Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Knowing how Fitterer likes to maneuver the draft


byob1013
 Share

With 3 picks in the top 100 and only 6 total what type of movement will we see in this years draft, if any?  

59 members have voted

  1. 1. Will we see more trade downs or up?

    • Predominantly Trade up
      5
    • Get more picks and trade down
      54


Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, Smithers said:

Maybe - but we have 66 players under contract already.  6 picks brings that to 72.  I’m sure we will add 2 more free agents after the draft, bringing us to 74.  Then come the UDFAs to bring us to 90 for camp.  Trading back to accumulate more picks while risking losing out on a more talented player just doesn’t make sense.

Yeah after doing numerous mock drafts, I'd rather pick at 39 and move back up into the 2nd/early 3rd for another impact player. We've already got projects on the roster left over from the rhule era and we'll add about 15-20 UDFA's. The UDFA's alone will probably land us a backup guard or DT or something

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can someone show me evidence that Fitt trading back to gain more picks has been beneficial to the team? I mean, we were drafting long snappers two years ago with those extra picks. 
 

And I know everyone will just blame Rhule for everything, but I thought I’d at least ask the question. 

  • Pie 2
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Smithers said:

Maybe - but we have 66 players under contract already.  6 picks brings that to 72.  I’m sure we will add 2 more free agents after the draft, bringing us to 74.  Then come the UDFAs to bring us to 90 for camp.  Trading back to accumulate more picks while risking losing out on a more talented player just doesn’t make sense.

I was just being facetious but this is a good post. 


I would still make the argument that draft picks, especially at this point in the draft, is a crapshoot. Having more opportunities to hit is still a positive. 
 

I could also see a scenario where Fitt trades down to pick up another pick or two next year. This would provide more ammo to get a late first next year or just additional pick(s) to compensate for not having a first. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could honestly see them trading up to get back into the 1st round if a player they like falls using that high 2nd round pick. If a top WR prospect falls and they have the chance to move up to grab him, I think they will. 

And like others have said, outside of a few positions like OL, CB, WR, and maybe LB, there aren't a lot of holes based on who is under contract. Personally I'm more in favor of trading down and acquiring picks for future years as well as this year but I think Tepper is hungry to win now and they'll want to get Bryce some weapons. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A combo trade up/down package is what I think could make a lot of sense to move up from 93 a tad.  Let's just capitalize on a top talent if there at 39.  If not, I can see us considering a MINOR trade down.  But yeah..a trade up/down-ski:  

A 93+132 type package to get up to ~75-85 with a team that gives us a later pick in the 160-170 range.  

Example: Lions give us 81, 159 for 93 & 132. Value isn't there but it's the general idea.

Also--Even though we don't have a 2024 1st, we have a 6th or 7th rounder we should be able to add on to a trade if we wanna move up a tad more at any spot.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, JawnyBlaze said:

I’d prefer not to trade down from 39, seems like a sweet spot where some guys I think will truly make an impact will be available. I wouldn’t mind trading up from 93 though. Would be awesome to land a top TE at 39 then trade up from 93 for Mingo

I think we should be able to find a starter at #39. If legit pass rusher is available (DE or DT) on the board when we pick we need to take him. I'd say the say the same thing for WR, LB, or CB. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, GamecockSmitty4 said:

I was just being facetious but this is a good post. 


I would still make the argument that draft picks, especially at this point in the draft, is a crapshoot. Having more opportunities to hit is still a positive. 
 

I could also see a scenario where Fitt trades down to pick up another pick or two next year. This would provide more ammo to get a late first next year or just additional pick(s) to compensate for not having a first. 

There’s certainly merit to the “crapshoot” philosophy to drafting, but I tend to prefer quality over quantity and trust the decision makers.  Rarely do the teams known for trading back and stockpiling picks actually turn those picks into better players than they could have taken at their original spot (at least, in my observations). I’d rather have two firsts, two seconds and nothing else in every draft than a pick in every round, heh. I’ll take a quarter over three dimes any day, when it comes to football players. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, SCO96 said:

I think we should be able to find a starter at #39. If legit pass rusher is available (DE or DT) on the board when we pick we need to take him. I'd say the say the same thing for WR, LB, or CB. 

Yea, other than DL I’d agree that a potential starter at any of those positions is someone we can’t pass on at 39 (with LB including  edge rushing OLBs).  I’d also add TE, even if they’re not necessarily going to start over Hurst on day one, there’s two or three guys that have really high potential to be exceptional players I would hate to pass on too

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • A lot of people have been slobbing all over this last draft but I hate the way that Fitterer/Morgan have built this offense since drafting Bryce. Anyone with eyes knew our IOL was crap but we didn't invest there and instead took project receivers and an injured RB. If you want a lesson in how build for your QB wrong, IMO, this was it. Draft him, protect him, THEN get him weapons. Its pretty much a rule, draft interior linemen, pay tackles. We're paying everyone. We had the opportunity to draft a center instead of Brooks, or perhaps instead of trading up for XL, trade back and take 2 guards/center. We could have paid Lewis and still drafted 2, but Hunt at 100m was just an overpay. And it's not like the guys many of us were begging us to draft were long shots. They're solid starters from day 1. Injuries happen. That's why all your starters can't be high value players. You need rookie contracts mixed in to be able to absorb those inevitable losses on the line. An offensive line playing an entire season together is an abnormality.  Factor into that also paying Moton 44m this offseason with a huge signing bonus when we didnt need to do right now to do him a "solid".  Now we have to sign Icky and possibly Bryce and it's a mess with more money tied up in the offense, inevitable cuts and dead cap coming. That's not even factoring in shifting Corbett to C last year after major injury to start at a position he's never played for an NFL season. It's all stuff that was foreseeable and pretty easily avoided.  The $$ and picks we've spent trying to surround Bryce outside of Tmac (Mitchell and Horn are TBD) have been used inefficiently IMO. Smarter drafting and FA with the line could have let us get more reliable weapons than XL and Sanders in FA. It might not be popular opinion, but I'll take a Bersin with hands that can get 6-8 85% of the time vs a big play XL with greasy fingers.  The part about hitting guys in stride was more about placement, which Bryce has struggled with. Obviously not every route is run to be hit in stride, but they do need to have the ball placed well to give the receivers a chance to do something after the catch. I just used Hill as an example because he's the biggest YAC threat I could think of over the past 5 years.   Receivers can feast on dink and dunk if it's schemed right. But to make it work, that vertical threat has to be there, if not the deep pass then the high speed routes that can spring someone for the huge YAC to keep the safeties from cheating into that 20 yard box all game.  I hope DC and Bryce can keep up what they did in the last game and it isnt just an Atlanta thing. But no matter what, I really want to see some better long term strategy coming from the FO. 
    • Eh. Don't speak it into existence lol. We've got enough on our plate just trying to overcome the bad juju of what has been our historically bad perfomances more often than not in primetime over the course of 30 years. We're overdue for a statement primetime game!
    • Passing chart had 3 over 20 I think. The Legette TD and another completion and an incompletion. All over 20 yards.  An incompletion at 19 or maybe 20 yards. So you could technically probably say 4 throws 20 or more.     That seems high to me compared to the norm. 45 throws and 10 YPA are both way high.   
×
×
  • Create New...