I've decided to jump into the fray and take a whack at my first mock. This is only the first attempt and there will be others.

For this first attempt, I'll be using DrafTek's Big Board, found here. Keeping the DrafTek Big Board at hand will allow readers to evaluate the decisions that I make, so you may want to open a second window and flip back and forth. You can also look at some of the other prospects that I won't mention and decide whether you believe they could better meet our needs.

In order to help readers evaluate how efficiently this mock meets the Broncos' goal of picking the Best Athlete Available (hereafter BPA), I'll place a negative score next to each pick with the term -- REACH: (-1, etc.), which indicates how much the pick fell below where that player was ranked on DrafTek's big board.

RESTRICTIONS -- Only players who fall below the Broncos' projected draft slot can be considered available for drafting. The very best number under these conditions will be a zero, which indicates that no value was lost in the selection.

STRATEGY -- There will be an emphasis on conserving value while meeting needs. Some picks are made because of my own personal evaluations but there are almost no instances in which I deviate much from the Big Board's values, and all deviations can be partly justified on a need/positional basis. I will comment in the discussion section when I do this and provide my rationale for the action.

There are goals other than preserving value however, needs are also important, so a perfect draft would consist of meeting team needs AND wasting no value -- which is highly unrealistic. Since I don't have a formal measure for how well this mock meets our needs, I'll discuss the idea at the end and evaluate the mock's strengths and shortcomings, which should provide some guidance for the next version.

A final note before starting -- this is a formal exercise designed to produce maximum utility. Many of you may disagree with DrafTek's Big Board rankings, and I do also. The point of this exercise is NOT to criticize their Big Board. We expect that the Broncos will have their own Big Board. Therefore, the point of this exercise is to produce a draft that maximizes BPA while meeting needs, and this can be partly measured by the REACH scores. Success at meeting needs will be more controversial and can be discussed at the end.

ROUND 1

#12 - Rey Maualuga, ILB (REACH: - 6)

ROUND 2

#48 - Ron Brace, DT (REACH: -2)

ROUND 3

#79 - Derrick Williams, WR (REACH: -1)

ROUND 4

#110 - Sherrod Martin, CB/S (REACH: -3)

ROUND 5(a)

#132 - Scott McKillop, ILB (REACH: -5)

ROUND 5

#141 - Tyronne Greene, OG (REACH: -4)

ROUND 6

#172 - Sammie Lee Hill, DE34 (REACH: -4)

ROUND 7

#208 - Orion Martin, OLB34 (REACH: -3)

ROUND 7(b)

#218 - Roy Miller, DT (REACH: -1)

DISCUSSION

The total REACH score is 29, for an average REACH of 3.22. This a fairly efficient draft in terms of BPA if one considers that most of the picks are very close to the Big Board value. The deviations from the BB values are explained below and always involve positional logic but there are a few small overrides, which are also explained.

PICK 1 - Rey Maualuga, ILB ( -6). Choosing Maualuga rather than the greater values; Knowshon Moreno, RB ( -2), Tyson Jackson, DE34 ( -3). Brian Cushing, OLB ( -4), is an arguable decision when looked at from a value standpoint. My feeling was that Maualuga was undervalued (an override) and filled a continuing need on the Broncos. There are strong arguments that could be made for any of the other three, when looking at need. The best argument might be for Cushing, who fills both a need and impact area, and also has the versatility to fill other areas.

PICK 2 - Ron Brace, NT ( -2). This pick met both need and value considerations. A greater value would be Patrick Chung, SS ( -1). Another obvious choice would be William Moore, S ( -4), which would be an override based on his undervalued status. And I wouldn't dismiss the possibility of Brian Robiskie, WR ( 0), who fits several criteria. He looks like the kind of player that McDaniels likes and WR can now be considered a need area based on Marshall's legal problems. Ultimately, it was the importance of NT that led to the decision.

PICK 3 - Derrick Williams, WR ( -1). Strong consideration was given to picking Andy Levitre, OG ( - 3), at this spot. If I knew that he was a good fit for a ZB scheme then I would have picked him instead. Derrick Williams also had some things going for him, too. As a KR and playmaker, he had some important assets other than just value and filling a need. Other possible picks; Andre Brown, RB ( -4) and Dorell Scott, DT/DE34 ( -8), make some sense.

PICK 4 - Sherrod Martin, FS/CB ( -3). The pick of Sherrod Martin fulfilled a need better than the competing CB choices. Martin may become a CB, too, but his use to the team as a FS was a dominant factor. If Derrick William hadn't been the choice in the 3rd then Jarett Dillard, WR ( 0), would have been a perfect choice here.

PICK 5(a) - Scott McKillop, ILB ( -5), I bypassed Glen Coffee ( 0) to reach 5 spots here. The justification was that there was a greater, and continuing, need at ILB. A pick such as Kevin Barnes, CB ( -2) could also be justified. The lack of ILBs currently on the roster struck me as a greater need.

PICK 5 - Tyronne Greene, OG ( -4). This pick is actually a tie between A. Q. Shipley, OC ( -3) and Greene. Shipley had a very slight lead according to DrafTek's Big Board but I broke the tie by going with the greater need (albeit arguable). My personal feeling is that replacing Ben Hamilton may be more important than replacing Casey Wieigmann. The presence of Kory Lichtensteiger made the pick of another OC, Shipley, somewhat less important. Oddly, I recently suggested that Shipley's arm length was too short (and his height is concern, too), but his combine showed he's an excellent athlete so I'll call this pick a tie and let others argue the merits. I do like the idea of an OL at this point though, so I like either pick here.

PICK 6 - The pick of Sammie Lee Hill, DE34 ( -4), at this point was easy. One of the positional goals was to add at as many defensive positions as possible, and DE34 is still un-adddressed at this point.

PICK 7 - This pick, of Orion Martin, OLB34 ( -3), is easy, too, as OLB34 is still unaddressed -- somewhat surprisingly.

PICK 7(b) - This pick, Roy Miller, NT ( -1), was also fairly easy, considering the importance of NT and Roy Miller's performance at the combine, which showed he clearly is a superior athlete. Some consideration was given to picking Trimane Goddard, SS ( -4) and Dan Gronkowski, TE ( 0). I'd prefer to see more than one Safety picked by the Broncos in the draft and Goddard is undervalued. I'm also mindful of the lack of offensive players and Gronkowski 'looks' like a good player. It would also make great sense to ignore the Big Board this late in the draft and let postional logic determine that we take Gartrell Johnson, RB ( -18). I can't argue with that logic but I think adding to NT is pretty important, and Miller is undervalued at this spot and is rising now.

GENERAL DISCUSSION

It can be argued that this draft 'shorts' the offense, and it clearly does and somewhat purposely. It also could be argued that one of the most important areas on defense -- OLB -- has barely been addressed. A solution to this problem might be to take Cushing in the 1st instead of Maualuga. I'm guilty of ignoring the DrafTek Big Board somewhat, although the ranking difference in only one spot. Another concern is the number of DBs. Ideally, the number should be higher.

There are strengths in this mock, too. The NT position is surprisingly well covered, which was unexpected. ILB is also particularly well covered, and this is important for team building although the positional logic doesn't necessarily justify it.

I will address potential shortcomings in the next mock, but it's an unfortunate fact that meeting one need leaves one less draft pick for another area. On general grounds though, I'd like to see perhaps a little more offense and address OLB earlier -- if possible. The 'layout' of the prospects made this difficult, and it would have necessitated some big reaches in cases. However, there were opportunities, but they would have taken from the strengths and I don't know if that's desirable.