IntheBullseye.com  

Go Back   IntheBullseye.com > Hot Reads ...In the Bullseye > The NFL Draft

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 04-29-2016, 11:54 PM
HPF Bob HPF Bob is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 3,569
Default

Incidentally, we gave up our sixth-round pick to Atlanta to trade up for Martin so we just have three choices (a 4th and two 5ths) Saturday unless we trade back for more picks.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 04-30-2016, 01:08 AM
chuck chuck is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,535
Default

I can see barrett's point and I can see Bob's, too. I think the team needs the WRs because as barrett points out the production outside of Nuke has been disgusting. My biggest problem is that the team drafts like such dickwits that they can't ever build on a draft because the last draft (and the previous one, etc.) sucked so bad that you can never say Hey, we filled three or four needs last year so let's move on to new problems.

I won't list all of the recent draft disappointments because I know everyone here knows them all too well. I'll just point out that Strong, whatever his potential, whatever his ceiling, could barely see the field. And the team obviously doesn't believe in him otherwise they wouldn't have drafted Miller. But the team traded up to get a guy that couldn't get on the fking field. That is exactly the sort of drafting incompetence we see year after year after year.

I don't mind the Texans drafting two receivers in the first three rounds but I do mind them having traded up for a receiver the year before that they obviously have no confidence in.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 04-30-2016, 06:43 AM
barrett barrett is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,602
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HPF Bob View Post
Barrett, I agree that Washington was a waste but Shorts was adequate (not much more) out of the slot and also provided some trick plays. How much of that was the receivers and how much was the guys throwing them the ball? Strong simply didn't see the field that often and my question is why. When he got into games and we threw to him he did pretty well. Did he not understand the playbook? Was he a discipline problem?

Yes, WR was a need and I had no problem adding one in the draft but we have too many needs elsewhere to spend 67% of the first three rounds of the draft on one position. Plus, I remind you we recently drafted guys from Notre Dame (Nix) and Ohio State (Posey) who were busts so why go back to those wells again?
Do you seriously equate guys drafted from the same schools? By that logic we never should have drafted Watt in 2011 since Garrett Graham was bad in 2010.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 04-30-2016, 06:45 AM
barrett barrett is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,602
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck View Post
I can see barrett's point and I can see Bob's, too. I think the team needs the WRs because as barrett points out the production outside of Nuke has been disgusting. My biggest problem is that the team drafts like such dickwits that they can't ever build on a draft because the last draft (and the previous one, etc.) sucked so bad that you can never say Hey, we filled three or four needs last year so let's move on to new problems.

I won't list all of the recent draft disappointments because I know everyone here knows them all too well. I'll just point out that Strong, whatever his potential, whatever his ceiling, could barely see the field. And the team obviously doesn't believe in him otherwise they wouldn't have drafted Miller. But the team traded up to get a guy that couldn't get on the fking field. That is exactly the sort of drafting incompetence we see year after year after year.

I don't mind the Texans drafting two receivers in the first three rounds but I do mind them having traded up for a receiver the year before that they obviously have no confidence in.
I wasn't arguing for 2 WRs. I was saying it was dumb to say we didn't need any WRs in the first 3 rounds. I think 2 WRs is smart if we get a great player out of the 2 and dumb if we don't. Drafting is a results based game.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 04-30-2016, 08:22 AM
HPF Bob HPF Bob is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 3,569
Default

In addition, the Texans' base offense, both with Kubiak and O'Brien, involved a tight end and a fullback. Both are "run first" types of offenses where they want the blocking weapons at those positions, therefore the "slot" receiver wasn't a big part of the offense. Whether it should be is another discussion but you have to take that up with Kubiak and O'Brien.

Now they've spent high draft choices on Hopkins, Strong, Fuller and Miller and, unless they are switching to a 4-WR spread offense, they've overinvested. Then you factor in Posey and Martin in our not-too-distant past and this issue should have already been settled.

Every spring, the Texans have to jettison an expensive veteran just to get under the cap. In the last three years, those were Schaub, AJ and Foster. The next two to go will surely be Brown and Cushing. So we ought to be drafting their replacements now instead of *still* trying to fix a problem they should have already fixed.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 04-30-2016, 09:57 AM
barrett barrett is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,602
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HPF Bob View Post
In addition, the Texans' base offense, both with Kubiak and O'Brien, involved a tight end and a fullback. Both are "run first" types of offenses where they want the blocking weapons at those positions, therefore the "slot" receiver wasn't a big part of the offense. Whether it should be is another discussion but you have to take that up with Kubiak and O'Brien.

Now they've spent high draft choices on Hopkins, Strong, Fuller and Miller and, unless they are switching to a 4-WR spread offense, they've overinvested. Then you factor in Posey and Martin in our not-too-distant past and this issue should have already been settled.

