Skinsfan69 presents The Draft Philosophy Poll

SmootSmack · 01-08-2007, 11:25 PM

Even though WR doesn't seem to be our most pressing need, some people are convinced that we should draft Calvin Johnson if he falls to us at #6 because he's a can't miss.

So, assuming we stay at #6 (and don't trade the pick) do we draft

A. For Need?
B. Best Player Available?

Vote or Matty will take his fan site and go home

FRPLG · 01-08-2007, 11:26 PM

I beat the poll. Go for need.

SmootSmack · 01-08-2007, 11:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FRPLG

I beat the poll. Go for need.

You're quick

FRPLG · 01-08-2007, 11:29 PM

We don't have the luxury of picking the best player. We have several needs and the 6th pick can potentially bring us more than one quality player. Plus I don't care who the hell the WR I don't EVER want to draft one in the 1st round. They are way too risky and for the most part don't give you much until late 2nd year or 3rd year.

mooby · 01-08-2007, 11:40 PM

some coaches draft the best player available, like the Saints did with Reggie Bush last year or the Ravens for example. I wouldn't be opposed to seeing us drafting the best player available, but only if there wasn't any good players that we needed in the draft.

Bill B · 01-09-2007, 12:35 AM

Got to draft defense all the way this year with the 1st pick. Either get a huge DT or DE, but someone on the front four is needed badly - the qb's on the opposing teams had too much time this year and their rating was I believe one of the highest in the NFL this year.

djnemo65 · 01-09-2007, 02:16 AM

Last can't miss WR was Mike Williams right? I was livid when the Skins didn't take him, choosing to address a need created by Smoot's departure rather than draft the "best player," but am a little more forgiving now (although if Rogers continues the way he is headed it will be pretty much a wash).

Anyway, there is something about Johnson I don't like. I don't follow the ACC to the extent that you MD and VaTech guys on here do, but has anyone else noticed that Johnson seems to not show up for the biggest games? Anyway, draft for need or trade down, don't take Johnson. We have too much money invested on our first three receivers anyway.

Edit: Oh yeah, Braylon Edwards too. We were supposedly entertaining trade scenarios to move up and get him. He hasn't exactly lit the league on fire.

SmootSmack · 01-09-2007, 02:18 AM

Wow. 12-0 so far. I was sure there would be at least one other person that agreed with Skinsfan69

chrisl4064 · 01-09-2007, 02:58 AM

**** that....

prime example, the texans needed a D-lineman

so they pass on bush..... stupid

chrisl4064 · 01-09-2007, 03:02 AM

hahaha i guess i was that one guy. sorry fellas but in my opinion this is a 2 part question.

early on in the draft yes you pick the best player available, however later on you must pick according to need and depth.

another example is passing up on merriman to get carlos rogers. however a lineman in the 6th or 7th round is needed. by then its harder to judge the "best player available"

just my take.

onlydarksets · 01-09-2007, 04:16 AM

I say both - take the best player on the board if you need him, otherwise, trade down.

Quote:

Originally Posted by djnemo65

Anyway, there is something about Johnson I don't like. I don't follow the ACC to the extent that you MD and VaTech guys on here do, but has anyone else noticed that Johnson seems to not show up for the biggest games?

I don't know about the regular season, but:
"In his final college game, the younger Johnson had nine catches for 186 yards and two touchdowns in a 38-35 loss to West Virginia in the Gator Bowl."
He did all that could be asked of him in that one.

dmek25 · 01-09-2007, 05:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by onlydarksets

I say both - take the best player on the board if you need him, otherwise, trade down.

this says it all. we definitely do not want another wide out

irish · 01-09-2007, 06:56 AM

If this team is stupid enough to draft a WR then there really is no hope. They need to draft the best available at a position that needs help.

GTripp0012 · 01-09-2007, 07:02 AM

They are really one in the same. Some positions are always going to be more valuable than others. Depending on whether you have a need at a certain position, or a certain player is versatile, all of that is factored in to total value. You should select the best player on YOUR big board. Going into the draft trying to pick only at one position per round is a bad strategy because it limits you too much.

GTripp0012 · 01-09-2007, 07:31 AM

Wasn't Charles Rogers a can't miss? And Mike Williams? Troy Williamson? David Terrell fell all the way to Chicago in 2001, was that not a good pick?

For my money, it's downright stupid to take a WR in the top 10. BEST case scenario is you pick up a Larry Fitzgerald and actually get the value of where you picked. Most likely, you will get a decent player but you're give up a huge amount of value. So now, you already are giving up value in the hopes you get something, and there is STILL a chance the WR will completely bust.

If if there was no risk of busting at the WR position, its a losing proposition. The fact that top 10 WRs often bust, makes it downright idiotic to select one that high. No reward, only risk.

View Poll Results: What's Your Draft Philosophy
Draft for need?	37	68.52%
Draft the best player available?	17	31.48%
Voters: 54. You may not vote on this poll

01-08-2007, 11:25 PM	#1
SmootSmack Mad Men Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 43,093	Skinsfan69 presents The Draft Philosophy Poll Even though WR doesn't seem to be our most pressing need, some people are convinced that we should draft Calvin Johnson if he falls to us at #6 because he's a can't miss. So, assuming we stay at #6 (and don't trade the pick) do we draft A. For Need? B. Best Player Available? Vote or Matty will take his fan site and go home __________________ You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You

01-08-2007, 11:26 PM	#2
FRPLG Franchise Player Join Date: May 2004 Age: 34 Posts: 9,232	Re: Skinsfan69 presents The Draft Philosophy Poll I beat the poll. Go for need.

