Cody Latimer Signs with NYG. So what does this mean for our need at WR?

[BaldyBronco]

29 minutes ago, BroncoBruin said:

Gonna address just a few things:

CJ is gone. Booker is a slow, plodding running back who doesn't scare anyone. Jake Butt has torn up his knee twice and was never a dynamic athlete to begin with. Depending on his potential is not a good plan. DT and E are old and have been banged up a lot over the past few years. We're going to end up with another Chad Johnson/TJ Housch situation where the offense runs through two declining athletes at WR. Not a good plan. And not sure I would tout Sanders, who lied about the birth of a child so he could skip practices to party and spends most of his time moping on the sideline, as such a great locker room guy or great example to follow.  Overall, it's an awful core of skill position players we currently have and improving the offensive line won't make any of them more dynamic. It's not like any offensive line you put on the field isn't at a significant disadvantage in pass pro in today's NFL anyway. The passing game in today's NFL is a reaction to that disadvantage: get the ball out as quickly as possible on shorter routes and let your athletes create YAC. Sanders is the only player on the team who fits that, and he's going to be 31 with several years of big hits and ankle injuries piling up. 

And to answer your earlier question, sure, why can't the Broncos go Barkley at #5 and Hernandez/Wynn/Price at #40? All three project to be very good offensive guards. This is not a zero sum game where injecting some life into our crippled offense means we can't improve the offensive line on Day 2. This class is very deep at OG as well. 

Your take is noted.  Draft a potentially great RB and the whats left at offensive guard and everything else and this best positions us in a pass happy league.  Roger.

Not cool to bring personal life's of players based on a couple going through a painful and emotional divorce based on a TMZ report.  He missed a "practice" and was transparent about it.  Gonna go back to the fun task of how we build a roster with all of the great voices on this forum.    

Thanks for the opinion

[Broncofan]

3 hours ago, broncos67 said:

Allen Hurns was just cut by Jacksonville. He would be a really good fit here, IMO.

 

3 hours ago, AnAngryAmerican said:

I saw that too! I think he'd be an excellent addition but Elway has been SO conservative this offseason (even with $25m in cap space left) that I'm not getting my hopes up.

I'll counter this sentiment - Hurns is injury-prone, and he's not really that special.   His best years were when JAX was playing from behind early, and were in major garbage time mode.   He's tough, over-the-middle, reliable-guy - but he's not a guy who beats press coverage, or wins 50-50 balls, or makes huge YAC plays anymore.  The injuries have robbed him of any special traits.  And 3 concussions - that's the final nail in the coffin IMO.   Next one could easily be a career-ender.   On a similar count, I'm not enthused on Jeremy Maclin - great in his prime, but made of glass - and again, the injuries have robbed him of his ability to be special.  His name is a mainstay on the weekly injury report lol.  

It's why I prefer a Cam Meredith - ACL recovery rates are excellent (although he's more likely to be truly his full explosive self in 2019, 18+ months post-injury, which is why you want to sign him to a 2-3 year deal, to get the additional bargain).    CHI WR Coach connection.  The issue will be if we can test CHI's resolve.    A bigger Q is if a guy like this is even on Elway's radar.    Which is sad - considering Elway's greatest hit was a 4th year player coming off his first contract, and being relatively unheralded - Manny Sanders.   This is the kind of thinking Elway needs, not retread vets with much higher price tags.   

The emphasis on retread vet choices is concerning.   REALLY concerning. 

[BaldyBronco]

24 minutes ago, AnAngryAmerican said:

So here's the question, which is the better combination:

Barkley at No. 5 + the best remaining OG in the 2nd

or

Nelson at No. 5 and the best remaining RB in the 2nd?

I believe Nelson at 5 and the RB in the 2nd.  I project Nelson as an All Pro and the other 3 RB's as potential Pro Bowlers.

[jsthomp2007]

Give me Barkley. all. day. long. 

[AKRNA]

35 minutes ago, Broncofan said:

Or Chubb and the best G at 2.7, and the best RB in the 3.8, and best RB/WR at 3.99?  We should NOT be pigeonholing ourselves to one way of drafting. 

I would love Sony Michel at 2.7 - but that's because IMO he's a top 30 player.   To get him at 39 is awesome.   But if the #25 guy comes up, and he's better, then we have other RB's at 3.8 to consider (although I would shed a tear at not getting him).   Likewise, if we get G at 2.7, maybe we're better off with Gallup or Anthony Miller at 3.7, and RB at 3.99 (or move up).    The point being, we have so many needs, going off the board and taking the best talent is a better idea than locking into need as the 1st criteria.    

