I look at it as Ziggy has the talent, but Taylor has the measurables. I want both. Hood is a good pick, but I view him as more of a luxury, in that for all his talent, he is simply better suited to being a penetrating one-gap style of player, and we have no guarantee of what kind of system we will be running. One or the other will be ideally suited to whatever we are doing, and beyond that you just hope that they work out. Also, I expect that Hood will be lined up more as a DE/DT than a true NT.

Note that I also picked up two more Dlinemen besides them, adn advocated signing another as a CFA. I really wnat to be sure that we have more answers than we need there at best, and at least enough guys to field the type of defense we want to run at worst.

and frankly, he is up for debate. taking Moreno might have actually mad ethe draft much easier, at least on the front end. My biggest worry int he draft is getting to round five with only one Dlineman taken. That is a very real possibility. I only felt pressure one time in this particular run through, and that was deciding to take Taylor in the fourth. I really felt like I could wait one more round, and if we still had that early fifth we gave up in the Cutler trade, I would have. As it is, I’m just glad that we have a true NT, someone who has actually played the position.

As to getting Jackson, I’m pretty sure that he doesn’t slip to us. We take him at #12 or we don’t get him, and I am not sold on him being at that talent level. By my standard it would be a reach. In Rey, I think we get a star, a leader, and an emotional catalyst. i meant it when I said urgency and intensity on the field. I want our D to be unrecognizable!!

I agree about making the first two picks as a pair. One thing I’m not sure of is whether Rey drops to 18. The draftek mock had him going to Washington right after us. For as close as they are, #12 and #18 are a long ways apart, and a lot of good players went in between them.

These comments from Doom have me hopeful that maybe the need for a leader ILB this year is not as great as I had previously thought. Hence, Moreno looks more doable. ; )

I took a chance on Moreno slipping and got burned. Testing it out with Moreno first made me lose out on Rey and Jackson both. Taking Jackson first netted me my choice of OLBs or Laurinaitis. 3 guys, so many combinations. I think that that first pick needs to be about some kind of statement, and can be one of three guys (in this mock).

Jackson: We will be solid, if not stellar. We build from the lines out, at all costs.

Moreno: We insist on maximum value and leverage. We will win with what we have.

Maualuga: We want a particular attitude on defense in the future (post Dawkins etc). Our leaders will protect the rest of the players.

None of these ideas is wrong, but they are very different.

Eric Wood was gone in the second when our pick rolled around, but I think I may have passed on him there. I really wanted to get someone who would start, and I didn’t see any of the centers beating out weigmann, but I did think that Andre Brown could be a starter, and that Chung could beat out Renaldo Hill. Not a guarantee, but above average chance. Chung was about value above all, and thinking that the later options at safety would be gone before we picked again. We do need a long terma nswer at the position, and while it would be nice to wish on the Taylor Mays star, the better thing to do would be do something about it now if there is a chance. It is an important enough position that I took that chance.

1) I didn’t think any of the three had a very good chance at lasting, so I hedged between taking the best overall value (moreno) and the highest overall need (dline). I don’t like to be pushed around by either idea, and I felt that Rey fit nicely in between, shoring up the defense while not ignoring a top talent. Keep in mind, I am someone who thinks that Jackson should still be in the second round, where he started out two months ago. He is up for a variety of reason (which I innacurately refer to as hype), but one of them is scarcity. If it was affecting the 2nd or 3rd round pick, i would be more forgiving, but I dont like the idea of scarcity forcing our hand in the first, unless it is on a much better talent (i.e. raji).
2) I think Hood is a reach, and I do regret the decision, once all the picks are in. However, my solution was to take Barwin, which many would say is even more of a reach! I see it differently, in that I have Barwin ranked higher than hood, from a pure talent and ceiling standpoint. So in a way, that goes to what you are saying, since I should have went with my gut, and taken what I thought was the better player. And Barwin’s versatility could have helped on the line. But where we will likely disagree again, is on Barwin’s talent level. As to Chung, i do think I took the BPA at that point, and I did it specifically because despite safety options alter, none of them hold a candle to the top of the class. The dropoff is quick and severe. Draftek had all the usual suspects at FS and SS (Rashad Johnson, Delmas, etc.) gone before our third rolled around, and I suspected as much when I took Chung. He is my toprated safety, and I was glad for the opportunity to get him.
3) I agree. I was watching WRs starting with the #2, but I simply couldn’t overlook some other, stellar values. If anyone is keeping track of my obscure “star-values” I was happy to note after this draft that I only selected one player in the “1 star” value range. Everyone else was 2 or more, and I even got two 5s, something I hadn’t expected (though I was hoping for a 6 and a 5). I am happy with Wallace, but I would have liked someone with a higher ceiling. Wallace, however, addresses two areas where we had a need: pure speed deep threat, and returner. We’ll see how the hands do, I’m not too optimistic there. I think we were lucky that he slipped to the fifth, otherwise the pickings would have been MUCH slimmer.
4)Even though it was addressed late, it was possible to add 3 players all rated highly for Denver, counting the CFAs. We do need depth, but Woods Unger and Mack weren’t anywhere we could have gotten them, and I hedged too long on Luigs. I like Cooper though, and since he has both Weigmann (of the consecutive starts streak) and Licks Ten Tigers ahead of him, I think it is a good all around fit.
5)I think I may have addressed this with the other answers.

