i think johnson's going to be a stud, but rogers is otherwordly. i would be shocked ifthe texans pass on him at 3, assuming he's still there. good guy, tremendous athlete... they need gamebreakers more than anything else.
first things first: mcgahee's a RS sophomore -- no guarantee he'll even be available (tho he likely will if... ok, when UM beats OSU). i don't think mcgahee's top 3-worthy.... but a lot can happen between now and april. and yes, rogers is far and away the best WR in the draft; a big kid with sprinter's speed and hands that secrete glue. he's ridiculous. and i'm hoping like hell he falls to #3.
The biggest problem with the Texans is depth. This is very typical of expansion teams. Even if your first string guys are good, the backups are not. Tennesse had a lot of depth on defense they were able to rotate in and out. This helps their players stay fresh throughout the season and avoid injuries from debilitating their team. How do we get depth? Trading down for multiple picks. This is the classic Bill Walsh strategy. Trade down, down, down, see a player you want, trade up. I would love to have Charlie Rogers. However, in a draft where up to 4 WRs can go in the first round, all of whom can be great players, stocking up multiple players would be wiser. Of course this depends on a couple of things. First, we are not guranteed the #3 pick. Due to Atlantas debacle yesterday, our opponents have the same Winning % as Chicago. If the Rams lose tonight, we have to flip a coin to determine who gets 3 and who gets 4. Second, yes Detroit may take Rogers. If this is the case, trading down should be a no brainer. Frankly I think Greg Jones (FSU) is an absolute stud back (if he comes out) that can be had late first possibly early second round. If we did trade the pick, and take Jones and a Andre Johnson or Rashaun Woods (who single handedly destroyed OU's defense with an average college QB). That would fill two skills positions. Third, it all depends on what you can get for the pick and how far you have to trade down. If we move down 8 spots and get an extra 2nd or 3rd, I'd do it. if we move down 15 spots and both Woodsand Johnson would not be available, I wouldnt. Last of course all depends on how many underclassmen declare. Since this is the last year we get multiple picks in the 3rd - 7th round, it behooves us to have a deep draft.
i agree, depth is a key ingredient, but so are studs who can crack open games, and those guys become much harder to find in the teens and beyond. quality is still more important than quanity, especially when you have 9 extra draft picks. trading is down is much easier said than done, and why give up 8 spots for an additional 3 (no way anyone's giving up a 1 and a 2 for the #3) when you already have three picks in that round (the texans' pick, the supplemental pick and one you got from ATL last year)? not worth it.
Ric- Dallas did a decent job of that last year (about the only thing they did right) in trading down from #6 to #8 and getting Roy Williams and another decent pick (either Antonio Bryant or Derek Ross, both who started this year) But I agree if there is someone you want don't trade down. Franchise players are tough to find (regardless of position) but it seems liek there are alot of QBS int he draft so you may be able to move down and add anotehr pick or two for a team desperate for Carson Palmer or Byron Leftwich (if available)
1. We don't know exactly who will come out and where we will pick 2. If Rogers is there at 3, we have a lot of options. We can take him, which would be a good selection, or we could trade him to the highest bidder. During draft day, some teams become obsessed with certain players. Trading down is not easy but it happens every year. Last year Dallas only had to move down 2 slots and got an extra pick. If Rogers is there, some team may be willing to give up a 1 and 2. It's happened before, look at the Ricky Williams deal. Granted that was an extreme case, but teams focus on certain players and they want them bad, especially that high in the draft. 3. This is assuming Rogers is there. If Detroit takes him, then what? Taking Willis Macgahee at 3 is a huge risk (if he comes out). We don't need a QB. Once again, trading down would be a viable option. Getting a late 2nd or early 3rd in this scenario would not be bad. Do we really want to take an impact defensive player at 3 (or 4) when our needs are primarily on the offensive end? 3rd round selections are hit or miss. This is a prime spot to add depth, especially if we could still get an impact player at 10 or 11.
yep; tremendous trade from dallas' perspective. but i don't think houston benefits from trading down: 1) they miss their opportunity to score the 3rd best player in football (right now, rogers or kennedy), and they need impact players; 2) they have plenty of extra picks; 8 to be exact, iirc (their 7 supplemental picks + 1 from ATL); which why they should stress quality, not quanity.
