Thread: To draft OT or RB at #12... that is the question.

There has been some debate here between forum members on which route to go with our #1 pick... OT or RB. Outside of Ellis or Dorsey falling to #12 most of us seem to have fallen into one of two camps. There's a smattering of people who want us to reach for Phillips, or Connor, or Rivers, but essentially most are torn between OT and RB.

I've brought it up in many posts, but I think one aspect of drafting is not only getting a talented player, but to get value out of your pick. Value may be hard to define at times, but for the most part value is relatively easy to understand. Outside of talent and value you need to look at other intagibles as well as desire and realizing whether or not a particular player fits your "system". Many variables obviously come into play when you make a draft selection.

The Denver Broncos do not and have not selected inside the top 10 or close to the top 10 very often. With that type of value that we are not normally accustomed to I think it is imperative that we get the most out of this opportunity. Value.

Between OT and RB where is the most value at #12? Unless Clady falls to #12 are there really any other OT's worth this selection? Some argue that not even Clady is worth this selection, but the masses that are for drafting an OT with our #1 selection mostly agree that trading down further in the first round would make more sense. Primarily due to the fact that many of the OT's are graded very close to each other. So, is there really any VALUE drafting an OT at #12 if Clady is gone? Probably not.

Well, then trade down. Easier said than done. If that would happen, it most likely wouldn't happen until draft day when a team has a player targeted that begins to fall a little bit... then they want to jump up and grab him. This is truly an impossible question to answer at this time... can we find a trade partner to slide down further in the draft while adding another pick or two?

Making the assumption that we won't be trading down we are left with reaching on an OT at #12 or selecting a top notch RB. The opponents to drafting a RB have never disputed that any of the top three running backs are not very talented. The opponents to drafting a RB are more fixated on fixing the oline for the run game and pass protection. I don't agree that the oline is as bad as some think it was or will be. Coupled with the fact that as long as I can remember in Shanahan's tenure we have not drafted an olineman and started him from day one. What makes you think we will now? And, if we do select one, chances are he won't be contributing to the oline this year helping with the run game or pass protection. Hence, not much value.

Draft the stud RB now, while we can achieve optimum value for the selection. How often will we have the ability to get a top flight RB like any of these top three running backs? Sure, we'll always find a RB that will run between 1,200-1,400 yards, but why not get the elite back that will run behind the exact same line as any ordinary back, but the elite back will gain upwards of 1,600-1,800 yards. Let's add the one final offensive skill player to our current young talented offensive players and prepare ourselves for a top 10 offense for the next 5-8 years.

Please, draft Johnathan Stewart.

I agree about the OT value not being much worse in rd 2. And on top of that is the word that they might even move kupes to LT or RT to compete with pears and harris- Thus making it less likely to take OT.

I still think that shannys draft baord is like this. Actually i might put it in my sig if i have enough room

1. trade to 7 for ellis/dorsey
2. #12 jstew/mendenhall
3. #12 clady
4. #12 laws
5. #12 WR (forgot his name the big guy who also KR)
6. trade back as none are there (doubtful)

I am with you for drafting stewart at #12. I think itwill happen if We cant get into 7 for ellis. I really think it will be one of the two for sure. Sadley I wont be in town for the draft to say i told you so :wink: :biggrin:

as far as the thread title goes........... It's not a question for me at all. I don't want to see either one a #12. I'd be OK with an OT but we have other needs.
I'd really like to see us trade the pick and aquire a few more picks.

Originally Posted by turftoad

I'd really like to see us trade the pick and aquire a few more picks.

And if we can not find the right deal would you rather us pass?

Originally Posted by MHCBill

And if we can not find the right deal would you rather us pass?

Sorry, I just don't have Stewart or Clady tatoo'd on my ass. JMO

That being said......... Whom ever we draft will be a Bronco so I will support them as I do the rest of the team.

No need to get hostile... I just try to live in reality.

If we can't make a trade odds are we'll draft someone at #12.

Who would you like it to be?

Originally Posted by MHCBill

No need to get hostile... I just try to live in reality.

If we can't make a trade odds are we'll draft someone at #12.

Who would you like it to be?

I'm not hostile at all Bill.

Just answering to the title of the thread.

You just made it sound like an OL or a RB are are only options at #12.

Okay, TT who would you like if we're forced to pick at #12?

My point is/was most people are from two camps... RB or OT. You obviously aren't. So, who do you like there?

Again, as my first post points out... I'm very concerned about value.

at 12, if clady is gone, i do not want to reach for a OT. if we can't trade down i would rather pick RB of the two choices.

i do think that WR is at least as big an option in the 1st as RB is if it works out like this. Malcolm Kelly at 12 wouldn't be too bad, or that big of a shock.


i, like you bill, am just obsessed with value this year in the draft. i really could care less what we draft as long as we avoid reaching and overspending to move up. there's no reason we should have trade up for moss last year with players of his caliber or very slightly less still on the board. I just want to the broncos to make the most of the draft, take players at spots where they deserve to be taken or players who should have been taken sooner and drop to us (as long as it's not because of character concerns or lingering injuries (dorsey is the exception i suppose).

i will be happy to see almost any draft as long as we don't trade up in the 1st to get clady, take trevor laws at 12, or reach for mehlhaff in the 4th... (or comparable moves)... JUST MAXIMIZE VALUE! it's almost at the point of being a BPA draft, but don't overload any position with picks unless it's DT. get young, hard workers and limit the draft to only a couple "sexy picks" as they are the ones that usually bite you. get hard workers and high character guys that are slated to be taken when we take them.