like I mentioned in the post, I had second thoughts about it once I saw the draft in its entirety. I think we will get our choice of DE/OLB with the #18, regardless of who we take at #12, and whoever we don’t take at #18 will be long gone before we are up again, so it is going to be a very critical choice.

I toyed with going through and updating all the combine times with pro days if they were better, or of inserting a new talbe with both sets of times, but in the end I figured the scouting reports in the links section, such as Draftcountdown and Walter, would be up to date. In the end, it just didn’t seem like much fun. :)

And, since I have Jennings, its nice to know that he is better than advertised!

Jenning and Shonn Greene are both high value picks. Also, Andre Brown is another high value guy, who I believe could be drafted as late as the #79 in the actual draft, amking him very high value. He is in the upswing, developmentally, of his young career, and I think we haven’t seen anything from him yet. If he gets on the right team, he could be the best RB in this class (outside of Moreno). He does have a past injury though, so some risk is present.

I’m pretty sure I would have taken Moreno if he had been there at #18. The only question would have been if Jackson was still around as well, and by my account it is really no contest, Moreno all the way. My thought was that of the three, Moreno had the highest probability of slipping to #18, so I took that chance. I like the statement that taking Maualuga makes,but I also dig the statement that Moreno makes.

This draft had to start somewhere, and when I saw that guys like Jenkins, Raji and Crabtree were going in smart places, my mindset got conservative. Its not that I expected to get any of those guys in particular, but seeing that many good decisions being made before our #12 made me feel that I couldn’t take any chances with our areas of need, which are heaviest on defense.

I think taking Moreno by luck ina conservative draft would be a coup, and I would have loved to do it. I think if we really WANT him, we need to take him at #12, and then be aggressive afterwards. There is another 7 round mock site that I was thinking of working through, with an aggressive strategy, by taking Moreno first. I’ll post it later if I do, or update this mock.

But I believe that Rey is solidly in the #12 range. that doesn’t mean he won’t slip to #18, but if a team wants him, they should take him at twelve. We are lucky in that we don’t HAVE to want him (our team was bad enough that we can like any number of guys in his stead) and I have noted instances in other 1st round mocks where if we passed on him at #12, he was still there at #18, as Steve notes below.

Will that happen when the real draft rolls around? That’s why we get excited about it, I suppose…

any possibility that we will acquire Sanchez or Stafford or any other high round QB. If McDaniels came out tomorrow and said that the Broncos would do whatever it took to get one of them, I would ignore that too….it is NOT what I want to hear right now.

but I should note I was inspired to try this (my first ever btw) mock draft by watching other quality mocks that have been going up in the past months.

Is pretty darn close to our arch-nemesis, despite our history with the Raiders. Its seems like the past few years have seen events beyond our control pushing these two teams into one showdown after another. Can’t say I like it, but that is what an arch-nemesis is all about, i suppose….

My target was 100 fully scouted (as far as I can go at any rate) players that fit denver’s needs. I ended up with 145, but I feel that I am a little short on WR and TEs. I didn’t watch as much or as many as I would have liked to, so I am prepared to be wrong a lot on those two positions….

And I agree totally about not being pleased with the Evander Hood pick, when looked at from the Macro. At the time of the pick, I really felt like I needed someone on the DLine, or ALL of my top dline guys would be gone before #48. However after seeing how the draft panned out, I can see that it didn’t pay to be trigger happy at the position.

