Just curious what you feel our top 5 needs are?  Still a bunch of needs but I think we can fill most with a great draft. 

1. NT
2. RG
3. TE
4. CB
5. LT

---

Dude we gotta put Safety up there somewhere. We got to.

I wouldn’t say TE is a top 3 need when we have Oliver who has the talent to be a top flight receiver.

---

Dude we gotta put Safety up there somewhere. We got to.

I wouldn’t say TE is a top 3 need when we have Oliver who has the talent to be a top flight receiver.

Does he?  He has potential but Oliver hasnt proven anything.  There is a number of TEs i like in this years draft that I would take over Oliver last year.  I really hope we get one of Bryant, Kmet, and Okwuegbunam. Jarrod Wilson has shown more than Oliver

---

1.  NT
2.  CB
3.  LT
4.  RG
5.  TE

With a "great" draft, or a good draft and one very good FA signing, we should be ok.  Without the FA and just an OK draft, it's going to be a long and painful season.

---

When you get into the endzone, act like you've been there before.

Just curious what you feel our top 5 needs are?  Still a bunch of needs but I think we can fill most with a great draft. 

1. NT
2. RG
3. TE
4. CB
5. LT

I thought you just wanted to select highest graded players regardless of their position?

---

Just curious what you feel our top 5 needs are?  Still a bunch of needs but I think we can fill most with a great draft. 

1. NT
2. RG
3. TE
4. CB
5. LT

I thought you just wanted to select highest graded players regardless of their position?

I do, what do you mean?

---

I thought you just wanted to select highest graded players regardless of their position?

I do, what do you mean?

Ummmm, I mean, if your grand plan is to completely ignore need and draft whichever random dude has the best grade when our pick is due, why the hell start a thread that's all about filling NEEDS in the draft???

You're down with landing 2 QBs, a SS, and 3 LBs before the sixth, so who cares?

---

I do, what do you mean?

Ummmm, I mean, if your grand plan is to completely ignore need and draft whichever random dude has the best grade when our pick is due, why the hell start a thread that's all about filling NEEDS in the draft???

You're down with landing 2 QBs, a SS, and 3 LBs before the sixth, so who cares?

So if you want to draft the BPA, that means the team dont have needs?  Cmon man, you are smarter than this.  That wont happen because the QB, LB, and SS class are all weak. Ive stated this before as well, the rule isnt set in stone but the majority of the time you draft BAP and especially the early rounds.

---

Ummmm, I mean, if your grand plan is to completely ignore need and draft whichever random dude has the best grade when our pick is due, why the hell start a thread that's all about filling NEEDS in the draft???

You're down with landing 2 QBs, a SS, and 3 LBs before the sixth, so who cares?

So if you want to draft the BPA, that means the team dont have needs?  Cmon man, you are smarter than this.  That wont happen because the QB, LB, and SS class are all weak.

OHHH, so now it DOES matter what position we choose? 

Make up your mind dude.  Don't act like you know Dave's board or how the draft is going to fall. 

But, just to be crystal freaking clear:  If the first five picks end up including us drafting a box safety and a weak side linebacker, you are totally down with that if they are the highest graded dudes available at our picks, right? 

Yes or no will suffice. 

---

So if you want to draft the BPA, that means the team dont have needs?  Cmon man, you are smarter than this.  That wont happen because the QB, LB, and SS class are all weak.

OHHH, so now it DOES matter what position we choose? 

Make up your mind dude.  Don't act like you know Dave's board or how the draft is going to fall. 

But, just to be crystal freaking clear:  If the first five picks end up including us drafting a box safety and a weak side linebacker, you are totally down with that if they are the highest graded dudes available at our picks, right? 

Yes or no will suffice. 

Yes, if Simmons is there and you had a box safety in this draft that was good enough to be the top player on the board like a Sean Taylor absolutely.  How much freaking clearer can i get?