01-08-2007, 11:29 PM	#4
FRPLG Franchise Player Join Date: May 2004 Age: 34 Posts: 9,232	Re: Skinsfan69 presents The Draft Philosophy Poll We don't have the luxury of picking the best player. We have several needs and the 6th pick can potentially bring us more than one quality player. Plus I don't care who the hell the WR I don't EVER want to draft one in the 1st round. They are way too risky and for the most part don't give you much until late 2nd year or 3rd year.

01-08-2007, 11:40 PM	#5
mooby MVP Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: NoVa Age: 24 Posts: 11,173	Re: Skinsfan69 presents The Draft Philosophy Poll some coaches draft the best player available, like the Saints did with Reggie Bush last year or the Ravens for example. I wouldn't be opposed to seeing us drafting the best player available, but only if there wasn't any good players that we needed in the draft.

01-09-2007, 12:35 AM	#6
Bill B Impact Rookie Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 721	Re: Skinsfan69 presents The Draft Philosophy Poll Got to draft defense all the way this year with the 1st pick. Either get a huge DT or DE, but someone on the front four is needed badly - the qb's on the opposing teams had too much time this year and their rating was I believe one of the highest in the NFL this year.

01-09-2007, 02:16 AM	#7
djnemo65 Playmaker Join Date: May 2004 Location: MA Age: 32 Posts: 2,836	Re: Skinsfan69 presents The Draft Philosophy Poll Last can't miss WR was Mike Williams right? I was livid when the Skins didn't take him, choosing to address a need created by Smoot's departure rather than draft the "best player," but am a little more forgiving now (although if Rogers continues the way he is headed it will be pretty much a wash). Anyway, there is something about Johnson I don't like. I don't follow the ACC to the extent that you MD and VaTech guys on here do, but has anyone else noticed that Johnson seems to not show up for the biggest games? Anyway, draft for need or trade down, don't take Johnson. We have too much money invested on our first three receivers anyway. Edit: Oh yeah, Braylon Edwards too. We were supposedly entertaining trade scenarios to move up and get him. He hasn't exactly lit the league on fire.

01-09-2007, 02:18 AM	#8
SmootSmack Mad Men Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 43,093	Re: Skinsfan69 presents The Draft Philosophy Poll Wow. 12-0 so far. I was sure there would be at least one other person that agreed with Skinsfan69 __________________ You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You

01-09-2007, 02:58 AM	#9
chrisl4064 Banned Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Lake Travis, Texas Age: 32 Posts: 786	Re: Skinsfan69 presents The Draft Philosophy Poll **** that.... prime example, the texans needed a D-lineman so they pass on bush..... stupid

01-09-2007, 03:02 AM	#10
chrisl4064 Banned Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Lake Travis, Texas Age: 32 Posts: 786	Re: Skinsfan69 presents The Draft Philosophy Poll hahaha i guess i was that one guy. sorry fellas but in my opinion this is a 2 part question. early on in the draft yes you pick the best player available, however later on you must pick according to need and depth. another example is passing up on merriman to get carlos rogers. however a lineman in the 6th or 7th round is needed. by then its harder to judge the "best player available" just my take.

01-09-2007, 06:56 AM	#13
irish Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 3,328	Re: Skinsfan69 presents The Draft Philosophy Poll If this team is stupid enough to draft a WR then there really is no hope. They need to draft the best available at a position that needs help.

01-09-2007, 07:02 AM	#14
GTripp0012 Living Legend Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Grand Rapids, MI Age: 25 Posts: 15,143	Re: Skinsfan69 presents The Draft Philosophy Poll They are really one in the same. Some positions are always going to be more valuable than others. Depending on whether you have a need at a certain position, or a certain player is versatile, all of that is factored in to total value. You should select the best player on YOUR big board. Going into the draft trying to pick only at one position per round is a bad strategy because it limits you too much. __________________ Shanahan: “The bad thing is he's [Sav Rocca] probably our best offensive weapon and that’s not good.”

01-09-2007, 07:31 AM	#15
GTripp0012 Living Legend Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Grand Rapids, MI Age: 25 Posts: 15,143	Re: Skinsfan69 presents The Draft Philosophy Poll Wasn't Charles Rogers a can't miss? And Mike Williams? Troy Williamson? David Terrell fell all the way to Chicago in 2001, was that not a good pick? For my money, it's downright stupid to take a WR in the top 10. BEST case scenario is you pick up a Larry Fitzgerald and actually get the value of where you picked. Most likely, you will get a decent player but you're give up a huge amount of value. So now, you already are giving up value in the hopes you get something, and there is STILL a chance the WR will completely bust. If if there was no risk of busting at the WR position, its a losing proposition. The fact that top 10 WRs often bust, makes it downright idiotic to select one that high. No reward, only risk. __________________ Shanahan: “The bad thing is he's [Sav Rocca] probably our best offensive weapon and that’s not good.”

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Skinsfan69 presents The Draft Philosophy Poll

NFL Draft Central