Thread: 2019 Broncos Draft Thread 04/25/19 - 04/27/19

Originally Posted by CoachChaz

If he makes it to 41, then he becomes Osweiler. Big kid with a big arm that a bunch of other QB needy teams passed on and didn't trade up for. Is that good value? Give me Erik McCoy at 41, please.

I guess I misunderstood you, I thought you said Lock would be good value at #41?

Originally Posted by CoachChaz

If he makes it to 41, then he becomes Osweiler. Big kid with a big arm that a bunch of other QB needy teams passed on and didn't trade up for. Is that good value? Give me Erik McCoy at 41, please.

Well it's a slightly different scenario though coach because lock does have a body of work. Osweiler basically started for a year and was similar to Haskins in this draft without the outrageous numbers vs Michigan. Let's be fair lock is a much better athlete than Osweiler. And has a lot of tape. I also read yesterday that he led the NCAA in dropped passes by receivers and still put up a decent completion percentage this year.

Lock is a tremendous value at 41. The nice thing about the movie yesterday as we got in my opinion the best pass-catching tight end in this draft. A guy that has the potential to be a perennial pro bowler. The other thing is is blocking deficiencies are completely overstated. It's lazy analysis to make the Julius Thomas analogy. You don't play tight end and Iowa and not block. But why when you have an athlete like Fant would you put them in line when you have Hockenson there as well?

Originally Posted by CoachChaz

I know. Just baffles me sometimes. Reminds me of my 10 year old daughter when I take her phone away from her. Now if only these people would just run to their room, slam the door and not come out for a few hours, it'd be great.

My daughter will be a freshman in HS next year. I'm starting to see daddy's little girl to daddy's little PITA. I'm kidding, but she is starting to get an attitude I'm not use to from her.

Originally Posted by CoachChaz

If he makes it to 41, then he becomes Osweiler. Big kid with a big arm that a bunch of other QB needy teams passed on and didn't trade up for. Is that good value? Give me Erik McCoy at 41, please.

Disagree. Os was a projected 2nd rounder, Lock was not. The only QB that actually went where he was projected was Murray. Going by your logic i guess that makes Jones Peyton Manning because of where he went right? Lock dropping does not make him Brock at all in my opinion. A DB's dropped as well but i dont consider them failures because of it. Wasnt Cody Ford a first round grade but going in the 2nd.

Originally Posted by Jsteve01

Lock is a tremendous value at 41. The nice thing about the movie yesterday as we got in my opinion the best pass-catching tight end in this draft. A guy that has the potential to be a perennial pro bowler. The other thing is is blocking deficiencies are completely overstated. It's lazy analysis to make the Julius Thomas analogy. You don't play tight end and Iowa and not block. But why when you have an athlete like Fant would you put them in line when you have Hockenson there as well?

Are any others that might be considered just as good of value at #41 as Lock?

Originally Posted by Jsteve01

Well it's a slightly different scenario though coach because lock does have a body of work. Osweiler basically started for a year and was similar to Haskins in this draft without the outrageous numbers vs Michigan. Let's be fair lock is a much better athlete than Osweiler. And has a lot of tape. I also read yesterday that he led the NCAA in dropped passes by receivers and still put up a decent completion percentage this year.

I was admittedly vague in my comment you are referencing. The overall point is if he is there at 41, then there are 32 teams that either chose to go a different route at QB...at least 1 time. Yes, many don't need a QB, but there are plenty that do now and even more than could use someone to groom. I mean, we're not looking at a scenario where everyone passed on Brady or Prescott or Wilson, because none of them were slotted to go higher than they did. They just happened to outplay their status. Even Osweiler wasn't projected to be a first round talent. But Lock was. And when you are considered first round talent and no one makes a play for you in the first 40 picks...that says something.

That said, I wouldn't be "pissed" if he fell to 41 and Elway drafted him, but I think we have more pressing needs and plenty of talent available to fill them.

Coach.....who are your top 3 at 41 & 52?

Originally Posted by Northman

Disagree. Os was a projected 2nd rounder, Lock was not. The only QB that actually went where he was projected was Murray. Going by your logic i guess that makes Jones Peyton Manning because of where he went right? Lock dropping does not make him Brock at all in my opinion. A DB's dropped as well but i dont consider them failures because of it. Wasnt Cody Ford a first round grade but going in the 2nd.

And I'll argue that it makes it worse. If you are considered 2nd round talent or lower and get drafted in that round...it makes sense. If you are considered high 1st round talent and are still available in the middle of the 2nd round, then questions have to be asked. And I won't bother with the comparison to OL and CB's that slide. That shit happens all the time simply due to teams prioritizing needs and system fits. QB's are a completely different standard.

The problem is people were whining that if Denver didnt go QB in round 1 that they would never get back there. My point of contention is if you can still get a #1 prospect in the 2nd round i would be hard pressed to pass up on it. Sure, we have a lot of needs but if its also about value than if Lock is there John would have to strongly consider it considering the situation he is in. Now technically he could trade back again but there is value there is Lock is still there although i doubt he will be.

Originally Posted by Northman

The problem is people were whining that if Denver didnt go QB in round 1 that they would never get back there. My point of contention is if you can still get a #1 prospect in the 2nd round i would be hard pressed to pass up on it. Sure, we have a lot of needs but if its also about value than if Lock is there John would have to strongly consider it considering the situation he is in. Now technically he could trade back again but there is value there is Lock is still there although i doubt he will be.

Is Kinger ok?

Originally Posted by Nomad

Is Kinger ok?

Yea, i think so. I havent talked to him today but he didnt seem upset or anything.

Originally Posted by Nomad

Coach.....who are your top 3 at 41 & 52?

At 41, I'd like to get a center, so I have Erik McCoy there. Cody Ford and Dalton Risner could still be there, but I prefer McGovern at guard. He was solid at guard and horrible at center, so give me a true center that can handle the position at a high level for the next 10 years. Plus, I think both McCoy and Jenkins will be gone by pick 52.

At 51, there are a bunch of directions to go. Maybe a corner if the feeling is Harris will be traded. I also like Winovich there. Or we have the luxury to overdraft if we want and maybe go with Andy Isabella or Blake Cashman or Burr-Kirven.

Originally Posted by Northman

The problem is people were whining that if Denver didnt go QB in round 1 that they would never get back there. My point of contention is if you can still get a #1 prospect in the 2nd round i would be hard pressed to pass up on it. Sure, we have a lot of needs but if its also about value than if Lock is there John would have to strongly consider it considering the situation he is in. Now technically he could trade back again but there is value there is Lock is still there although i doubt he will be.

I guess my argument is if a #1 prospect lasts until the middle of the 2nd round...is he really a #1 prospect? Especially at QB.

Originally Posted by CoachChaz

I guess my argument is if a #1 prospect lasts until the middle of the 2nd round...is he really a #1 prospect? Especially at QB.

Absolutely. Especially since so many QB's were taken last year.