Draft Tek new mock draft 4/9

[jri111]

So I was preparing to write this thread about how the first 12 picks would look if Detrot and TB swtich picks in round 1. I started looking at a bunch of mock drafts (and other sources) to refresh my memory on team needs when I came across Draft Tek's new 7-round mock that had the exact senario I was planning on creating. When i went through it, they actually had almost an identicle top 12 as I had in my mind.

 

http://www.drafttek.com/firstround.html

 

Here's their top 12:

 

1. Oakland - Russell

2. Tampa - Johnson

3. Cleveland - Peterson

4. Detriot - Adams

5. Arizona - Thomas

6. Washington - Carriker

7. Minnesota - Quinn

8. Atlanta - Landry

9. Miami - Brown

10. Houston - Hall

11. SF - Okoye

12. Buffalo - Willis

 

This senario involves detroit trading tampa the second overall pick for tampa's second and third rounders. I think if Russell goes to Oakland this is the most likely senario. Tampa gets Johnson who they want. Detroit can get adams who they want and pick up two picks in the process. Cleveland goes Peterson which is their best pick. Arizona gets thomas the guy they really want. Really the top 5 would play out to everyones advantage. I could see washington going with Okoye instead of carriker or trade down. I think if Quinn falls to Minnisota they will definitiely take him. Landry makes sense for Atlanta and so does Brown for Miami. IDK about Hall for Houston, but with what's available it may make sense. SF I see going willis, but they do need d-line help too so okoye makes sense. If washington takes okoye SF really like Carriker too so he could be their pick. If SF takes Willis I see the Bills taking Poz. I don't see them trying to get fancy and trade down with Willis off the board and temas like St. louis (13), Carolina (14), Pittsburgh (15), cincy (18) and the Giants (20) all who could possibily go LB. All in all though I think this is the best top 12 prediction i've seen. I also think it's the best 7-round draft for Buffalo I've seen.

 

1. Willis (LB - Mississippi)

2. Pittman (RB - Ohio State)

3. Alexander (OLB - Oklahoma)

3. Hughes (CB - Cal)

4. Wrotto (G - Georgia Tech)

6. Snelling (FB - Virginia)

7. Filani (WR - Texas Tech)

7. Cohen (DT - Florida)

 

 

Even if Willis is gone at 12 and the Bills take Poz and or we trade our 2nd for Turner I would be happy with this draft. After day one we have a starting RB to go with A-train, Two linebackers and a corner to compete with Youbotye and Thomas for the starting job.

 

This would be an EXCELLENT draft for us!

[Pyrite Gal]

I think it makes the most sense for us in terms of producing a better team in 07 to trade down in the first if we can and get more picks in the second an third rounds to increase competition in our areas of need.

 

In general, the draft is roughly 50/50 in the first round for producing players who can start at some point in their first year.

 

Last year was generally considered a pretty strong class, but an examination of the depth charts of the teams I did a few week ago showed that of the 32 first round choices, 18 were first on their teams depth charts at their position and 14 were back-ups even after a year of play.

 

There was a pretty heavy bias toward the top ten picks being starters and at 12 we are out of that window already with the talent in this class being seen as about average.

 

Particularly looking at the Bills needs, we are going to need multiple players at the key positions of RB and LB since as many as three players not on the roster now can easily make it to the final roster at RB as I think many are displeased with production as the 3rd down back by Shaud Williams and folks are hopeful about Jackson making the final roster but hope is about what this NFLE star can hope for as this is a tough transition even for stars in Europe.

 

At LB two of the players who started last season are gone and we will need two replacements there.

 

Willis looks easily like the best LB out there, but few if any pundits have him as a top 10 talent though his stock is obviously up since he proved to be a workout warrior with great Combine stats. Yet he clearly struggled in pass coverage at the Senior Bowl and given the ability to be able to make reads like a vet being central to good performance as the Cover 2 MLB, it is pretty likely that his rookie year would involve some painful learning experiences as he becomes a vet.

Willis is likely to be solid at MLB for years, but the NFL now more than ever is about production now and he simply is not that good that he will make folks forget about the best quality LBs ala a Lawrence Taylor.

 

If we trade down, we likely can still get the best of the OLBs on the board like Poz and have the ability to get a couple of the several RBs who are judged as worthy of a second or third round choice.

 

I think it almost certainly produces a better team if we trade down.

