Thread: 2015 Senior Bowl

Originally Posted by underrated29

If we can keep DT, knighton, and sign Vernon Davis...I'd be in favor of taking perryman in 1. And trading up for Drummond in 2 (using whatever picks necessary this year or next), haouli Kekaha at 3 and using our remaining comp picks on OL I'd be just fine.

I've been liking the idea of upgrading Orange Julius to Vernon Davis ever since you first suggested it, but Rotoworld says he has another year on his contract. Otherwise, that sounds really good; we get the legit starting Mike I've wanted for years, and it sounds like he'd be just as good a 3-4 ILB OR OLB, and we can still fix the line with top talent.

As far as trading up, I normally dislike it for the reason Ziggy stated: Lottery odds ALWAYS suck, but each ticket bought multiplies those awful odds. That said, a divisional round team in a weak draft is stuck with the dregs of the dregs UNLESS they trade up, and our roster's at or close to championship level, so we need to find the one or two rookie starters to get over the top NOW before the ones we've got are cap casulaties and retirees. Some defended picking Schofield in the 3rd last year because he might develop into a solid player in a few years: But all that happened THIS year was Manning got a year OLDER.

Originally Posted by Jaded

The Broncos don't draft as well as Newsome, he's had 2 pick that I can remember that have missed, the S from Florida and the LB from Kansas St, the Broncos haven't had that kind of success. I'd rather see them trade those 2nd-3rd rounders they struggle with to target a better player.

From what I remember they tried to trade up last year for Mosley, forgetting about Roby, for this point he wasn't an option; would you rather have the Latimer's and Schoefield's or that potential DRotY?

Right now I'd rather have Roby, Latimer and Schofield. Time will tell. Roby looks like a future star at CB. I think Schofield fits right in to the ZBS. Latimer was playing behind a ton of talent. Welker will be gone next year and he'll have his chance. I always give the draft at least 3 years before I start to judge the picks.

I'm not holding my breath on Schofield; fully a DOZEN OTs were drafted higher, and he was inactive EVERY game, despite Clark and Cornick floundering so badly at RT we were forced to move our All Pro G there and seek a way to fill the huge hole left in his wake. Unless we're throwing in the towel on winning a SB with Manning, we don't have time to fill existing holes with guys who may or may not develop into starters in 2-3 years. Latimer's a similar story; maybe that lottery ticket will pay off eventually, but in the mean time a dozen offensive linemen went between him and Schofield, including:

Justin Britt, who started every game at RT for Seattle,
Jack Mewhort, who started all but 2 games at LG for Indy,
Trai Turner, who had the fastest G 40 time at last years combine and started 11 games at RG for Carolina,
Gabe Jackson, who was on every list I saw of top guards in a draft deep at guard, but lasted till the middle of the 3rd round and started 12 games for Oakland this year, plus
Bryan Stork went AFTER SCHOFIELD and started nearly every game at C for NE.

We could've had the starting RT from one SB team AND starting C from the other; instead, we took Latimer, then drafted a RT who didn't even dress—and most weeks neither did Latimer! I can't argue with Roby given his play and Talibs fragility, age and price tag, but looking back at the season, it's clear RT and C were holes we'd have done better addressing with a couple SB starters instead of a season-long inactive and a guy we PSed. If we had, they might be starting a SB for US now. Really hope we get more instant gratification next year. http://espn.go.com/blog/denver-bronc...ok-at-14-draft

Originally Posted by Joel

I'm not holding my breath on Schofield; fully a DOZEN OTs were drafted higher, and he was inactive EVERY game, despite Clark and Cornick floundering so badly at RT we were forced to move our All Pro G there and seek a way to fill the huge hole left in his wake. Unless we're throwing in the towel on winning a SB with Manning, we don't have time to fill existing holes with guys who may or may not develop into starters in 2-3 years. Latimer's a similar story; maybe that lottery ticket will pay off eventually, but in the mean time a dozen offensive linemen went between him and Schofield, including:

Justin Britt, who started every game at RT for Seattle,
Jack Mewhort, who started all but 2 games at LG for Indy,
Trai Turner, who had the fastest G 40 time at last years combine and started 11 games at RG for Carolina,
Gabe Jackson, who was on every list I saw of top guards in a draft deep at guard, but lasted till the middle of the 3rd round and started 12 games for Oakland this year, plus
Bryan Stork went AFTER SCHOFIELD and started nearly every game at C for NE.

