"why should we pass up the higher-rated (offensive) prospect?"-Rick Smith

[TexanJedi]

In today's Chron:

“You have to look at value,” he said. “If it’s our turn to pick and we have an offensive player rated a lot higher than a defensive player, why should we pass up the higher-rated prospect?

“The idea is to improve the team any way we can. We’ve filled some holes in free agency, but we have a lot more work to get done in the draft. We want to take the best players we can get.”

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/...t/6370631.html

I wonder what happens if Maclin falls, but I think this would apply more so if (when) the Texans trade down.

[papabear]

I don't disagree with this, but I think the key part of that quote is "an offensive player rated a lot higher than a defensive player". If there are two guys at the top of the draft board , one offense and one defense, and they are rated fairly closely....then I think we'll take the defensive guy even if he is rated slightly lower. If an offensive player is rated significantly higher you have to take him. The rub is trying to decide how big a gap there must be in whatever grading system they use to over-ride the obvious defensive need.

That's why I have liked our FA signings. Not so much because of the individual players, but because they give us some options at our weak areas that allow us the freedom to take any position on draft day because.

[idymoe]

Originally Posted by papabear

. If there are two guys at the top of the draft board , one offense and one defense, and they are rated fairly closely....then I think we'll take the defensive guy even if he is rated slightly lower. If an offensive player is rated significantly higher you have to take him. The rub is trying to decide how big a gap there must be in whatever grading system they use to over-ride the obvious defensive need.

I think you are absolutely right. I think the offensive player would have to be unquestionably better, not just incrementaly better, for the Texans to draft him. I'm thinking if maybe one of the OT's or Crabtree fell, but I don't look for that to happen. If Stafford or Sanchez is there, I think they could and would find a trade-down.

[mussop]

Cant wait to hear what all the "were drafting Defense only" posters have to say about this. My bet,,,,, its just smoke! Then they will bring up how we were 3rd in offense and nearly last in defense.

[Roy P]

Originally Posted by mussop

Cant wait to hear what all the "were drafting Defense only" posters have to say about this. My bet,,,,, its just smoke! Then they will bring up how we were 3rd in offense and nearly last in defense.

My biggest dillemma is trying to decide whether or not we should draft Jeremy Maclin, should he be on the board. I think he's a much safer pick than most of the players available in the draft. Now, Matthews helps the defense more, if he's the guy most of us envision him to be. However, I think that there is a bit of risk that he might not become that Pro-Bowl OLB who is the modern day Julian Peterson.

Now, if we can trade down, by making another team believe that we will select Maclin, and garner an extra pick, then that mitigates the risk that Matthews would be at #15.

Basically, I want Clay, but I'll take Jeremy if I have to.

[gunslinger57]

Originally Posted by Roy P

My biggest dillemma is trying to decide whether or not we should draft Jeremy Maclin, should he be on the board. I think he's a much safer pick than most of the players available in the draft. Now, Matthews helps the defense more, if he's the guy most of us envision him to be. However, I think that there is a bit of risk that he might not become that Pro-Bowl OLB who is the modern day Julian Peterson.

Now, if we can trade down, by making another team believe that we will select Maclin, and garner an extra pick, then that mitigates the risk that Matthews would be at #15.

Basically, I want Clay, but I'll take Jeremy if I have to.

That was my first guess. I thought Rick was trying to convince the other GMs that if there's an offensive player that falls to 15 that the Texans will take him and not look back. That would hopefully "inspire" a GM to move up for someone like a Maclin and the Texans could grab an extra pick or even two is someone develops a mancrush on a player like Casserly did for Babin. If that's the case, looks like Rick may be thinking the LBs will fall a bit.

Of course, if they do take someone like Maclin and decide to have "The Greatest Show on Turf" ver. 2.0 I'm not totally averse to that. Make for some fun Sunday afternoons if nothing else.

[kRocket]

Originally Posted by papabear

I don't disagree with this, but I think the key part of that quote is "an offensive player rated a lot higher than a defensive player". If there are two guys at the top of the draft board , one offense and one defense, and they are rated fairly closely....then I think we'll take the defensive guy even if he is rated slightly lower. If an offensive player is rated significantly higher you have to take him. The rub is trying to decide how big a gap there must be in whatever grading system they use to over-ride the obvious defensive need.

That's why I have liked our FA signings. Not so much because of the individual players, but because they give us some options at our weak areas that allow us the freedom to take any position on draft day because.

I am not sure the Texan F.O. is as keyed into defense as this board is. All this statement seems to indicate that they will not draft for need so much as take the BPA.