Every spring, the Texans have to jettison an expensive veteran just to get under the cap. In the last three years, those were Schaub, AJ and Foster. The next two to go will surely be Brown and Cushing. So we ought to be drafting their replacements now instead of *still* trying to fix a problem they should have already fixed.
I think you are not totally wrong, I just think you are making terrible arguments without a hint of logic. First the ridiculous college team thing, and now you point at Posey and Martin who are long gone and were picked by the previous regime.

As for the kind of offense we run, do we really have any idea what O'Brien wants to do? This is the first year he has acquired any offensive talent. Up to now he's played with Kubiak's leftovers and minimum investment veterans. I would think what he chooses to spend his resources on is far more indicative of what he wants to do then what he did when handcuffed by the almost talent free skill group and QB situation of the last 2 years.

And as I already stated, drafting 2 WRs is questionable and will only be worth it if hindsight proves it is. But saying we shouldn't have drafted one in the first 2 rounds makes zero sense when looking at this roster construction. And saying we are terrible at a position but should be good because we invested prior resources there, so we should not attempt to fix it now is even less logical.

Either a position needs to be upgraded or it doesn't. That has nothing to do with what you did with old draft picks. And anyone who says Hopkins, Shorts, and a just arrested guy with 14 career catches is an NFL receiving core is probably smoking some of what Strong has.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 04-30-2016, 10:52 AM
Roy P Roy P is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,756
Default

I have no problem drafting 2 WRs. I had many Mocks where I drafted two. However, at #85 I would have taken TE Nick Vannett. Perhaps they like the idea of Braxton being able to be a kick returner and maybe Jerell Adams, Ben Braunecker, Beau Sandaled, or Dan Vitale is a later pick.
__________________
Originally Posted by chuck
I'm just sitting here thinking (pacing, actually) that whatever my issues with Kubiak he is apparently a goddam genius at tutoring quarterbacks.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 04-30-2016, 01:14 PM
HPF Bob HPF Bob is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 3,569
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by barrett View Post
I think you are not totally wrong, I just think you are making terrible arguments without a hint of logic. First the ridiculous college team thing, and now you point at Posey and Martin who are long gone and were picked by the previous regime.

As for the kind of offense we run, do we really have any idea what O'Brien wants to do? This is the first year he has acquired any offensive talent. Up to now he's played with Kubiak's leftovers and minimum investment veterans. I would think what he chooses to spend his resources on is far more indicative of what he wants to do then what he did when handcuffed by the almost talent free skill group and QB situation of the last 2 years.

And as I already stated, drafting 2 WRs is questionable and will only be worth it if hindsight proves it is. But saying we shouldn't have drafted one in the first 2 rounds makes zero sense when looking at this roster construction. And saying we are terrible at a position but should be good because we invested prior resources there, so we should not attempt to fix it now is even less logical.

Either a position needs to be upgraded or it doesn't. That has nothing to do with what you did with old draft picks. And anyone who says Hopkins, Shorts, and a just arrested guy with 14 career catches is an NFL receiving core is probably smoking some of what Strong has.
I'm the one making terrible arguments yet you're the one who claims anyone picked during Kubiak was the "old regime". Have you noticed who the general manager is? The same as the "old regime", the one who has the final say on what name goes on the draft card.

Okay, so the position needs to be upgraded. Then let's just draft 7 wide receivers in hopes that two of them might stick. This is the NFL where you have to balance your resources instead of just recruiting another high school All-American. You get, in general, seven chances one weekend of the year, to fix problems and add depth. Focusing on one position is fine if the rest of the positions are stable. For the Texans, it's not.

We drafted Jacoby Jones 2.0 in the first round (losing a sixth in the process) and drafted Kordell Stewart 2.0 in the third round. Meanwhile, we still have no TE to replace Graham, no DE to replace Crick and missed a chance to upgrade at LT, NT, OLB, ILB and SS.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 04-30-2016, 01:50 PM
Nconroe Nconroe is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Lake Conroe
Posts: 2,897
Default

It is okay in football, just like politics to have whatever opinion. Draft picks typically take 3 years to maturr, especially if picking juniors, so a lot like gambling on a coin flip. Of the 70 or so guys on roster currently there are several who might surprise at each position.

Texans cap position better now , we didn't release Foster due to cap necessity.

We have often in past 6 or so years drafted two guys at position of biggest need hoping one works out.

Drafting BPA in theory gets you a better team over time than overreaching for perceived need.

