Re: Interesting mock draft
 

[quote=offiss;298046]Stupid for who we would take at those spots.

Everyone thinks all you have to do is draft a player at a position of need and you have filled that need, not so! Take a look at last off season, and we still have a need for a pass rusher, and a safety, why?

Draft the best available player, we have so many holes to fill because of our stupidity, it would be just like us to trade down get 2 players who are average at best, and the Pats walk away with a perenial pro-bowler. The question must be asked, if the Pats are indeed willing to make this trade, why? Why not keep the picks and draft these players themselves? The one team that has proven to may be the best team in the NFL at spotting talent, is willing to give up 2 #1 picks to draft Landry, why?[/quote]

So with a defensive line that needs a run stuffer and a pass rusher, why would it be stupid to take two first round talents to fill them as opposed to betting the ranch that one guy is going to make a difference?

How do you know that the Pats are going to pick Landry?

Since offensive and defensive success is predicated on line play, you can't honestly think the Redskins defense would be better off taking a rookie safety over two defensive linemen. If you do, you need one of Al Koken's virtual physicals.

Why do the Eagles only draft linemen with their first round picks year in and year out? Because it makes sense.

Re: Interesting mock draft
 

I just don't see this draft going that way. First C.Johnson just might be the Raiders first pick. If that happens look for Russell to go to the Lions. Then who knows what happens. Sitting three the Browns could take a QB or RB in Quinn or Peterson. If it is Peterson then look for the Buc's to move down with a trade with Miami so the Dolphins get thier QB. But if the the Browns take Quinn and who could blame them with Frye and Anderson as your QB the Buc's would be left holding the bag! I really don't know what the Browns will do! But what ever they do it will have us all watching because then teams will wanted to move up to get Quinn like Miami [if they Fins don't pick up Green before the draft]. That is if the Browns go with Peterson. If they[Browns] go Quinn then Peterson is left there TB may trade out to a team like the Vikings maybe? TB may just go with G.Adams DE for that matter. What ever happens if Al Davis throws everthing out the window and gets Johnson it could be very fun first few hours on saturday.

Re: Interesting mock draft
 

[QUOTE=offiss;298046]Everyone thinks all you have to do is draft a player at a position of need and you have filled that need, not so! Take a look at last off season, and we still have a need for a pass rusher, and a safety, why? [/QUOTE]

The Lions didn't NEED all those wide receivers, but their philosophy was to take the best players available. How'd that work out?

We have gaping holes with the pass rush and run stoppers up front. You think we should just ignore that and draft Adrian Peterson?

Re: Interesting mock draft
 

I would like this trade if we are sure we can get some guys that we like on our draft board. I personally am a big fan of Ben Grubbs the OG from Auburn. He wouls be an upgrade over Doc. I'm sure of it. That guy has a high motor and put 225 40 times at the combine. He would be a steal at 28.

Now at 21 I like Justin Harrell but there also could be a DE there to. I have been saying I would like this trade to go down since we brought up trying to trade for Samuel ( who we don't need at this point). Now the question is how do you make up the 200 or 300 draft value points, and to be honest I don;t have an answer because I don't see the Pats coming off more picks unless they really think Landry is the missing piece or really put alot of value on finding Harrison's replacement.

Re: Interesting mock draft
 

You know to actually make this trade work as far as the 'Draft Value Chart' the Pats would have to include both of their #1's (24 and 28) (740pts and 660pts) as well as their #3 (91) (136pts) AND their #4 (127) (45pts). Which would bring them to 1581, which would still if you want to get really technical leave them 19 pts short of the #6 value of 1600 ... which they could make up by including their compensatory pick in the 5th round (171) (23pts).

So ...

To actual satisfy the value as dictated by the draft value chart the Pats would have to give the Skins their two firsts, their third, fourth, and fifth round picks. Which would leave the Pats with less draft picks than the Skins currently hold (the Pats have no #2). Obviously the value chart is a guide, but if it shows you how valuable the #6 pick is and how jealously the Skins ought to guard it if they really want to get proper value in return.

I don't, however, forsee Roger Goodell saying ...

"We have a trade ... the Patriots move to #6, in return the Redskins receive picks #24, #28, #91, #127, and #171." I guess you could talk about picks in future years, but man this would be a complicated trade.

Re: Interesting mock draft
 

That would be awsome if that happend. Lions fans have to be even more hyped.

