PDA

View Full Version : War Room Recap



WARHORSE
05-11-2009, 09:09 PM
Denver Broncos: 2009 NFL Draft Recap
SN correspondents and War Room scouts
Denver Broncos Broncos Schedule Broncos Depth Chart Broncos Blogs Broncos War Room
Monday April 27, 2009 2:19 pm
War Room scouts and Broncos' correspondent Lee Rasizer offer their analysis from the NFL draft:

Overview

Give Josh McDaniels this: He stuck to his promise of drafting high-motor, versatile players who fill holes while not confining the talent search to defense. But the lingering question is whether the team addressed its most pressing need, rebuilding the defense's front seven.

The Broncos had four top-48 picks, but McDaniels was adamant about not reaching for need, and the staff felt the front-seven draft talent suited for a 3-4 front was exceedingly thin.

But even more controversial, McDaniels gave up Denver's No. 1 pick next season in order to trade up for CB Alphonso Smith at No. 37. That move figures to be scrutinized heavily in the future. McDaniels also curiously dealt two third-rounders for a blocking tight end with 12 career catches. And he traded up two more times to pick up a wide receiver, a position of strength, and a sixth-round quarterback coming off a down year.

If the heat wasn't on sufficiently after the Jay Cutler saga, it is now.

1st round, No. 12 overall pick: Knowshon Moreno, RB, Georgia

Scout's take: Mike Shanahan would never have taken a running back this high. While this is a bit of a surprise, it makes sense. After Denver traded its franchise quarterback, the Broncos now have an RB who can support new QB Kyle Orton. Moreno doesn't have blazing speed, but he runs hard and shows the elusiveness and intangibles to be an excellent starting RB.

Correspondent's take:
How he fits: The Broncos had seven running backs on injured reserve in 2008 and went with Moreno despite acquiring LaMont Jordan, Correll Buckhalter and J.J. Arrington in free agency, adding to holdovers Ryan Torain, Selvin Young and Peyton Hillis. It's clear the new Broncos regime sees that group as role players and Moreno as the workhorse back. He'll complement a strong wide receiving group, bringing toughness and lateral quickness that was the Broncos' signature in the Terrell Davis days.
When he'll play: With Denver bypassing more pressing defensive needs, Moreno has to play right away. He will have an opportunity to start, competing directly with Buckhalter and Torain for No. 1 on the depth chart and likely bumping Hillis to an H-back type role. Moreno breaks a longstanding tradition for Denver of seeking late-round running back finds. Steve Sewell in 1985 was the last No. 1 pick at running back.

1st round, No. 18 overall pick: Robert Ayers, DE, Tennessee

Scout's take: Ayers came on strong after an impressive performance at the Senior Bowl. Denver needed to get bigger and stronger for its 3-4 defense, and Ayers is an excellent fit. He plays with a high motor and has the strength to hold the point of attack, as well as the speed and hands to rush the passer.

Correspondent's take:
How he fits: The Broncos are undergoing a massive rebuilding job on their front seven, and Ayers is the initial piece from the draft. The team coveted Ayers' versatility. Denver believes he can be a three-down player who can either be a stand-up rush end or a five-technique defensive end in its transition to a 3-4 front.
When he'll play: Denver liked Ayers enough that it considered taking him with the No. 12 selection, but the Broncos were afraid Knowshon Moreno would be gone by the 18th slot. Instead, Ayers was still around and immediately should compete for a starting position as a defensive end in a weak holdover group.

2nd round, No. 37 overall pick: Alphonso Smith, CB, Wake Forest

Scout's take: Denver trades up to get who we believe is the best cornerback in this draft. If Smith were two inches taller, he would have been considered a top-10 pick. He has the speed, fluidity in his hips, instincts and ball skills to make an instant impact in a position of dire need for the Broncos.

Correspondent's take:
How he fits: The Broncos, with two No. 1 picks in 2010 courtesy of the Jay Cutler trade, sent one of those selections to Seattle for the right to draft Smith. He fits Josh McDaniels' pre-draft pledge to pick smart, tough and versatile players that fulfill a need. Denver is set at cornerback as far as starters with Champ Bailey and Andre Goodman, but both are 30, and there are depth concerns behind the duo.
When he'll play: Smith, who ranks in the top 10 in NCAA history with 21 career interceptions, will compete for a role in Denver's nickel and dime packages with Jack Williams and Josh Bell in the near term. But Smith also brings potential value as a special-teams contributor, given his experience as a return man on both kickoffs and punts, potentially allowing Eddie Royal to concentrate solely on his role as the team's No. 2 receiver.

2nd round, No. 48 overall pick: Darcel McBath, S, Texas Tech

Scout's take: McBath has the great toughness and coverage skills to be a solid all-around safety and help Denver revamp its secondary.

Correspondent's take:
How he fits: The Broncos need safety depth after purging the position this offseason. The team did sign free agents Brian Dawkins and Renaldo Hill, but they'll be 36 and 31, respectively, this season. McBath has good size at 6-0, 198 pounds, and he has extensive experience, starting his final 39 games in college.
When he'll play: McBath won't crack the lineup immediately given the veterans in front of him. He will need to demonstrate superior special teams ability to crack the game-day rotation.

2nd round, No. 64 overall pick: Richard Quinn, TE, North Carolina

Scout's take: Quinn is a well-built tight end who will be used primarily as a run blocker. Quinn's receiving skills are largely unknown, and he's a huge reach in this spot, so Denver must really have liked his blocking ability.

Correspondent's take:
How he fits: Quinn is a seldom-used pass catching target with top-tier blocking skills. The Broncos already have Daniel Graham and Tony Scheffler atop the depth chart. But Scheffler's primary skill-set is as a receiver, while Quinn adds another physical presence in the trenches.
When he'll play: Quinn should fit in immediately, paired with Graham, in two tight-end formations. The Broncos last season paired Graham with since-departed Chad Mustard in goal-line sets and short-yardage situations. But Denver also is counting on Quinn's paltry numbers -- 12 career catches -- belying his actual ability to be an offensive weapon. The Broncos chalk up that lack of offensive production to UNC's offensive scheme rather than poor hands.