[Acantha]

1. Willis (LB - Mississippi)

2. Pittman (RB - Ohio State)

3. Alexander (OLB - Oklahoma)

3. Hughes (CB - Cal)

4. Wrotto (G - Georgia Tech)

6. Snelling (FB - Virginia)

7. Filani (WR - Texas Tech)

7. Cohen (DT - Florida)

In my opinion, that's a perfect draft for us.

[jri111]

**note: I just checked Draft tek's website again and they changed it. They're doing some kind of simulation with a seattle seahawks fan board where they had actual people simulate a live draft for the first 24 picks and then computer automated the rest, so it's a bit diifferent. I guess you'll have to take my word for it what it was before they did this crazy new simulation!

 

I really think detroit trading with TB makes the most sense. Detroit doesn't want the number two spot and TB wants to ensure they are the ones that are going to trade up to get Johnson. It works out for both teams. Detroit will probably even try to trade down from 4 again, but I don't see that happening with Russell, Johnson and Peterson off the board in the first three picks. MAYBE Miami would to try to jump ahead of the vikings for Quinn, but Washington would then be a better trading partner becuase they would have to give up less so even that doesn't make much sense.

 

the new one isn't bad either...but the other one is better. The new one has us using our third rounder to trade up to 10 to get Willis and then taking Beason in round two and Irons in Round 3. Rounds 4-7 are pretty much the same.

 

I'd rather stay put at 12 and take either Willis or Poz then give up a third to move up two spots though...but that's just me

[frogger]

pittman does little for me, If given the option of trading that 2nd and a future 3rd rounder for Turner or drafting Pittman I don't think there is any question who I'd pick. We need a back that attacks would be tacklers, makes them feel the sting of a cold December game in Buffalo, not one that can be taken down with a single tackler. I think that is why Henry had a few good years here. he was willing to attack.

not sure where he was drafted in that mock but a WR that i am really starting to like, is Mike Walker out of UCF, I didn't think he was that fast, but he ran a 4.35 and at 6'2" and 210 he has the size to be a #2, he was very productive in college, even without much of a QB.

[Mickey]

I think it makes the most sense for us in terms of producing a better team in 07 to trade down in the first if we can and get more picks in the second an third rounds to increase competition in our areas of need.

 

In general, the draft is roughly 50/50 in the first round for producing players who can start at some point in their first year.

 

Last year was generally considered a pretty strong class, but an examination of the depth charts of the teams I did a few week ago showed that of the 32 first round choices, 18 were first on their teams depth charts at their position and 14 were back-ups even after a year of play.

 

There was a pretty heavy bias toward the top ten picks being starters and at 12 we are out of that window already with the talent in this class being seen as about average.

 

Particularly looking at the Bills needs, we are going to need multiple players at the key positions of RB and LB since as many as three players not on the roster now can easily make it to the final roster at RB as I think many are displeased with production as the 3rd down back by Shaud Williams and folks are hopeful about Jackson making the final roster but hope is about what this NFLE star can hope for as this is a tough transition even for stars in Europe.

 

At LB two of the players who started last season are gone and we will need two replacements there.

 

Willis looks easily like the best LB out there, but few if any pundits have him as a top 10 talent though his stock is obviously up since he proved to be a workout warrior with great Combine stats. Yet he clearly struggled in pass coverage at the Senior Bowl and given the ability to be able to make reads like a vet being central to good performance as the Cover 2 MLB, it is pretty likely that his rookie year would involve some painful learning experiences as he becomes a vet.

Willis is likely to be solid at MLB for years, but the NFL now more than ever is about production now and he simply is not that good that he will make folks forget about the best quality LBs ala a Lawrence Taylor.

 

If we trade down, we likely can still get the best of the OLBs on the board like Poz and have the ability to get a couple of the several RBs who are judged as worthy of a second or third round choice.

 

I think it almost certainly produces a better team if we trade down.

"Workout warrior" is a sobriquet usually used to describe a guy with great numbers at the combine that aren't backed up by production on the field. As such, I don't think that is a fair description of Willis. Quite the contrary, he was on everyone's list as a top LB even before he wowed the scouts at the combine with his 40 time. He has a strong history of production on the field that is backed by solid size, weight, speed and strength numbers. As for the intangibles, he is off the charts.

 

After reading your post, it sounded as if Willis had a dismal Senior Bowl. In actuality, he was the South's MVP with 11 tackles, 7 solo, and a forced fumble. In practices they were saying things about him like this:

 

"Ole Miss linebacker Patrick Willis is doing his best to impress at the Senior Bowl. The Butkus Award winner is calling the signals for the South defense and has turned scouts' heads with his speed and desire. He even made an interception during an 11-on-11 drill."

