62 replies to this topic

[Sizzlebshu]

Im just wondering why people think we need to take one in the first round? We do have McClain and Ellerbe. The latter is playing phenomenally well, while the former has played well for us. When Ray went down last year and this year, they both filled in quite adequately and no loss in production was suffered. I agree we need more depth behind them, but imo you grab depth in later rounds. I feel that our earlier picks should be addressed to positions where we need to find a starter or replacement.

So I'm wondering do you guys dislike the Ellerbe, McClain combo that much or is there something Im missing. Im confident we can get Ellerbe resigned.

Edited by Sizzlebshu, 23 January 2013 - 12:24 PM.

[Johnwilson]

Im just wondering why people think we need to take one in the first round? We do have McClain and Ellerbe. The latter is playing phenomenally well, while the former has played well for us. When Ray went down last year and this year, they both filled in quite adequately and no loss in production was suffered. I agree we need more depth behind them, but imo you grab depth in later rounds. I feel that our earlier picks should be addressed to positions where we need to find a starter or replacement.

So I'm wondering do you guys dislike the Ellerbe, McClain combo that much or is there something Im missing. Im confident we can get Ellerbe resigned.

yea we really don't need a LB i realized because we have like 6 on roster(-Ray Lewis) like that a lot for a team we have
Ellerbe,mcClain,BA,josh bynes,Ricky Brown,and Daryl Blackstock and Albert McClellan can play that to so all we need is depth at the postion like 3rd or 4th round pick and 1st pick needs to be on D or LT and Second pick needs to be D also or WR.

Edited by Johnwilson, 23 January 2013 - 12:49 PM.

[GrimCoconut]

For me it is less about a lack of confidence in Ellerbe & McClain. It is more about the quality of player I believe will be there at 32. ILBs don't typically go very high. They can, but they don't always. I expect a run on CBs, DTs, OLBs, & DEs. I think this is a very good defensive draft, which is good because we need it.

So, why do I think ILB will be our pick? Because it's a position of need that will most likely be passed on due to OLBs, DEs, DTs, QBs, & OTs. I'd pick a lot of players before an ILB if I was a GM, but we pick at #32, and that means we will be picking the guy everyone else passed on.

Minter, Te'o, and possibly even Brown could make a case for 32. There are other guys, too. But then that's what makes the draft fun. Minter would help us recognizing offensive formations and helping adjust the defense accordingly. Brown helps us with his lateral speed and playmaking ability. Te'o brings a lot of leadership & lateral speed to help shut down these TEs. I like an ILB pick in the 1st.

It really depends who is there. Right now, I see an ILB being there who is really good that would be better than the other guys. The draft is more than just taking guys. It's about predicting who will go where, and figuring out what other guys need.

[Sizzlebshu]

I'm just saying I see a lot of mocks and a lot of people on this board taking guys like Ogletree, Mintor etc.... and Im just like why? Don't get me wrong I'm sure they are great players, but I feel like they are trying to find an ilb to replace Ray Lewis which isnt gonna happen. Its like they are looking for the next Ray Lewis. There was an article on here awhile ago, that said we arent gonna replace HoF at their position, but at other positions which I agree with. Besides, its not like Ray is replaceable. His primary value has always been his leadership and there is no one past, present, or future that will replace that.

[Sizzlebshu]

For me it is less about a lack of confidence in Ellerbe & McClain. It is more about the quality of player I believe will be there at 32. ILBs don't typically go very high. They can, but they don't always. I expect a run on CBs, DTs, OLBs, & DEs. I think this is a very good defensive draft, which is good because we need it.

So, why do I think ILB will be our pick? Because it's a position of need that will most likely be passed on due to OLBs, DEs, DTs, QBs, & OTs. I'd pick a lot of players before an ILB if I was a GM, but we pick at #32, and that means we will be picking the guy everyone else passed on.