We're not a contender.  We're not close to complete.  Even if we were, I'd argue the same thing - because going by need early lessens our overall talent.  Again, if the 2 guys are equal talents (or *that* close), then let need decide.  But do not let short-term need dictate your early picks.  I'd say that applies for 1.5 and 2.7.  We risk taking the 60th best player with the 39th pick with that thinking - when most of those guys are not likely to be Day 1 impact guys (even if they are starting).   

We keep saying that we need to hit in the draft.   Yet we keep making need factor in most when drafting - that's exactly what's led to our bad decisions.   Sly Williams?  Need pick.  Lynch?  Need pick.   Bolles totally driven by our need at LT.    At least Bolles is starting.   Now, the further back we go down the draft board, the smaller the talent differences become - so need is more justifiable.   But this year, at 1.5 & 2.7, don't let need drive you - pick the most talented guy.      

The only justification to not getting the BPA is if you think your alternatives to BPA at that same position are so close and available later (i.e. get  a decent G at 2.7, or a decent RB at 2.7 or even 3.8).     The thing is with Barkley, I'd say he's head and shoulders above the rest of the RB's.   And I don't say that about other Rd1 guys like Fournette, or CMac, or MGIII (Gurley and Elliott are the only 2 others I'd say that).    The argument for Chubb is that he's an elite pass rusher, and you can't get that later - where you can get a Day 2 G and RB that you could get.  I'd only say you're not getting HoF-ceiling RB talent, though.  But I get that argument.   The same goes for Nelson both ways - you can definitely get G/C later, but it won't be his level.   So it's a choice.    But unlike what Elway's been doing - we shouldn't be locking in to specific needs at specific spots.  Elway admitted that he was trying to trade up for both Bolles & Walker in Rd 1-2 - when he clearly didn't need to.   We shouldn't be so locked in like that. Ever.    

 

Very valid. The difference between those three and second best at their positions is pretty wide. I'm a trenches guy, have been now for half a century so my 1st choice is Nelson , then a 2nd rd RB, or offensive weapon.

When the dust settles on this draft, 10-15 years from now, I'd guess that Nelson will have more pro-bowls and all-pro years than any other player in this draft.

 

[jsthomp2007]

You know you look at all of the starting offensive linemen in the league and the pro bowlers and all pros...and it seems that very few of them were 1st rounders...in fact many seem to have been draft later in the draft, if at all.  I think offensive linemen new some time to develop.  Ergo, why not go Saquon and draft his blockers later?  

[BroncoBruin]

58 minutes ago, BaldyBronco said:

Your take is noted.  Draft a potentially great RB and the whats left at offensive guard and everything else and this best positions us in a pass happy league.  Roger.

Not cool to bring personal life's of players based on a couple going through a painful and emotional divorce based on a TMZ report.  He missed a "practice" and was transparent about it.  Gonna go back to the fun task of how we build a roster with all of the great voices on this forum.    

Thanks for the opinion

You do understand that RBs can be integral parts of passing games as well, yes? Roger Craig, Marshall Faulk, LT come to mind. An RB with Barkley’s receiving skills is a huge asset in a pass heavy league and the most dangerous matchup in the passing game for teams on early downs, especially when you consider how talented the league is at corner and front 4. Really, that kind of RB is the ideal matchup against current defenses. Remember what the Falcons did to our base defense in 2016? Also, this is one of the best guard drafts in a long time, a guard picked in the early 2nd round likely carries as much value as late 1st round guards in other years. Not exactly the horrible consolation prize you’re presenting.

I guess I’m sorry for correcting your false assertion with facts, however “not cool” you think they are. 

[Epic]

Barkley at 5.  Period.  If he is there, take him.  I doubt Hernandez falls to #40 (that would be a miracle), but maybe Daniels (C/G Iowa) will be there.  Wynn from Georgia perhaps.  We should still be able to find a starting Guard or Tackle at 40.

[jsthomp2007]

6 minutes ago, BroncoBruin said:

You do understand that RBs can be integral parts of passing games as well, yes? Roger Craig, Marshall Faulk, LT come to mind. An RB with Barkley’s receiving skills is a huge asset in a pass heavy league and the most dangerous matchup in the passing game for teams on early downs, especially when you consider how talented the league is at corner and front 4. Really, that kind of RB is the ideal matchup against current defenses. Remember what the Falcons did to our base defense in 2016? Also, this is one of the best guard drafts in a long time, a guard picked in the early 2nd round likely carries as much value as late 1st round guards in other years. Not exactly the horrible consolation prize you’re presenting.

