tackler. I will also point out though that in preseason (yes i know its only preseason) he did manage to see DJ intercept a pass so if he can step up his game in that area than he may just earn all that change he is making.

What has become apparent to me in the preseason is that, if DJ is one of your best starters and you need him to play really well, you're screwed. However, if DJ is the 4th or 5th best player on your defense, he then plays better than when he's one of your best 2 or 3 best and you need him to play really well. He shrinks when he's showcased. I agree that he's played better in the preseason but I think thats a function of having Doom, Miller, and even Joe Mays getting after it.

You could say he could be awesome and live up to his contract if he's not surrounded by garbage, but there's still the question of value and I still doubt whether he's so much better than Woodyard. Woodyard used to be a safety in college. I would expect him to have more INTs when presented with the opportunity. I actually think Woodyard plays a little faster than DJ too. What you say about experience is probably fair.

I just think part of the value assessment is also an acknowledgment that for what you're paying DJ, he needs to be more of a catalyst and not just a beneficiary.

Tned
09-04-2011, 02:26 PM
If he plays half the time because Denver runs 2 TE sets a significant % of their plays, would you call him a back up? Russ Hochstein is a back up.

And, once again, I said 6 possible starters.


This whole back and fourth with you trying so hard to make the case for JT being a starter, has nothing to do with any response I had to your post, but to G-Money, saying I agreed with most of what he posted, but that JT isn't technically a starter.

Again, I will refer you to the VP of PR for the Broncos who says he isn't a starter.

Further, if the Broncos wind up in nickel half the time, do you claim that Cassius Vaughn is a starer? It's VERY possible that Vaughn sees as many plays a game as JT. What if we run a lot of dime sets? If we run more dime sets than sets with JT, is Chris Harris also a starter?

When you start using that logic, where do you draw the line?



Its also hard to argue that he's the same as Russ Hochstein, who is a backup.

Ok, your point is?


So then why are you making such a big deal of this. Again, I said 6 possible starters. I said, "if" they cut DJ. As you can see, a lot of people wouldn't have been shocked to see that happen. It was hardly an unreasonable though.

You're the one that seemed to get defensive about me pointing out how unlikely it was that DJ would have been cut.

A lot of people claim Orton should have been cut, so that Tebow could get experience. Doesn't mean it is likely to happen out of Madden franchise mode.



I also find its interesting that you seem to know a lot about DJ's contract but you stop short of assessing this using the concept of value. And then you argue with those who do. Sorry but value counts for a lot. I don't even know why someone would argue this.

Sure, value counts for a ton. Hence the Broncos didn't make a run at a number of FA's that could have helped this team. The GM said yesterday that they would consider that when deciding whether or not to put a waiver claim in on a player, such as fully vested vets that would have their entire salary guaranteed if they were on the Broncos week one roster.

That said, I'm not sure what your point is with this statement, other than some vague statement about me doing something wrong, or only looking at one side of things. Not really sure.

As to value, I think DJ is worth his salary, and have stated before that I am looking forward to seeing him playing WLB, where he should be more of a play maker. Apparently the Broncos front office agrees.


I actually wasn't talking about what might have happened if a new head coach would have been hired. Again, it's more about the FO doing its own on going assessments during a timeline and then hiring any coach, at which point they might have to make compromises or adjustments based on input from that coach. A head coach doesn't always have significant input but sometimes he does. But another head coach might have done the same thing as Fox. It has more to do with how a coach and FO don't always have the same agendas, when working independently of one another.

Ok, this is interesting, but can you point to anything that indicates that the current front office was considering cutting DJ prior to John Fox being hired?

Agent of Orange
09-04-2011, 02:41 PM
This whole back and fourth with you trying so hard to make the case for JT being a starter, has nothing to do with any response I had to your post, but to G-Money, saying I agreed with most of what he posted, but that JT isn't technically a starter.

Again, I will refer you to the VP of PR for the Broncos who says he isn't a starter.

Further, if the Broncos wind up in nickel half the time, do you claim that Cassius Vaughn is a starer? It's VERY possible that Vaughn sees as many plays a game as JT. What if we run a lot of dime sets? If we run more dime sets than sets with JT, is Chris Harris also a starter?

When you start using that logic, where do you draw the line?

I said possibly and it doesnt even seem like I put a timeline on it. So this whole back and forth you're working so hard at is pointless.