Minter, Te'o, and possibly even Brown could make a case for 32. There are other guys, too. But then that's what makes the draft fun. Minter would help us recognizing offensive formations and helping adjust the defense accordingly. Brown helps us with his lateral speed and playmaking ability. Te'o brings a lot of leadership & lateral speed to help shut down these TEs. I like an ILB pick in the 1st.

It really depends who is there. Right now, I see an ILB being there who is really good that would be better than the other guys. The draft is more than just taking guys. It's about predicting who will go where, and figuring out what other guys need.

This is my argument against it. The 49ers have all pros at every linebacker position and when justin smith went down, they looked very ordinary. I mean Lynch and the Seahawks demolished them. The packers running game, was actually effective against them (its the packers running game remember, it should be no existent and yet it wasnt). That goes to show you how much of a difference average production vs phenomenal production makes at the position.

Edited by Sizzlebshu, 23 January 2013 - 12:58 PM.

[GrimCoconut]

This is my argument against it. The 49ers have all pros at every linebacker position and when justin smith went down, they looked very ordinary. I mean Lynch and the Seahawks demolished them. The packers running game, was actually effective against them (its the packers running game remember, it should be no existent and yet it wasnt). That goes to show you how much of a difference average production vs phenomenal production makes at the position.

See, I think this is where you are being narrow-minded. You're looking at it as a position and not as what could very well be the best player available. I understand your point and to an extent I agree. You are correct in saying that the DL is more important than an ILB. But let me ask you a question: do you take a DE just because he's a DE but an ILB is a better prospect? What if there's a run on DEs? Do you just take one because "he's there and I don't want an ILB".

I know you will say "then take an OT! DT! NT! OLB!" What if Fisher, Johnson & Joeckel are gone? What if Floyd, Richardson, Short, Hankins, Jenkins, & Star are gone? We can go onto OLBs but you see my point, I believe.

And please don't say take a WR, CB, S. Those are all skill positions just like ILB and would also depend on a defensive line or offensive line respectively. The bottom-line is I think an ILB could be our best pick at 32. That's all. If there's a better player take one. But I don't think there will be.

Edited by GrimCoconut, 23 January 2013 - 01:12 PM.

[gabefergy]

I'm just saying I see a lot of mocks and a lot of people on this board taking guys like Ogletree, Mintor etc.... and Im just like why? Don't get me wrong I'm sure they are great players, but I feel like they are trying to find an ilb to replace Ray Lewis which isnt gonna happen. Its like they are looking for the next Ray Lewis. There was an article on here awhile ago, that said we arent gonna replace HoF at their position, but at other positions which I agree with. Besides, its not like Ray is replaceable. His primary value has always been his leadership and there is no one past, present, or future that will replace that.

It's a position of need, simple as that. McClain has not proven he is capable of being a 3 down LB. He struggles mightily in coverage, and is really only a servicable player in run defense. Not a special player in the least. Ellerbe is a great player, really blossoming into a star, but he has never been able to stay healthy for an entire season and there is no guarantee he even comes back. Bynes is a back-up. BA is old and is also a back-up. If we are depending heavily on Josh Bynes and BA to log significant minutes we are in trouble. We really need an impact player at the position. This draft has several players who would be good value where we are drafting. It makes sense on a lot of levels.

The only other positions that are big question marks like ILB are Safety and OT. It seems unlikely that there will be a OT worth taking in the first round where we will be drafting. WR is another position that could be taken early, but I dont see it as any more pressing that ILB.

[ClintLB8]

I just think ILB is an extremely important position.. some disagree but your ILB is your quarterback of the defense. There is a reason that both Ellerbe and McClain went undrafted. Don't get me wrong.. they have majorly outplayed their expectancy and I think Ellerbe is a gem but I think McClain was a one hit wonder and with his spinal injury, he cannot be relied on. I think we were desperate last year and that's why McClain got the contract he did. We will never replace Ray but replacing Ray with McClain isn't going to work IMO. McClain might be similar to what Ray brings to the table skill set wise at this point in Ray's career, but Ray (outside of his fiery passion) has actually been a liability is some regards outside of the playoffs which he is playing like a freaking monster out there cause it's his last run. We need impact.. and McClain is not impact. Just my opinion...