We could've had the starting RT from one SB team AND starting C from the other; instead, we took Latimer, then drafted a RT who didn't even dress—and most weeks neither did Latimer! I can't argue with Roby given his play and Talibs fragility, age and price tag, but looking back at the season, it's clear RT and C were holes we'd have done better addressing with a couple SB starters instead of a season-long inactive and a guy we PSed. If we had, they might be starting a SB for US now. Really hope we get more instant gratification next year. http://espn.go.com/blog/denver-bronc...ok-at-14-draft

Complaining about Latimer is silly. He was playing behind pro bowlers. If he had gone to a team like Oakland with no talent, he probably would have been starting. That's one of the reasons you give draft picks at least 3 years. By your logic, Aaron Rodgers was a poor pick because he sat for 3 years. Now he's the league MVP. Give this draft some time before you piss on it Joel. In 2 years, Paradis, Schofield, and Latimer may all be quality starters.

Originally Posted by Ziggy

Complaining about Latimer is silly. He was playing behind pro bowlers. If he had gone to a team like Oakland with no talent, he probably would have been starting. That's one of the reasons you give draft picks at least 3 years. By your logic, Aaron Rodgers was a poor pick because he sat for 3 years. Now he's the league MVP. Give this draft some time before you piss on it Joel. In 2 years, Paradis, Schofield, and Latimer may all be quality starters.

Maybe, but in two years we won't have Manning. Latimer playing behind three Pro Bowlers doesn't vindicate the pick, but underscores its flaws: Instead of a RT AND C starting next weeks SB, we shuffled Clark and Cornick till BOTH proved useless and we had to slide Vasquez over hoping Ramirez finally learned to play G better than he played C and Montgomery could fill his spot there: So we could back THREE Pro Bowlers with a game day inactive who might be good in 2-3 years—or not; every lottery ticket's just that.

We don't have time to wait for our 3rd round RT and 7th round C to season, and could've had a SB starter at BOTH spots: All we had to do was TAKE THEM. If Stork can protect Brady, he can protect Manning. Sure, I get that we need to find Welkers successor now, but there's another draft coming up in a couple months, and the consensus we'll take a RT and/or interior linemen THEN; doesn't that seem a little backward? Especially since it was the LAST (two) drafts that were deep in offensive linemen?

I think Latimer will be like DT.

No idea about Schoffield or Paradis.

And I honestly believe Roby will allow is to cut Taliban next year.

Originally Posted by Joel

Maybe, but in two years we won't have Manning. Latimer playing behind three Pro Bowlers doesn't vindicate the pick, but underscores its flaws: Instead of a RT AND C starting next weeks SB, we shuffled Clark and Cornick till BOTH proved useless and we had to slide Vasquez over hoping Ramirez finally learned to play G better than he played C and Montgomery could fill his spot there: So we could back THREE Pro Bowlers with a game day inactive who might be good in 2-3 years—or not; every lottery ticket's just that.

We don't have time to wait for our 3rd round RT and 7th round C to season, and could've had a SB starter at BOTH spots: All we had to do was TAKE THEM. If Stork can protect Brady, he can protect Manning. Sure, I get that we need to find Welkers successor now, but there's another draft coming up in a couple months, and the consensus we'll take a RT and/or interior linemen THEN; doesn't that seem a little backward? Especially since it was the LAST (two) drafts that were deep in offensive linemen?

Joel,

Please show me where you posted before last year's draft that Britt and Stork would be starting for this year's Super Bowl teams.

People often forget that hindsight is 20/20 and it is much easier to "predict" how things should be after seeing the results.

If you are that brilliant, can you please let me know who Denver should draft this year that will be an instant starter in next year's Super Bowl?

IT'S A ******* CRAP SHOOT DUDE!!!!!!!!!!!

Originally Posted by MHCBill

Joel,

Please show me where you posted before last year's draft that Britt and Stork would be starting for this year's Super Bowl teams.

People often forget that hindsight is 20/20 and it is much easier to "predict" how things should be after seeing the results.

