PDA

View Full Version : A quick summary before I fade.



Blue Run
01-25-2009, 02:28 PM
Thank you Broncos fans for allowing me to use this board and all it entails. It has been a valuable resource for me during the Steve Spagnuolo courting process. After having promised some personnel tidbits in exchange we are on a shelf. That was days ago, and some kicked tires are just rolling in now...

What I know, in an educated guess about the offseason plans:
Draft should focus on these guys:
Round 1 (Pettigrew, Cushing, Moore, Maybin and a * below)
Round 2 (Brace and apparently they really like Louis Delmas)
Round 3 (Bruton, and 3 *s below)
Round 4 (Jennings or Peerman)
Round 5 on is anyone's guess but I know they like Shipley, Mauga from Nevada, Appleby from UVA and are really putting their due dilligence into troubled LB Willie Williams.

For the new impact stuff - heard from 2 scouts who don't know each other that Broncs have been burning the oil watching tape of Knowshon Moreno and Corvey Irvin of UGA. Irvin might be an interesting 3-4 DE and as I understand had a nice week at the SB.
Delmas is a new one - he's been a favorite of Nolan's for the last 2 years. He's close with Delmas' college coach.
The other 2 *'s from R3 would be a small-school kid - Sidbury - who has been connected to DEN as well and the VT G/C Shuman.
Peerman could be the fallback should Jennings (or Moreno) not be acquired.

Piece them together as you'd like but DEN has shown serious interest in all of these guys.

Free agency, Peppers is their #1 target and also love Crowder. Berry on the radar.
If you piece it together and PB gets most of this done it's hard not to see DEN as a Lombardi candidate.

Thanks Broncos fans for all you've afforded us, I am preparing my own specs now and must return to duty, but will drop by again before the draft should there be any interest in any additional DEN news. Good luck.

fcspikeit
01-25-2009, 02:36 PM
Thank you Broncos fans for allowing me to use this board and all it entails. It has been a valuable resource for me during the Steve Spagnuolo courting process. After having promised some personnel tidbits in exchange we are on a shelf. That was days ago, and some kicked tires are just rolling in now...

What I know, in an educated guess about the offseason plans:
Draft should focus on these guys:
Round 1 (Pettigrew, Cushing, Moore, Maybin and a * below)
Round 2 (Brace and apparently they really like Louis Delmas)
Round 3 (Bruton, and 3 *s below)
Round 4 (Jennings or Peerman)
Round 5 on is anyone's guess but I know they like Shipley, Mauga from Nevada, Appleby from UVA and are really putting their due dilligence into troubled LB Willie Williams.

For the new impact stuff - heard from 2 scouts who don't know each other that Broncs have been burning the oil watching tape of Knowshon Moreno and Corvey Irvin of UGA. Irvin might be an interesting 3-4 DE and as I understand had a nice week at the SB.
Delmas is a new one - he's been a favorite of Nolan's for the last 2 years. He's close with Delmas' college coach.
The other 2 *'s from R3 would be a small-school kid - Sidbury - who has been connected to DEN as well and the VT G/C Shuman.
Peerman could be the fallback should Jennings (or Moreno) not be acquired.

Piece them together as you'd like but DEN has shown serious interest in all of these guys.

Free agency, Peppers is their #1 target and also love Crowder. Berry on the radar.
If you piece it together and PB gets most of this done it's hard not to see DEN as a Lombardi candidate.

Thanks Broncos fans for all you've afforded us, I am preparing my own specs now and must return to duty, but will drop by again before the draft should there be any interest in any additional DEN news. Good luck.


Thanks!

Please feel free to come back anytime you want... I suspect when you do, we will have a lot better feel for your info and how it applied to our team...

Best regards to you :salute:

lex
01-25-2009, 02:40 PM
Thank you Broncos fans for allowing me to use this board and all it entails. It has been a valuable resource for me during the Steve Spagnuolo courting process. After having promised some personnel tidbits in exchange we are on a shelf. That was days ago, and some kicked tires are just rolling in now...

What I know, in an educated guess about the offseason plans:
Draft should focus on these guys:
Round 1 (Pettigrew, Cushing, Moore, Maybin and a * below)
Round 2 (Brace and apparently they really like Louis Delmas)
Round 3 (Bruton, and 3 *s below)
Round 4 (Jennings or Peerman)
Round 5 on is anyone's guess but I know they like Shipley, Mauga from Nevada, Appleby from UVA and are really putting their due dilligence into troubled LB Willie Williams.

For the new impact stuff - heard from 2 scouts who don't know each other that Broncs have been burning the oil watching tape of Knowshon Moreno and Corvey Irvin of UGA. Irvin might be an interesting 3-4 DE and as I understand had a nice week at the SB.
Delmas is a new one - he's been a favorite of Nolan's for the last 2 years. He's close with Delmas' college coach.
The other 2 *'s from R3 would be a small-school kid - Sidbury - who has been connected to DEN as well and the VT G/C Shuman.
Peerman could be the fallback should Jennings (or Moreno) not be acquired.

Piece them together as you'd like but DEN has shown serious interest in all of these guys.

Free agency, Peppers is their #1 target and also love Crowder. Berry on the radar.
If you piece it together and PB gets most of this done it's hard not to see DEN as a Lombardi candidate.

Thanks Broncos fans for all you've afforded us, I am preparing my own specs now and must return to duty, but will drop by again before the draft should there be any interest in any additional DEN news. Good luck.

Not to be too dismissive but it seems like a lot of inference is being made from what interests know about, but what about the players Denver has shown interest in that we dont know about? How do we distinguish "high level of interest" from simple due diligence?

SmilinAssasSin27
01-25-2009, 02:43 PM
I think at this point, he has named just about every player in the draft.

Blue Run
01-25-2009, 03:10 PM
CB Byrd of Oregon. Nolan LOVED this kid during the year - keep an eye on him, too. He had a 49ers scout at everyone of his home games.

RunYouOver
01-25-2009, 03:12 PM
If you hear anything about Derrick Ward, be sure to let us know.

broncobryce
01-25-2009, 03:17 PM
Ward is not bad, but if we sign a RB in free agency, he better be 1300+ and 10 TD's. But I think Hillis can give us that.

