I Hope Detroit Takes Matthew Stafford First, And You Should Too
As soon as it looked as if Jay Cutler was legitimately going to be traded, I started singing the doom-and-gloom song about why the Texans wouldn’t be getting any takers for a trade down. My rationale was that with Cutler available and Josh Freeman becoming a more viable option, there were likely too many QBs for teams to get antsy and trade up for one. The fact that Denver only wants a veteran QB doesn’t help either because it discounts the thought that even though they are providing a QB for the talent pool, they are now in the market for drafting a QB themselves.
Things change though, and they did so yesterday. At The University of Georgia Pro Day, QB Matthew Stafford looked lights out by all accounts, leading many to wonder where he will now be selected. Since draft speculation season began, the trendy line to take amongst analysts is that drafting a QB too early will kill your franchise. It doesn’t matter what analysts think, though; it only matters what Detroit General Manager Martin Mayhew and Head Coach Jim Schwartz think. After Stafford threw 47 out of 50 passes on the money in windy conditions yesterday, you have to assume they’re at least considering him with the first overall pick. So how does this help the Texans if they desire to trade down? I’m glad you asked.
While Detroit needs help on defense, I believe they’re building for the future. By trading for Julian Peterson and by all accounts keeping the expensive contract in place that he had with Seattle, you can assume that they won’t be drafting Aaron Curry because it would mean at least a quarter of the team's salary would be tied up in the LB corps alone. So, that leaves their options at QB and OT. Jason Smith is likely their guy if the decide to go OT, and after his performance yesterday there shouldn’t be a doubt in anyone’s mind that Stafford is the top QB in the draft class.
There are four viable players to be had at each position: Matthew Stafford, Mark Sanchez, Josh Freeman and Jay Cutler at QB and Jason Smith, Eugene Monroe, Andre Smith and Michael Oher at OT. As I said earlier though, Denver will only purportedly make a trade if they get a veteran QB in return, which Detroit doesn’t have, so scratch Cutler off the list. That leaves us with 3 QBs and 4 OTs. Also, the difference between the first and third QB on the board is much bigger than the difference between the first and fourth OT, or at least that is so in this year’s Draft.
Here’s what it comes down to though--if you think Stafford is going to be a franchise QB, you have to take him. There’s no way to know for sure, but you have to make up your mind and act accordingly. I personally think that Matt Ryan and Joe Flacco harmed Stafford’s chances. Everyone continually brings their names into discussions regarding taking Stafford early, which you think would work in his favor, but it doesn’t. Since someone determined that you stand a 50/50 chance of drafting a franchise QB in the first round, there’s almost an unspoken understanding that since lightning struck twice last year, there’s no chance it can happen again this year. I’ve got news for you though. If you’re basing your decision of whether to draft a QB or not on the law of probability, than you need to find a new profession.
For the purpose of our discussion, let’s assume that Detroit decides to take Stafford. They’d likely follow the blueprint of success that Atlanta adopted just a year ago with Matt Ryan: Take your QB early and your OT late in the first round. The good thing is that Detroit wouldn’t even have to trade into the first round like Atlanta did last year because Jerry Jones is a circus master. The problem is that there won’t be a surefire LT left on the board by 20. There is a possibility that there will be such a surefire LT available at 15 though.
St. Louis wanted Jake Long last year, but they got DE Chris Long instead. This year they’ll get their OT. Monroe and Andre Smith will both be gone by the tenth pick, and maybe even earlier. The last one left will probably be Michael Oher, and where he will be drafted is up for debate. No one really has the answer; some believe he could go in the top 10 as well, while there is a growing belief that he will not be drafted by the time the Texans are on the clock. I personally believe that he will probably be on the board at 13, but there is no one who ever knows what Washington will do. They should draft Oher, but I have a sneaking suspicion that Dan Snyder will try to make a splash with Michael Johnson in order to replace the recently cut Jason Taylor.
So if Oher is there at 15, why should Detroit trade up to get him? First of all, Oher is markedly better than William Beatty, Phil Loadholt and Eben Britton, who are the OTs Detroit would have to choose from if Oher was gone before they picked at 20. Although neither San Diego nor Chicago is currently targeting OTs, both have enough of a need that they probably couldn’t pass on Oher. Also, don’t forget about the Texans themselves. As many have noted on BRB and other Texans blogs, Oher is enough of a talent that it’s not beyond belief that Kubiak and Smith would pull the trigger if they didn’t get any takers for a trade.
This is the second post I’ve written concerning a Draft Day trade with Detroit. I just think it makes too much sense. Whether it’s a QB or an OT, there just seems to be players that Detroit would like at 15, and there seem to be more players we like that will be drafted somewhere between 20 and 46. If Detroit and Houston did do a deal, Detroit wouldn’t even have to lose any picks. They would simply give up the 20th and 33rd overall picks for the Texans’ 15th and 46th overall selections. This would allow the Texans to still get Clay Matthews and turn around and get someone like Sean Smith in the beginning of the second round. Maybe it’s wishful thinking, but I think it’s a rare situation in which both teams benefit from a trade and it seems plausible. What say you BRB? Do you think this could happen?
0 recs |
67 comments
|
Comments
That's Certainly One Possible Scenario
Though I’m still not buying that Oher’s going to fall to 15. Just like Houston couldn’t really pass on him despite having more dire needs elsewhere, I believe other teams could be in the same boat before we go on the clock.