If you are that brilliant, can you please let me know who Denver should draft this year that will be an instant starter in next year's Super Bowl?

IT'S A ******* CRAP SHOOT DUDE!!!!!!!!!!!

That's a fair point, but we knew we needed a G, C and/or RT, and DIDN'T need a 4th WR to go with 2 Pro Bowlers and a highly productive FA signing who became our THIRD Pro Bowler this year. So why draft even the best WR to sit behind at least 2 Pro Bowlers all year if it means passing over all the top linemen we NEED NOW? Lotteries have long odds, sure, but "you can't win it if you're not in it."

Drafting a C at the END of the SEVENTH round isn't a crap shoot, it's dreaming, and waiting till the end of the THIRD to draft an OT in a deep lineman draft isn't much better. Tackles are valuable enough and last years draft was deep enough at linemen that we could pretty much take it for granted ANY OT who lasted till the 3rd rounds penultimate pick (practically a 4th) wasn't all that hot, and certainly wasn't going to fill an existing hole immediately. I'd probably do worse than most forecasting good picks, but a DOZEN other OTs went first, and Gabe Jacksons name was on everyones lips at G.

So we took a WR despite near certainty garbage time or multiple injuries were the only way he'd play, an OT rejected 4 times by everyone who needed one, and a C two spots above Mr. Irrelevant. Then spent an entire season shuffling our line around almost every other week and wondering why it just kept right on sucking. Elway's hit a lot of homers, but he struck out on this one.

Everyone is a genius after the draft is over.

Originally Posted by daveaitken18

I think Latimer will be like DT.

No idea about Schoffield or Paradis.

And I honestly believe Roby will allow is to cut Taliban next year.

Latimer IMHO will surpass D. Thomas, that is one reason I feel that retaining Thomas could be folly, especially given the sheer number of missed attempts he's had.

Schofield will probably be kicked inside to guard where he is a better fit and Paradis will get a chance to compete.

Roby I think will continue to improve, but I highly doubt that he would be the reason we cut ties with Talib who just made the Pro-Bowl. Roby will be the reason we don't re-sign Chris Harris.

Originally Posted by Ziggy

Everyone is a genius after the draft is over.

I am usually a genius long before, but thank you for recognizing it Zigs!

Originally Posted by Joel

That's a fair point, but we knew we needed a G, C and/or RT, and DIDN'T need a 4th WR to go with 2 Pro Bowlers and a highly productive FA signing who became our THIRD Pro Bowler this year. So why draft even the best WR to sit behind at least 2 Pro Bowlers all year if it means passing over all the top linemen we NEED NOW? Lotteries have long odds, sure, but "you can't win it if you're not in it."

Drafting a C at the END of the SEVENTH round isn't a crap shoot, it's dreaming, and waiting till the end of the THIRD to draft an OT in a deep lineman draft isn't much better. Tackles are valuable enough and last years draft was deep enough at linemen that we could pretty much take it for granted ANY OT who lasted till the 3rd rounds penultimate pick (practically a 4th) wasn't all that hot, and certainly wasn't going to fill an existing hole immediately. I'd probably do worse than most forecasting good picks, but a DOZEN other OTs went first, and Gabe Jacksons name was on everyones lips at G.

So we took a WR despite near certainty garbage time or multiple injuries were the only way he'd play, an OT rejected 4 times by everyone who needed one, and a C two spots above Mr. Irrelevant. Then spent an entire season shuffling our line around almost every other week and wondering why it just kept right on sucking. Elway's hit a lot of homers, but he struck out on this one.

Please review what I bolded and underlined, then see Tom Nalen (I guess 6th round wouldn't have been "dreaming'.)

We can go in circles Joel, but I don't want to. Latimer was who the Front Office had graded highest at that point. I feel that you cannot just look to draft for need, even during a short window with a shot at a championship. Great teams build through the draft and draft their highest graded players. Sometimes they're right, sometimes they're wrong. Either way, it's a crap shoot.

Drafting players you or me or John Elway predict as "sure fire" starters from Day 1 on a championship level team have just as equal a chance of missing as they do hitting. However, when that is your draft philosophy you now still have a position of need and missed the opportunity to draft a better player when you miss.

Originally Posted by Lancane

Latimer IMHO will surpass D. Thomas, that is one reason I feel that retaining Thomas could be folly, especially given the sheer number of missed attempts he's had.