G_Money
01-25-2009, 03:23 PM
Byrd is a gamer and a fighter at corner, but can he run with elite WRs in the bigs?

I guess if they turned him into a Pegues-like FS that could be a good conversion. Pegues himself could still be there around the 3rd, though.

Although a move to jamming CBs would suit him perfectly. As long as he has good safety help over the top, Byrd could be nasty on a corner for anything up through 20 yards. I just don't think he can hang on deep fly routes.

McCree and Manuel would have made Byrd look like the worst corner ever.

With some pressure and press-coverage, Byrd probably replaces Bly as a starter. So I can see that interest.

~G

lex
01-25-2009, 03:45 PM
Byrd is a gamer and a fighter at corner, but can he run with elite WRs in the bigs?

I guess if they turned him into a Pegues-like FS that could be a good conversion. Pegues himself could still be there around the 3rd, though.

Although a move to jamming CBs would suit him perfectly. As long as he has good safety help over the top, Byrd could be nasty on a corner for anything up through 20 yards. I just don't think he can hang on deep fly routes.

McCree and Manuel would have made Byrd look like the worst corner ever.

With some pressure and press-coverage, Byrd probably replaces Bly as a starter. So I can see that interest.

~G
FYI- Pegues had a run in with the law a couple of years ago. Im not sure if theyre still going for character guys but its possible. I think they might like the dual role guys like this though. I think Byrd is a coach's son.

underrated29
01-25-2009, 03:53 PM
im sorry but what does a *below.

and

3 *'s below mean?

Are you inferring that players that are 3 stars or below will get looked at here? And how do we know how/what the broncos rate a star- if thats what that means.

I am confused on that part.


But thanks Blue- come back anytime you can. And dont forget a lot of us like to hear about the giants and such too....

So any and all info you can send our way is welcome.

BroncoWave
01-25-2009, 04:18 PM
FYI- Pegues had a run in with the law a couple of years ago. Im not sure if theyre still going for character guys but its possible. I think they might like the dual role guys like this though. I think Byrd is a coach's son.

I'm from Mississippi and a huge MSU fan but during his career at MSU, I heard that he was a huge thug in HS and that he didn't mature too much during college attitude-wise but Coach Croom managed to keep him in check for the most part. The homer part of me would love to see him in Denver but he definitely has some character concerns. Like you said, the run-in with the law was a few years ago and if he has matured since then he'd be a nice fit here because he is a great PR/KR along with his skills at safety.

lex
01-25-2009, 04:23 PM
I'm from Mississippi and a huge MSU fan but during his career at MSU, I heard that he was a huge thug in HS and that he didn't mature too much during college attitude-wise but Coach Croom managed to keep him in check for the most part. The homer part of me would love to see him in Denver but he definitely has some character concerns. Like you said, the run-in with the law was a few years ago and if he has matured since then he'd be a nice fit here because he is a great PR/KR along with his skills at safety.

Wait! I was right about that? According to some, I just make stuff up. LOL

Bozo Jr.
01-25-2009, 07:32 PM
Appreciate all your input BlueRun. Thanks for all the tidbits. And oh yea, If you ever get bored with your Giants, there is always room for another Bronco fan! Sounds enticing doesn't it? :salute:

DenBronx
01-25-2009, 11:34 PM
why brandon freakin pettigrew? that makes no sense at all. we would be the laughing stock of the nfl to make such dumb move when we have bigger needs. i seriously want to punch someone right now just thinking of it.

lex
01-25-2009, 11:37 PM
why brandon freakin pettigrew? that makes no sense at all. we would be the laughing stock of the nfl to make such dumb move when we have bigger needs. i seriously want to punch someone right now just thinking of it.



I know. Its so frustrating. It makes you simulaneously want to hug your teddy bear and punch a baby, no?

fcspikeit
01-26-2009, 12:32 AM
why brandon freakin pettigrew? that makes no sense at all. we would be the laughing stock of the nfl to make such dumb move when we have bigger needs. i seriously want to punch someone right now just thinking of it.

I'm :confused: about that also...

Then again, if he is the next Gates or Gonzales, he would be a great pick... Assuming our top defensive guys are off the board, we might as well take a top guy, that could be a huge contributor for us the next 10 years, then reach on a guy at a position of need...

I'm just sayin', maybe the next defensive guy Nolan wants will be there later in the draft... If that is the case, I would rather us not reach and instead, take the BPA..

dogfish
01-26-2009, 12:41 AM
enh. . . i'm not gonna lose any sleep over it-- i just can't see it happening. . . .

broncosinindy
01-26-2009, 03:23 AM
you would think RB would have a higher priority over a TE.

At this point i think its open season on which way we go. As long as we get better on D. get better in the redzone and return more kicks for touch downs i am a happy camper

fcspikeit
01-26-2009, 04:20 AM
you would think RB would have a higher priority over a TE.

At this point i think its open season on which way we go. As long as we get better on D. get better in the redzone and return more kicks for touch downs i am a happy camper

There were a lot of good backs taken in the later rounds last year.. If we had our choice of AP or Gates at 12, I would take AP.. However, if there are no AP's there when we pick, IMO it would make more sense to take a Gates in the 1st and pick up a a guy like the Bears got (I forgot his name) later in the draft.

There are risks with every pick, Chances are, whoever we take, there will be a better player taken in the later rounds. IMO, if there's a top player on the board, it is less risky to take them, then it is to take the highest guy left at a position of need. Even if it were a QB, you can always trade them for a couple 1st's later on, you might even be able to trade them in this draft to another team who was hoping they would fall to them, for a 1st and another pick in this draft. Even getting future picks helps your team out more then reaching on the top guy at a position of need who was projected as a much lesser talent on your board.

TXBRONC
01-26-2009, 08:14 AM
I'm :confused: about that also...

Then again, if he is the next Gates or Gonzales, he would be a great pick... Assuming our top defensive guys are off the board, we might as well take a top guy, that could be a huge contributor for us the next 10 years, then reach on a guy at a position of need...

I'm just sayin', maybe the next defensive guy Nolan wants will be there later in the draft... If that is the case, I would rather us not reach and instead, take the BPA..

I would hope there will be a defensive player of equal value to Pettigrew should that scenario play out.

PatricktheDookie
01-26-2009, 08:25 AM
Maybe we're drafting Pettigrew to be a linebacker?