Another possibility…Detroit goes LT with their first pick; Stafford and Sanchez go off the board before the Texans go on the clock; Freeman has a first-round grade from Detroit; Detroit gets nervous about NYJ or Tampa taking Freeman before No. 20 rolls around; Detroit makes the trade with us you’ve hypothesized to get Freeman at 15.
I’ll admit that’s probably wishful thinking. I still have a hard time believing that a team’s going to take Freeman in the first round.
Looking forward to a day when being a Texans fan doesn't mean that April is the highlight of my season...
by Tim on Mar 20, 2009 5:13 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Re: Freeman
I can’t see this either. However, people always fall, and I could see a couple of players falling to 15 that teams may covet.
by ~Buck on Mar 20, 2009 5:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pipedreams continued
ok, again, the scenarios u guys are giving are trade DOWNS, here’s a scenario I’m going to give that may prompt the Texans to trade UP. Let’s say w/ the first pick the Lions take Stafford (which is seeming more likely), and at the second pick the Rams take Jason Smith. That then leaves the Chiefs which might end up being the most telling tale of the draft story. The Chiefs can go in MAAANY directions considering they have many needs. Based on majority opinion, people believe that they will be taking Aaron Curry, I disagree. Think about this, Kansas City has gotten a young QB in Matt Cassell, hired a new coach in Todd Haley, and hired a new GM in Scott Pioli. Pioli comes from a Bellicheck system where recently offense was first, and they had two sick receivers in Moss and Welker. Haley as well comes from a similar spread scheme where he used the Fitz/Boldin/Breaston combo to get the most out of his offense, protect his qb, and work his running game. Truth be told, KC’s defense was the ONLY thing keeping this team alive last year as their young corners overachieved and Dorsey showed some flases of brilliance. While their linebackers corps may be weak, is it necessary they address a NON-pass rushing OLB w/ their #3 pick considering they don’t even have a 2nd rounder? Is that their greatest need? I say no, after all recall they got Vrabel in the draft as well. I know many people may think that O-line may be their greatest need, but if you pass up on Crabtree you miss out on the best playmaking receiver in the draft. There is no guarantee you will hit it big w/ a playmaker in round 3, and Haley’s an offensive coach anyways who needs the weapons to make his offense work, case(s) in point: Dallas and KC. So, to sum up Chiefs draft Crabtree or Eugene Monroe. Seahawks want an O-lineman so they’ll take whomever falls. Let’s say Monroe does, THEN Curry is available for Mangini, and let’s say he’s enamored and pleased to see him there, so he takes Curry. Now w/ the 6th pick the Bengals take Maualuga to pair him up w/ Keith Rivers. W/ the 7th pick the Raiders select Andre Smith, the 8th pick the Jags take BJ Raji, and NOW w/ the 9th pick is GB. They select 6 spots ahead of us, is it TOO much to ask for that if Orakpo is available we trade out of our 15th pick, package our third rounder and move up the same way Baltimore did to us last year? sigh i don’t think so. Ur thoughts guys? I’m thinking there’s a very little chance the Chiefs draft Curry which helps us alot. It just seems that a solid, but not great linebacker isn’t the best pick @ #3. The last time I remember an LB going in the top 5 was AJ Hawke, and to be fair, that wasn’t the greatest pick that could have been made. :/ iono, just a thought.
by wiseonekms on Mar 21, 2009 12:42 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I was with you...
until you said Raiders would take Andre Smith. There’s literally zero chance of that happening. Al Davis would get a boner over Jeremy Maclin if he were still capable. Smith has been beyond disappointing since the season ended. Ain’t happenin’.
-
I agree that the Chiefs might (and probably should) take Crabtree. I don’t buy that Jacksonville would take Raji when John Henderson is only 30.
-
Totally against trading up for Orakpo. I love the guy, but giving up our third for someone who will be a third-down rusher or will have to transition to a new position (SLB) where his coverage skills are a huge question mark is too high a price.
Yay, sports.
by MDC on Mar 21, 2009 7:49 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Hugh Hefner can get wood
…then Al Smith can as well.
When I'm on the mic, I'm like global warming, you can't ignore me.
by tehGrindCrusher on Mar 21, 2009 9:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Definitely A Feasible Scenario
But I have a hard time envisioning Scott Pioli passing on Curry, who, by nearly every account, is the surest thing in this draft (assuming you believe in such a creature). I’ll throw something else out there, though I don’t think it’s very plausible…when Pioli was in New England, the Pats always had a penchant for moving down. Now, I know it’s hard to fathom someone wanting to pay the price and subsequent rookie contract to move up to No. 3, but if ever there was a player to do it for this year, it’s probably Aaron Curry. It’d probably have to be a team who wasn’t too much further down the draft than KC, as the price would be prohibitive if there was much distance between KC at No. 3 and the unknown team’s first-rounder. Any takers? Or am I dreaming again?
Looking forward to a day when being a Texans fan doesn't mean that April is the highlight of my season...
by Tim on Mar 21, 2009 8:40 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I could see that.
If KC really did want to move down and Mangini really coveted Curry over Orakpo, that move would make sense. It’s not like the Browns have made prudent decisions in recent drafts, so this wouldn’t surprise me in the least.
