Jump to content

glazeduck

Members
  • Content Count

    192
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

137 Excellent

About glazeduck

  • Rank
    Practice Squad

Recent Profile Visitors

327 profile views
  1. It's fine to say that a lot of QBs are overpaid, I don't think anyone will disagree with you. And yes, in a vacuum, if teams were tighter on their spending to that position, the market would, in theory, go down. What you're not accounting for is the scarcity of talent at the position. MOST even viable QBs are drafted out of the first round, usually in the top 10 picks, or so. So what you're not accounting for is using premium draft capital every couple years to make sure you've got a suitable replacement. And that's assuming you're even able to get high enough in the draft to get a
  2. They don't *pay* the reporter to share fake news. The reporter *knows* that by playing this game, they're earning real scoops later. The reporter, being not an idiot, then goes off and phrases their scoop in such a way that it starts the conversation without overguaranteeing anything or connecting too many dots. This 100% happens, I've been told as much by one of sports' most well-known reporters, personally.
  3. Justice Hill would be an intriguing buy-VERY-low candidate...
  4. For a guy with his injury history it would have to depend on the cost, BUT, one thing I haven't seen get a lot of attention re. Ingram is what he allows our defense to do... While helpful for casual fans to get a general understanding of personnel groupings, positional groupings, general and foundational playcalling and strategy, etc., modern NFL defenses very rarely fall neatly into "scheme" boxes like 4-3, 3-4, etc. Teams are looking to be as "multiple" as they can be, which is a very football way of saying that they want to have players be able to do a variety of things in diffe
  5. For the record, I'm super hopeful all of these guys pan out. Just seeing a lot of posts about how great we did and thought I'd share my perspective. Would love nothing more than to be dead wrong on the ones I'm less than excited about.
  6. Separation is about a lot more than just explosion, it's ankle and hip agility, it's setting up CBs, it's knowing how to run routes against man v zone, hand placement/fighting, etc. This is why most GMs don't take too much away from the combine, literally no one in the NFL has ever run a straight line in shorts, unguarded in a game. Hodgins had a hard time creating separation against a lot of middling-to-bad DBs in the P12. He's going to have his work cut out for him against NFL CBs.
  7. You're making a lot of incorrect assumptions here... I've seen Moss play in person 3x, I'm basing my opinion on him on a lot more than just his 40 time. I gave the K a "pass" (as in pass/no pass), how else would you recommend I grade a Kicker taken in the 6th rd? Feel like I said a lot of the same things you said about Hodgins. Great hands are great, but if you can't get open in the NFL, you're not going to get thrown to. Hodgins is going to have trouble separating in the NFL, but he's big and has good hands, cool. I've seen Fromm play several times as well. Not sur
  8. Firstly, appreciate you being what would appear to be the first to have read my post before responding. I definitely see the potential in Moss and again, LOVE the way he runs. I guess I just question how dynamic a backfield can be with 2 guys with avg. to below-avg. speed, hopefully all of our smurfs will stretch the defense enough to open some holes. Similar with Hodgins, I'm optimistic, but I just fear he's too limited and stiff to ever really be more than a role player. On Jackson, again, you can't really waste a 7th round pick, so he's worth a shot, I'm
  9. A couple quick caveats to this post that hopefully provide enough context to make this a substantive conversation and not come across as simply complaining... 1. I'm very much in the camp of trusting Beane and McD, it's been clear to me (up to this point, anyway) that there's been a solid plan in place that they are executing. 2. My draft evaluations/judgments come from 2 places: watching the film and athletic testing First created topic, here goes... I love that most folks -- both on this board, as well as the broader community -- are excited about our
  10. Yes to every one of these. Also Quartney Davis, Juwan Johnson III, Dane Jackson, Calvin Throckmorton, Tyrie Cleveland, Michael Warren II...
  11. As I said in another thread, it's about more than just having a need, you have to find the player too. If a Jajuan Johnson type is just as bad in coverage as a 3rd LB, you're actually losing there. Delpit is the only one available that could come in and be that guy right away, to me. If we want to take a crack at Dugger in the 4th (I think his small school status will kill his draft prospects) then I'd be all for it, but I don't think you can say he's automatically your day 1 nickel LB starter. Sometimes it's better to not out-think the room...
  12. You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but I don't understand why we can't also be planning for the future to some degree (while also taking a player who plays special teams and provides another element to the offense?) I'm also not sure where else you're going to take a player who will have a much more substantive impact in games AND provide similar value... DE is 3+ deep already, we've clearly been poking around in free agency and the talent pool in this draft is dreadful. CB has a few interesting players, but we also have 3 guys on the roster already vying f
  13. The Packers have arguably the best QB of this generation AND more glaring needs elsewhere than we have, and used their 1 on a QB. The Chiefs have arguably the best offense in the history of the game AND more glaring needs elsewhere than we have, and used their 1 on a RB. The draft isn't always about "making sense" with your resources. It's about finding the best on-field value. Maybe Beane thinks that's at WR, maybenot, but simply adding up the total number of assets used doesn't really make a difference. Under your logic, the assets the Falcons gave up for Julio probably don'
  14. That's certainly one way to break it down. The other is to say it was a 1, a future 4 and 2 scrubs for a proven veteran, and a late 2 for great value at a position that has the potential of opening up new attack vectors and aid in the confidence of your young franchise QB. Obviously get your point, but I still come back to the argument of, when taking into account draft value, where else are we that much more deficient on the roster?
×
×
  • Create New...