The entry and comments here got me thinking…
Here were my initial thoughts on DE Antonio Smith:
…“If it has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on our draft plan for a DE, then fine. Smith is 27, and if our first or second-round DE isn’t able to tear it up right away, he’d be a great asset to have provided the price is right.”
Well, as it turns out – the price was right. Smith’s contract was very reasonable by free agent standards.
After having thought about it for a while, I think I’ve changed my mind on this one a little bit. It really would be a good problem to have if say – the Texans got a guy like Paul Kruger in the 2nd, and he turned out to be good right away.
I think that would still be the right way to look at it if our defense was already pretty solid… but the reality is, for how much work our defense needs, our second round pick can and should be a starter.
Let’s say, for the sake of argument – Paul Kruger is available at #46, or maybe Robert Ayers somehow slides. I certainly wouldn’t be upset if the Texans nabbed either one of them, but doesn’t it help the team more if they were able to get a starter at a position of need?
I know the coaches love Dominique Barber and he’s kind of lightly penciled in as the starter for ’09, but if you can get a highly-rated strong safety at #46 who would probably be an upgrade over Barber, shouldn’t they take him?
If Ron Brace, or another DT who they think could be an improvement over Travis Johnson is there – wouldn’t that be better than grabbing (admittedly excellent) depth at DE?
What if Sean Smith is still on the board? He can play corner or safety, and I think he’d be a fantastic addition to this team.
So, my point is – sure, I wouldn’t be upset if we still went DE at #46, but as of right now, in the second round, I’d rather upgrade one of our STARTERS rather than upgrade our DE depth. You can still get a decent depth DE in the third, but I think our “DE of the future” is on hold for another year or two.
Right now, we have Antonio Smith – our DE of the present and short-term future. Do you think it makes more sense to find a starter in round 2? Or are you locked in on a guy to groom as Smith’s eventual replacement/competition?
Loading ...
Mar 3, 2009 at 17:42:54
One thing to consider with defensive line depth is that it’s probably more important than depth at other positions. You’re going to get a heck of a lot of plays out of your third-best defensive end, and not only that, but that guy is a lot closer to the action than your starting free safety is when he’s on the field. That’s not to say that whoever is closest to the center is always the most important, but I hope it suggests that defensive line depth is more valuable than it might initially seem.
Perhaps on 3rd-and-longs you could go with some sort of “4 Aces” package like the Giants did two years ago, with Mario, Amobi, Smith, and Kruger (or Ayers or whoever) on the line. I guess it’d be three aces and a king kicker or something…
If you’re drafting with the mentality that whover you take in Rd 2 is automatically a starter, then you’re not doing the best for your team. Yes, they are probably more likely to be a starter if they are drafted there, but you should just really go for the best player available, especially in a situation where you could get a guy like Kruger.
Now I’m not committed to getting a DE in the first two rounds either – I think both you and I are favoring opposite sides of the same fence. For example, I’d love to see us do what the Steelers did a year or two ago and grab two linebackers in back to back rounds. I guess the logic is the same there – lots of good pass rushers is a good problem to have. (Although I realize Paul Kruger isn’t the second coming of Reggie White)
It will be interesting to see what happens in the first two rounds now that we have the other defensive end position settled down for the next two or three years. It will shine some light on Smithiak’s philosophy.
Mar 4, 2009 at 07:20:33
I agree with you Chris, this time at least. I think both round 1 and round 2 draft choices should be used on defensive players that can start as rookies at the positions of outside linebacker or cornerback or free safety without reaching for a player at that drafting position, and I think that’s what the Antonio Smith signing gives the Texans. On strong safety I’m not so sold. I suppose I fall into the trap of not being able to conjure an image of ball hawking strong safety.
Mar 4, 2009 at 07:40:15
I think the Texans should take the best player available in the second round on offense or defense, because they are always one snap away from losing their starter for the rest of the year.
Mar 4, 2009 at 09:00:42
Although depth would be nice to have at the DE position, we have other glaring needs like a DT or a safety. I would rather them trade down and pick up Clay Matthews late in the first and pick up a DT or S in the second. With the additional picks from the Rosenfels trade and hopefully trading down, we can work on depth and a RB to compliment Slaton. I like the argument of taking the best defensive player on the board but we need starters this year, one or two starters picked up in the draft could put us in playoff contention.
Mar 4, 2009 at 15:28:39
Texans matched offer for DA
Mar 4, 2009 at 15:34:53
I’ve gone back and forth about this since the signing. Fully admitting that I am biased and I covet DEs as a general rule, I think my take is as follows:
1st Rd—If Michael Johnson is on the board, I’d take him. He’s a physical freak and I don’t think you should pass up that kind of player. It would take some serious nads to pull the trigger on that, though, but think of the potential pass rush.
Assuming we don’t do that, I think a 2d rd DE is acceptable IF (and only if) he has a skill that you think you are missing in your pass rush. Like very good edge speed. If he’s just a smaller version of the bullrush-types you have, no thanks.
Also, if Sean Smith is on the board in the second, I don’t care WHAT kind of DE is available, you have to take that kid.
Mar 4, 2009 at 20:14:00
I would be up for trading up to get BJ raji. I think he is the second safest pick on defense. I just would not trade up that much. Raji could go anywhere from 4-12. I do not see him slipping past the broncos with them switching to the 3-4. He is a player I want but I do not want him so much that we have trade all of our draft picks to get. I think raji will tie up 2 blockers and help take attention away from our other dline man. I think we need a guy like raji. If not Raji, I would love to trade for Shaun Rogers. He wants out of Cleveland. the only downside is that he is owed a lot of money this year(I think 10 million). We need a defensive tackle that can tie up two guys. Maybe that guy is Evander hood of Mizzou.
Mar 4, 2009 at 21:11:32
Your logic is valid. We need upgrades at S, and IMO to a lesser extent DT. I think Amobi is going to improve, and I liked what I saw from DelJuan late last year. Smith can move inside in passing situations.
That being said, I agree more with socctty about depth on the DLine being more important than at any other defensive position group. This is why I commented at BRB that we should target DE in the 2nd round preferentially over safety (or DT). The Giants are the model for this strategy, but I think it is common for teams to go 8 deep along the line, or 2 players for each position. This is not done at LB or in the secondary. Of course all teams play dime packages that incorporate 4 CB’s, but that isn’t the same as rotating 8 linemen along the D Line. The nickel and dime are extra DB’s replacing OLB’s not the starting CB’s. The more good DE’s we have to rush the passer the better our D will be. Smith is obviously the starting LDE, but adding another pass rushing LDE like Ayers, Kruger, Johnson, etc. would give us more flexiblity and depth. I think we all agree that QB pressure is the key to defensive success which is why it is more important to add depth at DE or OLB/DE hybrid than Safety. This draft looks to be deep enough at DE that we can snag one at 46 after landing a good OLB at 15. I think that is the way we should go. After that S, DT, RB, CB, C & RG can be addressed.
Mar 6, 2009 at 02:27:48
I know its a longshot, but I wouldn’t mind going offense in Rd 1 or 2 if a couple scenarios play out.
1. Chris Wells is still on the board ( I know we’ll probably look to the later rounds to find a compliment to Slaton, but if the LB we want is gone, I don’t think you can pass on this guy.
2. If we do trade down to the 20′s and Percy Harvin is there, I’d love for us to scoop him up. He’d make our already potent offense explosive. He can return kicks, run the wildcat, line up as RB, etc.
3. Round 2….if James Casey is there, I would like to see this guy in a Texans uniform. Although not the dynamo Harvin is, he also can run the wildcat and play TE, H-Back, Fullback, line up as a WR, etc.
With all that being said, I see us trying to trade down and picking up an LB later in round one but I don’t see many teams wanting to move up.
Mar 8, 2009 at 18:57:01
The DE you’re looking for in the 2nd RD if he makes it that far is Jarron Gilbert. Ayers is a 1 yr wonder and Kruger has several medical issues. Check Gilbert’s sack total you’ll be amazed but then you’ll understand.