[Sizzlebshu]

It's a position of need, simple as that. McClain has not proven he is capable of being a 3 down LB. He struggles mightily in coverage, and is really only a servicable player in run defense. Not a special player in the least. Ellerbe is a great player, really blossoming into a star, but he has never been able to stay healthy for an entire season and there is no guarantee he even comes back. Bynes is a back-up. BA is old and is also a back-up. If we are depending heavily on Josh Bynes and BA to log significant minutes we are in trouble. We really need an impact player at the position. This draft has several players who would be good value where we are drafting. It makes sense on a lot of levels.

The only other positions that are big question marks like ILB are Safety and OT. It seems unlikely that there will be a OT worth taking in the first round where we will be drafting. WR is another position that could be taken early, but I dont see it as any more pressing that ILB.

I'll disgree with you here as Cleveland is getting better and will be a physical team in afc north style so thats 3 very physical defense we will need WR to be able to beat 6x a year but I get what you're saying.

Again I agree we need depth there, and as for McClain I didnt see terrible drop in production with him in so I'm okay with his play, but I can see why you wouldnt be. There is value where we are picking, Im just thinking we can find better impact players at other positions.

[Sizzlebshu]

I just think ILB is an extremely important position.. some disagree but your ILB is your quarterback of the defense. There is a reason that both Ellerbe and McClain went undrafted. Don't get me wrong.. they have majorly outplayed their expectancy and I think Ellerbe is a gem but I think McClain was a one hit wonder and with his spinal injury, he cannot be relied on. I think we were desperate last year and that's why McClain got the contract he did. We will never replace Ray but replacing Ray with McClain isn't going to work IMO. McClain might be similar to what Ray brings to the table skill set wise at this point in Ray's career, but Ray (outside of his fiery passion) has actually been a liability is some regards outside of the playoffs which he is playing like a freaking monster out there cause it's his last run. We need impact.. and McClain is not impact. Just my opinion...

I mean my argument here is that you shouldnt be looking for impact at this position as it generally isnt a huge impact position to begin with.

[ClintLB8]

See, I think this is where you are being narrow-minded. You're looking at it as a position and not as what could very well be the best player available. I understand your point and to an extent I agree. You are correct in saying that the DL is more important than an ILB. But let me ask you a question: do you take a DE just because he's a DE but an ILB is a better prospect? What if there's a run on DEs? Do you just take one because "he's there and I don't want an ILB".

I know you will say "then take an OT! DT! NT! OLB!" What if Fisher, Johnson & Joeckel are gone? What if Floyd, Richardson, Short, Hankins, Jenkins, & Star are gone? We can go onto OLBs but you see my point, I believe.

And please don't say take a WR, CB, S. Those are all skill positions just like ILB and would also depend on a defensive line or offensive line respectively. The bottom-line is I think an ILB could be our best pick at 32. That's all. If there's a better player take one. But I don't think there will be.

Incredibly well put, sir. +1 for you.

[Sizzlebshu]

See, I think this is where you are being narrow-minded. You're looking at it as a position and not as what could very well be the best player available. I understand your point and to an extent I agree. You are correct in saying that the DL is more important than an ILB. But let me ask you a question: do you take a DE just because he's a DE but an ILB is a better prospect? What if there's a run on DEs? Do you just take one because "he's there and I don't want an ILB".

I know you will say "then take an OT! DT! NT! OLB!" What if Fisher, Johnson & Joeckel are gone? What if Floyd, Richardson, Short, Hankins, Jenkins, & Star are gone? We can go onto OLBs but you see my point, I believe.

And please don't say take a WR, CB, S. Those are all skill positions just like ILB and would also depend on a defensive line or offensive line respectively. The bottom-line is I think an ILB could be our best pick at 32. That's all. If there's a better player take one. But I don't think there will be.