4th round, No. 114 overall pick: David Bruton, S, Notre Dame

Scout's take:Bruton is very aggressive and will be an asset in run support. He is a bit stiff as an athlete and will struggle in coverage. While he looked out of place at the Senior Bowl, he had a tremendous combine. But we believe he will be a bit more limited than his measurables suggest.

Correspondent's take: The Broncos continue their complete revamping of their secondary. Bruton also will bolster the special teams.

4th round, No. 132 overall pick: Seth Olsen, G, Iowa

Scout's take: Olsen is a fundamentally sound guard who has great instincts and uses his hands well as both a pass and run blocker. He tends to play high at times, and lacks top playing strength. His intelligence and experience will help him make Denver's roster.

Correspondent's take: The fastest guard at the combine and a key component to Shonn Greene's big season, Olsen is known as a mauler. In Denver, he will serve as developmental depth behind starters Ben Hamilton and Chris Kuper.

5th round, No. 141 overall pick: Kenny McKinley, WR, South Carolina

Correspondent's take: After being named a preseason All-American, a right hamstring strain marred McKinley's senior season. But he averaged 6.4 catches and nearly 81 yards per game as a junior, and he has a 40 time of 4.37 seconds.

6th round, No. 174 overall pick: Tom Brandstater, QB, Fresno State

Correspondent's take: Brandstater has undeniable physical tools at 6-5, 220 pounds, but he's already 24 and a considerable developmental project behind Kyle Orton and Chris Simms.

7th round, No. 225 overall pick: Blake Schlueter, C, Texas Christian

Correspondent's take: The latest in a long line of late-round offensive lineman that may not fit every system because of a lack of size but are a match for Denver's zone-blocking needs, given his quickness, ability and toughness.

Unfinished business

The Broncos have buttressed their secondary with skilled youth and added a playmaking running back with star potential, a top blocking tight end and a developmental quarterback prospect. They created the potential for a balanced attack that may be able to take pressure off the starting quarterback, either Kyle Orton or Chris Simms.

But serious holes remain on defense. Now it's up to the team's scouts to unearth some big-bodied prospects as undrafted free agents who may project as 3-4 defensive linemen. They also need linebacker prospects who fit specific packages. It may take another year or more to fully rebuild that group

Superchop 7
05-11-2009, 09:20 PM
Yeah....McD.....the draft was thin at DL.....BUT NOT AT LINEBACKER.

Since every person on the planet knew that......tell me again about your FA signings.

Tempus Fugit
05-12-2009, 01:15 AM
Yeah....McD.....the draft was thin at DL.....BUT NOT AT LINEBACKER.

Since every person on the planet knew that......tell me again about your FA signings.


No ‘backers:For only the second time in the 12 Polian-directed drafts, the team did not select a linebacker. The only other ’backer-less draft was in 2001. Polian described this year’s linebacker class as "very thin.‘’

http://www.indy.com/posts/colts-8-draft-picks-address-several-manpower-issues

The Patriots, a 3-4 team in need of linebacker help, didn't bother taking one until the third round, and that was the only one they took in the draft. (As an aside, he's lost to them for the season already with a knee injury)

The Chiefs, another 3-4 team needing linebackers, didn't draft a single one.

The Steelers, a 3-4 team that loves linebackers and just let Foote go, didn't draft a linebacker.

The Dolphins didn't take a linebacker until round 7.

Unless I miscounted, only 24 linebackers were taken in the entire draft, compared to 30 drafted last season, according to NFL.com.

I don't know who told you that the draft wasn't thin at linebacker, especially for the 3-4, but a lot of 3-4 teams (particularly from the Parcells/Belichick coaching tree) didn't seem to agree with that notion, and neither did Bill Polian.

Rick
05-12-2009, 08:38 AM
Also none of us here have been at the camps seeing our LBers play.

If the coaching staff believes that Doom, Reid, Crowder, and now throw in Ayers are all playing the OLBer role good then why the need to draft LBer?

DJ, Davis, Woodyard, Larson are all set and fine inside.

SOCALORADO.
05-12-2009, 09:02 AM
Also none of us here have been at the camps seeing our LBers play.

If the coaching staff believes that Doom, Reid, Crowder, and now throw in Ayers are all playing the OLBer role good then why the need to draft LBer?

DJ, Davis, Woodyard, Larson are all set and fine inside.

Yeah. I wanted Cushing, due to his versatility, but i guess we'll ust see.
I like WWIII and Larsen alot in Nolans defense.

Rick
05-12-2009, 09:12 AM
I wanted a big immovable force in the middle so my only real concern at this point is Fields.

Nomad
05-12-2009, 09:48 AM
I wanted a big immovable force in the middle so my only real concern at this point is Fields.

Terrence Cody (Alabama) 2010;)

NameUsedBefore
05-12-2009, 10:13 AM
Yes, this was a weak draft for the front seven.

Luckily there's a pretty strong number of DL/LB in the next draft-- oh wait... that's right, we traded one of our first's in that draft away for a 2nd in this one.

powderaddict
05-12-2009, 10:26 AM
Yes, this was a weak draft for the front seven.

Luckily there's a pretty strong number of DL/LB in the next draft-- oh wait... that's right, we traded one of our first's in that draft away for a 2nd in this one.

The Broncos traded their ONLY PICK IN 2010?!?!?!?!!

I thought they'd have at least, oh, 5+ picks next year!!!! :rolleyes:

They traded 1 of 2 #1's, and still have the rest of the draft to pick up other players. If Champ won't restructure next year, if he gets hurt, or whatever the reason, Smith will be in a much better position to step in after having a full year's experience than just about any rookie drafted next year. The Smith pick is what's known in the business as "planning ahead".

