It is currently Sat Dec 20, 2014 8:37 am

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 21 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Mack the Knife?
PostPosted: Tue Apr 22, 2014 2:13 pm 
Offline
Draught Guru
Draught Guru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 7:32 am
Posts: 5116
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/mock-draft ... --nfl.html

Mock draft 3.0
National Football Post
By Greg Gabriel 5 hours ago

We have done two previous mock drafts at the NFP this year, but those were done by Eric Galko from Optimum Scouting and myself using an alternating pick method. This time, I'm going it alone.

Anyone who has read my articles or followed me on twitter knows that I am a believer that this year’s quarterback class will not be taken as high as many in the media believe. Some feel that three or four quarterbacks will get drafted in the top 10. While I feel that there will be (maybe) three quarterbacks taken in the first round, I don’t feel any are deserving of top 10 status. In saying that, I still believe one could go that high, but if it does happen, the team making that selection is reaching. They would be better off trading down a few slots. That being said, here is my guess of how the first round could look come May 8th. As soon as one trade is made this mock will be out the window, but then again, that’s the problem with mocks.

1 – Houston Texans - Jadeveon Clowney – DE – South Carolina
Houston has a QB need, but a QB is not one of the top 10 best players in this draft, let alone the best. Based on 2013, tape, Clowney was not the best player, but he is the most talented. When Clowney is on his game, he can be an extremely dominant and disruptive player. With people like J.J. Watt in the Houston locker room, I feel that Clowney will play to his potential. Houston will look for a QB with their next pick.

2 – St. Louis Rams – Jake Matthews – OT – Texas A&M
The Rams will be looking to trade with this pick. If they can’t get one done, Matthews could very well be there man. Rams' Coach Jeff Fisher coached Matthews' father Bruce. Fisher is hoping like father like son.

3 – Jacksonville Jaguars – Sammy Watkins – WR – Clemson
The Jags are also in need of a quarterback, but will be patient and wait until the next pick. Justin Blackmon has been a disappointment while in Jacksonvillem and by taking Watkins, they are hoping he solidifies the position. Don’t be shocked if both Houston and Jacksonville try and trade into the bottom of the first round to select their quarterback.

4 - Cleveland Browns – Greg Robinson – OT- Auburn
The Browns also have a QB need and will wait. There are some in league circles that feel Robinson is the best player in this draft. He still had two years of college eligibility left, and there is no telling how good a player Robinson can be.

5 – Oakland Raiders – Taylor Lewan – OT – Michigan
The Raiders tried to sign Rodger Saffold in free agency, but he couldn’t pass their physical. While they did sign Donald Penn, he doesn’t have the talent of Lewan who could be a fixture on the Oakland line for years to come.

6 – Atlanta Falcons – Khalil Mack – OLB – Buffalo
If the draft falls the way I have it, it won’t take the Falcons long to make this selection. Mack can play on his on his feet on base downs and be used as a pass rusher on passing downs. He is a complete player who can give the Falcons some dominant plays right from the start.

_________________
"what if there were no hypothetical situations?"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mack the Knife?
PostPosted: Tue Apr 22, 2014 2:18 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 5:31 pm
Posts: 3211
There could be worse picks, but I don't see Mack falling to 6.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mack the Knife?
PostPosted: Tue Apr 22, 2014 3:59 pm 
Offline
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 3:11 pm
Posts: 4526
Location: Vancouver, WA
I hope Atlanta doesn't end up with Lewan unless it is later in the draft after trading down for a boatload of picks.

I just get the feeling that Lewan is the Sam Baker of this draft.

_________________
Fear the BEARD!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mack the Knife?
PostPosted: Wed Apr 23, 2014 12:10 am 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 26133
Location: North Carolina
AngryJohnny51 wrote:
There could be worse picks, but I don't see Mack falling to 6.

Ditto.