Don't knock it! That's all I can come up with!

Superchop 7
01-26-2009, 12:45 PM
Nice to hear they are interested in Delmas, he would definately remind the fans of Atwater.

Love to see that pick go down.

Now if they would just get their head out of their azz about Curry....we might be getting somewhere.

Ziggy
01-26-2009, 12:51 PM
Nice to hear they are interested in Delmas, he would definately remind the fans of Atwater.

Love to see that pick go down.

Now if they would just get their head out of their azz about Curry....we might be getting somewhere.

Curry is a stud. I doubt that the Broncos think he will be there at 12. He's expected to run near a 4.4 at the combine, and he can play any LB position in any defensive scheme. He's the whole package. The only way he drops is if he has a really bad combine.

DenBronx
01-26-2009, 01:15 PM
There were a lot of good backs taken in the later rounds last year.. If we had our choice of AP or Gates at 12, I would take AP.. However, if there are no AP's there when we pick, IMO it would make more sense to take a Gates in the 1st and pick up a a guy like the Bears got (I forgot his name) later in the draft.


we're only at pick 12 dude. i mean how many people on defense do you think are going to be gone by the time 12 rolls around? detriot needs a qb, seattle needs a wr, cleveland needs a rb, ect. i mean why a tight end at 12? his stats arent even that impressive. gates was a basketball player converted to the nfl as an UDFA. a freak thing if you ask me. look at vernon davis in san francisco. he was supposed to be some freak specimen that was supposed to change the way defense were to game plan. not really and im pretty sure the niners wish they had their pick back. just ask singletary, he was seen screaming at him on the sidelines.

we have 2 solid tight ends who i'm very happy with. sheff is not needing a new contract right now so i dont see all the fuss. next year is the year we can look at the draft or free agents. even lj smith would be a better choice then blowing a 1st. if our "guy" isnt there at 12 then we can try and trade down. but dont trade up and dont take a tight end.

TXBRONC
01-26-2009, 01:19 PM
we're only at pick 12 dude. i mean how many people on defense do you think are going to be gone by the time 12 rolls around? detriot needs a qb, seattle needs a wr, cleveland needs a rb, ect. i mean why a tight end at 12? his stats arent even that impressive. gates was a basketball player converted to the nfl as an UDFA. a freak thing if you ask me. look at vernon davis in san francisco. he was supposed to be some freak specimen that was supposed to change the way defense were to game plan. not really and im pretty sure the niners wish they had their pick back. just ask singletary, he was seen screaming at him on the sidelines.

we have 2 solid tight ends who i'm very happy with. sheff is not needing a new contract right now so i dont see all the fuss. next year is the year we can look at the draft or free agents. even lj smith would be a better choice then blowing a 1st. if our "guy" isnt there at 12 then we can try and trade down. but dont trade up and dont take a tight end.

Scheffler lead the League in ypc for tight ends this past season.

DenBronx
01-26-2009, 01:25 PM
Scheffler lead the League in ypc for tight ends this past season.

i think pettigrew is a smoke screen. maybe we are trying to get someone to trade up with is to get him.

as for sheff, he had 2 less touchdowns but i think he did overall better than he did last year with 645 yards, 72 long and a 16.1 average. he is only getting better. i wouldnt throw him under the buss just yet.

TXBRONC
01-26-2009, 01:34 PM
i think pettigrew is a smoke screen. maybe we are trying to get someone to trade up with is to get him.

as for sheff, he had 2 less touchdowns but i think he did overall better than he did last year. he is only getting better. i wouldnt throw him under the buss just yet.

I have doubts about the accuracy of it anyway Blue Run is the only person I have heard this from. I'm not calling him liar but just doesn't add up in my opinion.

CoachChaz
01-26-2009, 01:38 PM
i think pettigrew is a smoke screen. maybe we are trying to get someone to trade up with is to get him.

as for sheff, he had 2 less touchdowns but i think he did overall better than he did last year with 645 yards, 72 long and a 16.1 average. he is only getting better. i wouldnt throw him under the buss just yet.

But when he's a FA, we'll have bigger items on our agenda. Why not get a replacement ready now?

TXBRONC
01-26-2009, 01:40 PM
But when he's a FA, we'll have bigger items on our agenda. Why not get a replacement ready now?

I think its a little to early to count on him being gone, besides that tight ends not as difficult to find as defensive tackles.

G_Money
01-26-2009, 01:41 PM
So here are Coach and I, arguing for a the idea of a draftpick we would rate as, what, maybe 5% chance of the circumstances even coming up to make it reasonable, Coach?

Must be the offseason.

And the Super Bowl hasn’t even come yet.

Boy are we desperate for activity… :lol:

~G

Ziggy
01-26-2009, 01:41 PM
I'm also wondering if Graham is going to be in the Broncos plans. He's getting paid an awful lot of money to be primarily used as a blocker.

DenBronx
01-26-2009, 01:41 PM
But when he's a FA, we'll have bigger items on our agenda. Why not get a replacement ready now?

then sign lj smith as a free agent.

G_Money
01-26-2009, 01:42 PM
Takes two to tango. We could have fixed some of our DL problems with Kerney, but he didn't take our money.

You can force draftpicks to play for you, tho. ;)

~G

Ziggy
01-26-2009, 01:43 PM
then sign lj smith as a free agent.

Or possibly move Hillis to TE, depending on what our RB situation looks like.

Slick
01-26-2009, 01:43 PM
No need to worry about finding a TE guys. Wesley Duke is training with me this off season. He will be ready to go when Scheff goes down again.

DenBronx
01-26-2009, 01:45 PM
Takes two to tango. We could have fixed some of our DL problems with Kerney, but he didn't take our money.

You can force draftpicks to play for you, tho. ;)

~G

i thought he chose seattle because they we're going to be "contenders" for the superbowl. :rolleyes:

he really could have helped our team in more ways then he did seattle.

G_Money
01-26-2009, 01:46 PM
Or possibly move Hillis to TE, depending on what our RB situation looks like.

If we don’t add a TE sometime in the draft, that’s what I see: Hillis playing TE for us when we need it Hillis can run a decent pattern and has glue on his hands, and he can take a hit (and give one) better than Scheff.

