The only problem I have with drafting another 3-4 DE, especially one like Hageman, is that we're so stocked with "potential" at that position in Daniels, Jones, Worthy and both Neal and Boyd depending on what they're playing with those two, that I'm not sure I'd like another first rounder invested at this point.

Of course you pick him up if he would fall down further than expected and he'll be just of too great a value to pass on him.

Nix, I like. He's really not that different from Raji coming out of college. I wouldn't hestitate to take a shot on him if he would fall all the way down to us. Thing is, he's way too talented to go 21st overall. We'd have to trade up. Since he might just be the best DT in the draft and is projected to play NT in both the 3-4 and 4-3, giving him high positional value, I don't see him falling to the 20s.

Originally Posted by: Rockmolder 

You know, I find myself thinking the same thing whenever I think of this team spending a pick on a DL in rounds 1-3. Then I remember how the Giants rode their front 4 to two titles even though the rest of their D was mediocre. I know it's not exactly the same thing since the Packers are technically a 3-4 and run a lot of subpackages that involve 2 DL, but being able to control the LOS with only 4 guys seems more important than ever with how much the NFL favors passing these days.

Originally Posted by: Mucky Tundra 

You know, I find myself thinking the same thing whenever I think of this team spending a pick on a DL in rounds 1-3. Then I remember how the Giants rode their front 4 to two titles even though the rest of their D was mediocre. I know it's not exactly the same thing since the Packers are technically a 3-4 and run a lot of subpackages that involve 2 DL, but being able to control the LOS with only 4 guys seems more important than ever with how much the NFL favors passing these days.

Originally Posted by: Mucky Tundra 

The only problem I have with drafting another 3-4 DE, especially one like Hageman, is that we're so stocked with "potential" at that position in Daniels, Jones, Worthy and both Neal and Boyd depending on what they're playing with those two, that I'm not sure I'd like another first rounder invested at this point.

Of course you pick him up if he would fall down further than expected and he'll be just of too great a value to pass on him.

Nix, I like. He's really not that different from Raji coming out of college. I wouldn't hestitate to take a shot on him if he would fall all the way down to us. Thing is, he's way too talented to go 21st overall. We'd have to trade up. Since he might just be the best DT in the draft and is projected to play NT in both the 3-4 and 4-3, giving him high positional value, I don't see him falling to the 20s.

Originally Posted by: Rockmolder 

Also I think Raji had a lot more burst than Nix.

Originally Posted by: beast 

I want Ted to take the best MLB available. Hawk and Jones are really really bad compared to the rest of the league.

Originally Posted by: luigis 

I disagree with this strongly. Hawk played so well this year that some believe he deserved an alternate spot in the Pro Bowl. He has been criticized in the past for not being a part of big plays (namely turnovers), but this year he amassed 5 sacks while being credited with a pick, forced fumble, and fumble recovery. And of course, he continued to be a tackle machine. Perhaps most importantly however, he was arguably our most consistent healthy player on defense. While I think Jones grades out a lot better than people give him credit for, it does suck that he seemed injured throughout most of the season.

Anyhow, on the topic of the 21st pick in the draft, I know this is just fun speculation, but I really can't do it until I see the Senior Bowl and/or the Combine. We just really have no idea where people are going to fall right now. So instead of a wish-list of players and positions that I would really like to see addressed, I'm just going to be patient until more information arrives. I'll join the discussion then.

Originally Posted by: StoicFire 

Ted Thompson is a Ron Wolf disciple. They will not draft a defensive back under six feet, especially one from Florida State. I don't agree with the rule, as I love Joyner, but that is their philosophy.

Originally Posted by: porky88 

That the Terrell Buckley rule or something? [grin1]


Casey Hayward 5' 11"
Jerron McMillian 5' 11"
Nick Collins 5' 11"
Marviel Underwood 5' 10"

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 

Morgan Burnett and MD Jennings were targeted 60 times in 2013. Allowed 46 catches, 612 yards, 9 TDs and a passer rating of 148.1.


Do we double dip?

Originally Posted by: cheeseheads123 

From this list Collins was a good player. McMilian and Underwoord were busts.
And the jury is still out for Hayward.

Originally Posted by: luigis 

It is a good point sschind. A true contributor on D. Yep. That's what I want. Again.

Sad that this is so true. To me, Datone was super underwhelming, Perry never really materialized into the player I had hoped, Worthy never showed, Daniels rocked, but Hayward, our only real success on D couldn't contribute this year. Mike Neal seems a square peg in any round hole.

Thank God for Micah Hyde. Slow, but a sure instinctive defender and returner. So, 2 good contributors out of that bunch? Nevermind Raji & Matthews? Wow.

Ted has to do a better job.

Originally Posted by: play2win 

Obviously there is still hope for some of these guys and in a year or two we may be saying they were great draft picks (Heck I'd even settle for good draft picks)

I suppose part of that comes from picking later when all the blue chippers are gone and some development time can be expected but a lot of it comes form the idea that we really didn't need to hit it big because we really didn't need all that much help. I don't know if it allowed Ted Thompson to take chances or what, I don't really think so but maybe now it will be clear to him that we do need a lot of help.

He hit one out of the park with Lacy last year and and it looks like Hyde may be a keeper (although Hayward looked like a keeper last year) Bahktiari looked decent for a rookie and others may pan out and that might skew the draft grades when they come due in another two years (if you go by the "it takes 3 years to grade a draft" montra) but those are late round finds (maybe not Lacy but I think you know what I mean.)

I might be willing to whiff on our first round pick every year if we can find 4 solid contributors in the rest of the draft but I am getting tired of there uncertainty of our first round pick every year. Its like a visit to massage parlor. You get all worked up and then bang, you find out that it really is just a massage parlor and their is no happy ending.

Originally Posted by: sschind 

I say YES!!!!!! I don't think we should count on Burnett getting better, though the possibility may exist with less pressure to cover the whole damn field… We must add at least one S this offseason. I'd prefer it was a proven vet FS, then draft another top S.

Originally Posted by: play2win