What that synopsis fails to mention is that many of the players drafted will immediately make an impact on ST, particularly the two safetys, and Olson. That alone will help the team immensely in the short term.

NameUsedBefore
05-12-2009, 10:48 AM
The Broncos traded their ONLY PICK IN 2010?!?!?!?!!

I thought they'd have at least, oh, 5+ picks next year!!!! :rolleyes:

They traded 1 of 2 #1's, and still have the rest of the draft to pick up other players. If Champ won't restructure next year, if he gets hurt, or whatever the reason, Smith will be in a much better position to step in after having a full year's experience than just about any rookie drafted next year. The Smith pick is what's known in the business as "planning ahead".

What that synopsis fails to mention is that many of the players drafted will immediately make an impact on ST, particularly the two safetys, and Olson. That alone will help the team immensely in the short term.

Nay.

Two is always better than one. If Denver gets mopped up by their brutal schedule will this discussion maintain the same amount of leniency? Doubt it. I'm sure a prime-time DT or LB in the top-5/top-10 would be great for a Denver team that doesn't really have much of anything in its front seven. Or, if Denver fares well, and even if Chicago fares well, two picks can quickly become one high one. To me, it's simple. You don't reach on a blocking tight-end with some kind of conspiracy theory that his offensive abilities will be, to quote, "belying", as if other teams don't have, I dunno, game tape on players. You use the thirds used to get him, and possibly a 4th, to get Smith. Save the 1st for a much, much better draft where value can be actually met. If you can't get Quinn in the rounds he was actually slotted for, uh, don't worry about it? We got Daniel Graham and if you really want a two-TE set with blocking ends toss in a utility guard/tackle or even a fullback. If McDaniels is planning on never throwing to his tight-end I honestly don't know how that is going to work for Orton/Simms, the former especially, seeing as how most of his passes are in the dump game.

McDaniels clearly thinks he can win now. More so, he thinks Denver will fare better than Chicago. Do you? Does anyone? Does anyone who has looked at the schedule? As far as I can tell McDaniels actually hasn't done a damn thing that would be all too different from a typical Shanahan offseason other than draft a running-back in the first. Switch out McDaniels for Shanahan and I would guarantee you that many would be complaining that, once again!, nothing was done where Denver was weak and we made stupid, unnecessary and, let's just admit it, egotistical moves in the draft again while our run through the free agency was a novel of picking up the carwrecks, failures and broken pieces of over teams with the typical assumption: that they wouldn't be our carwrecks, failures, etc.

Fan in Exile
05-12-2009, 10:57 AM
Yes, this was a weak draft for the front seven.

Luckily there's a pretty strong number of DL/LB in the next draft-- oh wait... that's right, we traded one of our first's in that draft away for a 2nd in this one.

I understand why people have this problem with the draft, I however think that it's a superficial response to what is going on with the team. If you check here (http://www.milehighreport.com/2009/4/27/855963/long-term-value-short-term-fix-the). You'll find a good analysis of what our needs on defense were.

The biggest surprise was that the D-line wasn't that bad, the real problem was that after the RB got beyond them no one else really stopped them. Don't get me wrong though the D-line could be better.

To fix that we're going to have three new LB's and a ton of new people in the secondary.

We also will probably have two new guys on the D-line.

Now all of these guys aren't going to pan out, that's certain and we are going to have holes that have to be addressed next year however because we went BPA this year we won't have other needs that demand picks next year.

TE check, Interior O-line double check, WR Check, QB Check, RB check, DBs triple check.

So next year not only do we still have our full compliment of seven picks to use but we also have the freedom that comes from having picked a bunch of guys who are probably going to stick with the roster which lets us combine BPA with need.

Tempus Fugit
05-12-2009, 11:04 AM
Nay.

Two is always better than one. If Denver gets mopped up by their brutal schedule will this discussion maintain the same amount of leniency? Doubt it. I'm sure a prime-time DT or LB in the top-5/top-10 would be great for a Denver team that doesn't really have much of anything in its front seven. Or, if Denver fares well, and even if Chicago fares well, two picks can quickly become one high one. To me, it's simple. You don't reach on a blocking tight-end with some kind of conspiracy theory that his offensive abilities will be, to quote, "belying", as if other teams don't have, I dunno, game tape on players. You use the thirds used to get him, and possibly a 4th, to get Smith. Save the 1st for a much, much better draft where value can be actually met. If you can't get Quinn in the rounds he was actually slotted for, uh, don't worry about it? We got Daniel Graham and if you really want a two-TE set with blocking ends toss in a utility guard/tackle or even a fullback. If McDaniels is planning on never throwing to his tight-end I honestly don't know how that is going to work for Orton/Simms, the former especially, seeing as how most of his passes are in the dump game.

McDaniels clearly thinks he can win now. More so, he thinks Denver will fare better than Chicago. Do you? Does anyone? Does anyone who has looked at the schedule? As far as I can tell McDaniels actually hasn't done a damn thing that would be all too different from a typical Shanahan offseason other than draft a running-back in the first. Switch out McDaniels for Shanahan and I would guarantee you that many would be complaining that, once again!, nothing was done where Denver was weak and we made stupid, unnecessary and, let's just admit it, egotistical moves in the draft again while our run through the free agency was a novel of picking up the carwrecks, failures and broken pieces of over teams with the typical assumption: that they wouldn't be our carwrecks, failures, etc.

I don't know why people keep ignoring this (well, I do, actually... It's because it undercuts their griping about McDaniels), but teams don't want a top 7 pick in the draft because of the financial ramifications. The Patriots will be signing 4 second round players for just about the cost it would have been to sign their one first round player if they hadn't traded down, and they weren't even in that top 7.

McDaniels was in a no win situation with his detractors. If he doesn't make the trade, the wailing would have been "But they needed help THIS year!". Nothing short of an undefeated season and a blowout Super Bowl win is going to get these people off his back, all because a cry-baby of a quarterback threw a hissy fit over a non-issue and then acted in a way that would get 99.9% of the nation's employees fired.

