The first 17 picks Saturday.

[Vinny]

Originally Posted by Keith

I think the most intriguing thing for me will be whether the team selects a running back in the first three rounds, especially the first round. With three decent options - McFadden, Stewart, and Mendenhall - I'm not sure all will be gone by #18.

Just how comfortable is the team going into the season with Ahman, Brown, Walker, and Taylor?

what is the bigger potential crisis? Going into the season with Bennett as your best cornerback (healthy) may be a recipe for disaster in '08

[nero THE zero]

Originally Posted by Vinny

what is the bigger potential crisis? Going into the season with Bennett as your best cornerback (healthy) may be a recipe for disaster in '08

I definitely agree with this but how effective can a rookie CB be? Assuming DRC and McKelvin are off the board, would a Jenkins or a Cason make that much difference over a more seasoned, lesser talent like Fletcher?

[badboy]

Originally Posted by nero THE zero

I definitely agree with this but how effective can a rookie CB be? Assuming DRC and McKelvin are off the board, would a Jenkins or a Cason make that much difference over a more seasoned, lesser talent like Fletcher?

I also like Godfrey & Chevis Jackson should be there in 3rd. I have to say WIlliams then Stewart if avail @ 18. I really like Williams at #18 then in 2nd (Sage) Forte or J. Charles(should be gone)and CB in 3rd as stated. Tyvon Jackson in 4th CB/FS/KR with sub 4.4 I believe. In 5th I'd go the DT from Texas Tech (?) with emotional problems) or even Darnell Terrell Cb/FS with decent speed and size.

[Mike]

Originally Posted by nero THE zero

I definitely agree with this but how effective can a rookie CB be?

Dunta was effective as a rookie, and he was drafted at #10. Last year, once Fred "learned how to prepare and practice" like a pro, (per Kubes) he played OK. Yes, he made mistakes, but he was far from terrible.

No matter how we slice it, we need three good CB's at a minimum. As we sit today, we have Fred and Reeves. We need at least one more to go with them and then add Dunta in there, but who knows what we will get from him this year. If he comes back after being on the PUP list and plays decent, then that is a bonus as he continues to heal.

[nero THE zero]

Originally Posted by Mike

Dunta was effective as a rookie, and he was drafted at #10. Last year, once Fred "learned how to prepare and practice" like a pro, (per Kubes) he played OK. Yes, he made mistakes, but he was far from terrible.

No matter how we slice it, we need three good CB's at a minimum. As we sit today, we have Fred and Reeves. We need at least one more to go with them and then add Dunta in there, but who knows what we will get from him this year. If he comes back after being on the PUP list and plays decent, then that is a bonus as he continues to heal.

I understand that a rookie CB can be effective. But, what I'm asking is, would a rookie CB not named DRC or McKelvin change the fact that the best CB on the field is Fred Bennett? In other words, in the short term, would drafting Mike Jenkins really be any more beneficial to us than, say, Terrance Wheatley? They'll both end up playing nickel back for the majority of the season, so I don't see where there's much of a difference in impact there.

OTOH, if Jonathan Stewart or Rashard Mendenhall is drafted it easily plausible that they're starting (or primary back-up to AG if he's still around) from day one.

I'm not advocating a RB only stance in round one. I'm simply saying that the "crisis" at CB might not be solved even if we do draft a CB in the first.

[Mike]

[QUOTE=nero THE zero;83]I understand that a rookie CB can be effective. But, what I'm asking is, would a rookie CB not named DRC or McKelvin change the fact that the best CB on the field is Fred Bennett? They'll both end up playing nickel back for the majority of the season, so I don't see where there's much of a difference in impact there.
QUOTE]

I think we are splitting hairs here. We need a future LT, corner and RB. How and when we get them is irrelevant, we just need to get them.

[nero THE zero]

[QUOTE=Mike;85]

Originally Posted by nero THE zero

I understand that a rookie CB can be effective. But, what I'm asking is, would a rookie CB not named DRC or McKelvin change the fact that the best CB on the field is Fred Bennett? They'll both end up playing nickel back for the majority of the season, so I don't see where there's much of a difference in impact there.
QUOTE]

I think we are splitting hairs here. We need a future LT, corner and RB. How and when we get them is irrelevant, we just need to get them.

I agree.

I just don't think it'd be prudent (assuming the Texans have Stewart rated ahead of Jenkins) to reach for Mike Jenkins if Jonathan Stewart is there because our need at CB is "greater than" our need at RB.

Ultimately I think we need to either (a)trade down or (b) take the best CB, LT, RB available at pick number 18.

[papabear]

[QUOTE=nero THE zero;87]

Originally Posted by Mike

I agree.

I just don't think it'd be prudent (assuming the Texans have Stewart rated ahead of Jenkins) to reach for Mike Jenkins if Jonathan Stewart is there because our need at CB is "greater than" our need at RB.

Ultimately I think we need to either (a)trade down or (b) take the best CB, LT, RB available at pick number 18.

I think the statement about Assuming the Texans have Stewart ahead of Jenkins is very imprtant. I don't have a draft board, and I've watched Stewart a couple of times and Jenkins maybe once. I don't know that I would consider Jenkins a reach at 18. I was high on Stewart early in the season, but not so much later on in the year. I would be happy to have him, but I think I might be more excited about Jenkins.

I'm all about the trade down, but I think the best case scenario is to find a LT wherever we end up picking.

[painekiller]

Vinny's statement has me thinking CB is not the top pick.

Do I really want a 1st rounder to be my nickle?

If Dunta comes back, and Bennett is the real deal, than I wasted a 1st rounder on a back up.

If I go DB in the 3rd or 4th, Patrick Lee, Charles Goodfrey, Chevis Jackson type player and get him plenty of reps in training camp, did I spend my pick more wisely? I believe so...

[Vinny]

Originally Posted by painekiller

Vinny's statement has me thinking CB is not the top pick.

Do I really want a 1st rounder to be my nickle?

If Dunta comes back, and Bennett is the real deal, than I wasted a 1st rounder on a back up.

If I go DB in the 3rd or 4th, Patrick Lee, Charles Goodfrey, Chevis Jackson type player and get him plenty of reps in training camp, did I spend my pick more wisely? I believe so...

not if they all turn into Faggins and Fletcher....generally, all you get in the later rounds is more of the same kind of player that is good enough to make a bad team but probably not good enough to be a solid nickel back anywhere else.

[painekiller]

Originally Posted by Vinny

not if they all turn into Faggins and Fletcher....generally, all you get in the later rounds is more of the same kind of player that is good enough to make a bad team but probably not good enough to be a solid nickel back anywhere else.

What normal playoff team has a nickle back that was drafted in the 1st, and the starting CBs both under 28 years of age? Not sure I have seen that mix on any team but the Colts who never have the cap room to keep most of the LBs or CBs after their rookie contracts.

[Vinny]

Originally Posted by nero THE zero

I definitely agree with this but how effective can a rookie CB be? Assuming DRC and McKelvin are off the board, would a Jenkins or a Cason make that much difference over a more seasoned, lesser talent like Fletcher?

I have a low opinion of Fletcher and I'm not sure he is even a good nickel back...if you are building for the future then why take the rookie CB next season if you are using that logic. Take a solid cb now and you have Dunta, Bennett and a high pick CB as your core cornerbacks in '09.