Jump to content





Photo
- - - - -

PFW (Eric Holmes) also says DT position needs higher priority


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
61 replies to this topic

#37 Thorrez

Thorrez

    Junior Member

  • Joined: 14-March 12
  • PipPipPipPip
  • posts: 424
  • Reputation: 112
HUDDLER

Posted 18 January 2013 - 01:37 AM

Am I the only one thinking we are not a draft for need team at the moment? It is not like we are one or two players away from the super bowl.

We are set at rb qb de and lb, other than that I think we should just take the top talent available. We might make the play offs next year but I do not we have enough for a deep run until 2014.

#38 JawnyBlaze

JawnyBlaze

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 11-May 10
  • posts: 7,698
  • Reputation: 2,065
SUPPORTER

Posted 18 January 2013 - 03:26 AM

Am I the only one thinking we are not a draft for need team at the moment? It is not like we are one or two players away from the super bowl.

We are set at rb qb de and lb, other than that I think we should just take the top talent available. We might make the play offs next year but I do not we have enough for a deep run until 2014.


You're right in that you don't reach for a need if it can be helped, but positional value plays a large part in it too. Since we're set at QB and DE, the next two high value positions are OT and DT.

We could use either (though arguably we need a DT more than OT, OT is also higher value so it evens out in my opinion) so as long as there's not a player available at a position of lesser value that is obviously head and shoulders above the players at higher value (Warmack is the only player I see that fits that description) we should be picking BPA among Tackles on either side of the line.

Assuming Star, Joeckel and Fisher are all gone when we pick, I'm thinking the BPA will be a DT: Hankins, J. Williams or Richardson. The #3+ OTs don't come close to those 3 DTs in my opinion.

The only decisions to be made, in my opinion, are whether we go with Warmack if he's available or if not which of the 3 DTs. Since we obviously need a run stuffer more than a UT, the question becomes do they think Richardson is better enough than the other two to tip the scale away from the need for a run stuffer. In my opinion Richardson ISN'T that much (if any) better than Hankins or Williams and we should be picking between those two. But I wouldn't be upset if they disagree and think Richardson can be the next JJ Watt or whatever other great UT you can think of (since I'm guessing in a 4-3 Watt would be an UT).

#39 Ivan The Awesome

Ivan The Awesome

    Keep Pounding...all the way to...the draft! :D

  • Joined: 11-May 11
  • posts: 10,128
  • Reputation: 2,848
SUPPORTER

Posted 18 January 2013 - 03:58 AM

DT is a need but you should not reach for one.


14th is perfect for a DT. There isn't any reaching anymore, unless you're q QB needy team with the #1 pick and QBs suck in this years draft. The rookie pay scale softened the blow. We are in a perfect range to get a great DT, OT, DB, WR.

#40 SmittyistheGOAT

SmittyistheGOAT

    MEMBER

  • Joined: 28-September 12
  • PipPipPipPip
  • posts: 340
  • Reputation: 24
HUDDLER

Posted 18 January 2013 - 05:30 AM

dwan can stay but ron is about to be in a retirement home

we need a young stud DT

#41 panthersphan

panthersphan

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 2,596
  • Reputation: 157
HUDDLER

Posted 18 January 2013 - 05:37 AM

Lets be honest, we have a lot of glaring holes on this team.

We desperately need to upgrade the WR, DT, OT, OG, CB, and both Safety positions.

This won't get fixed in one off season, we pick the BAP at those positions instead of focusing in on one or 2 positions.

Obviously we need to make it a higher priority and I have faith that the Godfather will make he right decisions moving forward...

#42 JawnyBlaze

JawnyBlaze

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 11-May 10
  • posts: 7,698
  • Reputation: 2,065
SUPPORTER

Posted 18 January 2013 - 06:13 AM

I wouldn't say we desperately need to upgrade WR, OT (if Gross stays) or CB. Even if Gamble leaves we're not desperate at CB. The only "desperate" upgrades I see us needing is DT, S and maybe OG. CB could use some depth and maybe someone to push Thomas, Norman, Capt and Dockery if Gamble leaves. OT and WR will need successors eventually, better sooner than later, but they're not critical "must haves" this offseason.

#43 JawnyBlaze

JawnyBlaze

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 11-May 10
  • posts: 7,698
  • Reputation: 2,065
SUPPORTER

Posted 18 January 2013 - 06:22 AM

And of those three legitimate holes, I can mock us our first three picks and fill them right now:

1. Hankins or J Williams
2. Barrett Jones, Cooper, or Larry Warford
4. Rambo (or Eric Reid and let Godfrey stay at FS where I like him best anyway)

Bam. No holes. Just future replacements needed for Gross and Smitty and depth at CB and OL

#44 Beast_3000

Beast_3000

    MEMBER

  • Joined: 28-May 12
  • PipPipPipPip
  • posts: 971
  • Reputation: 307
HUDDLER

Posted 18 January 2013 - 08:02 AM

And of those three legitimate holes, I can mock us our first three picks and fill them right now:

1. Hankins or J Williams
2. Barrett Jones, Cooper, or Larry Warford
4. Rambo (or Eric Reid and let Godfrey stay at FS where I like him best anyway)

Bam. No holes. Just future replacements needed for Gross and Smitty and depth at CB and OL


I like your mock. I would be satisfied with those picks although. I just really want a stud OG . I think it will hide our tackle deficiency by addition of a better run game.

#45 DaCityKats

DaCityKats

    feed KB 2014

  • Joined: 11-March 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 9,160
  • Reputation: 1,177
HUDDLER

Posted 18 January 2013 - 08:39 AM

14th is perfect for a DT. There isn't any reaching anymore, unless you're q QB needy team with the #1 pick and QBs suck in this years draft. The rookie pay scale softened the blow. We are in a perfect range to get a great DT, OT, DB, WR.

i agree we are in perfect range for a good talent at DT, OT, WR, DB,but you should not reach for any position but QB. if no DT is there at 14 worth the pick, get a WR,OL, or DB.

#46 Floppin

Floppin

    Smooches

  • Joined: 10-May 10
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 12,957
  • Reputation: 3,467
HUDDLER

Posted 18 January 2013 - 08:46 AM

I don't disagree. the edwards wall was solid last season but dwan shouldn't be considered much more than hollis thomas was in 2009(?) ron is getting up there too.

I'd love to see offensive and defensive lineman in the first two rounds, and given the giants philosophy i think that's a safe bet


You got those names backwards. Ron is the older one.

#47 catnip

catnip

    Member

  • Joined: 14-October 10
  • PipPipPipPip
  • posts: 317
  • Reputation: 55
HUDDLER

Posted 18 January 2013 - 09:25 AM

Gettleman came from the Giants and knows the players very well. The Giants need a MLB and we need a WR. Beason would be a good fit for them and we need Nicks at WR. If Getleman can make it happen, we would not feel bad for Beason leaving and it will meet a big need for us without using our draft picks.
A win win !

#48 top dawg

top dawg

    The Creative Cat

  • Joined: 11-December 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 9,678
  • Reputation: 3,673
HUDDLER

Posted 18 January 2013 - 10:02 AM

Gettleman came from the Giants and knows the players very well. The Giants need a MLB and we need a WR. Beason would be a good fit for them and we need Nicks at WR. If Getleman can make it happen, we would not feel bad for Beason leaving and it will meet a big need for us without using our draft picks.
A win win !


I don't see them giving up Nicks that easy for a questionable Beason (though Nicks has his injury issues/history as well). Perhaps some other players or WRs could be in that scenario as well. Interesting thought if all parties would agree. Obviously allows us to address DT with the first pick.