Who will be BA at #24?

[carolinatony]

I know we need CB/SS/LB but.....
The more I think about it; I believe BB will take the BA at 24 and not worry as much about position.
Anyone not on the radar they may drop to us that may be a surprise?

[skaIownsIyou]

joe staley to play RT?

idk

[Seneschal2]

My top 4:

• DE Adam Carriker -- our DL is a major strength. But if someone goes down (or needs a breather -- we'll be just as strong. Excellent value pick.

• CB Darrelle Revis -- no brainer. One of the top 3 rated CBs. I think he fits best.

• OLB Paul Posluszny -- great intangibles and LB instincts necessary to play the position. Won't remove him from my board because of what he lacks in size.

• OT Joe Staley -- another value pick. Would represent a hopeful upgrade at LT. Tremendous upside.

Posluszny is the only one of the four who some would seriously disagree with. IMO, BB has the others rated very high.

[carolinatony]

Joe Staley.. haven't heard him mentioned before.
Personally if we went OL, I want a run blocking OG like the Chiefs used to have. Just knock there man off the line and open up the holes. (I know; all teams want this)
As far as Posluszny goes ;from reading on this board not many think he will be a great pro. He is not big I believe for what BB likes.

[Remix 6]

Originally Posted by carolinatony

Joe Staley.. haven't heard him mentioned before.
Personally if we went OL, I want a run blocking OG like the Chiefs used to have. Just knock there man off the line and open up the holes. (I know; all teams want this)
As far as Posluszny goes ;from reading on this board not many think he will be a great pro. He is not big I believe for what BB likes.

staleys not that kind of guy that u want then

Staley is a ZBS guy like the men in denver..athletic, fast,quick lineman

[SamBamsFan]

Originally Posted by Remix 6

staleys not that kind of guy that u want then

Staley is a ZBS guy like the men in denver..athletic, fast,quick lineman

Pardon? I'd like a source that says anything like that. Everything I read says that he put on 80 Lbs. to convert from a freshman TE, and he has plenty of "grow room" (i.e. he looks svelte at 305). Definitely not a zone blocker in attitude... I don't see him in a Denver-style at all.

[Metaphors]

Couple of questions that you need to ask with a first day pick:

1) Who does he knock off of the roster? (or off the 45 man active list?)
2) Whose playing time does he take (if different from #1 above)?
3) Is that enough playing time to develop to his full potential?
4) What are the contract implications of #1 and #2 above?

For example, take a popular name that has come up recently...Joe Staley:

1) Britt likely gets knocked off the roster and 1 of O'Callaghan/Kaczur become a gameday inactive.

2) He would take the starting RT job of O'Callaghan/Kaczur.

3) The starting RT job would give Staley plenty of PT, but would pretty much flush the development of the O'Callaghan/Kaczur loser down the crapper.

4) None of the players in question (Britt, O'Callaghan, Kaczur) have a problematic contract situation.

Taking Staley seems like a reasonable thing to do. The downside is that you are replacing a tackle on a cheap rookie contract with a 1st round contract. If the coaches have confidence in Kaczur/O'Callaghan to do the job, I wouldn't think they would want to disrupt a good thing.

Now take another popular BPA...Adam Carriker:

1) Hill gets knocked off the roster and Wright becomes a gameday inactive.

2) At first glance, it would seem that Warren would lose some time to Carriker. He doesn't have the same skill set as Wilfork or Green and you don't want to take Seymour off the field. Don't want to take Warren off either but someone has to make room.

3) I can't see how Carriker could get enough PT to justify a 1st round pick.

4) Nobody is crying for Hill or Wright (though Wright's development has been a nice story).

While I agree that Carriker is definitely suited for the Pats scheme, the only way I see him getting on the field enough is injury or a shift to more of a 4-3 look (which takes a linebacker off the field). Also, it would seem to be a little early to be preparing for Warren leaving in free agency (signed through 2008). Great pick and value, but would seem to be too disruptive to a defense that is already championship quality.

My analysis may not be spot on, but you get the idea. Any player taken in the 1st round is going to be an upgrade for someone on your roster. But BPA also has to be fit in a constructive way to avoid problems with team chemistry. Which is why I think you can effectively eliminate TE, QB, DL and K from 1st day consideration...and probably OT and C as well. Also can't see a RB, WR or OG in the first round. I know that nobody knows what the Pats FO will do, but I can't recall a case where a 1st day pick didn't make sense based on the existing team dynamics.

[DW Toys]

Originally Posted by Metaphors

Couple of questions that you need to ask with a first day pick:

1) Who does he knock off of the roster? (or off the 45 man active list?)
2) Whose playing time does he take (if different from #1 above)?
3) Is that enough playing time to develop to his full potential?
4) What are the contract implications of #1 and #2 above?

For example, take a popular name that has come up recently...Joe Staley:

1) Britt likely gets knocked off the roster and 1 of O'Callaghan/Kaczur become a gameday inactive.

2) He would take the starting RT job of O'Callaghan/Kaczur.

3) The starting RT job would give Staley plenty of PT, but would pretty much flush the development of the O'Callaghan/Kaczur loser down the crapper.

4) None of the players in question (Britt, O'Callaghan, Kaczur) have a problematic contract situation.

Taking Staley seems like a reasonable thing to do. The downside is that you are replacing a tackle on a cheap rookie contract with a 1st round contract. If the coaches have confidence in Kaczur/O'Callaghan to do the job, I wouldn't think they would want to disrupt a good thing.

Now take another popular BPA...Adam Carriker:

1) Hill gets knocked off the roster and Wright becomes a gameday inactive.

2) At first glance, it would seem that Warren would lose some time to Carriker. He doesn't have the same skill set as Wilfork or Green and you don't want to take Seymour off the field. Don't want to take Warren off either but someone has to make room.

3) I can't see how Carriker could get enough PT to justify a 1st round pick.

4) Nobody is crying for Hill or Wright (though Wright's development has been a nice story).

While I agree that Carriker is definitely suited for the Pats scheme, the only way I see him getting on the field enough is injury or a shift to more of a 4-3 look (which takes a linebacker off the field). Also, it would seem to be a little early to be preparing for Warren leaving in free agency (signed through 2008). Great pick and value, but would seem to be too disruptive to a defense that is already championship quality.

My analysis may not be spot on, but you get the idea. Any player taken in the 1st round is going to be an upgrade for someone on your roster. But BPA also has to be fit in a constructive way to avoid problems with team chemistry. Which is why I think you can effectively eliminate TE, QB, DL and K from 1st day consideration...and probably OT and C as well. Also can't see a RB, WR or OG in the first round. I know that nobody knows what the Pats FO will do, but I can't recall a case where a 1st day pick didn't make sense based on the existing team dynamics.

Cousin, You have thought this out. Good job. Have to agree with you. Nice players, but not enough playing time or roster space. A waste IMO. Maybe we trade Kaczur (on Browns threads). That's O.K. then.
DW Toys

[Box_O_Rocks]

Originally Posted by Metaphors

Now take another popular BPA...Adam Carriker:

1) Hill gets knocked off the roster and Wright becomes a gameday inactive.

2) At first glance, it would seem that Warren would lose some time to Carriker. He doesn't have the same skill set as Wilfork or Green and you don't want to take Seymour off the field. Don't want to take Warren off either but someone has to make room.

3) I can't see how Carriker could get enough PT to justify a 1st round pick.

4) Nobody is crying for Hill or Wright (though Wright's development has been a nice story).

While I agree that Carriker is definitely suited for the Pats scheme, the only way I see him getting on the field enough is injury or a shift to more of a 4-3 look (which takes a linebacker off the field). Also, it would seem to be a little early to be preparing for Warren leaving in free agency (signed through 2008). Great pick and value, but would seem to be too disruptive to a defense that is already championship quality.

LeKevin Smith.

[dryheat44]

Originally Posted by Metaphors

Now take another popular BPA...Adam Carriker:

1) Hill gets knocked off the roster and Wright becomes a gameday inactive.

2) At first glance, it would seem that Warren would lose some time to Carriker. He doesn't have the same skill set as Wilfork or Green and you don't want to take Seymour off the field. Don't want to take Warren off either but someone has to make room.

3) I can't see how Carriker could get enough PT to justify a 1st round pick.

4) Nobody is crying for Hill or Wright (though Wright's development has been a nice story).

Your analysis is very good. I would draft Carriker first, then worry about it. I don't expect anybody at #24 to be an instant starter. I think Carriker could replace Warren in obvious passing situations for starters, and rotate in along with Green to keep Seymour fresh.

Mike Wright, and I'm a big fan since he signed with the team (one of my darkhorses on my draft board back then) came in as a UDFA. We could reasonably trade him for a 4th-5th round pick during the pre-season, although he will need to be replaced (perhaps by Carriker) on Special Teams.

For what it's worth, I'll re-post my first round targets, since it's been awhile. Note that unless we trade Samuel, none of them will be full-time players in '07.

1. Carriker
2. Revis
3. Meachem
4. Spencer

I like what I hear about Staley, but I have a hard time recommending someone I've never seen play for a first round pick. I'd be OK with him though, or Ben Grubbs, or Tony Ugoh, if those four are unavailable and we are unsuccessful in trading the pick.

To answer the theme, I think Grubbs is probably BPA at 24, but he plays a position that regularly gets downgraded on draft day, so it's hard to see anybody taking him that high.