Again Im not saying draft just for need, but I am saying that you have to consider value. If you need depth, you dont waste your most important pick on it.

For what we need, a 3rd round or higher ilb would be more than enough. So you are going to waste your highest chance of getting an nfl quality player for a depth positional need is not exactly a good idea.

You have to consider your needs, but also how much value they hold and right now I dont see a lot of value in taking an ilb in the first since we have 2 serviceable starters.

That doesnt mean we shouldnt take one, it just means we shouldnt take one there.

To give you a better idea. I take the 5th best LT in the draft over the best ilb in the draft because LT holds more value and has a bigger impact than ilb. Even if the LT busts, I made a decision because I thought he could be one based on my scouting and because the risks were outweighed by the potential benefits. The benefits the ilb could give me would not nearly have the impact that LT I gambled on would give me and I calculate that even if he busts, that if I took the ilb the potential rewards I would reap would be minimal.

Its all about risk calculation and what you see of course, but positional value does play a role in determining who you take.

For example, we saw 2 years QB's like locker ponder and gabbert go in the early first over suerer players because the positional value at QB is higher than that of any other position. These teams decided they were okay on losing out on the production other positions they could have picked would have given them to risk finding their franchise QB.

Edited by Sizzlebshu, 23 January 2013 - 01:25 PM.

[ClintLB8]

I mean my argument here is that you shouldnt be looking for impact at this position as it generally isnt a huge impact position to begin with.

See, I just don't agree with that at all and never will. Why do they say the middle linebacker is the quarterback of the defense? We need a LB that can cover these revolutionary tight ends that are coming into the league but can also stop the Adrian Petersons of the league as well. Patrick Willis can cover tight ends and get gritty in the ground game as well.. we need a 3 down LB next to Ellerbe or as close to one as we can get. Middle linebacker is a big impact position IMO.

[gabefergy]

Again Im not saying draft just for need, but I am saying that you have to consider value. If you need depth, you dont waste your most important pick on it.

For what we need, a 3rd round or higher ilb would be more than enough. So you are going to waste your highest chance of getting an nfl quality player for a depth positional need is not exactly a good idea.

You have to consider your needs, but also how much value they hold and right now I dont see a lot of value in taking an ilb in the first since we have 2 serviceable starters.

That doesnt mean we shouldnt take one, it just means we shouldnt take one there.

To give you a better idea. I take the 5th best LT in the draft over the best ilb in the draft because LT holds more value and has a bigger impact than ilb. Even if the LT busts, I made a decision because I thought he could be one based on my scouting and because the risks were outweighed by the potential benefits. The benefits the ilb could give me would not nearly have the impact that LT I gambled on would give me and I calculate that even if he busts, that if I took the ilb the potential rewards I would reap would be minimal.

Its all about risk calculation and what you see of course, but positional value does play a role in determining who you take.

For example, we saw 2 years QB's like locker ponder and gabbert go in the early first over suerer players because the positional value at QB is higher than that of any other position. These teams decided they were okay on losing out on the production other positions they could have picked would have given them to risk finding their franchise QB.

If they are evenly talented than I would agree with you, but I dont think there are 5 LTs in this draft, at least not a LT that can come in and start for us immediately. An ILB would most likely be a starter. I dont think we have to take a LB in the first round, I would probably go WR or safety, but it really depends on who is on the board. You sound like you are suggesting to reach for a player that doesnt have a first round grade simply because it is a more "impactful" position. Just because it is an important position to fill doesnt mean you can discount talent.

[Sizzlebshu]

See, I just don't agree with that at all and never will. Why do they say the middle linebacker is the quarterback of the defense? We need a LB that can cover these revolutionary tight ends that are coming into the league but can also stop the Adrian Petersons of the league as well. Patrick Willis can cover tight ends and get gritty in the ground game as well.. we need a 3 down LB next to Ellerbe or as close to one as we can get. Middle linebacker is a big impact position IMO.