Let's just hope someone picking in the top 5 thinks Sammy Watkins (or Mike Evans) is the next Julio Jones or A.J. Green. Because we really need 1 of those guys to go that high to be in the best position to get one of the Big 4:

Clowney
Mack
Robinson
Matthews

And it's still even possible that one of the WRs could go that high and we don't get them, if none of the Qbs get picked.

So become fans of Blake Bortles and Sammy Watkins, ladies and gentlemen.

_________________
"Vincere scis, Hannibal, victoria uti nescis" -- Maharbal, 216 B.C.E.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mack the Knife?
PostPosted: Wed Apr 23, 2014 10:24 am 
Offline
Playmaker
Playmaker

Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 2:59 pm
Posts: 303
Location: Memphis, TN
Yeah, that's what scares me, we need a team above us to pick a QB or Watkins in order for us to get the pass rusher or OT that we need. Either TD is going to make up his mind to trade up and make sure he gets want he wants or be ready to trade down if we don't get what we want at 6. The latter option seems like the wiser decision, but we are talking about TD here. It would not surprise me if he makes a deal with STL for #2. I just don't want to put ourselves in a position where we can't address other needs because we've traded away picks. However, a case can be made that we can secure one of the 4 elite talents in this draft by moving up. I guess it all depends on what we have to give up. Part of me says it's worth it if we can get our pass rusher and have some decent picks available to get our FS and a OT. But you're taking a big gamble there too that the OL will be ok. Same if you take a OT with that #2 (or whatever), you are gambling that you can find a way to rush the passer. At least if we stay put at #6, we can get a OT more than likely, and perhaps nab Murphy to play OLB/pass rusher in the 2nd rd. If you don't like the options at #6, you can trade back perhaps and have more options to address more areas of need. There is no perfect answer.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mack the Knife?
PostPosted: Wed Apr 23, 2014 1:32 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:15 pm
Posts: 4391
There are no perfect answers, but there are answers that should be wrong answers. To me, the wrong answer is selling the farm to get 1 player. We are where we are because we have been, "trade up happy." We need to stop that.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mack the Knife?
PostPosted: Wed Apr 23, 2014 2:29 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 5:31 pm
Posts: 3211
RobertAP wrote:
There are no perfect answers, but there are answers that should be wrong answers. To me, the wrong answer is selling the farm to get 1 player. We are where we are because we have been, "trade up happy." We need to stop that.


Not necessarily. We are where we are because our FA's haven't produced and the players we drafted aren't working out as hoped. But that is what makes the draft so hit or miss.

I'm assuming you're talking about the Julio trade. If you recall at the time, our defense was doing enough to win. Our offense was run based....ball control. We couldn't stretch the field and no one feared the passing game. Teams knew what was coming and they still couldn't stop it.

I for one don't fault the brass for what they did. They, as well as us, knew what the biggest need was. And they went out and got it. It's the other blue collar picks/projects that haven't worked out.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mack the Knife?
PostPosted: Wed Apr 23, 2014 5:09 pm 
Offline
Draught Guru
Draught Guru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 7:32 am
Posts: 5116
AngryJohnny51 wrote:
RobertAP wrote:
There are no perfect answers, but there are answers that should be wrong answers. To me, the wrong answer is selling the farm to get 1 player. We are where we are because we have been, "trade up happy." We need to stop that.


Not necessarily. We are where we are bec ause our FA's haven't produced and the players we drafted aren't working out as hoped. But that is what makes the draft so hit or miss..


um...yes, necessarily...

http://www.kffl.com/player/23950/nfl/in ... ulio-jones

the guy is great, and 'could' be a HoF'er, but...he has to be durable. when we drafted him, he had new screws in his foot, which he broke in the combine..since then, he has had one 'full' season, and even in that, he was 'dinged up'.

