Draft guys

[PantherPaul]

I have read this is a very good year for safeties. Can you give me an idea what other positions are talent rich and which are not?

 

[Collin]

You can get a general idea by looking at this: http://www.gbnreport.com/2007top100.html

 

[magnus]

I have read this is a very good year for safeties. Can you give me an idea what other positions are talent rich and which are not?

DB in general isn't weak in the first couple rounds. QB, right now, by most ratings is topheavy. WR, I guess, is talented and deep.
OT is weak, DT is weak.

 

[PantherPaul]

You can get a general idea by looking at this: http://www.gbnreport.com/2007top100.html

Yeah I have viewed that a few times. What I was trying to gauge is since this appears to be a deep draft for safeties (and we need one) say the team really liked Nelson but Atlanta took him just ahead of us would we immediately take Landry or could we get similar value to Nelson in a linebacker (Willis?) and only have a smaller letdown with a safety in the second or even better the third.

Granted all of this is out the window with free agency upcoming

 

[Collin]

Landry is significantly better than any of the safeties with the possible exception of Nelson (depends on if you like Nelson's type of safety), so I hope not. MLB is pretty deep with solid but unspectacular guys.

 

[magnus]

Yeah I have viewed that a few times. What I was trying to gauge is since this appears to be a deep draft for safeties (and we need one) say the team really liked Nelson but Atlanta took him just ahead of us would we immediately take Landry or could we get similar value to Nelson in a linebacker (Willis?) and only have a smaller letdown with a safety in the second or even better the third.

Granted all of this is out the window with free agency upcoming

certainly, FA does change things a good bit. If you're asking if we could set S to the second round, in theory. I think it's our greatest need, so unless we got a veteran also, I'd have issue with that; I don't think either position requires an elite player so much as a very good one.

 

[McFly41]

I haven't looked in a while, but my assesment was that MLB has some talent, but that the speed of that group is terrible.

 

[magnus]

I haven't looked in a while, but my assesment was that MLB has some talent, but that the speed of that group is terrible.

yep. If you want a particularly speedy MLB, you're converting a guy. There's a chance a guy will work out especially well there, I guess, but Willis is a little above average for your typical first day MLB and nobody else that I know should crack sub 4.7.

 

[McFly41]

yep. If you want a particularly speedy MLB, you're converting a guy.

Or take a recent convert like Poslusny, he played middle most of the year...all but 2 games I believe. He's about the only one I see in there that has the complete package. He's a fit inside or out.

 

[PantherPaul]

certainly, FA does change things a good bit. If you're asking if we could set S to the second round, in theory. I think it's our greatest need, so unless we got a veteran also, I'd have issue with that; I don't think either position requires an elite player so much as a very good one.

I always suck at this. I just want the best player for the pick value. If we miss out on whomever the staff likes the best for a position at 14, is safety or linebacker deep enough without too much of a drop off to simply swap positions to draft.

If Nelson isn't there at 14 (knowing Landry won't be there in 2nd rd) would we take a Willis in rd 1 and get a safety (Griffen?) in rd two or take Landry in rd one and a Earl Everett in rd two. Which would be the better scenerio?