Mock draft: more LBs, please

[big mike]

sure I'll trade up for Carpenter - from our #2. Get a real #1 pick then trade into the high second for Carpenter because he'll probably be there. And it'd likely only cost a #3. Use our #1 for whatever and our 2 & 3 for Carpenter.

People who think that Carpenter will be there in the second round are completely ignoring the fact that several teams (in addition to us) in the late 2nd round are almost certainly going to be drafting OLBs, including a few 3-4 teams. The mocks that have Carpenter making it into the second round are the ones that highly over-rate the WRs and a few other positions (OT), and ignore the fact that OLB is a bigger need than WR and OT for those teams in the first round - having them reach for WRs rather than taking very good LBs in the late first.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

That's the rub. If a run on LB's starts in the mid to late teens, then BB may have to trade up for whomever he is targeting. However if Hawk is the only LB gone by #20, then BB can move down and still get his player.
I see two possible mid to late tenns runs starting either DB or LB/DE. If Ngata slides to Cleveland, they would be fools to pass on him. IF he's gone then they could start the LB run.

 

[dryheat44]

That's why I see us either staying at 21, or possibly trading down maybe 2 or 3 spots (not past NY) - maybe even trading up a little if there's a guy BB particularly likes, and wants to get ahead of Dallas.


You're completely ignoring though how many LBs WILL come off the board in the second half of round 1.

Why do you assume so?

Are we assuming all other teams are going to ignore their other needs? That doesn't sound right. If I'm, for example, Carolina, and linebackers start coming off quickly, wouldn't I be better served by taking one of the RBs, CBs, or linemen that must be falling as a result, rather than making a move for the sixth or seventh lineman on my list?

The Giants are talking about taking a linebacker, true. That's a 4-3 OLB. Maybe a DeMeco Ryans, Thomas Howard, Ernie Sims type. No problem. Ditto Carolina, Jacksonville, and New Orleans, although New Orleans has other needs as well.

Pittsburgh plays the 3-4 and will be looking at the same guys we are. They've also lost Bettis, ARE, Kimo, and Hope. They're certainly not going to reach for a LB with so many other needs.

I think you're seriously OVERestimating the linebackers taken in round one. But if you're right, I'm all for trading down and taking somebody else who's slipping (Hill, Cromartie, Maroney, Pope, Simpson) as a result of all these linebackers being taken early.

 

[BelichickFan]

People who think that Carpenter will be there in the second round are completely ignoring the fact that several teams (in addition to us) in the late 2nd round are almost certainly going to be drafting OLBs, including a few 3-4 teams.

I said that kind of as a joke, Carpenter could make it to the first few picks of round two but not much further. The point I'm trying to make is that there is a surplus, for once, of mid to late #1 picks at LB. Wimbley (although he'll probably be early teens), Carpenter, Greenway, Ryans, Lawson, maybe Kiwi. And a couple will be there at #21. Now, if Belichick loves one guy and has to have him I could see trading up. But the point of this thread is they could all be gone. All of them. And it's not happening.

 

[The Gr8est]

Why do you assume so?

Are we assuming all other teams are going to ignore their other needs? That doesn't sound right. If I'm, for example, Carolina, and linebackers start coming off quickly, wouldn't I be better served by taking one of the RBs, CBs, or linemen that must be falling as a result, rather than making a move for the sixth or seventh lineman on my list?

The Giants are talking about taking a linebacker, true. That's a 4-3 OLB. Maybe a DeMeco Ryans, Thomas Howard, Ernie Sims type. No problem. Ditto Carolina, Jacksonville, and New Orleans, although New Orleans has other needs as well.

Pittsburgh plays the 3-4 and will be looking at the same guys we are. They've also lost Bettis, ARE, Kimo, and Hope. They're certainly not going to reach for a LB with so many other needs.

I think you're seriously OVERestimating the linebackers taken in round one. But if you're right, I'm all for trading down and taking somebody else who's slipping (Hill, Cromartie, Maroney, Pope, Simpson) as a result of all these linebackers being taken early.

Agreed DH. I appreciate what you bring to this board rook, but I'm on board with the "opposition" here. We don't need to force this draft, and if there is a run on LBs, then as DH mentioned we'll just go ahead and draft the players from other positions that are slipping. I'm sure we'll still get help at LB, but we could use WR, RB, CB, OL and K too. It's all about value and I don't think BB is going to throw away picks. If we have too many then we'll just trade them for more picks next year.

 

[dryheat44]

Incidently, how would a trade of Donnie Edwards affect the trade-up-for-stud-LB camp? Would you still want to do it to get younger, or would you let it sit until later rounds/next year?