My First-Round Pick If I Were Dimitroff

[ChrisD]

I don't see us taking a running back in the first round. Maybe as early as the 3rd round. But we have other spots that we need explosive players at. With Turner in the backfield, I don't see us taking a RB in the first 2.

[MalteseFalcon1994]

What will help our passing attack more, a #2 WR or a pass receiving RB?

[kane#7]

(01-24-2011 11:37 AM)g-dawg Wrote:  1) Defensive End (hopefully addressed in Free Agency)
2) Cornerback (yes, I know we have Dunta and Grimes - we need more/better)
3) Wide Receiver (we need a fast/long strike playmaker)
4) Running Back (ok, I will put running back at #4 overall - say 3rd-4th round pick - think Derrick Locke, RB-Kentucky)
5) Tight End (we need a replacement for Tony Gonzalez who probably retires after 2011).
6) Offensive Line Depth
7) Linebacker Depth

I will agree on this but a few changes
1) Defensive End (hopefully addressed in Free Agency)

Biggest Need by Far

2) Cornerback (yes, I know we have Dunta and Grimes - we need more/better)
3) Wide Receiver (we need a fast/long strike playmaker)
4) Running Back (ok, I will put running back at #4 overall - say 3rd-4th round pick - think Derrick Locke, RB-Kentucky)
5) Tight End (we need a replacement for Tony Gonzalez who probably retires after 2011).
6) Offensive Line Depth
7) Linebacker Depth

Everything else is pretty much in order but 2/3 can go either way

[ChrisD]

(01-24-2011 02:55 PM)MalteseFalcon1994 Wrote:  What will help our passing attack more, a #2 WR or a pass receiving RB?

Probably a pass receiving RB that Ryan can check down to, but even with that, I see us taking a WR before we take a RB.

[papachaz]

my understanding is that the period we all know as free agency won't happen before the draft this year. it can't happen without a CBA in place first. I don't think we'll be without football next year, but i do think it will be summer, close to TC time before they really get serious about negotiating.

that being said, there WILL be a draft regardless of a CBA. most teams will be drafting to fill the needs they have instead of filling some of those via FA, because the FA just won't happen before the draft this year.

i guess what i'm trying to say through my foggy mind is that everyone will be drafting first and trading/cutting/acquiring later, this WILL play into every teams draft strategy this year

[TonyGraziani]

(01-24-2011 02:55 PM)MalteseFalcon1994 Wrote:  What will help our passing attack more, a #2 WR or a pass receiving RB?

I'm not sure if that question is supposed to be rhetorical, but I'll answer anyway.

Jason Snelling was 3rd on the team with 44 receptions. Michael Jenkins, our #2 WR, had 41, but that was in 11 games. Harry Douglas had 9 catches in Jenkins place at the beginning of the season. So our #2 WR only ended up with 6 more catches than our receiving RB. What does this mean? IMO, it means 2 things:

1- Matt checks down a lot. That is a very necessary part of our offense and when it is taken away, it causes problems for us. But, on the flipside, checkdowns and short dump offs are usually not explosive plays. To rely on these short passes/checkdowns as much as we do, and to have such little chance of a big play due to not only the nature of the play but also the talents of the player, hinders our offense.

2- Whether it's due to the system, the talent level, or Matt's preference, our #2 WR is only gonna get so many passes thrown his way. Jenks to me is to our offense what Lofton is to our defense in terms of pure play on the field. They both are unspectacular, but they go out there and just do their job. Due to our defensive philosophy, the majority of us are satisfied with Lofton's play. We don't expect him to have a whole lot of picks/sacks/etc. because that's not his game and not what he is counted on to do in our D. The same goes for Jenkins. In our scheme, he's doing what is asked of him. It's unfair to compare Lofton to Ray Lewis or Patrick Willis because they play in different schemes. Same goes for Jenkins.

In the end, I believe that both our #2 WR and receiving RB are equally important to the clockwork of our offense due to the scheme. A strong case can be made in support of Snelling and Jenkins, and a strong case can be made to upgrade both positions.

(sorry if I got a little long winded)

[papachaz]

(01-24-2011 03:30 PM)TonyGraziani Wrote:  I'm not sure if that question is supposed to be rhetorical, but I'll answer anyway.

Jason Snelling was 3rd on the team with 44 receptions. Michael Jenkins, our #2 WR, had 41, but that was in 11 games. Harry Douglas had 9 catches in Jenkins place at the beginning of the season. So our #2 WR only ended up with 6 more catches than our receiving RB. What does this mean? IMO, it means 2 things:

1- Matt checks down a lot. That is a very necessary part of our offense and when it is taken away, it causes problems for us. But, on the flipside, checkdowns and short dump offs are usually not explosive plays. To rely on these short passes/checkdowns as much as we do, and to have such little chance of a big play due to not only the nature of the play but also the talents of the player, hinders our offense.

2- Whether it's due to the system, the talent level, or Matt's preference, our #2 WR is only gonna get so many passes thrown his way. Jenks to me is to our offense what Lofton is to our defense in terms of pure play on the field. They both are unspectacular, but they go out there and just do their job. Due to our defensive philosophy, the majority of us are satisfied with Lofton's play. We don't expect him to have a whole lot of picks/sacks/etc. because that's not his game and not what he is counted on to do in our D. The same goes for Jenkins. In our scheme, he's doing what is asked of him. It's unfair to compare Lofton to Ray Lewis or Patrick Willis because they play in different schemes. Same goes for Jenkins.

