Jump to content

2019 Day 1 Draft Thread (NO SPOILERS!)


jleisher

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, beekay414 said:

We wanted Savage and there was smoke that Oakland and another team wanted him. It's really that simple. We got our guy for a mediocre price. It's not the end of the world.

Very much the latter part of this.  We gave up TWO fourth round picks.  We can easily recoup those picks by moving down from our second or third round picks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Bang! said:

Right ^

The Safety position is stacked. Why did we need to move up to get this guy? Will another go before 30?

Back in December (I think) I looked at the historically bad mishandling of the most valuable draft capital over the past decade or so (1st Round picks etc) I was 100% behind combining our assets and securing a top 5 pick to ensure we got the highest possible production out of our investment. My argument was extremely simple, the production out of our 1st round picks was laughable.

Afraid that history would repeat, I was extremely vocal about moving up to ensure we didnt screw up again with a top 12 and second 1st Rounder.

As I expected, my overreaction was met by some of the usuals and there was good/valid points on both sides; however, the overwhelming feeling was there is no way that we move up when so many holes needed to be addressed.

We arent out of Round 1 yet but I cannot understand why we traded up? Its arguably the most stacked position available at this point. I don't take issue with the player, I just can't see moving up 9 spots in the first when the probability of Abram (still convinced he was the top of the class), Thompson, Gardner-Johnson, Rapp, Adderley, Thornhill--- I think I could name 9 that Im ok with in a scenario where GB doesnt move from 30.

I know I didnt miss anything, but guys, what am I missing here?

Because GB doesn't view these safeties all as players they want to acquire. They're not like us, where we rank them and see a lot of them left at around the same grade. They wanted Savage, and Savage alone. He was their guy. They were afraid of the Colts and maybe a couple other teams, so they went and got him. There was no "settling" for CGJ, because maybe they didn't see CGJ as a fit. 

I don't have any inside info, but we as fans need to realize that NFL teams boards are A LOT smaller than ours. I'll bet a bunch of those safeties were rated significantly lower in GB's eyes. They wanted Savage. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Bang! said:

Right ^

The Safety position is stacked. Why did we need to move up to get this guy? Will another go before 30?

Back in December (I think) I looked at the historically bad mishandling of the most valuable draft capital over the past decade or so (1st Round picks etc) I was 100% behind combining our assets and securing a top 5 pick to ensure we got the highest possible production out of our investment. My argument was extremely simple, the production out of our 1st round picks was laughable.

Afraid that history would repeat, I was extremely vocal about moving up to ensure we didnt screw up again with a top 12 and second 1st Rounder.

As I expected, my overreaction was met by some of the usuals and there was good/valid points on both sides; however, the overwhelming feeling was there is no way that we move up when so many holes needed to be addressed.

We arent out of Round 1 yet but I cannot understand why we traded up? Its arguably the most stacked position available at this point. I don't take issue with the player, I just can't see moving up 9 spots in the first when the probability of Abram (still convinced he was the top of the class), Thompson, Gardner-Johnson, Rapp, Adderley, Thornhill--- I think I could name 9 that Im ok with in a scenario where GB doesnt move from 30.

I know I didnt miss anything, but guys, what am I missing here?

Free Safety is arguably the WEAKEST position in this class. And yes, a crap ton of Safeties are expected to go between now and 44. We got our pick of all of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

Legitimately asking for Raiders fans, why take Abram when you have Karl Joseph?

I think they're more complementary than it might seem at first glance. Karl isnt too much different from CGJ. I think hes been massively misused.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, HighCalebR said:

I think they're more complementary than it might seem at first glance. Karl isnt too much different from Savage. I think hes been massively misused.

I mean, Oakland drafted Joseph and Abram.  Both are more box safeties.  Unless you're planning on essentially playing a Cover-3/1 this doesn't make sense to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Bang! said:

Right ^

The Safety position is stacked. Why did we need to move up to get this guy? Will another go before 30?

Back in December (I think) I looked at the historically bad mishandling of the most valuable draft capital over the past decade or so (1st Round picks etc) I was 100% behind combining our assets and securing a top 5 pick to ensure we got the highest possible production out of our investment. My argument was extremely simple, the production out of our 1st round picks was laughable.

Afraid that history would repeat, I was extremely vocal about moving up to ensure we didnt screw up again with a top 12 and second 1st Rounder.

As I expected, my overreaction was met by some of the usuals and there was good/valid points on both sides; however, the overwhelming feeling was there is no way that we move up when so many holes needed to be addressed.

We arent out of Round 1 yet but I cannot understand why we traded up? Its arguably the most stacked position available at this point. I don't take issue with the player, I just can't see moving up 9 spots in the first when the probability of Abram (still convinced he was the top of the class), Thompson, Gardner-Johnson, Rapp, Adderley, Thornhill--- I think I could name 9 that Im ok with in a scenario where GB doesnt move from 30.

I know I didnt miss anything, but guys, what am I missing here?

Andy Herman:  There were 3 safeties I thought that fit well with Amos: Thornhill, Savage, & CGJ.

I think Herman kinda agrees with you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I couldn't be more excited about this first round for us. We bitched for years about not having athletes on defense. Well...today we landed two elite ones to go along with our free agent acquisitions and our stud 2nd year CB. The times, they are a-changin'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...