All Offense?

[GeauxFins2020]

I'm not saying I would be a good gm or coach lol. I just played at a decently high level so I know Xs and Os. I would personally go all offense though

What we need, and what every team needs are good players. Rank the board...rank the needs. GAMBLE ON GREATNESS.

I've seen a lot (A LOT) of posts saying "don't trade down if it costs you Chase or Smith!"

I think that's nonsense. Past couple of years...AJ Brown, DK Metcalf, Deebo Samuel, Terry McLaurin, Tee Higgins, Darnell Mooney, Gabriel Davis, Michael Pittman, Chase claypool, Marquez Calloway...

Michael Thomas, who last year set record for receptions was a second round pick.

I love JaMarr Chase and Terrace Marshall and the Bama WRs, but it would asinine to predicate the draft on one any of them being a necessity.

None of these players were first rounders.

Good players to be had at every position in every round.

 

[Mach2]

What we need, and what every team needs are good players. Rank the board...rank the needs. GAMBLE ON GREATNESS.

I've seen a lot (A LOT) of posts saying "don't trade down if it costs you Chase or Smith!"

I think that's nonsense. Past couple of years...AJ Brown, DK Metcalf, Deebo Samuel, Terry McLaurin, Tee Higgins, Darnell Mooney, Gabriel Davis, Michael Pittman, Chase claypool, Marquez Calloway...

Michael Thomas, who last year set record for receptions was a second round pick.

I love JaMarr Chase and Terrace Marshall and the Bama WRs, but it would asinine to predicate the draft on one any of them being a necessity.

None of these players were first rounders.

Good players to be had at every position in every round.

Some don't see it, but that is the nature of the WR position. That is exactly why the professionals, as a whole, do not place high value, with top picks, on the position.

The "armchair" scouts all like to think their guy is "different" or "special". Sometimes it works out that way, but not very often, according to analytics.

 

[fansinceGWilson]

What we need, and what every team needs are good players. Rank the board...rank the needs. GAMBLE ON GREATNESS.

I've seen a lot (A LOT) of posts saying "don't trade down if it costs you Chase or Smith!"

I think that's nonsense. Past couple of years...AJ Brown, DK Metcalf, Deebo Samuel, Terry McLaurin, Tee Higgins, Darnell Mooney, Gabriel Davis, Michael Pittman, Chase claypool, Marquez Calloway...

Michael Thomas, who last year set record for receptions was a second round pick.

I love JaMarr Chase and Terrace Marshall and the Bama WRs, but it would asinine to predicate the draft on one any of them being a necessity.

None of these players were first rounders.

Good players to be had at every position in every round.

The problems with "GAMBLE ON GREATNESS" are legion.
The gambler is susceptible to hindsight. 'They should have known better.'
'*I* would have picked . . . '
'They COULD HAVE (not 'of') had . . . '
By definition, gambling' is a risk - odds against the player. And, in this case, the lower the round, the higher the risk. The math is irrefutable. Matter of fact, I don't think teams gamble on greatness. Yes, they'll trade down and pass on player A, but that is NOT a gamble. If they have two players available with identical evaluations, they have to pick one. That's not a gamble. People make those decisions every day.

People throw around the term 'high ceiling.' I agree with that. Teams want high ceilings. So do fans. But selecting one isn't a gamble. IMO, it is no coincidence that having a good GM/HC/scouts and better draft picks is no coincidence. It's better gathering and using available data. Get the personnel to do a proper evaluation ang "gambling" isn't necessary

 

[GeauxFins2020]

The problems with "GAMBLE ON GREATNESS" are legion.
The gambler is susceptible to hindsight. 'They should have known better.'
'*I* would have picked . . . '
'They COULD HAVE (not 'of') had . . . '
By definition, gambling' is a risk - odds against the player. And, in this case, the lower the round, the higher the risk. The math is irrefutable. Matter of fact, I don't think teams gamble on greatness. Yes, they'll trade down and pass on player A, but that is NOT a gamble. If they have two players available with identical evaluations, they have to pick one. That's not a gamble. People make those decisions every day.

People throw around the term 'high ceiling.' I agree with that. Teams want high ceilings. So do fans. But selecting one isn't a gamble. IMO, it is no coincidence that having a good GM/HC/scouts and better draft picks is no coincidence. It's better gathering and using available data. Get the personnel to do a proper evaluation ang "gambling" isn't necessary

Those that don't think picking an OT high is good strategy should "gamble on greatness." Every pick is going to be second guessed. But sometimes you pick a player at a position you don't need.

 

[fansinceGWilson]

Those that don't think picking an OT high is good strategy should "gamble on greatness." Every pick is going to be second guessed. But sometimes you pick a player at a position you don't need.

It is certainly a possibility, but taking a gamble at #3 on a position not needed is rare - like close to never, since, with exceptions, teams picking in the top 5 have multiple deep holes. No, Miami doesn't have a lot of deep holes, but, IMO, the #3 pick will come down to need as defined by Flo. Could be an OT, but it won't be a gamble.

 

[Fin-Loco]

Wondering what the fans thoughts are about spending the first four picks in this years upcoming draft on offense.
Basically doing the reverse of what Carolina did, by drafting all defensive players last year.

Also, wonder how it works cap wise, when the majority of those players will all be due for a second contract 4 years. Does the team think about having a bunch of free agents on one side of the ball in a given year?

I'm down. Smith, Harris, Toney and best OG on the board after that.

 

[Rowdy1972]

It would be wise to place a lot of resources towards that offense this offseason. Offense wins in this league now. Looks at the remaining teams in the playoffs. With Flores, I think the defense is going to be middle of the road at worst. Can he build an offense? His tenure here relies on it.