Draft: The big picture

[NaboCane]

Posted this in one of the threads in the jungle, but I'd like to see some actual discussion of it, if y'all are so inclined:


This draft seems light at the top, but deep - especially at certain positions like CB and WR.

It's tempting to grab a stud at whatever position with the second pick, but consider this: the pressure to produce is extremely high on a top-three pick as it is - imagine the pressure on the poor ******* we select, being the only pick until the third round! Who can live up to that?

Besides, one player isn't going to make the difference on a 3-13 team; it just isn't going to happen, when the team has dire needs on the DL, OL, and second-priority needs such as Safety, LB depth and possibly RB.

You guys want to have the team contend in '06? Then you should hope that Saban can manage to trade down from the second overall spot - maybe a couple of times - and pick up as many first-day picks as he can that way.

Then, hope that he can trade players that are beginning the downhill part of their careers - players that won't be here anyway once the rebuilding is finished - and get real value for them from teams that need immediate help to contend.

Because the only hope for fielding a competitive team without a 3-4 year rebuilding process is to draft often and well, and make smart, cap-friendly acquisitions in FA.
<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

 

[3P]

My first preference would be to trade down. We've got way too many holes on this team to spend our only first day pick on one player. Perhaps if we had a 2nd and still had the 2 3rds we could, but not at this point. That said, if we for some reason cannot find a partner to trade down with, or we aren't getting good value for our pick... I'd have to say I would want a QB with that pick. If things go according to plan, we won't have a pick that high again for a very long time. The first person to get drafted that high should be the one that touches the ball on every snap.

 

[DrAstroZoom]

My first preference would be to trade down. We've got way too many holes on this team to spend our only first day pick on one player. Perhaps if we had a 2nd and still had the 2 3rds we could, but not at this point. That said, if we for some reason cannot find a partner to trade down with, or we aren't getting good value for our pick... I'd have to say I would want a QB with that pick. If things go according to plan, we won't have a pick that high again for a very long time. The first person to get drafted that high should be the one that touches the ball on every snap.

I tend to agree. I'm a little skeptical of the trading down theory because the top 5 slots are not far-and-away from the rest of the pack. That leads me to worry that if we get too hung up on trying to trade down, we'll settle for a deal that doesn't bring us an appropriate value in return.

 

[xiidaen]

I'd be interested in trading down, but I'd like the trade to be worth it, I'm not so desparate to trade that I'll take anything. I'm a little leary as to the value being that high.

One thing I think we should consider as part of the package is a #1 from next year's draft -- it would be nice to see us accumulate future picks, not giving them away.

If we can't trade down, I'd probably suggest BPA. But I don't know the college game and prospects well enough to have an opinion... I agree that a QB would be ideal -- more from the (hopeful) rare nature of a #2 pick, that lack of confidence in AJ. I don't have a set opinion on him yet, either.

Have some of the wiser heads in this forum spoken up on the QB situation? I don't want to start a thread on that and risk getting banned into the outer forum to wail and gnash my teeth...

 

[NaboCane]

Here's the problem with a QB at that #2 pick: Assuming that SF will take Leinart, (why wouldn't they) then you have the choice of Rodgers or Alex Smith - i believe those are the next two highest-rated QB's - correct me if I'm wrong.

And the problem there is that neither of those guys are solid, consensus top-three picks; they both come with serious questions about their ability to be the #1 guy on an NFL team.

One can argue that you don't need a QB to be spectacular in order to win in today's game - but if that's the case, don't we already have a guy (Feeley) who's like that right now - and may improve to surpass that definition next year? And do you spend a second-overall pick on what could very well end up being a caretaker QB?

 

[NLude33]

I think a big time playmaker is what we need. Who is the biggest playmaker that is worth the #2 pick? I think it is Braylon Edwards! The guy can take over a game. He will make any QB look a lot better than he is. I also like any of the top 3 RB's, but I think #2 is too high for any of them.

Best case senerio is that we could trade down to around pick 10, for an addition of a 2nd round pick this year, and a 1st rounder next year. This way we have a high pick in rounds 1,2,3 this year, and 2 number 1's next year. Then, 2006 draft, if there is a franchise QB, we could pretty easily trade up with the 2 number 1's. If Feeley is our guy, then we don't need to trade up, and we interject the defense with 2 first round picks.