Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Mock Draft Experiment (Feedback Needed!)
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> 2017 NFL Mock Draft
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
praegler


Joined: 14 Feb 2005
Posts: 8
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 7:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

22. Miami Dolphins - Jarrad Davis || LB || Florida

While LB is a need, if Reddick is not available at 22 for Mia, and Lamp is there I think the strengthen their OL and go with Lamp instead of Davis. They want to have a ground attack and protect their QB and Lamp can help in both those areas.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Cypher


Joined: 04 Mar 2008
Posts: 2851
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 9:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

rudyZ wrote:
I don't like it for the niners. I mean, I get the need for the QB, but the value of Trubisky (as a top 2 overall pick) and the interest from the niners (I don't remember any special interest in him by either Shanahan or Lynch) don't match. I feel like we're infinitely more interested in Watson or Kizer in the second than in Trubisky at 2. I don't know how that would impact the rest of the dominos falling if you had to rework your mock. Nice try, but I feel like stumbling on the second pick of the draft kinda screws the entire mock.


I struggled with #2. It was down to Foster, Adams or Trubisky. I thought Trubisky was the "least offensive" selection. Who would you have preferred?

Quote:

Jamal Adams, S, LSU (COM)
Keion Adams, DE, Western Michigan (PRO)
Rodney Adams, WR, South Florida (WOR)
Jonathan Allen, DT/3-4DE, Alabama (PRI)
Kofi Amichia, G, South Florida (WOR)
Budda Baker, S, Washington (PRI)
Jonathan Calvin, DE, Mississippi State (PRI)
Dalvin Cook^, RB, Florida State (COM, PRI)
Tim Crawley, WR, San Jose State (LOC)
Dalton Crossan, RB, New Hampshire (PRI)
Zach Cunningham, OLB/ILB, Vanderbilt (COM)
Julie'n Davenport, OT, Bucknell (SR)
Dion Dawkins, G/OT, Temple (PRI)
Casey DeAndrade, FS, New Hampshire (WOR)
Rudy Ford, S, Auburn (SR)
Reuben Foster, ILB, Alabama (PRI)
Myles Garrett, DE/3-4OLB, Texas A&M (PRO)
Geoff Gray, G, Manitoba (EW)
Derrick Griffin, TE, Texas Southern (PRO)
Chad Hansen, WR, California (WOR)
Carlos Henderson, WR, Louisiana Tech (PRO)
Brian Hill, RB, Wyoming (PRO)
Daquan Holmes, CB, American International (WOR)
Kareem Hunt, RB, Toledo (STM)
Aaron Jones, RB, Texas-El Paso (WOR)
Alvin Kamara, RB, Tennessee (COM)
DeShone Kizer, QB, Notre Dame (COM)
Tanoh Kpassagnon, DE/3-4DE, Villanova (SR)
Marshon Lattimore, CB, Ohio State (PRI)
Andrew Lauderdale, OT, New Hampshire (WOR)
Elijah Lee, OLB/ILB, Kansas State (PRI)
Jordan Leggett, TE, Clemson (WOR)
Pat Mahomes^, QB, Texas Tech (COM, PRO)
Christian McCaffrey, RB, Stanford (COM)
Leon McQuay III, S, USC (EW)
Haason Reddick, OLB, Temple (SR)
Cam Robinson^, OT, Alabama (PRI, WOR)
Artavis Scott, WR, Clemson (WOR)
Brad Seaton, OT, Villanova (PRO)
David Sharpe, OT, Florida (PRI)
Garrett Sickels, DE/3-4OLB, Penn State (PRO)
Nico Siragusa, G, San Diego State (PRI)
Ryan Switzer, WR, North Carolina (SR)
Sam Tevi, OT, Utah (EW)
Mitch Trubisky^, QB, North Carolina (COM, PRI)
Deshaun Watson^, QB, Clemson (WOR, PRI)
T.J. Watt, OLB/3-4OLB/ILB, Wisconsin (WOR)
Davis Webb, QB, California (WOR)
Tim Williams, OLB/DE/3-4OLB, Alabama (WOR)
Jordan Willis, DE/3-4OLB/OLB, Kansas State (PRI)
Ahkello Witherspoon, CB, Colorado (PRI)

_________________

AkronsWitness wrote:
The Browns are a football team, run by baseball people, making smart basketball trades...#Analytics
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Cypher


Joined: 04 Mar 2008
Posts: 2851
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 9:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

praegler wrote:
22. Miami Dolphins - Jarrad Davis || LB || Florida

While LB is a need, if Reddick is not available at 22 for Mia, and Lamp is there I think the strengthen their OL and go with Lamp instead of Davis. They want to have a ground attack and protect their QB and Lamp can help in both those areas.


Read the initial requirements in the post. Lamp has not visited or met with Miami from any source I can find.
_________________

AkronsWitness wrote:
The Browns are a football team, run by baseball people, making smart basketball trades...#Analytics
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
onejayhawk


Joined: 14 Apr 2006
Posts: 7502
Location: Waco, Tx
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 9:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Cypher wrote:
Read the initial requirements in the post. Lamp has not visited or met with Miami from any source I can find.