(i'm pretty sure i said the same thing like 5 times in there... hooray redundancy)

I agree shawshank...

Originally Posted by MHCBill

Okay, TT who would you like if we're forced to pick at #12?

My point is/was most people are from two camps... RB or OT. You obviously aren't. So, who do you like there?

Again, as my first post points out... I'm very concerned about value.

I totally understand the whole value thing. That being said, it sucks to be #12 this year with the needs we have.

I don't think RB is a need but if we do take one I like Mendenhall better than Stewart. RB at #12 is a very good possibility for us. I just don't like it.

OT is a need for us. I don't think it's a huge need but a need none the less. Same as RB, I like Williams better than Clady and have seen him ranked higher than Clady in many so called experts mocks. OT is a very good possibility for us also. Again, I just don't like it.

I like Conner but the value is not there at #12 and we just signed Niko so I don't see that happening.

I also like Phillips but that would not be a good value at #12.

I don't think we firmed up the #2 WR position by signing Colbert at all. There is no WR at #12 that has that value either.

Both top tier DT's will probably be gone. After that there are none to take at #12 with that value.

So............. I'm on the fence.

If we are fortunate, we'll be able to trade down.

If we are unfortunate, we stay where we're at.

Strong points TT.

Other than RB there isn't great value at #12.

Originally Posted by MHCBill

Strong points TT.

Other than RB there isn't great value at #12.

Which sucks because we really don't need one.

i'm torn. . . RB and OT are definitely my top choices assuming that we're actually going to pick at 12. . .

one thing i don't agree with is your belief that OT isn't as great a value because they might not start this year. . . for one thing, we've seen plenty of OTs start and play at a high level recently, and i don't think they guys we have are so special that a rook can't beat them out, even though we know that mike prefers to let his rookie OLs learn for a year before he puts them in. . . but even if a guy sits, it's not going to detract from his value in my eyes because i don't think we're going to be in contention for anything this year anyways. . . i'm far and away more concerned with long term value than immediate impact. . .

i go back and forth bewteen clady and stewart/mendenhall. . . two things ultimately have me favoring the RB. . . one is my belief that stewart and mendenhall are the safest picks-- we know nothing is guaranteed with draft picks, but i personally am completely convinced that both of them are sure-fire studs at the next level. . . the other is my belief that some of the potential 2nd round OTs have just as much potential as the 1st rounders (same goes for LBs)-- especially anthony collins, and cherilus if he happens to be avilable. . . i don't think any of the 2nd tier RBs have the same long term potential as stewart and mendenhall-- some good runners there no doubt, but none of them have that ideal combination of size and speed. . .


in the end, i'll be delighted with clady, stewart or mendenhall, and satisfied with chris williams-- any other pick at 12 is going to leave me disappointed, even though there are certainly some other guys who project as good players. . . i just don't see guys like rivers, connor or phillips becoming the same type of difference-makers that the top RBs are going to be-- good players, certainly, but will they really reach that elite status? i'm not convinced. . . i will be bummed if we take a WR or corner. . . .

Originally Posted by turftoad

Which sucks because we really don't need one.

this year, but going forward who do we really have? travis henry is old and broken down, there's no way anyone can realistically see him as the guy we're going to build around for any length of time. . . selvin young and andre hall are change-of-pace guys. . . young has never stayed helthy before, i don't see any possible reason to expect that he's going to start-- and shanahan has flat-out admitted publicly that he doesn't see young as more than a 12-15 carries per game type of back. . .

i'm not disputing anyone's right to have an opinion, or trying to say that mine is "better" or more correct than anyone else's. . . and i can see where you don't think we need one THIS year. . . but if it's going to become a need very soon anyways, why not fill it for the next 5-10 years with a guy you can build a team around, the way san diego and seattle have recently? it's one thing for us to plug in a nobody and crank out X amount of yards per season, but i think honest fans will admit that the stats aren't the full story. . . we've been able to crank out good numbers by running it up when we play weaker defenses, but when's the last time we layed a beatdown on a good team with our running game? we get stuffed when we play quality fronts like san diego, and where it really counts-- in the red zone-- our running game is a shell of it's former self. . . we don't dominate the way we used to-- NO ONE is afraid of our ground game anymore. . . it's not even the best in the division. . . running back by committe can produce solid numbers, but it doesn't take over games in the 2nd half the way a real horse in the backfield will, and it doesn't take pressure off both the passing game and the defense. . .



now that i've given up on the idea that we have to try filling every hole so we can compete this year, i'm not as insistent that we have to get a 1st day DT. . . i think my ideal 1st day, barring any trades, would be stewart mendenhall in the 1st, cherilus/collins/baker in the 2nd. . . spend the 2nd day looking at safeties, DTs and WRs (with an emphasis on return skills), and probably take a punter and a kicker. . .