Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Could the Bucs select Luke Kuechly with the fifth overall pick? « previous next »
Page: 1 2 3 4

Bucstopshere5

*
Starter
****
Posts : 324
Offline
#30 : April 21, 2012, 08:43:13 PM

I sure hope not at 5...I really am not infatuated with Kuechly. I can see him having an AJ Hawk type career....Not worth a top 10 pick IMO...He is a great coverage guy, but fails to bring the wood at the point of attack


Dolorous Jason

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 16632
Offline
#31 : April 21, 2012, 08:43:26 PM

I think some of you just want the chance to say " Luuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuke" at the stadium.  :P

What is your point? I was wrong? Ok. You win. I was wrong.

           

The Anti-Java

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 23094
Offline
#32 : April 21, 2012, 08:46:31 PM

I sure hope not at 5...I really am not infatuated with Kuechly. I can see him having an AJ Hawk type career....Not worth a top 10 pick IMO...He is a great coverage guy, but fails to bring the wood at the point of attack




Sounds familiar.


sig pic by chace1986

PewterReportMC....
\\\\\\\"Java, do you understand this a perfect example of why people beg me to suspend or ban you on a daily basis? Are you actually trying to make a point? Seriously what is the reason for even commenting. In fact why do you even bother coming to the boards? What happened to the intelligent poster from years ago?  A real shame. Like the Bucs yesterday, a wasted effort.\\\\\\\"

GMACsBlankey

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 2646
Offline
#33 : April 21, 2012, 08:50:31 PM

If we pass Kalil to take him, I will have lost what little hope signing Nicks and VJAX gave me in Dominik

Bucstopshere5

*
Starter
****
Posts : 324
Offline
#34 : April 21, 2012, 08:53:48 PM

You know im staring at previous drafts, if they dont think Richardson or Claiborne is gonna fall, trade up.....We missed Derrick Thomas, Barry Sanders and Deion Sanders because we sat there....We missed Calvin Johnson because we sat there....

Im tired of being that team :(


Madman

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 5594
Offline
#35 : April 21, 2012, 08:54:04 PM

Agree it would be real hard to pass on Kalil for Luke.

ryan24

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 10700
Offline
#36 : April 21, 2012, 09:42:32 PM

Kalil should be the pick. I'm not sure Penn is around all that long.

Happy and Peppy and Bursting with love.

nubcake

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 3909
Offline
#37 : April 21, 2012, 10:48:37 PM

"it doesn't matter where you pick them. It matters how they play"! Bill Walsh

But obviously one is going to take, say, a longsnapper or kicker in the first round, even if you somehow KNEW they'd be the best in the league.

Obviously the way they play matters more than where you pick a guy, but you have to use logic here too. There's a reason positions like QB are consistently drafted No 1 overall and top 5 when Guards and Centers are generally much more reliable, safe picks. Impact. And the same applies here...the impact of MLBs generally simply isn't as high as positions like QB, LT, WR, CB, etc, which is why Kuechly isn't top 5 in any mock. It's the same reason so many are hesitant to pick Richardson too, because no sane person is doubting the kid's skills or potential. They're doubting the maximum impact of a top RB vs a top LT or CB.

Obviously, if we were to take Kalil and he becomes a bust while Kuechly becomes a multiple Pro Bowler, people will question it. But it's not a logical argument because in hindsight, Brady also should have been drafted 1st overall rather than 6th round, but of course that would never have happened. There's really no logical argument for taking Kuechly 5th overall, regardless of who is on the board(but especially if Kalil is there). Trading down, sure, but not at No 5.


gone

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 9244
Offline
#38 : April 21, 2012, 11:01:59 PM

Screw "positional value". It really only applies for QB, LT (and LT is slowly devaluing) and in reverse at RB.  Outside of that you pick a guy you want and grab him.  Long snapper/kicker is a horrible example because you expect the to be available in the sixth or seventh or even UDFA.  The only reason to pass on a guy you want is if you are confident he will be there with your next pick.