That may be smoke. If the Fins like him and think they have a good read they will play down their interest.

J
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Cypher


Joined: 04 Mar 2008
Posts: 2851
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 10:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

onejayhawk wrote:
Cypher wrote:
Read the initial requirements in the post. Lamp has not visited or met with Miami from any source I can find.

That may be smoke. If the Fins like him and think they have a good read they will play down their interest.

J


Always possible. However, the point of the experiment is to test the accuracy of pre-draft visits. I'll be doing another right before the draft as the final visits close out and we get more info, but the purpose here is to see how accurate a draft based off visits, meetings and workouts hits home.
_________________

AkronsWitness wrote:
The Browns are a football team, run by baseball people, making smart basketball trades...#Analytics
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rudyZ


Joined: 12 Mar 2007
Posts: 17035
Location: Québec
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 8:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Cypher wrote:
rudyZ wrote:
I don't like it for the niners. I mean, I get the need for the QB, but the value of Trubisky (as a top 2 overall pick) and the interest from the niners (I don't remember any special interest in him by either Shanahan or Lynch) don't match. I feel like we're infinitely more interested in Watson or Kizer in the second than in Trubisky at 2. I don't know how that would impact the rest of the dominos falling if you had to rework your mock. Nice try, but I feel like stumbling on the second pick of the draft kinda screws the entire mock.


I struggled with #2. It was down to Foster, Adams or Trubisky. I thought Trubisky was the "least offensive" selection. Who would you have preferred?



Personally, I don't like anyone at 2, really. I'd even take a below market return on a trade down, but I don't think that's the majority's opinion. If we're stuck at 2, I'd probably go with one of the DBs (we have the possibility to move Jimmie Ward to S or CB, depending on what we do in the draft), but there has been interest in Foster. Foster would probably the FO's #1 target in a trade down scenario, in my opinion. There's an outside chance that given we can't make a trade down, he'd be the pick at 2. But we're caught between a rock and a hard place at 2. What we truly need is a QB (no QB should go this high this year) and a dynamic pass rusher (who will most likely be gone first overall). Then, there are a few very good players who really don't match what we need. Allen/Thomas would be great, but then we'd have a logjam on the DL, and we still wouldn't have that dynamic pass rusher on the edge.We could take a safety, even though we have Ward, Reid and possibly Tartt already competing for starting jobs. We could take Lattimore and keep Ward at FS. But adding a DB is really more of a secondary need. We need a QB, edge rusher, #1 WR far more than we need a DB. But none of the talent truly lines up with #2 overall. So for me, it's a trade down scenario. We can get Foster (it would be nice to have LBs be a position of strength again, after losing Willis two years ago) or Barnett a little further down. Or maybe we manage to trade a guy like Arik Armstead, and then taking Solomon Thomas at 2 makes a ton of sense. But I don't know.. our situation is quite volatile. But for the purpose of this mock, where you try to input needs, value and team interest, I guess the closer you have to a match is Foster.
_________________


RudyZ's Power Rankings Power Ranking

1) RudyZ's Power Rankings Power Ranking
2) y2's pie Power Rankings (3.1416 rules!)
3) N4L's Poster Power Rankings
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Cypher


Joined: 04 Mar 2008
Posts: 2851
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 9:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

rudyZ wrote:
Cypher wrote:
rudyZ wrote:
I don't like it for the niners. I mean, I get the need for the QB, but the value of Trubisky (as a top 2 overall pick) and the interest from the niners (I don't remember any special interest in him by either Shanahan or Lynch) don't match. I feel like we're infinitely more interested in Watson or Kizer in the second than in Trubisky at 2. I don't know how that would impact the rest of the dominos falling if you had to rework your mock. Nice try, but I feel like stumbling on the second pick of the draft kinda screws the entire mock.


I struggled with #2. It was down to Foster, Adams or Trubisky. I thought Trubisky was the "least offensive" selection. Who would you have preferred?



Personally, I don't like anyone at 2, really. I'd even take a below market return on a trade down, but I don't think that's the majority's opinion. If we're stuck at 2, I'd probably go with one of the DBs (we have the possibility to move Jimmie Ward to S or CB, depending on what we do in the draft), but there has been interest in Foster. Foster would probably the FO's #1 target in a trade down scenario, in my opinion. There's an outside chance that given we can't make a trade down, he'd be the pick at 2. But we're caught between a rock and a hard place at 2. What we truly need is a QB (no QB should go this high this year) and a dynamic pass rusher (who will most likely be gone first overall). Then, there are a few very good players who really don't match what we need. Allen/Thomas would be great, but then we'd have a logjam on the DL, and we still wouldn't have that dynamic pass rusher on the edge.We could take a safety, even though we have Ward, Reid and possibly Tartt already competing for starting jobs. We could take Lattimore and keep Ward at FS. But adding a DB is really more of a secondary need. We need a QB, edge rusher, #1 WR far more than we need a DB. But none of the talent truly lines up with #2 overall. So for me, it's a trade down scenario. We can get Foster (it would be nice to have LBs be a position of strength again, after losing Willis two years ago) or Barnett a little further down. Or maybe we manage to trade a guy like Arik Armstead, and then taking Solomon Thomas at 2 makes a ton of sense. But I don't know.. our situation is quite volatile. But for the purpose of this mock, where you try to input needs, value and team interest, I guess the closer you have to a match is Foster.


