That 1st pick (part 2): Btw. 2 Positions
With over 50% of the votes in favor of taking a Defensive Tackle with our 1st Round pick (MLB taking 2nd place with 27% of the vote), we enter the next phase of our methodical process which seeks to insure no blunder is made on the first day of this draft.
Many in the Nation were vociferous about taking an Offensive Tackle with the 1st pick. An outpouring of concern was expressed for the welfare of Gradkowski - in whom so much hope for our success now resides. Many emphasized the need for sustaining longer drives which upgraded line would make possible - with the added advantage of keeping Tommy Kelly and Gerard Warren off the field as much as possible.
And so we come to the critical choice between the remaining positional contenders for our 1st draft pick of 2010.
Will it be a DT or an OT? One thing's for certain, a Tackle it will be if the Nation has a voice.
0 recs |
52 comments
|
Comments
The poll is pointless since its doubtful were switching to a 3-4 system
If winning isn't everything, why do they keep score?
- Vince Lombardi
The Best DTs can play in a 4-3 or 3-4
Start thinking before you comment
by Sons-of-Blanda on Mar 10, 2010 5:24 PM PST up reply actions
Haha
But is there any talent at #8 worth that kinda of money? Dont get me worng, Id loooove to switch to the 3-4. But drafting for a 3-4 when were still in the 4-3 would be silly. A large NT who cant play 3 downs isnt what I want in the 1st
If winning isn't everything, why do they keep score?
- Vince Lombardi
Bottom Line, If McCoy or Suh some how fall to #8: We grab them
And IF an O-Lineman worthy of a #8 pick, that fits our mold and the DTs worth a #8 pick are gone, then we grab him. Otherwise we should try and trade down so that someone can grab who they want and we can slot into the position that will land us the BPA that fills a need and add more picks.
It is all about coming together as a team. At the end of the day, the team is all we have. - T. Branch 10-14-09
by Raymond St. Martin (Saint) on Mar 10, 2010 5:59 PM PST up reply actions
If McCoy falls to us, Grab him!
There is no way in hell Suh does though. He’s amazingily terrific! Otherwise, Theres no DT left worht a 8 pick. So, If I had it my way, Id trade our 8 pick for another 2nd and 3rd. There is soo much talent in the 2nd and 3rd!
If winning isn't everything, why do they keep score?
- Vince Lombardi
i dont think we will take an Olineman in the first
keeping barnes tells me this. if he fails then maybe next year in the first. but guaranteed we take one somewhere in the middle.
by rodeosnake12 on Mar 10, 2010 6:07 PM PST up reply actions
Barnes didnt get a starter contract though!
He is being retained because he provides solid competition.
If winning isn't everything, why do they keep score?
- Vince Lombardi
Barnes is only back on a one year deal
so I don’t see him as much of a long or even short term solution at tackle. Better to get a guy this year who can start this year and going forward. If he struggles early, Barnes will be there for transition.
The Airman of Westwood
Trade down...
Nobody we need or can get justifies 8th pick or the pay that goes with it… we can get unproven tackles for both sides in the second round.
I even cum Black & Silver...
by Tramp "Raider Roxxxtar" on Mar 10, 2010 5:23 PM PST via mobile reply actions
I'm sticking with picking an Offensive Tackle
Better value, lots of choices in the first round. I do want to see a potential starting NT taken in the first few rounds of the draft though.
The Airman of Westwood
I say you can definitely trade down and get Bruce Campbell
but in my honest opinion, Trent Willims is the second best tackle in this draft, and if he is there at eight, we should take him.
We really should go OT, and even if Khalif Barnes and Henderson win the starting tackle jobs, at least we have a good canididate to challenge for the right guard position.
Don't Trade Nnamdi Idiots!!!
Bring Back Bruce!!!
I just want to add
There will be plentyu of choices in the second round at DT, possibly including Dan Williams, Brian Price, Terrence Cody, and more thn likely, at least one of these guys WILL be there.
Then you have the secon tier, if you will, of Cam Thomas, Jared Odrick, LaMarr Houston, and Torell Troup, all of whom will be there in the sedon and maybe some into the third round.
Don't Trade Nnamdi Idiots!!!
Bring Back Bruce!!!
by B.A.Armstrong on Mar 10, 2010 5:35 PM PST up reply actions
Second*
Don't Trade Nnamdi Idiots!!!
Bring Back Bruce!!!
by B.A.Armstrong on Mar 10, 2010 5:36 PM PST up reply actions
Yeah!! Woot Woot!! Great variety of selections, OT!! A playing QB is better than a dead one.