We’d need at least one good back to free him up for it, though.

~G

CoachChaz
01-26-2009, 01:47 PM
LJ Smith? Hillis?

I thought we were discussing upgrading our TE position

DenBronx
01-26-2009, 01:48 PM
Or possibly move Hillis to TE, depending on what our RB situation looks like.

yep and use him a little like dallas clark is for indy. hillis has good hands so im sure that wouldnt be a bad idea.


No need to worry about finding a TE guys. Wesley Duke is training with me this off season. He will be ready to go when Scheff goes down again.

everytime i think of wesley duke i think about that front page picture on BM of him riding an elephant! :elefant:

Slick
01-26-2009, 01:49 PM
If we don’t add a TE sometime in the draft, that’s what I see: Hillis playing TE for us when we need it Hillis can run a decent pattern and has glue on his hands, and he can take a hit (and give one) better than Scheff.

We’d need at least one good back to free him up for it, though.

~G

Hillis in a Chris Cooley type role is something I wouldn't mind seeing.

fcspikeit
01-26-2009, 01:50 PM
we're only at pick 12 dude. i mean how many people on defense do you think are going to be gone by the time 12 rolls around? detriot needs a qb, seattle needs a wr, cleveland needs a rb, ect. i mean why a tight end at 12? his stats arent even that impressive. gates was a basketball player converted to the nfl as an UDFA. a freak thing if you ask me. look at vernon davis in san francisco. he was supposed to be some freak specimen that was supposed to change the way defense were to game plan. not really and im pretty sure the niners wish they had their pick back. just ask singletary, he was seen screaming at him on the sidelines.

we have 2 solid tight ends who i'm very happy with. sheff is not needing a new contract right now so i dont see all the fuss. next year is the year we can look at the draft or free agents. even lj smith would be a better choice then blowing a 1st. if our "guy" isnt there at 12 then we can try and trade down. but dont trade up and dont take a tight end.

I agree with you, I wouldn't take a TE at 12 either...

The bottom line is that we're not picking off our draft board.. They have all the players rated on their board.. If they have pettigrew rated as the 2nd guy on their board and 1,3,4,5,6, for example are gone, it would make more sense to take "their" 2nd rated guy. Especially if the next guy at a position of need is 10 +..

It's all speculation anyways, I'm just talking about getting maximum value out of our pick.

DenBronx
01-26-2009, 01:50 PM
LJ Smith? Hillis?

I thought we were discussing upgrading our TE position

no we were discussing that it doesnt need to be upgraded and that pettigrew wouldnt be an upgrade over sheff who led the nfl in ypc.

G_Money
01-26-2009, 01:50 PM
We were – but if we decide not to upgrade and Scheff goes down, what are we gonna do, call Mustard back? Keep Nate Jackson around just so he can get injured in his first game as a sub?

Hillis can catch passes while we wait for Scheff’s return. I can see him holding down the fort as a potential backup at the position and finally allowing us to dump Jackson.

Again, assuming we don’t add Nelson or somebody on day 2 of the draft.

~G

CoachChaz
01-26-2009, 01:53 PM
no we were discussing that it doesnt need to be upgraded and that pettigrew wouldnt be an upgrade over sheff who led the nfl in ypc.

Yeah...and if the training table wonder who cant block a safety comes around next year and says he's bolting in FA, do we really rely on Graham?

DenBronx
01-26-2009, 01:55 PM
We were – but if we decide not to upgrade and Scheff goes down, what are we gonna do, call Mustard back? Keep Nate Jackson around just so he can get injured in his first game as a sub?

Hillis can catch passes while we wait for Scheff’s return. I can see him holding down the fort as a potential backup at the position and finally allowing us to dump Jackson.

Again, assuming we don’t add Nelson or somebody on day 2 of the draft.

~G

g, who do you see as a good fit for tight ends on day 2? i can see why we would want to draft one this year but not on day one. who's going to be around later in the draft that you like?

DenBronx
01-26-2009, 01:59 PM
Yeah...and if the training table wonder who cant block a safety comes around next year and says he's bolting in FA, do we really rely on Graham?

no and i see your point coach. but why wouldnt sheff want to resign with us if we gave him a new contract? he loves it here and he gets along with cutler. if someone offered up a sweet trade for him then by all means but to deal our 12th pick overall when we have sheff AND graham this year wouldnt be wise at all.

as of right now it looks like we are going to a 3-4. we have to really take advantage of the safeties, dt's, de's and lb's on day one. maybe even a rb in round 2 or 3 for offense. i just think tight end on a scale of 1-10 (1 the highest and 10 the lowest) in needs is probablly an 8.

TXBRONC
01-26-2009, 01:59 PM
g, who do you see as a good fit for tight ends on day 2? i can see why we would want to draft one this year but not on day one. who's going to be around later in the draft that you like?

Again, good tight ends are in greater supply than good defensive tackles.

Lonestar
01-26-2009, 02:00 PM
Maybe we're drafting Pettigrew to be a linebacker?
Don't knock it! That's all I can come up with!


no mikey is gone..

DenBronx
01-26-2009, 02:02 PM
I agree with you, I wouldn't take a TE at 12 either...

The bottom line is that we're not picking off our draft board.. They have all the players rated on their board.. If they have pettigrew rated as the 2nd guy on their board and 1,3,4,5,6, for example are gone, it would make more sense to take "their" 2nd rated guy. Especially if the next guy at a position of need is 10 +..

It's all speculation anyways, I'm just talking about getting maximum value out of our pick.

i guess i could see it if it was a running back. would you rather pettigrew over wells or moreno?

Slick
01-26-2009, 02:03 PM
Yeah...and if the training table wonder who cant block a safety comes around next year and says he's bolting in FA, do we really rely on Graham?

I would Coach, with the versatility of Hillis it makes it fine with me.

Graham was a Mackey award winner, and he caught a hell of a lot of balls before Ben Watson came to New England. With our tackles playing as good as they did last year I think it frees up Graham to go back to being that all purpose TE that he is.

I know he dropped a few balls, and one in particular was extremely crucial, but IMO I think we can rely on him.

fcspikeit
01-26-2009, 02:07 PM
g, who do you see as a good fit for tight ends on day 2? i can see why we would want to draft one this year but not on day one. who's going to be around later in the draft that you like?

