Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

2014 College Prospects Thread
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 48, 49, 50  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Denver Broncos
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
broncos67


Joined: 28 Dec 2006
Posts: 21971
Location: Conshohocken
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2013 7:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

elliot878 wrote:
AKRNA wrote:
elliot878 wrote:
broncos67 wrote:
Decker is without a doubt most likely to leave in my opinion. If he has a big season he's gonna command big bucks. Given the receiver talent in 2014, if Decker costs too much, it'snot an awful time to cut bait.


I just think its a lot harder to find a very good number two receiver than it is to find a solid guard whose good at one thing (pulling) and basically average at the rest. When that guard is over-rated by most of the league, and will likely be the best at his position in free agency, his price soars.

Basically, we'd have an easier time replacing Beadles (several in house options) than we would Decker (draft is a bigger risk).


I would agree. Also, his time with PM cannot be discounted or undervalued. By the end of this season that connection will be deeply entrenched.

His value also goes up when you consider the pressure he helps take off of DT.


All that and the way the league is today, wide receivers are more valuable than ever, especially secondary receivers. You win in todays NFL with weapons. As a position group we're still very thin at WR, even if you're assuming King reaches his peak upside.

Is right tackle or left guard easier to replace than Eric Decker. I think so, and I think scouting the transition from NCAA to NFL is easier/more accurate than scouting how a receiver transitions. I think a wide receiver is one of the most boom/bust positions you can draft.


OG may be easier to replace, but sometimes money trumps all.

Von is going to get a contract of ~15M/yr, you gotta figure Demaryius will command somewhere around ~10 or so, and maybe even more depending on how he performs this year, Clady is gonna get ~10/11 a year, we need to pay Chris Harris, and where he ends up on the scale is anyone's guess. I'm fairly positive we will make the move to resign Wesley Woodyard based on the FOs glowing reviews about him.

I just don't see where Decker fits into that pie because he will likely command somewhere around ~9M/yr, and I'd rather have Beadles and JD Walton combined for that much per year than just Decker.
_________________


Thanks, Tzimisce
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AKRNA


Joined: 28 May 2008
Posts: 5129
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2013 10:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

broncos67 wrote:
elliot878 wrote:
AKRNA wrote:
elliot878 wrote:
broncos67 wrote:
Decker is without a doubt most likely to leave in my opinion. If he has a big season he's gonna command big bucks. Given the receiver talent in 2014, if Decker costs too much, it'snot an awful time to cut bait.


I just think its a lot harder to find a very good number two receiver than it is to find a solid guard whose good at one thing (pulling) and basically average at the rest. When that guard is over-rated by most of the league, and will likely be the best at his position in free agency, his price soars.

Basically, we'd have an easier time replacing Beadles (several in house options) than we would Decker (draft is a bigger risk).


I would agree. Also, his time with PM cannot be discounted or undervalued. By the end of this season that connection will be deeply entrenched.

His value also goes up when you consider the pressure he helps take off of DT.


All that and the way the league is today, wide receivers are more valuable than ever, especially secondary receivers. You win in todays NFL with weapons. As a position group we're still very thin at WR, even if you're assuming King reaches his peak upside.

Is right tackle or left guard easier to replace than Eric Decker. I think so, and I think scouting the transition from NCAA to NFL is easier/more accurate than scouting how a receiver transitions. I think a wide receiver is one of the most boom/bust positions you can draft.


OG may be easier to replace, but sometimes money trumps all.

Von is going to get a contract of ~15M/yr, you gotta figure Demaryius will command somewhere around ~10 or so, and maybe even more depending on how he performs this year, Clady is gonna get ~10/11 a year, we need to pay Chris Harris, and where he ends up on the scale is anyone's guess. I'm fairly positive we will make the move to resign Wesley Woodyard based on the FOs glowing reviews about him.

I just don't see where Decker fits into that pie because he will likely command somewhere around ~9M/yr, and I'd rather have Beadles and JD Walton combined for that much per year than just Decker.


Although I'd much rather they try to keep Decker than Zane, truth be told I doubt if they can keep either, based primarily on the items you mentioned.

JD will command a very reasonable salary IMO. Beadles I think will want Vasquez/Kuper money. That won't/can/t happen. Considering Clady at $10m, Vasquez $5m, say JD @ $3m pretty hard to justify another $5m for Zane. That's a lot of money tied up on the OL.

