You are currently viewing the old forums. We have upgraded to a new NFL Forum.
This old forum is being left as a read-only archive.
Please update your bookmarks to our new forum at forums.footballsfuture.com.


 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

BPA vs. Need, Locking In - Elway's Draft Strategy Change?
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Denver Broncos
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Broncofan


Joined: 02 Dec 2013
Posts: 3609
PostPosted: Mon May 01, 2017 5:32 pm    Post subject: BPA vs. Need, Locking In - Elway's Draft Strategy Change? Reply with quote

Well, another draft is in the books. While it’s way too soon to judge the 2017 draft, and still a year away from really knowing how 2016 is looking, we also have five years of draft history to look back on. But, as touched on in the Draft thread (but in a 70+ page thread, hard to keep going back there), Elway’s own words and his actions have revealed more info on his current draft philosophy. If we look at his past philosophy which he’s stated (and I think we can say his actions back him up), he’s clearly changed in about 2 meaningful ways that I don’t think anyone will dispute, now that Elway himself confirms these points with his 2017 draft and his own words. There are also 2 other observations I’d make, but they aren’t nearly as clear-cut, but look like emerging patterns. So let’s get started.


Elway's GM Draft History

Let’s start out by first getting the draft info we know. No guesses, just the facts. Football reference has the draft picks, but they don’t have the UDFA’s or the trades. So it took a while, but here’s the complete 2011-2017 list with impact UDFA & trades included, if there are missing ones feel free to add thx (just putting up 2016-2017 so this can live on later if we think it helps):


2011

1.3 Von Miller
2.45 Rahim Moore
2.45 Orlando Franklin
3.67 Nate Irving
4.108 Quinton Carter
4.129 Julius Thomas
6.189 Mike Mohamed
7.204 Virgil Green
7.247 Jeremy Beal

Trades - Two trades to note – Elway traded his 4th round pick for Laurence Maroney. That was KJ Wright. Oops. Elway trades up to get Julius Thomas, who while flawed as a blocker and the perfect guy to let go once he got pricey, hard to argue he wasn’t a hit for his time in DEN (like most rookie TE’s, he needed time to develop).

UDFA – Chris Harris

Coming off a lost season, Elway just goes BPA – we’re so bad, our needs are everywhere. To say it’s the crown jewel is an understatement. Only mistake was Maroney, but hard to complain.

2012

2.36 Derek Wolfe
2.57 Brock Osweiler
3.67 Ronnie Hillman
4.101 Omar Bolden
4.108 Philip Blake
5.112 Malik Jackson
6.188 Danny Trevathan

Trades – traded down 2x from 1.25 to 2.36 to get 4.101 & 4.108

UDFA – Duke Ihenacho

Coming off a resurgent year, Elway still sees depth issues everywhere, and sticks to a BPA philosophy, not addressing specific needs early, but then spreading it around. Trading from our 1st to pick early 2nd and get Wolfe and added value was great (unfortunately missed with the Bolden & Blake picks). What didn't work out was taking Os in our rd 2 spot, or moving up in Rd 3 to take Ronnie Hillman. Instead of Os we passed on guys like Lavonte Davis, Kelechi Osemele, Casey Heyward, Trumaine Johnson (which would have then likely prevented us taking CB next year). If we don't miss badly on Hillman, we likely don't need to go RB so early next year (and really miss on Ball 2013). What saves Elway? His Round 5/6 picks – where he just fills roster spots at position players. Malik & Trevathan pure genius picks. For those that say Round 5-6 you can’t find help at premium positions or need positions, it’s more accurate to say you can’t find immediate help. Both took 1 or 2 seasons, but when the light came on, it came on huge. Ihenacho a nice value, if only for a short time.

2013

1.28 Sylvester Williams
2.58 Montee Ball
3.90 Kayvon Webster
5.146 Quanterrus Smith
5.161 Tavares King
6.173 Vinson Painter
7.234 Zac Dysert
Trades – Denver trades 125 for 146 & 173 (Smith & Painter)

UDFA – CJ Anderson

After a 2nd straight year in the playoffs, I’d actually say this is where the philosophy starts to change. NT was a huge need area, remember Pot Roast was signed as an unknown cheap FA 2 weeks before the draft – and Elway still went with Sly Williams Rd 1. The bigger issue was taking Ball Rd 2. Kayvon Webster was actually a decent pick, he just couldn’t crack a top 3 with great talent ahead of him. STL clearly thinks he can help them, and Wade’s their DC. Day 3 isn’t nearly as good as 2011-12, but to be fair, that was injury for Smith, and King was really talented, just raw. But a pattern starts to emerge on the type Elway goes after – huge ceiling, low floor. UDFA CJ Anderson really helps, but to say this is Elway’s worst draft from 2011-2015 is very fair. A big reason why we have a roster that needs more help in more areas than before, given our 2011-2012 successes.


2014


1.31 Bradley Roby
2.56 Cody Latimer
3.95 Michael Schofield
5.156 Lamin Barrow
6.207 Matt Paradis
7.242 Corey Nelson

Trades – DEN trades 2.63 & 5.171 & 4.126 2015 pick to move up for Latimer at 57. DEN trades 4.131 and 7.246 for 2.156 and 2015 5.143. That 5.143 is used to trade up for Shane Ray.

UDFA – Shaq Barrett

The Rd 2-3 struggles start to really become apparent. 2015 when I joined was full of this talk. By then only 2011-2013 have any real record to go off, but talk starts. This is dismissed by many at this time, and given we had 2011, and only 1 year of 2013 to go off, understandable. And to be fair to most, people actually questioned Roby a lot more than Cody Latimer. But sad to say this was a team-changer. Allen Robinson, Jarvis Landry and Donte Moncrief went just after, and if you go OL, Jack Mewhort. Ouch. Schofield hasn’t been bad, I’d say he and Webster aren’t awful Day 2 picks. Just not great that they might be our 2 best, although Simmons might work out better (more on that later).

2015

1.23 Shane Ray
2.59 Ty Sambrailo
3.92 Jeff Huermann
4.133 Max Garcia
5.164 Lorenzo Doss
6.203 Darius Kilgo
7.250 Trevor Siemian
7.251 Taurean Nixon
7. 252 Josh Furman

Trade – 4.126 was traded last year. DEN trades the 5th they got from CHI last year, 5.169 From 2016 and Manny Ramirez to move up from 28 to 23 to get Ray (who was replaced by Evan Mathis).

UDFA – none that I can find.

Trading up to get Ray the best part of this draft, along with Siemian in the 7th. This is Sambrailo's make or break year, I think we see Huermann is unlikely to ever have the impact. Why that hurts - for rd 2, Ali Marpet, Frank Clark, Tyler Lockett and Tevin Coleman all go. Any one of those, or frankly, a few others, and we're one asset stronger - and don't need to spend more draft capital or FA $ to address. For Rd3 and Huermann, remember that La'el Collins gave a Rd3-or-don't-draft-me ultimatum. I think Collins' lesson is why teams were all-in on Gareon Conley, even with his case potentially threatening his career, and why even a more iffy legal case in the air, Caleb Brantley, still got drafted this year (plus, he's not a top 15 talent like Conley or Collins were being seen as pre-incident, more Day 2 - so the payoff doesn't justify the risk until later). To be fair, Elway wasn't alone, but it's still probably a pick a lot of GM's wish they had back.



2016

1.26 – traded up with 3.95 & 1.31 to get Paxton Lynch
2.63 – Adam Gostis
3.98 (comp) – Justin Simmons
4.136 – Devontae Booker
5.144 – Connor McGovern
6.176 – Andy Janovich
6.219 – Will Parks
7.228 – Riley Dixon

Trades – DEN lost 5.176 as part of the Ray trade. DEN traded 4.130 for 5.144 and Gino Gradkowski. Too early to say the impact of 4.130 to 5.144. Gradkowski no longer on team, never made an impact. DEN also traded 6.207 2016 for Vernon Davis and 7.228 (Dixon)

UDFA – no way to know this early.