Ok, your point is?

You make it sound like Thomas and Hochstein are the same.



You're the one that seemed to get defensive about me pointing out how unlikely it was that DJ would have been cut.

Several people have agreed with me on this. You've argued with all of them. I'd say you're the one who is most defensive.


A lot of people claim Orton should have been cut, so that Tebow could get experience. Doesn't mean it is likely to happen out of Madden franchise mode.

How many DUI's does Orton have?




Sure, value counts for a ton. Hence the Broncos didn't make a run at a number of FA's that could have helped this team. The GM said yesterday that they would consider that when deciding whether or not to put a waiver claim in on a player, such as fully vested vets that would have their entire salary guaranteed if they were on the Broncos week one roster.

OK, but in one of your responses you responded to (or made) a number of points but you merely walked up to the issue of value assessment while barely dipping your toe in the water. Again, thats where this whole discussion is taking place for most who question DJ.


That said, I'm not sure what your point is with this statement, other than some vague statement about me doing something wrong, or only looking at one side of things. Not really sure.

See above. Thats exactly what it was. You dove into this DJ vs Woodyard debate talking about DJ almost as if it was purely on the basis of whether or not he's good. The way you responded was as if there was no acknowledgment of the fact that he has 2 DUIs and/or makes significantly more than a player on the team who is, at worst, a comparable substitute.


As to value, I think DJ is worth his salary, and have stated before that I am looking forward to seeing him playing WLB, where he should be more of a play maker. Apparently the Broncos front office agrees.

You don't know what the front office thinks. We've already been over the distinct possibility of the head coach and front office having conflicting agendas. As far as your assessment of value is concerned, I think you're only saying that now because you've gone too far and have now dug a hole. If you would have considered value before you entered this discussion, I question whether you'd be saying this. Like I told Northman, for what you're paying DJ, you should be getting more of a catalyst.



Ok, this is interesting, but can you point to anything that indicates that the current front office was considering cutting DJ prior to John Fox being hired?

You, likewise, have nothing to the contrary.

Tned
09-04-2011, 02:51 PM
I said possibly and it doesnt even seem like I put a timeline on it. So this whole back and forth you're working so hard at is pointless.


You have been making the case that JT is a starter NOW.


You make it sound like Thomas and Hochstein are the same.

That's too ridiculously and false to give a real response to.



Several people have agreed with me on this. You've argued with all of them. I'd say you're the one who is most defensive.

Ok, Dr. Phil.


How many DUI's does Orton have?

I'm not aware of any. How many DUI's does Hochstein have, since you seem fascinated with him?


OK, but in one of your responses you responded to (or made) a number of points but you merely walked up to the issue of value assessment while barely dipping your toe in the water. Again, thats where this whole discussion is taking place for most who question DJ.

"Value" is only a small part of the equation. Sticking with the Woodyard/DJ position, Woodyard could bring MUCH more value in terms of dollars spent for production gained, but it still wouldn't mean you should start Woodyard, unless his total production would be as high or higher, where by the "value" component becomes the deciding factor.


See above. Thats exactly what it was. You dove into this DJ vs Woodyard debate talking about DJ almost as if it was purely on the basis of whether or not he's good. The way you responded was as if there was no acknowledgment of the fact that he has 2 DUIs and/or makes significantly more than a player on the team who is, at worst, a comparable substitute.

If he's a "comparable substitute" why wasn't he cut, as you speculated he might be? Why, because he isn't a comparable substitute in the minds of the Broncos front office. They could change in time, but clearly it isn't the case now.


You don't know what the front office thinks. We've already been over the distinct possibility of the head coach and front office having conflicting agendas. As far as your assessment of value is concerned, I think you're only saying that now because you've gone too far and have now dug a hole. If you would have considered value before you entered this discussion, I question whether you'd be saying this. Like I told Northman, for what you're paying DJ, you should be getting more of a catalyst.

No, I don't know, but you are insinuating that you do know. You are insinuating that the front office would have cut DJ, if not for Fox, who prefers veterans, preventing such action.

Talk about pure speculation with no basis in fact.


You, likewise, have nothing to the contrary.

This is a classic Internet argument, "I will throw out something you can't disprove, and then claim that because you can't disprove it, it's fact."

