Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 83

Thread: If Dalvin Cook falls to 20, he may be the best athlete in the draft.

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Jupiter, Fla.
    Adopted Bronco:
    Rubin Carter
    Posts
    1,763

    Default If Dalvin Cook falls to 20, he may be the best athlete in the draft.

    He may be the closest thing to Marshall Faulk I have seen.



    He has unreal breakaway speed. He is powerful between the tackles. He is a more dynamic version of Devonta Freeman imo. Ironically they both graduated from the same HS and college.

    May be too good to pass up. Of course I doubt he will last to 20, but what a player he would he for the offense.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Sturgis, SD
    Adopted Bronco:
    Greg Dulcich
    Posts
    4,265

    Default

    We need a stud on offense even if it's not Cook. BPA is the general rule of thumb, but our offense needs a boost. Just score points!

    Stupidity is also a gift of God, but one mustn't misuse it. ---- Pope John Paul II

  3. #3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bronco4ever View Post
    We need a stud on offense even if it's not Cook. BPA is the general rule of thumb, but our offense needs a boost. Just score points!
    There's a big difference between "Best Player AVAILABLE" and "Best Player LEFT at #20." Usually, if a player "drops" that far without HUGE red flags, he's not that drafts best nor even one of its best, just pretty good. That's still fine if he plugs one of the few holes that aborted a title run, but not to sit behind a young starter who's made a Pro Bowl AND a promising second-year player.

    The problem with RB by Committee is that teams need great RBs on the field producing, not spelled by lesser talents (remember our opening SB drive marching downfield until CJ needed a rest, but IMMEDIATELY sputtering to a halt when Hillman took over?) And teams lucky/perceptive enough to find MULTIPLE great RBs can't keep them all under contract in the cap era. Most RB-by-committee is less to maintain "fresh legs" than to reveal which (if any) of the teams RBs is starting quality.

    What our offense NEEDS more than anything is stud BLOCKERS to open holes for our RBs and protect our young QBs >2 seconds (or even >1.) Outside the top half (preferably top third) of the draw, BPA is a sucker bet that only yields the "best" of the REST. And until the first round of FA cuts and signings, we can't be sure what our draft needs are anyway, because they're certain to change as we add to and subtract from the roster BEFORE the draft.
    Oh, valid point. I thought you meant all starters, you should take the time to be more descriptive, don't be shy. Jaded

    Never confuse frustrated candor and disloyal malice.
    Love can't be coerced. —Me

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Jupiter, Fla.
    Adopted Bronco:
    Rubin Carter
    Posts
    1,763

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joel View Post
    There's a big difference between "Best Player AVAILABLE" and "Best Player LEFT at #20." Usually, if a player "drops" that far without HUGE red flags, he's not that drafts best nor even one of its best, just pretty good. That's still fine if he plugs one of the few holes that aborted a title run, but not to sit behind a young starter who's made a Pro Bowl AND a promising second-year player.

    The problem with RB by Committee is that teams need great RBs on the field producing, not spelled by lesser talents (remember our opening SB drive marching downfield until CJ needed a rest, but IMMEDIATELY sputtering to a halt when Hillman took over?) And teams lucky/perceptive enough to find MULTIPLE great RBs can't keep them all under contract in the cap era. Most RB-by-committee is less to maintain "fresh legs" than to reveal which (if any) of the teams RBs is starting quality.

    What our offense NEEDS more than anything is stud BLOCKERS to open holes for our RBs and protect our young QBs >2 seconds (or even >1.) Outside the top half (preferably top third) of the draw, BPA is a sucker bet that only yields the "best" of the REST. And until the first round of FA cuts and signings, we can't be sure what our draft needs are anyway, because they're certain to change as we add to and subtract from the roster BEFORE the draft.
    Pretty sure quality OLinemen can be drafted in the second round or third round along with free agency. If the Broncos can land a Marshall Faulk type of back, it would be too good to pass up.

    Running back by committee seemed to work really well with the Falcons and Pats. They could easily work that with the Broncos. Also, I do not think CJ has the durability to carry the load like an Ezekiel Elliott. He has demonstrated that he is injury prone. He is a good productive runner. I am not convinced Booker is the guy, who lasted till the 4th round. I guess for a reason right?

    If there is a dynamic playmaker at 20, I think you take that guy. There is NO guarantee that an OLineman picked in the first round is going to be good. George Foster?

    If Cook drops (I doubt he will) then he is the pick imo.

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Broncoknight30 View Post
    Pretty sure quality OLinemen can be drafted in the second round or third round along with free agency.
    Anything's possible, but the next time we do that will be the FIRST. Either way, we need MULTIPLE quality "OL" (i.e. OTs AND Gs, which have VERY different draft and FA values) far more than a 3rd RB.

