2017 Team Information (Needs)

Originally posted by Lobo49er:
Well, would you look at that! Maybe these visits "inform" a little more than I thought. Your mock definitely tracks . So, based on the number of Guards interviewed, up and down the draft rankings (and especially late), it's would seem likely that we grab one. I might need to go digging to see which one of these G's has a good PB grade, and seems suited to OZ scheme.

Agreed. Going back and reviewing, that too really stood out to me now that we have the completed list. We'll take a G somewhere for sure (most likely with the 3rd or 4th pick). I may need to go back and review my mock. I originally had G Dion Dawkins at #66 but recently, went with Peterman there (as there would be no chance he'd be there for us at #109). Let me know what you dig up!

Also, when you look at the T list, you can see why the FO went hard for Garry Gilliam in FA. It literally, erases T from this draft class. Now they just need to focus on G.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Lobo49er:
Well, would you look at that! Maybe these visits "inform" a little more than I thought. Your mock definitely tracks . So, based on the number of Guards interviewed, up and down the draft rankings (and especially late), it's would seem likely that we grab one. I might need to go digging to see which one of these G's has a good PB grade, and seems suited to OZ scheme.

Agreed. Going back and reviewing, that too really stood out to me now that we have the completed list. We'll take a G somewhere for sure (most likely with the 3rd or 4th pick). I may need to go back and review my mock. I originally had G Dion Dawkins at #66 but recently, went with Peterman there (as there would be no chance he'd be there for us at #109). Let me know what you dig up!

Also, when you look at the T list, you can see why the FO went hard for Garry Gilliam in FA. It literally, erases T from this draft class. Now they just need to focus on G.

Exactly. And you know what? I've been doing a little digging so far, and David Sharpe is being considered to kick inside (6'6 343lbs), so instead of that being an OT interview, that may very well have been an OG interview They did a lot of work looking at Guard lol.

Originally posted by Lobo49er:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Lobo49er:
Well, would you look at that! Maybe these visits "inform" a little more than I thought. Your mock definitely tracks . So, based on the number of Guards interviewed, up and down the draft rankings (and especially late), it's would seem likely that we grab one. I might need to go digging to see which one of these G's has a good PB grade, and seems suited to OZ scheme.

Agreed. Going back and reviewing, that too really stood out to me now that we have the completed list. We'll take a G somewhere for sure (most likely with the 3rd or 4th pick). I may need to go back and review my mock. I originally had G Dion Dawkins at #66 but recently, went with Peterman there (as there would be no chance he'd be there for us at #109). Let me know what you dig up!

Also, when you look at the T list, you can see why the FO went hard for Garry Gilliam in FA. It literally, erases T from this draft class. Now they just need to focus on G.

Exactly. And you know what? I've been doing a little digging so far, and David Sharpe is being considered to kick inside (6'6 343lbs), so instead of that being an OT interview, that may very well have been an OG interview They did a lot of work looking at Guard lol.

Good eye and point. They certainly did. All in all, we met with 32 offensive players, 24 defense. But in terms of 1st and 2nd round talents, pretty even (14 for offense, 13 for defense). They are loading up heavily for a possible trade back IMHO.

My take on the OGs we interviewed:

Dawkins - stud.
Feeney - stud.
Siragusa - really good.
Dunker - pass
Sharpe - pass
Levin - nice find <- my fav of the day 3 "late rounders" that we interviewed

Originally posted by Lobo49er:
My take on the OGs we interviewed:

Dawkins - stud.
Feeney - stud.
Siragusa - really good.
Dunker - pass
Sharpe - pass
Levin - nice find <- my fav of the day 3 "late rounders" that we interviewed

Nice. It looks like that 3rd pick at #66 is the one.

66 Dion Dawkins Temple G - met with
68 Dorian Johnson Pittsburgh G - have not met with
69 Dan Feeney Indiana G/C - met with
70 Julie'n Davenport Bucknell OT - met with

Would Davenport move inside?

Originally posted by NCommand:
Nice. It looks like that 3rd pick at #66 is the one.

66 Dion Dawkins Temple G - met with
68 Dorian Johnson Pittsburgh G - have not met with
69 Dan Feeney Indiana G/C - met with
70 Julie'n Davenport Bucknell OT - met with

Would Davenport move inside?

Don't know - that'd be for MD lol. From what I can see, he's a raw OT with potential, most likely on right side. He's 6'7 318. He didn't do well at Senior Bowl, fwiw.