Overall, 2016 is a mixed bag so far, but really we need 1 more year to tell with more certainty. Good signs 1 year out are always promising, however. So let's cover that. It is good we got our P with a cheap pick, and Simmons/Parks look poised to be able to let TJ Ward go. Booker & McGovern struggled (Booker on the field, McGovern not being able to get on the field with a horrid OL, but again, given year 1, not a complete knock, more an incomplete grade), but again, you need 1 more year minimum to see for sure. Janovich filled our old FB role nicely, not Elway’s fault we are likely switching schemes, unclear if the future value might be gone.


2017

1.20 - Garrett Bolles
2.51 - Demarcus Walker
3.82 - Carlos Henderson
3.101 - Brandon Langley
5.145 - Jake Butt
5.172 - Isiah McKenzie
6.202 - Deangelo Henderson
7.253 - Chad Kelly (Mr. Irrelevant)

Trades - Elway traded 4.126 to Browns 7.252 for 5.145 (Butt) and 5.175. Traded 5.175 with Kapri Bibbs to SF for 2018 4th round (SF) and 4.175.Then traded 5.175 and 5.238 for 5.172 (McKenzie)

UDFA - too many to list, will add impact ones later (in 1-2 years lol).


OK, next post, let’s talk about hard facts we know on Elway’s philosophy changes (two of them), and some patterns that appear to be emerging with more time (but even with 5 years, it’s a small sample size, so it’s nowhere near certainty – but worth pointing out).
_________________
steelpanther wrote:
This is like playing checkers with a pigeon. No matter how well you play, sooner or later the pigeon is going to crap on the board, then puff his chest out and strut around like he won something.


Last edited by Broncofan on Mon May 01, 2017 6:33 pm; edited 4 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Broncofan


Joined: 02 Dec 2013
Posts: 3609
PostPosted: Mon May 01, 2017 5:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Now, let's add the posts on paul-mac's query on whether there's a McDaniels like flavor. I don't think this is a McDaniels like flavor, but the 2017 draft had statements from Elway, and his 2017 Rd1 pick calls into question a statement he keeps making on going overall BPA vs. need, as he's said time and again.

I think 2 take home messages were confirmed this year by Elway himself and locking in and his Rd1 pick and emphasis on speed later on on his BPA/need philosophy, one that's been hotly debated in the past:

1. Elway will in fact go need over true, overall BPA. He said he would have passed on OJ Howard even if he was there at 20 (Renck confirmed as well). So he passed on slam dunk consensus top 10-12 guys in Foster and Howard (and again, he would have passed on Howard, he was asked this directly by Renck) for our biggest need with Bolles. Whether it works out or not, no one knows, but I don't know how anyone can argue Elway will always go overall BPA like he's said repeatedly in years gone by. And furthermore, on Day 2-3, he really went for speed - even where most would say it seemed early. And to be upfront, I argued heavily in the past that Elway is a BPA guy. But man, I have to say I think that's changed.


2. Elway does in fact lock onto guys, no matter how the board falls.
Elway himself said he tried and failed to trade up in Rd 1 & 2 for Bolles & Walker. Renck confirmed that Elway 2x tried to trade up for Bolles Rd 1 and then Walker in Rd 2. And he didn't reconsider, Elway admitted he just got lucky he didn't pay with extra picks to get both guys. Link -
https://twitter.com/troyrenck/status/858166875053838337 (In the next tweet above, Elway makes the "lucky" comment - all his words. No guess work here).

That's a concerning approach, because it means Elway is so locked in that he's not letting how the board falls influence him at all. Orgs like NE, BAL, GB, that are the most successful in the draft, don't get that tied into 1 guy...unless that 1 guy is really head and shoulders above his peer group available. If he's not, then that's a real problem.

The draft shows Elway didn't have to reach, and I think even the biggest Bolles supporters would be hard pressed to say it was called for. I don't think you can argue Bolles would have for sure been there if we traded back, though, as some suggested - we do know the other guys in his LT tier (Ramczyk & Robinson) would have been able to be picked later. But it's fair to say locking in to Bolles ruled out going after talents like Foster and Howard, or moving back for more value with others in the same tier, wasn't an option for Elway.

Now, my 3rd observation, not nearly as much of a given, but just my take, looking at the draft....

3. Elway can't resist going for the home run every time (at least, until need picks came in). - I think that explains why he's done so well in Day 3 - you're not supposed to hit at a high rate. But when Elway does, it's a homer. But, it also explains why he reaches so badly in Rd 2-3 over many years - because to reach for huge-ceiling guys, he goes for guys with insanely low floors. That's a great strategy in Day 3, because the bust rate is so high anyways. But on Day 2, that's how you get bust picks when a lot of really other great choices were there. Rd 1, I think he's succeeded, because you can find high-floor, high-ceiling guys in Rd1. Ironically, I think Elway's move towards need over BPA is the first time where he's taken need pick to make team better now vs. BPA long-term, despite his assertions that he looks to life long-term. With Todd Davis a UFA after this year, it's hard to say Reuben Foster isn't a need for 2018. Or that run D isn't a huge need short & long-term. It just our 2nd need, behind LT, so that overruled BPA (and I'd say the same with OJ Howard).

The last observation is just my interpretation, though. I think the locking-on (Elway's own words show this) and the need over BPA (with LT going over Howard/Foster) shows Elway has changed. It doesn't mean he won't fail, but the philosophy change is certainly worth noting. I'd say the locking on is a strength if you reserve it for guys clearly above their peers available - but I don't think Elway's using it that way anymore. What we do know is that over the long run, the best drafting teams just accumulate best talent overall, and don't factor need, and don't target specific players when other choices of similar value can be had at lower cost. And if the first 2 approach statements are true, it's hard to see us getting better value draft-wise going forward. In Elway's own words - he got lucky this year, that's not a good thing to bank on. That's just my feeling that Elway's HR philosophy, but I leave the evidence of how his 2011-12 drafts look vs. the last 4-5 for you to consider, along with his own words.

Now, to be clear, Elway is a smart guy. Great GM. One of the best. But his Day 2-3 weakness was why he wasn't perfect draft-wise, and this draft's philosophy reveals could easily explain why. And as a general approach, going need over BPA, and locking into guys, the best orgs do the exact opposite. I totally get B67's point that he think it's because Elway sees us as 1-2 guys away. That's justifiable if we are. But I think most of us agree we have lots of needs to fill - whether or not we've done it, no one knows. But the approach is certainly worth discussing, because Elway's words themselves remove any guesswork, and it's hard to conclude otherwise on his actions Rd1.

And again, don't take the above as me trashing the draft completely - I actually loved Rd 2 pick Walker, Rd 5 pick Butt, Rd 6 Henderson, and Rd7 Chad Kelly. Getting Rd 4 SF for 2018 was a gift from the gods themselves given we could keep 10 guys on our roster . And I see the reasoning for Carlos Henderson and Langley, they just seemed like we reached (Henderson pays off if he can be a true slot threat and not just a KR/PR/gadget guy). But when I look at the past, and the Bolles decision, and Elway clearly reaching for "his guy" with trades he didn't need to do (Bolles & Walker - again, Elway confirmed this completely, no guesses, his words), well, we didn't get burned, but if the approach stays the same, it both explains past misses, and is a potential issue going forward. The best draft orgs stay away from both #1 & #2. I hope Elway does as well in future drafts.


