g-dawg

Falcoholic/Peter King: Falcons Tried to Trade Up to #10 but were outbid

99 posts in this topic

49 minutes ago, 4dabirds said:

I think this draft class will pivot the Falcons toward more success if not his year then next. I want a monster defense just like anyone else, but having an offense that can stay on the field longer, and keep the defense fresher throughout the course of a game is probably the best course of action. I think the defense will be much improved from what we saw last year with the addition of DQ calling the shots, and with the additions made to the DL. If we can just avoid major injuries, then we'll be in the playoffs.

I agree.  While Quinn doesn’t have many elite tools to work with - he does have a bunch of players - when put to their best use - can yield results.

DQ is famous for saying “We look at what a player CAN DO and try to feature him in that way.”

I see DQ having a plan for Vic, a plan for Takk, a plan for Crawford, a plan for Clayborn, a plan for Cominskey, etc, etc.

4dabirds likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, 4dabirds said:

I think this draft class will pivot the Falcons toward more success if not his year then next. I want a monster defense just like anyone else, but having an offense that can stay on the field longer, and keep the defense fresher throughout the course of a game is probably the best course of action. I think the defense will be much improved from what we saw last year with the addition of DQ calling the shots, and with the additions made to the DL. If we can just avoid major injuries, then we'll be in the playoffs.

I think this class will pivot towards success NEXT year.  Just as we went 2 FA OL and doubled down on OL in the draft, I think that will be the mold next year for the Dline.

We have very little talent on the D line and next year a number of guys are on expiring contracts. This time next year we will be looking at our new Oline and new Dline and they will be complete overhauls from 2018.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, g-dawg said:

Wilkins

McGary

Sheffield

Comminsky

Gaillard

The Washington DB

Qadre Ellison(later)

 

not that different.   Sub Gaillard late for Lindstrom early

If we trade up for Wilkins...I don’t think we’d have the ammo to get McGary...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
 
 
 
3
1 hour ago, FalconBlood said:

People were acting like we were lying. TD and Quinn said in post draft they made calls about moving up but the price was not right. I am glad we didn’t give up a 2nd and next years 3rd to move up. Getting two 1st round OL excites me. We have never invested in Matts safety and opening running lanes quite like this offseason during Matts career with us. TD and Quinn sounded really excited to add Davison, Clayborn, Cominsky and even Hageman, in the post draft interview, to Jarrett, Beasley, McKinley, Means, Senat, and Crawford. Saying we had lots of talented guys to rotate on our defensive line. I think Davison is very underrated by the board. I think Clayborn is a really nice reunion as well. Our front office seemed to have decided that our DL had improved, but that our offense could benefit MORE from the OL players on the board, than our defense could by the defensive players on the board, with or free agents considered. Like I said, Davison is still young, Senat is young, both likely have not seen their best football but have already shown out. Hageman is a fun wildcard. Crawford had a breakout year. Jarrett is very good. Our DT spot may be a strength this year. Our DEs, adding Clayborn back really strengthens the group. And I am excited to see Means taking over Reeds snaps. That is all. :P

Pretty sure we had one of the top 10 or top 5 most expensive lines the last couple of years. No matter, this myth that we have not spent resources on our line has been put to sleep for good thanks to this draft.

ShadyRef likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

1 hour ago, Dr Long Shot said:

Pretty sure we had one of the top 10 or top 5 most expensive lines the last couple of years. No matter, this myth that we have not spent resources on our line has been put to sleep for good thanks to this draft.

“We have never invested in Matts safety and opening running lanes quite like this offseason during Matts career with us.”

How did this quote mean “we have not spent resources on our line”? Lol.

I am right. We have never invested in our offensive line during Matts career QUITE LIKE THIS. 2 1st round picks. Multiple starter worthy OL depth signed or resigned in free agency. To add to our best pieces in Matthews and Mack.

I guess you can almost always find the conclusion you’re looking for, doesn’t matter whats actually said.