Ok, I can play that game. The front office was seriously considering cutting the one trick pony, midget pony otherwise known as Dumervil, but Fox came in and stopped them.

Oh, in addition, they were ready to cut Clady, because they didn't like his risky off field behavior, which resulted in the injury that made him less effective last year, but Fox stopped that as well.

See, I can play that game too.

Agent of Orange
09-04-2011, 03:01 PM
You have been making the case that JT is a starter NOW.



That's too ridiculously and false to give a real response to.




Ok, Dr. Phil.



I'm not aware of any. How many DUI's does Hochstein have, since you seem fascinated with him?



"Value" is only a small part of the equation. Sticking with the Woodyard/DJ position, Woodyard could bring MUCH more value in terms of dollars spent for production gained, but it still wouldn't mean you should start Woodyard, unless his total production would be as high or higher, where by the "value" component becomes the deciding factor.



If he's a "comparable substitute" why wasn't he cut, as you speculated he might be? Why, because he isn't a comparable substitute in the minds of the Broncos front office. They could change in time, but clearly it isn't the case now.



No, I don't know, but you are insinuating that you do know. You are insinuating that the front office would have cut DJ, if not for Fox, who prefers veterans, preventing such action.

Talk about pure speculation with no basis in fact.



This is a classic Internet argument, "I will throw out something you can't disprove, and then claim that because you can't disprove it, it's fact."

Ok, I can play that game. The front office was seriously considering cutting the one trick pony, midget pony otherwise known as Dumervil, but Fox came in and stopped them.

Oh, in addition, they were ready to cut Clady, because they didn't like his risky off field behavior, which resulted in the injury that made him less effective last year, but Fox stopped that as well.

See, I can play that game too.

No. Value encompasses everything.

DenBronx
09-04-2011, 03:17 PM
Orange Julius may not technically be the starter right now but he does look damn impressive.

G_Money
09-04-2011, 03:44 PM
I agree with most of what you are saying, and even the point you are trying to make with J. Thomas, but I still don't think you can call him a starter. Using that logic, that he will be the 2nd TE when using a two TE set, is like saying that the nickel DB is a starter, because he's the first DB in when the team uses 5 DBs.

Now, I know the counter argument could be "teams sometimes start the game in two TE sets, but rarely start the game in a nickel package." It might be true that two TE sets are more common, but it is still convention not to list 12 or 13 starters on a unit.

FWIW, the Broncos don't consider JT a starter, because Saccomano has been Tweeting about how the Broncos are starting three rookies.

True. :salute: I consider a nickel back, the slot receiver and a 2nd TE to be tweeners on the starter/backup category.

No, they may not be in the starting 11, but they will see a lot of action throughout every game of the season. Probably more than the "starting" FB, for instance. I mean, Scheffler wasn't technically "the starter" for a decent chunk of his time here, but he was a very valuable part of the offense every week.

But I'll go with JT as a backup who will play a lot. After the uselessness of Dick Quinn I'm very happy that is the case. :beer:

~G

Northman
09-04-2011, 03:46 PM
After the uselessness of Dick Quinn I'm very happy that is the case. :beer:

~G

You and me both brother.

Tned
09-04-2011, 04:13 PM
No. Value encompasses everything.

I'll send a memo to EFX in your name, since they clearly don't agree on your value position on DJ.


True. :salute: I consider a nickel back, the slot receiver and a 2nd TE to be tweeners on the starter/backup category.

No, they may not be in the starting 11, but they will see a lot of action throughout every game of the season. Probably more than the "starting" FB, for instance. I mean, Scheffler wasn't technically "the starter" for a decent chunk of his time here, but he was a very valuable part of the offense every week.

But I'll go with JT as a backup who will play a lot. After the uselessness of Dick Quinn I'm very happy that is the case. :beer:

~G

Taken a step further, official starters as they are recorded in the game books, are based on the opening set. So, if the team comes out with two TE's, they are both starters. IF they come out in a 20, then the two RB's and three WR's are the starters for that game, so it's a bit of a moving target.

The Broncos seem to list their starting offense as a 21, even though in any given game they may not open up with that personnel group on the first play of the game.

Dean
09-04-2011, 10:07 PM
Here is who the Broncos think are the starters (they make that decision). Those players are indicated with the term first above the column with their name.

http://www.denverbroncos.com/team/depth-chart.html

:D