 

I wouldn't judge a guy based on his senior bowl performance as opposed to an entire college career. They are too limited in terms of what they are allowed to do defensively but even so, if winning the defensive MVP isn't enough, what would be?

 

The first round isn't a sure thing but neither is the second round. I think the team is positioned to have an excellent draft and could only screw it up if they decided to get cute or greedy. We definitely have a huge need to fill at MLB and if we have the chance to get the best one in the draft, a guy with the production, stats and character tha P-willie has, the pick is a no brainer.

[Flbillsfan#1]

As a Bucs fan as well as a Bills fan. I sure as hell hope the Bucs don't trade up for Johnson. They have more needs than the Bills, and can't afford to give up those picks.

[R. Rich]

There seems to be a lot of talent sliding in the 2nd. First of all, TE Greg Olsen taken in the 2nd? It'll be tough for a team like Carolina, who badly needs a receiving TE, or Green Bay, if Lynch doesn't fall to them, to pass up this guy. LB Jon Beason is another guy who has been mentioned as a potential first round pick for numerous teams. Personally, I think Beason is more suited for the 2nd and I don't get this 11th hour love affair the draftniks are having for him, but he does seem to be a hot commodity lately.

 

 

Also, I don't see the Steelers passing up a stud center like Ryan Kalil even for a playmaker like Eric Wright, especially since:

 

1. Jeff Hartings, their Pro Bow center, has retired

2. Wright has some serious character issues (hmm....a CB w/ talent but major character issues? Imagine that...), and w/ the Steelers having a new coaching staff, I'm not sure they want to take a flyer on a guy who could be another Puncman or Chris Henry.

3. Kalil is a top notch caliber center, similar to Nick Mangold (who the Steelers could've drafted last year after trading up), w/ no character issues and would go a long way towards replacing Hartings (Chuky Okobi is decent, but nothing special).

 

You made some nice calls in the 2nd though, in particular Merriweather to Green Bay, Ramirez to Atlanta, and Harris to Detroit, though Harris had better not get passed up by the Bills unless they do end up w/ Willis. If those teams end up w/ those players, then I'm sure they'd be thrilled.

[Pyrite Gal]

"Workout warrior" is a sobriquet usually used to describe a guy with great numbers at the combine that aren't backed up by production on the field. As such, I don't think that is a fair description of Willis. Quite the contrary, he was on everyone's list as a top LB even before he wowed the scouts at the combine with his 40 time. He has a strong history of production on the field that is backed by solid size, weight, speed and strength numbers. As for the intangibles, he is off the charts.

 

After reading your post, it sounded as if Willis had a dismal Senior Bowl. In actuality, he was the South's MVP with 11 tackles, 7 solo, and a forced fumble. In practices they were saying things about him like this:

 

"Ole Miss linebacker Patrick Willis is doing his best to impress at the Senior Bowl. The Butkus Award winner is calling the signals for the South defense and has turned scouts' heads with his speed and desire. He even made an interception during an 11-on-11 drill."

 

I wouldn't judge a guy based on his senior bowl performance as opposed to an entire college career. They are too limited in terms of what they are allowed to do defensively but even so, if winning the defensive MVP isn't enough, what would be?

 

The first round isn't a sure thing but neither is the second round. I think the team is positioned to have an excellent draft and could only screw it up if they decided to get cute or greedy. We definitely have a huge need to fill at MLB and if we have the chance to get the best one in the draft, a guy with the production, stats and character tha P-willie has, the pick is a no brainer.

 

I think Willis a great pick by us IF we start him at SLB (which word had it he can also play), However, the MLB position in the Hybrid Cover 2 we play is simply just a route for leaving a rookie very exposed.

 

 

Specifically, in the style we play which is more like the Tamps 2 D, the MLB is called upon to both divide the field into 3rds for deep cover with safeties and to cover deep, but particularly with the emphasis we are putting on the LB to be more aggressive, really hold and play the LOS on running plays filling in for we expect to penetrate.

 

A premium is going to placed in the D the way we run it for the MLB to make vet level reads and diagnose correctly whether the D will run or pass. Willis sounds like a good guy and a bright guy, but I simply argue that rookies are not vets for a while and that opposing OCs will simply salivate at the chance to get a rookie at MLB whom they will attempt to fool into taking a step back to pass cover on a play they are running up the middle or even worse to get him to take a step in on passing plays where they send a speedy WR on a post pattern looking for six.