Re: Interesting mock draft
 

[QUOTE=Grim21Reaper;298048]So with a defensive line that needs a run stuffer and a pass rusher, why would it be stupid to take two first round talents to fill them as opposed to betting the ranch that one guy is going to make a difference?

How do you know that the Pats are going to pick Landry?

Since offensive and defensive success is predicated on line play, you can't honestly think the Redskins defense would be better off taking a rookie safety over two defensive linemen. If you do, you need one of Al Koken's virtual physicals.

Why do the Eagles only draft linemen with their first round picks year in and year out? Because it makes sense.[/QUOTE]

Well first off if you would pay attention they are not first round talent, they are second round talent, so it would be stupid to take them in the forst round, but of coarse that is are MO we over pay for talent.

Second if you would pay attention the article refering to this trade said they would probaly move up to take Landry to take over for Harrison.

But does it really matter who they move up and take? If they do move up it's because they see more value with 1 player than with 2!

Please don't compare our personel department with the eagles, as they will actually draft a player that belongs in the first round. But part of the reason they draft lineman is because of there ability to draft other players later in the draft, example Westbrook, we give up the farm for Portis, they take Westbrook later in the draft and he becomes every bit as valuable if not more to them for minimal $, then Portis is for us at 52 million. That is why they can draft lineman, we are not that savvy.

So in closing by all means draft these 2 guys just like we had to give up a #2 this draft for Rocky. Having a need and properly filling it are 2 totally differnet things.

Re: Interesting mock draft
 

[QUOTE=Beemnseven;298077]The Lions didn't NEED all those wide receivers, but their philosophy was to take the best players available. How'd that work out?

We have gaping holes with the pass rush and run stoppers up front. You think we should just ignore that and draft Adrian Peterson?[/QUOTE]

Did they take the best player available? OBVIOUSLY NOT!

They took big Mike Williams funny right before that draft we were conteplating taking him and I said he could be a huge bust he was to slow of foot getting off the line, funny they couldn't see it? So the fact is they have the right philosophy but have no idea how to impliment it because of thier inability to evaluate talent.

Why would we draft Peterson? Portis is better right?:rofl:

But we should draft CJ if he's available, even though we are stocked at WR from last season's spending binge. CJ is a can't miss barring injury!

How did our pick of Rocky work out last draft? Apparently we still need a LB. And that's what this is about if you can't fill that need with a bonified stud [pro-bowler] at the 6 spot then fill another need!

I don't mind trading down, but we better trade down for the right players!

Re: Interesting mock draft
 

[QUOTE=artmonkforhallofamein07;298080]I would like this trade if we are sure we can get some guys that we like on our draft board. I personally am a big fan of Ben Grubbs the OG from Auburn. He wouls be an upgrade over Doc. I'm sure of it. That guy has a high motor and put 225 40 times at the combine. He would be a steal at 28.

Now at 21 I like Justin Harrell but there also could be a DE there to. I have been saying I would like this trade to go down since we brought up trying to trade for Samuel ( who we don't need at this point). Now the question is how do you make up the 200 or 300 draft value points, and to be honest I don;t have an answer because I don't see the Pats coming off more picks unless they really think Landry is the missing piece or really put alot of value on finding Harrison's replacement.[/QUOTE]

I am with you on that, I do not want Harrell in the first, but either Grubbs or Blalock I think we have a huge need for, I said in a earlier post as well as SS, Blalock and Moss, but I would be happy with Grubbs and Moss, but I think we have glossed over the importance of the need for a OG, give me one of those 2 guards and either Moss or Carricker. that would be nice.

Re: Interesting mock draft
 

[QUOTE=offiss;298268]Did they take the best player available? OBVIOUSLY NOT!

They took big Mike Williams funny right before that draft we were conteplating taking him and I said he could be a huge bust he was to slow of foot getting off the line, funny they couldn't see it? So the fact is they have the right philosophy but have no idea how to impliment it because of thier inability to evaluate talent.

Why would we draft Peterson? Portis is better right?:rofl:

But we should draft CJ if he's available, even though we are stocked at WR from last season's spending binge. CJ is a can't miss barring injury!

How did our pick of Rocky work out last draft? Apparently we still need a LB. And that's what this is about if you can't fill that need with a bonified stud [pro-bowler] at the 6 spot then fill another need!

