This is not for the draft as we tend to go for the best player that fits us long term. I'm sure in the back of the FO's mind need is still a tie breaker and always in the back of their minds, but that is not the purpose of this exercise.
Anyway, here's my best shot at our needs list prioritizes, completely ignoring how it fits into the draft a few days from now:
1) No. 2 WR
2) No. 3 CB
3) Starting RT
4) Ball Hawking Free Safety
5) Starting LB
6) Another pass rushing DE
7) TE
8) RB
Go ahead and rip it apart. This is just an exercise for me to get a feel from the rest or our fans.
2. RT
3. FS
4. DE
5. G
6. LB
7. TE
Quote:
In comment 12908810 Anakim said:
Quote:
In comment 12908806 huygens20 said:
Quote:
In comment 12908804 yatqb said:
Quote:
Seems to me that WR and FS are #1 and 1A, with RT a close 3rd.
we have 3 guys on this roster whose sole purpose drafted was to be a FS
are you telling me that we need to draft another FS?
Yes. They're not good.
so lets be clear.
You want to draft a RT when we already have one (Flowers)
You want to draft a FS when we have 3 players who will be on our active roster who were all recently drafted to be a FS.
You seem like a very very smart football guy.
So let's be clear:
I want to draft the best player available, but if we're going by need, RT is a gaping hole.
My turn:
Ereck Flowers will be the starting LT barring a scenario where we draft Ronnie Stanley. But since you said Ereck Flowers is a RT, who do you think will play LT?
And Berhe is a SS, Jackson was drafted to be a CB, not Safety and Thompson flat-out sucks. Not to mention, all three are extremely inexperienced, are coming off injuries and aren't very good to begin with.
RT is not a gaping hole.
We have players there who can start and be below average.
There isnt a #2 WR on this team who could even be below average.
2) Ball Hawking Free Safety
3) Starting RT
4) Another pass rushing DE
5) No. 2 WR
6) TE
7) No. 3 CB
8) RB
Quote:
In comment 12908817 est1986 said:
Quote:
And "we don't need a starting right tackle" ? What??
Did you see our safeties last year? FS is a gaping hole. Gaping.
It's a need for sure but I guess I'm factoring in the value of the position, that plus the fact that it was like cursed last season everyone at camp competing for that spot got hurt and we don't know what they have yet already, but I hear good things about Nat. Plus we haven't really seen him, Jackson or Thompson yet.
I'm skeptical. I never liked Berhe, Jackson or Thompson to begin with. I simply don't think that any of them are starting quality players. Obviously they haven't played much as they are all coming off injuries but let's break them down very briefly.
Berhe was a fifth rounder drafted to be a SS. Coming out of San Diego State, he wasn't known as a centerfield guy; he was known as a LoS guy, similar to Landon Collins. He's a SS like Collins. I don't think we need two redundant players starting.
Jackson was a sixth round pick who converted from WR to CB. I'm pretty sure he doesn't have any experience at Safety and if he does it's very limited. Could he be a decent FS? Maybe but I'm not going to hand him the job. He's proven absolutely nothing and I never thought he was very good to begin with.
Thompson was a fifth round pick who didn't even expect to be drafted. He was an unspectacular Safety at Texas.
So not only have these guys shown nothing in college or the pros to warrant any of them receiving the starting FS job but they're all coming off injuries. FS is the biggest need on this team, IMO.
We have players there who can start and be below average.
There isnt a #2 WR on this team who could even be below average." [/quote]
So it's ok to be below average?
We have players there who can start and be below average.
There isnt a #2 WR on this team who could even be below average."
So it's ok to be below average? [/quote]
red herring.
Got anything else?
Quote:
"RT is not a gaping hole.
We have players there who can start and be below average.
There isnt a #2 WR on this team who could even be below average."
So it's ok to be below average?
red herring.
Got anything else? [/quote]
You make zero sense. You said we don't need a starting RT (just another JAG) and then you go ahead and say that we have guys who can start and be below average? Is that what you want? You want a RT who is below average? You don't want a starting RT that is average or, God forbid, above average?
We have players there who can start and be below average.
There isnt a #2 WR on this team who could even be below average."
So it's ok to be below average? [/quote]
And maybe you missed the fact that I listed WR as my third biggest need. This isn't an either/or thing. No one is holding a gun to my head and saying that I need to fill either the RT position or the #2 WR position. We have plenty of cap space and plenty of draft picks to improve this team. I want to fill every single need and not with "below average" players.