 

I think Willis is a good player who will not be totally fooled often. I think that his fellow teammates like Crowell (who likely will be doing play calling from the SLB slot even though it is a bit off center on the field) will need to help this rookie out recognizing Pro deception he has not seen at all from the field level and this will help also.

 

I think his teammates on the DL, (particularly the DTs) will need to step up to the plate and do an arm stop on an RB shooting the gap and slow or stop this rusher before he gets to the second level and would likely blow right by Willis speedily coming in while the RB speedily runs out.

 

However, I think there also will be a noticeable number of plays where a rookie MLB, even a good one gets undressed and we would have to hope and pray that this does not happen at bad times or that like Brad Johnson when they undressed McGee last year on a fly pattern where he failed to read that his teammate Whitner was out of position to cover the fly pattern and that there was no receiver coming underneath anyway he failed to go deep with the WR, but fortunately Brad Johnson overthrew Koren Robinson by a hair and we won the game.

 

I think if we are lucky, having the rookie Willis at MLB will only cost us one game we should have won last year and likely it will cost us two games and that this will make the difference between a 7-9 team or a 9-7 team.

 

I think that the likely apropos analogy for what the Willis MLB learning experience will be like is that went through by JP at QB. A player who is central to his units performance who is incredibly physically gifted and a really nice guy.

 

However, if you put him into a situation where he is over his head and you ask too much of him, then opponents who are good will simply take advantage of him. If this player presses too much in part because he is a very competitive type who wants to do well it can very ugly.

 

I will root hard foe Willis and if we draft him and start him at MLB I will root hard for me to be completely wrong in my fears.

 

However, I think we can do a far better job of performance on the field if we trade down this first and get some extra 2nds and/or 3rds out of it and use these resources to get the best OLB we can get later in the first (Poz or Timmons) and start them as they are rated to do at the less complex and demanding but still demanding alot SLB position. Reinforced with extra resources we then have the potential to pick up not 1 but 2 RBs on the first day from the Irons, Pittman, Booker, Jackson, etc. retinue and allow these players to compete to have one of them really prove to be the feature back we want or to join up with A-Train to have the best possible RBBC approach.

 

If we are really lucky, we get the extra picks necessary that allow us to take a Butch Davis to learn the MLB spot sitting on the bench behind Crowell. If we have 5 first day picks to devote to the task of reinforcing the LBs and RBs getting the players that we want, this team can foster competition so that the rookies who prove not to be up to immediate starts or big first year contributions (which is almost certainly going to be the case as all drafts are simply a crapshoot) we have the best chance of performing well in 07.

[obie_wan]

The only problem is that the Raiders will take Calvin Johnson at #1.

 

Al Davis does not have time to wait for a rookie QB.

 

They passed on 2 QBs better than Russell last year.

 

They will continue that trend and go with the playmaker with the least downside in Johnson.

[mattypro89]

They lso called Willis reach and that LB is our number 2 priority. That makes me give this mock a little less value as a whole because i know that LB is our Number 1 priority!

[obie_wan]

I think Willis a great pick by us IF we start him at SLB (which word had it he can also play), However, the MLB position in the Hybrid Cover 2 we play is simply just a route for leaving a rookie very exposed.

Specifically, in the style we play which is more like the Tamps 2 D, the MLB is called upon to both divide the field into 3rds for deep cover with safeties and to cover deep, but particularly with the emphasis we are putting on the LB to be more aggressive, really hold and play the LOS on running plays filling in for we expect to penetrate.

 

A premium is going to placed in the D the way we run it for the MLB to make vet level reads and diagnose correctly whether the D will run or pass. Willis sounds like a good guy and a bright guy, but I simply argue that rookies are not vets for a while and that opposing OCs will simply salivate at the chance to get a rookie at MLB whom they will attempt to fool into taking a step back to pass cover on a play they are running up the middle or even worse to get him to take a step in on passing plays where they send a speedy WR on a post pattern looking for six.

 

I think Willis is a good player who will not be totally fooled often. I think that his fellow teammates like Crowell (who likely will be doing play calling from the SLB slot even though it is a bit off center on the field) will need to help this rookie out recognizing Pro deception he has not seen at all from the field level and this will help also.

 

I think his teammates on the DL, (particularly the DTs) will need to step up to the plate and do an arm stop on an RB shooting the gap and slow or stop this rusher before he gets to the second level and would likely blow right by Willis speedily coming in while the RB speedily runs out.