I don't mind trading down, but we better trade down for the right players![/QUOTE]

We don't know about Rocky yet, but in my opinion, it doesn't look promising. But your criticism of that pick can be used with the Mike Williams example -– you have to separate the philosophy of drafting for need from player evaluation.

A team can ignore their needs, draft what they perceive to be the best player available and still whiff on a player because their evaluation was wrong.

But what you clearly can't do is draft the best player available regardless of the makeup of your current roster – San Diego wouldn't draft a running back, Indy wouldn't make a huge swing for a quarterback, and neither would we when we have to consider the development of Jason Campbell, salary cap constraints, and the obvious understanding that there is only one ball to go around on every single play.

If your team is completely stocked, and you have no glaring needs at any one position, I could fully understand drafting the best guy on the board when you pick.

We have zero pass rush, and we could not stop the run last year. It would be madness for us to take Brady Quinn or Adrian Peterson because Quinn would never see the field, and Peterson would never see the ball.

Re: Interesting mock draft
 

we should take L. Laundry, covers the field and is a beast at saftey, next to sean taylor, these guy reeve havoc on the field, great run stoppers and great cover safteys

Re: Interesting mock draft
 

[QUOTE=Beemnseven;298295]We don't know about Rocky yet, but in my opinion, it doesn't look promising. But your criticism of that pick can be used with the Mike Williams example -– you have to separate the philosophy of drafting for need from player evaluation.

A team can ignore their needs, draft what they perceive to be the best player available and still whiff on a player because their evaluation was wrong.

But what you clearly can't do is draft the best player available regardless of the makeup of your current roster – San Diego wouldn't draft a running back, Indy wouldn't make a huge swing for a quarterback, and neither would we when we have to consider the development of Jason Campbell, salary cap constraints, and the obvious understanding that there is only one ball to go around on every single play.

If your team is completely stocked, and you have no glaring needs at any one position, I could fully understand drafting the best guy on the board when you pick.

We have zero pass rush, and we could not stop the run last year. It would be madness for us to take Brady Quinn or Adrian Peterson because Quinn would never see the field, and Peterson would never see the ball.[/QUOTE]

Of coarse, unless you use 1 of those players in a trade for need with someone else.

But to say there are no other players of need besides DL is also insane, and one of the reasons we have zero pass rush is why? Perhaps last season addressing of this very need in Carter? Obviously that hasen't worked out has it? I don't want the same problem next draft a revolving door of DL who don't pan out. we have to many holes and 1 legit draft pick, address 1 need? Or address 2 to 3 needs, tough call, I think we roll the dice trade down and get at least Moss and either Blalock or Grubbs, we are not winning the SB next season, so we allow Moss to develope for a year, who knows we may be able to grab another potential starter later in the draft there are some sleepers in this draft, especailly in the defensive backfield.

Re: Interesting mock draft
 

Greg Williams is on his way back from the Landry workout and is going to put an end to all this Tom Foolery. We'll be taking my man LL with #6. Just get used to the idea cuz that's how this thing is going down. LL and ST laying the smack-down on opposing teams game plans for the next decade or so.

Re: Interesting mock draft
 

[quote=bigm29;297871][URL="http://www.fanball.com/fb/article.cfm/ID.9652/Football"]Fantasy Football - Fanball.com[/URL]

thats probably the best scenario i can see happening for the skins[/quote]


i think it sucks

Re: Interesting mock draft
 

[QUOTE=offiss;298321]Of coarse, unless you use 1 of those players in a trade for need with someone else.

But to say there are no other players of need besides DL is also insane, and one of the reasons we have zero pass rush is why? Perhaps last season addressing of this very need in Carter? Obviously that hasen't worked out has it? I don't want the same problem next draft a revolving door of DL who don't pan out. we have to many holes and 1 legit draft pick, address 1 need? Or address 2 to 3 needs, tough call, I think we roll the dice trade down and get at least Moss and either Blalock or Grubbs, we are not winning the SB next season, so we allow Moss to develope for a year, who knows we may be able to grab another potential starter later in the draft there are some sleepers in this draft, especailly in the defensive backfield.[/QUOTE]

OK, but why trade one of those players to fill a need when you could have drafted to address the need in the first place?

I'm with you on trading down -- and it's maddening that since we pissed this year's draft away, we now have to scramble to patch together a selection of draft picks which is the way we should have been building this team to begin with.

We have needs just about everywhere, no one denies that. And I don't think anyone's under the delusion that we can fix all of our problems with just 4 picks in one draft. For this season, I think we're set at quarterback, running back, and wide receiver.