Not sure you could go wrong with Dawkins or Feeney. I think MD likes Dawkins a lot (#38 on Best Board). Or....get one later...Siragusa looks really good, and Levin looks like a good later pick.

Personally I also think Davenport is a RT in the NFL, and I think he could or may need to move to Guard to be more effective.

I personally like Dawkins, Feeney, and Lamp. Also Taylor Moton, who I think can play Guard.

But I'm not sure we go with another OG high, we have too many other needs to address.

Originally posted by SmokeCrabtrees:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by AB81Rules:
Update, unconfirmed(trying to confirm it), but Garrett Celek's base salary may have became fully guaranteed on April 1, making him a lock to make the team, unless they trade him, which will be hard, we'd have to also give up a pick just to get a pick back, like we did with Derek Carrier, and how Baltimore did with Zuttah(w Us) and Jernigan.

Great point AB. You can see above, we haven't shown much interest in TE's until later in the draft.

I keep forgetting about Paulsen. Celek is definitely expendable . Could be a nice compliment,experienced,good blocking TE for someone out there.

Got confirmation that $1M of his $1.55M base became guaranteed on April 1st. Only way we gain much cap room is by trading him, not sure what he would net us in a trade.

Originally posted by AB81Rules:

Personally I also think Davenport is a RT in the NFL, and I think he could or may need to move to Guard to be more effective.

I personally like Dawkins, Feeney, and Lamp. Also Taylor Moton, who I think can play Guard.

But I'm not sure we go with another OG high, we have too many other needs to address.

Awesome! Thank you AB. I agree with you on the other guards. I also think we might get a guard, will be looking at one later in the draft. Should be interesting.

Oh, and please check your inbox.

Garry Gilliam's terms.

1yr deal, $1.4M base($750K GTD), $500K signing bonus, $300K Per Game RB($260,500 counts), $2,160,500 cap number. $1.25M Fully Guaranteed.

I saw it Lobo, I'll try and get to it soon.

Originally posted by AB81Rules:

Originally posted by SmokeCrabtrees:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by AB81Rules:

Update, unconfirmed(trying to confirm it), but Garrett Celek's base salary may have became fully guaranteed on April 1, making him a lock to make the team, unless they trade him, which will be hard, we'd have to also give up a pick just to get a pick back, like we did with Derek Carrier, and how Baltimore did with Zuttah(w Us) and Jernigan.

Great point AB. You can see above, we haven't shown much interest in TE's until later in the draft.

I keep forgetting about Paulsen. Celek is definitely expendable . Could be a nice compliment,experienced,good blocking TE for someone out there.

Got confirmation that $1M of his $1.55M base became guaranteed on April 1st. Only way we gain much cap room is by trading him, not sure what he would net us in a trade.

I think packaging with a pick(S) for a trade up would be good. He could be a solid #2 for someone out there whose #1 TE is more of receiver.

One thing I forgot to mention is for players with guarantees in their contracts, It may be real tough to deal them, since there is no guarantee that a team will want that player with the guarantee in his deal, and a player won't waive it just to go to a different team. Like Eric Reid's $5.676M base is fully gtd, no way we get something good for him on a 1yr deal, and GTD salary. So IMO, these guys are here for 2017 unless they completely suck, and the team is willing to eat cap room.

Originally posted by AB81Rules:

One thing I forgot to mention is for players with guarantees in their contracts, It may be real tough to deal them, since there is no guarantee that a team will want that player with the guarantee in his deal, and a player won't waive it just to go to a different team. Like Eric Reid's $5.676M base is fully gtd, no way we get something good for him on a 1yr deal, and GTD salary. So IMO, these guys are here for 2017 unless they completely suck, and the team is willing to eat cap room.

But if a team thinks he can be productive and have a good season... Even if they walk that team can get a comp pick. Though we smell what you're cooking that it makes it more unlikely they are dealt.

Originally posted by AB81Rules:
Got confirmation that $1M of his $1.55M base became guaranteed on April 1st. Only way we gain much cap room is by trading him, not sure what he would net us in a trade.

Originally posted by AB81Rules:
Garry Gilliam's terms.

1yr deal, $1.4M base($750K GTD), $500K signing bonus, $300K Per Game RB($260,500 counts), $2,160,500 cap number. $1.25M Fully Guaranteed.

Thanks J!