1B) No. 1 LT preferred but RT will do
2A) No. 1 two way TE
2B) No. 2 WR
3) No. 1 FS
4) 3 down RB
5) No. 3 CB
6) No. 1 RG
You make zero sense. You said we don't need a starting RT (just another JAG) and then you go ahead and say that we have guys who can start and be below average? Is that what you want? You want a RT who is below average? You don't want a starting RT that is average or, God forbid, above average?
This team absolutely does nto need another RT, because we already have one, Flowers. It just happens that he is playing out of position.
You are never going to build a team where every position player plays at a level considered average. There will be weaknesses.
My assessment of the team is that the weakness at WR far exceeds that of the OL as currently constructed.
Quote:
You make zero sense. You said we don't need a starting RT (just another JAG) and then you go ahead and say that we have guys who can start and be below average? Is that what you want? You want a RT who is below average? You don't want a starting RT that is average or, God forbid, above average?
This team absolutely does nto need another RT, because we already have one, Flowers. It just happens that he is playing out of position.
You are never going to build a team where every position player plays at a level considered average. There will be weaknesses.
My assessment of the team is that the weakness at WR far exceeds that of the OL as currently constructed.
Ok, so he plays LT?
"You are never going to build a team where every position player plays at a level considered average. There will be weaknesses."
Uhh, what?
2.) RT
3.) FS/Slot CB
Quote:
In comment 12908855 Anakim said:
Quote:
You make zero sense. You said we don't need a starting RT (just another JAG) and then you go ahead and say that we have guys who can start and be below average? Is that what you want? You want a RT who is below average? You don't want a starting RT that is average or, God forbid, above average?
This team absolutely does nto need another RT, because we already have one, Flowers. It just happens that he is playing out of position.
You are never going to build a team where every position player plays at a level considered average. There will be weaknesses.
My assessment of the team is that the weakness at WR far exceeds that of the OL as currently constructed.
Ok, so he plays LT?
"You are never going to build a team where every position player plays at a level considered average. There will be weaknesses."
Uhh, what?
yes, he does.
Do you have a question or an argument instead of a statement?
Quote:
In comment 12908870 huygens20 said:
Quote:
In comment 12908855 Anakim said:
Quote:
You make zero sense. You said we don't need a starting RT (just another JAG) and then you go ahead and say that we have guys who can start and be below average? Is that what you want? You want a RT who is below average? You don't want a starting RT that is average or, God forbid, above average?
This team absolutely does nto need another RT, because we already have one, Flowers. It just happens that he is playing out of position.
You are never going to build a team where every position player plays at a level considered average. There will be weaknesses.
My assessment of the team is that the weakness at WR far exceeds that of the OL as currently constructed.
Ok, so he plays LT?
"You are never going to build a team where every position player plays at a level considered average. There will be weaknesses."
Uhh, what?
yes, he does.
Do you have a question or an argument instead of a statement?
*Who. Pardon me. I meant WHO plays LT?
2) WR #2 (upgrade to Randle)
3) FS (assumes the three we have all flop outright)
4) No. 3 CB
5) Starting LB
6) Another pass rushing DE
7) RB
Note: A "Pass Rusher" would be 1A and I could care less if he is a DE, DT, or LB. We need a "matchup nightmare" guy for other teams to worry about, gameplan for, and requires double teaming.
I still think we draft six players and all stick (barring injury); we also sign a starting UFA RT, WR #2, DL, CB and FS. I would not be shocked if we spent all of our money (except for rookie pool and in-season injury pool)within a week of the draft ending.
I still want CB Powers signed.
CB-WR/TE: lack of quality depth is alarming at these positions
DE: better depth of talent needed...JPP still an enigma on a one year contract
OG: Pugh has ability, Hart might be a factor. The rest appear to be a bunch of JAG's. Maybe the CFL kid has some upside if he did yeoman's work in the weight room.
RB: No impact players in this group.
3. WR
4. LB
5. RT
You make zero sense. You said we don't need a starting RT (just another JAG) and then you go ahead and say that we have guys who can start and be below average? Is that what you want? You want a RT who is below average? You don't want a starting RT that is average or, God forbid, above average?
I think the OP is right and the criticism cited above is wrong and just trying to "not understand". Newsome is better than our second WR and probably better (at his position) than anyone we have at FS. The posters point is that all teams have positions where you get by with less than good players Not that you wouldn't upgrade that position if you have the chance. See Torbor, Blackburn, james Butler, Wilson, Madison, Grant, Paysinger etc.all below average players that we won superbowls with.