On defense there are always defensive gems in the later rounds look at Scott, Saughnessy, Bryant, Morrison, (Warren…jk). The same can not be said for the O-line tackle position Sons. We need this! I remember when I wanted to draft Jamon Meredith as he made it to the third round, Well guess what, he sucks! that was a close one, as real O tackles are found in the early rounds (1,2).
The RaiderLaker
I agree
Don't Trade Nnamdi Idiots!!!
Bring Back Bruce!!!
by B.A.Armstrong on Mar 10, 2010 5:36 PM PST up reply actions
Left Tackles
It is all about coming together as a team. At the end of the day, the team is all we have. - T. Branch 10-14-09
by Raymond St. Martin (Saint) on Mar 10, 2010 6:00 PM PST up reply actions
order your mays jerseys now!
Reality people lol u can face it!
I even cum Black & Silver...
by Tramp "Raider Roxxxtar" on Mar 10, 2010 6:13 PM PST via mobile reply actions
If Oakland drafts Taylor Mays
I feel bad for the 1st Charger fan to give me shit about it haha I would put up with it from any other fan, but I just hate the Chargers sooooo much
If winning isn't everything, why do they keep score?
- Vince Lombardi
he's good and we really dont have any pro bowl safetys now do we?
I even cum Black & Silver...
by Tramp "Raider Roxxxtar" on Mar 10, 2010 6:26 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Tyvon Branch!
He was easily our best Defensive player last year! And if he has the same year next year like he did this year, he’ll be a pro bowler. With out a doubt!
If winning isn't everything, why do they keep score?
- Vince Lombardi
probably 3rd best (I'd put Asomugha and Scott ahead of Tyvon ... maybe even Howard)
don’t take it wrong – Tyvon is doing fine.
by Sons-of-Blanda on Mar 10, 2010 7:20 PM PST up reply actions
Maybe Nnamdi
Scott wasnt at OLB long enough to earn that #2 spot. But Tyvon certianly should make the Pro Bowl this next year
If winning isn't everything, why do they keep score?
- Vince Lombardi
realistically
we’ll either draft mays or bryant.
But my hopes? Anthony Davis or Bruce Cambell. Then select either Cam Thomas in the 3rd or Linval Joseph in the 4th. Or snag both. There are enough versatility on DL in this draft that we can draft players who can fit either 4-3 or 3-4.
The only part you need now is a method so you can be methodical
instead of pseudo, irrelevant, fantasy methods
perhaps you can suggest a method
in a post of your own.
by Spirals galore on Mar 11, 2010 6:52 AM PST up reply actions
No need
Dont waste your time talking to the guy. He just shoots the lips service and never contributes other than to knock others down.
Win at all costs! Winning ugly is still winning! Remember the past and what got us to the top before. Jim Plunkett and winning ugly......enough said!
by TheLyleAlzadoPunch on Mar 11, 2010 8:52 AM PST up reply actions
Best choice
I posted something similar somewhere else saying pretty much the same thing. I think the likelyhood of taking a DT in the first is very unlikely for a very good reason or 2. We have a D line that accounts at this moment with 3 out of 4 starters in a 4-3 defense getting a whooping $27 mill apporximately next year. If we decided to take a DT at #8 or even traded up to get Suh at #2 the money that either one will get will make our D line probably the most expensive bust of all time given the current performance or lack there of consistant performance from atleast 2 of those 3 starters. If we cut Warren and/or Kelly (its still not too late to save that huge salary hit) then I would be fairly certain we would go for a DT with the first pick. I am just convinced were going to take a CB/DB first and I dont think we are hurting there as much ass in the trenches on either side of the ball. I pray for either an OT (maybe G) OR if we cut Kelly and Warren (please they are not worth the scratch they get) the grab a DT and sign a FA or draft more in the 2nd round and or 3rd round.
Win at all costs! Winning ugly is still winning! Remember the past and what got us to the top before. Jim Plunkett and winning ugly......enough said!
by TheLyleAlzadoPunch on Mar 11, 2010 9:00 AM PST reply actions
I wish some others grasped the situation as well as you do. I hope to see Kelly traded - Warren, at least hustles - and then
bring in a Quick-Anvil DT. Trading Kelly and Carlisle for a 2nd and 5th pick and trading away our 1st pick for a 2nd and 5th – would give us 2 2nds, 2 3rds, 1 4ths and 2 5ths. With those we haul in line talent on both sides, i.e. guys who can get to other QBs, stop the run and protect Bruce.
by Sons-of-Blanda on Mar 11, 2010 9:55 AM PST up reply actions
Question should be phrased, which of these two tackle picks are more likely to make an immediate impact
In which case I’d stick by OT in the first, and DT in the second. DTs drop off significantly after McCoy and Suh. There will remain some first round tackle talent worth taking, but probably would be smartest to trade to the middle or end of the round, and take whatever tackle remaining from Williams, Davis, Bulaga, or even Iupati at the bottom of the round.