Yay, sports.
by MDC on Mar 21, 2009 8:43 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Cleveland Did Bite...
I guess Kansas City would take Orakpo at No. 5. Or would they go LT (Monroe?) or somewhere else?
Looking forward to a day when being a Texans fan doesn't mean that April is the highlight of my season...
by Tim on Mar 21, 2009 8:48 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hmm.
I actually like the dude above’s theory that KC will go WR if possible to match the New England model. Assuming Crab didn’t go at 4, I could buy the theory that they’d take him so that (w/ Bowe) they had a dynamite WR tandem that pleases both HC and OC.
If he was gone, though… your guess is as good as mine. Monroe (or Oher if they’re smart), Orakpo, or even Maclin make sense.
Yay, sports.
by MDC on Mar 21, 2009 9:29 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm ok w/trading up
but only for Curry or Raji.
No to ‘po, unless he falls to us and he’s BPA.
Smushiak will take us to the playoffs in 2009.
by texanphil on Mar 21, 2009 9:22 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'll agree with this...
with the exception that I’m not willing to move up more than two spots for either of them because the price v. value isn’t that great.
Yay, sports.
by MDC on Mar 21, 2009 9:24 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Raji drops to 11
I’d be all for trading up to get him, depending on the cost.
I know at this point we all scramble to the trade chart, but really – how often is that accurate when talking about top-half first round trade-ups?
Chris - www.HoustonDiehards.com
by HoustonDiehards on Mar 21, 2009 3:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
yes, depending on the cost
cuz there may be some competition for that trade if he falls to 11, imo.
Smushiak will take us to the playoffs in 2009.
by texanphil on Mar 21, 2009 4:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hmm.
Raji is an interesting case because he’s SUCH a perfect fit (theoretically). Still, when you can get Ron Brace (aka Raji Lite) in the second, even if you have to trade up there a little bit, how much are you willing to give up for the four spot jump? A third? I’d probably do that…I think…if I thought I could package both 4ths and get back into the third if I needed to.
Two things I wouldn’t want to do: 1. Give a third plus anything else. 2. Give any picks from next year’s draft, which looks to be stacked like Catherine Zeta-Jones with defensive players. Plus, if Raji gets to down around 10/11, you’ve got to imagine Denver will start looking to move up and they’ve got the piece(s) to pull a three-way trade to pull it off if they’re serious.
Yay, sports.
by MDC on Mar 21, 2009 6:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
All Hypothetical, I Believe
Because Raji ain’t droppin’ to 11.
Looking forward to a day when being a Texans fan doesn't mean that April is the highlight of my season...
by Tim on Mar 22, 2009 9:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd take Manchild over Curry
I understand the skepticism behind Orakpo, but he’s not one of those players that has that “physical specimen, but lack of motivation” knock. He’s actually not only a monster, but he is a highly motivated, coachable, talented player. He has skill of getting to the qb with both his hands in the dirt and from the olb position. I don’t think it would be necessary for him to come into games only on situational pass-rushing downs b/c while his coverage may have been shaky at times, he’s physically capable of fixing this and getting coached up. Remember, for the most part ur drafting players based on what they WILL be and not what they already are. I looked at the NFL website and Jamie Dukes has us picking Michael Johnson, in theory that’s awesome. Curry is good, but I think u can find an olb later in the draft, and not to mention we already have depth w/ adibi and diles. I just would love to see the Texans aggressively target a speedster rusher next to Mario to give us that 1-2 punch. Can you imagine a mixture of Thunder and lightning on that d-line? Mario’s imposing size and speed, and Orakpo’s Freeney like ability….mmmaaaaaaaan.
by wiseonekms on Mar 21, 2009 3:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
antonio smith
just signed on as a starter on the other side.
We don’t trade up for someone who will not start.
We’re not lacking holes to fill, esp. on defense.
Smushiak will take us to the playoffs in 2009.
by texanphil on Mar 21, 2009 4:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Manchild
is a registered trademark of DGDB&D, Inc., and refers to Amobi Okoye. Please adjust your nicknames accordingly.
Also, Curry has the size to play SLB, the instincts to play MLB, and the speed to play WLB. Depending on what happens with DeMeco’s contract and/or the development of Adibi, that might be good flexibility to have. And it’s NOT something you can find later in the draft.
Yay, sports.
by MDC on Mar 21, 2009 6:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
my bad
lol, kinda new to the blog ;)
by wiseonekms on Mar 22, 2009 1:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Freeney-like?
C’mon dude.
The kid’s pretty good, but let’s leave it at that.
Bacon tastes good... Pork chops taste good.
by beefy on Mar 23, 2009 1:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
the upside
is there. I guess I was stretching a bit, but don’t tell me the similarities aren’t there.
by wiseonekms on Mar 23, 2009 7:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Whoa.
Are we really considering Curry “solid, but not great”?
You can’t ever say for sure whether a guy is going to succeed in the NFL, but he has the absolute best combination of college resume and combine numbers that you’ll find. And regardless of what your needs are, it’s tough to pass on a guy with that kind of versatility. This guy is the Calvin Johnson of defense; tons of potential, limited risk. I can’t imagine him going out of the top three. And in all honesty, I still think he’s going first overall.