The poster quoted above seems more interested in attracting attention with a vitriolic misrepresentation of a well-drawn point.
Quote:
In comment 12908877 Anakim said:
Quote:
In comment 12908870 huygens20 said:
Quote:
In comment 12908855 Anakim said:
Quote:
You make zero sense. You said we don't need a starting RT (just another JAG) and then you go ahead and say that we have guys who can start and be below average? Is that what you want? You want a RT who is below average? You don't want a starting RT that is average or, God forbid, above average?
This team absolutely does nto need another RT, because we already have one, Flowers. It just happens that he is playing out of position.
You are never going to build a team where every position player plays at a level considered average. There will be weaknesses.
My assessment of the team is that the weakness at WR far exceeds that of the OL as currently constructed.
Ok, so he plays LT?
"You are never going to build a team where every position player plays at a level considered average. There will be weaknesses."
Uhh, what?
yes, he does.
Do you have a question or an argument instead of a statement?
*Who. Pardon me. I meant WHO plays LT?
Plays? I dont know, I dont think his job as a LT is etched in stone as Richburg's is as C.
Flowers PLAYED LT. Because we have a new coaching regime, it remains to be seen if he PLAYS LT.
What I do know is that Flowers led the league in allowing QB pressures (75) as a LT. He had the worst pass blocking grade, and overall lowest graded OT by PFF.
So people who say that we need a "RT" are either short sighted or plain wrong, what the team needs is a LT which would allow Flowers to play his natural position all along.
https://twitter.com/pff/status/684108847133364228
https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2016/01/04/pro-worst-players-at-every-position-in-week-17/
You make zero sense. You said we don't need a starting RT (just another JAG) and then you go ahead and say that we have guys who can start and be below average? Is that what you want? You want a RT who is below average? You don't want a starting RT that is average or, God forbid, above average?
I think the OP is right and the criticism cited above is wrong and just trying to "not understand". Newsome is better than our second WR and probably better (at his position) than anyone we have at FS. The posters point is that all teams have positions where you get by with less than good players Not that you wouldn't upgrade that position if you have the chance. See Torbor, Blackburn, james Butler, Wilson, Madison, Grant, Paysinger etc.all below average players that we won superbowls with.
The poster quoted above seems more interested in attracting attention with a vitriolic misrepresentation of a well-drawn point.
Yes, and I believe you mean Newhouse.
Is Davis good enough to replace Randle?
Are any of the FS worthy of starting?
Can we find someone better then Newhouse?
Do we have enough corners?
Do we have 2 way TE?
Who plays DE if JPP leaves?
Do we have a down 3 Lber?
Do we have anyone who can cover TEs?
Answer these questions in order of risk?
2. MLB - quarterback of the defense
3. Free safety
4. Wide receiver
1. RT
2. WR - #2
3. CB - #3
4. FS
5. OLB
6. RG
7. TE
8. MLB
9. DT - #3
10. CB - #4
OL
WR
CB
FS
1. RT
2. WR - #2
3. CB - #3
4. FS
5. OLB
6. RG
7. TE
8. MLB
9. DT - #3
10. CB - #4
2) WR #2 (upgrade to Randle)
3) FS (assumes the three we have all flop outright)
4) No. 3 CB
5) Starting LB
6) Another pass rushing DE
7) RB
Note: A "Pass Rusher" would be 1A and I could care less if he is a DE, DT, or LB. We need a "matchup nightmare" guy for other teams to worry about, gameplan for, and requires double teaming.
I still think we draft six players and all stick (barring injury); we also sign a starting UFA RT, WR #2, DL, CB and FS. I would not be shocked if we spent all of our money (except for rookie pool and in-season injury pool)within a week of the draft ending.
I still want CB Powers signed.
OT
OT
OT
...and OT.
(I've been saying that for 4 years straight now)
1) LT Push Flowers to Right Tackle (This would be Stanley or Tunsil in that order)
2) IMPACT LB (hoping Jack Falls) (Caillas and Brinkly are backups not starter
3) WR#2 In Rnd 2 R2 (Sterling
4) DB FS and a Cover Corner to fill 3rd downs
5) RB Jennings is 31 and A Williams minimal impact L2 yrs
6) DE/DT With Wynn, Bromly, O2, Kuhn decent depth if healthy.
7) TE Larry Donnell can't stay healthy. Need late end flyer.