so even though he put up great numbers, IMO he needs one more 'good/not injured' season to make this trade 'worth it'. If we go forward mortgaging the team on Ryan ( the 8th most highly paid athlete in the WORLD ) and then give the farm to Julio, we will become Detroit South. The idea that any GM had to 'hit every other' prospect whilst giving up soooo much is not realistic in todays NFL with the cap.. :whistle:

_________________
"what if there were no hypothetical situations?"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mack the Knife?
PostPosted: Wed Apr 23, 2014 11:27 pm 
Offline
Playmaker
Playmaker

Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 2:59 pm
Posts: 303
Location: Memphis, TN
I don't know that we will have to give away the farm in this case. We just have to make it worthwhile to whoever we trade with. Say, for example, we give up #6, a 3rd this year, and a 1st next year. I don't know the values, but back-loading the deal would allow us to get where we want to be and limit how much we lose this year in order to still be able to address our needs.

I've been thinking about these options TD is faced with. If I have a chance to get an elite talent for my team and meet a need, I'm going to try and make it happen. Could we be OK with Matthews (if he's there for us at #6) and perhaps a pass rusher in the 2nd tier? I don't know for sure, but I know my defense will be suffering for it. I have some young talent along my OL that didn't have a good first year when I gave them a chance. However, I think their pride will be wounded and they will want to prove themselves, so I might take a chance from that perspective and get my pass-rusher. I personally don't think this team is going to get back to where they need to be without a pass-rusher, and that means Clowney or Mack. I think even if we have to give up our 2nd rd pick this year, I would do it and take my safety with the 3rd rd pick. Getting a pass-rusher of that ability could transform our defense overnight. And having a significantly better defense means more possessions on offense. And more possessions means more opportunities for Ryan and company to break you down and score. If the OL is even a little more towards average (which I believe it will be with Asamoah alone), our offense is going to be more like it was prior to last season.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mack the Knife?
PostPosted: Thu Apr 24, 2014 12:20 am 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 26133
Location: North Carolina
AngryJohnny51 wrote:
I for one don't fault the brass for what they did. They, as well as us, knew what the biggest need was. And they went out and got it. It's the other blue collar picks/projects that haven't worked out.

Counter argument to that is though at the time we made the trade, it was a time when picks would have been really beneficial. Michael Turner was starting to slow down. His performance had dropped off every year from 2008 to 2010, and we saw in 2011 that trend continued. That would have been the perfect time to try and find his replacement if the team insisted on keeping the ball-control offense.

In the past 2 years combined, this is where the Falcons run game ranks:

32. Jaguars - 2,629 yards
31. Falcons - 2,644 yards
30. Cardinals - 2,744 yards
29. Cowboys - 2,769 yards
28. Steelers - 2,920 yards

Doug Martin, Bernard Pierce, Vick Ballard, or Alfred Morris were within reach come in 2012. Now we're at 2014 and hopefully get our guy. But trading for Julio hurt our ability to fill that critical offensive spot.

Obviously the same argument can be made about not having a good replacement for Tony. Again, 2014 is the year where the Falcons may be drafting the heir apparent to Tony that they could have gotten in 2011 or 2012, Kyle Rudolph, Julius Thomas, Dwayne Allen, were within reach.

Again, the beef is the Falcons (wrongly) assumed that they were 1 amazing WR away from winning a title, due to them ignoring the age of their RB, TE, and also poorly assessing the OL (letting Dahl walk), and also not adding much talent to the defense over the course of previous years (Jerry busted, Dent stunk) and the misses in FA (DUnta, Ray Ray, etc.)

But we can continue to argue about this for years and years. Trading for Julio by itself can be considered a great move, but pretty much 90% of the other moves were terrible. And the simple fact is that if you're going to give up assets like we did in that Julio trade, your margin for error is a whole lot smaller.

That's one of the reasons you try your best to keep picks, if you miss on a pick like Jerry or Konz, then you can make up for it with another pick.