Anyways, figured it's a LOT easier to put in 1 thread, and let it live long-term, and then we can see how it changes over time. All good. Have at it, guys.
_________________
steelpanther wrote:
This is like playing checkers with a pigeon. No matter how well you play, sooner or later the pigeon is going to crap on the board, then puff his chest out and strut around like he won something.


Last edited by Broncofan on Tue May 02, 2017 8:00 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
thebestever6


Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 3182
PostPosted: Tue May 02, 2017 12:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This lets bash Elway talk needs to be tempered down. Let me explain why. Year 1 having a top 3 pick in each roind with the needs we have on the roster Elway could afford to go bpa because there were needs everywhere.

The take a risk on raw talent started in 2012 when we selected a raw talent in the second in Brock Osweiler . There were other more pro ready guys but Elway felt Brock had the highest ceiling. It didn't work out but I dont condemn elway for doing in. If we take Wilson or cousins maybe we never win that superbowl.

Elways strategy is perfect for out situatiom! If we picked top 10 since Von I'd be on the elway bashing more than anyone. But we don't so we have to take risk.

Langley is a first round talent 7th round rawness so you take that cjance becauee you have the secondary. To developq premier talent the reward is higher than the risk.

Let's look at the Colts after the won the Superbowl in 06' and lost it in 09' what did the Colts do being bottom end of the first round other than take Garcon? Virtually nothing because they went with safe picks guys close to their ceiling.

The guy gets 2 to 3 impact players each draft picking bottom half of the first round that isn't bad at all!. When your not in the top 16 10 in each round you have to take risks I give elway a pass om 2013 because that draft was horrible.

Elway doesn't take the Bill polian approach I commend him for that.
_________________
Props to Deadpulse for the Sig:

Big Palooka wrote:
"They don't have to worry about him making consistent passes. They will win another 2-3 max with him at QB."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jsthomp2007


Joined: 11 Jan 2008
Posts: 8722
Location: USA
PostPosted: Tue May 02, 2017 6:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I agree that the Elway bashing needs to be tempered. Let's look at the things he has done. He signed Peyton Manning as a free agent; arguably one of the best signing in NFL history.

And, I think one of the better and more telling judgement calls Elway has made was in drafting Von Miller over Marcel Darius. That decision left virtually everyone scratching their heads. The only better pick that could have been made is if he had drafted Watt instead. But, in the end, Von basically got the Broncos to the Super Bowl and won it for them. Watt has won some awards, that is it.

I think the only way you are going to draft a player that has very little doubt for succeeding is if you are drafting in the top 5, and if you are drafting there, that means, your team wasn't good to begin with. I think after pick 20, drafting becomes an educated crap shoot. And, from then on, Elway has won some and he has lost some. The fact is, that he generally gets 2-3 impact players out of his picks. I think that is pretty damn good.
_________________
Ninja stealth muggers in the Bellagio has left me in a state of congitive disonance...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Broncofan


Joined: 02 Dec 2013
Posts: 3609
PostPosted: Tue May 02, 2017 7:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

thebestever6 wrote:
This lets bash Elway talk needs to be tempered down. Let me explain why. Year 1 having a top 3 pick in each roind with the needs we have on the roster Elway could afford to go bpa because there were needs everywhere.

The take a risk on raw talent started in 2012 when we selected a raw talent in the second in Brock Osweiler . There were other more pro ready guys but Elway felt Brock had the highest ceiling. It didn't work out but I dont condemn elway for doing in. If we take Wilson or cousins maybe we never win that superbowl.

Elways strategy is perfect for out situatiom! If we picked top 10 since Von I'd be on the elway bashing more than anyone. But we don't so we have to take risk.

Langley is a first round talent 7th round rawness so you take that cjance becauee you have the secondary. To developq premier talent the reward is higher than the risk.

Let's look at the Colts after the won the Superbowl in 06' and lost it in 09' what did the Colts do being bottom end of the first round other than take Garcon? Virtually nothing because they went with safe picks guys close to their ceiling.

The guy gets 2 to 3 impact players each draft picking bottom half of the first round that isn't bad at all!. When your not in the top 16 10 in each round you have to take risks I give elway a pass om 2013 because that draft was horrible.

Elway doesn't take the Bill polian approach I commend him for that.


Look at the whole posts - Elway's credit is given where it's well earned. He's fantastic Day 3, he's not missed Day 1 other than Sly Williams. But, he has had a really bad record Rd 2-3. And so it's fair to ask why. Now we have new info that isn't guesswork, it's confirmed by Elway himself (locking in), and we can see by his Rd1 pick that need does clearly overrule overall BPA, unlike what Elway has said time and again in the past. As Diehardbronx pointed out, this could very well explain why he's missed on Day 2 picks so much in the past (especially if you combine it with #3 - his love of home run boom/whiff bust picks - but unlike #1 & #2, that's just my opinion, not confirmed).

It's not bashing Elway to point out potential flaws in approach that are present. Elway by his own words confirmed he locked into guys so much this year he tried to trade up when it wasn't needed. He said it himself - he got lucky both times. His own words. Still he's human. No GM is perfect. But his approach is clearly changing.

The approach used to be overall BPA. Need clearly went over overall BPA here. That's an approach the most successful draft orgs avoid. The only time it's justified is when a team is literally just a need away. But even then in the long run it returns less value, it's just that it could be the difference between SB or no. If we aren't a complete team anymore BPA is the better approach. It's why Elway himself has always said he approaches the draft. Going LT instead of elite talents like Foster or Howard (Elway said he'd pass on Howard even if he was there) clearly shows this.

There have been lots of talks in need vs. BPA in the Draft Thread - you just supported the stance that Elway goes need first (BPA at that need position) rather than overall BPA, even if overall BPA is clearly different guy, in the Draft Thread this week. eljefe7, DiehardBronx & germ-x brought this up, page 21 in the Draft Thread, Thursday night (and germ-x has been carring this flag for years, as I recall), your reply:

thebestever6 wrote:
germ-x wrote:
DiehardBronxFan wrote:
ElJefe7 wrote:
broncos67 wrote:

There are things to be concerned about though. He's not young, so he needs to contribute literally right away. If he doesn't start contributing until he's 27- that's a HUGE waste of a pick. He has a learning disability. That's not confidence-inspiring. He needs work in pass blocking. There's a lot of things that need to go right.


I have no issue with that criticism. I am talking about those who are saying "BPA my a--." or "I never want to hear ELway talk about BPA." Or Elway totally went away from his philosophy of BPA. Those are the people to which I refer


Very Happy Very Happy that would be me. Pretty hard to paint picture where Bolles was, pure and simply, BPA. Is it possible Elway is deluding himself? Sure. But just because he calls a zebra a horse doesn't make it so.


I've said this for 2 years now. Elway takes BPA at a position of need. He has literally never been pure BPA since he was hired. I had a huge argument with someone about this last year. there literally has never been an instance Elway has simply taken the best player without it filling a need (at least early to mid rounds).


Totally remember this I brought that up and you backed me.


Do you see that? That's you agreeing with statement 1 - Elway goes position of need rather overall BPA. So now, are you bashing Elway? Of course not. Again, you don't have to believe me - use your own words to show you. Recognizing that Elway doesn't always goes overall BPA isn't bashing - it's a point for discussion. If the gap is small between overall BPA vs. need pick, then it's probably very justifiable. I think most would agree there wasn't a small gap, very justifiable. But if there is a big gap, then it's a problem. And Elway said himself he wouldn't take Foster or Howard if they were there, it's hard to say Foster wasn't a clear overall BPA well ahead of any of the T's, it's next to impossible to then say Foster and Howard, right?