And for the record, I’d gladly trade up for Raji or Curry. But only Raji is even feasible; you’d have to give up way too much to be in a position to get Curry. I get that it’s not a great long-term move given this team’s penchant for finding talent in the 3rd and 4th rounds, but I think we’re sort of at that point now where we need that impact player to get to the next level. Maybe Matthews can be that guy, but I just don’t see SAM being quite as important as DT.
by Nashmeister on Mar 21, 2009 8:44 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I'd trade up to 8 for Raji.
In fact, I’d love to see this but I think Raji goes earlier.
Not a chance at 9 for Orakpo. We don’t need an end to pay first round money too, 3rd down specialist esp.
by JMay on Mar 21, 2009 3:14 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
+1
we have an extra 4th rounder, but I suspect it would cost more to move up that much. Throw in TJ?
Smushiak will take us to the playoffs in 2009.
by texanphil on Mar 21, 2009 4:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The idea of throwing in TJ
reminds me of this exchange from “Half Baked”
Brian: Lady, seven bucks for a used Kenny Loggins record?! I’ll give you five.
Lady: Unh-uh. He autographed it himself.
Brian: All right…I’ll give you four.
Yay, sports.
by MDC on Mar 21, 2009 6:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Trading TJ
If I was another team’s GM, I’d rather have a slightly used jockstrap.
Looking forward to a day when being a Texans fan doesn't mean that April is the highlight of my season...
by Tim on Mar 22, 2009 9:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd take...
a slightly used tampon.
Yay, sports.
by MDC on Mar 22, 2009 10:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Going from 15 to 8
Would cost us our first and second. Or, more accurately, would cost us MORE than our first and third. Barring players swapping teams, you’re either giving up your first and second or your first, third, and BOTH fourths. No thanks. Not with Brace available in the second.
Yay, sports.
by MDC on Mar 21, 2009 6:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
just curious
how about 15 to 11?
Smushiak will take us to the playoffs in 2009.
by texanphil on Mar 21, 2009 8:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Depends on what you believe.
The “trade chart” which I just don’t buy into as anything near a rule (I have no research to back that up, I just don’t think it’s reality in a lot of situations) shows the following:
- value: 1250
- value: 1050
- value: 205
So – if you go by the trade chart – it’s almost a PERFECT match to trade our 1 and 3 for their #11. That said, like others have mentioned – there would be a lot of competition if Raji fell that far.
Chris - www.HoustonDiehards.com
by HoustonDiehards on Mar 21, 2009 8:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Uh, what the fuck is with the auto-formatting???
That just totally wrecked my post. That needs to be fixed, yo.
So – what I actually typed (minus the number signs this time) was…
Our first round pick (15) is valued at 1050
Our third round pick (77) is valued at 205
Buffalo’s 11th pick is valued at 1250.
So again, it’s almost a perfect match.
Chris - www.HoustonDiehards.com
by HoustonDiehards on Mar 21, 2009 8:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
What's the harm in trading up
if u believe the player your going after is someone that can help ur team? I understand the natural skepticism given Smithiak’s tendencies to find effective players deeper in the draft a la Owen Daniels, David Andersen, Steve Slaton, Xavier Adibi. But to be fair, we haven’t made the playoffs in Kubiak’s 3 years here, and if moving up meant bringing a guy who can potentially wreak some havoc and in the future be a cornerstone player, I’m all about moving up. Recall, for the greater part of the season we didn’t have Dunta. He’s back, our offense was much improved, and all we REALLY lacked was a pass rush, so to say that the Texans have so many holes on defense that you can’t strictly target pass rushers or lineman seems a bit naive. If we drafted two defensive ends in this year’s draft, I’d be very pleased considering I deem that the biggest weakness on this team. I just want to give Mario a liiiiitle bit of help, cuz I feel that we’ve scratched the surface w/ this guy. There is no doubt in my mind he is the best defensive player in the league, it’s time Kubiak gave him the opportunity to be it.
by wiseonekms on Mar 22, 2009 1:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Three things:
1. Dunta was bad last year. It remains to be seen if he can even become close to what he was before…and even before the injury, he was part of the second-tier of CB1s.
2. NT is a much greater need on this team than SLB. As positions on a 4-3 go, SLB is one of the least “important,” relatively speaking. Not saying we don’t need an upgrade—-we do—-but we don’t need to pay through the nose for it. Look at it this way. Say our defense is a C- right now. Getting an SLB pushes it, at best, to a C+, and that’s if the SLB is a Pro Bowler. Getting a good (not Pro Bowl) NT would take that same C- defense to a B- (at least) because of what it would mean to Mario, Amobi, and DeMeco.
3. The “harm in trading up” is the fact that the scenario mentioned above requires giving up either our first and second or our first, third, and both fourths if you buy the draft value calculator. Even if you think it’s a little skewed, you are not going from 15 to 8 with just a first and third. Ain’t happening. And I don’t want to pay more than that for any player. Not when so many positions on the D could be upgraded (FS, SS, SLB, NT).
Yay, sports.
by MDC on Mar 22, 2009 6:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Calculated risks
I see, so you’re considering Orakpo a linebacker? I was under the assumption he’d be the right defensive end opposite Mario. Actually, that’s the only reason I’d draft him is if he would play on the line as opposed to being an outside linebacker. A couple of things:
1. To say Dunta was “bad” last year is kinda unfair. After all, he rushed himself back to the field, he was coming off of a possible career-ending injury and we can attribute his bad start to rust, missing offseason training camp b/c of his rehab, and his injury. I think to get a fair evaluation of Dunta we need this season which is why franchising him was a good move by Smith. It lets him get one year to prove he’s the anchor of this secondary, and if he can’t be then maybe we’ll let him go.