Schofield will probably be kicked inside to guard where he is a better fit and Paradis will get a chance to compete.

Roby I think will continue to improve, but I highly doubt that he would be the reason we cut ties with Talib who just made the Pro-Bowl. Roby will be the reason we don't re-sign Chris Harris.

Ummmmmm... we already re-signed Harris.

Originally Posted by MHCBill

Ummmmmm... we already re-signed Harris.

Sorry misspoke (typed) in this instance...my bad (I don't know why I thought Harris). But originally I do believe that Denver hoped that Roby would allow them to eventually part with Talib, he is entering the second year of a six year, 57 million dollar contract - 26 million of which is guaranteed. He not only came in and didn't miss a beat, he made the Pro Bowl - makes it sort of hard to part with him. But Roby is bound to be a starter, sooner rather then later in my humble opinion and that makes it harder because we have no leeway with Denver inking Harris to a new five year deal.

Originally Posted by MHCBill

Please review what I bolded and underlined, then see Tom Nalen (I guess 6th round wouldn't have been "dreaming'.)

Dreams occasionally come true, but it's a bad idea to pin the next SB on that.

Originally Posted by MHCBill

We can go in circles Joel, but I don't want to. Latimer was who the Front Office had graded highest at that point. I feel that you cannot just look to draft for need, even during a short window with a shot at a championship. Great teams build through the draft and draft their highest graded players. Sometimes they're right, sometimes they're wrong. Either way, it's a crap shoot.

Drafting players you or me or John Elway predict as "sure fire" starters from Day 1 on a championship level team have just as equal a chance of missing as they do hitting. However, when that is your draft philosophy you now still have a position of need and missed the opportunity to draft a better player when you miss.

There's no one-size fits all draft philosophy; neither Best Player Available NOR drafting for need is always the right approach: It depends where the team is.

Playoff teams should draft needs for several reasons:

1) Playoff teams get the best player LEFT, because 20 NFL scouting teams won't drop the ball on the Best Player AVAILABLE. The slim lotto chance of a HoFer is negligible for playoff teams.

2) Even if they DO find a hidden gem at the bottom of a round, they've got so many great players there's a good chance he'll ride the bench behind Pro Bowlers (e.g. Latimer.)

3) All those existing great players leave just a few holes keeping them from championship, so they need the "best player available" AT THOSE FEW POSITIONS, not a 4th Pro Bowl WR who can't help now.

It's totally different with <6 wins, because those teams:

1) TRULY have their pick of the Best Player AVAILABLE regardless of position, because few if any teams are ahead of them (and those few may screw up and draft "needs.") Just don't screw up scouting.

2) Have painfully earned and (hopefully) rare top picks they can't afford to waste on a less than elite player just because he fills a given need better than anyone, especially since

3) Dog teams have huge needs EVERYWHERE, so "prioritizing" them is like picking an organ to lose; they have far more gaping holes than picks: Take the Best Available and take it for granted he fills a need.

With an awful team, taking the top of ones board is almost a must, because that's the only way to get the Andrew Lucks and Von Millers to build franchises and dynasties, and unless they PLAN to be 2-14 for the next five years, they won't get many more chances for guys like that. Do that for 2-3 drafts and suddenly we're looking at a 10-6 team; they're not getting top picks anymore, but that's OK, because they've got a young, elite franchise core under contract and just "need" to fill in the few missing pieces in their championship puzzle.

Playoff teams can't do that, because unless they spend a bunch of picks to trade up, they don't get Von Miller or Andrew Luck, and don't want to bench one All Pro for another anyway. Their key stars also aren't healthy 24-year-olds with a couple years left on a cheap rookie deal and a tender or compensatory pick after that: Many of them only have 2-3 more years left playing for ANYONE. They need to fill their few remaining holes and prevent pending ones with the best guys to do it (even if they aren't the best overall) so they stay on top.

Guess which boat we're in? Hint: A bunch of rookies we needed to reach the SB got there without us, while Latimer sat on the bench behind three Pro Bowlers, Schofield couldn't even get the starting RT after we benched TWO others, and Paradis was on the practice squad all year. They may have been the most talented guys left at #31 and worse, but didn't help.