eesti Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ChyrenB Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Whether it is Best or not is a matter of
> opinion.
> > Draft a running back ahead of him at the number
> 12
> > spot and I'll say, "Good move (at least by the
> > intentions)."
>
> I have no idea what you just said

RESPONSE: Same thing as below. One of your points was that Best had not even performed in the combines and I have him in the top 12. I am merely saying that to contest Best as THE running back we should pick with our first choice is a fight that I do not care to get into right now.

But I am prepared to fight to say that we should grab WHAT WE CONSIDER TO BE THE TOP RUNNING BACK IN THIS DRAFT OR THE BEST ONE AVAILABLE AT OUR PICK.

Like I said right here next.............
>
>
> > But the point is it must be Running Back.
> >
> > Running Backs are NOT A DIME A DOZEN like
> almost
> > every other position on the field EXCEPT
> > QUARTERBACK is.

Eesti wrote:
> > When you need a BACK UP, you draft one in the
> > later rounds.

RESPONSE: It's not a BACK UP WE NEED, WE NEED A FIRST STRING RUNNING BACK. Ronnie and Ricky will not do it next year. I'll bet. They are effectively finished.


>
> Or when the need is not that great you select one
> with potential to start in the later rounds with
> plans to groom him. For example...work on his pass
> protection...route running etc.

RESPONSE: That's just my point. The need is Running Back NOW.



eesti wrote:
> I don't care about a few seasons ago...we have
> different players on the line now and they have
> proven that they can get the job done. I never
> once said we had run of the mill RB's...you did.

RESPONSE: You have it exactly reversed. I considered Ronnie and Ricky to be great running backs but dammit one is injured and the other is old. Can't you guys get that. Do you have to wait to next season to see it and then be crying about why we can't run and they are keying in on Henne??????

eesti wrote:

> It was actually a combo of all the above but RB's
> don't get squat without a good line.

RESPONSE: So what are you saying, we should switch from needing LBs and WRs and Free safeties to OL? Now, you're confusing me.

If we have that "good line" now, why not get a great young Running back, a la Best and keep that 4th place rushing ranking?

Eesti wrote:
We did not
> run the WC or Ronnie from week 9 on and we still
> finished 4th overall.

RESPONSE: So logically if we had not lost Ronnie we may have finished first! What's your point? It still means that our running game more than anything else got us our 7 wins. Trying to upgrade the defense to cut down on the 9 losses at the expense of the offense might have our 7 wins go down instead of our 9 losses going down.

Eesti wrote:
It wasn't all Ricky's doing
> in the second half...he had some help from the
> line....Lousaka "move the chains" Polite also
> helped by extending opportunities.


RESPONSE: Backups who only have backup quality. Draft another number 1 running back NOW!


Eesti wrote:

> Not if you want them to play in the first year. 5
> LB'ers were taken in the first round last year.
> They all have either been able to start or have
> shown that they are going to be good
> players....Cushing, Mathews, Orakpo, Curry and
> English.

RESPONSE: Let's look at that whole class in 3 or4 years. You named 5. I'll bet in 3 or 4 years, of the top five linebackers only 2 or 3 will be among the names you have listed above and later round linebackers will account for 2 or 3. However, won't be able to say the same thing about running backs.

eesti wrote:

> I'm not saying the Best isn't the Best. I am just
> not claiming to know who will be...until they at
> least get to the combine

RESPONSE: Like I said, I would not mind it if you did. I am not so much wedded to Best himself as to picking the top running back.

eesti:
> Secondly, you can't lump all LB'ers together. Pass
> Rushing 3-4 LB'er are at a premium and generally
> go high in the draft. Sure you can still find good
> players in the second...and more likely an ILB but
> it obviously gets tougher.

RESPONSE: Listen, write this name down, Ryan Kerrigan from Purdue. He's not even listed among the draft gurus first or second round picks. Betcha he'll be an ALL-PRO.

eesti wrote:
> It works both ways. There are PLENTY of 1st round
> bust RB's. As Dolphin fans, we know all too well.

RESPONSE: Yeah, but I should receive some kind of discount for the absolutely ludicrous picks of the Dolphins. I mean you can't go by them. I mean we were picking people no one expected to be great or even good rbs.


eesti wrote:
> The main point is that we have greater needs in
> 2010 than RB. There is no denying that fact. I am
> not disagreeing that you take skill players in
> round 1 depending if they grade out but we would
> be better off taking a WR if one falls to us
> worthy of 12.

RESPONSE: As to your argument about WR, if we could pick a dandy, then I would not be so upset because after I posted about RBs and QBs, it occurred to me that I should have put WRs in that category. But LB, high in the first round? I don't think so.

As far as needs are concerned again. I rank RB higher than you. I don't think we will agree. You rank LB as a need which I conceded but I think picking at that position is so risky that if you need to replace your franchise running backs NOW as I think we do, you go ahead and do it and roll the dice with the LBs in later rounds.

eesti wrote:
> The one thing you have to get out of round 1 is a
> player that can start from day one. If there is no
> WR's that can do it then you start looking at FS
> or a stud pass rusher or NT or even a stud ILB.

RESPONSE: RBs as a group are much more likely to start on day 1 than ILBs and for every first round ILB that starts, there are 2 or 3 second rounders who end up starting.

eesti wrote:
> What good is it to take a RB and leave Ronnie
> Brown and Ricky Williams on the bench? We can do
> that next year when we won't have RW.

RESPONSE: The good will be if Ronnie plays about 3 games before going out again and Ricky has lost any part of his magnificient a) moves b) speed or c) power.

Actually, to sum it up. I believe that we should draft a RB not to go from 4th to 1st but because I believe we will go from 4th to maybe 32nd if we don't. But then again, I don't have the faith in Cobbs, Lousaka, Ricky's youth or Ronnie's body that you have.

So eesti, are you saying that you think we should pick WR first or LB first?

If the former, I have no serious argument with you except that I don't think there is a talented enough WR on the board just like you probably don't think there is an RB talented enough to warrant the 12th pick.

Actually, I think we can get Keith Smith, WR from Purdue pretty cheap.

He has excellent hands and size.

I would say we should take a WR if one is there that grades out after the combine....guessing but Dez Smith.

If he is gone then I'd say we go after a OLB that can play all three phases...cover, run & rush or the most talented player from a pool of

FS (Earl Thomas)
OLB (Jason Pierre Paul who is a JT clone 6'6 250)
NT (not sure if Dan Williams or Cody will grade out)
I will take a wait and see stance on how McClain grades out in coverage at the combine.

List will change but that is just an idea I have for now.

I would like to see us pick up Antonio Bryant or Anquan Boldin so we aren't relying on a rookie WR. We could then add one in the second round if Benn, Fell, Demaryius Thomas or Golden Tate should drop to 43.

We'll have to see who drops to us.

.....................................................................................
“I'm here" You're welcome!" - Kenny Powers