But when your defense is in complete shambles across the board (with the possible exception of linebacker) you have to start somewhere. As it is said everywhere by anyone who understands the game of football: it all starts up front. If you have a pass rush, that makes up for deficiencies in the secondary. When you have run stuffing defensive tackles, that makes average linebackers look like solid Pro Bowlers.

The reason we have no pass rush is not because they went after Andre Carter. I think Carter gave us about what was expected given his track record -- in other words, he was never a sack-master in San Fran, so my expectations of him weren't as high as others, and I suspect, the coaches. All in all, he was a disappointment. But to say that the way to improve the pass rush is to ignore it and draft elsewhere is completely nonsensical. Carter hasn't worked out because he was the wrong player -- not because he's a defensive end.

You will have the same problem with the D-line next year if last year's old, washed up, rickety D-line comes back and gives us the same results. We still have to find their replacements.

Maybe I'm reading you wrong, but it sounds like you believe the way to build up a football team is to ignore the weaknesses and draft players that don't have anything to do with strengthening those weaknesses.

Because you were wrong once with a player doesn't mean you never address that player's position again.

Re: Interesting mock draft
 

[QUOTE=Beemnseven;298376]OK, but why trade one of those players to fill a need when you could have drafted to address the need in the first place?

I'm with you on trading down -- and it's maddening that since we pissed this year's draft away, we now have to scramble to patch together a selection of draft picks which is the way we should have been building this team to begin with.

We have needs just about everywhere, no one denies that. And I don't think anyone's under the delusion that we can fix all of our problems with just 4 picks in one draft. For this season, I think we're set at quarterback, running back, and wide receiver.

But when your defense is in complete shambles across the board (with the possible exception of linebacker) you have to start somewhere. As it is said everywhere by anyone who understands the game of football: it all starts up front. If you have a pass rush, that makes up for deficiencies in the secondary. When you have run stuffing defensive tackles, that makes average linebackers look like solid Pro Bowlers.

The reason we have no pass rush is not because they went after Andre Carter. I think Carter gave us about what was expected given his track record -- in other words, he was never a sack-master in San Fran, so my expectations of him weren't as high as others, and I suspect, the coaches. All in all, he was a disappointment. But to say that the way to improve the pass rush is to ignore it and draft elsewhere is completely nonsensical. Carter hasn't worked out because he was the wrong player -- not because he's a defensive end.

You will have the same problem with the D-line next year if last year's old, washed up, rickety D-line comes back and gives us the same results. We still have to find their replacements.

Maybe I'm reading you wrong, but it sounds like you believe the way to build up a football team is to ignore the weaknesses and draft players that don't have anything to do with strengthening those weaknesses.

Because you were wrong once with a player doesn't mean you never address that player's position again.[/QUOTE]


You are reading this wrong, I have alway's said that the key to a team starts with the offensive line, a QB, then 2 man to man CB's, After that the D-line, but if you also have a need lets just say safety as we do, and that safety is a much better safety than any of the linemen are at thier perspective positions, then I think you have to go safety. The Landry comparisons are that of an elite safety, I haven't heard that about any of the D-linemen, do we see a Julius Peppers with this bunch? No. There may very well be a lot of quality amoungst the lineman, but are anyone of them tagged for superstardom? So trading down and drafting a Moss shouldn't be much of a drop off if any compared to taking a G.Adams, Moss just plays with that killer instinct, and if we can add a guard with him beautiful.

Part of our line problem last year looked like tackle trouble, but the fact is Carter was being man handled by TE's, rather than commanding a double team, this freed up the offensive line to double up on our tackles on when ever they ran to his side, which in turn put our LB's in a tough situation, I am sorry to have to say it but Carter is a very week link in our D-line, there is a reason the 9er's tried to move him to LB, he couldn't hold the point of attack, we all saw him just get pushed all over the place our last game by the Giants backup TE, that is just flat out unacceptable, a DE being dominated by a backup TE.

As for drafting Landry? I am all for it, he should be a big help allowing Taylor to be the best safety in the game once he gets comfortable, part of Taylors lack of production last year was due to the fact that he had to try and be all over the place, AA wasen't going to cover anyone, and teams were not going to throw at Taylor so long as we had a safety who couldn't cover on the field.