_________________
"Vincere scis, Hannibal, victoria uti nescis" -- Maharbal, 216 B.C.E.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mack the Knife?
PostPosted: Thu Apr 24, 2014 2:07 am 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:15 pm
Posts: 4391
jagstang76 wrote:
I don't know that we will have to give away the farm in this case. We just have to make it worthwhile to whoever we trade with. Say, for example, we give up #6, a 3rd this year, and a 1st next year.

This is exactly what it means to, "give up the farm." In this case, you're giving up a top prospect next year, and a potential starter, or role player this year. That's too much to give up for any player other than a QB.

That's exactly why the Julio Jones trade was a bad move. Look at how often Julio has been hurt. If we had two other players on the field in addition to Julio, then him getting hurt would not have set the team back as far as it did. Fast forward to this year, we have needs at DE/OLB, OT, TE, SA, and CB. (to say nothing of depth issues) If you give away our 3rd this year and 1st next year, how do you intend to fill all of those holes? With scrubs? What happens if Roddy loses a step this year and WR becomes a major need? What happens if no OT's step up and Baker continues to regress?

If we continue to give up 1st-3rd round picks, we are never going to catch up with our existing problems, much less get ahead of the game.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mack the Knife?
PostPosted: Thu Apr 24, 2014 8:17 am 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 5:31 pm
Posts: 3211
Quote:
Again, the beef is the Falcons (wrongly) assumed that they were 1 amazing WR away from winning a title, due to them ignoring the age of their RB, TE, and also poorly assessing the OL (letting Dahl walk)


I agree 100%. But this is all in hindsight. At the time, the team and majority of fans thought we were one piece away. The Falcons went all in. It didn't work. You can fault them for failing, but you cannot fault them for trying. They did what they thought they had to to get a title....And as I said. I don't like the results just like the rest of you....but hey, sometimes you get the bear and sometimes the bear gets you.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mack the Knife?
PostPosted: Thu Apr 24, 2014 10:37 am 
Offline
Playmaker
Playmaker

Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 2:59 pm
Posts: 303
Location: Memphis, TN
RobertAP wrote:
jagstang76 wrote:
I don't know that we will have to give away the farm in this case. We just have to make it worthwhile to whoever we trade with. Say, for example, we give up #6, a 3rd this year, and a 1st next year.

This is exactly what it means to, "give up the farm." In this case, you're giving up a top prospect next year, and a potential starter, or role player this year. That's too much to give up for any player other than a QB.

That's exactly why the Julio Jones trade was a bad move. Look at how often Julio has been hurt. If we had two other players on the field in addition to Julio, then him getting hurt would not have set the team back as far as it did. Fast forward to this year, we have needs at DE/OLB, OT, TE, SA, and CB. (to say nothing of depth issues) If you give away our 3rd this year and 1st next year, how do you intend to fill all of those holes? With scrubs? What happens if Roddy loses a step this year and WR becomes a major need? What happens if no OT's step up and Baker continues to regress?

If we continue to give up 1st-3rd round picks, we are never going to catch up with our existing problems, much less get ahead of the game.


Hey, I'm not disagreeing with you that it hurts to give up so much. I don't know exactly what we'd have to give up to move to #2 for example. The way I see it, we know it would cost us to get an elite playmaker, but a late 1st next yr and an extra pick this yr (hopefully not too high) will set us back by 2 players that will likely not have the same level of impact. That's a risk to be evaluated if it's worth it, but we have so few playmakers on defense that I think it would make a huge difference. If we stay put and hopefully get a decent OT, we do help our OL (which I will not diminish the importance of that) but leave our defense in a poor state. I think even that is a risk though because we have to pray that someone takes a QB before we pick to get something we can use. And I'm not sure we will be able to get a good deal to trade back if we are stuck. So the question is: Do you sit on your hands and hope it works out, or do you stay aggressive and make a move to get that elite guy who you know is going to make a difference? I don't want to give away the farm again, but the cost of not getting a player that will help us now is tough swallow too. If we do get lucky and get our OT at #6, then perhaps we get lucky again with our 2nd rd pick and find a pass-rusher, but I don't like our history of making smart picks. I debated this argument a good deal in my mind, and my conclusion (which hopefully isn't biased by the talent I like at the top of this draft, namely Mack) is it would be better for the team to bite the bullet and get the elite player rather than risk not getting what I want or reaching to fill a need.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mack the Knife?
PostPosted: Thu Apr 24, 2014 2:14 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:15 pm
Posts: 4391
If you can't find a player who can help the team at the #6 pick in the draft, you shouldn't be managing an NFL team.