2. I never argued that nose tackle isn’t important. I actually think Okoye has alot to prove this year, and Travis Johnson is expendable. However, we still have Okam and Delwyn Robinson who I’m willing to give a chance to prove themselves rather than drafting Raji high and waiting for him to get caught up. It just seems that the learning curve to the NFL game is quite high for a NT considering even blue-chip NT’s have trouble their first year. I undertand this year, the talent pool for NT is not deep and developmental guys like Ron Brace or Fili Moala aren’t what the Texans are looking for, but I’d rather draft one of those guys than trade up to get Raji. Just not sold on him.
3. Behind Mario at rush end, we have NOTHING. Can you honestly say that you are satisfied to enter the season w/ Mario, Bulman, and Antonio Smith? I’m not. I think our d-line should resemble that of the NY Giants. For a good amount of time they had Strahan, Tuck, Omenyura, and Kiwanuka rotating in and out at end. I understand the necessity of a NT, but if it’s just going to be a developmental guy anyways, draft one later and work with what we have. Our first round pick should definitely address the D-line, be it Raji if he falls to us or one of the speed-rush specialists: Orakpo or EBrown. If we get production out of our first round pick in the form of sacks and QB pressures. I’d take that, and I wouldn’t feel guilty about it at all.
by wiseonekms on Mar 22, 2009 7:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Answering your questions.
I was always pulling for Orakpo as a SLB because I think he’d be a good fit there and because, without an NT, his talent (speed rushing) will be wasted at the LDE spot frequently. (Remember, Mario is going to be RDE.) Not saying he couldn’t play DE in a 4-3 or anything…but I don’t think his contribution with the current interior line would be enough to justify taking a rotational player who will primarily (at least at first) be a third-down rusher.
Re: Dunta. It’s not unfair to say he was bad. I mean, it’s great and it shows heart that he rushed back, but he played like shit. The rest of the D seemed to play harder, which is nice, but he was not anywhere approaching good. That’s just how it was—-nothing fair or unfair about it. Put it this way: If he’d played like that without being injured first, you’d have no trouble saying he was bad. Just because he rushed back doesn’t change that. I totally agree that franchising him was the right move, though. I was pushing for that the whole time.
Re: NT. Amobi Okoye is not an NT, nor was he drafted to be one, nor does anyone expect him to become one. He’s the prototypical UT. Travis is an NT in name only and couldn’t be a two-gap player against a good college team. I really, REALLY hope Okam develops, which is a big reason I’m not in favor of spending too much to move up and get Raji. And he could now that he has a real DC. DelJuan Robinson weighs less than Okoye or TJ, so he’s not a two-gap NT either. Really, Okam is the only one on the roster (and, technically, the only one the franchise has ever had.)
Re: DE. We signed Antonio Smith to be that something behind Mario. Do I think he’ll be a Pro Bowler? Of course not, but I think a lot of teams would cut off a metaphorical ear to have those two as their starting DEs. Bulman is no great shakes, but he’s a motor guy and a decent backup. I was hoping Earl Cochran would heal and still be there, because I’d be totally fine with that foursome. As it is, I agree that we could use a fourth—-preferably a speed guy—-but I don’t think that’s anywhere pressing enough to need a first-round guy.
As for the Giants. Strahan was a 2d round pick, Osi Umenyiora was a 2d round pick, Tuck was a 3d round pick, and Kiwi was the last pick of the first round. That sort of proves the idea that you don’t need to be trading up to grab a DE—-you are just as likely to find one after the first round (i.e. Sidbury). Plus, of those four picks, they wound up moving the FIRST rounder to linebacker for a while, so it’s not like he was Mario Williams or something and the best of the lot (despite being the first rounder in the group).
Finally, I don’t think you totally grasp the necessity of a two-gap NT. Getting one that was merely average would make the entire line much, much better. Amobi would be freed on the inside, teams couldn’t cheat over and double or triple Mario on every single play (or, if they did, Smith would be coming more or less free). On the other hand, putting a different DE at the LDE spot, without that NT, would improve the line only slightly. And that’s if the rookie is better than Antonio Smith from day 1.
Yay, sports.
by MDC on Mar 23, 2009 9:14 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
re: DEs
I imagine they consider McClover the 4th guy, based on re-signing him and cutting (essentially) Cochrane. I’m sure they’ll throw a 2-3 more bodies at the DE’s between now and camp. Likely a 1st-3rd rounder, as I think we’d all agree.
Bacon tastes good... Pork chops taste good.
by beefy on Mar 23, 2009 1:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
good points
Good points MDC. I forgot that the G-men’s D ends weren’t “premier” players entering the draft. In particular, Justin Tuck. Ur also right that Kiwanuka was used primarily as a LB during that Superbowl run.