WARHORSE
05-12-2009, 11:08 AM
Nay.

Two is always better than one. If Denver gets mopped up by their brutal schedule will this discussion maintain the same amount of leniency? Doubt it. I'm sure a prime-time DT or LB in the top-5/top-10 would be great for a Denver team that doesn't really have much of anything in its front seven. Or, if Denver fares well, and even if Chicago fares well, two picks can quickly become one high one. To me, it's simple. You don't reach on a blocking tight-end with some kind of conspiracy theory that his offensive abilities will be, to quote, "belying", as if other teams don't have, I dunno, game tape on players. You use the thirds used to get him, and possibly a 4th, to get Smith. Save the 1st for a much, much better draft where value can be actually met. If you can't get Quinn in the rounds he was actually slotted for, uh, don't worry about it? We got Daniel Graham and if you really want a two-TE set with blocking ends toss in a utility guard/tackle or even a fullback. If McDaniels is planning on never throwing to his tight-end I honestly don't know how that is going to work for Orton/Simms, the former especially, seeing as how most of his passes are in the dump game.

McDaniels clearly thinks he can win now. More so, he thinks Denver will fare better than Chicago. Do you? Does anyone? Does anyone who has looked at the schedule? As far as I can tell McDaniels actually hasn't done a damn thing that would be all too different from a typical Shanahan offseason other than draft a running-back in the first. Switch out McDaniels for Shanahan and I would guarantee you that many would be complaining that, once again!, nothing was done where Denver was weak and we made stupid, unnecessary and, let's just admit it, egotistical moves in the draft again while our run through the free agency was a novel of picking up the carwrecks, failures and broken pieces of over teams with the typical assumption: that they wouldn't be our carwrecks, failures, etc.

Much remains to be seen.

The results of McLovins moves along with his coaching will be made plain this coming season.


If the players we drafted are playing and still on the roster next year, then Im good with it.

As for those who are upset we didnt draft another LBer or Dlineman......

Id rather take a player that starts.......anywhere......than take another 'Crowder' simply because we need Dline.

Im hoping Crowder does better this year but up to now, he hasnt contributed very much. What good does it do to draft players you dont think will come in and play at a high level now, or at least supplant whats on the roster.

Im just saying I agree with McDs decision to draft players he thinks can come in and play and contribute now and in the future.

NameUsedBefore
05-12-2009, 11:15 AM
stuff

The D-line was terrible. I don't need to have "special situation stats" leveraged to note this. They got pushed around like they didn't exist and saying "they weren't that bad" is a fairly sparkling review of what was an awful unit. Saying "Oh, they stopped them here. But, uh, the 10-20 yard sprints were totally on the DBs." is somewhat dodging the fact that those 10-20 yard sprints still go through the D-Line. That is, offensive linemen were breaking through to our second level, meaning a total collapse of the D-line's very purpose which is to make that not happen.



I don't know why people keep ignoring this (well, I do, actually... It's because it undercuts their griping about McDaniels), but teams don't want a top 7 pick in the draft because of the financial ramifications. The Patriots will be signing 4 second round players for just about the cost it would have been to sign their one first round player if they hadn't traded down, and they weren't even in that top 7.

McDaniels was in a no win situation with his detractors. If he doesn't make the trade, the wailing would have been "But they needed help THIS year!". Nothing short of an undefeated season and a blowout Super Bowl win is going to get these people off his back, all because a cry-baby of a quarterback threw a hissy fit over a non-issue and then acted in a way that would get 99.9% of the nation's employees fired.

I separate my personal views of McDaniels with his decision making. The former seems like an egotistical dick to me, the latter has been full of, "Uh, what?" and "This seems awfully familiar." I hope he is better on the field, but nobody can really tell of what that will be.



Im just saying I agree with McDs decision to draft players he thinks can come in and play and contribute now and in the future.

Yes of course, but that kind of ends when you start losing on the trades big time. I.E., "getting your guy" does have limitations. It would be fair to say those limitations are different for all of us; but trading down coming into a stronger draft, then turning around and trading thirds to reach on a blocking tight end, seems an awfully backward way of going about getting your guys (particularly when Seattle bundled a 3rd+4th, jumped back into the 2nd round and got the guy they wanted as if nothing even happened).

Fan in Exile
05-12-2009, 12:10 PM
The D-line was terrible. I don't need to have "special situation stats" leveraged to note this. They got pushed around like they didn't exist and saying "they weren't that bad" is a fairly sparkling review of what was an awful unit. Saying "Oh, they stopped them here. But, uh, the 10-20 yard sprints were totally on the DBs." is somewhat dodging the fact that those 10-20 yard sprints still go through the D-Line. That is, offensive linemen were breaking through to our second level, meaning a total collapse of the D-line's very purpose which is to make that not happen.

I'm sorry, last time I try to confuse you with the facts.

powderaddict
05-12-2009, 12:22 PM
Yes of course, but that kind of ends when you start losing on the trades big time. I.E., "getting your guy" does have limitations. It would be fair to say those limitations are different for all of us; but trading down coming into a stronger draft, then turning around and trading thirds to reach on a blocking tight end, seems an awfully backward way of going about getting your guys (particularly when Seattle bundled a 3rd+4th, jumped back into the 2nd round and got the guy they wanted as if nothing even happened).

Who cares when/where they are drafted if they can contribute?

I'd rather them bring in a guy that produces than draft a dud due to "value".

NameUsedBefore
05-12-2009, 12:25 PM
I'm sorry, last time I try to confuse you with the facts.

*Stats, and then an argument. A poor one, IMO, and one, even if you accept the premise, doesn't exactly put the draft or the decisions in a better light. I.E., if you grant the notion that the 2nd-tier was the core of our woes, then what in the draft helped that? Alphonso Smith is a cover corner, not a tackler (don't show me highlights btw; they are called that for a reason). Ayers is a 4-3 player moving into 3-4. Everyone else is late-round who definitely wont be starting barring injury.