If they keep the three cogs I mentioned, I think in house they can develop suitable lower priced players to fill the remaining two spots.

Upgrading RT right now for a guy that could transition to the left would be high on my list.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
broncos67


Joined: 28 Dec 2006
Posts: 21971
Location: Conshohocken
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2013 10:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The thing is, you have to consider money coming off our books in the future. Manning's 20M contract will be gone, and Bailey's will too, so down the road, we can afford these contracts, it'll just be a squeeze in the near term.

Walton will get 4-5 mil per. Beadles will not get Vasquez money, IMO. Could be wrong, but I doubt it. And just based on philosophy, I think Denver will go with continuity on the OL before they keep a #2 WR.

We'll have to agree to disagree for now, but it'll be something interesting to keep an eye on. I think the long-term core of Broncos will end up featuring:

Demaryius Thomas, Hillman/Ball, Clady/Franklin/Walton/Beadles?, Wolfe, Sly, Woodyard, Harris, Moore

Past that, it's anyone's guess.

Edit: And obviously Von Miller lol.
_________________


Thanks, Tzimisce
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AKRNA


Joined: 28 May 2008
Posts: 5129
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2013 11:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

broncos67 wrote:
The thing is, you have to consider money coming off our books in the future. Manning's 20M contract will be gone, and Bailey's will too, so down the road, we can afford these contracts, it'll just be a squeeze in the near term.

Walton will get 4-5 mil per. Beadles will not get Vasquez money, IMO. Could be wrong, but I doubt it. And just based on philosophy, I think Denver will go with continuity on the OL before they keep a #2 WR.

We'll have to agree to disagree for now, but it'll be something interesting to keep an eye on. I think the long-term core of Broncos will end up featuring:

Demaryius Thomas, Hillman/Ball, Clady/Franklin/Walton/Beadles?, Wolfe, Sly, Woodyard, Harris, Moore

Past that, it's anyone's guess.

Edit: And obviously Von Miller lol.


Substitute Vasquez for Beadles and I'd have a hard time disagreeing with this list. Simple reasoning, Vasquez is signed for 4 years, is larger, stronger, much better at the POA (probably doesn't pull as well) same age and is simply a much better OG.

IMO Zane is not difficult to replace and for reasons previously stated will probably command more in FA than his actual value.

Walton is a much better re-sign and much harder to replace.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AnAngryAmerican


Joined: 23 Apr 2006
Posts: 18533
Location: Loveland, CO
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2013 12:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm very curious to see how much Decker asks for. He isn't a #1 WR but he is a quickly becoming a household name, as much due to his personality and celebrity as anything he does on the field, so will he/his agent go looking for someone to pay him 8-figures a year? I'd pay him $6-$8m/ per but I'm not sure I'd go higher than that.

And, how much value will Elway place on Decker as a leader, lockerroom-glue and fan favorite? I see a lot more 87s around these parts than I see 88s, will that factor into Elway's decision? I'm not saying Decker's popularity will cloud Elway's judgment and get him to drastically over-pay, but is that worth an extra $1m/year?
_________________
big_palooka:

Broncos CSU Rams Rockies Tiger Woods
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
AKRNA


Joined: 28 May 2008
Posts: 5129
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2013 12:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

AnAngryAmerican wrote:
I'm very curious to see how much Decker asks for. He isn't a #1 WR but he is a quickly becoming a household name, as much due to his personality and celebrity as anything he does on the field, so will he/his agent go looking for someone to pay him 8-figures a year? I'd pay him $6-$8m/ per but I'm not sure I'd go higher than that.

And, how much value will Elway place on Decker as a leader, lockerroom-glue and fan favorite? I see a lot more 87s around these parts than I see 88s, will that factor into Elway's decision? I'm not saying Decker's popularity will cloud Elway's judgment and get him to drastically over-pay, but is that worth an extra $1m/year?


Hopefully he and other teams realize that A) he benefits greatly from PM and B) he seldom sees double teams with DT opposite him.

His production elsewhere would drop. I'd think 5 years at about $35mil would be about right.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
elliot878


Moderator
Joined: 03 Feb 2007
Posts: 10717
Location: Connecticut
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2013 6:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

AKRNA wrote:
AnAngryAmerican wrote:
I'm very curious to see how much Decker asks for. He isn't a #1 WR but he is a quickly becoming a household name, as much due to his personality and celebrity as anything he does on the field, so will he/his agent go looking for someone to pay him 8-figures a year? I'd pay him $6-$8m/ per but I'm not sure I'd go higher than that.

