Spts1 Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 Nobody is right or wrong. Here is my OPINION on what I would do as Falcons GM this off season. I like the coaching moves on defense that have been made. My overall philosophy is stacking talent. As I look at the roster, I feel the offense is good to go. I do want to add another starting offensive guard which I would acquire through free agency. The first move is to announce that Ridder is the starting qb. Logan Woodside is my backup. My draft priority is defense. Using a mock simulator based on value, I want to be around the middle of the first round so that I can pick up another low first, high second or future 1st. My free agent priority is getting guard Nate Davis from Tennessee. Yeah, Tennessee doesn't want to let him go but the Falcons are sitting pretty at $56 million cap space. Below is based on a first round and second round simulation: (this is a draft simulation, obviously the Bears don't have the pick at 12 currently). This simulation is based on parameters the Falcons should attempt in my opinion. Two firsts from approximately the middle of the 1st round to the bottom of the 1st round, high second. The rest of my draft after the 3 picks below would concentrate on finding another safety, another linebacker, and another defensive tackle. My first offer I consider is trading the Falcon's 8th pick for Chicago's 12th pick, 33rd pick and their 2024 5th round pick. The target here is Alabama's Brian Branch. Nielsen wants a very versatile defense and Branch is the most versatile defensive back in the draft and is VERY physical. Think Damontae Kazee but bigger and faster. Bama played him everywhere except defensive tackle last season. He can play both safeties, corner, nickel, linebacker and they played him at defensive end depending on the scheme. He is a MUST GET for a Falcons defense needing versatility and physicality. He is selected at 12. My pick at 33 (slipped out of the first which can happen) is Iowa State defensive end Will McDonald. Again, versatility is the key here. He can play with his hand in the dirt, but Nielsen will use him at linebacker and end, depending on the scheme being run. His speed and height are key here. Its not always about getting the sack. Making the qb get the ball out quick and being able to knock down passes are key elements of defensive end play also. This pick is not about getting a pure pass rusher. Its about getting someone who can disrupt. McDonald has a high motor and would help in that regard. Round 2, pick 45. the Falcons own this pick. I'm going with linebacker Trenton Simpson. Again, versatility. He played inside and outside linebacker at Clemson. You can put him at strong safety depending on the scheme being deployed. Good speed and size. Would be a very good complement beside Rashaan Evans in the Falcons linebacker corps. Nate Davis is my major free agent signing. Devasting at the point of attack AND can get to the second level. 1989Fan, falconzfan4ever, Hokies&Falcons and 1 other 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
falconzfan4ever Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 My ideal offseason would be: FA- Sign Dalvin Tomlinson at NT, Taylor Rapp at FS (move Grant to SS), Nate Davis at LG. First 2 rounds- Christian Gonzalez/Witherspoon at CB and Tuli at DE. If a team is desperate to jump the Panthers for a QB I'd gladly take the haul. With remaining resources get a LB, WR2 and RB2 (I'd prefer to use CP as more of a wildcard in the passing game to preserve him for the full season rather than wear him down in the first half) Herr Doktor, Falcons_Frenzy and Spts1 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spts1 Posted February 9 Author Share Posted February 9 9 minutes ago, falconzfan4ever said: My ideal offseason would be: FA- Sign Dalvin Tomlinson at NT, Taylor Rapp at FS (move Grant to SS), Nate Davis at LG. First 2 rounds- Christian Gonzalez/Witherspoon at CB and Tuli at DE. If a team is desperate to jump the Panthers for a QB I'd gladly take the haul. With remaining resources get a LB, WR2 and RB2 (I'd prefer to use CP as more of a wildcard in the passing game to preserve him for the full season rather than wear him down in the first half) Two things stick out here. First, I like the choices. What sticks out to me is the Falcons have enough cap space to sign both Davis and Rapp. I wanted to hang on to some space to see how the season would play out, but I like what I saw of Rapp after doing a quick cursory look at his video. Initially, he looks like he would solve two problems for the Falcons. They instantly would have depth and how is it that Richie Grant had more tackles than Jaylinn Hawkins? Rapp and Grant is a formidable combo. I like your choice there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
falconzfan4ever Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 4 minutes ago, Spts1 said: Two things stick out here. First, I like the choices. What sticks out to me is the Falcons have enough cap space to sign both Davis and Rapp. I wanted to hang on to some space to see how the season would play out, but I like what I saw of Rapp after doing a quick cursory look at his video. Initially, he looks like he would solve two problems for the Falcons. They instantly would have depth and how is it that Richie Grant had more tackles than Jaylinn Hawkins? Rapp and Grant is a formidable combo. I like your choice there. I like the way you targeted the DL and Secondary. I structured my choices slightly differently in a way that allows us to double dip at both groups. Having said that, I'd be really happy if our offseason went how you laid it out as well. Spts1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ovie_Lover Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 Why would chicago make this trade? Diesel_Bird, ATLskinjob and Vandy 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonDaLuvMaker Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Ovie_Lover said: Why would chicago make this trade? Exactly. That's one reason why I don't like mocks/offseason draft plans that have a bunch of trades in them because most of them lack logic of why would the opposing team agree to do it? It's like playing Madden franchise back in the day with the "force trade" option on. Edited February 9 by DonDaLuvMaker ATLskinjob, TheRisen999, Diesel_Bird and 3 others 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Summerhill Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 14 minutes ago, Ovie_Lover said: Why would chicago make this trade? That's what I'm thinking. They seem to think they have their QB and they have a new regime that needs to recoup lost draft capital. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spts1 Posted February 9 Author Share Posted February 9 4 minutes ago, Summerhill said: That's what I'm thinking. They seem to think they have their QB and they have a new regime that needs to recoup lost draft capital. The mock simulator is saying the Bears would do the same as the Falcons, drop down and stack picks. Thats why your accessment of "they seem to think they have their qb" fits with what the mock is saying. Now, it doesn't have to be the Bears. The point of me accepting the trade in the mock simulator is it got me where I believe the Falcons SHOULD BE in the draft. It could be any of the other 31 teams that arrived at the same result. I could do the mock over and over with different teams offering approximately what I want. Summerhill 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Doktor Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 My ideal off season is to not tell anyone in the media my plans. What's said in my house stays there. FA: A guard. Resign Wilk for depth. Edge. Perhaps a DT. Vet QB. We still need another arm for camp and the PS. Draft: CB, WR, OT would be needs. jetpac and Spts1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeg272 Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 Genuinely asking here. Are you rolling with the DTs and DEs we have on the roster here other than McDonald, who I like, but you mention the cap space and no other defensive help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spts1 Posted February 9 Author Share Posted February 9 33 minutes ago, mikeg272 said: Genuinely asking here. Are you rolling with the DTs and DEs we have on the roster here other than McDonald, who I like, but you mention the cap space and no other defensive help. Roll with what you got after adding McDonald and one more defensive tackle in the draft. My theory is to build up the back end with versatility and speed. Your pass rush can come from coverage sacks. I want to use that theory as a starting point. The cap space would be used on another guard and possible defensive additions after analysing what you have after the draft and free agency. Keeping the cap flexible would also make you players in the trade market for defensive help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PriMeTiiMe Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 Bears don’t even have pick 33 it was sent to Pittsburgh in the Claypool trade. Even if they did Chicago is in the business of adding picks and assets not losing them. No reason for them to trade up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diesel_Bird Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 While I respect the effort, I dont really see any of this possible except Nate Davis jetpac 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ovie_Lover Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 On 2/9/2023 at 3:37 PM, Spts1 said: The mock simulator is saying the Bears would do the same as the Falcons, drop down and stack picks. Thats why your accessment of "they seem to think they have their qb" fits with what the mock is saying. Now, it doesn't have to be the Bears. The point of me accepting the trade in the mock simulator is it got me where I believe the Falcons SHOULD BE in the draft. It could be any of the other 31 teams that arrived at the same result. I could do the mock over and over with different teams offering approximately what I want. What kind of backwards logic is this? The mock says the bears should stack picks, the bears then trade picks away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spts1 Posted February 12 Author Share Posted February 12 On 2/9/2023 at 6:43 PM, Diesel_Bird said: While I respect the effort, I dont really see any of this possible except Nate Davis Its possible. In fact, they could over draft Branch and then attempt to package lower picks to move up and grab McDonald in the second if he slips. The bad part about this strategy is the Falcons need to be able to pick those types of players up by trading back and grabbing a pick in the process, instead of giving up picks to do the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diesel_Bird Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 38 minutes ago, Spts1 said: Its possible. In fact, they could over draft Branch and then attempt to package lower picks to move up and grab McDonald in the second if he slips. The bad part about this strategy is the Falcons need to be able to pick those types of players up by trading back and grabbing a pick in the process, instead of giving up picks to do the same. Not doubting branch being available at 12. I’m doubting any of these trades happening Aluminafalcon 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spts1 Posted February 12 Author Share Posted February 12 2 hours ago, Diesel_Bird said: Not doubting branch being available at 12. I’m doubting any of these trades happening Which is why its my opinion. It wouldn't surprise me if the Falcons drafted another receiver with their first pick in the upcoming draft. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diesel_Bird Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 4 minutes ago, Spts1 said: Which is why its my opinion. It wouldn't surprise me if the Falcons drafted another receiver with their first pick in the upcoming draft. Neither would it surprise me, we continue to do dumb **** Spts1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Doktor Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 Trades are expensive. And let's face it, don't happen as often as we all mock. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetpac Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 On 2/9/2023 at 6:43 PM, Diesel_Bird said: While I respect the effort, I dont really see any of this possible except Nate Davis Like. None of it 😂 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetpac Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 6 hours ago, Herr Doktor said: Trades are expensive. And let's face it, don't happen as often as we all mock. There were over 52 draft impacted trades last year. I’m gonna disagree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.