However, I don't buy it. It's hindsight glorification of what was, undoubtedly, our biggest weakness. Just look at the pre-draft vote we had here on these forums: far and away the defensive line was seen as the biggest hole. It still is. Situational stats don't do it for me, sorry.

NameUsedBefore
05-12-2009, 12:27 PM
Who cares when/where they are drafted if they can contribute?

I'd rather them bring in a guy that produces than draft a dud due to "value".

Then the Raiders had a great draft and there is no reason to criticize.

As I said, "getting your guy" has its limitations. One of the reasons you don't show your cards is so teams don't rob your ass so you can get your guy, for instance. McDaniels can trade 1sts for 2nds and 3rds to reach for blocking tight ends all he wants if he believes the pieces fit. But look around -- there are better ways of doing it. The Patriots showed it, and the Seahawks did it within the very same round inwhich they basically took our 1st.

T.K.O.
05-12-2009, 12:28 PM
Yes, this was a weak draft for the front seven.

Luckily there's a pretty strong number of DL/LB in the next draft-- oh wait... that's right, we traded one of our first's in that draft away for a 2nd in this one.

and we got what the coach believes is 1st round talent this year so whats the problem?
it wasnt likely we would have to trade up to get dl help next year and they didnt want to pay 2 1st rounders in an uncapped year....makes sense to me.
see below.....

2nd round, No. 37 overall pick: Alphonso Smith, CB, Wake Forest

Scout's take: Denver trades up to get who we believe is the best cornerback in this draft. If Smith were two inches taller, he would have been considered a top-10 pick. He has the speed, fluidity in his hips, instincts and ball skills to make an instant impact in a position of dire need for the Broncos.

NameUsedBefore
05-12-2009, 12:33 PM
and we got what the coach believes is 1st round talent this year so whats the problem?
it wasnt likely we would have to trade up to get dl help next year and they didnt want to pay 2 1st rounders in an uncapped year....makes sense to me.
see below.....

2nd round, No. 37 overall pick: Alphonso Smith, CB, Wake Forest

Scout's take: Denver trades up to get who we believe is the best cornerback in this draft. If Smith were two inches taller, he would have been considered a top-10 pick. He has the speed, fluidity in his hips, instincts and ball skills to make an instant impact in a position of dire need for the Broncos.

Yes, but the NFL saw him as a 2nd-round value so you treat him as such.

If Denver didn't want to pay for two 1st-rounders next year then you can combine the two and trade up.

NightTrainLayne
05-12-2009, 12:35 PM
Yes, but the NFL saw him as a 2nd-round value so you treat him as such.

If Denver didn't want to pay for two 1st-rounders next year then you can combine the two and trade up.

He was drafted in the 2nd-round. . .

I know that you feel we over-paid to get the second round pick, but it's not like we traded up to take three 1st round picks. The NFL sees him as a second round pick, and lo-and-behold, we drafted him in the second round.

T.K.O.
05-12-2009, 12:48 PM
Yes, but the NFL saw him as a 2nd-round value so you treat him as such.

If Denver didn't want to pay for two 1st-rounders next year then you can combine the two and trade up.

the point is THE COACH saw him as a player worthy of giving up one of our picks next year to help the team this year .
it happens all the time ,and we dont know whether bowlen wanted to pay top money next year.by trading up or paying 2 first rounders
if the draft is so deep for defensive prospects next year we wont need 2 1sts to get the help we need,right?
like it or not our new coach drafts who he believes has the character and skill to impact the team now. and i for one hope he's right and plan to give him at least a season to prove it.
i'm so sick of watching my favorite team on the planet under-achieve
maybe this year they'll over-achieve

NameUsedBefore
05-12-2009, 01:09 PM
the point is THE COACH saw him as a player worthy of giving up one of our picks next year to help the team this year .
it happens all the time ,and we dont know whether bowlen wanted to pay top money next year.by trading up or paying 2 first rounders
if the draft is so deep for defensive prospects next year we wont need 2 1sts to get the help we need,right?
like it or not our new coach drafts who he believes has the character and skill to impact the team now. and i for one hope he's right and plan to give him at least a season to prove it.
i'm so sick of watching my favorite team on the planet under-achieve
maybe this year they'll over-achieve

You're right that McDaniels is planning to win now.

I can't say I think it's going to work -- that is, this season -- because McDaniels moves, FA and draft, don't seem all too different than how Shanahan would have approached it (barring the 1st round RB). So, when that schedule tears into us and the "win now" planning doesn't pan I'd like at least to have some light at the end of the tunnel.

If you think we can win now, then the Smith pick makes sense. Similar to the Panthers trade (although they got a 5th IIRC). However, I think the "win now" comes from McDaniels ego, not from what this team can do at the moment. Comparable to last offseason when Shanahan was boasting that he'd get into playoffs and then proceeded to ride into the season with no defense to very unsurprising results.

Requiem / The Dagda
05-12-2009, 01:57 PM
The pick of Smith makes sense regardless of how it is sliced. You get a guy who can get groomed by two good starting corners now and has a chance at contributing in nickel packages, perhaps even more this year. Is this not Champ's final year of his contract? Denver needed to do something to make sure they had a high profile guy under the wings considering the age of our defensive backfield. It makes sense to win now and in the future.

NameUsedBefore
05-12-2009, 02:04 PM
The pick of Smith makes sense regardless of how it is sliced. You get a guy who can get groomed by two good starting corners now and has a chance at contributing in nickel packages, perhaps even more this year. Is this not Champ's final year of his contract? Denver needed to do something to make sure they had a high profile guy under the wings considering the age of our defensive backfield. It makes sense to win now and in the future.

I believe Smith could have been had for two 3rds and maybe a little extra. Remember, Seattle jumped right back into the 2nd with merely a third and a fourth. Instead, we took Smith with a first and used our thirds to go reaching for a blocking tight end. Seattle smelled blood and rang McDaniels clock, getting him to fire away a first when the pressure came fast. That's pretty easy to see, IMO.

