If the top 3 are gone, do we consider Strong in the first or Smith, Perriman, Dorsett, or Coates in the second?

Landry
Matthews
Stills
?

Cameron
Simms



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/13/2015 05:31PM by jlyell13.

Clay isn't a WR and I doubt we are going to have TE making 14m a year.

Just a Charlie Casserly mock where he had Parker and Cooper available at 14

jlyell13 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Clay isn't a WR and I doubt we are going to have
> TE making 14m a year.
>
> Just a Charlie Casserly mock where he had Parker
> and Cooper available at 14

Don't doubt it. They are trying to make it happen. It won't be 14 mil. JC is on a one year 5 mil deal.

Clay isn't a WR but Cameron is...4.5 40, 6'5 250....Got Split end written all over him....Mike Evans type.

Charlie Casserlie is losing it. I saw his mock live today. So far off it's fantasy. Amari Cooper dropping to Cleveland at 19???? Get real Charlie...LOL

We pretty much HAVE to take a receiver in the first or second this year. We still need a big, fast, young, WR despite the fact that we just got one in Stills.

I'd almost bet that we experiment with Clay playing a bit of WR this off season as well...

The problem is, as of right now, we have only two guys (Landry and Matthews) where we know exactly what we have. EVERYONE else at the receiver position is a mystery for this team. We can guess all we want about how they will play for us but as of right now, no one knows.

We just gave Wallace away for mostly nothing except cap savings...shame, because he was worth more to us on the field than a measly fifth, IMHO.

And just ignore CB, OG, FS, DT2? Stills is a younger version of Mike Wallace PLUS we added Cameron...a PB TE. Clay is not a WR but Cameron can be...

We had no choice but to make a projection. Living with the Ireland contracts would have set us back for years if we hadn't made a change. We have to plan for next year as well. RT, Pouncey, Suh, etc.

Mike Wallace is great IF you have a QB like big Ben who can hit him on a dime and he doesn't have to do anything BUT stick his arms out and catch the ball... but we don't have that. The bad news is there are about 3 or 4 of those in the league and they are not on Miami's roster. Let's instead play to RT's strengths and the strengths of the offensive philosophy. Wallace was only a possession receiver in this system and he cost about 11.5 mil more a year than Stills AND he was a divisive force on the sidelines.

Ken Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> We pretty much HAVE to take a receiver in the
> first or second this year. We still need a big,
> fast, young, WR despite the fact that we just got
> one in Stills.
>


I agree wholeheartedly.


Wouldn't mind signing a vet like Cecil Shorts so we can take Todd Gurley at 14.


> I'd almost bet that we experiment with Clay
> playing a bit of WR this off season as well...


Clay runs a 4.75 40 and is over 250lbs at just 6'3.

He's not an answer at WR.

Cameron is a better option there if one of them has to play WR. He runs a 4.55




>
> The problem is, as of right now, we have only two
> guys (Landry and Matthews) where we know exactly
> what we have. EVERYONE else at the receiver
> position is a mystery for this team. We can guess
> all we want about how they will play for us but as
> of right now, no one knows.
>
> We just gave Wallace away for mostly nothing
> except cap savings...shame, because he was worth
> more to us on the field than a measly fifth, IMHO.


Kenny Stills was a 5th round pick.

Yeah I think we take parker or Strong at 14 if available


Strong
Landry
Stills
Matthews


Cameron/ Sims



Could we drop a bit and take Perriman or Dorsett?

Add Hazel? FA? Conley? Montgomery?

and then who do you bench? Landry, Stills, Clay or Cameron?

We just spent a 3rd rd pick in this year's draft on a WR in Kenny Stills. We will not be drafting another WR in the early rounds.

I don't think we are going with Stills, Landry and Matthews. #1 WR come in the draft, and early.

Stills and Landry are starters, barring injury,and Matthews will see more activity. We need Parker or Strong unless they go with a small speedy guy like Dorsett or Lockett but would have to take them in the second but small guys like Tavon Austin don't always have success

I don't think Clay is coming back, and with Cameron and Sims not sure we need him unless Cameron is another Keller. Hopefully not

OK..then I repeat...

who do you bench? Landry, Stills, Clay or Cameron?

Clay is coming back. He wants to be a apart of this. Suh...2 TE...Lazor offense.

We have to draft a WR early, OR sign a mid-tier Free Agent. Why? Simple, look at it like this:

* Stills replaces Wallace's production (best case)

* Landry repeats Landry's production from last year

Now, you have to replace the combined production of Hartline AND Gibson.

And even then, all other things being equal, you've built an offense that gets you to... wait for it... 8-8.

Now, unless you really expect Rishard Matthews or Matt Hazel to step up to the next level, it's clear we need at least one more WR who can be a meaningful contributor. And what we *really* need to get beyond 8-8, is a BIG, physical WR who can be a real threat in the red-zone. That's something none of Wallace, Gibson, Hartline or Landry brought to the table last year, and we still need that.

Anyway, we have to have a starting Flanker to pair with Stills. Landry is a slot guy, not a flanker.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/14/2015 03:20PM by Doctor Feelgood.

dolfanmark Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> We just spent a 3rd rd pick in this year's draft
> on a WR in Kenny Stills. We will not be drafting
> another WR in the early rounds.

***************************************************

What would be great is if one of the top three WRs is still there at 14. Then Miami could field calls for a trade down and get their third rounder back, or possibly a second rounder.

Or, if that is the BPA and nothing is there that Miami really wants, then take that WR.