IMHO It plays out like this
1) STL Goff
2) IF CLV or other Wentz
3) SDC DE Buckner
4) Dallas DE Bosa
5) Jags CB RAmsey
6) Baltimore CB V V Hardgreaves
7) SF DT Buckner
8) Philly LT Tunsil (Stanley better IMO) (if trade to 2 for QB,Clv takes Stanley)
9) TB DE S LAwson
So now its our turn Who's left LT Stanley, LB Jack, CB Alexander, DT Ashon Robinson, RB Elliot.
With what we said above, in need we fire JAck or Stanley. If Jack gone we Fire between Stanley and Hardgreaves. Those two are our pick
10 LT Stanley Push Flowers to RT.
R2... We must hit WR (Shepard, Miller, or M Thomas,,,,
this is how it plays out
Quote:
In comment 12908889 huygens20 said:
Quote:
In comment 12908877 Anakim said:
Quote:
In comment 12908870 huygens20 said:
Quote:
In comment 12908855 Anakim said:
Quote:
You make zero sense. You said we don't need a starting RT (just another JAG) and then you go ahead and say that we have guys who can start and be below average? Is that what you want? You want a RT who is below average? You don't want a starting RT that is average or, God forbid, above average?
This team absolutely does nto need another RT, because we already have one, Flowers. It just happens that he is playing out of position.
You are never going to build a team where every position player plays at a level considered average. There will be weaknesses.
My assessment of the team is that the weakness at WR far exceeds that of the OL as currently constructed.
Ok, so he plays LT?
"You are never going to build a team where every position player plays at a level considered average. There will be weaknesses."
Uhh, what?
yes, he does.
Do you have a question or an argument instead of a statement?
*Who. Pardon me. I meant WHO plays LT?
Plays? I dont know, I dont think his job as a LT is etched in stone as Richburg's is as C.
Flowers PLAYED LT. Because we have a new coaching regime, it remains to be seen if he PLAYS LT.
What I do know is that Flowers led the league in allowing QB pressures (75) as a LT. He had the worst pass blocking grade, and overall lowest graded OT by PFF.
So people who say that we need a "RT" are either short sighted or plain wrong, what the team needs is a LT which would allow Flowers to play his natural position all along.
https://twitter.com/pff/status/684108847133364228
https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2016/01/04/pro-worst-players-at-every-position-in-week-17/
Flowers was playing on a bum ankle for most of the year and while I do think he's more suited to be a RT, the staff seems committed to keeping him at LT. So be it. You do agree though that we need a starting OT, right? One that isn't "below average"?
Most important is a true #2 WR....to count on Cruz again, would be to repeat the folly of last season...if he plays, it would be a plus.....but Eli needs someone to replace Randle....
After that, we need a true free safety.....the pretenders to the throne coming back from injury, are not the answer.....to depend on players with absolutely no experience, or have not shown a propensity for playing the position, borders on insanity.......
After filling those positions with the top of the draft, what do you think will be left in the later rounds to fill the rest of the holes on this team, especially with Reese's track record after the second round?
It becomes best player available, rather than need....to try and fill a need with a jag, solves nothing....
RT
TE
OLB
WR
Nickel
DE
A Mike who can pass cover
Nickel corner
Wr
ROT
Olb who can pass cover
Backup cb who can provide press coverage
Quote:
Or Harris as a #2 WR is better than Newhouse as our starting RT. That doesn't mean that WR doesnt need to be upgraded, but I would feel much better going into the season with a better RT and the current WR's than I would with a better WR and the current RT. If Eli has time, he can make anybody look good.
1. RT
2. WR - #2
3. CB - #3
4. FS
5. OLB
6. RG
7. TE
8. MLB
9. DT - #3
10. CB - #4
Harris is a slot, not a wide-out. And tbh, he is a special teams guy who did surprisingly okay and exceeded expectations when put into a receiver role either out of necessity or as a sop to his psyche.
As I clearly said, we certainly need an upgrade at WR. I understand Harris is a slot receiver, this isn't news. We need better. But if he is the 2nd best receiver on our team I feel better than if Newhouse is the starting Tackle. An OT is more important, IMO as I think having Harris and Cruz is better than having Newhouse. Doesn't mean I am satisfied with either positions. It just means in a discussion about which is more important I think the OT is more important.
2) IMPACT LB (hoping Jack Falls) (Caillas and Brinkly are backups not starter
3) WR#2 In Rnd 2 R2 (Sterling
4) DB FS and a Cover Corner to fill 3rd downs
5) RB Jennings is 31 and A Williams minimal impact L2 yrs
6) DE/DT With Wynn, Bromly, O2, Kuhn decent depth if healthy.
7) TE Larry Donnell can't stay healthy. Need late end flyer.
