Countdown to the draft, team need #1
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Next
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| #1 need going into the draft? |
| Traditional Linebacker |
|
36% |
[ 8 ] |
| Pass Rushing Linebacker |
|
36% |
[ 8 ] |
| LEO |
|
13% |
[ 3 ] |
| Interior Oline |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| WR |
|
13% |
[ 3 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 22 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Tatupu_64
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 17028
Location: Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die.
|
 Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 7:02 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
|
| TheOsprey wrote: | | Tatupu_64 wrote: | | SaveourSonics wrote: | | Tatupu_64 wrote: | | Maybe. It's pretty close. Hawthorne is about to fall off his peak however. |
Nice, what're the next winning lotto numbers while we're here?
And the fact that it's even close proves my point. These teams don't need exceptional MLBs... |
Teams don't need a lot of exceptional things... With your logic, we should trade back every year and just get a bunch of picks so we end up with a lot of solid players. Who needs elite ones. |
I'd rather have a solid player at every position, over one or two elite guys, paired with a bunch of subpar players. |
So are you planning on getting rid of all our solid to good players then? Because Seattle isn't in a situation where we're choosing. We have borderline elite safeties, a great set of CB's, and a great starting DL.
_________________
Props to the Ramster
Seattle's Original Bruce Irvin Supporter
ET and Mebane's Biggest Supporter
FFMD2 13 GM |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
TheOsprey
Joined: 27 Aug 2009
Posts: 6521
Location: In a van, down by the river.
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 7:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Tatupu_64 wrote: | | TheOsprey wrote: | | Tatupu_64 wrote: | | SaveourSonics wrote: | | Tatupu_64 wrote: | | Maybe. It's pretty close. Hawthorne is about to fall off his peak however. |
Nice, what're the next winning lotto numbers while we're here?
And the fact that it's even close proves my point. These teams don't need exceptional MLBs... |
Teams don't need a lot of exceptional things... With your logic, we should trade back every year and just get a bunch of picks so we end up with a lot of solid players. Who needs elite ones. |
I'd rather have a solid player at every position, over one or two elite guys, paired with a bunch of subpar players. |
So are you planning on getting rid of all our solid to good players then? Because Seattle isn't in a situation where we're choosing. We have borderline elite safeties, a great set of CB's, and a great starting DL. |
Why would I be getting rid of solid players we already have? We're only adding players in the draft. I agree that our Safeties are borderline elite. We have a potentially very good CB (Sherman) and the rest of the group is solid. We have good DT's in Mebane and Jones and Clemons and Bryant are good DE's, but they are situational players. We have a solid MLB if Wright moves there, but a poor SLB if he stays where he is. That is what has to change, on defense. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tatupu_64
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 17028
Location: Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die.
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 8:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Oh boy... I quit haha
_________________
Props to the Ramster
Seattle's Original Bruce Irvin Supporter
ET and Mebane's Biggest Supporter
FFMD2 13 GM |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SaveourSonics
Joined: 20 Apr 2008
Posts: 45445
Location: Sleepless in Seattle
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 8:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
I agree with almost everything Osprey has said.
...not sure if that's a good thing 
_________________
 '
Richard D!ck Sherman 4 Prez |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
imani
Joined: 03 Mar 2009
Posts: 21333
Location: Harlem, NY
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 9:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| TheOsprey wrote: | | imani wrote: |
Kuechly not only has the pass coverage ability to allow us to send more rushers, he has the football IQ to put players into better position with audibles and on field adjustments. He'd be the final gear in an elaborate machine as long as he comes with a pass rusher |
We have to have the pass rushers to send though. You can't just rush anyone. They have to have that skillset. We lack linebackers with that skillset. If Kam did move to LB, he'd automatically, become the best pass rushing LB we have. |
do i really need to say anything else?
And IMO Vilma was better than David Hawthorne SoS, scheme effects everyone besides elite players
_________________
abdi7451 on the sig
| Cypher wrote: | | Erryday i'm Russelin'. |
Russell Wilson Fan since July 2012 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SaveourSonics
Joined: 20 Apr 2008
Posts: 45445
Location: Sleepless in Seattle
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 11:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
I was really hoping someone would comment on this. It's pretty obvious to me that people are allowing who might be available in the draft to influence what they believe to be the team needs.
| SaveourSonics wrote: | No, you're putting too much emphasis on who we can actually get with the needs. Forget Kuechly and Ingram, they're irrelevant to this thread for the most part. Take Player X and Player Y. Both are equally rated as prospects but X is better in coverage and Y is better at rushing the passer. Not only that, but Y comes at a position of higher value and more unique scheme fit.
