Jump to content

Al Bruce

New Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Al Bruce

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

362 profile views
  1. The Woody Paige article that this fan blogger cites is the same article that prompted three credentialed Broncos reporters to take to Twitter to refute the idea that Denver had called us. Also, as mentioned by others on this thread, the compensation laid out by Paige does not make any sense for Atlanta (we'd have fewer picks in 2021 after this trade down). I don't know whether Paige's source is bad, or if the other three reporters have inaccurate info, but my guess is the answer probably lies somewhere in the middle. Perhaps the Broncos called ATL and floated the offer that Paige la
  2. Whether we take Lance at 4 or not, we need to acquire a capable backup QB for 21' in the draft or free agency for the scenario you laid out. If Lance is forced to play early because of an injury then he will have to learn on the job like any other rookie.
  3. This would be ideal to me if Fields goes at 3. Could still get Lance at 6 as long as Cincy stays put. May even have a shot at Pitts if Miami takes Chase at 4 and Cincy goes Sewell.
  4. By the way, in Woody Paige's story the deal he speculated on was: DEN receives- pick 4, Atlanta's fourth-round pick and one of Atlanta's fifth-round picks ATL receives- pick 9, Denver's third-round pick and Denver's 2022 1st That would not be enough to move off of 4 in my opinion. We'd actually be trading down and coming away with FEWER picks (8 instead of 9) in 2021. Not worth it.
  5. Yeah I saw Paige story too, Albright's tweet was in response to that. Two other Broncos insiders (Troy Renck and Andrew Mason) corroborated Albright on twitter
  6. If there is a trade down, it's highly unlikely that it will happen before we are on the clock. Remember that after SF moved to 3, Schefter reported that SF had discussions with us but opted to deal with Miami because SF wanted to get as high as the could and because Miami was willing to deal right then. That tells me that we want to see who goes in front of us before we commit to moving down.
  7. Firtst of, there are definitely teams who are good at drafting (Ravens and Steelers for example). If you trust your evaluation process, there is no need to accumulate extra picks solely for the purpose of trying to increase your odds of landing good players. If you opt move down from 4, it needs to be because the trade offer is so overwhelming that the package justifies passing up the chance to take the player at the top of our board at 4, even if we take the leap and assume that particular player becomes a star. Also, Duron Harmon is not a nobody at S.
  8. Right, even if Warner's assessment is accurate, ATL would not need Lance to start right away. It's a different risk assessement for ATL than you what you would have for a team who needs him to be "the guy" from day 1.
  9. Yes, despite all of the arguing on here over what we think should happen at 4, we're going to get on board with whatever they do because we are fans. I think a lot of these media mock drafts will end up being off (as usual) and Surtain/Horn will both be gone by 15. The realistic scenario I see for a trade down is if Fields goes #3 to SF, we may be able to trade down with Miami or Detroit. Both teams seem to be targeting pass catchers, and they may want to get in front of Cincy. We could move back to 6 or 7 and still potentially get Pitts or Lance along with picking up another day 2 pic
  10. Horn probably won't be there at 15, but I agree that a decent edge prospect will be there at 35. I still would not trade all the way back to 15 if I was TF though. Future 1's from the Pats will be picks in 20's, not that much value. Also, if Fields is there at 4 (I bet he goes 3 to SF), we are probably taking him.
  11. We will get the truth in less than two weeks now. I was never buying the Mac Jones talk, but let's see how many "Trey Lance is a lock at 3" stories come out after he works out again on Monday...
  12. Two very good signings at this point in free agency. I won't play the "this is a sign that we are drafting _____ " game, but these moves coupled with the previous FA additions give us flexibility to seek to draft good football players as opposed to being so fixated on particular positions.
  13. Meh, this is another piece of historical draft that is flawed when put in the right context. You can pull out examples like this all you want, but whatever you do in the draft (trade up, stay put or trade down) boils down to picking the right guys. Looking only at the past 5 drafts, Jordan Love should be excluded because we don't know what he is yet. He was not drafted to be a "day 1" starter, so it's unknown whether he is a bust or not. It's also worth noting that Lamar Jackson was the 5th QB drafted in 2018 and he won an MVP. Again, you have to pick the right guys. In 2017, Cleve
  • Create New...