As for the other point made - locking in to 1 guy if similar talents are there also decreases draft value in the long run. And on this count, it's again confirmed by Elway himself. Elway in his own words confirms he locks in. So how is that bashing? Honestly, I get you support Elway and want to think the best, but guess what? We all do. Even AAA (I know that's hard to believe at times). But supporting our team and being critical actually can co-exist. It's how the best orgs learn. And it's why we're here to post, right?

Both of the above approaches are either new to Elway's statements (B67's earlier observation in the Draft thread - again which you replied and agreed 100 percent), or an approach Elway confirmed with his own words. They are approaches that the most successful drafting orgs don't take. Elway himself has always said he prefers BPA in recognition of this. So it's worth discussion.

Elway's a fantastic GM. But he's not perfect. That's ok no one is. But the best GM's evolve. It's fair to say being so close and then winning the SB Elway changed his approach when were 1-2 guys away. And as B67 pointed out, makes total sense. But that approach has very clear pitfalls once your roster isn't complete. And ours isn't. Run D, ILB leaving next year, several OL leaving beyond LT next year and year after - going immediate short term need leaves more holes over time if the overall talent in the roster acquired through drafts lessens . As I said this thread isn't really about the results as it is the approaches being taken. They are changing - Elway's confirmed this.

So let's discuss rationally. You don't have to put aside your support of loyalty to discuss these points. And really, you don't have to take it from me - your own words indicate these points are worth discussing.
_________________
steelpanther wrote:
This is like playing checkers with a pigeon. No matter how well you play, sooner or later the pigeon is going to crap on the board, then puff his chest out and strut around like he won something.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
thebestever6


Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 3182
PostPosted: Tue May 02, 2017 10:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

^^^^ I know what I said I've always said it the only year you could say he truly went Bpa was year 1. Because we had so many needs. Specifically, Rahim Moore, and Orlando Franklin since everyone wants to look at second round rightfully so.

I think they were 2 okay to solid players nothing too special they had a low bust rate were close to their ceilings.

Elway take risks in round 2 sometimes I don't know why I feel loke ges confident in his late round drafting so he can go a bit risky, butI think this year he took less of a risk in that round.

Bottom line I'm not mad at elways approach. One could argue if he doesn't have this approach we wouldn't have many late round successes.

You look at Elways style of drafting compared to Bill polian once Manning won a Superbowl. I'll take Elway.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Broncofan


Joined: 02 Dec 2013
Posts: 3609
PostPosted: Tue May 02, 2017 11:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

thebestever6 wrote:
^^^^ I know what I said I've always said it the only year you could say he truly went Bpa was year 1. Because we had so many needs. Specifically, Rahim Moore, and Orlando Franklin since everyone wants to look at second round rightfully so.

I think they were 2 okay to solid players nothing too special they had a low bust rate were close to their ceilings.

Elway take risks in round 2 sometimes I don't know why I feel loke ges confident in his late round drafting so he can go a bit risky, butI think this year he took less of a risk in that round.

Bottom line I'm not mad at elways approach. One could argue if he doesn't have this approach we wouldn't have many late round successes.

You look at Elways style of drafting compared to Bill polian once Manning won a Superbowl. I'll take Elway.


Polian's a strawman argument, though. We're not looking to hire Polian or suggest he should be our GM - is that your point? No one would argue otherwise.

You recognize that this position-need approach is what Elway does. I didn't before, but I agree now. Elway's choice this year, I don't how anyone could argue otherwise (something DHB even alluded to above lol, I'm right there with him). This approach is also fundamentally different than Elway's publicly said many, many times. germ-x stood on this flag even 2 years ago IIRC, and I salute him for it. Whether there was doubt before, there certainly can't be now.

B67's explanation that this happened as our team went from needing help everywhere to only a few key needs as a SB explains this change, that makes complete sense to me. But now that's an approach that may not fit our team makeup & needs (because remember, the draft is how you build long-term, yet short-term needs overruled here). You agreed with the assertion many made that this was the most important draft Elway had in a long time because we have so many needs. So going need alone to trump overall BPA is actually something worth discussing. If our team is only 1-2 needs away, it's justifiable - but it's also reducing our overall accumulation of talent, when done over a long stretch of time. And I think B67 hit the nail on the head, something to which others noted (I think DiehardBronxfan, BF2010, champ11, AKRA, Germany, germ-x, BF007, UK, elliot878, etc.) - our roster has a lot of holes to fill, we're not just 1-2 guys away any more like we were in 2013-15. And again, this is not an insult to Elway - it's the reality of the cap nowadays. They're not bashing our team - they're just recognizing our roster needs for what they are. Just like the points #1 and #2 are just how things are. #3 is just my take, but hey, let's discuss.

But at least we're having a dialogue, that's a start. Really, that's all we can do. Calling the above points bashing is clearly way off-base - you yourself agree with #1, and Elway himself confirms #2. So let's as a group keep the rational discussion going. Honestly, the concept that criticism = hater, or that we don't support Elway, but simply bashing, is ridiculous. Criticism, when done constructively, is how we all learn (whether the criticism is right or wrong is actually not even the biggest factor, it's the examination process that takes place that leads to learning and improvement).
_________________
steelpanther wrote:
This is like playing checkers with a pigeon. No matter how well you play, sooner or later the pigeon is going to crap on the board, then puff his chest out and strut around like he won something.


Last edited by Broncofan on Tue May 02, 2017 12:03 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
champ11


Joined: 14 Apr 2014
Posts: 5868
Location: CO -> ATX
PostPosted: Tue May 02, 2017 11:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yeah this is a really good thread - thanks for accumulated all of that info Broncofan.

It's funny because I think this draft could have totally been saved by signing Whitworth. Just like I think (many don't) this team could have been a Super Bowl threat with Romo if Whitworth was added. The key to this draft was having a GLARING hole that they decided ahead of time they were going to fill in the first round. That's just frankly a bad spot to be. I'm not low on Bolles in a vacuum and I actually am kind of excited about him.....but the value is off.

This comes back to not filling the need in FA and not drafting well. LT's are no doubt hard to come by because teams that get great LT's pay them and keep them. But it's frustrating Elway couldn't even get a passable talent in the draft previously.

I actually like the draft beyond the first two rounds. I think they are picks that are actively building the team and not fixing mistakes. The team needs to get more explosive offensively and improve ST and I think they did that. I know there is hate for the McKinley pick, but I don't mind getting a guy so explosive in the fifth round. I think the first two picks are fixing past mistakes and like it has been discussed they have locked in on the two guys.

I'm kind of with BroncoBruin on the Walker pick. He wasn't the fit I was seeing when we were talking about DL. He doesn't look super athletic to me which I just see as a red flag when we are talking about a guy that excels as a pass rusher. Like he seems he is in a Robert Ayers mold and let me know if that comparison is totally off. I know BF has talked extensively about him bulking up, which would be great, but I guess we will see. All that being said, adding pass rushers (one of the top 4 most valuable positions/skills) is fine.
_________________

team rammy

Joined: 3/10/2007
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Broncofan


Joined: 02 Dec 2013
Posts: 3609
PostPosted: Tue May 02, 2017 11:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

champ11 wrote:
Yeah this is a really good thread - thanks for accumulated all of that info Broncofan.

It's funny because I think this draft could have totally been saved by signing Whitworth. Just like I think (many don't) this team could have been a Super Bowl threat with Romo if Whitworth was added. The key to this draft was having a GLARING hole that they decided ahead of time they were going to fill in the first round. That's just frankly a bad spot to be. I'm not low on Bolles in a vacuum and I actually am kind of excited about him.....but the value is off.

This comes back to not filling the need in FA and not drafting well (BF add: Rd 2-3 in the past, or OL overall) LT's are no doubt hard to come by because teams that get great LT's pay them and keep them. But it's frustrating Elway couldn't even get a passable talent in the draft previously.