If you wanted Smith now then you could have gotten him now without using a first. If you want to talk about the future, well, then the way the Smith pick was taken certainly doesn't give room for that. It is a now and only now pick since it was at the expense of an inherently higher-value, future pick.

Lonestar
05-12-2009, 02:34 PM
Much remains to be seen.

The results of McLovins moves along with his coaching will be made plain this coming season.


If the players we drafted are playing and still on the roster next year, then Im good with it.

As for those who are upset we didnt draft another LBer or Dlineman......

Id rather take a player that starts.......anywhere......than take another 'Crowder' simply because we need Dline.

Im hoping Crowder does better this year but up to now, he hasnt contributed very much. What good does it do to draft players you dont think will come in and play at a high level now, or at least supplant whats on the roster.

Im just saying I agree with McDs decision to draft players he thinks can come in and play and contribute now and in the future.

I have to wonder about crowder, he played rather well in his rookie year.. not great but showed alot of promise much more so that moss did..

Now I have to wonder why he was on the inactive list for much of 2008, was it because he slacked off, sophomore slump, showed up the #1 moss that we ALSO GAVE UP TWO draft choice to REACH for, or just flat pissed mike off...



I suspect that Josh and Nolan saw something in those existing DL guys or knew that there would be 5-6 available as UDFA, they certainly cleaned house after the draft was over..

Will we find a couple of real players there or merely good rotational types..

Lets hope so and see what the June 1, TC cuts bring also..

Lonestar
05-12-2009, 02:52 PM
Who cares when/where they are drafted if they can contribute?

I'd rather them bring in a guy that produces than draft a dud due to "value".


much like Marshall from 4th rounder to STUD and for the first few years we pay him peanuts opposed to #1 pay and bonuses..

The really good teams have been building themselves Via the draft for decades and filling in hot spots with a FA here and there..

T.K.O.
05-12-2009, 02:52 PM
I believe Smith could have been had for two 3rds and maybe a little extra. Remember, Seattle jumped right back into the 2nd with merely a third and a fourth. Instead, we took Smith with a first and used our thirds to go reaching for a blocking tight end. Seattle smelled blood and rang McDaniels clock, getting him to fire away a first when the pressure came fast. That's pretty easy to see, IMO.

If you wanted Smith now then you could have gotten him now without using a first. If you want to talk about the future, well, then the way the Smith pick was taken certainly doesn't give room for that. It is a now and only now pick since it was at the expense of an inherently higher-value, future pick.

if they could have traded a 3rd and 4th for the same pick and didnt,it obvious they didnt want 2 1sts next year,the fo is not comprised of retards that have no clue about draft values,they must have felt it was smarter to use the 1st and save the lower picks to bring in more players.
some people dont seem to grasp the fact (which is well known by most f.o.)
its just tooooo expensive these days to draft top 10 guys so trading up doesnt make sense unless there is a guy the team just has to have.
it would be better to draft 3 3rd rounders that contribute and help the team than a #1 that makes millions to ride the pine,thats mcd's theory

Lonestar
05-12-2009, 03:00 PM
Just remember that some folks will never be happy regardless of what Josh does..

He can win the Super bowl with nothing but UDFA's from his point forward, he will be remember for trading draft choices next year for players this year..

Personally I could care less about "value" unless of course you draft some one on day one that was clearly in ever ones draft service was a round 5-7 guy..

If the round peg fits into the round hole then what is the issue..

Drafting a one handed WR in the 2nd round was dumb considering he could have been had late on day two.. So mike has nothing on Josh..

Many folks forget that excepting perhaps 2006/08 mike was not a guru on draft day..

Requiem / The Dagda
05-12-2009, 03:06 PM
I believe Smith could have been had for two 3rds and maybe a little extra. Remember, Seattle jumped right back into the 2nd with merely a third and a fourth. Instead, we took Smith with a first and used our thirds to go reaching for a blocking tight end. Seattle smelled blood and rang McDaniels clock, getting him to fire away a first when the pressure came fast. That's pretty easy to see, IMO.

If you wanted Smith now then you could have gotten him now without using a first. If you want to talk about the future, well, then the way the Smith pick was taken certainly doesn't give room for that. It is a now and only now pick since it was at the expense of an inherently higher-value, future pick.

We probably could have gotten Smith without having to trade a future first -- but then we wouldn't have been able to acquire some of our other selections. Have to think of it that way as well. Two sides to everything. Personally, I'm glad Denver got their highest rated RB, CB and one of their favorite defensive players in the draft -- all first rounders in their book and won't have to shell out big time for a top ten pick if we tank next year.

T.K.O.
05-12-2009, 03:11 PM
We probably could have gotten Smith without having to trade a future first -- but then we wouldn't have been able to acquire some of our other selections. Have to think of it that way as well. Two sides to everything. Personally, I'm glad Denver got their highest rated RB, CB and one of their favorite defensive players in the draft -- all first rounders in their book and won't have to shell out big time for a top ten pick if we tank next year.

exactly...thats what ive been saying as well:salute:

Lonestar
05-12-2009, 03:19 PM
exactly...thats what ive been saying as well:salute:


again some folks will ever like the guy.. they will find some reason to berate him just because mike is gone..

powderaddict
05-12-2009, 04:49 PM
again some folks will ever like the guy.. they will find some reason to berate him just because cutler is gone..

Fixed it for ya!

roomemp
05-12-2009, 04:49 PM
Yes, but the NFL saw him as a 2nd-round value so you treat him as such.

If Denver didn't want to pay for two 1st-rounders next year then you can combine the two and trade up.

The nfl saw TD as a 6th rounder. They also saw Rod Smith as not worthy of being drafted at all :coffee:

NightTrainLayne
05-12-2009, 05:00 PM
The nfl saw TD as a 6th rounder. They also saw Rod Smith as not worthy of being drafted at all :coffee:

That's the reason these arguments are pointless in a nutshell.

