Matt Ryan, Matt Ryan, Matt Ryan

They're supposed to be interested in any OT they can get their hands on and, I assume, Albert.

 

I guess that means I'm opposed to dealing with them, unless the only OT left at 13 is Cherilus.

 

Glazer often knows his shit, and that jibes with everything i think i know about hurfox.

 

I think a big part of a move down is simply that we expect both the big OTs will be there. I think that Otah is, in fact, a little big for their wants, but they'd take him. I have to believe that they'd be willing to go down to 17-19 simply to get the value instead of picking from amongst the OTs. The part that'll force their hand is whether they want the end more, whether the end is there at all, and/or whether one of the three expected OTs doesn't make it.

I'm leaving Albert out of the equation, partly out of denial that he could be the pick, and partly because I just don't want him to be considered.




Trading up just doesn't look like something they'd do. I could see them trading up to get Peppers if they had needed to do so. I couldn't see them trading up for Ryan, but Ellis possibly. Clady making it to 10, possibly.

 

Nightmare scenario:So what happens if the consensus ends and tackles are gone? Do we reach for Calais, take Kenny Phillips, go for a RB like Felix Jones, DT?

 

You mean like last season when we traded down to take a safety only to see them all go between our original pick and the one we traded down to? Obviously Beason turned out to be a nice consolation prize, but I think we're too eager to move down, especially considering how awful Hurney is with picks after the first.

 

Exactly.

 

Balmer makes some sense there. I don't feel like Merling or Campbell make sense at 13, but they're better value around 20 (honestly, I'm leaning toward just wanting a situational rusher in 3). If all 3 OT in that situation did go, that's 6 in the first 20 picks, which is unheard of, but if not, there's still ample room to find a good pick.

Still feel like the team would've easily taken Beason at 13 last year.

 

Nope. That's the team's excuse after the run on safeties, but it's highly unlikely. We traded down and all the safeties were gone.

 

There were pre-draft rumblings about Beason.

At any rate, we know there were roughly five players that were all there that they expected to have some choice at their new spot. They did well with it. We don't know, of course, but it's worth noting they could've dangled their safety issue as a carrot to get a run going to ensure they got their guy at a spot other than safety. I think it's safe to say I don't really expect safety to be that big a stress today either.