I actually like the draft beyond the first two rounds. I think they are picks that are actively building the team and not fixing mistakes. The team needs to get more explosive offensively and improve ST and I think they did that. I know there is hate for the McKinley pick, but I don't mind getting a guy so explosive in the fifth round. I think the first two picks are fixing past mistakes and like it has been discussed they have locked in on the two guys.

I'm kind of with BroncoBruin on the Walker pick. He wasn't the fit I was seeing when we were talking about DL. He doesn't look super athletic to me which I just see as a red flag when we are talking about a guy that excels as a pass rusher. Like he seems he is in a Robert Ayers mold and let me know if that comparison is totally off. I know BF has talked extensively about him bulking up, which would be great, but I guess we will see. All that being said, adding pass rushers (one of the top 4 most valuable positions/skills) is fine.


No problem - FWIW your points bolded above I would have added in too, that was point #4 I was going to add as a personal observation. You said these same points over the weekend on page 23 in the Draft thread, BTW (found them when I found steve's reply, knew I missed something). And you said it right after Whitworth signed - full credit. And I completely agree with all the points (did you mean to say "not drafting well Rds 2-3"? Or drafting well for OL? I added those qualifier above lol, I know you didn't mean not drafted well in general). I won't lie, I've been planting my flag on signing Whitworth from January onwards (as you and many others, too), and after we signed Leary, too. Just too many great points brought up in so many different threads, or threads too big to go back and find easily. It was time to put them all in 1 thread to live on long-term.

I'll be happy to update the first post so everyone can find all our Elway Draft History in just 1 place. It's REALLY hard to get all the info - Football reference has the picks in 1 place, MHR/Wikipedia have the trades/UDFA, but on separate pages for each draft, too (yeah I know they are iffy overall, but literally only sources to get all the trade info) for the rest. And then to try and find the observations made by so many posters here & there....well, let's put it all in 1 place and keep discussing. The problem with the Draft Thread is there's so much live stuff, going back to find stuff is IMPOSSIBLE (or next to). Great for live discussion, but if you want to discuss 1 topic raised there (Draft history/approach), well, this is the better way. And then we can also have an easy reference to go back to for Elway's complete Draft history, too.

But back to your point - if we sign Whitworth, then we have no one glaring need - and then Elway can get Howard / Foster, and go G round 2. This is no guarantee that Rd 2 G (it would have been Feeney or Dawkins available at 2.51) / Whitworth is instantly better than Leary/Bolles - but you add in the fact that we would have Foster/Howard at 1.20 PLUS Whitworth/Feeney or Dawkins, the overall talent acquired IMO is just miles ahead of the way we went Rd 1-2. Put another way - if Elway has Whitworth, no way he goes Bolles over Foster/Howard. I don't see how anyone can argue that point. But it goes back to taking need as an absolute overruling overall BPA, even when the gap is wide. And to be clear, no one can know for sure - but I think even the most ardent fans who support Bolles would be hard-pressed to say if we had Whitworth, that Rd 1-2 would have been justified. And that drives home the point about #1 (taking need rather than overall BPA) being philosophy-wise a bad approach. It might work out, it might not - but in the long run, this approach leads to less talent accumulated on rosters over time. So it's worth discussing for sure.

Anyway, all good stuff.
_________________
steelpanther wrote:
This is like playing checkers with a pigeon. No matter how well you play, sooner or later the pigeon is going to crap on the board, then puff his chest out and strut around like he won something.


Last edited by Broncofan on Tue May 02, 2017 8:04 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
thebestever6


Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 3182
PostPosted: Tue May 02, 2017 12:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Broncofan wrote:
thebestever6 wrote:
^^^^ I know what I said I've always said it the only year you could say he truly went Bpa was year 1. Because we had so many needs. Specifically, Rahim Moore, and Orlando Franklin since everyone wants to look at second round rightfully so.

I think they were 2 okay to solid players nothing too special they had a low bust rate were close to their ceilings.

Elway take risks in round 2 sometimes I don't know why I feel loke ges confident in his late round drafting so he can go a bit risky, butI think this year he took less of a risk in that round.

Bottom line I'm not mad at elways approach. One could argue if he doesn't have this approach we wouldn't have many late round successes.

You look at Elways style of drafting compared to Bill polian once Manning won a Superbowl. I'll take Elway.


Polian's a strawman argument, though. We're not looking to hire Polian or suggest he should be our GM - is that your point? No one would argue otherwise.

You recognize that this position-need approach is what Elway does. I didn't before, but I agree now. Elway's choice this year, I don't how anyone could argue otherwise (something DHB even alluded to above lol, I'm right there with him). This approach is also fundamentally different than Elway's publicly said many, many times. germ-x stood on this flag even 2 years ago IIRC, and I salute him for it. Whether there was doubt before, there certainly can't be now.

B67's explanation that this happened as our team went from needing help everywhere to only a few key needs as a SB explains this change, that makes complete sense to me. But now that's an approach that may not fit our team makeup & needs (because remember, the draft is how you build long-term, yet short-term needs overruled here). You agreed with the assertion many made that this was the most important draft Elway had in a long time because we have so many needs. So going need alone to trump overall BPA is actually something worth discussing. If our team is only 1-2 needs away, it's justifiable - but it's also reducing our overall accumulation of talent, when done over a long stretch of time. And I think B67 hit the nail on the head, something to which others noted (I think DiehardBronxfan, BF2010, champ11, AKRA, Germany, germ-x, BF007, UK, elliot878, etc.) - our roster has a lot of holes to fill, we're not just 1-2 guys away any more like we were in 2013-15. And again, this is not an insult to Elway - it's the reality of the cap nowadays. They're not bashing our team - they're just recognizing our roster needs for what they are. Just like the points #1 and #2 are just how things are. #3 is just my take, but hey, let's discuss.

But at least we're having a dialogue, that's a start. Really, that's all we can do. Calling the above points bashing is clearly way off-base - you yourself agree with #1, and Elway himself confirms #2. So let's as a group keep the rational discussion going. Honestly, the concept that criticism = hater, or that we don't support Elway, but simply bashing, is ridiculous. Criticism, when done constructively, is how we all learn (whether the criticism is right or wrong is actually not even the biggest factor, it's the examination process that takes place that leads to learning and improvement).


I disagree in the sense we aren't 2 to 3 holes away. The bottom line we're in the same boat as we were 2013- 2015 what changed was we no longer have a sure fire franchise qb like we did in that time frame. Manning maximized a bottom tier oline. He maximized an aging te on his last legs, he maximized lower tier 3rd or fourth wrs.

The fact is if we have a franchise qb on the roster we are in great shape and can compete. If not than the above assessments are correct because you need a complete team top to bottom to win the superbowl if you don't have a franchise qb.
_________________
Props to Deadpulse for the Sig:

Big Palooka wrote:
"They don't have to worry about him making consistent passes. They will win another 2-3 max with him at QB."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
thebestever6


Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 3182
PostPosted: Tue May 02, 2017 12:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If the addition of Bolles and the players we added get the most out of our young qbs I don't see how this draft disappoints.

The addition of Bolles can impact tge careers of so many players the addition of Foster or howard has less of an impact.
_________________
Props to Deadpulse for the Sig:

Big Palooka wrote:
"They don't have to worry about him making consistent passes. They will win another 2-3 max with him at QB."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Broncofan


Joined: 02 Dec 2013
Posts: 3609
PostPosted: Tue May 02, 2017 12:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

thebestever6 wrote:
Broncofan wrote:
thebestever6 wrote:
^^^^ I know what I said I've always said it the only year you could say he truly went Bpa was year 1. Because we had so many needs. Specifically, Rahim Moore, and Orlando Franklin since everyone wants to look at second round rightfully so.

I think they were 2 okay to solid players nothing too special they had a low bust rate were close to their ceilings.