I really like Shawne Nelson.. He is climbing up the draft board though.. If he somehow stayed where is is now, he would be a great pick in the 4th..

CoachChaz
01-26-2009, 02:10 PM
Again, good tight ends are in greater supply than good defensive tackles.

Again, it'a ll speculation with a ton of variables.

Example. We pick at 12. We added a safety, LB and DE in FA. Raji and Wells are gone. We find a way to move back and add an extra pick. In that time, Moore and Moreno are gone.

Do we reach for Brace or take the BPA?

Slick
01-26-2009, 02:12 PM
Again, it'a ll speculation with a ton of variables.

Example. We pick at 12. We added a safety, LB and DE in FA. Raji and Wells are gone. We find a way to move back and add an extra pick. In that time, Moore and Moreno are gone.

Do we reach for Brace or take the BPA?

trade back again.

TXBRONC
01-26-2009, 02:15 PM
I would Coach, with the versatility of Hillis it makes it fine with me.

Graham was a Mackey award winner, and he caught a hell of a lot of balls before Ben Watson came to New England. With our tackles playing as good as they did last year I think it frees up Graham to go back to being that all purpose TE that he is.

I know he dropped a few balls, and one in particular was extremely crucial, but IMO I think we can rely on him.

Graham's stats for the year:

32 receptions, 389 receiving yards, 12.2 ypc, and 4 tds.

Just for kicks Scheffler stats for the year:

40 receptions, 645 receiving yards, 16.1 ypc, and 3 tds.

Combined:

72 receptions, 1,034 receiving yards, 14.36 ypc, and 7 tds.

fcspikeit
01-26-2009, 02:16 PM
i guess i could see it if it was a running back. would you rather pettigrew over wells or moreno?

If all 3 players are the same level of talent and impact at their positions, I take either Wells or Moreno over pettigrew because I feel the impact of a true starting HB is greater then a top TE and we need RB at least as much as we need TE.

To tell you the truth, I haven't seen that much of all 3. I'm just going off of what little I have seen and their value..

With all the great backs coming out in the later rounds last year, it would make it a bit tougher for me to take one high in the draft. He would have to really be something special. From what their saying about Wells or Moreno they could be that special?

What if both them are gone, would you take your 3rd highest rated back over pettigrew? Or would you rather wait and grab the 5th-10 highest rated back in rounds 3+?

TXBRONC
01-26-2009, 02:17 PM
Again, it'a ll speculation with a ton of variables.

Example. We pick at 12. We added a safety, LB and DE in FA. Raji and Wells are gone. We find a way to move back and add an extra pick. In that time, Moore and Moreno are gone.

Do we reach for Brace or take the BPA?

Chaz I realize that, I'm just trying to provide a different side to the debate.

Slick
01-26-2009, 02:18 PM
I would think Stokley and Royal will see more balls than any TE in our new offense anyways. I don't think it's even an issue.

fcspikeit
01-26-2009, 02:21 PM
Again, it'a ll speculation with a ton of variables.

Example. We pick at 12. We added a safety, LB and DE in FA. Raji and Wells are gone. We find a way to move back and add an extra pick. In that time, Moore and Moreno are gone.

Do we reach for Brace or take the BPA?

IMO, there is less risk in taking a guy you have scouted really high then reaching on a guy at a position of need who shows potential.. Therefore, the best value is in taking the BPA

underrated29
01-26-2009, 02:21 PM
for me rd 1 players that i would take.....in no order

cush,
raji
curry
rey
larunit
moreno
wells
crabtree
orapko
the other DE
moore
jenkins (the CB) whatever his name is
brace-(in the 20's)
chung
delmas?-maybe-havent seen anything about him yet.


Thats like 15 guys. There is no way that atleast 2-3 arent available by the time we pick even if we trade all the way back to 21............................................Some team that desperately needs a TE-like buffalo for ex. will take petti, but that aside i dont see the value at all in it for us..

DenBronx
01-26-2009, 02:33 PM
What if both them are gone, would you take your 3rd highest rated back over pettigrew? Or would you rather wait and grab the 5th-10 highest rated back in rounds 3+?

i really dont want a rb in round 1. greene or mccoy (doubt he drops) would be nice in the 2nd. lots of good looking prospects in the 3rd and 4th too. but if it came down to wells/moreno or pettigrew. then i say rb because it is a bigger need and wells/moreno will be starters next year for someone. pettigrew would be 3rd on our depth chart for tight ends.

DenBronx
01-26-2009, 02:36 PM
for me rd 1 players that i would take.....in no order

cush,
raji
curry
rey
larunit
moreno
wells
crabtree
orapko
the other DE
moore
jenkins (the CB) whatever his name is
brace-(in the 20's)
chung
delmas?-maybe-havent seen anything about him yet.


Thats like 15 guys. There is no way that atleast 2-3 arent available by the time we pick even if we trade all the way back to 21............................................Some team that desperately needs a TE-like buffalo for ex. will take petti, but that aside i dont see the value at all in it for us..


the other de i think is jackson. chung, delmas, jackson, brace, cushing and jenkins are all a reach at 12. so much value in this years first on defense i see it hard to draft a tight end the 12 overall. we seriously need to consider trading back.

Slick
01-26-2009, 02:40 PM
the other de i think is jackson. chung, delmas, jackson, brace, cushing and jenkins are all a reach at 12. so much value in this years first on defense i see it hard to draft a tight end the 12 overall. we seriously need to consider trading back.

I tend to agree, and trading back wouldn't bother me one bit. However, any player that can come in and start, and improve this defense, isn't really a reach IMO. Getting a quality starter is all I care about.

TXBRONC
01-26-2009, 02:41 PM
the other de i think is jackson. chung, delmas, jackson, brace, cushing and jenkins are all a reach at 12. so much value in this years first on defense i see it hard to draft a tight end the 12 overall. we seriously need to consider trading back.

The only player I know that heard where projected to go are Brace and Cushing. I believe Brace is projected as late first/early second round pick. I think I heard that Cushing is projected as mid first round pick.

CoachChaz
01-26-2009, 02:45 PM
The only player I know that heard where projected to go are Brace and Cushing. I believe Brace is projected as late first/early second round pick. I think I heard that Cushing is projected as mid first round pick.

