Welcome JT Woods, DB, Baylor (R3, #79)

[DerwinBosa]

There are never guarantees about any players, but risk can be minimized. We were obviously interested in a big DT as we selected Ogbonnia. The fact remains that we could have had Travis Jones at #75 and we do not have to guess about the original owner of that pick trading it because they did trade and traded it for less than what we would have offered.

When people on our forum complain that we are so close and are only a player or two away, they should remember scenarios like this one where that player or two were lost. That, more than anything, is my point. It is not a knock on Woods as a player. It is a knock on our poor draft strategy.

I like what I have read about Travis Jones, and would have been happy to have him yesterday. I didn't even know who J.T. Woods was before yesterday. Regardless, they were both in the third round for a reason, meaning that they weren't thought of highly enough by those picking to be selected before then. Therefore it's a reach to say with any certainty that either of them will be the missing piece to a championship puzzle.

You could be right. I was slamming my fist into my recliner when A.J. Smith selected Marcus Gilchrist and Jonas Mouton while Justin Houston was sitting right there for us in the second round years ago. More often than not, though, scenarios such as the one that took place in the third round yesterday are not as big of a deal.

[Steve]

Well, this goes back to us playing a 3-4. The worst starter is Tillery by a mile.

What's a starter?

[gzubeck]

What's a starter?

I would say #1 at that position.

:rimshot:

[Bearded14YourPleasure]

And because we did not take Jones when we had the chance, we used our 5th round pick to take Ogbonnia and that cost us Araiza. There are consequences to not getting full value for draft picks.

If we had taken Jones it would have cost us our 5th rounder (at least) so we STILL wouldn’t have had Araiza.

[Steve]

I would say #1 at that position.

:rimshot:

Not trying to be obtuse, but I still don't know what it means.

To me the starters are Johnson and SJD. They are the ones who will get the majority of the snaps, and it shouldn't be close. TIllery is a depth guy who is going to have to earn his time. Maybe he will be a situational rusher, maybe a rotational guy.

Who cares who plays in the base D, since we don't play the 34 base very much. Just like LB, if you are listed on the top of the roster in the base D, you are a situational role player, not a guy who is going to play a major role and play reguarly. The draft needs to reflect that.

[SYB]

Comp for Woods is Craig Mager

FFS... This post proves why you shouldn't have an opinion on drafted players.

One was a 5'11" CB and the other a 6'3" S. Super comparable. :sigh:

[Guest]

I like what I have read about Travis Jones, and would have been happy to have him yesterday. I didn't even know who J.T. Woods was before yesterday. Regardless, they were both in the third round for a reason, meaning that they weren't thought of highly enough by those picking to be selected before then. Therefore it's a reach to say with any certainty that either of them will be the missing piece to a championship puzzle.

You could be right. I was slamming my fist into my recliner when A.J. Smith selected Marcus Gilchrist and Jonas Mouton while Justin Houston was sitting right there for us in the second round years ago. More often than not, though, scenarios such as the one that took place in the third round yesterday are not as big of a deal.

I disagree. Sometimes a player falls unexpectedly. That is what happened with Keenan Allen and happened with Travis Jones. Their pre-draft rankings and fall are eerily similar. Both were rated as a first half of the second round consensus pick, but there were some pundits in each case that had each player rated as a first round player. Yet, both players fell to exactly pick #76 overall. In the case Allen, it did not mean that he was not great value as a draft pick. I think the same will be true of Jones.

And then, of course, as could only happen with our team, we ended up selecting a DL player in round 5 instead of solving our major problems at P, costing us Araiza.

So, we ended up missing out on a player that was way better than the player we got and then later tried to cover the position with a lesser player, costing us a chance at a player that most think will be a good starting punter, something we really have not had since Scifres.

Score that missing a golden opportunity to get great value in round 3; reaching for poor value; trying to fill the missed golden opportunity position later with a weak player that causes us to miss a good player that would have filled an important need for us at another position. Yes, I am frustrated that Telesco turned gold into mud.

[Guest]

If we had taken Jones it would have cost us our 5th rounder (at least) so we STILL wouldn’t have had Araiza.

Not true at all. That is one way to get there. Next year's 4th is another. We could have given up our 5th and traded back into the 5th. There were plenty of ways to get there.

[blueman]

Blah.

[Bearded14YourPleasure]

Not true at all. That is one way to get there. Next year's 4th is another. We could have given up our 5th and traded back into the 5th. There were plenty of ways to get there.

Not true at all, it’s only what it cost the Texans to move up into that spot. Why do you think our divisional opponent would have given us a better deal?

[Guest]

What's a starter?

A guy who walks onto the field with his unit the first time it takes the field.

I get your point about Tillery not playing as many snaps, but we still took Ogbonnia when we could have had Jones. Ogbonnia does nothing better than Jones.

Plus Woods has a round 5 clone in Tycen Anderson. We had other, clearly better options.

[Guest]

Not true at all, it’s only what it cost the Texans to move up into that spot. Why do you think our divisional opponent would have given us a better deal?

Our trade offer would have been the better deal. Both our third and 5th round picks were better. I do not think division rivalry trades are the taboo they used to be. We saw lots of teams making those trades. I think DEN would have taken the better offer, which would have been ours because that is what would have given them the best draft capital.