Had we picked TD up in the 1st round, or Rod in the 3rd, everyone would have by now forgotten their draft order because they kicked ass.

NUB makes a valid point in asking "why overpay for something just because you feel it's worth more?" That's a good and legitimate point/question. Of course, the other side of the coin is that if you really feel like someone is an all-star, how long do you gamble on them falling before you pull the trigger?

What if someone had picked up TD in the 5th round, and we had thought we were the only team interested? We could argue all we want that he wasn't "worth" a 5th round pick in the NFL and that the other team overpayed, but the reality is that if you like a guy, and you know you want him on your team, you may as well just go get him. Gambling that you can somehow get him when his value is "right" is pointless imo as long as you leave yourself enough room to accomplish your other goals for that draft.

Fan in Exile
05-12-2009, 06:02 PM
*Stats, and then an argument. A poor one, IMO, and one, even if you accept the premise, doesn't exactly put the draft or the decisions in a better light. I.E., if you grant the notion that the 2nd-tier was the core of our woes, then what in the draft helped that? Alphonso Smith is a cover corner, not a tackler (don't show me highlights btw; they are called that for a reason). Ayers is a 4-3 player moving into 3-4. Everyone else is late-round who definitely wont be starting barring injury.

However, I don't buy it. It's hindsight glorification of what was, undoubtedly, our biggest weakness. Just look at the pre-draft vote we had here on these forums: far and away the defensive line was seen as the biggest hole. It still is. Situational stats don't do it for me, sorry.

:elefant::elefant::elefant::elefant::elefant:

elsid13
05-12-2009, 06:34 PM
http://www.indy.com/posts/colts-8-draft-picks-address-several-manpower-issues

The Patriots, a 3-4 team in need of linebacker help, didn't bother taking one until the third round, and that was the only one they took in the draft. (As an aside, he's lost to them for the season already with a knee injury)

The Chiefs, another 3-4 team needing linebackers, didn't draft a single one.

The Steelers, a 3-4 team that loves linebackers and just let Foote go, didn't draft a linebacker.

The Dolphins didn't take a linebacker until round 7.

Unless I miscounted, only 24 linebackers were taken in the entire draft, compared to 30 drafted last season, according to NFL.com.

I don't know who told you that the draft wasn't thin at linebacker, especially for the 3-4, but a lot of 3-4 teams (particularly from the Parcells/Belichick coaching tree) didn't seem to agree with that notion, and neither did Bill Polian.

Most of those team you mention don't really need starters at LB, and are looking for development depth at this point. To say there wasn't any LB worth taking because other teams didn't take them isn't completely true. You need to look at what each team situation is and what they have for depth.

T.K.O.
05-12-2009, 07:44 PM
hmmmmmm........ its getting old all these experts on messege boards who know better how to fix a team than nfl coaches owners and scouts.
downright odd really
ok heres more to chew on.....

Vic Carucci, Senior Columnist, NFL.com
My sense is that the player who will have the greatest impact on how the front seven performs is one of their first-round picks, Robert Ayers, who could line up as an end or an outside linebacker. I can see Dumervil at one outside linebacker spot and Williams at another. I think the real key to the success of this scheme is the outstanding coaching that Mike Nolan is going to provide. He might not have done so well as a head coach, but he is among the game's very best D-coordinators.

it is very VERY possible that our defensive woes were a product of scheme and coaching rather than all our players being talentless hacks:salute:

broncohead
05-12-2009, 08:16 PM
hmmmmmm........ its getting old all these experts on messege boards who know better how to fix a team than nfl coaches owners and scouts.
downright odd really
ok heres more to chew on.....

Vic Carucci, Senior Columnist, NFL.com
My sense is that the player who will have the greatest impact on how the front seven performs is one of their first-round picks, Robert Ayers, who could line up as an end or an outside linebacker. I can see Dumervil at one outside linebacker spot and Williams at another. I think the real key to the success of this scheme is the outstanding coaching that Mike Nolan is going to provide. He might not have done so well as a head coach, but he is among the game's very best D-coordinators.

it is very VERY possible that our defensive woes were a product of scheme and coaching rather than all our players being talentless hacks:salute:

It's funny when people where giving Shanny's drafts crap too. It's the same thing. It's opinion and people can give it. Isn't that what this board is for?

T.K.O.
05-12-2009, 08:21 PM
It's funny when people where giving Shanny's drafts crap too. It's the same thing. It's opinion and people can give it. Isn't that what this board is for?

yep and thats mine....

broncohead
05-12-2009, 09:02 PM
yep and thats mine....

That's great. I think it's just a way to get out of actually having a discution but more power to you. That comment is directed at more posters then just you.

Lonestar
05-12-2009, 09:14 PM
Most of those team you mention don't really need starters at LB, and are looking for development depth at this point. To say there wasn't any LB worth taking because other teams didn't take them isn't completely true. You need to look at what each team situation is and what they have for depth.

If they are taking one for depth that means they are also looking to replace someone down the road.. If mayo falls in their lap they are going to take him..

Just like Moreno falling to us.. you take them in heart beat unless you can trade back a few spots..

DO not kid your self if there is not great starting material out there, there is even LESS backup material to be had....

I thought the article was a very good one stating that even the teams that were looking for LB did not take one when they had the chance because they were not worthy of the pick..

Lonestar
05-12-2009, 09:17 PM
It's funny when people where giving Shanny's drafts crap too. It's the same thing. It's opinion and people can give it. Isn't that what this board is for?


which three drafts other than 2006 and maybe 2008 where worth a crap..

IN fact Which OTHER draft was worth a crap.. other than 3 LB's, one RB and One DE on day one.. all of them were stinkaroo.. almost NO ONE was around long enough to get a second contract..

broncohead
05-12-2009, 09:43 PM
which three drafts other than 2006 and maybe 2008 where worth a crap..