Whoever has Brace as a late first.early 2nd is delusional and whoever slects him that high will be disappointed. if ever there was a player that fed off of the talent around him...

Cushing could go mid-first...but so did Bobby Carpenter. I rest my case on that one.

Medford Bronco
01-26-2009, 02:46 PM
im sorry but what does a *below.

and

3 *'s below mean?

Are you inferring that players that are 3 stars or below will get looked at here? And how do we know how/what the broncos rate a star- if thats what that means.

I am confused on that part.


But thanks Blue- come back anytime you can. And dont forget a lot of us like to hear about the giants and such too....

So any and all info you can send our way is welcome.


Is is possible to give out negative stars to guys like Nate Webster:lol:

CoachChaz
01-26-2009, 02:47 PM
I think the only round 2 guy that I'd reach for in round one...and come draft time, he may project to round 1...is Larry English. But if a deal for Philly's 2 picks were legit. We could take him AND McCoy in the first

Slick
01-26-2009, 02:50 PM
Whoever has Brace as a late first.early 2nd is delusional and whoever slects him that high will be disappointed. if ever there was a player that fed off of the talent around him...

Cushing could go mid-first...but so did Bobby Carpenter. I rest my case on that one.

The highest I've seen Brace was a projected third...no way the Goodman's arm are that long.

TXBRONC
01-26-2009, 02:55 PM
Whoever has Brace as a late first.early 2nd is delusional and whoever slects him that high will be disappointed. if ever there was a player that fed off of the talent around him...

Cushing could go mid-first...but so did Bobby Carpenter. I rest my case on that one.

I'm just sharing what I heard also I disagree with you about Brace in the second round. Cushing isn't Bobby Carpenter.

dogfish
01-26-2009, 03:59 PM
I think the only round 2 guy that I'd reach for in round one...and come draft time, he may project to round 1...is Larry English. But if a deal for Philly's 2 picks were legit. We could take him AND McCoy in the first



:whoo: :whoo:

fcspikeit
01-26-2009, 04:12 PM
im sorry but what does a *below.

and

3 *'s below mean?

Are you inferring that players that are 3 stars or below will get looked at here? And how do we know how/what the broncos rate a star- if thats what that means.

I am confused on that part.



What I know, in an educated guess about the offseason plans:
Draft should focus on these guys:
Round 1 (Pettigrew, Cushing, Moore, Maybin and a * below)
Round 2 (Brace and apparently they really like Louis Delmas)
Round 3 (Bruton, and 3 *s below)
Round 4 (Jennings or Peerman)
Round 5 on is anyone's guess but I know they like Shipley, Mauga from Nevada, Appleby from UVA and are really putting their due dilligence into troubled LB Willie Williams.

For the new impact stuff - heard from 2 scouts who don't know each other that Broncs have been burning the oil watching tape of Knowshon Moreno and Corvey Irvin of UGA. Irvin might be an interesting 3-4 DE and as I understand had a nice week at the SB.
Delmas is a new one - he's been a favorite of Nolan's for the last 2 years. He's close with Delmas' college coach.
The other 2 *'s from R3 would be a small-school kid - Sidbury - who has been connected to DEN as well and the VT G/C Shuman.
Peerman could be the fallback should Jennings (or Moreno) not be acquired.

Piece them together as you'd like but DEN has shown serious interest in all of these guys.

Free agency, Peppers is their #1 target and also love Crowder. Berry on the radar.
If you piece it together and PB gets most of this done it's hard not to see DEN as a Lombardi candidate.

Thanks Broncos fans for all you've afforded us, I am preparing my own specs now and must return to duty, but will drop by again before the draft should there be any interest in any additional DEN news. Good luck.

I believe the "*" was only meant to read, Read special note below...

underrated29
01-26-2009, 04:16 PM
the other de i think is jackson. chung, delmas, jackson, brace, cushing and jenkins are all a reach at 12. so much value in this years first on defense i see it hard to draft a tight end the 12 overall. we seriously need to consider trading back.



I didnt mean at #12. I was thinking 12 or if we traded back some...

As for brace- NO i dont think he is 1st rd talent. But i do think we are switching to a 3-4 and i do think that we do not have a 3-4 nt on our roster. I also think that someone will take brace before our 2nd pick comes...

So we might have to reach, cuz lets face it- value takes a back seat to the centerpiece of your defense. As we know a 3-4 will fail without a bigheavy DT.

Who thought last year sam baker would go #30 or whatever last year.

LRtagger
01-26-2009, 04:45 PM
the other de i think is jackson. chung, delmas, jackson, brace, cushing and jenkins are all a reach at 12. so much value in this years first on defense i see it hard to draft a tight end the 12 overall. we seriously need to consider trading back.

The other DE is Brown who could project as an OLB. I have him in my top 5 first rounders. He is a sack machine and I have seen many prospect lists that have him ahead of Orakpo because Orakpo sucked in the fiesta bowl.

TXBRONC
01-26-2009, 04:45 PM
I didnt mean at #12. I was thinking 12 or if we traded back some...

As for brace- NO i dont think he is 1st rd talent. But i do think we are switching to a 3-4 and i do think that we do not have a 3-4 nt on our roster. I also think that someone will take brace before our 2nd pick comes...

So we might have to reach, cuz lets face it- value takes a back seat to the centerpiece of your defense. As we know a 3-4 will fail without a bigheavy DT.

Who thought last year sam baker would go #30 or whatever last year.

That centerpiece has to have talent, he can't just be just big. Not that you were saying I just thought I would throw that in.

SBboundBRONCOS
01-26-2009, 05:30 PM
The other DE is Brown who could project as an OLB. I have him in my top 5 first rounders. He is a sack machine and I have seen many prospect lists that have him ahead of Orakpo because Orakpo sucked in the fiesta bowl.

i would fall in love with either one of those guys to be our rush OLB if we do indeed move to that 3-4, orakpo IMO can play both positions either OLB or DE

those i think are my first 2 choices then raji then, maualuga then moreno or wells

pick up chung, delmas, smith or moore(if he slips that far) in the second for S and from then on out go LBs and DLmen maybe an OLman as well

id consider that a successful draft

fcspikeit
01-26-2009, 05:58 PM
I would think Stokley and Royal will see more balls than any TE in our new offense anyways. I don't think it's even an issue.