And, how much value will Elway place on Decker as a leader, lockerroom-glue and fan favorite? I see a lot more 87s around these parts than I see 88s, will that factor into Elway's decision? I'm not saying Decker's popularity will cloud Elway's judgment and get him to drastically over-pay, but is that worth an extra $1m/year?


Hopefully he and other teams realize that A) he benefits greatly from PM and B) he seldom sees double teams with DT opposite him.

His production elsewhere would drop. I'd think 5 years at about $35mil would be about right.


AK I've got to flat out disagree with the bolded statement. Decker showed a ton of promise well before Manning even got here. His sophomore year, he was looking great until Tebow came in, who couldnt do anything with Decker's skill set, running good routes to get open and delivering the ball by dropping back and throwing timing routes. There was a clear shift in receiver production when the qb switch was made in 2011, and it was largely based on the qb styles. Orton could throw to routes, which Decker was good at running. Tebow scrambled and found DT in soft spots, which worked because at the time DT wasnt much of a route runner. The QB style switched, and so did the WR production.

In Orton's 4 full games these were Deckers numbers:
22 receptions, 4 touchdowns, 270 yards. A per game average of 68yards and a touchdown.

After Orton left, he wasn't seeing targets and the targets he did see, were often poorly thrown. He also dealt with an injury mid season.

While Decker's production has increased with Manning's arrival, that success is not dependent on Manning. He's shown signs of being very productive with a quarterback who is not good at all, but could throw to a route (Orton).

Decker can definitely be very successful with a bottom tier QB, and has gotten better each year of his career. He'll be a major asset post Manning, should we decide to keep him.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AKRNA


Joined: 28 May 2008
Posts: 5129
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2013 7:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

elliot878 wrote:
AKRNA wrote:
AnAngryAmerican wrote:
I'm very curious to see how much Decker asks for. He isn't a #1 WR but he is a quickly becoming a household name, as much due to his personality and celebrity as anything he does on the field, so will he/his agent go looking for someone to pay him 8-figures a year? I'd pay him $6-$8m/ per but I'm not sure I'd go higher than that.

And, how much value will Elway place on Decker as a leader, lockerroom-glue and fan favorite? I see a lot more 87s around these parts than I see 88s, will that factor into Elway's decision? I'm not saying Decker's popularity will cloud Elway's judgment and get him to drastically over-pay, but is that worth an extra $1m/year?


Hopefully he and other teams realize that A) he benefits greatly from PM and B) he seldom sees double teams with DT opposite him.

His production elsewhere would drop. I'd think 5 years at about $35mil would be about right.


AK I've got to flat out disagree with the bolded statement. Decker showed a ton of promise well before Manning even got here. His sophomore year, he was looking great until Tebow came in, who couldnt do anything with Decker's skill set, running good routes to get open and delivering the ball by dropping back and throwing timing routes. There was a clear shift in receiver production when the qb switch was made in 2011, and it was largely based on the qb styles. Orton could throw to routes, which Decker was good at running. Tebow scrambled and found DT in soft spots, which worked because at the time DT wasnt much of a route runner. The QB style switched, and so did the WR production.

In Orton's 4 full games these were Deckers numbers:
22 receptions, 4 touchdowns, 270 yards. A per game average of 68yards and a touchdown.

After Orton left, he wasn't seeing targets and the targets he did see, were often poorly thrown. He also dealt with an injury mid season.

While Decker's production has increased with Manning's arrival, that success is not dependent on Manning. He's shown signs of being very productive with a quarterback who is not good at all, but could throw to a route (Orton).

Decker can definitely be very successful with a bottom tier QB, and has gotten better each year of his career. He'll be a major asset post Manning, should we decide to keep him.


Maybe you're reading something into my comment that isn't there. That statement could be made about any WR Mannings played with and would be correct.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
elliot878


Moderator
Joined: 03 Feb 2007
Posts: 10717
Location: Connecticut
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2013 11:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

AKRNA wrote:
elliot878 wrote:
AKRNA wrote:
AnAngryAmerican wrote:
I'm very curious to see how much Decker asks for. He isn't a #1 WR but he is a quickly becoming a household name, as much due to his personality and celebrity as anything he does on the field, so will he/his agent go looking for someone to pay him 8-figures a year? I'd pay him $6-$8m/ per but I'm not sure I'd go higher than that.