I guess I’m sorry for correcting your false assertion with facts, however “not cool” you think they are. 

All for Barkley...I would even trade with the Brown at #4 get him...even if that meant giving up later/future pick to get him...I just think him being the face of the offense and Von being the face of the defense....would represent well for the organization a whole.  I mean, if Keenum isn't any good...you have the leverage to go get an all world QB by stating that all they really have to do is hand the ball of to Saquon.  

[broncofan48]

7 minutes ago, jsthomp2007 said:

All for Barkley...I would even trade with the Brown at #4 get him...even if that meant giving up later/future pick to get him...I just think him being the face of the offense and Von being the face of the defense....would represent well for the organization a whole.  I mean, if Keenum isn't any good...you have the leverage to go get an all world QB by stating that all they really have to do is hand the ball of to Saquon.  

That brings up a good point.  If Cleveland is willing to trade back, and you don't like the QB prospects left, and Barkley is there do you trade up 1 spot to ensure getting him?  

[BaldyBronco]

3 minutes ago, BroncoBruin said:

You do understand that RBs can be integral parts of passing games as well, yes? Roger Craig, Marshall Faulk, LT come to mind. An RB with Barkley’s receiving skills is a huge asset in a pass heavy league and the most dangerous matchup in the passing game for teams on early downs, especially when you consider how talented the league is at corner and front 4. Really, that kind of RB is the ideal matchup against current defenses. Remember what the Falcons did to our base defense in 2016? Also, this is one of the best guard drafts in a long time, a guard picked in the early 2nd round likely carries as much value as late 1st round guards in other years. Not exactly the horrible consolation prize you’re presenting.

I guess I’m sorry for correcting your false assertion with facts, however “not cool” you think they are. 

Lets assume that most of the people who post opinions here understand. 

I am sure Emanuel would appreciate your apology.  You should read the 1st rule in the forum.  I know Bronco players and personnel who read and value this blog.  We should show respect as  such I would think.

Would prefer not to chat with you, as I am not here to be lectured.  LOL  Thank man.

[BaldyBronco]

11 minutes ago, jsthomp2007 said:

All for Barkley...I would even trade with the Brown at #4 get him...even if that meant giving up later/future pick to get him...I just think him being the face of the offense and Von being the face of the defense....would represent well for the organization a whole.  I mean, if Keenum isn't any good...you have the leverage to go get an all world QB by stating that all they really have to do is hand the ball of to Saquon.  

 

3 minutes ago, broncofan48 said:

That brings up a good point.  If Cleveland is willing to trade back, and you don't like the QB prospects left, and Barkley is there do you trade up 1 spot to ensure getting him?  

This scares the heck out of me.  Trading up to #1 for  a RB is super risky don't you think?  Especially for the cost?

[broncofan48]

Just now, BaldyBronco said:

 

This scares the heck out of me.  Trading up to #1 for  a RB is super risky don't you think?  Especially for the cost?

No to #4

[Broncofan]

6 minutes ago, BaldyBronco said:

Lets assume that most of the people who post opinions here understand. 

I am sure Emanuel would appreciate your apology.  You should read the 1st rule in the forum.  I know Bronco players and personnel who read and value this blog.  We should show respect as  such I would think.

Would prefer not to chat with you, as I am not here to be lectured.  LOL  Thank man.

Dude the rules of the forum are to be civil to each other.  Everyone is entitled to their opinion on a player.   @BroncoBruin doesn’t need to apologize to anyone.   He knows the rules like pretty much everyone else.  There is zero call for this.  

People don’t have to agree.   Disagreement is how we learn from each other.  But we should stay on topic and talk about the points made - not personal jabs at the people making the posts .   This does not help in any way.  Let’s be better than this. 

[BaldyBronco]

Just now, broncofan48 said:

No to #4

Ah. Maybe?  So you are set on Barkley and I can't argue with someone who is.  Kid is special.  I just have this brick and mortar belief right now.  I never want anyone to think I am anti  - Barkley, I don't see him changing this team as it stands now.  If Elway can use this Von Money through trade to fill a couple holes (O LINE!!), I would warm up in a big hurry to this.