1) I think this is an emminently reasonable goal, and I even agree that OLB makes a better target than ILB, but let me muddy the waters for you. DJ Williams could be an excellent OLB in the 3-4, ala James Harrison (harrison clocks in at 6-0 242, DJ is 6-1 242 and a little bit more explosive, and maybe a hair less mean). How I have longed for DJ to get his just desserts, and what desserts they would be! He should be a perennial probowler, but that isn’t how the chips have fallen for him in Denver. He is flexible enough to let us target either OLB or ILB with our draft picks, and you won’t hear a peep from him about it. But dare we imagine him unleashed? To date, that longing has brought only pain and frustration. He deserves better.

2) 5 seems like a sound number. That means we target one DB and maybe 4 offensive guys. That smells like balance to me!

3) Agree wholeheartedly, and Moreno is by far the best option, because he can’t be quantified easily at RB or running routes for a WR.

One problem (if you can call it that) is the glut of OLBs and OLB potential we have on the roster: DOOM, DJ, Woodyard, Boss, Moss, Green, Reidand Crowder. For the two spots inside we have Haggan, Andra and Larsen. DJ will happily play either one, but as always, is better suited to the outside. DOOM will play both DE and OLB, and so will Moss and Crowder probably. It is a confusing mess that won’t get sorted out until training camp, preseason and maybe the first gameplans of the year. And then it might change.

One last point about safety. I agree that Mays is a great thought, but it is just a thought. If Chung is there at #48, we will be faced with choosing between a happy thought, and a happy reality. I rate Chung highly enough that it will take some stiff competition, and an unusual scenario at #48 to make him too unpalatable if he is available.

I woudl love to be a fly on the wall for the real thing. Those seminars must have kicked some serious tail!

The Original 1.0
1st round, pick #12 overall ILB, Rey Maualuga, USC
1st round, pick #18 overall DT, Evander Hood, Missouri
2nd round, pick #48 overall SS, Patrick Chung, Oregon
3rd round, pick #79 overall RB, Rashad Jennings, Liberty
3rd round, pick #84 overall DE, Mitch King, Iowa
4th round, pick #114 overall DT, Terrance Taylor, Michigan
5th round, pick #149 overall WR, Mike Wallace, Mississippi
6th round, pick #185 overall TE, Bear Pascoe, Fresno State
7th round, pick #225 overall DT, Darryl Richard, Georgia Tech
7th round, pick #235 overall C, Jon Cooper, Oklahoma

