FalconsIn2020

Patriots Sign Veldeheer: Kaleb was their guy

154 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

31 minutes ago, Falconsin2012 said:

Patriots just signed OT  Veldeheer for 5.8 million.  This pretty much confirms McGary was their guy at 32

Even if he wasn't, the Falcons predicted a run on OTs and got their guy ahead of the run. That part is a fact. It's exactly how round 2 went down. Run on CBs and OTs before pick 45.

If you have a guy you want, you go get him.

Just like with Lindstrom. Falcons 'may' have gone elsewhere had Wilkins or Bush fell to 14, but they weren't going to trade up in round 1. Instead, they optimized according to how the board was falling vs runs on positions. Big board shook out as Lindstrom; after the run on DL left it between him or trading down at 14 more than likely.

Patriots moves don't have to validate the Falcons. lol

Edited by Ergo Proxy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What i think this showsis how much teams that wins value O-lineman..... I know their plans are for Wynn to win the LT spot but they want to make sure Brady is protected......

 

They draft a 1st round Tackle last year and this year they draft a Guard and Tackle in the 3rd and 4th round.

 

Injurys happen.. Have to make sure you have depth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ergo Proxy said:

Even if he wasn't, the Falcons predicted a run on OTs and got their guy ahead of the run. If you have a guy you want, you go get him.

Just like with Lindstrom. Falcons 'may' have gone elsewhere had Wilkins or Bush fell to 14, but they weren't going to trade up in round 1. Instead, they optimized according to how the board was falling vs runs on positions. Big board shook out as Lindstrom; after the run on DL left it between him or trading down at 14 more than likely.

Patriots moves don't have to validate the Falcons. lol

Yeah, I believe Dimitroff was vindicated on Lindstrom, McGary and Cominsky picks in that Lindstrom wouldn’t have been there with trade back out of top 20, McGary may or may not have made it past Pats but he wasn’t making it to #45 and that Cominsky wasn’t gonna be available past Cowboys when Dimitroff jumped them.

TD has good intel fo sho.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

6 minutes ago, atljbo said:

What i think this showsis how much teams that wins value O-lineman..... I know their plans are for Wynn to win the LT spot but they want to make sure Brady is protected......

 

They draft a 1st round Tackle last year and this year they draft a Guard and Tackle in the 3rd and 4th round.

 

Injurys happen.. Have to make sure you have depth

And, if you aren't getting a potential STUD at another position; such as a defender or franchise QB, etc...well you best get a winning LOS...

OL that are close to NFL ready are scarce. If you want to win now and have a roster close to a SB that needs OL among your highest priorities, then do what the Falcons did.

Simple. Whether it works out or not, it makes sense if you understand the big picture of OL and NFL these days.

Edited by Ergo Proxy
g-dawg and Jumpin Jehosaphat like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Ergo Proxy said:

Patriots moves don't have to validate the Falcons. lol

Correct.....However it nice to imagine jumping the Saints, Cowboys and Pats in that order whenever possible in a draft.

On a side note:

Off season: Fix OL with two HUGE veteran OGs. inside zone coming with Ollison

Then draft two OLmen to protect WR2 for the remainder of his career.

Edit: I was thinking Warner Robins HS.........MR2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, g-dawg said:

Yeah, I believe Dimitroff was vindicated on Lindstrom, McGary and Cominsky picks in that Lindstrom wouldn’t have been there with trade back out of top 20, McGary may or may not have made it past Pats but he wasn’t making it to #45 and that Cominsky wasn’t gonna be available past Cowboys when Dimitroff jumped them.

TD has good intel fo sho.

Exactly!

And the thing is, it's hard to get a trade down partner from 14 after the creme of the crop were gone among elite defenders other than maybe...Sweat or Burns on DL? Even still, both weren't gone at ATL and Haskins was going to WAS right after ATL. Try to trade for cheaper with CAR than trade with ATL.

Simple. We stuck to our plan and weren't going to sacrifice our close SB roster over the OL failing again; which it was one of the top 3 reasons we lost both the past 2 years. Freeman not covering for the OL stepping back in 2017; mainly once Levitre was injured, and RS regressing further in 2018 brought this all to a head.

OL was going to be fixed and we were not willing to trade up to secure a guy pick 6-12 etc for someone we wanted more than said OL.

Does picking Greedy at 14 if we likewise couldn't trade down look any better? Etc?

One might argue Lawrence or a DE. I say Falcons have clearly put off the DL and front 7 until 2020 roster forming, giving VB one last chance to earn a keep and seeing what Takk/Senat/Davison become before investing the 14th overall into another DL.

OL was overdue, we all knew it couldn't fall short just from a few FA signings; regardless of seeming cost, as the cap will be dealt with within 2 years on OL front.

Meanwhile, DQ gets a full season with this front 7....the Defense and really hones in on who to keep and where to draft come next offseason.

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Ergo Proxy said:

OL that are close to NFL ready are scarce. If you want to win now and have a roster close to a SB that needs OL among your highest priorities, then do what the Falcons did.

LOL! And they left no doubt about their off season intentions. I just love it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I think I see @Falconsin2012's point tho, even if a degree of speculation.

Patriots just had to sign a FA OT after the draft for a pricey 1 year cap hit; read short-term fix for missing on OT this draft.

This was after skipping on the other OTs available at 32...showing why maybe McGary was a closer year 1 RT than the rest of the crop and why Falcons had to move up if they DEFINITELY wanted the best OT possible on their board by 45. 

It just didn't line up with fans thinking it should've been Ford or Taylor...of course this was after assuming it would be for CB,etc. :tiphat:

Edited by Ergo Proxy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Ergo Proxy said:

This was after skipping on the other OTs available at 32...showing why maybe McGary was a closer year 1 RT than the rest of the crop and why Falcons had to move up if they DEFINITELY wanted the best OT possible on their board by 45. 

Yes. I like your analysis.:tiphat:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was completely baffled by the signing of two guards then the drafting of two OL in round 1. Especially fearing they both sounded like guards. However, the more I've seen about this draft class the more I like it. The Falcons got nasty on the O-line. They added corner depth and got a guy for the DL I think they can mold into a great player who can play DE vs run and move inside on pass downs. A brusing RB and a return guy. All in all I'd say that's a heck of a draft.

I can't knock the trade ups. One thing is for certain they go and get their guy. Win or lose, they are doing it their way. I'd rather they get who they want that's a fit as opposed to improvise and settle.

Share this post


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

And, if you aren't getting a potential STUD at another position; such as a defender or franchise QB, etc...well you best get a winning LOS...

OL that are close to NFL ready are scarce. If you want to win now and have a roster close to a SB that needs OL among your highest priorities, then do what the Falcons did.

Simple. Whether it works out or not, it makes sense if you understand the big picture of OL and NFL these days.

I understand things fairly well. But drafting  an OG at pick 14 shortly after throwing what little available cap space they had at two FA starting caliber OG’s  during offseason is subject to being questioned as overkill. Especially for a team that finished near bottom of league in defense.

For everyone’s (including DQ/TD’s) sake, sure hope it works out. It’s gonna be a fascinating year to see how it all plays out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

1 hour ago, Vandy said:

I understand things fairly well. But drafting  an OG at pick 14 shortly after throwing what little available cap space they had at two FA starting caliber OG’s  during offseason is subject to being questioned as overkill. Especially for a team that finished near bottom of league in defense.

For everyone’s (including DQ/TD’s) sake, sure hope it works out. It’s gonna be a fascinating year to see how it all plays out.

Here’s the thing...Lindstrom is a long-term interior OL solution. We valued him over the available players at 14. It was pretty much go OG or DL.

Our FA moves were short term at best in Carpenter; age (Brown obv younger but same 2 year out style deal), and still left us depth depleted pre-draft with injured Fusco and final year Wes...one is now gone.

The same depth problem that derailed our offense from a player standpoint ending 2017 and during 2018.

OG situation and RT play.

Cant fix everything in 1 offseason. Not when you need a complete overturn at key positions. You can view GJ and VB as bigger cap investments anyway; albeit for 1 year as of this post. :tiphat: Vs 2 years for the OGs...one of which or both could be starters in 2021 still if Mack is gone and Lindstrom becomes the C. That too is a possibility but it frees up 2020 to address the defense more wholesale.

Besides, they did make short term moves for the defense as well as got healthier for 2019. Defense is not short on talent.

The unseen is coaching. DQ being the DC much like Sark getting replaced by a more proven commodity.

Edited by Ergo Proxy

Share this post


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

Here’s the thing...Lindstrom is a long-term interior OL solution. We valued him over the available players at 14. It was pretty much go OG or DL.