 

However, I think there also will be a noticeable number of plays where a rookie MLB, even a good one gets undressed and we would have to hope and pray that this does not happen at bad times or that like Brad Johnson when they undressed McGee last year on a fly pattern where he failed to read that his teammate Whitner was out of position to cover the fly pattern and that there was no receiver coming underneath anyway he failed to go deep with the WR, but fortunately Brad Johnson overthrew Koren Robinson by a hair and we won the game.

 

I think if we are lucky, having the rookie Willis at MLB will only cost us one game we should have won last year and likely it will cost us two games and that this will make the difference between a 7-9 team or a 9-7 team.

 

I think that the likely apropos analogy for what the Willis MLB learning experience will be like is that went through by JP at QB. A player who is central to his units performance who is incredibly physically gifted and a really nice guy.

 

However, if you put him into a situation where he is over his head and you ask too much of him, then opponents who are good will simply take advantage of him. If this player presses too much in part because he is a very competitive type who wants to do well it can very ugly.

 

I will root hard foe Willis and if we draft him and start him at MLB I will root hard for me to be completely wrong in my fears.

 

However, I think we can do a far better job of performance on the field if we trade down this first and get some extra 2nds and/or 3rds out of it and use these resources to get the best OLB we can get later in the first (Poz or Timmons) and start them as they are rated to do at the less complex and demanding but still demanding alot SLB position. Reinforced with extra resources we then have the potential to pick up not 1 but 2 RBs on the first day from the Irons, Pittman, Booker, Jackson, etc. retinue and allow these players to compete to have one of them really prove to be the feature back we want or to join up with A-Train to have the best possible RBBC approach.

 

If we are really lucky, we get the extra picks necessary that allow us to take a Butch Davis to learn the MLB spot sitting on the bench behind Crowell. If we have 5 first day picks to devote to the task of reinforcing the LBs and RBs getting the players that we want, this team can foster competition so that the rookies who prove not to be up to immediate starts or big first year contributions (which is almost certainly going to be the case as all drafts are simply a crapshoot) we have the best chance of performing well in 07.

 

Bills will not draft Buster Davis to play MLB- he is a clone of Fletcher and the anti-MLB for a cover-2. Too short and gets lost in the trash when tryign to tackle.

 

As you state, the Bills would be better served by using inferior players to play the most important position in the cover-2. They would know where to go, but just couldn;t get there due to their physical limitations.

 

I don't think so.

 

You take the elite player with the speed and athletic ability to make gamechanging plays, play him and live with his mistakes - which will be overshadowed by the great plays.

[Beerball]

The only problem is that the Raiders will take Calvin Johnson at #1.

 

Al Davis does not have time to wait for a rookie QB.

 

They passed on 2 QBs better than Russell last year.

 

They will continue that trend and go with the playmaker with the least downside in Johnson.

Common man! Who are they going to start at QB, Jeff Otis? Al's got more loose screws than most, but even he wouldn't sit idle an entire off season while QBs are changing jerseys like crazy if he had thoughts of taking Johnson. Someone does have to play QB, don't they?

[jri111]

The only problem is that the Raiders will take Calvin Johnson at #1.

 

Al Davis does not have time to wait for a rookie QB.

 

They passed on 2 QBs better than Russell last year.

 

They will continue that trend and go with the playmaker with the least downside in Johnson.

 

 

 

Well my original post was suppose to be an analysis two likley senarios, one where the Raiders take Russell and one where they take Johnson. When I started doing it though, the post got REALLY long and i just realized that if the raiders take johnson there are just ENTIRERLY too many possibilities to rationally attempt to predict anything. And because i know my posts generally run too long as is, I decided just to scrap it!

 

However, I don't think its a foregone conclusion that the Raiders take Johnson. IMO if I had to put a number on it I would so 60/40 they'd take Russell and here why:

 

1. If they take Johnson they'll most likly take a second round (or later) QB to develop. They're already toying with the idea of bringing in a vetern even if they draft Russell so Russell could sit for a year and "redshirt." So if they go with Johnson, I think they'll almost definititely want to bring a younger QB along slowly and allow him to sit a few years while a veteran takes the reigns.