My feeling is this, I see a lot of D-lineman in this draft as well as DE's, if we trade down we can still get what I believe will be a good one in Moss, who may have the most upside of any DE, this should allow us to draft what I believe may be our biggest need [although overlooked] and that's a bonified stud at guard.

Next draft depending how we go with this one, will hopefully provide the rest of what we need on defense, at least we will have all our picks to try.

The Carter deal is a real problem for us in all aspects, a lot of money for a guy who may be the equal to AA as a DE?

Re: Interesting mock draft
 

[QUOTE=offiss;298520]My feeling is this, I see a lot of D-lineman in this draft as well as DE's, if we trade down we can still get what I believe will be a good one in Moss, who may have the most upside of any DE, this should allow us to draft what I believe may be our biggest need [although overlooked] and that's a bonified stud at guard.[/QUOTE]

Did you know that for the price of Andre Carter we could have signed Drew Brees? Sickening.

Anyway, as for LaRon Landry -- how could we take him at #6 and still have access to another D-lineman later on in the first or second round? The way people talk about Landry, if we try and trade down even just a few spots, he won't be there. Teams are reportedly trying to trade UP to get him.

I've never believed O-guard was a big need even with the loss of Dockery. I feel like a veteran journeyman could fill in adequately this year; maybe look for a guard in next year's draft class.

Re: Interesting mock draft
 

Hindsight is always 20/20 though. With all I'm reading about Okoye, I'm more than fine with sitting and taking him at six. We'll worry about using all those draft picks next year.

Re: Interesting mock draft
 

[quote=offiss;298520]The Carter deal is a real problem for us in all aspects, a lot of money for a guy who may be the equal to AA as a DE?[/quote]

I think that's taking it a bit too far. Carter at least finished the season on the field and his play really picked up down the stretch. Look at his stats from the 5 December games... 33 total tackles, 4 sacks. Granted that doesn't excuse the first 11 games but at least he showed us something to look forward to for this year.

Arch on the other hand was a complete disaster.

Re: Interesting mock draft
 

I would love to have two first rounders, but the Patriots will unlikely trade up with multiple first round picks. New England is one of the best drafting teams in the nfl and could probobly get more out of two 1st round picks than just one high 1st round picks. The skins should try to trade down to Mia. or Atl and still get the D line help they need.

Re: Interesting mock draft
 

[QUOTE=Beemnseven;298568]Did you know that for the price of Andre Carter we could have signed Drew Brees? Sickening.

Anyway, as for LaRon Landry -- how could we take him at #6 and still have access to another D-lineman later on in the first or second round? The way people talk about Landry, if we try and trade down even just a few spots, he won't be there. Teams are reportedly trying to trade UP to get him.

I've never believed O-guard was a big need even with the loss of Dockery. I feel like a veteran journeyman could fill in adequately this year; maybe look for a guard in next year's draft class.[/QUOTE]

I agree that we really need to focus on the O-line...it was the only real bright spot from the team last year. If thier play is strong and we can repeat the running game from a year ago and the d steps up we might take the division.

Re: Interesting mock draft
 

Is the draft here yet?

Re: Interesting mock draft
 

[QUOTE=Beemnseven;298568]Did you know that for the price of Andre Carter we could have signed Drew Brees? Sickening.

Anyway, as for LaRon Landry -- how could we take him at #6 and still have access to another D-lineman later on in the first or second round? The way people talk about Landry, if we try and trade down even just a few spots, he won't be there. Teams are reportedly trying to trade UP to get him.

I've never believed O-guard was a big need even with the loss of Dockery. I feel like a veteran journeyman could fill in adequately this year; maybe look for a guard in next year's draft class.[/QUOTE]

Obviously if we deciede to draft Landry we wont be able to move down, I don't have a problem with that because I feel he will help our D more than we know. 2 safeties who can run in the 4.3 40 range, both with great instincts, the NFL as far as I know has never fielded a tandem with that kind of athletic ability at safety. If our CB's can handle 1 on 1 matchups our safeties will cover everyone else which will allow for our LB's to commit more to the run and help out the D-line. As much as I would love to draft the next Reggie White I just don't think he's in this draft. This would be a great draft to be loaded with picks there is a lot of what we need in this draft, to bad!

Re: Interesting mock draft
 

But how often are there "can't miss" DT prospects in the draft? I don't think there really ever are. Okoye is about as highly rated as you can get, AND with all that upside. His age, smarts and heart are ALL assets.