Here's the thing, lets say we didn't need a LT last year when we picked and Clady was still on the board, Wouldn't it had made more sense to take him anyways? What would a guy like Clady be worth in trade this year?

You don't find many guys who can be that dominate at any position in the draft every year.. If the scouts believe they have found one at just about any position besides K,P LS, they should jump on him...

Again, I'm not saying I believe Pettigrew is that dominant of a player, but if our scouts do, I can see why they would pick him..

TXBRONC
01-26-2009, 06:05 PM
Here's the thing, lets say we didn't need a LT last year when we picked and Clady was still on the board, Wouldn't it had made more sense to take him anyways? What would a guy like Clady be worth in trade this year?

You don't find many guys who can be that dominate at any position in the draft every year.. If the scouts believe they have found one at just about any position besides K,P LS, they should jump on him...

Again, I'm not saying I believe Pettigrew is that dominant of a player, but if our scouts do, I can see why they would pick him..

In all honesty I don't think it would have made sense to take him. If that had been the case then it would have made more sense to take Stewart or Mendenhall who were both on Shanahan's top five choices. That's just my opinion.

Lonestar
01-26-2009, 06:26 PM
I agree but we frankly do not have the luxury of stocking the shelf at position s we do not need..

If we had quality players at each starter spot then OK build for the future right now we need to have starters in about 6-7 spots for next year..

4-5 years form now perhaps

Right after the SB years we took future players or at least what mikey thought they were..

At the time we really did not need Al Wilson or for that matter DJ when he was drafted.. we had other needs when DJ was taken much bigger needs something we are still sucking at DL..

fcspikeit
01-26-2009, 08:01 PM
In all honesty I don't think it would have made sense to take him. If that had been the case then it would have made more sense to take Stewart or Mendenhall who were both on Shanahan's top five choices. That's just my opinion.


I see your point, Its the age old debate with the draft, do you draft Best Player on the board or Best player at a position of need... I have always looked at best player at a position of need, but lately it just seems to me, you have more to gain in the long run if you take BPA...



I agree but we frankly do not have the luxury of stocking the shelf at position s we do not need..

If we had quality players at each starter spot then OK build for the future right now we need to have starters in about 6-7 spots for next year..

4-5 years form now perhaps

Right after the SB years we took future players or at least what mikey thought they were..

At the time we really did not need Al Wilson or for that matter DJ when he was drafted.. we had other needs when DJ was taken much bigger needs something we are still sucking at DL..

Jr, the most important thing is that you don't draft a bust. If you can get a starter at a position of need with your top picks, it only makes sense to take that player.. If that player is not there, you had better take a future starter at another position.

What is the point in taking a LB with your #1 who isn't going to be the long term answer? 2 or 3 years down the road, your still looking for an improvement. Then you will still have the same question's in that draft. Should you take the top LB who is a stud or draft a less talented player at a position, of need? You see my point?

At the end of the day, you are building the best team you can instead of building a team with the best players.

Now that we have Clady, we shouldn't have to worry about LT for 10+ years, had we went another way in the draft say we took a LT in the 4th round, we might have a decant players but there would still be room for improvement.
That's basically what I'm saying, If we could find an every down TE who would be one of the best at the position for several years, it would at least be worth a hard look. I would rather us do that then take a DT who is just good enough to be a starter and we will still be looking at an upgrade in the future.

I think the scouts should grade out every player based on talent and potential, Then they could go back through and add points at the positions of need. Even subtract some at the none needed positions. The level of need would determine the amount of points they added, the level of none need would determine how many they took away.

Then they should simply take the top guy on their board.. They wouldn't have to worry about what position they played because that would already be figured into the ratings. They of course would have to adjust the ratings after each pick as the teams needs changed..

IMO, that would be the best way to balance the need vs BPA.. It should also keep the reaching to a minimum

Lonestar
01-26-2009, 08:11 PM
I see your point, Its the age old debate with the draft, do you draft Best Player on the board or Best player at a position of need... I have always looked at best player at a position of need, but lately it just seems to me, you have more to gain in the long run if you take BPA...




Jr, the most important thing is that you don't draft a bust. If you can get a starter at a position of need with your top picks, it only makes sense to take that player.. If that player is not there, you had better take a future starter at another position.

What is the point in taking a LB with your #1 who isn't going to be the long term answer? 2 or 3 years down the road, your still looking for an improvement. Then you will still have the same question's in that draft. Should you take the top LB who is a stud or draft a less talented player at a position, of need? You see my point?

At the end of the day, you are building the best team you can instead of building a team with the best players.

Now that we have Clady, we shouldn't have to worry about LT for 10+ years, had we went another way in the draft say we took a LT in the 4th round, we might have a decant players but there would still be room for improvement.
That's basically what I'm saying, If we could find an every down TE who would be one of the best at the position for several years, it would at least be worth a hard look. I would rather us do that then take a DT who is just good enough to be a starter and we will still be looking at an upgrade in the future.

I think the scouts should grade out every player based on talent and potential, Then they could go back through and add points at the positions of need. Even subtract some at the none needed positions. The level of need would determine the amount of points they added, the level of none need would determine how many they took away.

Then they should simply take the top guy on their board.. They wouldn't have to worry about what position they played because that would already be figured into the ratings. They of course would have to adjust the ratings after each pick as the teams needs changed..

IMO, that would be the best way to balance the need vs BPA.. It should also keep the reaching to a minimum

Normally I;d say yep do it but this team has way to many holes to fill for next year SEP 09 not worry about another TE or LT.. If it were a position that could handle an upgrade then I;d be worried about it but TE or for that matter OLINE on day one IMHO is a waste even though the others are potential busts..

If we did not need a couple each DT or NT, DEs OLB and safeties I;d say sure go for BPA but in our case IMO you go for BPA in those areas we have the most need for..

Makes no difference if your defense sucks so bad if you have a potential all PRO TE on the bench..

If we are setting pretty with good to great starers at all position Except say safety and an all world TE comes up then you take it and get your safety next round.. but if both a re available a potentially great safety or al world TE.. then maybe.. But this team is so far in the hole after almost a decade of lousy personnel moves we need more than warm bodies all over the place..

fcspikeit
01-26-2009, 08:40 PM
Normally I;d say yep do it but this team has way to many holes to fill for next year SEP 09 not worry about another TE or LT.. If it were a position that could handle an upgrade then I;d be worried about it but TE or for that matter OLINE on day one IMHO is a waste even though the others are potential busts..