You realize how rare of a skill set that is right now right? It doesn't help our case that your example is the best ilb in the game right now. I highly doubt any of the current prospects can do what your hoping for.

[Sizzlebshu]

If they are evenly talented than I would agree with you, but I dont think there are 5 LTs in this draft, at least not a LT that can come in and start for us immediately. An ILB would most likely be a starter. I dont think we have to take a LB in the first round, I would probably go WR or safety, but it really depends on who is on the board. You sound like you are suggesting to reach for a player that doesnt have a first round grade simply because it is a more "impactful" position. Just because it is an important position to fill doesnt mean you can discount talent.

I wasnt being specific here and I would take the LT even if he is a bit rawer coming out than the most polished ilb because if I can find a franchise LT, my team becomes much better immediately where as getting a guy like Patrick Willis would improve my team, but only marginally. Again its risk management. Im not suggesting a reach here. What I am suggesting is that taking an ilb just because he is the bpa and we have a depth need at ilb is the wrong move because it really doesnt help us any if much at all. Even if we had a starter need at the position, the position is low impact and we have shown that we can fill it with udfa and be good. As a result, there just isnt good value at the position for the improvement it nets. An ilb would have to be very special for us to consider him in the first imho.

The metaphor I use is this.

You can put money in the bank and it will get you 1% a year but your money is safe (taking an ilb)

or

You can put money in the stock market. Its a bit riskier but if you do your research, your net return is much greater in the end than that of the bank. There is potential for a loss, but if you do your research, you've accounted for that and done all you could and made the best decision possible.

Edited by Sizzlebshu, 23 January 2013 - 01:41 PM.

[GrimCoconut]

Again Im not saying draft just for need, but I am saying that you have to consider value. If you need depth, you dont waste your most important pick on it.

For what we need, a 3rd round or higher ilb would be more than enough. So you are going to waste your highest chance of getting an nfl quality player for a depth positional need is not exactly a good idea.

You have to consider your needs, but also how much value they hold and right now I dont see a lot of value in taking an ilb in the first since we have 2 serviceable starters.

That doesnt mean we shouldnt take one, it just means we shouldnt take one there.

To give you a better idea. I take the 5th best LT in the draft over the best ilb in the draft because LT holds more value and has a bigger impact than ilb. Even if the LT busts, I made a decision because I thought he could be one based on my scouting and because the risks were outweighed by the potential benefits. The benefits the ilb could give me would not nearly have the impact that LT I gambled on would give me and I calculate that even if he busts, that if I took the ilb the potential rewards I would reap would be minimal.

Its all about risk calculation and what you see of course, but positional value does play a role in determining who you take.

For example, we saw 2 years QB's like locker ponder and gabbert go in the early first over suerer players because the positional value at QB is higher than that of any other position. These teams decided they were okay on losing out on the production other positions they could have picked would have given them to risk finding their franchise QB.

You say a lot of good things but the best part is Locker & Gabbert. What GMs drafted those two guys? Oh yeah. That's right. And tell me how that worked out for those respective teams. Because it didn't. See, the Baltimore Ravens don't typically deviate from their BPA strategy. It works, that's why. A lot of their failed draft picks came from deviating from the formula.

I also think MLB is an extremely valuable position. You have an injury-risk in Ellerbe, McClain who may never be the same & who has underperformed, BA who is as old as dirt, Bynes who is really raw, and McClellan who is good but is used a lot for OLB depth.

I just don't agree with this and won't. The only position I wouldn't take is a RB in the first. I think it's foolish to exclude a position just because it's not a "high impact position", which I can easily argue against but won't.

But to move on, I really like Te'o & would trade up for him. Minter, I like him a lot as well and would trade up for him, too. If both those prospects are gone, I would trade back and take Arthur Brown.

I think we can get a good DE in the 2nd. And I started to watch some film on Brandon Williams from Missouri and he is actually pretty good. I haven't heard his name much but someone here kept pimping his name so I looked into him.