    Quote Originally Posted by Broncoknight30 View Post
    If the Broncos can land a Marshall Faulk type of back, it would be too good to pass up.
    Tell that to Barry Sanders' Lions, Adrian Petersons Vikings or LaDainian Tomlinsons Chargers. The Colts DID land a Marshall Faulk-type of back but STILL only made the playoffs half the time, and only WON there a quarter of the time. Then they got Jeff Saturday to go with Tarik Glenn and Manning, and suddenly Edgerrin James was a star: Too bad he left the year before their SB and never did much again.

    Quote Originally Posted by Broncoknight30 View Post
    Running back by committee seemed to work really well with the Falcons and Pats. They could easily work that with the Broncos. Also, I do not think CJ has the durability to carry the load like an Ezekiel Elliott. He has demonstrated that he is injury prone. He is a good productive runner. I am not convinced Booker is the guy, who lasted till the 4th round. I guess for a reason right?
    NO running works "well" for NE*; they were 25th in average this year, 29th last year, 9th in 2014 and 2013, then 17th, then 24th. Their TOTALS look good because regularly winning 12+ games means lots of second half running to kill the clock, but it's a classic case of "they run because they win, not win because they run." Atlanta ran no better til 2016, when Freeman got 2/3 carries and Matty Ice himself got the 3rd most carries (a whopping 35.) That's not much of a committee.

    Anderson's no more "injury-prone" than Manning: Crap blocking gets you get hit a lot, and RBs tend to anyway; those with crappy blocking just get hit MORE because they must break tackles just to reach the line and rarely get walkoff TDs nor the luxury of running out of bounds after 20 yds. Ever Denver RB since Mike Anderson's been "injury-prone;" at some point you have to stop looking at the succession of RBs or strength and conditioning coaches and start looking elsewhere.

    Quote Originally Posted by Broncoknight30 View Post
    If there is a dynamic playmaker at 20, I think you take that guy. There is NO guarantee that an OLineman picked in the first round is going to be good. George Foster?
    If there's a dynamic playmaker at 20 roughly half the scout teams in the NFL screwed up BADLY. There's no GUARANTEE a "dynamic playmaker" nor ANYONE taking at 20 nor ANYWHERE won't bust—but if I'm forced to wait for all the top talent to go and then reach, I'd at least like to gamble on somone I can USE. Ray and Roby are good and Sly's OK, but have ANY of Elways 1st rounders since Von delivered 1st round production?

    No, and much of it may not even be their fault: It's hard to make Pro Bowls on the bench behind TWO other guys ALREADY doing that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Broncoknight30 View Post
    If Cook drops (I doubt he will) then he is the pick imo.
    Fair enough; everyone's entitled. But the only way he drops is if he's NOT "the pick." Our offense hasn't consistently failed for three years because it lacked playmakers like Manning, DT, Sanders and Anderson: It failed because it's hard to make plays on your backside. There's only one way to change that.
    Oh, valid point. I thought you meant all starters, you should take the time to be more descriptive, don't be shy. Jaded

    Never confuse frustrated candor and disloyal malice.
    Love can't be coerced. —Me

  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joel View Post
    There's a big difference between "Best Player AVAILABLE" and "Best Player LEFT at #20." Usually, if a player "drops" that far without HUGE red flags, he's not that drafts best nor even one of its best, just pretty good. That's still fine if he plugs one of the few holes that aborted a title run, but not to sit behind a young starter who's made a Pro Bowl AND a promising second-year player.

    The problem with RB by Committee is that teams need great RBs on the field producing, not spelled by lesser talents (remember our opening SB drive marching downfield until CJ needed a rest, but IMMEDIATELY sputtering to a halt when Hillman took over?) And teams lucky/perceptive enough to find MULTIPLE great RBs can't keep them all under contract in the cap era. Most RB-by-committee is less to maintain "fresh legs" than to reveal which (if any) of the teams RBs is starting quality.

    What our offense NEEDS more than anything is stud BLOCKERS to open holes for our RBs and protect our young QBs >2 seconds (or even >1.) Outside the top half (preferably top third) of the draw, BPA is a sucker bet that only yields the "best" of the REST. And until the first round of FA cuts and signings, we can't be sure what our draft needs are anyway, because they're certain to change as we add to and subtract from the roster BEFORE the draft.
    Tyler Eifert dropped to Cincinnati but he was ranked as one of the best prospects in the draft. In recent years some great RB prospects dropped to the second round. ODB was the best talent in the draft, but he dropped.

    Elite talents to drop in the draft. Eifert dropped because there were so many great talents at different positions (I think cornerback was huge that year) and ODB dropped because of weed and he was immature. RBs dropped because of the position decline, but I think they're being taken earlier again now that people realized LeVeon Bell should not have been a second round player.