Anyways, on to fifth round picks.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 04-30-2016, 05:01 PM
barrett barrett is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,602
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HPF Bob View Post
I'm the one making terrible arguments yet you're the one who claims anyone picked during Kubiak was the "old regime". Have you noticed who the general manager is? The same as the "old regime", the one who has the final say on what name goes on the draft card.

Okay, so the position needs to be upgraded. Then let's just draft 7 wide receivers in hopes that two of them might stick. This is the NFL where you have to balance your resources instead of just recruiting another high school All-American. You get, in general, seven chances one weekend of the year, to fix problems and add depth. Focusing on one position is fine if the rest of the positions are stable. For the Texans, it's not.

We drafted Jacoby Jones 2.0 in the first round (losing a sixth in the process) and drafted Kordell Stewart 2.0 in the third round. Meanwhile, we still have no TE to replace Graham, no DE to replace Crick and missed a chance to upgrade at LT, NT, OLB, ILB and SS.
Bob, neither Martin or Posey played a game for the Texans last year. You don't make roster moves according to players who moved on in previous seasons. You don't make draft picks in 2016 based on who you drafted in 2012.

You make draft picks based on who is currently on your team.

The current Texans WRs are Hopkins, Shorts, and 28 CAREER CATCHES from Strong, Mumphrey, and Josh Lenz. That's it. That is a giant glaring hole. CJ Fiedorowitz has more catches than any of the guys who started Thursday as our #3 WRs. You are out of your mind if you think a pick on the first two days was unwarranted.

I am fine with you thinking Fuller is Jacoby Jones 2.0. I think you're dead wrong in the comparison you chose (they have nothing in common, Jones and Fuller are way different sized, whole different speeds, with entirely different skill sets, and college experiences on totally different ends of the spectrum). But Fuller might be worse than Jones, who knows. I am fine with you calling Miller Kordell Stewart 2.0 (of course Kordell Stewart accounted for 120 TDs in his NFL career and that would be a heck of a 3rd round pick). But even if you meant Kordell 2.0 as an insult that's fine. Maybe Miller is a terrible pick. I don't pretend to know enough to know if Fuller or Miller are bad picks (I'll leave the certainty to you). But declaring we didn't need a WR is just plain wrong.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 05-01-2016, 02:06 AM
HPF Bob HPF Bob is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 3,569
Default

In nearly every mock I did, I took a wide receiver. I'm not denying an upgrade would be useful.
But let's look at what receivers made it to the last day:

4th round:
Chris Moore, WR, Cincinnati
Malcolm Mitchell, WR, Georgia
Ricardo Louis, WR, Auburn
Pharoh Cooper, WR, South Carolina
Demarcus Robinson, WR, Florida
Seth DeValve, WR, Princeton

5th round:
Tajae Sharpe, WR, Massachusetts
Jordan Payton, WR, UCLA
Trevor Davis, WR, California
Tyreek Hill, WR, West Alabama
Rashard Higgins, WR, Colorado State

6th round:
Moritz Boehringer, WR, International (Germany)
Jakeem Grant, WR, Texas Tech
Cody Core, WR, Ole Miss
Mike Thomas, WR, Southern Mississippi
Aaron Burbridge, WR, Michigan State

7th round:
Devin Lucien, WR, Arizona State
Demarcus Ayers, WR, Houston
Daniel Braverman, WR, Western Michigan
Devin Fuller, WR, UCLA
Charone Peake, WR, Clemson
Kenny Lawler, WR, California

Granted, many of these guys are stiffs I wouldn't draft but there's some decent quality out there on the third day that could suffice, particularly if you planned on drafting two WRs.

Meanwhile, we did not draft a TE to replace Graham, did not draft a DE to replace Crick and did not draft a second OL after taking our future center.

If those two receivers were future Andre Johnsons and DeAndre Hopkins, that might be one thing but neither of them are which is why I see this as a poor use of our draft resources.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 05-01-2016, 08:04 AM
barrett barrett is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,602
Default

That makes sense to me Bob.

I think we desperately needed an upgrade. I don't think it's strange it came on the first 2 days. I think doubling down is problematic unless they really nail at least one of the picks. I would not have been angry if they waited and addressed it later and went a different direction early. I have no idea if any of the guys they drafted were good picks, nobody really does. But I'm fine with the use of resources outside of the multi-use RB pick. That one seemed strange to me after the WR picks.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 05-01-2016, 08:14 AM
barrett barrett is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,602
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HPF Bob View Post
If those two receivers were future Andre Johnsons and DeAndre Hopkins, that might be one thing but neither of them are which is why I see this as a poor use of our draft resources.
And I'm guessing you didn't say anything positive when Hopkins was drafted either.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 05-01-2016, 11:51 AM
HPF Bob HPF Bob is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 3,569
Default

Nice idea. I went back to the 2013 draft thread and looked to see what my reactions were.