IN fact Which OTHER draft was worth a crap.. other than 3 LB's, one RB and One DE on day one.. all of them were stinkaroo.. almost NO ONE was around long enough to get a second contract..

I agree but now people are saying "McD is 0-0", "wait and see", "the players haven't played a game yet" and so on. I remember after every draft besides the 06 and 08 drafts posters would go crazy wondering what he was thinking. Why can't the same be said now for McD? Posters who give opinions about the draft are bashed for giving an opinion then actually participating in a discution which is what this board is for.

MOtorboat
05-12-2009, 09:51 PM
I agree but now people are saying "McD is 0-0", "wait and see", "the players haven't played a game yet" and so on. I remember after every draft besides the 06 and 08 drafts posters would go crazy wondering what he was thinking. Why can't the same be said now for McD? Posters who give opinions about the draft are bashed for giving an opinion then actually participating in a discution which is what this board is for.

Because there was so much history with Shanahan. We knew that he had a history of defensive, and wide receiver busts. We knew that he struggled picking defense, and we knew that he tended to overthink himself.

We don't know anything about McDaniels. It looks like if he sees his guy, he's going after him no matter what (see, Smith, Quinn, Brandstater)...

But, again, there's just a lot of unknowns...that's why there's a lot of "wait and see" attitudes.

broncohead
05-12-2009, 10:05 PM
Because there was so much history with Shanahan. We knew that he had a history of defensive, and wide receiver busts. We knew that he struggled picking defense, and we knew that he tended to overthink himself.

We don't know anything about McDaniels. It looks like if he sees his guy, he's going after him no matter what (see, Smith, Quinn, Brandstater)...

But, again, there's just a lot of unknowns...that's why there's a lot of "wait and see" attitudes.

Good points. Also with all the scouting reports and the way the draft picks/FAs have played on the field I think it's possible to give a legit argument about how they will perform.

WARHORSE
05-13-2009, 12:28 AM
Yes of course, but that kind of ends when you start losing on the trades big time. I.E., "getting your guy" does have limitations. It would be fair to say those limitations are different for all of us; but trading down coming into a stronger draft, then turning around and trading thirds to reach on a blocking tight end, seems an awfully backward way of going about getting your guys (particularly when Seattle bundled a 3rd+4th, jumped back into the 2nd round and got the guy they wanted as if nothing even happened).


Well, I guess it depends on what your plan is, and what your role on the team is as well. Bowlen gave him the power, and he has a plan that he stuck to.

Whether hes smart or dumb....:confused:....we will find out soon enough.

Lonestar
05-13-2009, 02:25 AM
I agree but now people are saying "McD is 0-0", "wait and see", "the players haven't played a game yet" and so on. I remember after every draft besides the 06 and 08 drafts posters would go crazy wondering what he was thinking. Why can't the same be said now for McD? Posters who give opinions about the draft are bashed for giving an opinion then actually participating in a discution which is what this board is for.



And many did not question the draft.. It just sees that lists of the "fans" are questioning it with out having a Clue on what the agenda is/was.


with mike we all knew he was going to take a WR, RB, LB and a few OLINE types late in the second day.. Most folks thought mike was ONE or TWO players away from the next Lombardi..

Now we have not a clue as to who was drafted and for what reason..

T.K.O.
05-13-2009, 02:34 PM
its all good WE'RE SAVED......check THIS out

Everette Pedescleaux (born January 19, 1985) is an American football player. He was recently signed by the Denver Broncos.[1] Pedescleaux projects as a 3-4 defensive end in the NFL and was considered a “sleeper” for the 2009 NFL Draft,[2] but yet went undrafted.

He attended the University of Northern Iowa, where he has played in the defensive line for the Panthers. Pedescleaux had 54 tackles, 11.5 tackle-for-loss and 6.5 quarterback sacks for the Panthers in 2008 and was named All-Missouri Valley Football Conference First-Team.
:defense::elefant::defense:

oh yeah and he's 6'6"

Lonestar
05-13-2009, 03:01 PM
its all good WE'RE SAVED......check THIS out

Everette Pedescleaux (born January 19, 1985) is an American football player. He was recently signed by the Denver Broncos.[1] Pedescleaux projects as a 3-4 defensive end in the NFL and was considered a “sleeper” for the 2009 NFL Draft,[2] but yet went undrafted.

He attended the University of Northern Iowa, where he has played in the defensive line for the Panthers. Pedescleaux had 54 tackles, 11.5 tackle-for-loss and 6.5 quarterback sacks for the Panthers in 2008 and was named All-Missouri Valley Football Conference First-Team.
:defense::elefant::defense:

oh yeah and he's 6'6"

I suspect there may another GEMs or TWO in the UDFA we brought in.. If nothing else some good rotational players for the future..

They may not be studs but NE only has 2-3 on their squad the rest are very good role players..

T.K.O.
05-13-2009, 05:37 PM
another interesting quote from mcD pre draft.....everyone shouldnt act so surprised by our draft....

At almost every opportunity to throw the Broncos defense of 2008 under any passing Greyhound, first-year Broncos coach Josh McDaniels has instead offered something on the order of:

"We want to make the whole team better."

Good thing. Because with a draft board full of hopefuls staring them in the face, a closer look at the Broncos' special teams numbers from the past year reveals almost as big a job as repairing a defense that has surrendered 400 points in back-to-back seasons.

hopefully both sides are improved,and we sweep the bolts so we wont have to hear anymore hocculi stuff....:D

broncohead
05-13-2009, 09:02 PM
And many did not question the draft.. It just sees that lists of the "fans" are questioning it with out having a Clue on what the agenda is/was.


with mike we all knew he was going to take a WR, RB, LB and a few OLINE types late in the second day.. Most folks thought mike was ONE or TWO players away from the next Lombardi..

Now we have not a clue as to who was drafted and for what reason..

I don't see the difference. A current Shanny draft you still don't know how the rookies adjust to the NFL same with McD draft.