2004 Draft main discussion

I think if Vernon Carey lasts till our pick (doubt it, but then again last year I didn't think Steinbach would last till the second round either), you have to make that call. I see that as becoming a need position as quickly as any other.

 

Carey's a good lineman.

We're also not in dire need. Shocker's suggestion of a RT/G is a great one, but his doesn't suggest replacement or making a hole and then having to fill it with a #1.

It's just line. You find an able body who works hard, you find him likeminded competition, and then you have a line. We've got some of the best linemen in the league, a fine coach, and run the most lineman-friendly scheme in the NFL. You don't have to have blue chip talent along the line to make it work, necessarily. And looking at what's in the second and third - Starks, Joseph, Wharton, Dorsey, and so on, we can do fine with them. It's a great year for tackles.

 

New idea to chew on.

I've studied the hell out of the CB's and the WR's and have come to this conclusion.

DeAngelo Hall and Chris Gamble have emergered as the 2 "potential gamebreakers" from this draft, the next 5 or 6 are lumped together anywhere from late first to early third round.

The WR class is as deep as any I remember.

Assuming Smith and Moose are Panthers next season, and a veteran like Vincent comes in at CB.

I think I might look at Vilma or Dansby at #32, Vilma in particular would give us flexability and the perfection rotation man and fill in starter at where ever we have a need.

The follow that up with Cb in round 2 and Wr in 3.

 

I'm not so sure about Hall. I used to be intrigued by his speed until I read TFY say he has, lets say, somewhat limited mental capacity. I prefer someone smart and savvy, and I'm not sure Hall is it. I think he will be exciting, especially as a returner, but I'm not so sure about him as a starting CB (which you would expect if we take him in the 1st).

Vilma is the guy I am really warming to in the first. His flexibility and speed make him a perfect fit in this defense. His motor also seems to always be going. I think his experience at MLB would be very nice insurance if Morgan has another injury plagued year. That would allow 'spoon to focus solely on his natural weakside spot, instead of alternating with the middle whenever Morgan goes down. I also think Vilma could move to strongside when Fields' play slips (assuming he can even come back close to his 2002 form).

In the 2nd, I am praying your boy Colbert slips to us. I'm not as confident of that as I once was. Based on his Senior Bowl week, he may be playing himself into the late first/early second...especially if he has a good combine/workout as I expect. Which brings up a point. If he does rise that far, would you consider taking him with our #1 or go CB/LB and see who is available later?

 

Even though there are a ton of good WR prospects I think Colbert will probably be gone by our second round pick. Someone could fall down to us in the first and if it's not one of the blue chip WRs like Woods or Clayton it will be a LB or more likely a CB that will grade out higher than Colbert. Whoever that "middle of the 1st" talent is (hopefully) we will need to grab him for the value and adjust from there. Our second round pick will probably be our best and last chance to get one of the good established WRs. The fifteen receivers below could disapear fast after a couple of first day runs.

Larry Fitgerald, 6-3, 220, Pittsburgh
Reggie Williams, 6-4, 220, Washington
Roy Williams, 6-5, 210, Texas
Rashaun Woods, 6-2, 190, Oklahoma State
Michael Clayton, 6-4, 185, LSU
Bernard Berrian, 6-1, 175, Fresno State
Michael Jenkins, 6-5, 210, Ohio State
Lee Evans, 5-11, 190, Wisconsin
James Newson, 6-1, 205, Oregon State
Keary Colbert, 6-1, 200, Southern California
Devery Henderson, 6-0, 190, LSU
Ernest Wilford, 6-4, 220, Virginia Tech
Jerrico Cotchery, 6-1, 200, North Carolina State
Darius Watts, 6-2, 185, Marshall
B.J. Johnson, 6-1, 195, Texas

 

Vilma may not be around for us to pick.......WR would be the route if he isnt available. LB corp is our immediate need.

 

Agree that Carey is good and he has added value in that he may be able to play RT. That said, I do agree with mags that Carey isn't in the league of "dominate" lineman who step right in. That said we can probably fill that need a little later with a comparible guy and not use the #1 there.

Depending on Fields (or not) we probably are looking for a starter level talent at OLB. Being that Vilma and Dansby could be there, its likely we'd be very interested with our #1.

I'm still not sold that if we keep all our WRs that this coaching staff thinks that is as big a need area as us fans may think.

TE is interesting. If Troupe is sitting there at the end of round 1, the staff might just take a long look at him.

 

I see Carey as a tackle. But I have a feeling a lot of guys are going to go back and forth on this with him. RT only, but certainly talented enough. His guard experience could help if we put him at RG for a year, but either way IF we draft line first round I hope it's not neglecting more important or harder to fill needs.

WR and LB are two I've been going back and forth on, because I feel like we need more from those positions, but it's hard to justify it in some regards.

At LB, Morgan's playing better, Fields is "expected" back and Witherspoon somehow is getting accolades for this season from the press. We need something better, but I can't figure out who to kick out. And certainly, one may suggest we can't afford to just forget about Brian Allen. But our linebacking could still be better.

WR? We won't need a starter, because the average rookie won't be one anyway. Neither Moose nor Proehl can be counted on for more than a short distance, I guess; but if you draft a posession, you now have exactly one burner still. So how high can you justify drafting another Steve Smith - a guy who'll start returning immediately, and will eventually get around to offensive production - if he's going to be 4th receiver?

The problem is, if FA goes right, we don't need a first rounder to start. We need about five second round picks to spread amongst WR, TE, OT, and nickel corner, and linebacker. And that's unrealistic.

Which leaves me back to thinking that a first round receiver or TE makes the most sense again; I guess, that leaves the TE, since a fourth round WR/RS will make more impact than would a fourth round TE, in theory, even though the TE could have a chance to start. And a 2nd/3rd to split amongst CB, OT, LB.
That's where I'm at now, anyway.

 

I can only agree 100% with that reasoning and a couple of things are clear to me now. Your long-standing call for "more playmakers on offense" will be tough to answer as late as we are picking, and not just in the first round. WR might really be the smartest move with our 1st because by the sixties all the starting caliber deep threat WRs will definitely be gone. Maybe we can afford to wait until the 2nd for a WR (like BJ Johnson?) who could return and be our long-term slot guy. There are several guys like him who have deep speed but will never be that starting caliber every down guy who can do all those things we need as a #1 or #2 (like block for instance). Then there is a guy like Cotchery who won’t last until our 3rd that could give us the every down aspect but not the deep threat. Who IS our guy damnit! It will be interesting as hell to see who we draft because it has got to be addressed in the draft. Free agency doesn’t look to offer us any significant help in 2004. They are going to have to suck it up a draft SOMEBODY to play the position on day one, yes?
I can’t wait! :boune: