Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: "The Trent Richardson Thread" « previous next »
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 ... 102

alldaway

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 36754
Offline
#30 : February 13, 2012, 01:26:11 PM

I think Richardson will be a elite but I think Blount will be elite as well.  I don't understand the need to call either one non elite to prove the other is elite? lol.

XFactor

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 2266
Offline
#31 : February 13, 2012, 01:27:19 PM


I'm starting to wane off the Kalil (Reiff any tackle), pick.  I don't see a valid reason to drafting a RT at #5.  Sure, he is a LT, but Penn is very good and I can't see why they'd make a pick that really won't help this team that much for at least 2-3 years.

I would disagree that Penn is "very good".  He's above average at his position, but because he's out of shape his play really drops off at the end of every season.  That will never work in the playoffs.
Drafting a LT and flipping Penn to RT gives us a huge upgrade over Trueblood and Penn's late-season swoons won't be as harmfull against theless athletic pass-rushers at LDE

Totally agree on Penn, he starts off great but drops off in the second half.  For the guys who don't think Reif is a good pick at 5 look at it in terms of BPA and not need.
This is a deep draft at RB and who ever we draft is going to split carries with Blount.

TBayXXXVII

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 5708
Offline
#32 : February 13, 2012, 01:49:04 PM

I would disagree that Penn is "very good".  He's above average at his position, but because he's out of shape his play really drops off at the end of every season.  That will never work in the playoffs.
Drafting a LT and flipping Penn to RT gives us a huge upgrade over Trueblood and Penn's late-season swoons won't be as harmfull against theless athletic pass-rushers at LDE

Personally, I'm strongly of the opinion that if we drafted a tackle, it would make more sense to go ahead and start him at LOT and move Penn.  Sure, Penn is a decent player, but so is Blount.  It isn't as if drafting Richardson wouldn't mean we'd also be changing the role of one of the team's better players.  And frankly, even if we did draft a tackle and start him on the right side, it would still help the team out quite a bit immediately, not 2-3 years down the road.

To me, "above average" equals very good.  He's a legitimate starting LT in this league.  Why not draft an RT in the 2nd round to upgrade Truebloood?  How do we know that Penn can or will play RT?  Let's say that Penn can't... then what, put him back at LT and Kalil at RT?  We then just spent a #5 pick on a RT.  How about if he won't play RT?  What, keep him at LT for the year then unload him next offseason, or do move him and he refuses to play and becomes a distraction?  Now you have to replace him anyway.  Either way, you just "fixed" a problem and created a new one.  We also don't know if he'll be another Robert Gallery.

Because every 1st round pick the Bucs have used for an immediate impact player has sucked?

Drafting poorly is drafting poorly, it doesn't matter who the player is... what position he plays... or when you draft him.  I'd think at some point they'd have to get another one right.

Totally agree on Penn, he starts off great but drops off in the second half.  For the guys who don't think Reif is a good pick at 5 look at it in terms of BPA and not need.
This is a deep draft at RB and who ever we draft is going to split carries with Blount.

Are you sure this is a Penn issue and not a Morris by-product?  I'm willing to give him this one more year to find out.  Every year there is a great LT prospect, if not Kalil this year, there'll be one next year.  My guess is that we'll have a top 1-5 pick next year too, so getting one next year shouldn't be an issue.
: February 13, 2012, 01:53:14 PM TBayXXXVII

Feel Real Good

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 26718
Online
#33 : February 13, 2012, 01:54:10 PM

Because every 1st round pick the Bucs have used for an immediate impact player has sucked?

Drafting poorly is drafting poorly, it doesn't matter who the player is... what position he plays... or when you draft him.  I'd think at some point they'd have to get another one right.
You don't see a correlation between limiting yourself to immediate impact positions and drafting poorly? Maybe if the team had kept more of an open mind about which positions might need to be filled 2-3 years later, they would have allowed themselves to look at a broader group of players and not picked the stinkers they ended up picking.

FRG is the most logical poster on this board.  You guys just don\'t like where the logical conclusions take you.

acacius

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 4715
Offline
#34 : February 13, 2012, 02:07:55 PM

To me, "above average" equals very good.  He's a legitimate starting LT in this league.  Why not draft an RT in the 2nd round to upgrade Truebloood?  How do we know that Penn can or will play RT?  Let's say that Penn can't... then what, put him back at LT and Kalil at RT?  We then just spent a #5 pick on a RT.  How about if he won't play RT?  What, keep him at LT for the year then unload him next offseason, or do move him and he refuses to play and becomes a distraction?  Now you have to replace him anyway.  Either way, you just "fixed" a problem and created a new one.  We also don't know if he'll be another Robert Gallery.
Cornerback is really the only position that the team could draft at #5 where we don't have a respectable starter.  And I'll be delighted if we wind up drafting Claibourne.  I could easily ask why not draft a running back in the 2nd round to upgrade Blount?  And if Penn can't play any other position on the line, I would consider that evidence that he's not really all that good after all.  (Frankly, it does't necessarily have to be RT.  He might be better off moving inside.)  And if he *won't* play another position?  Then he's *definitely* part of the problem.  The bottom line for me is that I don't consider him a franchise cornerstone type player, worthy of special consideration*, particularly in comparison to Blount.  And sure, we don't know if Kalil would be another Robert Gallery, but the same can be said of any draft prospect.  Maybe Richardson is another Ronnie Brown.  There are no sure things.

* Let me emphasize here that I wouldn't be upset if the team drafted Richardson, particularly over Reiff.  But the specific place I jumped into the conversation in this thread had Kalil still on the board, and I consider Kalil at least as good a prospect at tackle as Richardson is at RB.  YMMV.

Bucko40

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 3445
Offline
#35 : February 13, 2012, 02:14:31 PM

Very hard to speculate at this point. If LeGarrette convince Coach Schiano that he's bought into the Buccaneer way and a FA RB is signed then I don't see the Bucs selecting Richardson at 5. If Blount is gone then all bets are off.

alldaway

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 36754
Offline
#36 : February 13, 2012, 02:28:48 PM

Very hard to speculate at this point. If LeGarrette convince Coach Schiano that he's bought into the Buccaneer way and a FA RB is signed then I don't see the Bucs selecting Richardson at 5. If Blount is gone then all bets are off.

This +1000

The next month and a half will be interesting.

TBayXXXVII

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 5708
Offline
#37 : February 13, 2012, 03:43:14 PM

Because every 1st round pick the Bucs have used for an immediate impact player has sucked?

Drafting poorly is drafting poorly, it doesn't matter who the player is... what position he plays... or when you draft him.  I'd think at some point they'd have to get another one right.
You don't see a correlation between limiting yourself to immediate impact positions and drafting poorly? Maybe if the team had kept more of an open mind about which positions might need to be filled 2-3 years later, they would have allowed themselves to look at a broader group of players and not picked the stinkers they ended up picking.

No.  Teams do it all the time and works often.  Over the last few years, Detroit, Atlanta, Jets, Panthers, and Bucs needed QB's.  The Lions drafted Stafford, Falcons drafted Ryan, and the Panthers drafted Newton... it worked out for all 3.  The Jets drafted Sanchez and the Bucs drafted Freeman... in these instances, it did not work out (yes, to those reading, I'm saying it's just a matter of time 'til Freeman is cut).   The immediacy of impact has nothing to do with whether a player pans out.

XFactor

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 2266
Offline
#38 : February 13, 2012, 03:55:58 PM

I would disagree that Penn is "very good".  He's above average at his position, but because he's out of shape his play really drops off at the end of every season.  That will never work in the playoffs.
Drafting a LT and flipping Penn to RT gives us a huge upgrade over Trueblood and Penn's late-season swoons won't be as harmfull against theless athletic pass-rushers at LDE

Personally, I'm strongly of the opinion that if we drafted a tackle, it would make more sense to go ahead and start him at LOT and move Penn.  Sure, Penn is a decent player, but so is Blount.  It isn't as if drafting Richardson wouldn't mean we'd also be changing the role of one of the team's better players.  And frankly, even if we did draft a tackle and start him on the right side, it would still help the team out quite a bit immediately, not 2-3 years down the road.

To me, "above average" equals very good.  He's a legitimate starting LT in this league.  Why not draft an RT in the 2nd round to upgrade Truebloood?  How do we know that Penn can or will play RT?  Let's say that Penn can't... then what, put him back at LT and Kalil at RT?  We then just spent a #5 pick on a RT.  How about if he won't play RT?  What, keep him at LT for the year then unload him next offseason, or do move him and he refuses to play and becomes a distraction?  Now you have to replace him anyway.  Either way, you just "fixed" a problem and created a new one.  We also don't know if he'll be another Robert Gallery.

Because every 1st round pick the Bucs have used for an immediate impact player has sucked?

Drafting poorly is drafting poorly, it doesn't matter who the player is... what position he plays... or when you draft him.  I'd think at some point they'd have to get another one right.

Totally agree on Penn, he starts off great but drops off in the second half.  For the guys who don't think Reif is a good pick at 5 look at it in terms of BPA and not need.
This is a deep draft at RB and who ever we draft is going to split carries with Blount.

Are you sure this is a Penn issue and not a Morris by-product?  I'm willing to give him this one more year to find out.  Every year there is a great LT prospect, if not Kalil this year, there'll be one next year.  My guess is that we'll have a top 1-5 pick next year too, so getting one next year shouldn't be an issue.

I don't think it's a Morris by-product. This was brought up a few years ago and was debated when there was a threat of him holding out before we resigned him.
I would not be shocked if Reif ends up being the first OT taken, seriously. Not saying he will be but it's not a stretch. To use your same argument we can get a running back in rounds two or three. What sounds better getting the 2nd rated OT and the 2nd rated RB in the first two rounds or the 1st rated RB and the 6th rated OT in the first two rounds? Unless you think Richardson is the next Tomlison or AP, which is the big question, there's better value in taking a RB in the 2nd or 3rd.

TBayXXXVII

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 5708
Offline
#39 : February 13, 2012, 03:59:37 PM

To me, "above average" equals very good.  He's a legitimate starting LT in this league.  Why not draft an RT in the 2nd round to upgrade Truebloood?  How do we know that Penn can or will play RT?  Let's say that Penn can't... then what, put him back at LT and Kalil at RT?  We then just spent a #5 pick on a RT.  How about if he won't play RT?  What, keep him at LT for the year then unload him next offseason, or do move him and he refuses to play and becomes a distraction?  Now you have to replace him anyway.  Either way, you just "fixed" a problem and created a new one.  We also don't know if he'll be another Robert Gallery.
Cornerback is really the only position that the team could draft at #5 where we don't have a respectable starter.  And I'll be delighted if we wind up drafting Claibourne.  I could easily ask why not draft a running back in the 2nd round to upgrade Blount?  And if Penn can't play any other position on the line, I would consider that evidence that he's not really all that good after all.  (Frankly, it does't necessarily have to be RT.  He might be better off moving inside.)  And if he *won't* play another position?  Then he's *definitely* part of the problem.  The bottom line for me is that I don't consider him a franchise cornerstone type player, worthy of special consideration*, particularly in comparison to Blount.  And sure, we don't know if Kalil would be another Robert Gallery, but the same can be said of any draft prospect.  Maybe Richardson is another Ronnie Brown.  There are no sure things.

* Let me emphasize here that I wouldn't be upset if the team drafted Richardson, particularly over Reiff.  But the specific place I jumped into the conversation in this thread had Kalil still on the board, and I consider Kalil at least as good a prospect at tackle as Richardson is at RB.  YMMV.

With repect to your statement about Penn not being able to play another position, I totally disagree with that.  Not all lineman can play another spot on the line at a certain level.  Mike Williams would probably make a terrible slot receiver, Jeff Faine would probably make a terrible RT, Gerald McCoy would probably make a terrible End... it doesn't mean they should be replaced.  While I agree with him not being "... a franchise cornerstone type player, worthy of special consideration", he's not a player that needs to be upgraded or replaced before others.  Basically, my overall point is, by drafting any LT at #5, you're addressing a position that doesn't need to be addressed and still leaving many positions that need to be addressed... unaddressed.

Feel Real Good

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 26718
Online
#40 : February 13, 2012, 04:00:44 PM

Because every 1st round pick the Bucs have used for an immediate impact player has sucked?

Drafting poorly is drafting poorly, it doesn't matter who the player is... what position he plays... or when you draft him.  I'd think at some point they'd have to get another one right.
You don't see a correlation between limiting yourself to immediate impact positions and drafting poorly? Maybe if the team had kept more of an open mind about which positions might need to be filled 2-3 years later, they would have allowed themselves to look at a broader group of players and not picked the stinkers they ended up picking.

No.  Teams do it all the time and works often.  Over the last few years, Detroit, Atlanta, Jets, Panthers, and Bucs needed QB's.  The Lions drafted Stafford, Falcons drafted Ryan, and the Panthers drafted Newton... it worked out for all 3.  The Jets drafted Sanchez and the Bucs drafted Freeman... in these instances, it did not work out (yes, to those reading, I'm saying it's just a matter of time 'til Freeman is cut).   The immediacy of impact has nothing to do with whether a player pans out.
2004: Bucs just signed Charlie Garner so they don't draft Steven Jackson, Bucs have Simeon Rice so they don't draft Will Smith, Bucs have Booger McFarland so they don't draft Vince Wilfork, Bucs have Derrick Brooks and Shelton Quarles so they don't draft DJ Williams
2005: Bucs have Simeon Rice so they don't draft DeMarcus Ware, Bucs have Derrick Brooks so they don't draft Thomas Davis nor Derrick Johnson, Bucs have Michael Clayton so they don't draft Roddy White

FRG is the most logical poster on this board.  You guys just don\'t like where the logical conclusions take you.

TBayXXXVII

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 5708
Offline
#41 : February 13, 2012, 04:07:56 PM


I don't think it's a Morris by-product. This was brought up a few years ago and was debated when there was a threat of him holding out before we resigned him.
I would not be shocked if Reif ends up being the first OT taken, seriously. Not saying he will be but it's not a stretch. To use your same argument we can get a running back in rounds two or three. What sounds better getting the 2nd rated OT and the 2nd rated RB in the first two rounds or the 1st rated RB and the 6th rated OT in the first two rounds? Unless you think Richardson is the next Tomlison or AP, which is the big question, there's better value in taking a RB in the 2nd or 3rd.

I want no part of Richardson either.  My thinking is that the 2 best choices in the 1st round are Blackmon (#1), and Claiborne (#2).  In the 2nd round, I'd like to see the Bucs draft Mike Adams in the 2nd round (if available)... I'm also fine with Ryan Tannehill in the 2nd as well... and all the implications that may follow, and then Martin in the 3rd.  To me, the only terrible pick the Bucs can make is in fact Richardson.  While I don't have a problem with Reiff, Martin, Kalil or any OT, I'd rather the Bucs address needs with all of their picks.

TBayXXXVII

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 5708
Offline
#42 : February 13, 2012, 04:09:56 PM

Because every 1st round pick the Bucs have used for an immediate impact player has sucked?

Drafting poorly is drafting poorly, it doesn't matter who the player is... what position he plays... or when you draft him.  I'd think at some point they'd have to get another one right.
You don't see a correlation between limiting yourself to immediate impact positions and drafting poorly? Maybe if the team had kept more of an open mind about which positions might need to be filled 2-3 years later, they would have allowed themselves to look at a broader group of players and not picked the stinkers they ended up picking.