And, how much value will Elway place on Decker as a leader, lockerroom-glue and fan favorite? I see a lot more 87s around these parts than I see 88s, will that factor into Elway's decision? I'm not saying Decker's popularity will cloud Elway's judgment and get him to drastically over-pay, but is that worth an extra $1m/year?


Hopefully he and other teams realize that A) he benefits greatly from PM and B) he seldom sees double teams with DT opposite him.

His production elsewhere would drop. I'd think 5 years at about $35mil would be about right.


AK I've got to flat out disagree with the bolded statement. Decker showed a ton of promise well before Manning even got here. His sophomore year, he was looking great until Tebow came in, who couldnt do anything with Decker's skill set, running good routes to get open and delivering the ball by dropping back and throwing timing routes. There was a clear shift in receiver production when the qb switch was made in 2011, and it was largely based on the qb styles. Orton could throw to routes, which Decker was good at running. Tebow scrambled and found DT in soft spots, which worked because at the time DT wasnt much of a route runner. The QB style switched, and so did the WR production.

In Orton's 4 full games these were Deckers numbers:
22 receptions, 4 touchdowns, 270 yards. A per game average of 68yards and a touchdown.

After Orton left, he wasn't seeing targets and the targets he did see, were often poorly thrown. He also dealt with an injury mid season.

While Decker's production has increased with Manning's arrival, that success is not dependent on Manning. He's shown signs of being very productive with a quarterback who is not good at all, but could throw to a route (Orton).

Decker can definitely be very successful with a bottom tier QB, and has gotten better each year of his career. He'll be a major asset post Manning, should we decide to keep him.


Maybe you're reading something into my comment that isn't there. That statement could be made about any WR Mannings played with and would be correct.


Just seemed you were tying Deckers great play to Manning. Just sayin there is evidence that Decker was going to be good so long as he gets targets of at least a number 2 receiver. He's a high end number two for just about any team in this league.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AKRNA


Joined: 28 May 2008
Posts: 5129
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2013 11:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

elliot878 wrote:
AKRNA wrote:
elliot878 wrote:
AKRNA wrote:
AnAngryAmerican wrote:
I'm very curious to see how much Decker asks for. He isn't a #1 WR but he is a quickly becoming a household name, as much due to his personality and celebrity as anything he does on the field, so will he/his agent go looking for someone to pay him 8-figures a year? I'd pay him $6-$8m/ per but I'm not sure I'd go higher than that.

And, how much value will Elway place on Decker as a leader, lockerroom-glue and fan favorite? I see a lot more 87s around these parts than I see 88s, will that factor into Elway's decision? I'm not saying Decker's popularity will cloud Elway's judgment and get him to drastically over-pay, but is that worth an extra $1m/year?


Hopefully he and other teams realize that A) he benefits greatly from PM and B) he seldom sees double teams with DT opposite him.

His production elsewhere would drop. I'd think 5 years at about $35mil would be about right.


AK I've got to flat out disagree with the bolded statement. Decker showed a ton of promise well before Manning even got here. His sophomore year, he was looking great until Tebow came in, who couldnt do anything with Decker's skill set, running good routes to get open and delivering the ball by dropping back and throwing timing routes. There was a clear shift in receiver production when the qb switch was made in 2011, and it was largely based on the qb styles. Orton could throw to routes, which Decker was good at running. Tebow scrambled and found DT in soft spots, which worked because at the time DT wasnt much of a route runner. The QB style switched, and so did the WR production.

In Orton's 4 full games these were Deckers numbers:
22 receptions, 4 touchdowns, 270 yards. A per game average of 68yards and a touchdown.

After Orton left, he wasn't seeing targets and the targets he did see, were often poorly thrown. He also dealt with an injury mid season.

While Decker's production has increased with Manning's arrival, that success is not dependent on Manning. He's shown signs of being very productive with a quarterback who is not good at all, but could throw to a route (Orton).

Decker can definitely be very successful with a bottom tier QB, and has gotten better each year of his career. He'll be a major asset post Manning, should we decide to keep him.


Maybe you're reading something into my comment that isn't there. That statement could be made about any WR Mannings played with and would be correct.


Just seemed you were tying Deckers great play to Manning. Just sayin there is evidence that Decker was going to be good so long as he gets targets of at least a number 2 receiver. He's a high end number two for just about any team in this league.


No disagreement here. I don't think he can go anywhere else however and match his productivity here. This is a perfect situation for him.

