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.
[Reply]

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.
[Reply]

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.
[Reply]

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.
[Reply]

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.
[Reply]

Sure - but I think this draft is only about 20 players deep in 'pure first round talents'. Maybe 25.

Now there's gonna be some QB reaches and someone snapping up a WR or OT that is probably higher than I'd go, but by the time you get to 29, your pickin's on 'pure first round talents' are gonna be awfully slim, especially at premium positions.

There's an excellent chance that you're looking at 1 of 2 things by then - a couple if 1st round talents at positions of secondary importance (I'm looking at you, Josh Jacobs) or a big ol' mash of borderline 1st/2nd round players at positions of higher importance and more significant relative need.

So that's how you end up with Devin Bush. You're looking at a half dozen guys of all roughly similar 'prospect value' with no clear standout option of the bunch so you go with need over taking perhaps a higher end player at RB or OG.

There's a world where Bush is our pick and I'm not upset about the pick, but that world requires 3 hours of dick punches as my preferred options get picked clean right ahead of us.
[Reply]

The thing with Bush is that you can teach discipline in there and with his ability and attitude you end up with what?

Say he runs a 4.58 or something at the combine. That make you guys ok with him there?
[Reply]

If he ends up being an Eric Kendricks type player there, wouldn't you be ok with that at 29?
[Reply]

The issue is going to be his size. He's a little small. If he can make up with that with speed and instincts that would be awesome.

I will say i'd much rather a guy have speed and instincts than just size.
[Reply]

I'll admit i'm all about athletes in there now, I don't really care as much about size. Maybe we get gashed because of it, but i'm tired of lead footed reggie ragland
[Reply]

Recall a guy named Ben Heeney? Pure ILB out of KU - fast, athletic and aggressive. Went in the 5th round and washed out in 3 years - clocked right at that 4.58. He simply didn't have the necessary feel to play the game at the next level - he just wanted to run around out there and I see waaaaaaay to much of that with Bush.

I'm arguing against my previous position here as an unabashed SPARQ whore but that's what happens when you remember a guy who looked a LOT like this guy who amounted to nothing.

Now on the flipside - Bush starts to sound a lot like Eric Kendricks as well. Kendricks went mid-2nd though I think he maybe had a little more of a standout college career than Bush; dude won the Butkus award as a SR. Granted, Bush was a finalist twice.

Explain to me what makes Bush a clearly superior prospect to Kendricks. I don't see a more aggressive mentality and in fact I think Kendricks is equally aggressive while also having a better feel in space. I don't think he's an obviously better athlete and there's a chance he tests out worse.

I just think he's more of a mid-2nd guy. And again, it may turn out that a mid-2nd round who fits our needs is the best we can do - it would just disappoint me if that's the case.
[Reply]

Hey, you got something out before I finished my post again! Nicely done.
[Reply]

Lotta truth

My issue is once you get to 25 and later, I tho k the difference in a guy there and the mid 2nd is pretty much subjective opinion from each team.

If they think a guy would be there with one of their seconds sure. But if a guy is gonna go top of the 2nd that you really want just take him at 29
[Reply]

Would much rather have Wilson, he's just a more aggressive, violent player, and he's a bit bigger to boot.
[Reply]

I don’t see that at all. I’ve watched two games now of Wilson, most recently Oklahoma in the Orange Bowl, and he was passive as fuck. Never really attacked and honestly appeared to be dogging it way more than I care to see.

It sucks because I want to like Wilson so bad. He’s a prototype for today’s ILB. But I seriously question his passion for the game based on what I’ve seen so far. He was just there for most of the snaps.
[Reply]