---

Ummmm, I mean, if your grand plan is to completely ignore need and draft whichever random dude has the best grade when our pick is due, why the hell start a thread that's all about filling NEEDS in the draft???

You're down with landing 2 QBs, a SS, and 3 LBs before the sixth, so who cares?

So if you want to draft the BPA, that means the team dont have needs?  Cmon man, you are smarter than this.  That wont happen because the QB, LB, and SS class are all weak.  Ive stated this before as well, the rule isnt set in stone but the majority of the time you draft BAP and especially the early rounds.

As always, the question is, how many "grade points" do you sacrifice to take a lower graded player, but at a position of much higher need?

---

When you get into the endzone, act like you've been there before.

1. Owner
2. General Manager
3. Head Coach
4. Defensive Coordinator
5. OL, DT, WR, TE, CB, or S

---

OHHH, so now it DOES matter what position we choose? 

Make up your mind dude.  Don't act like you know Dave's board or how the draft is going to fall. 

But, just to be crystal freaking clear:  If the first five picks end up including us drafting a box safety and a weak side linebacker, you are totally down with that if they are the highest graded dudes available at our picks, right? 

Yes or no will suffice. 

Yes, if Simmons is there and you had a box safety in this draft that was good enough to be the top player on the board like a Sean Taylor absolutely.  How much freaking clearer can i get?

LOL

You aren't being clear at all.  I didn't name specific players or rounds. I damn sure didn't say [BLEEP] about Sean [BLEEP] Tayloe. LOL 
I'm saying if ANY of those first five picks involve selecting redundant players at those spots, you're cool with it because they are the highest graded guys, right? 

Also - nice edit and backpedal in your earlier post. Posting out of both sides of your mouth. 

If there's a box safety at pick 73 that's better than the RG you've got your eye on there, you better draft that safety, right?

---

I don't really have strong feeling on the order, but for me it's DT, LT, RG, CB, FS. We aren't going to do anything about it but I don't think we're as set at SS as the team assumes either.

---

Yes, if Simmons is there and you had a box safety in this draft that was good enough to be the top player on the board like a Sean Taylor absolutely.  How much freaking clearer can i get?

LOL

You aren't being clear at all.  I didn't name specific players or rounds. I damn sure didn't say [BLEEP] about Sean [BLEEP] Tayloe. LOL 
I'm saying if ANY of those first five picks involve selecting redundant players at those spots, you're cool with it because they are the highest graded guys, right? 

Also - nice edit and backpedal in your earlier post. Posting out of both sides of your mouth. 

If there's a box safety at pick 73 that's better than the RG you've got your eye on there, you better draft that safety, right?

How am i not being clear?  You just asked the question and I answered.  Funny you cant get it in your little brain that I would take a WLB or a box safety if they are good enough to be at the top of the board.  I dont give a damn if you said anything about Sean Taylor, I said it.  Im not sure what so hard for you to comprehend?  What did I edit?  Where I added Seaon Taylor to prove a point?  If the players are good enough to be the best player on my board than thats who I want to draft. "LOL"  If you have a box safety at the top of your board he must be pretty damn good

---

I don't really have strong feeling on the order, but for me it's DT, LT, RG, CB, FS. We aren't going to do anything about it but I don't think we're as set at SS as the team assumes either.

Yeah, I do like Harrison and think he has potential but if they are super high on a SS and they have him at the top of their board and they think he can be a great player, take him.

---

LOL

You aren't being clear at all.  I didn't name specific players or rounds. I damn sure didn't say [BLEEP] about Sean [BLEEP] Tayloe. LOL 
I'm saying if ANY of those first five picks involve selecting redundant players at those spots, you're cool with it because they are the highest graded guys, right? 

Also - nice edit and backpedal in your earlier post. Posting out of both sides of your mouth. 

If there's a box safety at pick 73 that's better than the RG you've got your eye on there, you better draft that safety, right?