    There's some context there.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaded View Post
    Y’all know I’m an OL Groupie but I think Jeudy is going to be worth missing out on a T, knock on wood.

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Von Kinger View Post
    Tyler Eifert dropped to Cincinnati but he was ranked as one of the best prospects in the draft. In recent years some great RB prospects dropped to the second round. ODB was the best talent in the draft, but he dropped.

    Elite talents to drop in the draft. Eifert dropped because there were so many great talents at different positions (I think cornerback was huge that year) and ODB dropped because of weed and he was immature. RBs dropped because of the position decline, but I think they're being taken earlier again now that people realized LeVeon Bell should not have been a second round player.

    There's some context there.
    Yeah, I thought about RBs being relegated to a complementary position and dropping for precisely that reason, so it's more likely, but only relatively (and I'd still rather have a G, who've been in same boat to a greater degree for even longer; I'm hoping but not expecting we spend money on a good FA OT and look for Gs in the 2nd or 3rd, where there's still a good chance of finding one of starting quality.)

    It's still only RELATIVELY more likely though, which is to say, not very. We're far from the only team that's bought into the "ALWAYS draft the BPA even if he's someone you can't POSSIBLY use" philosophy, so the chances over HALF THE LEAGUE leaves any generational or even Pro Bowl talent lying around loose at #20 are small. You're basically hoping that a LOT of scouting teams missed VERY badly, or that it's a generational DRAFT full of a COUPLE DOZEN All Pros.

    As demonstrated when I went through two decades of drafts, one from the '90s and then the most recent ten years, that's not realistic: There's rarely enough Pro Bowl players in an ENTIRE draft to fill its 1st round, and I mean even the guys who have one flukey year that earns them a SINGLE Pro Bowl vote, not just perennial All Pros. On average, there's 25-35 of those guys, and the chances of getting one in the top half of the 1st are about even, but drop to 33% after pick #16.

    Sure, it happens, and will continue—OCCASIONALLY. But pouncing on a "can't miss" "dynamic playmaker" because he "dropped" to 20? That's agent talk, not GM talk.
    Oh, valid point. I thought you meant all starters, you should take the time to be more descriptive, don't be shy. Jaded

    Never confuse frustrated candor and disloyal malice.
    Love can't be coerced. —Me

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joel View Post
    Yeah, I thought about RBs being relegated to a complementary position and dropping for precisely that reason, so it's more likely, but only relatively (and I'd still rather have a G, who've been in same boat to a greater degree for even longer; I'm hoping but not expecting we spend money on a good FA OT and look for Gs in the 2nd or 3rd, where there's still a good chance of finding one of starting quality.)

    It's still only RELATIVELY more likely though, which is to say, not very. We're far from the only team that's bought into the "ALWAYS draft the BPA even if he's someone you can't POSSIBLY use" philosophy, so the chances over HALF THE LEAGUE leaves any generational or even Pro Bowl talent lying around loose at #20 are small. You're basically hoping that a LOT of scouting teams missed VERY badly, or that it's a generational DRAFT full of a COUPLE DOZEN All Pros.

    As demonstrated when I went through two decades of drafts, one from the '90s and then the most recent ten years, that's not realistic: There's rarely enough Pro Bowl players in an ENTIRE draft to fill its 1st round, and I mean even the guys who have one flukey year that earns them a SINGLE Pro Bowl vote, not just perennial All Pros. On average, there's 25-35 of those guys, and the chances of getting one in the top half of the 1st are about even, but drop to 33% after pick #16.

    Sure, it happens, and will continue—OCCASIONALLY. But pouncing on a "can't miss" "dynamic playmaker" because he "dropped" to 20? That's agent talk, not GM talk.
    Those guys do drop a bit more than we think, though. That OL from LSU dropped -for a bizarre reason- as well as Dez Bryant. Dez was the consensus BPA. Zeitler is a guard from Cincy who dropped to us. DeCastro also dropped at that point, too. Each draft is different, and that's a strange thing to me, but it is true.

    There was a draft class with Cam Newton, Julio Jones, Von Mother ******* Miller, AJ Green, Dareus, and Patrick Peterson. A lot of those guys would be the top guy in most classes. Sometimes you get to go donkey balls with all the elite guys. Other times...the first pick is Luke Joekel....

    Travis Frederiech, the C from Dallas was overdrafted by Dallas. He's really good, but they took him well before anyone thought he should go. I chalk it up more along the lines as dumb luck that he worked out for Dallas, but that's an example.

    Also, the PB way of going isn't the best route. You can be an above average player and not make the PB. Fletcher, the ILB for the Redskins was on par with Brian Urlacher for most of their respective careers. Urlacher didn't miss too many PB's, but Fletcher did.