No.  Teams do it all the time and works often.  Over the last few years, Detroit, Atlanta, Jets, Panthers, and Bucs needed QB's.  The Lions drafted Stafford, Falcons drafted Ryan, and the Panthers drafted Newton... it worked out for all 3.  The Jets drafted Sanchez and the Bucs drafted Freeman... in these instances, it did not work out (yes, to those reading, I'm saying it's just a matter of time 'til Freeman is cut).   The immediacy of impact has nothing to do with whether a player pans out.
2004: Bucs just signed Charlie Garner so they don't draft Steven Jackson, Bucs have Simeon Rice so they don't draft Will Smith, Bucs have Booger McFarland so they don't draft Vince Wilfork, Bucs have Derrick Brooks and Shelton Quarles so they don't draft DJ Williams
2005: Bucs have Simeon Rice so they don't draft DeMarcus Ware, Bucs have Derrick Brooks so they don't draft Thomas Davis nor Derrick Johnson, Bucs have Michael Clayton so they don't draft Roddy White

I can make the same exact list that shows the other way too.  Just because the Bucs are bad at talent evaluation, it doesn't mean that the practice is flawed.  It's the execution that's flawed.

bradentonian

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 27371
Offline
#43 : February 13, 2012, 04:19:42 PM


I don't think it's a Morris by-product. This was brought up a few years ago and was debated when there was a threat of him holding out before we resigned him.
I would not be shocked if Reif ends up being the first OT taken, seriously. Not saying he will be but it's not a stretch. To use your same argument we can get a running back in rounds two or three. What sounds better getting the 2nd rated OT and the 2nd rated RB in the first two rounds or the 1st rated RB and the 6th rated OT in the first two rounds? Unless you think Richardson is the next Tomlison or AP, which is the big question, there's better value in taking a RB in the 2nd or 3rd.

I want no part of Richardson either.  My thinking is that the 2 best choices in the 1st round are Blackmon (#1), and Claiborne (#2).  In the 2nd round, I'd like to see the Bucs draft Mike Adams in the 2nd round (if available)... I'm also fine with Ryan Tannehill in the 2nd as well... and all the implications that may follow, and then Martin in the 3rd.  To me, the only terrible pick the Bucs can make is in fact Richardson.  While I don't have a problem with Reiff, Martin, Kalil or any OT, I'd rather the Bucs address needs with all of their picks.


I think Adams will be vaulting up boards into the top half of round 1


XFactor

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 2266
Offline
#44 : February 13, 2012, 04:20:17 PM


I don't think it's a Morris by-product. This was brought up a few years ago and was debated when there was a threat of him holding out before we resigned him.
I would not be shocked if Reif ends up being the first OT taken, seriously. Not saying he will be but it's not a stretch. To use your same argument we can get a running back in rounds two or three. What sounds better getting the 2nd rated OT and the 2nd rated RB in the first two rounds or the 1st rated RB and the 6th rated OT in the first two rounds? Unless you think Richardson is the next Tomlison or AP, which is the big question, there's better value in taking a RB in the 2nd or 3rd.

I want no part of Richardson either.  My thinking is that the 2 best choices in the 1st round are Blackmon (#1), and Claiborne (#2).  In the 2nd round, I'd like to see the Bucs draft Mike Adams in the 2nd round (if available)... I'm also fine with Ryan Tannehill in the 2nd as well... and all the implications that may follow, and then Martin in the 3rd.  To me, the only terrible pick the Bucs can make is in fact Richardson.  While I don't have a problem with Reiff, Martin, Kalil or any OT, I'd rather the Bucs address needs with all of their picks.

Yea I agree on Claiborne, hes the pick if he's there. If we go need only like you want don't you think its CB, OLB, RB, S in that order? Unless you have us filling OLB, S in free agency. A QB in the second round is a waste IMO.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 ... 102
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: "The Trent Richardson Thread" « previous next »
:

Hide Tools Show Tools