Also I do understand the necessity of a two-gap NT, but I’m just not sure Raji’s a better talent in the 1st round than Orakpo. He’s been given the lofty comparison to Ngata, but eeehhh, I’ll have to see it before I believe it. As a matter of fact, I actually like his buddy Ron Brace as a 2nd round option better than I do Raji. Let’s put it this way, if we ended up with Raji and Kruger as our 1st and 2nd round picks respectively, are we better off w/ that or w/ Orakpo and Brace as our 1st and 2nd round picks? Personally, I like the latter. I greatly understand the need for a NT, however, the fact that we have Okam in the wings makes me think twice about drafting a guy at the same position who’s probably going to be just as effective… but no doubt, I get ur point. TJ is garbage.
by wiseonekms on Mar 23, 2009 8:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
"I actually like his buddy Ron Brace as a 2nd round option better than I do Raji."
Based on cost, I agree with you here. Plus, I think it’s hard to distinguish between how Raji benefited from having Brace and vice versa.
I think ending up with a DE with either of our first two picks is probably a poor decision, all things considered. Right now, DE has two legit starters (one of whom is Yahweh). I don’t think we should pick for depth with a day 1 pick, considering the holes elsewhere. Not that I am going to complain if we take Michael Johnson, but that’s just because I covet freakish DEs and, aside from weight, his combine numbers are eerily similar to Mario’s. But that’s neither here nor there.
I don’t think Raji will be as good as Ngata ever. Haloti is a monster. 350 lbs and moves like he’s 290. That ain’t fair.
If the braintrust is willing to give Okam a year to prove he can be the NT, then I am completely fine passing on Brace.
Yay, sports.
by MDC on Mar 24, 2009 10:29 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
To add to what Matt said
Particularly in regards to #3 – it’s even FURTHER exacerbated by the fact that this F.O. has shown ability to get both solid contributors and SIGNIFICANT IMPACT players in the third.
Say we DO give up a third – what if it meant we missed out on our 2010 defensive version of Steve Slaton (3rd rounder, ROY candidate, just missed the pro bowl, led the AFC in yds from scrimmage) or the 2010 defensive version of Owen Daniels (4th rounder, pro bowler).
It’s not like I’m saying “hey we MIGHT miss out on a good player” – I’m saying this current FO has proved that we very likely WILL be missing out on a good player.
Is one HUGE impact player in the first better than one big impact player in the first and another big impact player in the 3rd/4th? Depends on the player, but conventional wisdom and the law of probability would suggest no.
Chris - www.HoustonDiehards.com
by HoustonDiehards on Mar 22, 2009 7:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Easier said than done
The examples you gave were both of offensive players. Both of whom have greatly benefited from Kubiak’s Denver zone scheme. Particularly in Daniel’s case, we’re talking about a guy who took about 3 years to develop into what he was this year. That’s definitely not a bad thing, nor am I saying Owen was not worth the pick, but you mentioned the phrase “defensive version.” The truth is, to find “defensive versions” of playmakers and meaningful players in later rounds is quite difficult.
Not to take anything away from this front office from greatly utilizing their 7th round picks, and their sleeper picks like Adibi and even Demeco Ryans to some extent, but sometimes it’s asking too much to turn coal into diamonds when there are better options at the top end of the draft. The Slaton pick is imho not a fair example of what’s available in the middle rounds only b/c Slaton’s production in college and speed spoke for themselves. He was an easy fit into our system and finding him in the 3rd round is not a testament to the Texans great drafting ability, but rather to teams thinking they didn’t need a small scat back.
It’s also easier to find offensive players deeper in the draft than it is easier to find defensive players. I just don’t think we can find a legitamite complement to Mario in the 3rd round, and imo such a complement exists in the form of Orakpo at the top of this year’s draft. The Texans are in a similar position the Jaguars and Ravens were last year in that we can sit pat and just slightly improve our team hoping to find “impact players.” Or we can go for the big “bang” and get the guy who’s going to help us get over that hump, our hump being: making the playoffs. We’ve proven we can be a mediocre 8-8 team w/ the squad we have, what we lack is that SERIOUS impact player on defense. I feel that this hole can be filled by Orakpo and IF Kubiak and co. feel the same way, the rewards greatly outweighs the costs in terms of going out and getting THE impact player for ur team, that is if ur evaluation and the guy’s production tells u he’s the “one.”
by wiseonekms on Mar 22, 2009 9:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good Stuff Wiseone
I understand the logic of what you’re saying, and I don’t wholeheartedly disagree with you on the notion of trading up, but I do think going all the way up to 8 is too far, especially for Orakpo. The learning curve you were speaking of applies to DE’s just as much as it does DT’s, so if you trade that far up for a guy like Orakpo you’re screwed if he doesn’t produce in the fisrt year.
I think the issue of what you’re saying about needing a DE despite the acquisition of Antonio Smith is true, but that’s not saying we NEED to get one in round one. But, if Kubiak and Smith agree with you, I would think they would try and get either Robert Ayers or maybe even Michael Johnson, whom they wouldn’t have to trade up to get.
If they were 100% set on drafting a DE, Ayers would be my choice. He’s a good mix between Smith and Williams and could rotate in at RDE or LDE. I think he could develop nicely and have a good career. Having said that though, I think it’s more important to get a starting NT, FS, SS, SLB than a rotational player, no matter how good that player might be. Unfortunately, there probably won’t be a NT, FS or SS worth drafting at 15, which is why so many people are touting the SLB idea.\
I personally would be ok if the Texans drafted up under two conditions:
1. The player was such a game changer and immediately improve our Defense, i.e. using Matt’s grading scale, take us from a C- to a B by his sheer presence alone. I know this point is obvious, but needed to be said.