    And let's be honest, even just an above average guy out of the first round is nice. There's so many injuries/busts/guy drafted to the wrong scheme or team/ that it's really hard to turn away a good, solid, but unspectacular player.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaded View Post
    Y’all know I’m an OL Groupie but I think Jeudy is going to be worth missing out on a T, knock on wood.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    West Coast
    Adopted Bronco:
    Steve Atwater
    Posts
    4,864

    Default

    OL is their top priority.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Jupiter, Fla.
    Adopted Bronco:
    Rubin Carter
    Posts
    1,763

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magnificent Seven View Post
    OL is their top priority.
    Yeah, but that does not mean they need to use their first pick on an ol

  11. The Following 4 Users High Fived Broncoknight30 For This Post:


  12. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    6-3/215
    Adopted Bronco:
    Mighty Quinn
    Posts
    36,769

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joel View Post
    There's a big difference between "Best Player AVAILABLE" and "Best Player LEFT at #20." Usually, if a player "drops" that far without HUGE red flags, he's not that drafts best nor even one of its best, just pretty good. That's still fine if he plugs one of the few holes that aborted a title run, but not to sit behind a young starter who's made a Pro Bowl AND a promising second-year player.

    The problem with RB by Committee is that teams need great RBs on the field producing, not spelled by lesser talents (remember our opening SB drive marching downfield until CJ needed a rest, but IMMEDIATELY sputtering to a halt when Hillman took over?) And teams lucky/perceptive enough to find MULTIPLE great RBs can't keep them all under contract in the cap era. Most RB-by-committee is less to maintain "fresh legs" than to reveal which (if any) of the teams RBs is starting quality.

    What our offense NEEDS more than anything is stud BLOCKERS to open holes for our RBs and protect our young QBs >2 seconds (or even >1.) Outside the top half (preferably top third) of the draw, BPA is a sucker bet that only yields the "best" of the REST. And until the first round of FA cuts and signings, we can't be sure what our draft needs are anyway, because they're certain to change as we add to and subtract from the roster BEFORE the draft.
    Are you going to explain the big difference between "Best player AVAILABLE" and "Best player LEFT at #20"? Cause it sounds kinda stupid and pointless.
    "Tuning ... into each other ... lift all higher”
    “I’m just different!”

    Sign Garbage Minshew.

    Draft
    1st round— Cooper Dejean CB
    2nd round— Jack Sawyer OLB
    3rd round— Will Shipley RB
    4th round— Ricky Pearsall WR
    5th round— Ladd McKonkey WR
    6th round— Cash Jones RB
    7th round— Carson Steele RB

  13. The Following User High Fived Simple Jaded For This Post:


  14. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    West Coast
    Adopted Bronco:
    Steve Atwater
    Posts
    4,864

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Broncoknight30 View Post
    Yeah, but that does not mean they need to use their first pick on an ol
    True.

  15. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Denver
    Adopted Bronco:
    Dangerous Freedom Lock
    Posts
    25,132

    Default

    Cook doesnt remind me of Faulk at all, in fact Mccaffrey does more.

  16. The Following User High Fived ShaneFalco For This Post:


  17. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Broncoknight30 View Post
    Yeah, but that does not mean they need to use their first pick on an ol
    It sure doesn't mean they need to spend it on a #3 RB.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jaded View Post
    Are you going to explain the big difference between "Best player AVAILABLE" and "Best player LEFT at #20"? Cause it sounds kinda stupid and pointless.
    The best player AVAILABLE is the best in the draft: You can't draft what was never there. Unfortunately the best, 2nd best and even 5th best is almost GUARANTEED to be gone by #20; you can't expect over a DOZEN NFL scout teams to make that MANY mistakes, nor half the league to reach with a prime pick. So you get the best player LEFT. The best leftOVER, if that's more clear. The Best Player AVAILABLE isn't on the table, because he never was unless you want to trade into the top 5.
    Oh, valid point. I thought you meant all starters, you should take the time to be more descriptive, don't be shy. Jaded

    Never confuse frustrated candor and disloyal malice.
    Love can't be coerced. —Me

  18. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Jupiter, Fla.
    Adopted Bronco:
    Rubin Carter
    Posts
    1,763

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ShaneFalco View Post
    Cook doesnt remind me of Faulk at all, in fact Mccaffrey does more.
    Well, Cook and Faulk both have basically the identical physical size. Both 5 foot 10 and range between 210lbs and 215. They have about the same speed.

    Plus....

    McCaffrey.....is uhhhhh, white.

Go
Shop AFC Champions and Super Bowl gear at the official online Pro Shop of the Denver Broncos!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. If a guy falls in draft do we have to pull the trigger?
    By underrated29 in forum Draft and Free Agency
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 03-24-2011, 07:03 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
status.broncosforums.com - BroncosForums status updates
Partner with the USA Today Sports Media Group