SCLOBERNOCKER

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 2476
Offline
#39 : April 21, 2012, 11:24:06 PM

Only reason I dont want Richardson is because, despite how studly he is, the production increase from blount to TR isnt that great. You cant say the same for Claiborne replacing our holes at CB or Keek pushing Mason over to WILL

Pepsi

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 3019
Offline
#40 : April 21, 2012, 11:34:21 PM

If a trade down resulted in Kuechly I won't be that upset, but I like Hightower over Kuechly. This team is dying for a big beast nasty LB. Hightower is being underrated.



BucBalla85

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 18405
Offline
#41 : April 21, 2012, 11:36:35 PM

Only reason I dont want Richardson is because, despite how studly he is, the production increase from blount to TR isnt that great. You cant say the same for Claiborne replacing our holes at CB or Keek pushing Mason over to WILL

Exactly. Blounts carries in each of his seasons were pretty low. Imagine if our defense didn't suck and our offense were able to get leads. He'd be getting more runs and would be racking up a ton of yards. He may not get as many yards as Richardson but it wouldn't be that much less. He may not look as exciting but Blount is still fun to watch. Do you really want to spend the 5th pick on a guy who's gonna give a little more production and entertainment? I think defense would be more important. Hell even Blackmon would be more helpful.

The Anti-Java

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 23094
Offline
#42 : April 21, 2012, 11:41:40 PM

Only reason I dont want Richardson is because, despite how studly he is, the production increase from blount to TR isnt that great. You cant say the same for Claiborne replacing our holes at CB or Keek pushing Mason over to WILL

Exactly. Blounts carries in each of his seasons were pretty low. Imagine if our defense didn't suck and our offense were able to get leads. He'd be getting more runs and would be racking up a ton of yards. He may not get as many yards as Richardson but it wouldn't be that much less. He may not look as exciting but Blount is still fun to watch. Do you really want to spend the 5th pick on a guy who's gonna give a little more production and entertainment? I think defense would be more important. Hell even Blackmon would be more helpful.



Most teams use multiple RB's these days.


sig pic by chace1986

PewterReportMC....
\\\\\\\"Java, do you understand this a perfect example of why people beg me to suspend or ban you on a daily basis? Are you actually trying to make a point? Seriously what is the reason for even commenting. In fact why do you even bother coming to the boards? What happened to the intelligent poster from years ago?  A real shame. Like the Bucs yesterday, a wasted effort.\\\\\\\"

gone

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 9244
Offline
#43 : April 21, 2012, 11:45:53 PM

Only reason I dont want Richardson is because, despite how studly he is, the production increase from blount to TR isnt that great. You cant say the same for Claiborne replacing our holes at CB or Keek pushing Mason over to WILL

Exactly. Blounts carries in each of his seasons were pretty low. Imagine if our defense didn't suck and our offense were able to get leads. He'd be getting more runs and would be racking up a ton of yards. He may not get as many yards as Richardson but it wouldn't be that much less. He may not look as exciting but Blount is still fun to watch. Do you really want to spend the 5th pick on a guy who's gonna give a little more production and entertainment? I think defense would be more important. Hell even Blackmon would be more helpful.



Most teams use multiple RB's these days.

So then the Vikings should pick him?

Total and complete waste of a pick for us to grab TR.

BucBalla85

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 18405
Offline
#44 : April 21, 2012, 11:46:34 PM

Only reason I dont want Richardson is because, despite how studly he is, the production increase from blount to TR isnt that great. You cant say the same for Claiborne replacing our holes at CB or Keek pushing Mason over to WILL

Exactly. Blounts carries in each of his seasons were pretty low. Imagine if our defense didn't suck and our offense were able to get leads. He'd be getting more runs and would be racking up a ton of yards. He may not get as many yards as Richardson but it wouldn't be that much less. He may not look as exciting but Blount is still fun to watch. Do you really want to spend the 5th pick on a guy who's gonna give a little more production and entertainment? I think defense would be more important. Hell even Blackmon would be more helpful.



Most teams use multiple RB's these days.

Sure they do but they don't need to be a Richardson/Blount backfield. We just need somebody who is able to take over when Blount needs a break and can do a good job at it. That guy doesn't need to be the #5 pick in the draft.
Page: 1 2 3 4
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Could the Bucs select Luke Kuechly with the fifth overall pick? « previous next »
:

Hide Tools Show Tools