There's plenty of talented players in this year's draft who can help us immediately. There will be talent available in the 2nd and 3rd rounds that can make an impact on this team this year. If you make the trade up for Clowney, you are limiting yourself to fixing one position on the field, out of 7 or 8 that need help. If you don't make the trade, there's potential for you to fix 2 or 3. If you trade down, you might be able to fix 3 or 4.

Considering the talent issues on this team, the ideal scenario would be for us to trade down and acquire more 1st or 2nd round picks. The more positions that we can address with 1st or 2nd round picks, the better off we'll be. If we address only one position, we're not going to be much better for it. If we give up 1st and 2nd round picks next year, we're hurting our ability to continue to address shortcomings. (which we obviously have a lot of)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mack the Knife?
PostPosted: Thu Apr 24, 2014 2:44 pm 
Offline
Draught Guru
Draught Guru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 7:32 am
Posts: 5116
RobertAP wrote:
If you can't find a player who can help the team at the #6 pick in the draft, you shouldn't be managing an NFL team.




Image

_________________
"what if there were no hypothetical situations?"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mack the Knife?
PostPosted: Thu Apr 24, 2014 3:07 pm 
Offline
Draught Guru
Draught Guru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 7:32 am
Posts: 5116
"You look at him as a fundamental football player when you talk about feet, hip and hands, like we watch Khlail Mack, he's actually atrocious,” Hoge said. “Clowney as a football player is not very good. Amazing athlete. Don't get confused by being an athlete and being a good football player. Not a very good football player."

The discussion of Mack over Clowney with the No. 1 overall pick in the 2014 NFL Draft got heated up earlier this week. It's not that outrageous. But shrugging off Clowney as a quality football player? That's just dumb.

"[Clowney] doesn't play with his feet, hip and hands like Khalil Mack. Gets controlled, trucked a lot," Hoge said. "The second he tries to swim move you he's neutralized if you get inside his pads which is easy because he plays so high."

Could Clowney work on his fundamentals? Yes. Coaching would help just about every single player out there. But that's no reason to insult his intelligence and laugh about taking him No. 1 overall.

"Jadeveon Clowney does not play very smart as a football player. He has a long learning curve to be successful in the NFL," Hoge said. "I would take Mack in a heartbeat over Clowney in the first round, first pick, all day."


http://thebiglead.com/2014/04/21/merril ... ll-player/

_________________
"what if there were no hypothetical situations?"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mack the Knife?
PostPosted: Thu Apr 24, 2014 3:42 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 5:31 pm
Posts: 3211
Quote:
If you can't find a player who can help the team at the #6 pick in the draft, you shouldn't be managing an NFL team.


Here's what we can "expect" at number 6. I made a list of all #6 picks from 2000 to 2012. (Too early to tell on last years pick) Don't see any Hall of Famers and only one "great" player. (Vernon Davis)

2000 - Corey Simon, DT, Eagles. Had 9.5 sacks as a rookie and went down hill after. Finished his career in '07 with 32.5 career sacks.

2001 - Richard Seymour, DT, Patriots. Very good player who has 57.5 career sacks. Won a Super Bowl or two with the Pats. Probably second best on the list.

2002 - Ryan Sims, DT, Chiefs. Had a 8 year career and had 8.5 career sacks. Meh.