[gabefergy]

You say a lot of good things but the best part is Locker & Gabbert. What GMs drafted those two guys? Oh yeah. That's right. And tell me how that worked out for those respective teams. Because it didn't. See, the Baltimore Ravens don't typically deviate from their BPA strategy. It works, that's why. A lot of their failed draft picks came from deviating from the formula.

I also think MLB is an extremely valuable position. You have an injury-risk in Ellerbe, McClain who may never be the same & who has underperformed, BA who is as old as dirt, Bynes who is really raw, and McClellan who is good but is used a lot for OLB depth.

I just don't agree with this and won't. The only position I wouldn't take is a RB in the first. I think it's foolish to exclude a position just because it's not a "high impact position", which I can easily argue against but won't.

But to move on, I really like Te'o & would trade up for him. Minter, I like him a lot as well and would trade up for him, too. If both those prospects are gone, I would trade back and take Arthur Brown.

I think we can get a good DE in the 2nd. And I started to watch some film on Brandon Williams from Missouri and he is actually pretty good. I haven't heard his name much but someone here kept pimping his name so I looked into him.

I'm with you 100%. Not sure I would move up to take an ILB, but I think the position is very valuable. I've had this conversation before with Sizzle who thinks success of ILBs is directly proportional to quality of DL. I think there is some correlation there, but its not that easy.

Quality ILBs in today's game are more than just downhill run-stuffers. They have key roles in coverage in the 3-4 defense. McLain, Lewis, and even Ellerbe were all poor in this role. We need an athletic ILB that can not play all three downs and impactful not only in run defense, but also pass defense. It is a real weakness in our defense and needs to be addressed.

[gabefergy]

I wasnt being specific here and I would take the LT even if he is a bit rawer coming out than the most polished ilb because if I can find a franchise LT, my team becomes much better immediately where as getting a guy like Patrick Willis would improve my team, but only marginally. Again its risk management. Im not suggesting a reach here. What I am suggesting is that taking an ilb just because he is the bpa and we have a depth need at ilb is the wrong move because it really doesnt help us any if much at all. Even if we had a starter need at the position, the position is low impact and we have shown that we can fill it with udfa and be good. As a result, there just isnt good value at the position for the improvement it nets. An ilb would have to be very special for us to consider him in the first imho.

The metaphor I use is this.

You can put money in the bank and it will get you 1% a year but your money is safe (taking an ilb)

or

You can put money in the stock market. Its a bit riskier but if you do your research, your net return is much greater in the end than that of the bank. There is potential for a loss, but if you do your research, you've accounted for that and done all you could and made the best decision possible.

I disagree at pretty much everything you are saying here. Inside LB is more impactful than you make it out to be and drafting a project LT is a very risky investment, especially if you take him early in the draft.

This is where scouting comes in to play. There is a reason why prospects are given grades and OT is one of the more cut and dry positions. There are certain physical attributes that are necessary to play the OT position in the NFL like Size, foot speed, arm length, ability to bend, etc...Some players have all this attributes and in combination with study of film are given first round grades. When players have some attributes but not all, or have poor film, they slide down the grading scale. You can't just hope that a guy who is given a poor grade can get faster or bigger. It doesnt work that way. It's possible that a "project" can develop into a solid technician, but an elite LT is almost never going to be missed. There are always going to be exceptions to the rule, but it's not a position to reach for.

[BloodRaven]

I'm with you 100%. Not sure I would move up to take an ILB, but I think the position is very valuable. I've had this conversation before with Sizzle who thinks success of ILBs is directly proportional to quality of DL. I think there is some correlation there, but its not that easy.

Quality ILBs in today's game are more than just downhill run-stuffers. They have key roles in coverage in the 3-4 defense. McLain, Lewis, and even Ellerbe were all poor in this role. We need an athletic ILB that can not play all three downs and impactful not only in run defense, but also pass defense. It is a real weakness in our defense and needs to be addressed.

I see a lot of the young lightning quick Ray Lewis in Alec Ogletree, he needs a lot of work with second level blocks though.