Complete List of 2024 Blue Bomber Draft picks.

TecnoGenius · May 02, 2024, 06:43:01 AM

Quote from: theaardvark on May 01, 2024, 03:57:16 PMThe panel was suggesting we could start 9 Nats this year, Wallace played games at OT in Buffalo, could he be in the competition for RT to give us 10 Nat starters? Longshot for a rookie to start at RT, but 6'6, 344 with a 29.5" vertical...

TSN said Wallace was way too slow/clunky to play OT. His particular assets may make him a decent guard and run-blocker though.

I think we're pretty much obligated to find a serviceable IMP RT now...

TecnoGenius · May 02, 2024, 06:50:31 AM

Quote from: theaardvark on May 01, 2024, 04:12:02 PMWe sucked on teams last year. So, they went out and got teams demons. Exactly replacing Sheed/Miller/Johnson's roles with Nats in picks 13-14. We will have to see how they pan out at this level, but on paper this looks brilliant, IMHO.

Lots of people are saying this, but is this really a thing? Does any GM ever sit there before the draft and say "I really don't want top starters, what I really want is ST-only guys". I'm thinking no.

I think the goal in the draft (for us), especially after the first round, is to find guys who could be solid, dressed, in-game injury replacements (as well as spellers) while being acceptable on ST. If 1 of every 5 of those guys turns out to be a legit starter, then bonus!! (In addition you want some extra injury backups who you can dev into the above on the PR.)

Keep in mind that not even Mike Miller was ST-only... he had a decent-sized role as the TE/FB before his injuries.

So my hunch is even these guys we are looking at as "brought in to beef up ST" are seen has having a good shot at real roles on O and D. Think: Miles, Briggs, Cole, Hallett...

TecnoGenius · May 02, 2024, 07:02:24 AM

Quote from: theaardvark on May 01, 2024, 06:50:48 PMNo player that is needed is ever an SMS casualty. If you don't have a succession plan for that position, you pay the player.

Quote from: Blue In BC on May 01, 2024, 09:04:08 PMThat's just not accurate. We had no idea who was going to replace Bailey. We had no idea who was going to replace Hardrick. There might have been someone on our PR that could replace Walker and / or Jefferson but it's TBD.

Ya, BinBC nailed it: Hardrick. "Succession plan" means you have a big FA splash lined up or a dude in-house you've dev'd 1-2 years. We fired all the IMP OL (well, save Ivy who likely won't be "it", and traveled-the-league Lofton who couldn't hack it in SSK), and let a good one walk previously (McGloster). There ain't jack squat as a succession plan for Hardrick except hopes and prayers.

The only way you can say we had a plan all along is if week 1 we're starting a NAT (Neufeld?) at RT... and it works out.

So everyone get down on your knees and pray that one of the IMP rookie OTs coming to camp are the next Yoshi!! Because that's what it's going to take or things will get real ugly for Zach in about a month!

theaardvark · May 02, 2024, 05:00:03 PM

Cut down days in Bomberland are going to be tough this year, and I think a lot of our cutdowns are going to find homes on other teams.

The new Nats DP's that are joining are going to make life tough for some current players. I wouldn't be surprised if we have multiple players refuse PR spots or get plucked off our PR.

Throw Long Bannatyne · May 02, 2024, 05:24:04 PM

Quote from: TecnoGenius on May 02, 2024, 06:50:31 AMLots of people are saying this, but is this really a thing? Does any GM ever sit there before the draft and say "I really don't want top starters, what I really want is ST-only guys". I'm thinking no.

I think the goal in the draft (for us), especially after the first round, is to find guys who could be solid, dressed, in-game injury replacements (as well as spellers) while being acceptable on ST. If 1 of every 5 of those guys turns out to be a legit starter, then bonus!! (In addition you want some extra injury backups who you can dev into the above on the PR.)

Keep in mind that not even Mike Miller was ST-only... he had a decent-sized role as the TE/FB before his injuries.

So my hunch is even these guys we are looking at as "brought in to beef up ST" are seen has having a good shot at real roles on O and D. Think: Miles, Briggs, Cole, Hallett...

I don't think you can rate Mike Miller's positional play as anything other than minimal. I think the attitude the Bombers are looking for in "our kind of guy" is a player who will be happy just to get paid to play football and will do anything asked. Whereas many more physically talented players that have had past success may only be content if they can play as a starter in a specific position. It's an attitude thing.

TecnoGenius · May 03, 2024, 02:26:30 AM

Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on May 02, 2024, 05:24:04 PMI don't think you can rate Mike Miller's positional play as anything other than minimal.

His TE/FB role was important enough that when he was IR'd we wasted an entire DI spot on a replacement for that role for most of 2023, including the post-season!

I know what you're saying -- not a starter, etc -- but some of the backup / special set roles are pretty critical to our team. Guys like Lawson, or the special-set passing down LBers (Cole, Clements) or DBs (Hallett) who spell the regulars. And the 6th/7th hoggies who are in for 20-30% of the game sometimes.

Mike Miller was as critical to his role as those guys are to theirs -- in addition to their ST role.

So maybe there's a middling role, in between starter and (mostly) ST-only guy. The above are examples of the middling (and very important) players. Examples of the ST-only guys would be Exume and Augustine, the lowest (but still dressed) on the totem poll: they really only see the field in garbage time/season, or after injuries.