 

2. The veteran QB they're looking at is Josh McNown. What makes this interesting is that McNown is a Lion. Now i'm not going to overthink the intelligence of the lion's front office but they HAVE to see the implications of dealing McNown to Oakland. EVen if McNown goes to Oakland and Oakland has all the intention in the world of still drafting Russell, Detroit has all the incentive not to make the trade. here's why:

 

say Oakland gets McNown and then drafts johnson in round 1 and a QB in round 2. We all know Detroit wants out of the second pick and by far and away the best chance for that to happen is if Calvin Johnson is there. there are FAR more teams ready to give up picks for johnson, who is far more unique and valuable then Russell. Talent aside there just aren't that many teams in need of a QB in the Top ten to justify giving up multiple picks to move up (Cleveland (3)?, Minnestoa (7), Miami (9)) I'm not saying it can't happen just that it's more likely that Detroit is going to find a trading partner if Johnson rather than Russell. For that reason they hold all the cards with McNown. If they think it's even a REMOTE possibility that McNown would entice Oakland to take Johnson, they do not, and should not make the trade.

[Pyrite Gal]

"Workout warrior" is a sobriquet usually used to describe a guy with great numbers at the combine that aren't backed up by production on the field. As such, I don't think that is a fair description of Willis. Quite the contrary, he was on everyone's list as a top LB even before he wowed the scouts at the combine with his 40 time. He has a strong history of production on the field that is backed by solid size, weight, speed and strength numbers. As for the intangibles, he is off the charts.

 

After reading your post, it sounded as if Willis had a dismal Senior Bowl. In actuality, he was the South's MVP with 11 tackles, 7 solo, and a forced fumble. In practices they were saying things about him like this:

 

"Ole Miss linebacker Patrick Willis is doing his best to impress at the Senior Bowl. The Butkus Award winner is calling the signals for the South defense and has turned scouts' heads with his speed and desire. He even made an interception during an 11-on-11 drill."

 

I wouldn't judge a guy based on his senior bowl performance as opposed to an entire college career. They are too limited in terms of what they are allowed to do defensively but even so, if winning the defensive MVP isn't enough, what would be?

 

The first round isn't a sure thing but neither is the second round. I think the team is positioned to have an excellent draft and could only screw it up if they decided to get cute or greedy. We definitely have a huge need to fill at MLB and if we have the chance to get the best one in the draft, a guy with the production, stats and character tha P-willie has, the pick is a no brainer.

 

The thing that folks seem to de-emphasize (too much IMHO) is that quite frankly all the draftees deserve the sobriquet workout warrior because they have not produced anything whatsoever on the NFL field yet.

 

It certainly is reasonable to offer up their on field production in college as a rational relevant determinant of where they get drafted, but it ends there beyond being more than an indicator of what they will do in the NFL.

 

Folks seem to routinely offer up these mere indicators as seemingly stone cold lock predictors of NFL performance when they are not even that. That folks seem to propose relying on these mere indicators as not only firm determinants that any fool should be able to see of how the total career of a player will play out, but even giving firm guidance on the course and speed of development which a players career will take seems nothing short of outlandish to me.

 

What folks are proposing here is that we take a player who at best (and this is being extremely charitable to Willis) a marginal top 10 prospect (read that again PROSPECT) and assert that he will be an IMMEDIATE STARTER for us at an incredibly complex position.

 

I do not see how anyone can make this assertion (which already is well beyond a multi-rail bankshot and not recognize that even if all this is achieved that it simply is going to be quite painful as we root for this player at a number of times during the season.

 

I will hope and even pray hard that it is not, but prayer and dumb luck are gonna be are best friends which rely upon if we start Willis at MLB.

[Pyrite Gal]

Bills will not draft Buster Davis to play MLB- he is a clone of Fletcher and the anti-MLB for a cover-2. Too short and gets lost in the trash when tryign to tackle.

 

As you state, the Bills would be better served by using inferior players to play the most important position in the cover-2. They would know where to go, but just couldn;t get there due to their physical limitations.

 

I don't think so.

 

You take the elite player with the speed and athletic ability to make gamechanging plays, play him and live with his mistakes - which will be overshadowed by the great plays.

 

Do you really think that Crowell right here and right now this season would be inferior to Willis at MLB this season?

 

If so, where do I find the Kool-Aid which leads to that conclusion.

 

I assume that is what you were referring to in my post because it says that Buster would be a reasonable pick to sit on the bench behind Crowell at MLB and the player one should most realistically compare him to in judging whether he is inferior or superior to them is our current MLB back-up John DiGregorio.

 

One might argue that we should compare our back-up as a starter possibility since that is there job. However, if one takes this approach, you quickly run into similar issues if you chose Willis and start him at MLB because the likely back-up scenario is that if Willis is hurt (or like about half of first round choices is not capable of starting right away) then Crowell is your MLB anyway and then you go to your back-up at SLB which is Haggan. It gets ugly quick when one is forced to a back-up.