How am i not being clear?  You just asked the question and I answered.  Funny you cant get it in your little brain that I would take a WLB or a box safety if they are good enough to be at the top of the board.  I dont give a damn if you said anything about Sean Taylor, I said it.  Im not sure what so hard for you to comprehend?  What did I edit?  Where I added Seaon Taylor to prove a point?  If the players are good enough to be the best player on my board than thats who I want to draft. "LOL"  If you have a box safety at the top of your board he must be pretty damn good

---

Oh, yeah? 

The box safety at the top of your board at pick #116 "must be pretty damn good?"  What if you've got a clear upgrade to AJ Cann sitting there at 116, but that pretty damn good box safety is rated better?

---

How am i not being clear?  You just asked the question and I answered.  Funny you cant get it in your little brain that I would take a WLB or a box safety if they are good enough to be at the top of the board.  I dont give a damn if you said anything about Sean Taylor, I said it.  Im not sure what so hard for you to comprehend?  What did I edit?  Where I added Seaon Taylor to prove a point?  If the players are good enough to be the best player on my board than thats who I want to draft. "LOL"  If you have a box safety at the top of your board he must be pretty damn good

---

Oh, yeah? 

The box safety at the top of your board at pick #116 "must be pretty damn good?"  What if you've got a clear upgrade to AJ Cann sitting there at 116, but that pretty damn good box safety is rated better?

Once again, the rule is not set in stone.  The majority of the time, im taking the highest player on the board.  Hopefully you have a little luck and everytime the highest player on your board isnt a box safety and a WLB

---

Oh, yeah? 

The box safety at the top of your board at pick #116 "must be pretty damn good?"  What if you've got a clear upgrade to AJ Cann sitting there at 116, but that pretty damn good box safety is rated better?

Once again, the rule is not set in stone.  The majority of the time, im taking the highest player on the board.  Hopefully you have a little luck and everytime the highest player on your board isnt a box safety and a WLB

So you're selecting need over BAP in that scenario. Got it. 

 (The same way that every GM does repeatedly throughout the draft every year)

---

Once again, the rule is not set in stone.  The majority of the time, im taking the highest player on the board.  Hopefully you have a little luck and everytime the highest player on your board isnt a box safety and a WLB

So you're selecting need over BAP in that scenario. Got it. 

 (The same way that every GM does repeatedly throughout the draft every year)

Lol, a lot of teams take need over BAP and all teams dont draft the same.  If we take Brown at 9, and Kinlaw is there at 20 I want Kinlaw because I feel he is the BAP.  But as you see, 3 tech isnt even in my top 5 needs.  Maybe not even top 10, I'd have to go through all the positions.  But I want him because he is BAP.  I think one of the FS's will probably be the BPA when we pick in the 2nd if Winfield or Delpit is there and I would take them.  Once again not even a top 5 need but I think they will be BPA.  It's not that hard

---

Yes, if Simmons is there and you had a box safety in this draft that was good enough to be the top player on the board like a Sean Taylor absolutely.  How much freaking clearer can i get?

LOL

You aren't being clear at all.  I didn't name specific players or rounds. I damn sure didn't say [BLEEP] about Sean [BLEEP] Tayloe. LOL 
I'm saying if ANY of those first five picks involve selecting redundant players at those spots, you're cool with it because they are the highest graded guys, right? 

Also - nice edit and backpedal in your earlier post. Posting out of both sides of your mouth. 

If there's a box safety at pick 73 that's better than the RG you've got your eye on there, you better draft that safety, right?

Why are you being such a jerk NYC? You're usually not like that.

I consider myself a BAP drafter, but it's not etched in stone. If the drop off in quality from BAP to a "need" player is large (think Roethlisberger vs. Reggie Williams) then you try to get a good trade value for the slot and player. If you can't get what you think is a fair trade you take the best player, need or not. But if the difference is marginal then go ahead and pick the position you need over the slightly higher rated "box safety."

Personally I consider box safeties a dime a dozen, but that's neither here nor there.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"