Before the pick, I said I wanted defense in the first round.

When the pick came in, I was neither thumbs up or thumbs down.

After everyone gave opinions (and a few others expressed dislike) I said I thought they could have traded down and still found a quality WR but said Hopkins was clearly the one the Texans wanted so it's not surprising the Texans took him.

I think the difference between 2013 and 2016 is that 1) I feel we have larger needs than WR that are being ignored and 2) Fuller strikes me as a guy who will run right by the defender and then probably drop the pass. As a comparison, the Vikings looked silly, dealing a 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 7th to the Patriots for Cordarrelle Patterson who, like Fuller, is really fast and made some big plays but has been largely a bust.

In 2013, it was clear AJ was nearing the end and we had no other receivers who were stepping forward. It was a need you could justify a first-round pick for. In 2016, you could argue we don't have a receiver besides D-Hop but I would say Shorts and Strong can still fill that void and we just need to add another piece.

Let's put it this way. If you replace Fuller on our draft with anyone taken between 27-31 (Kenny Clark, Joshua Garnett, Robert Nkemdiche, Vernon Butler, Germain Ifedi) and then taken Miller in Round 3 as we did, that now looks like a better draft to me. Perhaps we get a TE (Jerell Adams) instead of Reader with our last pick and now it looks a lot better.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 05-01-2016, 01:13 PM
Roy P Roy P is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,756
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HPF Bob View Post
In nearly every mock I did, I took a wide receiver. I'm not denying an upgrade would be useful.
But let's look at what receivers made it to the last day:

4th round:
Malcolm Mitchell, WR, Georgia

5th round:
Trevor Davis, WR, California

6th round:
Cody Core, WR, Ole Miss

7th round:
Charone Peake, WR, Clemson



Meanwhile, we did not draft a TE to replace Graham, did not draft a DE to replace Crick and did not draft a second OL after taking our future center.
I would have been happy with these 4 guys especially when they were picked. I suppose that Covington is the DE to replace Crick. No idea what to do at TE other than hope and pray that the guys we have get better or they aren't on the field because we run 4 WRs out there with Lamar Miller.
__________________
Originally Posted by chuck
I'm just sitting here thinking (pacing, actually) that whatever my issues with Kubiak he is apparently a goddam genius at tutoring quarterbacks.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 05-01-2016, 10:04 PM
barrett barrett is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,602
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HPF Bob View Post
Nice idea. I went back to the 2013 draft thread and looked to see what my reactions were.

Before the pick, I said I wanted defense in the first round.

When the pick came in, I was neither thumbs up or thumbs down.

After everyone gave opinions (and a few others expressed dislike) I said I thought they could have traded down and still found a quality WR but said Hopkins was clearly the one the Texans wanted so it's not surprising the Texans took him.

I think the difference between 2013 and 2016 is that 1) I feel we have larger needs than WR that are being ignored and 2) Fuller strikes me as a guy who will run right by the defender and then probably drop the pass. As a comparison, the Vikings looked silly, dealing a 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 7th to the Patriots for Cordarrelle Patterson who, like Fuller, is really fast and made some big plays but has been largely a bust.

In 2013, it was clear AJ was nearing the end and we had no other receivers who were stepping forward. It was a need you could justify a first-round pick for. In 2016, you could argue we don't have a receiver besides D-Hop but I would say Shorts and Strong can still fill that void and we just need to add another piece.

Let's put it this way. If you replace Fuller on our draft with anyone taken between 27-31 (Kenny Clark, Joshua Garnett, Robert Nkemdiche, Vernon Butler, Germain Ifedi) and then taken Miller in Round 3 as we did, that now looks like a better draft to me. Perhaps we get a TE (Jerell Adams) instead of Reader with our last pick and now it looks a lot better.
I don't think Patterson is a very good comparison. They are both fast but that's about it. Patterson is WAY bigger. Patterson was a super raw JUCO guy who played one season of major college football at Tennessee and had his biggest impact on special teams. He was a project as a WR.

Fuller had 29 TDs as a WR the last two years in major college football. He and Patterson may both be combine fast with less than reliable hands, but Fuller has tons of game tape and production to show that his speed is just as impressive on the field as it is in shorts. He is not a project, and if he is a bust it will not be because he doesn't know how to play WR like Patterson. I'd say he's way more like Tedd Ginn than Patterson (though he had way more production in college than Ginn).

And I'm still not advocating Fuller. I have no idea how he'll turn out because I lack your gift of prophecy. I just think you dismissing WR as a need is totally wrong. Any GM who says, I don't need a #2 WR because I have Cecil Shorts deserves to be fired.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:59 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.