In the end, I believe that both our #2 WR and receiving RB are equally important to the clockwork of our offense due to the scheme. A strong case can be made in support of Snelling and Jenkins, and a strong case can be made to upgrade both positions.

(sorry if I got a little long winded)

while i don't know the speed difference in Turner vs Snelling, i would go so far as to say that the difference in Norwood/Snelling is tremendous. Now take into consideration the number of times JS caught the ball, and give a majority of them to a healthy Norwood/back like him and how much better a threat is that? most definitely a bigger threat for sure. I always thought with JN on the field that there was a chance he was going all the way any time he touched the ball.

I'd say with your explanation, a speed back who catches the ball helps us more than a WR, esp if we don't improve our pass protection so Matt has more time to throw downfield

[TonyGraziani]

(01-24-2011 03:45 PM)chazmataz Wrote:  while i don't know the speed difference in Turner vs Snelling, i would go so far as to say that the difference in Norwood/Snelling is tremendous. Now take into consideration the number of times JS caught the ball, and give a majority of them to a healthy Norwood/back like him and how much better a threat is that? most definitely a bigger threat for sure. I always thought with JN on the field that there was a chance he was going all the way any time he touched the ball.

I'd say with your explanation, a speed back who catches the ball helps us more than a WR, esp if we don't improve our pass protection so Matt has more time to throw downfield

Exactly. I'm torn between the two, and I think Snelling was our most underrated/stated player this season. But all those wanting to upgrade Jenkins should look to upgrade Snelling because they both are (solid but) nonexplosive.

[kane#7]

(01-24-2011 03:30 PM)TonyGraziani Wrote:  I'm not sure if that question is supposed to be rhetorical, but I'll answer anyway.

Jason Snelling was 3rd on the team with 44 receptions. Michael Jenkins, our #2 WR, had 41, but that was in 11 games. Harry Douglas had 9 catches in Jenkins place at the beginning of the season. So our #2 WR only ended up with 6 more catches than our receiving RB. What does this mean? IMO, it means 2 things:

1- Matt checks down a lot. That is a very necessary part of our offense and when it is taken away, it causes problems for us. But, on the flipside, checkdowns and short dump offs are usually not explosive plays. To rely on these short passes/checkdowns as much as we do, and to have such little chance of a big play due to not only the nature of the play but also the talents of the player, hinders our offense.

2- Whether it's due to the system, the talent level, or Matt's preference, our #2 WR is only gonna get so many passes thrown his way. Jenks to me is to our offense what Lofton is to our defense in terms of pure play on the field. They both are unspectacular, but they go out there and just do their job. Due to our defensive philosophy, the majority of us are satisfied with Lofton's play. We don't expect him to have a whole lot of picks/sacks/etc. because that's not his game and not what he is counted on to do in our D. The same goes for Jenkins. In our scheme, he's doing what is asked of him. It's unfair to compare Lofton to Ray Lewis or Patrick Willis because they play in different schemes. Same goes for Jenkins.

In the end, I believe that both our #2 WR and receiving RB are equally important to the clockwork of our offense due to the scheme. A strong case can be made in support of Snelling and Jenkins, and a strong case can be made to upgrade both positions.

(sorry if I got a little long winded)

See this is the problem with this board... Well thought out answers now no one will reply to this thread

I honestly believe that a RB who can catch and make one or 2 guys miss is our biggest offensive need... now you say a strong case can be made for either so I may take the RB side...

Advantages of a RB that can recieve the ball:

Against the Blitz... a Rb who can catch against the blitz is invaluble it can make teams think twice about blitzing if we will just dump it off to a RB that can make a man miss and is a potential home run threat, with 5-7 guys going after the QB and assuming 2 WR and a TE upfield that is a big risk they are taking in sending extra blitzers because one missed tackle can result in a large gain.

Check-down... If no one is open and we have an explosive player in the flat who Matt can just dump the ball to if he can pick up + yards it is a major help to moving the chains and turns a possibly negative play into a positive play.

Mis-matches... Now this is where they really become valuable if we have a guy who is too athletic or fast for a LBer to cover then if we bring him out in the backfield then motion him out to the slot the other team MUST commit a saftey to covering him or we get an easy completion in the open field. This can mean that they cannot double Roddy with that Saftey leaving him open 70% of the time (1 on 1 I will take him everytime).

This is only the basic ones I could come up with in 5 minutes with all the other options I see a good recieving RB expanding our offense greatly...

[MalteseFalcon1994]

I'm looking at runningbacks projected in the 4th-6th round and none of them are really impressive.

even if we did he wouldn't be a game breaker.

I just think we need an explosive and exciting guy that brings alot of talent. A runningback is all of those things. We have had trouble drafting Dlinemen so I'd get one in FA.

Draft for me:

1.) Runningback
2.) Defensive End (eventually surpasses FA or Abe)
3.) Cornerback
4.) Wide Receiver (If we get a ball-catching runningback this need dies down A LOT)
5.) O-lineman
6.) Linebacker
7.) Cornerback