Wouldn't it be nice to see him sign a reasonable contract so he's not cut for "cap" considerations in about the 3rd or 4th year. Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
paul-mac


Joined: 12 Jul 2009
Posts: 8746
Location: Scotland
PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2013 6:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This discussion alone shows, sans he who must not be named, how awesome out 2010 draft was.



My gut feeling is if we can get Kuper healthy then Beadles walks. I'm still head scratching as to why we threw cash at Louis Vasquez.

JD Walton is probably going to be re-signed unless we are particularly high on Philip Blake.


As for Decker I'd maybe give him 6M per annum. Jordy Nelson is only on 4.5

I think we should keep Decker and Walton and let Beadles go.
_________________
Big Palooka wrote:
Broncos won't make the playoffs
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
broncos67


Joined: 28 Dec 2006
Posts: 21971
Location: Conshohocken
PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2013 8:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

paul-mac wrote:
This discussion alone shows, sans he who must not be named, how awesome out 2010 draft was.



My gut feeling is if we can get Kuper healthy then Beadles walks. I'm still head scratching as to why we threw cash at Louis Vasquez.

JD Walton is probably going to be re-signed unless we are particularly high on Philip Blake.


As for Decker I'd maybe give him 6M per annum. Jordy Nelson is only on 4.5

I think we should keep Decker and Walton and let Beadles go.


You're head scratching at why we paid below market value for one of the Top 10 OGs in the league? You just said yourself that if Kuper is healthy, Beadles walks....that still leaves an OG spot open which we filled through Vasquez.
_________________


Thanks, Tzimisce
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
paul-mac


Joined: 12 Jul 2009
Posts: 8746
Location: Scotland
PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2013 8:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

broncos67 wrote:
paul-mac wrote:
This discussion alone shows, sans he who must not be named, how awesome out 2010 draft was.



My gut feeling is if we can get Kuper healthy then Beadles walks. I'm still head scratching as to why we threw cash at Louis Vasquez.

JD Walton is probably going to be re-signed unless we are particularly high on Philip Blake.


As for Decker I'd maybe give him 6M per annum. Jordy Nelson is only on 4.5

I think we should keep Decker and Walton and let Beadles go.


You're head scratching at why we paid below market value for one of the Top 10 OGs in the league? You just said yourself that if Kuper is healthy, Beadles walks....that still leaves an OG spot open which we filled through Vasquez.



Yeah but had we not signed Vasquez we could give Beadles a new contract for half the money and upgraded a more important position.
_________________
Big Palooka wrote:
Broncos won't make the playoffs
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
broncos67


Joined: 28 Dec 2006
Posts: 21971
Location: Conshohocken
PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2013 8:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

paul-mac wrote:
broncos67 wrote:
paul-mac wrote:
This discussion alone shows, sans he who must not be named, how awesome out 2010 draft was.



My gut feeling is if we can get Kuper healthy then Beadles walks. I'm still head scratching as to why we threw cash at Louis Vasquez.

JD Walton is probably going to be re-signed unless we are particularly high on Philip Blake.


As for Decker I'd maybe give him 6M per annum. Jordy Nelson is only on 4.5

I think we should keep Decker and Walton and let Beadles go.


You're head scratching at why we paid below market value for one of the Top 10 OGs in the league? You just said yourself that if Kuper is healthy, Beadles walks....that still leaves an OG spot open which we filled through Vasquez.



Yeah but had we not signed Vasquez we could give Beadles a new contract for half the money and upgraded a more important position.


Vasquez is better than Beadles, and Kuper was injured the entire offseason. Vasquez represents a massive upgrade on the OL, and OG is one of, if not the most important OL position in today's NFL.
_________________


Thanks, Tzimisce
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JerseysFinest27


Joined: 07 Jan 2010
Posts: 8280
Location: New Jersey... Props to inDENguise on the sig
PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2013 10:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is a completely moot discussion IMO.

Not only is Kuper not healthy and may never be, but even last year when he was healthy Beadles out-played him. Cut Kuper and re-sign Beadles at LG. Zane wont get a Vasquez deal anyways.

Im not sure what our cap situation looks like but I would like to see how much money is coming off the books before saying Beadles and Decker cant be re-signed. Remember, Elvis and DJ are counting as dead money this year, thats like $10M right there.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Denver Broncos All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 48, 49, 50  Next
Page 3 of 50

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group