Elway take risks in round 2 sometimes I don't know why I feel loke ges confident in his late round drafting so he can go a bit risky, butI think this year he took less of a risk in that round.

Bottom line I'm not mad at elways approach. One could argue if he doesn't have this approach we wouldn't have many late round successes.

You look at Elways style of drafting compared to Bill polian once Manning won a Superbowl. I'll take Elway.


Polian's a strawman argument, though. We're not looking to hire Polian or suggest he should be our GM - is that your point? No one would argue otherwise.

You recognize that this position-need approach is what Elway does. I didn't before, but I agree now. Elway's choice this year, I don't how anyone could argue otherwise (something DHB even alluded to above lol, I'm right there with him). This approach is also fundamentally different than Elway's publicly said many, many times. germ-x stood on this flag even 2 years ago IIRC, and I salute him for it. Whether there was doubt before, there certainly can't be now.

B67's explanation that this happened as our team went from needing help everywhere to only a few key needs as a SB explains this change, that makes complete sense to me. But now that's an approach that may not fit our team makeup & needs (because remember, the draft is how you build long-term, yet short-term needs overruled here). You agreed with the assertion many made that this was the most important draft Elway had in a long time because we have so many needs. So going need alone to trump overall BPA is actually something worth discussing. If our team is only 1-2 needs away, it's justifiable - but it's also reducing our overall accumulation of talent, when done over a long stretch of time. And I think B67 hit the nail on the head, something to which others noted (I think DiehardBronxfan, BF2010, champ11, AKRA, Germany, germ-x, BF007, UK, elliot878, etc.) - our roster has a lot of holes to fill, we're not just 1-2 guys away any more like we were in 2013-15. And again, this is not an insult to Elway - it's the reality of the cap nowadays. They're not bashing our team - they're just recognizing our roster needs for what they are. Just like the points #1 and #2 are just how things are. #3 is just my take, but hey, let's discuss.

But at least we're having a dialogue, that's a start. Really, that's all we can do. Calling the above points bashing is clearly way off-base - you yourself agree with #1, and Elway himself confirms #2. So let's as a group keep the rational discussion going. Honestly, the concept that criticism = hater, or that we don't support Elway, but simply bashing, is ridiculous. Criticism, when done constructively, is how we all learn (whether the criticism is right or wrong is actually not even the biggest factor, it's the examination process that takes place that leads to learning and improvement).


I disagree in the sense we aren't 2 to 3 holes away. The bottom line we're in the same boat as we were 2013- 2015 what changed was we no longer have a sure fire franchise qb like we did in that time frame. Manning maximized a bottom tier oline. He maximized an aging te on his last legs, he maximized lower tier 3rd or fourth wrs.

The fact is if we have a franchise qb on the roster we are in great shape and can compete. If not than the above assessments are correct because you need a complete team top to bottom to win the superbowl if you don't have a franchise qb.


First off, TBE6 (everyone else with a long name gets shortened, let's go with that lol), I'm glad we're having this kind of talk. Notice the difference between the bash calls and what it adds, versus the above? I certainly do, and I suspect by the posts this weekend (and to be fair, not calling you out there, just the point's clearly come up), many others do as well. Just take it FWIW.

I get your point, but don't agree we're in the same boat as 2013-15 outside of QB. Let me present why:

2013-15 key players gone in 2016-2017: Pot Roast, Malik Jackson, Danny Trevathan, Evan Mathis, 3rd WR's like Welker or Decker (with Sanders in slot), Good Manning 2013-14.
2017 key players in to replace them:
Pekos x 2, Kerr, Walker (who is pass-rush only for now), Todd Davis at ILB, no one yet at 3rd WR (Henderson is hopefully our LT guy), same withTE (Butt again same deal).

On O, we had a healthy CJ Anderson - he's older, and banged up now. I like Booker still, but I can't say we're better there. We also had real TE threats for 2013-14 in JT, he was awful in blocking, but he was a legit threat. Butt is a GREAT pick - but Year 1 is usually a redshirt year for TE, and he's still iffy to return for Week 1 anyways post-2nd ACL. Elway even said he could end up redshirting TE. And that's before you get to our OL. Is that OL better than 2016? Of course. On D, we had Pot Roast give us 2 great years of production. Sly was probably JAG, but he played well in 2015's lineup - with Trevathan and Malik Jackson as our other DE and ILB. We do NOT have that type of NT/DE/ILB play, We are NOWHERE close to our 2013-15 run D talent yet. I love Kerr signing, and the Jarrett pick could get us there - but realitistically, Jarrett is a future NT talent. Still no one for ILB other than Todd Davis. You aren't going to realistically suggest that we've replaced NT, and Malik/Trevathan well going into 2017?

And keep in mind it's not a question of player talent above - it's how they add to OL play, run D play, etc. I'm sure we're better than we were on OL from 2016. But 2015 levels? And we aren't any better at run D from our bad 2016 levels, far from it. So I don't se that we're in the same boat...at all. We're of course better on OL, but to say were at 2013-15 before we address QB is a stretch...to say the least.

And finally....are you suggesting we are going to get franchise QB-level play from our 2017 guys? Like what Manning gave us in 2013-14? We won 2015 because we were totally complete except at RT and QB. I'll be fair, and broaden franchise-QB play to top 10. Still, is that what you are expecting this year (not the future, but 2017)? QB-wise I still have hope Lynch will eventually get it, and I'm fine with Siemian until then while he's cheap, but to say we'll get franchise QB play from either 1 IMO is a huge stretch. Because while I don't agree with your evaluation of where our roster is at compared to 2013-15, your premise that franchise-level QB play will mask any holes is valid. I'd point out that we won in 2015 because we had a complete team, when Petyon was playing at a franchise QB level it still wasn't enough in the playoffs/SB48. But it's absolutely a fair take that a franchise level QB play can mask a few weaknesses. But even then, you'd now be saying we're going to get top-10 QB play this year from 1 of our guys. Which we'd all love to see, but man, that's out there as an expectation for 2017. I hope we see progression - but progression is one thing, franchise-level QB play (top 10) this year is another. And again, this is why so many ppl see our need to fill holes across the board roster-wise.

Again, though, all good. I'm glad we're having this discussion. 1000000x better than bash/hater/blind apologist calls. That does nothing to add to discussion. You do realize that you aren't disagreeing with the philosophy change discussed (#1 and #2). You just see our team as more complete than I, or most do. But that's OK. But on that point - look at the above, and consider it, along with whether or not you really think we'll get top-10 QB type play in 2017 from our guys. I don't know how you come to the conclusion, other than never-say-die optimism (and even then, your call, I appreciate that too, I usually call for a DEN victory each GD thread, lol, even when my head says we shouldn't win).
_________________
steelpanther wrote:
This is like playing checkers with a pigeon. No matter how well you play, sooner or later the pigeon is going to crap on the board, then puff his chest out and strut around like he won something.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Broncofan


Joined: 02 Dec 2013
Posts: 3609
PostPosted: Tue May 02, 2017 12:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

thebestever6 wrote:
If the addition of Bolles and the players we added get the most out of our young qbs I don't see how this draft disappoints.

The addition of Bolles can impact tge careers of so many players the addition of Foster or howard has less of an impact.


Again, I don't need to convince you - your own words say otherwise.

Page 25 of the Draft Thread, top part, around noon ET...

Broncofan wrote:
thebestever6 wrote:
Broncofan wrote:
thebestever6 wrote:
I don't get why people say Elway could of traded down and still got one of the 3 tackles. Clearly he had Bolles ranked head and shoulders the other tackles. That's why he didn't trade down.

I think Oline was so devalued this draft that it was getting undervalued . I get theres no depth or blue chip guys. But at pick 20 Bolles has a highest ceiling of any left tackle recent memory taken that late in the first.