2. They wouldn’t have to trade that far to get him. I wouldn’t want to see them go past 11, and even that would be pushing it. I would be much more comfortable with taking a deal with Washington who likely would be willing to deal because it would likely only cost us a fourth rounder, and since we have an extra one floating around thanks to Sage it would be doable.
I just don’t see a player that fits into those two contingencies, which is why I’m not in favor of a trade up. We’ll just have to wait and see what Smithiak thinks though.
Let's get the Texans a better fight song.
by Jake on Mar 23, 2009 7:13 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
thanks!
Iono, I’m just real excited to see what the Texans are gonna do. My mancrush and Longhorn pride are giving me a super obvious bias towards my boy Orakpo. So at times u can attribute my lack of foresight of our NT situation to my terrible case of Orange Blood ;) But to be honest, I’d just be kinda bummed if we ended up drafting a SLB in the 1st when this year’s draft has some solid talent at the DE. Although as stated earlier by MDC, the option of Sidbury in the 3rd round is enticing as is Paul Kruger or Connor Barwin in the 2nd. Iono…guess we’ll have to wait and see. But if Orakpo is available at 13 to the skins, and all it’d cost us is to switch spots and give up one of our 4th’s….come on, that’s solid.
by wiseonekms on Mar 23, 2009 7:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
glad to see you went on record as a UT backer wiseone
not sure I have done that here yet, but I’ve been bleeding Orange since the early 60’s. That Fiesta Bowl this year was a freakin’ heart stopper. If that game had been for the national championship, would that have been bigger than the VY victory over USC 3 years ago? Doesn’t matter. I just enjoy replaying the 4th quarters of those games in my head.
I would love to see the Texans draft Orakpo, but do not want to sacrifice a pick. If we can do the deal you described above with the Skins that wouldn’t be too bad I guess. We could really use an edge rusher to complement Mario. I dunno if Orakpo can be that guy but would like to see him in Steel Blue.
by oiler-texan diehard on Mar 23, 2009 10:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
AND Battle Red
haha, ya I nearly passed out that game. We def got jipped for the national championship. Actually I go to school at UT right now. I remember going to the Beat OU rally and I got to see the guys right after the rally. ORAKPO IS HUUUUUUGE. I mean, obviously all these guys are big, but Orakpo, my God. I’m 5’9 and I got to stand next to the guy, I was afraid if he got hungry he’d just rip off one of my arms for a snack. :/ haha, but for those not sold on Orakpo and who try to pawn off Babin analogies to him…uh, here’s some STARTLING differences:
1. Orakpo is far more physically talented than Babin.
2. Casserly is no longer the GM of this team.
3. He played for a huge college program and saw top tier talent on a weekly basis including Jason Smith, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Ohio State.
4. He played hurt towards the end of the season, if anyone recalls he got injured during the Texas Tech game, but came back and fought through.
5. He came into college nowhere near what he is physically when he left which means he has tremendous work ethic.
6. He had 11 sacks last year, so clearly his college production is more impressive than that punk Babin’s.
7. He’s just plain nasty, we need a nasty guy on this defense.
ok, so I’ve made the case for him before, and until draft day I’m gonna keep doing it. It is my goal to spam Orakpo fever on this wall on the off chance one of the Texans brass happens to get persuaded by my amazingly biased scouting skills. btw, did I mention the case for the Texans to draft Colt Mccoy next year as well? haha.
by wiseonekms on Mar 23, 2009 11:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
UT backer?
Yeah, like we don’t have enough of THOSE around here.
I constantly feel like I’m in the midst of a seedy gay bar, and everyone won’t stop looking at my junk.
Bacon tastes good... Pork chops taste good.
by beefy on Mar 24, 2009 9:39 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I just wear metal underwear when I come over here.
It’s safer.
Yay, sports.
by MDC on Mar 24, 2009 10:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd do the same at your site if I were you.
I see the bfd looks at you with those hungry eyes.
When I'm on the mic, I'm like global warming, you can't ignore me.
by tehGrindCrusher on Mar 24, 2009 12:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I meant
I see the way bfd looks at you with those hungry eyes.
When I'm on the mic, I'm like global warming, you can't ignore me.
by tehGrindCrusher on Mar 24, 2009 12:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
As long as a person separates VY
…the college superstar from VY the pro flop, and understands that the Texans would never, ever, in a million years have been better off if they’d drafted Wonderlic, I’m ok with UT backers.
Plus, who wouldn’t love Orakpo, my fellow Lamar Redskin? If he was somehow available when we draft I would spontaneously combust.
However, he won’t be, so I’m safe.
When I'm on the mic, I'm like global warming, you can't ignore me.
by tehGrindCrusher on Mar 24, 2009 12:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
look the whole thing is a gamble
nobody knows, its just best educated guess at draft time.
Trading up seems too much of a gamble for me, especially for Orakpo.
Smushiak will take us to the playoffs in 2009.
by texanphil on Mar 23, 2009 9:22 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Excellent points
And, for the record, I hate Raji. Don’t want him – Think he’ll be a bust.
There… I’ve said it. I mean, I don’t know what else you guys would need to confirm this as fact.
Bacon tastes good... Pork chops taste good.
by beefy on Mar 23, 2009 1:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Did you really need to put quotes around "important?"
