The 2nd rd doesn't make any sense, it has us giving up our own pick and not getting Indianapolis's pick.. Thus giving the colts 2 second rd picks and us none when it should be the other way around...

-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche

Truth, we are not picking a Guard at 12. Ireland would be run out of town on a rail. I don't care how good the Guard is.

________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Truth, we are not picking a Guard at 12. Ireland
> would be run out of town on a rail. I don't care
> how good the Guard is.


Lol, you ain't fibbing...... I would be blown away if that is what we do.....

-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche

Crowder52 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The 2nd rd doesn't make any sense, it has us
> giving up our own pick and not getting
> Indianapolis's pick.. Thus giving the colts 2
> second rd picks and us none when it should be the
> other way around...


The font graphics on that site make it hard to follow but I thought he had us take FS TJ McDonald with our 2nd.

And I laughed when I saw he didn't have our colts pick. I mean c'mon...its one thing to get the order wrong in the 5th or 6th round...but the 2nd round? Hard to take it seriously when the guy doesn't do his home work.


Still, if it broke the way he suggests I'd take:


Chance Wormack, OG in round #1.

Stedman Bailey, WR WVU and Joseph Fauria, TE UCLA in the 2nd.

Brennan Williams, OT UNC and Michael Buchanan, DE from Illinois in the 3rd.

Aaron Murray, QB UGA in the 4th

Omoregie Uzzi, OG GA Tech in the 5th

I'd look for CB's in the 6th and 7th but at that point you are looking for someone who fell through the cracks at any position.

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Truth, we are not picking a Guard at 12. Ireland
> would be run out of town on a rail. I don't care
> how good the Guard is.


Never say never Berk...

I think people get WAY to hung up on position or meaningless internet rankings in the first round. At the end of the day, you either get a star player, a contributor or a bust. I'd rather hit on a star player than settle for a so-so player at a sexier position. Especially when I have a HUGE need at that less sexy position.

LG is probably the most vital position on the o-line in a zone blocking scheme. If your G's can't pull you are going to struggle running the ball which means play action is going to be way less effective.

If I thought I was getting a Perennial Pro Bowl LG at #12 I wouldn't hesitate to take him if he was the best player on my board.

At the end of the day, the proof is in the pudding. If you hit on players in the first round then it doesn't matter what position they play. You just have to hit on them. I'd feel FAR more comfortable at #12 believing the best O-lineman in the draft is going to be a star player for me than the 4th best Pass Rusher, the 2nd OT or the 3rd CB.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/06/2013 11:09AM by THE Truth.

It has the Colts drafting the FS with our pick, the guy got it backwards...

-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche

The problem with taking the LG at 12, is if he doesn't solve some pressing needs with the rest of the picks, he will be crucified and rightly so.. I think BPA is going to have a different meaning again this year.. It is going to have to merge a little bit with dire needs... Last year most people don't believe RT was ranked 8 on anybodies board but he went 8... That was a merger of our teams need vs BPA... I expect something similar this year as far as the BPA rule...

-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche

Crowder52 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The problem with taking the LG at 12, is if he
> doesn't solve some pressing needs with the rest of
> the picks, he will be crucified and rightly so..

Taking a LG at #12 has nothing to do with the rest of the draft.

MISSING on a LG at #12 will get you fired.

Just like missing on both 2nd's and 3rd's this year would get him fired.


> I think BPA is going to have a different meaning
> again this year.. It is going to have to merge a
> little bit with dire needs...


Like I said before...either you hit on a pick or you don't.

If you don't...then you get fired.

If you do... then it doesn't matter what position it is. Nobody fires GM's who consistently find stars in the draft because those guys win games once they find a QB.



> Last year most
> people don't believe RT was ranked 8 on anybodies
> board but he went 8... That was a merger of our
> teams need vs BPA... I expect something similar
> this year as far as the BPA rule...

QB's value's are inflated by the importance of the position the play.

Conversely, LG's like Wormak have their value depressed because of the position they play. That doesn't mean they can't be great players.

Besides, OG is a NEED position for us.





Let me ask you this Crowder and you Berk...

IF you knew Wormack was a Hall OF Fame OG like Larry Little...would you take him at #12 if you also knew there were no other Hall of Fame players in the draft?

Truth, I understand your point, and maybe with a probowl LG, it would help the running game and pass protection that it would be more of an immediate help then drafting a stud WR... There is to value to going that route. If the running game and pass protection were more dominant this year then that would have taken a lot of pressure off of Tannehill, physically and metaphorically speaking, I still don't think it happens... But maybe you are right, who knows...

-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche

Your best chance fixing a hole in your team is in the first rd. If you don't spend that pick on a hole and are unable to fill that hole properly later in the draft then choosing a LG at 12 becomes relative to what else you were able to do with the rest of your picks IMO...

-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche

Crowder52 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Truth, I understand your point, and maybe with a
> probowl LG, it would help the running game and
> pass protection that it would be more of an
> immediate help then drafting a stud WR... There is
> to value to going that route. If the running game
> and pass protection were more dominant this year
> then that would have taken a lot of pressure off
> of Tannehill, physically and metaphorically
> speaking, I still don't think it happens... But
> maybe you are right, who knows...