There's no way in hell I'm taking Player X. |
_________________
'
Richard D!ck Sherman 4 Prez |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tatupu_64
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 17028
Location: Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die.
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 12:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| SaveourSonics wrote: | I was really hoping someone would comment on this. It's pretty obvious to me that people are allowing who might be available in the draft to influence what they believe to be the team needs.
| SaveourSonics wrote: | No, you're putting too much emphasis on who we can actually get with the needs. Forget Kuechly and Ingram, they're irrelevant to this thread for the most part. Take Player X and Player Y. Both are equally rated as prospects but X is better in coverage and Y is better at rushing the passer. Not only that, but Y comes at a position of higher value and more unique scheme fit.
There's no way in hell I'm taking Player X. |
|
That isn't the situation though So why bring it up as if it is
_________________
Props to the Ramster
Seattle's Original Bruce Irvin Supporter
ET and Mebane's Biggest Supporter
FFMD2 13 GM |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SaveourSonics
Joined: 20 Apr 2008
Posts: 45445
Location: Sleepless in Seattle
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 12:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Tatupu_64 wrote: | | SaveourSonics wrote: | I was really hoping someone would comment on this. It's pretty obvious to me that people are allowing who might be available in the draft to influence what they believe to be the team needs.
| SaveourSonics wrote: | No, you're putting too much emphasis on who we can actually get with the needs. Forget Kuechly and Ingram, they're irrelevant to this thread for the most part. Take Player X and Player Y. Both are equally rated as prospects but X is better in coverage and Y is better at rushing the passer. Not only that, but Y comes at a position of higher value and more unique scheme fit.
There's no way in hell I'm taking Player X. |
|
That isn't the situation though So why bring it up as if it is |
Why isn't it? This thread is asking, quite simply, what our biggest needs are in order. With that, we shouldn't be considering prospects at all. You should be looking at team needs at complete face value, just team needs.
Which is exactly why I bring up the situation, because I think some of you are failing to look at this objectively.
I'm personally not considering available prospects in my priority of team needs.
Justin Blackmon and Melvin Ingram are the two best players available at the #12 pick. Is WR suddenly a bigger need than SLB because Blackmon is the better prospect?
_________________
'
Richard D!ck Sherman 4 Prez |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
C-Hawkin'
Joined: 30 Aug 2011
Posts: 232
Location: olympia, wa
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 12:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Gotta agree with SOS. The thread's about WHAT we need, not WHO. What does change somewhat depending on placement of Wright etc, but doesn't have anything to do with who happens to be available when it comes our turn. That (who) certainly could influence our pick/trade down @ 12, but still doesn't affect our needs.
_________________
"We have met the enemy & he is us."- Pogo |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tatupu_64
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 17028
Location: Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die.
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 12:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| SaveourSonics wrote: | | Tatupu_64 wrote: | | SaveourSonics wrote: | I was really hoping someone would comment on this. It's pretty obvious to me that people are allowing who might be available in the draft to influence what they believe to be the team needs.
| SaveourSonics wrote: | No, you're putting too much emphasis on who we can actually get with the needs. Forget Kuechly and Ingram, they're irrelevant to this thread for the most part. Take Player X and Player Y. Both are equally rated as prospects but X is better in coverage and Y is better at rushing the passer. Not only that, but Y comes at a position of higher value and more unique scheme fit.
There's no way in hell I'm taking Player X. |
|
That isn't the situation though So why bring it up as if it is |
Why isn't it? This thread is asking, quite simply, what our biggest needs are in order. With that, we shouldn't be considering prospects at all. You should be looking at team needs at complete face value, just team needs.
Which is exactly why I bring up the situation, because I think some of you are failing to look at this objectively.
I'm personally not considering available prospects in my priority of team needs.
Justin Blackmon and Melvin Ingram are the two best players available at the #12 pick. Is WR suddenly a bigger need than SLB because Blackmon is the better prospect? |
Why do you keep bringing up arguments that have nothing to do with the subject at hand?
I already explained my rankings early on.
1. SLB
2. MLB
3. OG (versatile)
4. LEO
SLB in our system should be a guy that can play DE on passing downs. With that assumption, LEO is less of a need than MLB or OG.
If we go with MLB or OG with our first pick, then SLB and LEO become our 1 and 2 needs.
