Devin Bush ILB

[DJ's left nut]

Hitchens would be a viable Sam; not sure I like him as a Will at all. In the middle I think he's passable but perhaps a little less than I'd like to see there.

If we drafted a new MLB, the LB corps seems pretty straightfoward - Hitch as the SLB, Newjack in the middle and DoD as the WLB.

[Mecca]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Hitchens would be a viable Sam; not sure I like him as a Will at all. In the middle I think he's passable but perhaps a little less than I'd like to see there.

If we drafted a new MLB, the LB corps seems pretty straightfoward - Hitch as the SLB, Newjack in the middle and DoD as the WLB.

Yea and if that guy is Bush that makes the team speed significantly better back there.

This team isn't that far away from a good defense.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Mecca

Yea and if that guy is Bush that makes the team speed significantly better back there.

This team isn't that far away from a good defense.

You're reaching for need if you take Bush in the 1st, IMO.

He's a fine prospect, but he's not a guy I'd be eager to take that high.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

You're reaching for need if you take Bush in the 1st, IMO.

He's a fine prospect, but he's not a guy I'd be eager to take that high.

Depends what he runs I think in Indy.

He could inch up that high and be a little Hightower ish.

I like him a lot, but an added bonus is that he legit plays with a real **** you attitude. This defense needs that.

[Chargem]

Originally Posted by O.city

Depends what he runs I think in Indy.

He could inch up that high and be a little Hightower ish.

I like him a lot, but an added bonus is that he legit plays with a real **** you attitude. This defense needs that.

The combine is sort of bullshit though, right? If you watch him play multiple seasons of football and you don't think he's a first round talent, why would watching him run in shorts change that?

No matter how fast he runs or how far he jumps, he would still be a reach in the first I think.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Chargem

The combine is sort of bullshit though, right? If you watch him play multiple seasons of football and you don't think he's a first round talent, why would watching him run in shorts change that?

No matter how fast he runs or how far he jumps, he would still be a reach in the first I think.

I'm a SPARQ whore and just can't help it. I know it's stupid but man, gimme an athlete with a coaching staff and there's something I would be willing to work with.

The problem with the 'reach' analysis is the same as it ever was, especially in the late 1st. You can't extract the kind of price for that pick that I'd need to give it up AND you're not going to have Bush in the late 2nd in all likelihood. So if you want him, you can either get some piddly as 4th round pick to trade back (and risk losing him still) or take him in the 1st.

And if that's the guy you truly think best fits your team at that time, then there's no such thing as a reach.

I still don't think I'd do it.

[Chargem]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

I'm a SPARQ whore and just can't help it. I know it's stupid but man, gimme an athlete with a coaching staff and there's something I would be willing to work with.

The problem with the 'reach' analysis is the same as it ever was, especially in the late 1st. You can't extract the kind of price for that pick that I'd need to give it up AND you're not going to have Bush in the late 2nd in all likelihood. So if you want him, you can either get some piddly as 4th round pick to trade back (and risk losing him still) or take him in the 1st.

And if that's the guy you truly think best fits your team at that time, then there's no such thing as a reach.

I still don't think I'd do it.

I don't know, if the 3 big name tight ends are off the board, and all the potential first round safeties, LBs, corners and pass rushers all go then I can see why you would take Bush and not consider it a reach. But unless you only have very few needs then taking a guy who's more of a second round guy is still a reach.

Insane as it sounds, I'd still rather take a pure first round talent at a premium position than draft a 2nd round talent that you have a greater need for position wise in the 1st.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by O.city

Depends what he runs I think in Indy.

He could inch up that high and be a little Hightower ish.

I like him a lot, but an added bonus is that he legit plays with a real **** you attitude. This defense needs that.

He does play downhill and in the end that's probably what I've noticed that has moved him ever so slightly ahead of Wilson for me, though I think Wilson's a better pure athlete.

Hitchens is probably punching a little above his weight athleticially as a SLB but if you had Wilson and DoD out there with him, you'd sure be able to cover a lot of ground. Meanwhile Bush seems to just be a bit of a guided missile who could be pretty easily manipulated and you could see some pretty gaping holes in the middle with his aggression, DoD's youth and Hitchens mediocre athleticism.

I see arguments both ways but in the end it kinda just wants me to take them both off the board there. I don't know that I see either as ideal enough fits to convince me to use a 1st unless our board has just fallen to hell around us.

[staylor26]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

You're reaching for need if you take Bush in the 1st, IMO.

He's a fine prospect, but he's not a guy I'd be eager to take that high.

So if it came down to Bush or Wilson you’d take Wilson?

Asking because I’ve seen you say you would be ok with Wilson at 29.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by staylor26

So if it came down to Bush or Wilson you’d take Wilson?

Asking because I’ve seen you say you would be ok with Wilson at 29.

Yeah but I also changed my mind since then. I don't think I'd really like Wilson at 29 either. Same with Thompson who I would've originally been pretty happy with. I think I've joined the Adderley set there and would prefer him to Thompson.

Bush and Wilson are effectively a coinflip for me at this point though I probably like Bush a little more. I'd just be surprised if the board shook out in such a way that those are going to be my preferred choices.

[staylor26]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Yeah but I also changed my mind since then. I don't think I'd really like Wilson at 29 either. Same with Thompson who I would've originally been pretty happy with. I think I've joined the Adderley set there and would prefer him to Thompson.

Bush and Wilson are effectively a coinflip for me at this point though I probably like Bush a little more. I'd just be surprised if the board shook out in such a way that those are going to be my preferred choices.

I agree with all of that for the most part.

Adderley, Baker, Murphy, and even Mullen would have to all be gone for me to consider Bush/Wilson. Thompson too, but from the sounds of it I’m more open to him than you are.

I’d probably even take Dexter Lawrence before those guys, but they’re all in my next tier of defensive guys that I’d prefer not to take in the 1st but I wouldn’t hate it either.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Hitchens would be a viable Sam; not sure I like him as a Will at all. In the middle I think he's passable but perhaps a little less than I'd like to see there.

If we drafted a new MLB, the LB corps seems pretty straightfoward - Hitch as the SLB, Newjack in the middle and DoD as the WLB.

Devin Bush for 29.