 

I like the pick of Willis IF he can make the start at the less complex (than MLB) position of SLB, because then he can learn the game at this position and be our back-up MLB if Crowell gets hurt and he can contribute right here and right now as SLB and also learn to be a vet in a less crucial position.

 

If you judge Willis to be a superior player to Crowell at SLB right now, then you are asserting that he essentially is a good enough player that he easily is a top -10 choice.

 

He is not, and I know of nobody (and I mean nobody) beyond his family (and probably you) that assert that.

[obie_wan]

Well my original post was suppose to be an analysis two likley senarios, one where the Raiders take Russell and one where they take Johnson. When I started doing it though, the post got REALLY long and i just realized that if the raiders take johnson there are just ENTIRERLY too many possibilities to rationally attempt to predict anything. And because i know my posts generally run too long as is, I decided just to scrap it!

 

However, I don't think its a foregone conclusion that the Raiders take Johnson. IMO if I had to put a number on it I would so 60/40 they'd take Russell and here why:

 

1. If they take Johnson they'll most likly take a second round (or later) QB to develop. They're already toying with the idea of bringing in a vetern even if they draft Russell so Russell could sit for a year and "redshirt." So if they go with Johnson, I think they'll almost definititely want to bring a younger QB along slowly and allow him to sit a few years while a veteran takes the reigns.

 

2. The veteran QB they're looking at is Josh McNown. What makes this interesting is that McNown is a Lion. Now i'm not going to overthink the intelligence of the lion's front office but they HAVE to see the implications of dealing McNown to Oakland. EVen if McNown goes to Oakland and Oakland has all the intention in the world of still drafting Russell, Detroit has all the incentive not to make the trade. here's why:

 

say Oakland gets McNown and then drafts johnson in round 1 and a QB in round 2. We all know Detroit wants out of the second pick and by far and away the best chance for that to happen is if Calvin Johnson is there. there are FAR more teams ready to give up picks for johnson, who is far more unique and valuable then Russell. Talent aside there just aren't that many teams in need of a QB in the Top ten to justify giving up multiple picks to move up (Cleveland (3)?, Minnestoa (7), Miami (9)) I'm not saying it can't happen just that it's more likely that Detroit is going to find a trading partner if Johnson rather than Russell. For that reason they hold all the cards with McNown. If they think it's even a REMOTE possibility that McNown would entice Oakland to take Johnson, they do not, and should not make the trade.

 

1. If the Raiders want McNown- they won't be taking another developmental QB in round 2 or Russell in round 1- they already have Walter.

 

2. If Detroit cuts ties with McNown, they may very well want Russell and all the trade down talk is a smokescreen.

[stuckincincy]

Do you really think that Crowell right here and right now this season would be inferior to Willis at MLB this season?

 

If so, where do I find the Kool-Aid which leads to that conclusion.

 

I assume that is what you were referring to in my post because it says that Buster would be a reasonable pick to sit on the bench behind Crowell at MLB and the player one should most realistically compare him to in judging whether he is inferior or superior to them is our current MLB back-up John DiGregorio.

 

One might argue that we should compare our back-up as a starter possibility since that is there job. However, if one takes this approach, you quickly run into similar issues if you chose Willis and start him at MLB because the likely back-up scenario is that if Willis is hurt (or like about half of first round choices is not capable of starting right away) then Crowell is your MLB anyway and then you go to your back-up at SLB which is Haggan. It gets ugly quick when one is forced to a back-up.

 

I like the pick of Willis IF he can make the start at the less complex (than MLB) position of SLB, because then he can learn the me at this position and be our back-up MLB if Crowell gets hurt and he can contribute right here and right now as SLB and also learn to be a vet in a less crucial position.

 

If you judge Willis to be a superior player to Crowell at SLB right now, then you are asserting that he essentially is a good enough player that he easily is a top -10 choice.

 

He is not, and I know of nobody (and I mean nobody) beyond his family (and probably you) that assert that.

 

PG, I just don't understand your long-time contention that a rookie MLB can't have the smarts to play the position.

 

These days, the pro game is chock full of coaches that make a gazillion decisions and issue orders during a game. Players aren't on an island. Unfortunately there are many (most) Offensive coordinators that lift their leg on a decent run game and decide that passing is the way to go, d*mn the consequences.

 

And defensive coordinators that chronically ignore what's worked most of the game, then panic and play prevent in the waning moments, result often being the opponent marching downfield with short gains to kick a winning FG. See NE's SB wins.

