Dr LBC Posted April 5, 2018 Share Posted April 5, 2018 1 hour ago, NVRamsFan said: Don't worry guys! Les has a plan Damnit! Why can't Ryan Grigson still be employed as a GM? This might have actually worked! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RamRod Posted April 8, 2018 Share Posted April 8, 2018 How about a guy like Wyatt Teller at 87? I got to watch him plenty at Virginia Tech and he's an animal, plus offensive line could become a serious need in another year or two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEE RAWL Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 On 4/8/2018 at 7:14 AM, RamRod said: How about a guy like Wyatt Teller at 87? I got to watch him plenty at Virginia Tech and he's an animal, plus offensive line could become a serious need in another year or two. Not a fan of Teller, but I agree that round 3 is a great spot for OL. Corbett Crosby Ragnow All guys that would provide excellent value should they be there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RamRod Posted April 10, 2018 Share Posted April 10, 2018 Anybody know anything on Dane Cruikshank? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr LBC Posted April 10, 2018 Share Posted April 10, 2018 42 minutes ago, RamRod said: Anybody know anything on Dane Cruikshank? Possible Hawk Davis replacement. He gets overrated in a lot of internet draftnik circles because of his athleticism - which you don't always see translate to field. You see a lot of mental hiccups in his game which really makes me question his instincts. Kind of reminds me of a lighter (and for the moment that's a knock because at 205 lbs, he's kind of a man without a position at the next level) Jaquiski Tartt. Maybe he's someone they look at to try and bulk up into a linebacker because he's a willing hitter, but he was your classic SPUR/Robber in that there were a coupel of things he did really well (intercept passes, come in strong as a free blitzer, and hit hard), but he has a deficiency that leaves a glaring hole in him playing any one particular position of CB, FS, SS, or LB because he's not as adept as you'd want him to be in coverage, and he gave up A LOT of penalties and TD's... and most of his coverage issues weren't for lack of being able to athletically compete, rather mental. The one thing that I think he could definitely replace that Hawk was giving us is the catches from Hekker, because Cruikshank does have soft hands. I just don't know that that's something you draft unless you feel like you can repair those (many) mental mistakes he makes to have him actually carve out a position for himself, even if as an eternal backup/ST'er. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flatlyner Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 Quote On 4/9/2018 at 1:03 PM, DEE RAWL said: Not a fan of Teller, but I agree that round 3 is a great spot for OL. Corbett Crosby Ragnow All guys that would provide excellent value should they be there. Ragnow would be an absolute steal at our pick in the 3rd. I'm all for any of the 3 you posted, but a bit worried that none of them will be there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrry32 Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 There's no reason to spend our 3rd on an OL unless a LT surprisingly falls. There are plenty of talented interior OLs and OT projects available on Day 3. Our 3rd round pick will give us a shot at a talented edge rusher or a playmaking ILB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StLunatic88 Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 12 hours ago, jrry32 said: There's no reason to spend our 3rd on an OL unless a LT surprisingly falls. There are plenty of talented interior OLs and OT projects available on Day 3. Our 3rd round pick will give us a shot at a talented edge rusher or a playmaking ILB. Being locked into anything before where we see the board falls is just bad draft strategy. I know there are some solid LB prospects in the 75-125 range in this draft, but we have other picks to go get guys if an unexpected talent falls to 87. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrry32 Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 50 minutes ago, StLunatic88 said: Being locked into anything before where we see the board falls is just bad draft strategy. I know there are some solid LB prospects in the 75-125 range in this draft, but we have other picks to go get guys if an unexpected talent falls to 87. I didn't think I needed a disclaimer that we should consider a guy like Billy Price on Quentin Nelson if by some miracle they dropped in the Draft. EDIT: This came off more dickish than I intended. My apologies for that. But you're stating the obvious here. None of us know if someone unexpected will drop. We're discussing the pick with the players expected to be available in mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StLunatic88 Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 23 minutes ago, jrry32 said: I didn't think I needed a disclaimer that we should consider a guy like Billy Price on Quentin Nelson if by some miracle they dropped in the Draft. EDIT: This came off more dickish than I intended. My apologies for that. But you're stating the obvious here. None of us know if someone unexpected will drop. We're discussing the pick with the players expected to be available in mind. I get it, and my quote wasnt necessarily directed toward you (I know you know theses things) you just happened to be the latest person to say something about the LBs. But some around here have completely locked themselves into a LB with most of our first 4 picks, and Im just saying I wouldnt put all your draft hopes in there. I think Snead & McVay are actually comfortable wit the 4 LBs we will be running out there as of now (Ebukam, Littleton, Barron, Longacre) and will only upgrade if the right guys are there. Im honestly shocked in how interested in Safety types we seem to be... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrry32 Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 5 minutes ago, StLunatic88 said: I get it, and my quote wasnt necessarily directed toward you (I know you know theses things) you just happened to be the latest person to say something about the LBs. But some around here have completely locked themselves into a LB with most of our first 4 picks, and Im just saying I wouldnt put all your draft hopes in there. I think Snead & McVay are actually comfortable wit the 4 LBs we will be running out there as of now (Ebukam, Littleton, Barron, Longacre) and will only upgrade if the right guys are there. Im honestly shocked in how interested in Safety types we seem to be... It's the depth that worries me. Our starting 4 are passable, but we need a lot of help behind them. Personally, I see need meeting value in the 3rd with a LB. It seems like there are a lot of good ones in that range. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StLunatic88 Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 2 minutes ago, jrry32 said: It's the depth that worries me. Our starting 4 are passable, but we need a lot of help behind them. Personally, I see need meeting value in the 3rd with a LB. It seems like there are a lot of good ones in that range. Completely agree. With 8 picks, we need to add atleast 3 LBs somewhere, and I think we will. I could just see that #87 being absolutely anyone (its our only Top 100 pick, we need to grab talent there). If Crosby, Brown, Rankin, or O'Neill slip I could see us jumping at a high upside Lineman. If Chark, Miller or Hurst drop I could see us adding another Weapon. And if someone like Settle, Phillips, Oliver or even Reid drops, I could see us adding another defensive guy at an area of strength. As Im looking at my big board, yes I agree with you, the most likely talent left at 87 is probably a LB. but if there is a run on them that starts at the back end of the 2nd, all of those guys could potentially be gone, and I dont want to reach for a guy we can have in the 4th (even if we need to give up a 6th to ensure it) over a true Top 100 talent (especially if its a Top 75 or higher talent that drops) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flatlyner Posted April 12, 2018 Share Posted April 12, 2018 22 hours ago, jrry32 said: There's no reason to spend our 3rd on an OL unless a LT surprisingly falls. There are plenty of talented interior OLs and OT projects available on Day 3. Our 3rd round pick will give us a shot at a talented edge rusher or a playmaking ILB. While I definitely want a Edge or ILB in the 3rd, I have Ragnaw as a early to mid talent on the OLine. He can play any interior position and I think he's very talented. To me, it would be hard to pass on that value there. I certainly see what your saying about LB's though, we are clearly pretty desperate for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEASToftheEAST4 Posted April 12, 2018 Share Posted April 12, 2018 On 4/10/2018 at 2:22 PM, The LBC said: Possible Hawk Davis replacement. He gets overrated in a lot of internet draftnik circles because of his athleticism - which you don't always see translate to field. You see a lot of mental hiccups in his game which really makes me question his instincts. Kind of reminds me of a lighter (and for the moment that's a knock because at 205 lbs, he's kind of a man without a position at the next level) Jaquiski Tartt. Maybe he's someone they look at to try and bulk up into a linebacker because he's a willing hitter, but he was your classic SPUR/Robber in that there were a coupel of things he did really well (intercept passes, come in strong as a free blitzer, and hit hard), but he has a deficiency that leaves a glaring hole in him playing any one particular position of CB, FS, SS, or LB because he's not as adept as you'd want him to be in coverage, and he gave up A LOT of penalties and TD's... and most of his coverage issues weren't for lack of being able to athletically compete, rather mental. The one thing that I think he could definitely replace that Hawk was giving us is the catches from Hekker, because Cruikshank does have soft hands. I just don't know that that's something you draft unless you feel like you can repair those (many) mental mistakes he makes to have him actually carve out a position for himself, even if as an eternal backup/ST'er. I actually like Cruikshank a lot (as a late round flier). Lot of athleticism and a willing and capable hard hitter. I think his flaws are coachable and worst case scenario, if they're not, it'll only be a 6th round pick (if I had to predict where he landed). He's a guy I've been constantly putting in my personal mock drafts. Would like to see him in horns as safety depth. Worst case, I think he's a stud special teamer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr LBC Posted April 12, 2018 Share Posted April 12, 2018 10 minutes ago, BEASToftheEAST4 said: I actually like Cruikshank a lot (as a late round flier). Lot of athleticism and a willing and capable hard hitter. I think his flaws are coachable and worst case scenario, if they're not, it'll only be a 6th round pick (if I had to predict where he landed). He's a guy I've been constantly putting in my personal mock drafts. Would like to see him in horns as safety depth. Worst case, I think he's a stud special teamer. Late round, as in one of our glut of 6th's, absolutely. I have my own safeties I prefer who also project as potential special teams studs, but I won't turn my nose up at Cruikshank either. I want no part of him before mid/late Day 3 though unless Wade is convinced he can do a quick bulk-up to play ILB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.