Interesting mock draft

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by offiss

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?

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?

[offiss]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

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?

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?

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!

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by offiss

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?

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!

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.

[offiss]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

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.

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.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by offiss

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.

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.

[offiss]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

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.

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?

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by offiss

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.

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.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by offiss

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?

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.