Idealized 1.0.1
First, lets stay with Maualuga and see what happens. He, of course, is up for debate, but he is a legitimate pick at #12 in that there is no guarantee that he will last to #18.
1st round, pick #12 overall ILB, Rey Maualuga, USC
Next, I’ll take Connor Barwin, with a couple of ideas guiding the pick. First is that it is a bonus pick, and a chance to look to the future, while simultaneously getting legitimate talent. The other idea, is that we will get him some reps as a TE, reducing pressure to draft a TE at all and freeing up another pick. This isn’t a great solution for TE, and if Tony is on his way out, than it is probably the equivalent of a bandaid for an amputated limb, but if we can keep some status quo at the TE position, I think he is a legitimate solution for up to 10 percent or so of TE reps, and a much higher percentage in critical short yardage and goal to go situations. He can also be a pass rush weapon easing concerns about the current roster questions.
1st round, pick #18 overall OLB/DE Connor Barwin, Cincinnati
Next we get to Chung, and in my mind this is Chung vs. Luigs. Three centers have gone off the board, and Luigs is the last of the true starting centers that could play as a rookie if he needed to, at a high level. Chung on the other hand is Part One of a two-part solution to the coming safety problem. Both players are primarily about the future. I worry about “clustering” dline later, as per your caution, but this is a golden opportunity. For the purpose of this idealization, we’ll get max value out of the two free agent safety signings, and put Licks Ten Tigers value at risk ( a 4th round pick who projects well to guard) by taking Luigs.
2nd round, pick #48 overall C Jonathon Luigs, Arkansas
Next, we stick with the exceptional value of Rashaad Jennings, and note that the offense has been given a likely potency upgrade as well as an outlook upgrade at this point, as has the defense. In fact, our first four picks are like offense/defense mirrors of eachother, in a way.
3rd round, pick #79 overall RB, Rashad Jennings, Liberty
Again, we will stay with Mitch King with the next pick. Our first true Dlineman who can line up strongside or weakside, and could be a surprise option inside on ‘funkier’ line schemes. That kind of versatility, and the all around hustle he brings are stellar values.
3rd round, pick #84 overall DE, Mitch King, Iowa
Continuing with theidealization, lets consider your points on Taylor. I went back and looked at my notes, and saw that I specifically said to target him in the fifth or later. Between you and me, I have been convinced to drop him from this idealized version and look for different opportunities. My thought is that he has legitimate production as a NT for Michigan. If that production warrants that he go earlier, than he will go when we are addressing other needs. If his downside (conditioning issues, primarily, including the reasons FOR those conditioning issues) causes him to slip, than we have nothing to lose waiting to see how far he slips. Fifth or later would be nice (Draftek says no, so be it.) Now, the best opportunity I see here is to upgrade the WR choice, and both Gibson and Collie are attractive. Let’s do Collie, who averaged over 26 yards on KRs. What I don’t like about this is that I thought Wallace wasa teriffic falling value, and getting him in the fifth was a coup.
4th round, pick #114 overall WR, Austin Collie, BYU
Well, I don’t see anything great here, so the idealization is going to take a hit. With Collie instead of Taylor there is no need for Wallace, despite his value at this spot. The best guys here are DT Corvey Irvin, DE34 Sammie Lee Hill, and ILBs McKillop and Brinkley. Irvin is a one-gap style player with room to develop, Hill has “Nice guys finish last” written on him, McKillop Doesn’t look to be significantly different from Spencer Larsen, and Brinkley, while more of a prototype 3-4 ILB than Larsen is, is still a redundant pick. This is a really tough decision. I think I will take a chance on Sammie. With his ethic and build, the ceiling is high and the floor is low. I could be talked out of this, and would be specifically interested in opinions on the alternatives.
5th round, pick #149 overall DE34 Sammie Lee Hill, Stillman(ILB Brinkley, ILB McKillop)
I can still target TE here, but I should see if the Barwin pick can be leveraged into a greater value by finding a defensive steal if possible. I’m thinking taking another ILB would be smart, even though I passed on Brinkley and McKillop. Appleby is available here. Alternatively I could go with Brinkley/McKillop in the 5th and then take DT Roy Miller here, who is a producer, and had enough power to stack-shed very well in college.
6th round, pick #185 overall ILB, Antonio Appleby, Virginia (DT/NT Roy Miller)
Next, I’ll keep the Richard pick the same, even though the grouping is pretty tight. He is simply to highly valued here to pass, and it isn’t a clearcut redundancy.
7th round, pick #225 overall DT, Darryl Richard, Georgia Tech
Because we got our center depth earlier we can look elsewhere here, and I am pleased to nab the top player on my board in FS Troy Nolan, who was Barrett’s teammate and who is a ‘catalyst’ type player. For some reason his teammates play better around him, and the opponent plays worse, even if he isn’t doing anything. It reminds me of that article Spock posted awhile back about the basketball player along the same lines…
7th round, pick #235 overall FS, Troy Nolan, Arizona St.

Overview: Obviously “idealization” is a loose term, since it turned into an all-out redraft by the end. But it was idealized in the sense that I raised the overall value of the draft using prior knowledge of who would be where, instead of guessing. The original 1.0 draft clocked in at 34 stars (5, 4, 5, 4, 4, 4, 2, 2, 3, 1 respectively). The idealization 1.0.1 clocks in at 35-36 stars (5, 5, 4, 4, 4, 3-4, 2, 3, 3, 2 respectively). In this version we have upgraded significantly on the offensive side of the bll, using the same number of picks. This was done at the cost of treating NT like a depth draft, where we go into next year solid, but ready to make sacrifices for a playmaker. With the acquisition of Fields at NT, i think this is an emminently doable option. As you suggested, DE became a fixable priority, and I think Sammie Hill and King will help a lot. ILB is also significantly upgraded, at the cost of a pure TE upgrade, but we can now tolerate injuries at ILB, which should give us the stability to develop the safeties (I like the AZ teammates angle, it gives the broncos’ Mr.Irrelevant that little extra something) and the time to find a balance that works good on at the OLB positions. Thoughts?