But, I think Miami would get a trading partner so they wouldn't take a WR and (hopefully) grab another position of need.

yeah Clay can't get separation to play WR. If Cameron is that fast maybe.

if they don't get Parker or Strong there aren't any other top level big receivers. Lockett and Dorsett are slots Can Landry move to a wide out?

We need to take a big/fast WR to take this offense to the next level and give us multiple red zone threats. We need to solve the CB, S, or OL via FA and draft

Dashon Goldson?
Patrick Robinson?

I'm confident Landry can play flanker. He's our best WR right now.

JoeFootball Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And just ignore CB, OG, FS, DT2? Stills is a
> younger version of Mike Wallace PLUS we added
> Cameron...a PB TE. Clay is not a WR but Cameron
> can be...

RE: Of course not, we shouldn't ignore any of those positions...but the fact is that we will not be able to address all of our needs this off season. We need to address the ones that give us the biggest bang for our bucks...that means offense, because it scores points.

>
> We had no choice but to make a projection. Living
> with the Ireland contracts would have set us back
> for years if we hadn't made a change. We have to
> plan for next year as well. RT, Pouncey, Suh,
> etc.

RE: Agreed.
>
> Mike Wallace is great IF you have a QB like big
> Ben who can hit him on a dime and he doesn't have
> to do anything BUT stick his arms out and catch
> the ball... but we don't have that. The bad news
> is there are about 3 or 4 of those in the league
> and they are not on Miami's roster. Let's instead
> play to RT's strengths and the strengths of the
> offensive philosophy. Wallace was only a
> possession receiver in this system and he cost
> about 11.5 mil more a year than Stills AND he was
> a divisive force on the sidelines.

RE: Ego and primadonna issues aside, Wallace still caught 10 TD's despite RT's issues. We have to get that production back from somewhere, and add to it even...a TE is more than likely not going to get it done.

We need another "playmaker" badly on offense and we only have room for one...a WR.

Matthews is not that guy, never will be...he's a good fill in type player and a depth guy, but that's all he is ever going to be.

Oh, and Orande Gadsden ran a 4.7 40...if Clay can run good routes he's fast enough.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/23/2015 04:53AM by Ken.

JoeFootball Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> RE: Of course not, we shouldn't ignore any of
> those positions...but the fact is that we will not
> be able to address all of our needs this off
> season.
>
> I never understood why people say that. You have
> no choice BUT to address them. It may not be with
> big name FA's and 1st round draft picks but....

RE: Because we will not add to what we already have a TE assuming Clay leaves, power RB, WR, OG, LB or two, CB or two, and a QB, while at the same time have 8 of them be upgrades.
>
> It was said last year and they did, in fact
> address each position. We got a FS and a CB and
> some linemen....etc. How long can you make that
> excuse? People have been saying it for years now.

RE: It isn't an excuse. Every simgle year we'll have needs that we have to address, evey team does.
>
> Also tired hearing the overblown "RT's issues".
> Wallace caught 10 TD's "despite" Tannehill's
> issues? How about he caught 10 THANKS to some good
> QB play? The best season of his career was 10 td's
> WITH Roethlisberger. Why does Tannehill get
> knocked for it? Because he wasn't perfect?

RE: I'm a big supporter of RT, he was my pick when we drafted him. And Wallace might very well have caught his 10 TD's as a result of good QB play not because of good WR play. The truth is most likely in the middle somewhere. I for one am happy with the way RT's career is going...but he was not as good as he could have been. That's not a knock, just the reality.
>
> We have players at WR and TE. They have (or are
> trying to) invest in a few players that had down
> years BUT who have also proven they can play at a
> high level.

RE: True.
>
> Wallace = 10 td's to replace?
> Hartline = 2 td's to replace?
> Gibson = 1 td to replace?
>
> Clay = 6-8 td's
> Cameron 6-8 td's
> Stills 6-8 td's
>
> That's a likely improvement of 5-11 td's with the
> potential for much more. I'd say all three could
> have 10. It's hard to cover everyone when you put
> 5-6 weapons on the field like we are going to have
> this year.

RE: I doubt we see alot of Cameron and Clay at the same time...sure we'll see some if Clay comes back but it won't be a staple. Stills is almost a complete mystery for us because what he did with another team and situation is not any kind of gurantee of what we'll see on our team.
>
> Our running game will be better this year just by
> the simple fact that we are getting people back
> from injury. We were looking pretty good until
> Albert when down. That will also open things up.

RE: Assuming we don't have another rash of injuries and that we actually develop some chemstry along the time this year.
>
> I am all for getting another WR to play outside
> but only if it's done the right way. For instance,
> don't reach for one if the top guys are gone and
> don't bypass talent at a position where we have a
> gaping hole just to land a WR. We need a CB, FS
> and OL more than we need another WR.

RE: 8 of the top 10 scoring offenses made the playoffs last year. We need offense, offense, and more offense. Defense is critical and we can't ignore it's improvement but it's just not as much as a potent, deverse and prolific offense. One of the top talents WILL be available at #14. For instance, DGB may have issues but he is a top talent.


We have no one to start at FS or OG as of now. I would rather
> depend on Stills as our outside guy than Jamar
> Taylor as the starting CB all season. He will
> never last.

RE: Stills will be our outside guy, that's a given. However, we need another outside guy that is a playmaker. Landry is going to play in the slot and we won't regularly use a TE on the outside. In any event it would be stupid to rely on any of our TE's being sucessful the entire season doing it. Matthews is what he is, a #4 player on the depth chart...we have to draft a WR in the first or second at the very latest. Taking one at #14 would better because we'd get better talent...in theory.