GTripp0012
03-25-2008, 11:59 PM
Well, can we assume anything about the FO's tendencies? Anything teams say at this point has to be taken with a grain of salt.
Blache said Corners are the cornerstone of defense, but he didn't say he thought we had a need there. Reading between the lines, I'd say it's less likely that we take a CB in the first.
If the value is there, I'm totally 100% all for it. But only if we grade a particular corner out as a top 10 player. If we grade him out as a top ten player, and he's there at 21, then by golly we better jump on him.
I don't think there's any chance we address WR before the third round. I mean, consider that the only FA we brought in and offered a contract to (under the assumption that we were trying to add him to the depth chart) was a WR. Assuming the team had a draft plan before free agency began, it's the reasonable conclusion to say that we weren't going to chase Hackett, and then also pick a WR on day 1.
Obviously, the logical conclusion is that we then put a majority of our scouting hours at the combine into players at other positions. Meaning that unless there's a great value on a WR, we will probably re-evaluate the remaining prospects after day one before considering spending a pick on one. To me, this is the closest train of thought I can have to the team's stance on WRs.
Obviously, we will select one at some point on day 2. We definately have the depth need there. I just don't see a lot of cues pointing to using a day one pick on a WR.
Ultimately, the Skins will make three selections where they will depend on the player to factor in to the long term plans. After that, you've just got to do the smart thing and just pick guys in the late rounds at any position that have a chance to contribute. Makes sense to grab the LB that fell over whatever is left at DL simply because we have a need there.
I totally follow your train of thought here, hopefully, I've added some deductive insight. Maybe I'm totally wrong, but at least I feel like I'm on to something. At the least, that in itself is good :)
Blache said Corners are the cornerstone of defense, but he didn't say he thought we had a need there. Reading between the lines, I'd say it's less likely that we take a CB in the first.
If the value is there, I'm totally 100% all for it. But only if we grade a particular corner out as a top 10 player. If we grade him out as a top ten player, and he's there at 21, then by golly we better jump on him.
I don't think there's any chance we address WR before the third round. I mean, consider that the only FA we brought in and offered a contract to (under the assumption that we were trying to add him to the depth chart) was a WR. Assuming the team had a draft plan before free agency began, it's the reasonable conclusion to say that we weren't going to chase Hackett, and then also pick a WR on day 1.
Obviously, the logical conclusion is that we then put a majority of our scouting hours at the combine into players at other positions. Meaning that unless there's a great value on a WR, we will probably re-evaluate the remaining prospects after day one before considering spending a pick on one. To me, this is the closest train of thought I can have to the team's stance on WRs.
Obviously, we will select one at some point on day 2. We definately have the depth need there. I just don't see a lot of cues pointing to using a day one pick on a WR.
Ultimately, the Skins will make three selections where they will depend on the player to factor in to the long term plans. After that, you've just got to do the smart thing and just pick guys in the late rounds at any position that have a chance to contribute. Makes sense to grab the LB that fell over whatever is left at DL simply because we have a need there.
I totally follow your train of thought here, hopefully, I've added some deductive insight. Maybe I'm totally wrong, but at least I feel like I'm on to something. At the least, that in itself is good :)