Hey, if AJ Green or Julio Jones is on the board at #12 this year I'd sprint to the podium even if we'd signed a #1. But they aren't.

I think Wormack is the single best O-lineman in the draft and will be a dominant force in the NFL for a decade.

I'm fine with people disagreeing with that assessment, but I can't subscribe to the argument that a LG isn't worthy of being drafted at #12 if someone believes he's the best player on the board. Whether they are right or wrong will be determined down the road and their employment will rest on that success or failure of that assessment.

I guess what I'm getting at is this:

If there's another player at a different need position that I'm more or equally confident will be an elite NFL player for the next decade then I take him. If I felt that way about Wormack (after going through the pre-draft process) I wouldn't hesitate to take him if there wasn't a similar high end player there when we picked.

Having looked at this draft class to the limited extent a fan can, I'm not enamored of the top end talent. I don't think there is a can't miss DE/OLB/MLB/CB/FS/WR/OT that will be there at #12. Because of that, I have zero issues taking an OG at #12 who I do think is a can't miss/elite prospect.

Worst thing a franchise can do short of never finding a QB is to whiff on first round picks.

Crowder52 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Your best chance fixing a hole in your team is in
> the first rd. If you don't spend that pick on a
> hole and are unable to fill that hole properly
> later in the draft then choosing a LG at 12
> becomes relative to what else you were able to do
> with the rest of your picks IMO...


I think that drafting for need is the worst way to draft.

If two players are rated about the same then you break the tie with need, but you have to take the guy you think has the brightest future ahead of him every time.

Its one thing to draft for need when you get out of the first round. The players are bunched closer together and they all have warts.

I think doing that in the first round, and even the second round, is the surest way to get fired as a GM.

I am not saying you reach for a player but if the best player on the board is a Qb do we pick him.. Of course not, BPA is foolish if you neglect to address serious holes on your team.. If you have a WR who is rated as a mid first rd pick but is behind what you have a QB, RB, or DT rated who are available, you take the WR if he is a guy who you think has "it"...

-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche

That being said If a stud pass rusher falls who you have rated in the top 5 or so then I agree you most likely have to take him.. But if that happens you better use those extra picks to trade back up and grab the stud WR mid first rd...

-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche

Crowder52 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am not saying you reach for a player but if the
> best player on the board is a Qb do we pick him..

QB is kind of a unique scenario kinda like Kicker and Punter. You won't see a team with a franchise QB take a QB in the first round often, but it worked out pretty well for Green Bay when they did it.

There are always exceptions to the rule. That doesn't mean the rule isn't a good standard.

Even so...if I'm picking 12 and the single best player on the board is a QB you bet I take him.


> Of course not, BPA is foolish if you neglect to
> address serious holes on your team.. If you have a
> WR who is rated as a mid first rd pick but is
> behind what you have a QB, RB, or DT rated who are
> available, you take the WR if he is a guy who you
> think has "it"...


You can't force a square peg into a round hole. And you can't fill every hole in your team in every off-season. Thinking that you have to fill them all leads to selecting lesser caliber prospects which leads to less talent on your team.

So in your scenario I take the QB. I may not need a 2nd franchise QB, but SOMEBODY does. If he's that good that I have him clearly above all the other players in the draft then I take him and I flip him for something I need or for draft picks when the opportunity arises.

Truth- If you take the Qb and pass on your top rated WR, the most likely WR you believe to succeed in the draft and rated in the area, that is the best way to get fired as well... You are saying the best way to help this team would be wasting your 1st rd pick on a guy that will not catch a snap all year unless your top ten pick the year before falls on his face.. Forget about the mess you create in the locker room by drafting a QB 12.... Honestly u have got to be kidding me with that nonsense...

-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche

When Mike Mayock or the pundits analyze who is gonna go where, they judge a lot of that on what a teams needs are... They will prelude their analysis of a teams need and why they will choose this guy.. Sure in a round about way they are choosing BPA but that is relative as well from team to team scout to scout.. I am sure some guys in a room are hot on guys that other guys in that room are not...I mean what kind of analysis and big board put Egnew in our lap in the third rd... If you want a player you go get him, your board is your back bone but not the end all be all...Ireland drafts based on what he thinks he needs to help the team vs ranking... Otherwise why would he trade up to get Daniel Thomas? He wanted that guy and he went and got him, that is not a BPA move IMO..

-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche

Crowder52 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> When Mike Mayock or the pundits analyze who is
> gonna go where, they judge a lot of that on what a
> teams needs are... They will prelude their
> analysis of a teams need and why they will choose
> this guy..


That's what they get paid to do...speculate on what teams will do...but if you watch the draft...guys like Kiper, Mayock, McShay, Etc all have a list of who they consider to be the best player available.



> Sure in a round about way they are
> choosing BPA but that is relative as well from
> team to team scout to scout..

Its all relative. the entire ranking process is subjective to the people doing the analysis and the prejudices they have with regards to need. It all factors into their rankings.


> I am sure some guys
> in a room are hot on guys that other guys in that
> room are not...