Blue In BC · May 03, 2024, 01:04:09 PM

Quote from: theaardvark on May 02, 2024, 05:00:03 PMCut down days in Bomberland are going to be tough this year, and I think a lot of our cutdowns are going to find homes on other teams.

The new Nats DP's that are joining are going to make life tough for some current players. I wouldn't be surprised if we have multiple players refuse PR spots or get plucked off our PR.

Some posters suggest that every TC. It almost never happens. Every team has their own rookies to add to their PR's and unless we chop some experienced players, then it's unlikely.

Every team has rookies they hope will be all stars and have long time success. A few will but most will disappear after cut day and PR assignments.

IIRC, we have 99 players + 12 draft choices made this week. A large number will be released when rosters are trimmed to 75 non counters.

LXTSN · May 03, 2024, 01:40:10 PM

Quote from: TecnoGenius on May 03, 2024, 02:26:30 AMHis TE/FB role was important enough that when he was IR'd we wasted an entire DI spot on a replacement for that role for most of 2023, including the post-season!

I know what you're saying -- not a starter, etc -- but some of the backup / special set roles are pretty critical to our team. Guys like Lawson, or the special-set passing down LBers (Cole, Clements) or DBs (Hallett) who spell the regulars. And the 6th/7th hoggies who are in for 20-30% of the game sometimes.

Mike Miller was as critical to his role as those guys are to theirs -- in addition to their ST role.

So maybe there's a middling role, in between starter and (mostly) ST-only guy. The above are examples of the middling (and very important) players. Examples of the ST-only guys would be Exume and Augustine, the lowest (but still dressed) on the totem poll: they really only see the field in garbage time/season, or after injuries.

So in my mind, I have Clercius replacing BOO's spot and Chris-Ike replacing Miller/Jackson.
All our backups on the AR need to be able to play special teams, but it is nice when they can fill in for a bit to give some of our starters a breather when needed. I can also see them putting in Clercius on short yardage plays (swapping out Demski), if they find that he's a talented blocker.
I like the idea of Chris-Ike at fullback too. I feel like he can turn into a really nice threat out of the backfield too. You will rarely see a FB get a handoff in the CFL, but you will occasionally see them catch a pass out of the backfield with lots of space to run. Even though I don't see him as a staple in our offence, he could get close to a catch a game when teams start to overload on the WR's leaving him wide open!

theaardvark · May 03, 2024, 03:36:57 PM

My take on the draft...

Clercius and Murphy will be battling for BOO's spot. Clercius could have the inside track with his ST play.

Chris-Ike will have Millers spot. I don't see any other contenders for it. Jackson's DI spot becomes a free spot for either a rookie Int DB or WR, or even a OT.

kkc60 · May 03, 2024, 04:47:28 PM

Quote from: theaardvark on May 03, 2024, 03:36:57 PMMy take on the draft...

Clercius and Murphy will be battling for BOO's spot. Clercius could have the inside track with his ST play.

Chris-Ike will have Millers spot. I don't see any other contenders for it. Jackson's DI spot becomes a free spot for either a rookie Int DB or WR, or even a OT.

I would say it probably should be for a DE as things stand right now. Bennett hasn't proven a thing and our defense is at its best when it has three true defensive ends (last year they were lining up Walker at DE, the year prior Sayles). DB I too could get behind. Cole, Castillo, KR, DB, DE.
Last year with the lack of Canadian STers, Clement and Cole had to dress. Luckily that won't be the case this year (although Hall did a great job featuring them).

TecnoGenius · May 04, 2024, 12:42:21 AM

Quote from: LXTSN on May 03, 2024, 01:40:10 PMSo in my mind, I have Clercius replacing BOO's spot and Chris-Ike replacing Miller/Jackson.
I like the idea of Chris-Ike at fullback too. I feel like he can turn into a really nice threat out of the backfield too.

Everyone needs to go watch KW's May 1 interview on bb.com. He really spells out what his thoughts are on all these guys' positions. He basically lays out what many of us have predicted.

And lots of ideas for FB/TE usage.

And what he wants to do with Wallace.

It's great insight into the mind of the Mafia and hints as to what we'll see week 1, if all goes according to plan.

TecnoGenius · May 04, 2024, 12:44:26 AM

Quote from: kkc60 on May 03, 2024, 04:47:28 PMI would say it probably should be for a DE as things stand right now. Bennett hasn't proven a thing and our defense is at its best when it has three true defensive ends (last year they were lining up Walker at DE, the year prior Sayles). DB I too could get behind. Cole, Castillo, KR, DB, DE.

Ya, if you look at the puzzle-piece approach, I think it's clear we were really hurt by not having more DL and LB as DI's. Especially DL. We are really out of whack with the rest of the league in terms of DL rotation.

But that means we need to find some impact IMP guys that can rotate!! I would love to see some new monster DTs dressing -- not just our starter but a DI.

theaardvark · May 04, 2024, 05:29:19 PM

Quote from: TecnoGenius on May 04, 2024, 12:42:21 AMEveryone needs to go watch KW's May 1 interview on bb.com. He really spells out what his thoughts are on all these guys' positions. He basically lays out what many of us have predicted.

And lots of ideas for FB/TE usage.

And what he wants to do with Wallace.

It's great insight into the mind of the Mafia and hints as to what we'll see week 1, if all goes according to plan.

Awesome interview, and great insight. The Dru Brown "trade" pick being used as a flyer is just so fitting...