IMHO It plays out like this
1) STL Goff
2) IF CLV or other Wentz
3) SDC DE Bosa
4) Dallas CB Ramsey
5) Jags CB Hargreaves
6) Baltimore CB E.Apple
7) SF DT Buckner
8) Philly LT Tunsil (Iif trade to 2 for QB, Clv takes Stanley)
9) TB Bucs. DE S LAwson
So now its our turn. Who's left as far as BPA that heeds to team need:
LT Stanley, ( Ourlads has him ranked higher than Tunsil. What people DONT know is Flowers ranked 31 of 32 last year for a LT (PFF).
LB Jack, (Ourlads has Jack as 4th best overall)
WR L Treadwell or J Doctson. Ourlads has Doctson higher.
CB Alexander,
DT Ashon Robinson, 2nd best DT behind Buckner
RB Elliot. In a Tier above others. Wow. With him Safety can't DT ODB3
Buckner goes as a DT and Ramsey a CB
5 CB go Rnd 1
5 DT go Rnd 1
5 DE go Rnd 1
5 LB go Rnd 1
3 OT go Rnd 1
3 QBs go Rnd 1
2 WR go Rnd 1
1 RB go Rnd 1
1 S goes Rnd 1
Our Pick is Stanley or Jack. So now it comes down two things. Flowers ranked 31 of 32 and Jacks potential knee issue.
RND 2: Top 10 WR that go (We get one of this Grp)
Coleman, Fuller, Shepard, B Miller, Thomas,
RND 3 Linebacker. We get one in this Group)
Frackel Utah St, Vigil Utah St, D Jones LSU, J Smith ND, J Jenkins UGA
4th Rnd: Safety. (we get one in this Group)
FS: TJ Green Clem, , J Simmons BC, J Mills LSU
SS: IF top SD on board hard to pass up in 4th in J Cash. (Swiss army knife beast)
5th: DT/ DE between this group
DT M Collins Neb, L Thomas MSU, M Ioannifis Temp, W Henry Mich
DE D Lowery NW, A Zettle PS, J Fanika Utah
6th. Depth RB WR
WR: J Marshall Oh St, J Paxton UCLA, T Sharpe Umass, C Brown ND
RB: D Lasci Cal, D Washington Tex Tech, T Ervin SJS N Marshall UGA
That's Vegas Rich List of PBA/ to team need IMO
2 - FS
3 - WR
4 - OT
5 - CB
6 - TE
7 - RB
Then MLB to anchor the middle of the defense.
Ball hawking Free Safety to clean up in the secondary.
Tight End to open up the middle of the defense.
Then you worry about WR's and CB's.
You build from the inside to the outside.
#2 - RT
#3 - FS
#4 - DE
#5 - CB3
#6 - RG
#7 - MIKE
#8 - SAM
#9 - WILL
#10 - DT
We need to add pass rusher's, if that is a player like a Floyd who will do it from the linebacker position but move all over, or a player like Buckner, who would do it from the DT position and would also move all over, or by adding the right DE that could move around the line, but that is the #1 need in my opinion, you need at least 3 players that can get after the QB. That is the most important thing we need on defense.
So to name it at 1 position and then saying that is the #1 need position, that is not possible when just doing position rankings, so I added this explanation, because it is a need that does not necessarily come from 1 position. Spags could flourish with this type player. He used to do it with two players, Tuck and Kiwi, but if he had 1 great player, you could kill two birds with one stone.
2. Starting FS
3. Starting RG
4. Starting WR
5. Starting MLB
6. Nickel CB
7. RB
8.Starting TE
9. DT
10. Starting OLB
Yes, I think an entirely new linebacking corps; DK's health status concerns me.
That has to be a fairly high priority. Right up there with decent FS.
kennard--solid WHEN healthy, start at SAM prob miss 6 games
robinson--start at MIKE, IF he can stay healthy-BIG IF
herzlich--LOL special teamer at most
brinkley-2 down player, serviceable backup
sheppard-2 down player, maybe a backup
casillas--played okay last year, back up at best
thomas--could start at WILL if he could stay healthy, which he wont
we have nothing but backups and question marks, we literally could cut like 4 of those guy above and draft two LBers in first 4 rounds lol
Picks 2-5 any order, best player available at pick
2 - OT
3- CB
4 - WR
5. - DT/DE
6 - QB not sold on Kinne, possible replacement for Nassib. Don't think he will be back he wants a chance to start. May not get that chance here. Perfect time to groom another for 3 years.