I'm sorry Ric. I was rather intoxicated when I posted those two venemous posts. I really like your posts and think you bring alot to this board. If I could delete or edit my response, I would. That being said, you wouldn't just shill for Casserly, would you? I mean, I love the Texans, but I wouldn't give him carte blanche yet. For the record, I do think that Carr was the right pick. I'm just not positive he's gonna be better than everyone in this group.
Youre telling me that if Charles Rogers is gone, youd rather take Jimmy Kennedy a DT, than trade down and pickup an impact receiver like Andre Johnson (who should fall between 10-12). And if this happens, in what rounds do we take the offensive skill players that we desperately need?
I don't think the Lions will be drafting Rogers. Bengals need a QB - Hopefully they'll pick Palmer, since he's a guarenteed bust. John Kitna, Akili Smith, Gus Ferrote, and Carson Palmer. Nice QB rotation. Lions have some nice WR already - Germane Crowell, Jacquez Green, Az-Zahir Hakim, and Bill Schroeder. None are superstars, but they have solid starters. What they need is a RB, which is what I think they'll draft. Texans, with the 3rd pick should NOT trade away this pick and draft Rogers. We aren't going to the playoffs next year, there's no reason to trade depth for a playmaker. Rogers, is like someone here said, a once in a lifetime pick.
Yes it is funny, especially since we have no idea how early of a draft pick we'd get next year. Unless you are Miss Cleo's son and know something we don't.
What about Cory Redding? Magnificent physical specimen and a big, run stuffing DE. Those are the types that fit into the 3-4, right? He'll be available in the mid first I think. So, a trade down is reasonable.
If Roy Williams was to come out, he would be within 2 -3 picks of Charlie Rogers. Some scouts rate Roy Williams higher. He is a legitimate 6'4" with sprinter speed. It is very plausible that Houston can pick in the Top 5 again next year. Now tell me again how if you have 2 very similiar players, how one would be a once in a lifetime player. There have been very few once in a lifetime receivers - Jerry Rice being the obvious was picked in the middle of the first round.
Also, if the 49ers beat the Rams tonight, we might end up getting the 4th pick, not the 3rd. Who the Bears needs, I have no idea. I don't think they have solid starting WR, do they? Go Rams.
RIET, To appease you, let me rephrase "once in a lifetime" to "once in the 2003 draft opportunity." Also, I don't think it's a good idea to try and guess what might happen next year. You do what you can right now.
no problemo. no, never; i have no reason to. if he'd like to put me on the payroll, i gladly would, but until then... in fact, i was initially skeptical of carr; thought they'd be better off trading down. in the interim, i was lucky enough to become friends with an nfl scout and spoke to him often between december and april. simply put, he flat-out loved carr. and through him, i became friends with another nfl scout... and he, too, flat-out loved carr. the evidence was simply overwhleming at that point, and i gave in. and i think they've been proven right -- carr's a stud. well, obviously, a lot of factors go into making a great QB. carr certainly has the toughest hill to climb short of whoever the bengals draft. if raggone, for instance, falls into... st. louis' lap, or something like that, he may prove "better," in that he lucked into a more favorable situation. but given what i've seen of carr this year, i don't think any of those guys would have done any better and most would've done worse. leftwich remains the only guy i might -- might -- rank ahead of carr. he's a bit of a beast, a real rare talent and a courageous one, too. but i think we can now say the same things about carr. i just think the texans are really lucky to have gotten him.
yep. kennedy's a game-changing tackle; he instantly makes a good defense better. and more importantly, he's a better prospect than johnson. the last thing you wanna do, especially in year 2 of your existence, is start reaching for so-called needs. you draft the best player available each andevery time and it eventually work itself out. besides, at this point and time, there isn't a position the texans couldn't upgrade, 'cept QB. so why reach for a WR in any round? as for when and where they could find the playmaker... portis was a second rounder, wasn't he?