If Bolles is significantly better than Ramczyk or Robinson then no one will argue with Elway's pick. If the 2 others are the same, or better than Bolles, well, BF2010's point (which B67 was also outlining last night) can't be argued either. And if Foster is indeed a top 5 talent, a perennial All-Pro/Pro-Bowler, and miles ahead of Bolles, that's a miss. If Foster is just good, and on the same level (or lower) as Bolles, then Elway's justified to pass on Foster.

It's no lock either way, but the outcome being good or bad, while unknown, is very easy to track - how the 3 T's and Foster fare will determine the outcome of whether this was a good decision or not. And no one knows yet for sure. We'll know by mid-end 2018 season.


You can't just judge it by Foster you have to see how the draft unfilds who we get there could be better linebackers for our team with less injury, and character concerns.


That's true if Foster is just at the same level as the LB we use. If he's elite and ours are just ok the conclusions are the same. But yeah it's fair to add who we use at LB too. Just as the other T vs Bolles gives the picture there.


We agreed on Thursday night that if Bolles is way better than the other T's, then it invalidates the argument others made that trading back to get Ramczyk and/or Robinson in criticizing the pick. Diehardbronx (DHB - , gotta start shortening more names lol) point that you can't trade back and say you would have gotten Bolles later is fair, so I wouldn't extend that reasoning, but the above point that how Bolles fares vs. Ramczyk/Robinson in determining outcomes still holds, along with Foster.

As for Foster, his outcome is entirely relevant - it depends how he does, and like you said in your own words - how our ILB play performs for the guys we use instead of him. Again, I'll repeat what you said - it depends on Foster vs. other ILB we play. Add in how Bolles vs. other T, in the OP you responded to...can I suggest that perhaps now that DEN doesnt' have a new ILB and Davis is leaving, you're now changing the argument to fit the belief Bolles is justified, no matter what, and disregarding the Foster part? Which you're entitled to...but again, to say that Foster isn't relevant to the outcome, well, you're now arguing against yourself.

Still all good, BTW. This is why we discuss. To be completely transparent - if Bolles is way better than the other T's, or if he's just as good, and Foster isn't an elite guy, then Elway made the right call. It's not like we know for sure. It's just fodder for discussion. But as yourself pointed out (in your own words), how the pick ends up is dependent on Bolles vs. other T's in his tier (Ramczyk/Robinson), and Foster vs. other ILB's. Time will tell.
_________________
steelpanther wrote:
This is like playing checkers with a pigeon. No matter how well you play, sooner or later the pigeon is going to crap on the board, then puff his chest out and strut around like he won something.


Last edited by Broncofan on Tue May 02, 2017 1:06 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
thebestever6


Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 3182
PostPosted: Tue May 02, 2017 1:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Broncofan wrote:
thebestever6 wrote:
Broncofan wrote:
thebestever6 wrote:
^^^^ I know what I said I've always said it the only year you could say he truly went Bpa was year 1. Because we had so many needs. Specifically, Rahim Moore, and Orlando Franklin since everyone wants to look at second round rightfully so.

I think they were 2 okay to solid players nothing too special they had a low bust rate were close to their ceilings.

Elway take risks in round 2 sometimes I don't know why I feel loke ges confident in his late round drafting so he can go a bit risky, butI think this year he took less of a risk in that round.

Bottom line I'm not mad at elways approach. One could argue if he doesn't have this approach we wouldn't have many late round successes.

You look at Elways style of drafting compared to Bill polian once Manning won a Superbowl. I'll take Elway.


Polian's a strawman argument, though. We're not looking to hire Polian or suggest he should be our GM - is that your point? No one would argue otherwise.

You recognize that this position-need approach is what Elway does. I didn't before, but I agree now. Elway's choice this year, I don't how anyone could argue otherwise (something DHB even alluded to above lol, I'm right there with him). This approach is also fundamentally different than Elway's publicly said many, many times. germ-x stood on this flag even 2 years ago IIRC, and I salute him for it. Whether there was doubt before, there certainly can't be now.

B67's explanation that this happened as our team went from needing help everywhere to only a few key needs as a SB explains this change, that makes complete sense to me. But now that's an approach that may not fit our team makeup & needs (because remember, the draft is how you build long-term, yet short-term needs overruled here). You agreed with the assertion many made that this was the most important draft Elway had in a long time because we have so many needs. So going need alone to trump overall BPA is actually something worth discussing. If our team is only 1-2 needs away, it's justifiable - but it's also reducing our overall accumulation of talent, when done over a long stretch of time. And I think B67 hit the nail on the head, something to which others noted (I think DiehardBronxfan, BF2010, champ11, AKRA, Germany, germ-x, BF007, UK, elliot878, etc.) - our roster has a lot of holes to fill, we're not just 1-2 guys away any more like we were in 2013-15. And again, this is not an insult to Elway - it's the reality of the cap nowadays. They're not bashing our team - they're just recognizing our roster needs for what they are. Just like the points #1 and #2 are just how things are. #3 is just my take, but hey, let's discuss.

But at least we're having a dialogue, that's a start. Really, that's all we can do. Calling the above points bashing is clearly way off-base - you yourself agree with #1, and Elway himself confirms #2. So let's as a group keep the rational discussion going. Honestly, the concept that criticism = hater, or that we don't support Elway, but simply bashing, is ridiculous. Criticism, when done constructively, is how we all learn (whether the criticism is right or wrong is actually not even the biggest factor, it's the examination process that takes place that leads to learning and improvement).


I disagree in the sense we aren't 2 to 3 holes away. The bottom line we're in the same boat as we were 2013- 2015 what changed was we no longer have a sure fire franchise qb like we did in that time frame. Manning maximized a bottom tier oline. He maximized an aging te on his last legs, he maximized lower tier 3rd or fourth wrs.

The fact is if we have a franchise qb on the roster we are in great shape and can compete. If not than the above assessments are correct because you need a complete team top to bottom to win the superbowl if you don't have a franchise qb.


First off, TBE6 (everyone else with a long name gets shortened, let's go with that lol), I'm glad we're having this kind of talk. Notice the difference between the bash calls and what it adds, versus the above? I certainly do, and I suspect by the posts this weekend (and to be fair, not calling you out there, just the point's clearly come up), many others do as well. Just take it FWIW.

I get your point, but don't agree we're in the same boat as 2013-15 outside of QB. Let me present why:

2013-15 key players gone in 2016-2017: Pot Roast, Malik Jackson, Danny Trevathan, Evan Mathis, 3rd WR's like Welker or Decker (with Sanders in slot), Good Manning 2013-14.
2017 key players in to replace them:
Pekos x 2, Kerr, Walker (who is pass-rush only for now), Todd Davis at ILB, no one yet at 3rd WR (Henderson is hopefully our LT guy), same withTE (Butt again same deal).

On O, we had a healthy CJ Anderson - he's older, and banged up now. I like Booker still, but I can't say we're better there. We also had real TE threats for 2013-14 in JT, he was awful in blocking, but he was a legit threat. Butt is a GREAT pick - but Year 1 is usually a redshirt year for TE, and he's still iffy to return for Week 1 anyways post-2nd ACL. Elway even said he could end up redshirting TE. And that's before you get to our OL. Is that OL better than 2016? Of course. On D, we had Pot Roast give us 2 great years of production. Sly was probably JAG, but he played well in 2015's lineup - with Trevathan and Malik Jackson as our other DE and ILB. We do NOT have that type of NT/DE/ILB play, We are NOWHERE close to our 2013-15 run D talent yet. I love Kerr signing, and the Jarrett pick could get us there - but realitistically, Jarrett is a future NT talent. Still no one for ILB other than Todd Davis. You aren't going to realistically suggest that we've replaced NT, and Malik/Trevathan well going into 2017?