Edited by FalconBlood
vel and Drew4719 like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, TheDirtyWordII said:

If we trade up for Wilkins...I don’t think we’d have the ammo to get McGary...

yeah, some one pointed that out already and I agreed.  I bet we would have offered our 2nd rounder this year and maybe a 4th this year and next year's 3rd though.   That would have meant we would have had Wilkins and McGary and not another pick until the back of the 4th round.

#1-012) (f/ Green Bay) - Christian Wilkins  (give up #3-079)

#1-014) traded to Packers

#1-031) (f/ Rams) - Kaleb McGary (give up #2-045, #4-117 and 2020 3rd rounder)

#2-045) traded to Rams

#3-079) traded to Packers

#4-117) traded to Rams

#4-137) Cornerback  (Sheffield or Fuller)

#5-152)  Defensive End / Defensive Tackle (probably lose Cominsky and settle for someone lesser)

#6-186) Running Back (probably could still get Ollison here)

#7-230) KR/PR - either WR or RB (probably still get Marcus Green here)

 

2020 3rd rounder - Traded to Rams

 

I like our current haul better than above.

vitaman likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, g-dawg said:

Wilkins

McGary

Sheffield

Comminsky

Gaillard

The Washington DB

Qadre Ellison(later)

 

not that different.   Sub Gaillard late for Lindstrom early

Assuming Lindstrom was around at the end of round 1, he could theoretically have been the trade up target instead of McClod or whatever his name is...then taken an OT later if TD still wanted one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The other thing to keep in mind here is that TD said that the Rams called us about that swap. The same could have been true of Denver. We were outbid according to King, whom I trust completely. He doesn't say that we made a serious offer, though. We could have suggested 50 cents on the dollar when they called us, and they were still considering it until they found somebody more serious. 

I do think it was for Wilkins, though. Quinn, when asked about him in the press conference, had a look that suggests that he'd go to war with that kid any day. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, g-dawg said:

Wilkins

McGary

Sheffield

Comminsky

Gaillard

The Washington DB

Qadre Ellison(later)

 

not that different.   Sub Gaillard late for Lindstrom early

It was mentioned earlier the trade up would affect that.

I do think this is very close to what our draft would have looked like had Wilkins just dropped to us.  Which is much closer to what most of us predicted (I had DT, OL, DE, CB as the first four as did several others)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FalconBlood said:

“We have never invested in Matts safety and opening running lanes quite like this offseason during Matts career with us.”

How did this quote mean “we have not spent resources on our line”? Lol.

I am right. We have never invested in our offensive line during Matts career QUITE LIKE THIS. 2 1st round picks. Multiple starter worthy OL depth signed or resigned in free agency. To add to our best pieces in Matthews and Mack.

I guess you can almost always find the conclusion you’re looking for, doesn’t matter whats actually said.

This is real, and why it throws/threw a lot of us off. We are so used to "accepting" Carpenter, Brown, and Sambrailo as "upgrades" that we went with it. Patchwork OL is par for the course. For them to turn around and drop two firsts on more OL?! That's not only out of the norm for the Falcons, it's a serious investment on top of the ~$25MM we guaranteed to the FA signings. This has never happened. I mean we've grown accustomed to a mid round guy with "upside" but not legit stud picks and money spent. No games were played nor expenses spared. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Draftnut57 said:

Wilkins was my top player I wanted for us the get ,, But in reallity .,,   and in the long run,, what happened may be the very best thing that could have happened.. WE must protect Matt Ryan.!! Or we will fail... So in the end ,, I'm now kind of glad things ended up like they did.. Best for the team.

I still think that:

It's harder to find a player like Dexter Lawrence, than it is to find an OG like Lindstrom.  I think we could have taken a tradeback (if one was available) and still gotten Lindstrom.  Lawrence went just three picks after ours.....

….and I really wanted Cody Ford in the second.  That tradeup (if possible) would have cost a 4th and gotten us a player capable of playing OG or RT.

I know, a lot of 'ifs' here. Good news is, the Falcons have finally invested some real draft capital in our O line, and come away with two projected starters.  Lets hope our D is good enough to get off the field so our offense can operate....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, g-dawg said:

Wilkins

McGary

Sheffield

Comminsky

Gaillard

The Washington DB

Qadre Ellison(later)

 

not that different.   Sub Gaillard late for Lindstrom early

How do we have all those picks after moving up for Wilkins? How do we trade up for McGary?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's what we need to understand, and some have already hinted at it indirectly- We changed our MO this offseason and for the right BIG PICTURE reasons. Our offense was 3 OL short(and maybe a RB) of having no starting or depth weak links. We had a chance to field a top 3, and complete offense, including depth.

IMO The final piece on one side of the ball has extra value above and beyond the individual player's production. It eliminates any obvious way for a team to counter your strengths. "Completing" the offense could literally help our defense(in terms of ppg allowed, sacks, turnovers, overall run defense) as much as a first round DT. The Colts didn't need a great run defense when they were scoring at will and their opponents were playing catch up. Their offense made the opponent one dimensional and that is as valuable as having one more good player on D.

Kyle's first season as OC was undone by the lack of a remotely passable Center. Even the drops could have been lessened if the snap and protections were smooth and Ryan was a hair more accurate and on time. For that season, a quality center would have been more valuable to our team than a quality DE. The pass rusher wouldn't have fixed our offense, and would have improved but not transformed our defense.

Wen you factor in that we will live and die based on the health of our $150mil qb, this year and in the future... I just believe that for this team a couple starting OL we're more valuable than DL. (And I value DL more than OL in a vacuum that doesn't consider team make up).

Last point- Kyle could outsmart opponents and cover up weaknesses on the OL. But he's gone now, and DK needs that OL talent to deliver results.

 

ATLskinjob and vel like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Cole World said:

If they wanted Wilkins they could've had him. Miami was collecting picks and playing for next year.

I think it was for Bush. The 10th spot was right in front of the Bengals who needed a LB after losing Burfict this offseason.

Losing Jones last season really hurt our defense. Having someone like Bush would have helped.

You’re right, except they traded for Rosen.  Dolphins are no longer Tanking For Tua 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, g-dawg said:

Quinn seemed to indicate they wanted Cominskey to “keep eating” to bulk up another 10-15 lbs to get to 295-300.

Quinn wants Cominskey to play inside.

Correct, he's already 285, and DQ said "he's one good dinner away from 290"  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, birdz4i said:

 

i don't know. if we moved up for wilkins, i doubt we have mcgary since we moved up for him. 

He quoted someonecwho asked what our draft would look like had Wilkins feol to 14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see no way the Falcons would have been interested in Rashan Gary. The two 1st round players the Falcons did draft were both noted as nasty players who play really hard. If that is what they were looking for, I do not at all believe they would have been interested in a player who seems to be partially squandering his physical talent in Gary. 

vel likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, rudy said:

It's sad to see that we just missed out on a chance to get an elite defensive player on a year when talent is so stacked on the defensive side.

We won't know for sure until it plays out but wouldn't you want to give up just a bit more to land such a player?

1st, 2nd and 3rd?   or even less since we're moving up from #14

 

All the more reason why we needed to bulk up the oline. Defensive linemen are bigger and better. We need a solid line to protect Matt. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way the league has evolved now, once a team has a rockstar OG or OT, rarely, if ever, does that team let him reach FA.  It’s getting harder and harder to secure the services of a valuable veteran OL piece.  Mack was an anomaly and an absolute gift for us.  Teams have put such a value on their current OL, that u have to build your OL through the draft, long term, and hope to sign short term mediocre patchwork where needed.

i think it’s just the way of the OL landscape going forward, and our FO has come to that realization earlier than other teams, by their brilliant actions this draft.

vel and ATLskinjob like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Maltese Falcon said:

The way the league has evolved now, once a team has a rockstar OG or OT, rarely, if ever, does that team let him reach FA.  It’s getting harder and harder to secure the services of a valuable veteran OL piece.  Mack was an anomaly and an absolute gift for us.  Teams have put such a value on their current OL, that u have to build your OL through the draft, long term, and hope to sign short term mediocre patchwork where needed.

i think it’s just the way of the OL landscape going forward, and our FO has come to that realization earlier than other teams, by their brilliant actions this draft.

Also, this was the best time to have two guys on 5 year rookie deals. That runs the course of the remainder of Jake's contract. Mack will be gone. We'll have cheap labor with one big contract on the OL and potentially all homegrown talent. 

Like you said, it's gotten very hard to find OL talent that can play in the NFL and play early. It's almost like if fans just watched other teams around the league, they'd understand that. A proven scrub like Matt Kalil got $55MM because of this drought of capable OL. Look at the Vikings OL from last year. Single handedly ruined their playoff bid. 

The Falcons just drafted two OL with a combined ~90 games worth of starting experience. These guys have been starting along their respective OLs since we hired DQ. Think about that. Cody Ford started 14 games at RT, 21 games overall. Compare that to McGary who started 46 games, all at RT. 

ATLskinjob and Maltese Falcon like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, vel said:

This is real, and why it throws/threw a lot of us off. We are so used to "accepting" Carpenter, Brown, and Sambrailo as "upgrades" that we went with it. Patchwork OL is par for the course. For them to turn around and drop two firsts on more OL?! That's not only out of the norm for the Falcons, it's a serious investment on top of the ~$25MM we guaranteed to the FA signings. This has never happened. I mean we've grown accustomed to a mid round guy with "upside" but not legit stud picks and money spent. No games were played nor expenses spared. 

It won’t be good enough for some.

I can see it now the first signs of trouble the pitch forks will be out.

First round pick and all will be expected to hit the ground running.No matter that olineman coming out for the most part struggle.

Good prospects I had a look at last year Jake Conklin and Will Hernandez did.

So when they say we have 10 year starters and have invested I’m very guarded on my opinion on that because the struggle is real for these rooks coming out in the position we drafted at.

vel likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Pacific_Falcon said:

Assuming Lindstrom was around at the end of round 1, he could theoretically have been the trade up target instead of McClod or whatever his name is...then taken an OT later if TD still wanted one.

I don't believe Lindstrom was getting past Minnesota (who took Bradbury).   Anyone could watch  both those guys and see that Lindstrom was better.

vitaman and vel like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, kiwifalcon said:

It won’t be good enough for some.

I can see it now the first signs of trouble the pitch forks will be out.

First round pick and all will be expected to hit the ground running.No matter that olineman coming out for the most part struggle.

Good prospects I had a look at last year Jake Conklin and Will Hernandez did.

So when they say we have 10 year starters and have invested I’m very guarded on my opinion on that because the struggle is real for these rooks coming out in the position we drafted at.

I agree but they've got so much more experience than usual rookies. Most rookies haven't been starting since their freshman year. Both Lindstrom and McGary have. That helps them more than most. We've seen rookie OL come in and hit the ground running. It's not unheard of. Like you said, Conklin did. Ramczyk was an All Pro rookie. McGlinchey was good for SF. HeIl, Jake did until he got his ankle rolled up on. 

This reminds me of when we took Tru and Alford and people were nervous about starting two rookie CBs at "one of the hardest positions to translate" and they both hit the ground running. There will be a speed adjustment, but I don't foresee that taking a full season. Having 5 preseason games helps a ton. I think McGary beats Sambrailo out the gate and we put some training wheels on early vs MIN and PHI, if not through the HOU game week five then let him roll. If they're going to play him this year, he needs to get real game action well before going to NO week 10. That gives him a bye week to settle down, lick his wounds, watch his losses and bounce back. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now