2003 - John Sullivan, DT, Saints. Out of football by 2006. 1.5 career sacks. Now puts groceries in sacks at the local Publix.

2004 - Kellen Winslow, TE, Browns. Full of promise early, off the field foolishness effectively ended his career for all intensive purposes. (knee) 25 career td's.

2005 - Pacman Jones, CB, Titans. Plenty of talent and plenty of trouble.

2006 - Vernon Davis, TE, 49ers. A physical specimen, he was Gronkowski before Gronkowski. 53 career td's.

2007 - LaRon Landry, SS, Redskins. Nothing special that I see.

2008 - Vernon Gholston, LB, Jets. Out of football in 3 years. Can take comfort in knowing that he was one of the biggest busts ever. Some here wanted him if I recall. :hand:

2009 - Andre Smith, OT, Bengals. Took two years to become the starter in Cincy.

2010 - Russel Okung OT, Seahawks. 45 starts in 4 years. Too early to tell.

2011 - Julio Jones, WR, Falcons. Shiny hood ornament. You guys either love him or hate him.

2012 - Morris Claiborne, CB Cowboys. Started 22 out of 32 games. Has 2 interceptions. Too early to predict his career, but so far it doesn't look extraordinary.


So as I said, the 6th overall pick looks good on paper, but I really don't see any homeruns hit on the above list....do you???? I guess TD is going to have to do much, much better than the 13 GM's did with their above picks because after all, with the 6th pick you should help your team or you should be in the NFL.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mack the Knife?
PostPosted: Thu Apr 24, 2014 6:36 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:15 pm
Posts: 4391
Great post AJ51. I love it when people do the legwork on this kind of stuff. I'll match you with the 1st overall picks in the draft back to 2000.

2013 Eric Fisher (OT) - Too early. Didn't look very good last year, and had a couple of surgeries.
2012 Andrew Luck (QB) - Only two years in, he's looking ok. He certainly doesn't look like a washout.
2011 Cam Newton (QB) - Cam has showed some signs of being a fantastic player. He's also showed that he can hit rock bottom with the best of them.
2010 Sam Bradford (QB) - I'm hearing a lot of, "bust," talk surrounding Bradford at this point.
2009 Matt Stafford (QB) - Stafford and Megatron are about all that Detroit has going for it. Stafford has put up some serious numbers for the past couple of years.
2008 Jake Long (OT) - Played very well for three years, then fell off and Miami let him go. He also tore his ACL and MCL at the end of last year. I'd still take him over anyone on our roster.
2007 JaMarcus Russel (QB) - Not so much of a bust as a no-show.
2006 Mario Williams (DE) - Struggled a bit his first year, but has been a 10 sack a year player since.
2005 Alex Smith (QB) - Has been an average NFL starter. Not really what you want from a #1 overall pick.
2004 Eli Manning (QB) - One of the top 10 QBs in the league. Also has a couple of Super Bowl rings to his name.
2003 Carson Palmer (QB) - Played for one of the worst franchises around. He has been a fairly consistent starting QB.
2002 David Carr (QB) - Never quite got it together. Was done as a starter in 2007. No longer in the league.
2001 Michael Vick (QB) - I'm not going to rehash this one.
2000 Courtney Brown (DE) - 19 career sacks. Out of the NFL by 2006.

I don't think your list or my list really prove anything. But they're fun to look at. There are no, "sure things," in this game. That's why giving up the farm is a bad idea. The draft is as much about luck as it is about research. Since there is a luck factor, putting all of your chips on one guy is a bad move. Better to take your chances with several guys.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mack the Knife?
PostPosted: Thu Apr 24, 2014 9:29 pm 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 26133
Location: North Carolina
AngryJohnny51 wrote:
Here's what we can "expect" at number 6. I made a list of all #6 picks from 2000 to 2012. (Too early to tell on last years pick) Don't see any Hall of Famers and only one "great" player. (Vernon Davis)

You'll probably be surprised then in 5-10 years when Richard Seymour gets into the Hall. It's not a question of if, but a question of when. Widely considered the best 3-4 defensive end since Bruce Smith, although Aaron Smith never gets enough love…

AngryJohnny51 wrote:
You can fault them for failing, but you cannot fault them for trying.