And keep in mind it's not a question of player talent above - it's how they add to OL play, run D play, etc. I'm sure we're better than we were on OL from 2016. But 2015 levels? And we aren't any better at run D from our bad 2016 levels, far from it. So I don't se that we're in the same boat...at all. We're of course better on OL, but to say were at 2013-15 before we address QB is a stretch...to say the least.

And finally....are you suggesting we are going to get franchise QB-level play from our 2017 guys? Like what Manning gave us in 2013-14? We won 2015 because we were totally complete except at RT and QB. I'll be fair, and broaden franchise-QB play to top 10. Still, is that what you are expecting this year (not the future, but 2017)? QB-wise I still have hope Lynch will eventually get it, and I'm fine with Siemian until then while he's cheap, but to say we'll get franchise QB play from either 1 IMO is a huge stretch. Because while I don't agree with your evaluation of where our roster is at compared to 2013-15, your premise that franchise-level QB play will mask any holes is valid. I'd point out that we won in 2015 because we had a complete team, when Petyon was playing at a franchise QB level it still wasn't enough in the playoffs/SB48. But it's absolutely a fair take that a franchise level QB play can mask a few weaknesses. But even then, you'd now be saying we're going to get top-10 QB play this year from 1 of our guys. Which we'd all love to see, but man, that's out there as an expectation for 2017. I hope we see progression - but progression is one thing, franchise-level QB play (top 10) this year is another. And again, this is why so many ppl see our need to fill holes across the board roster-wise.

Again, though, all good. I'm glad we're having this discussion. 1000000x better than bash/hater/blind apologist calls. That does nothing to add to discussion. You do realize that you aren't disagreeing with the philosophy change discussed (#1 and #2). You just see our team as more complete than I, or most do. But that's OK. But on that point - look at the above, and consider it, along with whether or not you really think we'll get top-10 QB type play in 2017 from our guys. I don't know how you come to the conclusion, other than never-say-die optimism (and even then, your call, I appreciate that too, I usually call for a DEN victory each GD thread, lol, even when my head says we shouldn't win).



Bashing was a little harsh and I'm not sold not sold at all. Since collges have moved to more spread offenses the products coming out are no shoe in to do anything.

But, I love what elway has done and I pointed to the trade up for lynch giving up way less than what franchise's gave up this year.

I love the additions of Musgrave who works wonders with qbs. I thinl he's putting our young qbs in position to succeed even though the deck might be stacked against them.

Decker was gone by the time we got Sanders, Welker was a shell of himself on his last legs wgwn we got Sanders.

Evan Mathis was a guy we got who contributed but was also on his last legs maximized by Peyton.

Malik yes we haven't replaced him but walker looks like a match measurable wise coming out. Gotsis was also drafted to contribute to losing him .

If we have Manning 2012 2013 who doubts we go 12 and 4 this year?

We have to get a franchise qb or else in today's nfl you have no shot.

Last year people undrrestimated pm. Yes he was losing skill sets. But looking back it's arguable he still got more out of the offense than warranted.

I think what Im about to say is my most important point. I think division teams make most of their moves to be better in the Division because thats 6 games almost half your schedule. The fact Kc gave up a first and a 3rd in my mind to geta future potential franchise qb. Says they're worried about their qb in this division and I don't think it's because of Carr or Rivers. My gut says they feel the Broncos got their franchise qb. Just a gut feeling i can't prove it. But kc tried to match what the broncos and raiders did with the drafting of Carr and Lynch.
_________________
Props to Deadpulse for the Sig:

Big Palooka wrote:
"They don't have to worry about him making consistent passes. They will win another 2-3 max with him at QB."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Broncofan


Joined: 02 Dec 2013
Posts: 3609
PostPosted: Tue May 02, 2017 1:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

thebestever6 wrote:


Bashing was a little harsh and I'm not sold not sold at all. Since collges have moved to more spread offenses the products coming out are no shoe in to do anything.

But, I love what elway has done and I pointed to the trade up for lynch giving up way less than what franchise's gave up this year.

I love the additions of Musgrave who works wonders with qbs. I thinl he's putting our young qbs in position to succeed even though the deck might be stacked against them.

Decker was gone by the time we got Sanders, Welker was a shell of himself on his last legs wgwn we got Sanders.

Evan Mathis was a guy we got who contributed but was also on his last legs maximized by Peyton.

Malik yes we haven't replaced him but walker looks like a match measurable wise coming out. Gotsis was also drafted to contribute to losing him .

If we have Manning 2012 2013 who doubts we go 12 and 4 this year?

We have to get a franchise qb or else in today's nfl you have no shot.

Last year people undrrestimated pm. Yes he was losing skill sets. But looking back it's arguable he still got more out of the offense than warranted.

I think what Im about to say is my most important point. I think division teams make most of their moves to be better in the Division because thats 6 games almost half your schedule. The fact Kc gave up a first and a 3rd in my mind to geta future potential franchise qb. Says they're worried about their qb in this division and I don't think it's because of Carr or Rivers. My gut says they feel the Broncos got their franchise qb. Just a gut feeling i can't prove it. But kc tried to match what the broncos and raiders did with the drafting of Carr and Lynch.


All good. I'm going to end our convo on this point to let others talk (mainly because if we've got nothing new to say, then let it go so it doesn't derail), you're free to reply. I'd just point out how the initial gut reaction was to play the bash card. We've seen the hater / leave the basement / go apply to the basement / and more insults thrown out. And that's what they are - insults, labels. They do NOTHING to add to a very legitimate convo. There is no way it helps the convo at all, or move discussion forward.

Remember, the first 2 points didn't come from me, or a poster, or even 10. One was a point that Elway made himself (he was so locked in he tried to trade up 2x when he didn't need to - in his own words, he got lucky. Elway said it himself. Another was a point that you yourself agreed with - Elway goes position of need rather than overall BPA. Yet because it looked like criticism, the instant labels came on. And if you re-read my post on the 3 points, look at how many times I gave Elway credit. And to keep things really clean, the 1st post was just a recap of Elway's history. Which you cannot find ANYWHERE else on the internet, not at least for picks/UDFA/trades. So please ask yourself (and to be fair, you weren't alone, this applies to jst) - ask how in the world would this thread create the idea of a bash label being applied? My answer (you're free to find another, of course) - it's because fans are human, and criticism is hard to take. But that doesn't make criticism wrong. Not when it's balanced, and it's constructive. In fact, balanced and constructive criticism is necessary for people and orgs to learn (whether it's self-critique, or from outside). The labels, and flaming, on the other hand, aren't necessary, or helpful...ever. Go far enough, and it's against the rules, but even at lower levels, it's not even 1 percent, or 1/1000 of a percent productive. Take that FWIW the next time you think someone is a hater, or bashing, or whatever label you want to call it.

As for your point on your belief that we'll get franchise level QB play this year in your gut - it takes courage to stand on an island and say that. It's not how most people feel. It doesn't mean you'll be wrong, either. Just remember it takes the same courage be a lone critic in a crowd, too, the next time you see criticism you don't like, even if it feels wrong to you - first off, they may not be as critical as your gut reaction tells you (look for balance in the criticism). I think you see that here. But even if they are nothing but critical, that critic is probably just as big a fan of the Broncos as you are (well maybe that's impossible in your mind, but right there just below you lol). All good.
_________________
steelpanther wrote:
This is like playing checkers with a pigeon. No matter how well you play, sooner or later the pigeon is going to crap on the board, then puff his chest out and strut around like he won something.


Last edited by Broncofan on Tue May 02, 2017 1:37 pm; edited 7 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Denver Broncos All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 1 of 5

 
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