_________________
Props to the Ramster
Seattle's Original Bruce Irvin Supporter
ET and Mebane's Biggest Supporter
FFMD2 13 GM |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SaveourSonics
Joined: 20 Apr 2008
Posts: 45445
Location: Sleepless in Seattle
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 12:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
1. Actually, it has everything to do with the subject at hand The people that voted for "traditional LB" for #1 need consistently brought up Kuechly as their reason.
2. I never specified that you were the person I was referring to Get a grip. Like I said, I'm referring to those that voted for "traditional LB" as the teams #1 need.
3. If SLB should be a guy that can play DE on passing downs, what do you expect to happen with KJ Wright if we take Kuechly? See, this question is actually directed to you specifically.
4. Chris Clemons doesn't come off the field on passing downs....why would any other LEO we took?
5. I fail to see how anyone can have both SLB and MLB as needs for this team. Either you believe KJ is a viable option at SLB and you think our need is at MLB or you believe KJ can start at MLB and you think SLB is our need. However, I don't see a scenario in which we need both.
_________________
'
Richard D!ck Sherman 4 Prez |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tatupu_64
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 17028
Location: Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die.
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 1:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| SaveourSonics wrote: | 1. Actually, it has everything to do with the subject at hand The people that voted for "traditional LB" for #1 need consistently brought up Kuechly as their reason.
2. I never specified that you were the person I was referring to Get a grip. Like I said, I'm referring to those that voted for "traditional LB" as the teams #1 need.
3. If SLB should be a guy that can play DE on passing downs, what do you expect to happen with KJ Wright if we take Kuechly? See, this question is actually directed to you specifically.
4. Chris Clemons doesn't come off the field on passing downs....why would any other LEO we took?
5. I fail to see how anyone can have both SLB and MLB as needs for this team. Either you believe KJ is a viable option at SLB and you think our need is at MLB or you believe KJ can start at MLB and you think SLB is our need. However, I don't see a scenario in which we need both. |
You're making this so much more confusing then it is...
3) I said ideally... That doesn't mean I'm going to rush to replace Wright. If Keuchly is the best player available, you take him and put him at MLB. Wright stays at SLB for this year unless we get a SLB later in the draft.
4) When did I say I wanted Clemons or any other LEO to come off the field on passing downs? Honestly I don't know what the hell you're talking about anymore. I'm saying if we draft a SLB like Ingram, he'll play DE opposite Clemons on passing downs. Therefore the need for another pass rusher, ie drafting a LEO, isn't a top priority.
_________________
Props to the Ramster
Seattle's Original Bruce Irvin Supporter
ET and Mebane's Biggest Supporter
FFMD2 13 GM |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SaveourSonics
Joined: 20 Apr 2008
Posts: 45445
Location: Sleepless in Seattle
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 1:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
I think I'm making it pretty clear (as posters have stated they understand where I'm coming from), you've just taken this weird stance that everyone I say is a negative comment directed at you
3. Maybe it's just personal preference, but I want the "ideal" situation. Which is why I'd take Ingram over Kuechly. If SLB is ideally a pass rusher, let's push for that.
4. I admittedly misunderstood what you were saying. I thought you were saying that since our ideal SLB could play DE on passing downs, LEO wasn't as big of a need because he would come off the field in those situations. But drafting a LEO isn't a move that can only be looked at for solely this season. I'd rather get a guy like Perry, see what he can do this season, and reevaluate how we want to handle the Clemons contract situation rather than have our hand forced into giving Clemons big money because we need him. And like I said before with the example of the Giants defense, you need an ample supply of pass rushers, not just 2 guys.
_________________
'
Richard D!ck Sherman 4 Prez |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheOsprey
Joined: 27 Aug 2009
Posts: 6521
Location: In a van, down by the river.
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 1:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| SaveourSonics wrote: | I agree with almost everything Osprey has said.
...not sure if that's a good thing |
It's a great thing. It means you're coming over to "the darkside". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheOsprey
Joined: 27 Aug 2009
Posts: 6521
Location: In a van, down by the river.
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 1:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| SaveourSonics wrote: | I was really hoping someone would comment on this. It's pretty obvious to me that people are allowing who might be available in the draft to influence what they believe to be the team needs.
| SaveourSonics wrote: | No, you're putting too much emphasis on who we can actually get with the needs. Forget Kuechly and Ingram, they're irrelevant to this thread for the most part. Take Player X and Player Y. Both are equally rated as prospects but X is better in coverage and Y is better at rushing the passer. Not only that, but Y comes at a position of higher value and more unique scheme fit.
There's no way in hell I'm taking Player X. |
|
When you put "X's" and "Y's" in there, I had flashbacks to algebra class and my brain nearly exploded. It was a bad scene, man! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