 

Collegian LBs have played the game for some time...they do recognize things. They have instincts. And there is help..vets on the DL, other LB's, DBs. The rookie MLB isn't out there by his lonesome. No doubt experience helps, knowing a tram's tendencies, their players over time.

 

But the offense owns the snap. Even the most astute defensive playcaller is in trouble when an offense shifts things about 5 seconds or so before the snap. And if he starts shouting out changes then, good luck.

 

If my rookie MLB shows better athletic skills than whatever else I have at that position, I'm going to work hard to get him in the starting lineup.

[jri111]

1. If the Raiders want McNown- they won't be taking another developmental QB in round 2 or Russell in round 1- they already have Walter.

 

2. If Detroit cuts ties with McNown, they may very well want Russell and all the trade down talk is a smokescreen.

 

 

1. If you believe andrew walter is anything near a potential starter in this league then you should have a good chance of getting a job with Art Shell, the ex Raiders coach whereever he is now (warning: without looking it up, i think its a good chance he's still unemployed - so sorry you're out of luck). Also Lane Kifiln has no connection or loyalty to Walter. Kiflin is a QB guy, he's going to want a guy he can teach his way as soon as he gets into the NFL. NOT a long term project who has already had other NFL coaches "hands on him" and is most likely a career backup. Also there are indications that the Raiders could be high on Trent Edwards from Standfard in the Second round (he had a good visit there last week where they worked him out pretty hard and came away impressed - sorry i don't have link and can't find where i read this, so take it for what its worth). The idea would to be trade for McNown, let him start a year or two while Edwards develops and you're still able to take Johnson in round one. So if you're detroit and you think this is a possibility you're not going to want this to happen so you wont ship McNown to the Raiders.

 

2. You're right that Detroit may want Russell and releaseing/trading McNown may be an indication of that. But I don't put too much stock in that being a good indicator. McNown only singed a two-year contract with Detriot and he was given a chance to comptete for the starting job w/ Kitna. He lost that job in training camp last year. He only has one year with $2 million left on his contract, so moving him now may make sense. it doesn't necessarily mean they're positioning themselves for a round 1 QB.

[jri111]

1. If the Raiders want McNown- they won't be taking another developmental QB in round 2 or Russell in round 1- they already have Walter.

 

2. If Detroit cuts ties with McNown, they may very well want Russell and all the trade down talk is a smokescreen.

 

 

Even more proof via ESPN insider: http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/features/rumors

 

Tuesday, April 10

WHO WHAT THE SKINNY

 

Oakland No. 1 pick Russell or Johnson?

<Apr. 10> Calvin Johnson is moving to the top of the Raiders' draft board, but there's one caveat, writes ESPN.com's John Clayton. Al Davis, who loves LSU QB JaMarcus Russell's arm, wants an alternative to Russell in order to justify taking Johnson, one of the most talented receivers to come along in years.

The Raiders are looking at Lions backup QB Josh McCown in a trade. They would consider Daunte Culpepper if the Dolphins let him go. The problem is putting something together before the draft. Trent Edwards of Stanford and some of the second-round quarterbacks could be options as well. If Davis isn't satisfied with the options, he'll take Russell.

 

WHO WHAT THE SKINNY

 

Detroit No. 2 pick Intriguing thought

<Apr. 10> Should JaMarcus Russell fall out of the No. 1 spot, he will cause considerable thinking with the Lions, writes John Clayton. Although the Lions don't want to draft a quarterback, Russell has the type of strong arm that will make them pause for a second.

Not having Calvin Johnson available at No. 2 could kill some of the Lions' trade options. That leaves the Lions with the options of taking halfback Adrian Peterson, tackle Joe Thomas and Russell. For the Lions, Russell will be a thought.

 

Monday, April 9

WHO WHAT THE SKINNY

 

Tampa Bay Trade Bucs trading up?

<Apr. 9> The Bucs appear to be leaning toward trading up to the No. 2 pick to get Georgia Tech wide receiver Calvin Johnson, according to John Clayton. That is why they are trying to do everything possible to make sure the Raiders draft JaMarcus Russell at No. 1. If the Raiders trade for the Lions' Josh McCown, which has been rumored, they might not feel a sense of urgency to draft a quarterback.

The Bucs are keeping in touch with the Lions, who hold the No. 2 pick, about keeping the trade door open. With an extra second-round pick thanks to the Anthony McFarland trade last season, the Bucs have the ammunition to get the player they want.