There are some great later round DTs who should be available for us, and we won’t be paying them bigtime scratch to wait and see if they perform, as we are doing with some other guys who are swallowing up some big jack.
"If your only ambition in life, is to be a better person; well, that's just the best ambition you can have..." Wayne "Rabbit" Bartholomew
+1
Thats sensible. I would appreciate those decisions. I however am very certain that a DB/CB will be taken with our first pick :( I wanna cry. The biggest need is OLinemen OR DLinemen specifically DT or NT
Win at all costs! Winning ugly is still winning! Remember the past and what got us to the top before. Jim Plunkett and winning ugly......enough said!
by TheLyleAlzadoPunch on Mar 11, 2010 9:56 AM PST up reply actions
The answers made it obvious, therfore
“Which position upgrade will improve us most?”
is better and not so wordy as:
“which of these two tackle picks are more likely to make an immediate impact?”
You guys are either getting
1.) Bruce Campbell
or
2.) Jason Pierre-Paul
End of discussion.
I will wager otherwise
As I keep stating in the last few days in regards to my thoughts on who I think Al will pick first it will be a defensive secondary guy. Of this I am almost certain given some of the roster choices and tenders in the last few days/weeks.
Win at all costs! Winning ugly is still winning! Remember the past and what got us to the top before. Jim Plunkett and winning ugly......enough said!
by TheLyleAlzadoPunch on Mar 11, 2010 11:44 AM PST up reply actions
I would take that
But there is no real way one or the other can collect I will just say I really doubt those 2.
Win at all costs! Winning ugly is still winning! Remember the past and what got us to the top before. Jim Plunkett and winning ugly......enough said!
by TheLyleAlzadoPunch on Mar 12, 2010 6:21 AM PST up reply actions
I wouldn't hate Haden at all.
Not one bit, and we could still address positions in the later rounds. Haden could be huge.
"If your only ambition in life, is to be a better person; well, that's just the best ambition you can have..." Wayne "Rabbit" Bartholomew
Raiders fixin' to draft an OT
Now there’s a great Southern phrase eh? :) With all the salaries they’ve been dumping, I get the feeling they may be preparing to pay someone LT money. If it is to be Bruce Campbell, then he can share college reminisces with Heyward-Bey over a dinner of Maryland crabcakes. Not to mention, Bruce Campbell is fast and is built like a Greek god :)
Walterfootball.com reports that DT’s bust quite often in the draft. So, beyond Suh and McCoy, it probably gets iffy.
I would use rounds 2-7 to draft as many DT’s and LB’s as possible – there are probably some solid players out there at these positions. Also, I’ve heard Dan Lefevour mentioned at QB on these boards. I wouldn’t mind having him on the team.
Bruce Cambell isnt worth a 8 Pick though
I have a feeling hes gonna be a huge bust. Just because he had a combine that impresses the Raiders, everyone thinks hes gonna be our pick. I dont want Cambell though, If were picking a OT at 8. It should either be Buluga or Davis.
In Bruce We Trust
Bruce Campbell fits Als player profile criteria - fast / athletic and welll built. Wouldn't surprise me at all if #8 is the Robot. OT
But Al also loves DBs and Haden is in the running. He’ll take LeFevour if the arm meets the minimum standard. Al’s committed to Kelly for several more years so look for someone who can do what Kelly can’t – penetrate and pressure QBs – so a DTs sacks and TRLs will be a significant measurement to project who Al takes.
by Sons-of-Blanda on Mar 11, 2010 7:24 PM PST up reply actions
Taking Haden wouldnt be so bad
I mean, Itd give us a scary defensive back field you know? Nnamdi, Haden and then Branch and Huff. But then we would need a DT and a LB to really secure our D as a whole
In Bruce We Trust
Kill me if you like, but I say CJ Spiller
He’s always open. He catches a lot of balls. He’s un-guardable, no matter how old he is





