If we did not need a couple each DT or NT, DEs OLB and safeties I;d say sure go for BPA but in our case IMO you go for BPA in those areas we have the most need for..

Makes no difference if your defense sucks so bad if you have a potential all PRO TE on the bench..

If we are setting pretty with good to great starers at all position Except say safety and an all world TE comes up then you take it and get your safety next round.. but if both a re available a potentially great safety or al world TE.. then maybe.. But this team is so far in the hole after almost a decade of lousy personnel moves we need more than warm bodies all over the place..

Jr with all our positions of need, it would be hard for there not to be a higher rated player at one of those positions.

If you subtracted 3/4 a point for QB, WR, T and 1/2 a point for TE, on down the list, then you added 3/4 a point to NT, (3-4) ILB, (3-4) OLB, S and 1/2 a point for DE, on down the list. Any TE would have to be a full 1.5 higher then every player at your positions of very high need..

If our FO is taking a player they graded an 8 in the first round over one they graded a 9.6, they need to be replaced!

Lonestar
01-26-2009, 08:44 PM
Jr with all our positions of need, it would be hard for there not to be a higher rated player at one of those positions.

If you subtracted 3/4 a point for QB, WR, T and 1/2 a point for TE, on down the list, then you added 3/4 a point to NT, (3-4) ILB, (3-4) OLB, S and 1/2 a point for DE, on down the list. Any TE would have to be a full 1.5 higher then every player at your positions of very high need..

If our FO is taking a player they graded an 8 in the first round over one they graded a 9.6, they need to be replaced!

I just know If I was in charge most of the offensive positions would be way down the wish list.. RB included..

almost everyone on O is either good to great, and young enough to get us by over the next 3-4 years.. when we could address them..

O is flat not a worry compared to the Katrina on D..

TXBRONC
01-26-2009, 08:49 PM
Jr with all our positions of need, it would be hard for there not to be a higher rated player at one of those positions.

If you subtracted 3/4 a point for QB, WR, T and 1/2 a point for TE, on down the list, then you added 3/4 a point to NT, (3-4) ILB, (3-4) OLB, S and 1/2 a point for DE, on down the list. Any TE would have to be a full 1.5 higher then every player at your positions of very high need..

If our FO is taking a player they graded an 8 in the first round over one they graded a 9.6, they need to be replaced!

I think I get where you're coming from. So then, there are three options, take the lower rated player because he fills a need, take the higher rated player even though he doesn't fill a need or trade back.

DenBronx
01-26-2009, 09:47 PM
I think I get where you're coming from. So then, there are three options, take the lower rated player because he fills a need, take the higher rated player even though he doesn't fill a need or trade back.

i choose option 4.

trade back and still get the lower rated player to fill the need.

TXBRONC
01-26-2009, 09:56 PM
i choose option 4.

trade back and still get the lower rated player to fill the need.

If he's there that's possible.

fcspikeit
01-26-2009, 10:12 PM
i choose option 4.

trade back and still get the lower rated player to fill the need.

That's pretty much the point of trading back. :lol: Get the extra picks plus one of the guys you had a lower scouting report on.

Ziggy
01-26-2009, 10:56 PM
That's pretty much the point of trading back. :lol: Get the extra picks plus one of the guys you had a lower scouting report on.

It's all good in theory and works if the guy you want is actually there when you pick again. It doesn't always work though. Ask Texans fans how thier first round trade down worked for them last year. They got burned.

skycoyote
01-26-2009, 11:31 PM
That makes sense. It looks like the big names like Ragi and Maualuga will be gone by the time we get to pick. Rumor has it that defense is the hot ticket this year. It should be an interesting draft.

fcspikeit
01-27-2009, 12:38 AM
It's all good in theory and works if the guy you want is actually there when you pick again. It doesn't always work though. Ask Texans fans how thier first round trade down worked for them last year. They got burned.

If there's one guy you can't afford to lose, why would you trade back? :confused:

If he is clearly better then the rest of your scouting report, you had better take him.

IMO, the only reason you would trade down is because the top guy left on your board isn't much better then the 2nd 3rd and 4th... You trade back knowing you will lose 1,2, or 3 of them but you know there will be at least one that you want. That's why I said, "one of the guys you had a lower scouting report on"

Yeah, I agree with you, if there is one guy left on your board that you have ahead of everyone else and you specifically want him, it would be dumb to trade back and hope he is still there... If you want him, you better make the pick.

56crash
01-27-2009, 12:45 AM
come on guys you are being played . the mane has a game going LMAO at lex he knows the game and fell hook line and sinker ...

fcspikeit
01-27-2009, 01:26 AM
come on guys you are being played . the mane has a game going LMAO at lex he knows the game and fell hook line and sinker ...


Well this isn't a Travishamockery. Taco started the that thread on the 9th. Blue Run registered on the 5th. Either Taco cheated with an early start or this guy is legit. Legit as in not part of OM game.


Thanx for checking. I've been unable to get onto the mane today. Besides, the game was supposed to be on other teams' boards, right?

And thanx for clarifying "legit".

We have already discussed that...

SmilinAssasSin27
01-27-2009, 08:08 AM
Yeah...no ense in playing the "i told you so game" or being a dick about it. I personally never really believed the dude, but I could still be the one who is wrong. If we sign Peppers, draft a TE, etc his statements will have some merit. I personally think Run is quite vague and has mentioned just about every player in the draft as a person of interest. JMHO. Best part about what I believe to be his farce is the fact we can't ever PROVE it to be a lie.

TXBRONC
01-27-2009, 08:27 AM
Yeah...no ense in playing the "i told you so game" or being a dick about it. I personally never really believed the dude, but I could still be the one who is wrong. If we sign Peppers, draft a TE, etc his statements will have some merit. I personally think Run is quite vague and has mentioned just about every player in the draft as a person of interest. JMHO. Best part about what I believe to be his farce is the fact we can't ever PROVE it to be a lie.

He may have been sincere, at any rate things he said should be taken with a grain of salt.