When I'm on the mic, I'm like global warming, you can't ignore me.
by tehGrindCrusher on Mar 23, 2009 10:00 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, actually.
Or I should have left off the “relatively speaking” part.
Yay, sports.
by MDC on Mar 23, 2009 11:14 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Next time, just write "
When I'm on the mic, I'm like global warming, you can't ignore me.
by tehGrindCrusher on Mar 23, 2009 12:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Uhh, don't know what happened there
What I meant to say was:
Next time, just write “quote-unquote” before the word or phrase you want to put in “quotes.” So your sentence would look like this:
NT is a much greater need on this team than SLB. As positions on a 4-3 go, SLB is one of the least quote-unquote important, relatively speaking.
I think that’s like a totally stylish way to say something.
And, just to prove that I’m not a completely pedantic douche, let me add my two cents on trading up.
I don’t think it’s a good idea.
When I'm on the mic, I'm like global warming, you can't ignore me.
by tehGrindCrusher on Mar 23, 2009 1:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That always bugs me in print.
I mean, the point of SAYING “quote-unquote” is because people can’t see the quotes that you would have around the word if it was written. So, if I’m writing it…why not just use the quotes if I would say “quote-unquote” anyway?
In the end, though, I didn’t need the quotes. I was trying to stress that the importance is relative, but, instead, I made it seem like the importance was ironic. Damn.
Yay, sports.
by MDC on Mar 23, 2009 1:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
FWIW I was being ironic about the "quote-unquote" thing
I think it’s the jetlag. It’s turned me into a dick.
When I'm on the mic, I'm like global warming, you can't ignore me.
by tehGrindCrusher on Mar 23, 2009 1:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
My bad for missing the irony.
But I love how you blamed the Welsh in a roundabout way.
Yay, sports.
by MDC on Mar 24, 2009 10:31 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Back to the point of TT's post.
I’m still not sure I’m buying the “too many QBs” argument. Walk through this with me…
Before the Cutler incident, there were three teams (NYJ, TB, DET) who (possibly, in the case of DET) would be drafting after us and would be looking for a QB. There were two QBs worth taking—-Stafford and Dirty Sanchez.
After the Cutler incident, you suddenly bring a third QB into the mix, and you figure that one of those three teams (again, probably DET) would make that trade. However, if Det did trade, then you have DEN taking their place. So, still, three teams, two QBs. Except DEN says they want a veteran QB. So assume they trade for one, possibly in a three-way deal where they get Brady Quinn.
OK, at THAT point, you have two teams/two QBs, which could be an issue. Except, (a) there’s nothing that says a team like KC wouldn’t jump on Stafford if he fell (or St. Louis, as they are pretty sick of Bulger) and (b) guessing that Denver could pull off the three team deal and not need a drafted QB is reading a whole lot of tea leaves.
So, if we move forward assuming Den has just taken the place of Det — as you say, you can’t discout that “they are now in the market for drafting a QB themselves” — you have Den, TB, NYJ and two QBs. Which, I get, is where Freeman’s rise makes things sticky.
Here’s the problem with that as I see it: you are assuming that all three QBs are fungible; that a team who would want Matt Stafford would be happy sitting back and taking Freeman instead. I think that’s faulty. All three of the QBs in the first round bring vastly different skill sets. Stafford has a huge arm but isn’t the most accurate (his pro day notwithstanding, he completed about 57% through his career). Sanchez seems much more accurate, but without the cannon. Freeman has a nice arm, but if his college days are any indication, his biggest strength is being able to create space with his legs and throw on the run if need be. He’s not a pocket passer by any stretch.
So, if you are a team like Denver, maybe you are happy with Freeman. But if you’re built like the Jets, are you really going to want a kid who is going to constantly move the pocket? Or if you’re TB, you’re probably thrilled with Sanchez and his accuracy (it’s why Garcia was successful in that offense), but you might be less thrilled with Stafford, especially given your lack of a viable deep threat.
I’m not saying you are right or wrong here. I just don’t know that I buy that “three QBs” really equals “three QBs” when it comes to the teams who are looking for one.
Yay, sports.
by MDC on Mar 23, 2009 9:41 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Ignore the KC part
momentary brain fart there
Yay, sports.
by MDC on Mar 23, 2009 9:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i ignored the kc part
got confused for a bit, but I’m tending to agree with the idea that the 3 qb’s necessarily means each team needing a particular qb is going to draft their heir apparents successively. After all, there’s no guarantee a team uses a first round pick on a qb they just aren’t sold on if they see a different need available. The team in particular: TB. They lack a true #1 rb after injuries to Graham and Cadillac, they have no #2 receiver behind Bryant, and maybe they feel that they could spend that 1st rounder on someone who could possibly replace a need like that while maybe moving up in the second to grab whomever of the 3 qb’s those 3 teams decide to pass on or maybe one of those 3 teams trade for Cutler eliminating their need to draft the qb. damn, lots of confusion when it comes to the qb’s this year. I figure we’ll get a better idea of how things are gonna play themselves out when the Cutler thing gets resolved.
by wiseonekms on Mar 23, 2009 7:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good use of fungible
the college pipeline pumps out the QB’s, but as you aptly pointed out, those 3 guys are about as different as 3 guys could be.
by oiler-texan diehard on Mar 23, 2009 10:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 