Right. But one guy makes the call. Besides, their board is set weeks in advance after taking all the scouts and coaches input into account.


> I mean what kind of analysis and
> big board put Egnew in our lap in the third rd...

Actually, I remember reading that Egnew was a guy Philbin asked for so we deviated from BPA.

But that's what happens when you draft for need, and we needed a receiving threat at TE in the worst way.


> If you want a player you go get him, your board is
> your back bone but not the end all be
> all...Ireland drafts based on what he thinks he
> needs to help the team vs ranking

Says who? All I've ever heard about Ireland is him preaching about how you have to trust the board. Sure you make concessions to need if things are close...and the deeper you get into the draft the closer the talent levels get...but I've never seen anything that claims he drafts for need.

> ... Otherwise why
> would he trade up to get Daniel Thomas? He wanted
> that guy and he went and got him, that is not a
> BPA move IMO..

Actually that is a BPA move. He had a higher grade on Thomas and wanted him. If he didn't think Thomas was far better than the other options he would have sat there and taken a similar RB to fill a need.

Now you can question the grade they had on him, but they felt he was a steal at that point in the draft and that he wouldn't fall to their next pick so they moved up for him.

It doesn't matter what approach you take to the draft if your evaluations are wrong.

wait, truth, did I read correctly that you'd take a QB at 12 this year if he is the highest rated guy in the board?

________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.

Truth- BPA is not a black and white thing, it is gray.. When Ireland took Daniel Thomas, he said there was an unexpected run on RB, that made him nervous so he traded up to get Thomas.. This past year, Ireland bragged He had a 1st rd grade on Lamar Miller, yet he took Egnew and others over miller.. Do you honestly think Egnew had a higher 1st rd grade then Miller, which is why he went ahead of Miller. BPA with Ireland and many other GM'a is a myth, that they use to justify certain picks, but when you add it all up it doesn't make sense.. So please explain to me how Lamar Miller and Egnew fit the BPA mold you speak of...

-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/07/2013 04:05AM by Crowder52.

lol esti, your posts always make me laugh... thank you.

I agree with The Truth. Take the best player available.

We tend to always have a need when there are no great players at the spot or that we are willing to get.

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> wait, truth, did I read correctly that you'd take
> a QB at 12 this year if he is the highest rated
> guy in the board?


If we were picking 12 and Aaron Rodgers was on the board...are you going to pass on him for a lesser talent at oline or de?

Crowder52 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Truth- BPA is not a black and white thing, it is
> gray.. When Ireland took Daniel Thomas, he said
> there was an unexpected run on RB, that made him
> nervous so he traded up to get Thomas.. This past
> year, Ireland bragged He had a 1st rd grade on
> Lamar Miller, yet he took Egnew and others over
> miller.. Do you honestly think Egnew had a higher
> 1st rd grade then Miller, which is why he went
> ahead of Miller. BPA with Ireland and many other
> GM'a is a myth, that they use to justify certain
> picks, but when you add it all up it doesn't make
> sense.. So please explain to me how Lamar Miller
> and Egnew fit the BPA mold you speak of...


I just explained that situation. Philbin asked for a te. So they made a concession and drafted for need. If that's not reason enough to stop drafting for need I don't know what is.

If Ireland had stayed with the board and taken miller in the 3rd he likely gets egnew or a TE that might have actually helped us this year in the fourth. Had he stuck to bpa he wouldn't have had to trade other assets to move up for miller.

Yes it's not black and white all the time. It's a standard, but there are always exceptions to the rule. Like when you don't have a franchise qb.

But the best gm's...the Ron Wolfe's, the bobby bethard's, the Ozzie Newsome's of the world always go bpa when it's not close.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/07/2013 03:21PM by THE Truth.

THE Truth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> berkeley223 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > wait, truth, did I read correctly that you'd
> take
> > a QB at 12 this year if he is the highest rated
> > guy in the board?
>
>
> If we were picking 12 and Aaron Rodgers was on the
> board...are you going to pass on him for a lesser
> talent at oline or de?

berk can certainly speak for himself but he didn't ask you about Aaron Rodgers or any QB who is now known to be great IN THE PROS, he also didn't ask you about Andrew Luck or RGIII or Russell Wilson, he asked you about the draft THIS YEAR and the Quarterbacks this year who was the highest rated quarterback THIS YEAR, NOT Dan Marino or Bart Starr or Bret Favre.

And, I believe, he was talking about the Miami Dolphins who now have Ryan Tannehill and not just Chad Henne and Matt Moore as we did last year.

THE Truth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> berkeley223 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > wait, truth, did I read correctly that you'd
> take
> > a QB at 12 this year if he is the highest rated
> > guy in the board?
>
>
> If we were picking 12 and Aaron Rodgers was on the
> board...are you going to pass on him for a lesser
> talent at oline or de?


the best QB in this draft can't hold Roger's jock. So BPA at 12 will not be a QB and if he was, I wouldn't take him. Now if Andrew Luck fell to us at 12, maybe that's something to consider, but obviously that ain't happening.

And to the Rogers point, 20 some teams did pass on him in the draft bc no one knew he was "Aaron Rogers" at the time....

________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.