Normally AJ51, I'm right there with you. If you draft Peter Konz, widely considered to be a quality NFL prospect and winds up being a bum, I can't get too upset at that. I didn't love the Ray Edwards or Dunta Robinson signings at the time, but they were somewhat necessary, so I can't really fault them for trying. Both Edwards and Robinson were good NFL players, so the fact that they were garbage here isn't necessarily their fault (I could blame the coaches, but not necessarily the front office)

Now, back in summer of 2011 we debated this back and forth that trading up for Julio was an "all in" move designed to get them into the Super Bowl within 1 or 2 years. And you could certainly say that it "worked out" for the Falcons by making it to NFC Championship Game in 2012, although that is probably an oversimplification. And now the Falcons are back in the middle of the pack. It also assumes that the team could not be in a better position had they "stayed the course" and could be in a potentially better situation.

We'll still be talking about this for years...

_________________
"Vincere scis, Hannibal, victoria uti nescis" -- Maharbal, 216 B.C.E.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mack the Knife?
PostPosted: Fri Apr 25, 2014 8:16 am 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 5:31 pm
Posts: 3211
Quote:
Now, back in summer of 2011 we debated this back and forth that trading up for Julio was an "all in" move designed to get them into the Super Bowl within 1 or 2 years. And you could certainly say that it "worked out" for the Falcons by making it to NFC Championship Game in 2012, although that is probably an oversimplification. And now the Falcons are back in the middle of the pack. It also assumes that the team could not be in a better position had they "stayed the course" and could be in a potentially better situation


I'm not really an "if's or but's" guy. The facts are the facts. We didn't win a Super Bowl. Period. We are know a middle of the pack team due to many reasons which are all implied above. Period. "But" (lol) if we did win the Super Bowl when we went all in, we wouldn't be having these conversations.

Like I said, we can blame them for failing, but I don't blame the effort.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mack the Knife?
PostPosted: Fri Apr 25, 2014 3:24 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:15 pm
Posts: 4391
AngryJohnny51 wrote:
Quote:
Now, back in summer of 2011 we debated this back and forth that trading up for Julio was an "all in" move designed to get them into the Super Bowl within 1 or 2 years. And you could certainly say that it "worked out" for the Falcons by making it to NFC Championship Game in 2012, although that is probably an oversimplification. And now the Falcons are back in the middle of the pack. It also assumes that the team could not be in a better position had they "stayed the course" and could be in a potentially better situation


I'm not really an "if's or but's" guy. The facts are the facts. We didn't win a Super Bowl. Period. We are know a middle of the pack team due to many reasons which are all implied above. Period. "But" (lol) if we did win the Super Bowl when we went all in, we wouldn't be having these conversations.

Like I said, we can blame them for failing, but I don't blame the effort.

Going all in isn't the way to win the Superbowl. I'm going to reference some of Pudge's past comments that Superbowls are really lucky. Your best shot at winning a Superbowl is to be competitive every year. You keep your team competitive by continuously building.

How many times have you seen the, "all in," approach work? Washington and Dallas have made a mockery of the practice. Philly tried to do it a few years ago and failed miserably. Going all in is a sure fire way to mediocrity, or worse. If you look at the teams that are there with regularity, they are teams that don't make a bunch of flashy moves. They are teams that have built through the draft, with patience and consideration.

Just like Superbowls are lucky, draft picks are lucky too. You improve your chances of getting great players by having more picks to work with. Giving up 1st, 2nd, and 3rd round picks greatly reduces your odds of being successful in the draft. Bad drafts lead to bad teams.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 21 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  


cron