Our FA moves were short term at best in Carpenter; age (Brown obv younger but same 2 year out style deal), and still left us depth depleted pre-draft with injured Fusco and final year Wes...one is now gone.

The same depth problem that derailed our offense from a player standpoint ending 2017 and during 2018.

OG situation and RT play.

Cant fix everything in 1 offseason. Not when you need a complete overturn at key positions. You can view GJ and VB as bigger cap investments anyway; albeit for 1 year as of this post. :tiphat: Vs 2 years for the OGs...one of which or both could be starters in 2021 still if Mack is gone and Lindstrom becomes the C. That too is a possibility but it frees up 2020 to address the defense more wholesale.

Besides, they did make short term moves for the defense as well as got healthier for 2019. Defense is not short on talent.

The unseen is coaching. DQ being the DC much like Sark getting replaced by a more proven commodity.

Like I said...We hope. 

ATLFalcons11 and FalconsIn2020 like this

Share this post


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

I understand things fairly well. But drafting  an OG at pick 14 shortly after throwing what little available cap space they had at two FA starting caliber OG’s  during offseason is subject to being questioned as overkill. Especially for a team that finished near bottom of league in defense.

For everyone’s (including DQ/TD’s) sake, sure hope it works out. It’s gonna be a fascinating year to see how it all plays out.

Disagree.  Up until the draft, Falcons were in mostly the same offseason pattern as every year adding the rather undistinguished vets on OL.  Alex Mack was exception.

Up until the draft, we were on the same crappy pattern on the offensive line. Carpenter & Brown are nice pieces to an OL but don’t believe they are building blocks - we needed YOUNG talent on OL. Further, I don’t mind having a couple of capable backups making a few mil on the bench.  In a 16 game season we will need one, if not both of them.

Back to defense, Adding Clayborn and Davison gives Falcons a deep rotation on the DL

DT - Grady, Davison, Senat, Crawford, Hageman, Cominsky 

DE - Beasley, Takk, Clayborn, Means, Odom 

Nickel - Grady, Crawford, Takk, Beasley, Clayborn 

While there isn’t a lot of star power there, talent is there and if DQ is the defensive mind we believe, he has enough talent there to scheme a passrush.  Adding Davison and an improved Senat will help run stuffing.

Good plan

Good offseason.

Share this post


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

Like I said...We hope. 

OK, on the flip side let’s say they drafted Dexter Lawrence at 14...and then we have an overcrowded DT situation instead of OG; which isn’t actually given our history.

Meanwhile, Wes is the only backup we know of behind Carpenter and Brown. Fusco still would be gone seeing it’s medical.

And, if it’s for Brian Burns we basically are playing the VB replacement but also not a full time; as in non base DE retry? We had to hold onto VB as a replacement wasn’t gonna be a long-term signing. That likely pushed DE further down the list for a year.

Just seems like we gotta hope they would get one of the Lines 100% right this year via 1st round.

We’ve been investing into the DL and DQ needs to make it work. Doesn’t even need to be elite with our offense built team. Had to fix the OL or that’s just working against your strengths. Like hiring an experienced NFL OC.

Pass rush depth and truly revamped OL are tough jobs for a single offseason. I think we are close at minimum from the moves and coaching needs to do it’s part now. The setup is there.

g-dawg likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, g-dawg said:

Disagree.  Up until the draft, Falcons were in mostly the same offseason pattern as every year adding the rather undistinguished vets on OL.  Alex Mack was exception.

Up until the draft, we were on the same crappy pattern on the offensive line. Carpenter & Brown are nice pieces to an OL but don’t believe they are building blocks - we needed YOUNG talent on OL. Further, I don’t mind having a couple of capable backups making a few mil on the bench.  In a 16 game season we will need one, if not both of them.

Back to defense, Adding Clayborn and Davison gives Falcons a deep rotation on the DL

DT - Grady, Davison, Senat, Crawford, Hageman, Cominsky 

DE - Beasley, Takk, Clayborn, Means, Odom 

Nickel - Grady, Crawford, Takk, Beasley, Clayborn 

While there isn’t a lot of star power there, talent is there and if DQ is the defensive mind we believe, he has enough talent there to scheme a passrush.  Adding Davison and an improved Senat will help run stuffing.

Good plan

Good offseason.

Truth and they may not be done yet. Who knows. According to what pops up.

g-dawg likes this

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