Honestly, I feel you. I'm in a somewhat similar boat with Carolina. I don't feel like any of the top-3 blue chip defenders make it to 8, and while i'd be thrilled to trade up for Thomas, I feel like if we trade up it's for Fournette, which would be a colossal mistake. Take him at 8, fine, but giving up that much capitol for a HB would be draft suicide.
_________________

AkronsWitness wrote:
The Browns are a football team, run by baseball people, making smart basketball trades...#Analytics
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sodakcowboy78


Joined: 18 Jan 2012
Posts: 905
Location: sioux falls so dak
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 10:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Love it for Dallas

TJ Watt will be become everything his brother is - Jerry has found his "War Daddy"

Peace
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rudyZ


Joined: 12 Mar 2007
Posts: 17035
Location: Québec
PostPosted: Thu Apr 20, 2017 8:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Cypher wrote:
rudyZ wrote:
Cypher wrote:
rudyZ wrote:
I don't like it for the niners. I mean, I get the need for the QB, but the value of Trubisky (as a top 2 overall pick) and the interest from the niners (I don't remember any special interest in him by either Shanahan or Lynch) don't match. I feel like we're infinitely more interested in Watson or Kizer in the second than in Trubisky at 2. I don't know how that would impact the rest of the dominos falling if you had to rework your mock. Nice try, but I feel like stumbling on the second pick of the draft kinda screws the entire mock.


I struggled with #2. It was down to Foster, Adams or Trubisky. I thought Trubisky was the "least offensive" selection. Who would you have preferred?



Personally, I don't like anyone at 2, really. I'd even take a below market return on a trade down, but I don't think that's the majority's opinion. If we're stuck at 2, I'd probably go with one of the DBs (we have the possibility to move Jimmie Ward to S or CB, depending on what we do in the draft), but there has been interest in Foster. Foster would probably the FO's #1 target in a trade down scenario, in my opinion. There's an outside chance that given we can't make a trade down, he'd be the pick at 2. But we're caught between a rock and a hard place at 2. What we truly need is a QB (no QB should go this high this year) and a dynamic pass rusher (who will most likely be gone first overall). Then, there are a few very good players who really don't match what we need. Allen/Thomas would be great, but then we'd have a logjam on the DL, and we still wouldn't have that dynamic pass rusher on the edge.We could take a safety, even though we have Ward, Reid and possibly Tartt already competing for starting jobs. We could take Lattimore and keep Ward at FS. But adding a DB is really more of a secondary need. We need a QB, edge rusher, #1 WR far more than we need a DB. But none of the talent truly lines up with #2 overall. So for me, it's a trade down scenario. We can get Foster (it would be nice to have LBs be a position of strength again, after losing Willis two years ago) or Barnett a little further down. Or maybe we manage to trade a guy like Arik Armstead, and then taking Solomon Thomas at 2 makes a ton of sense. But I don't know.. our situation is quite volatile. But for the purpose of this mock, where you try to input needs, value and team interest, I guess the closer you have to a match is Foster.


Honestly, I feel you. I'm in a somewhat similar boat with Carolina. I don't feel like any of the top-3 blue chip defenders make it to 8, and while i'd be thrilled to trade up for Thomas, I feel like if we trade up it's for Fournette, which would be a colossal mistake. Take him at 8, fine, but giving up that much capitol for a HB would be draft suicide.



I feel you could move up without mortgaging your draft. That's why many think the Panthers and Niners could be good trade partners. I personally don't expect a king's ransom (first and second this year plus future first) for #2. Maybe only sending us your second second rounder would be enough (although it wouldn't be exactly the most exciting trade from our perspective... if we end up selecting the same guy at 8 we would at 2, it would nonetheless be a good trade). You could then draft Thomas and still keep your high second rounder. Maybe add a future second as well. In the lines of #2 for #8 + #64 + 2018 second rounder. I think that's feasible, and well below market, so that's a big win for you guys, and possibly a small underwhelming win for us.
_________________


RudyZ's Power Rankings Power Ranking

1) RudyZ's Power Rankings Power Ranking
2) y2's pie Power Rankings (3.1416 rules!)
3) N4L's Poster Power Rankings
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
rudyZ


Joined: 12 Mar 2007
Posts: 17035
Location: Québec
PostPosted: Thu Apr 20, 2017 9:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

sodakcowboy78 wrote:
Love it for Dallas

TJ Watt will be become everything his brother is - Jerry has found his "War Daddy"

Peace



TJ will be as good as his brother Derek?
_________________


RudyZ's Power Rankings Power Ranking

1) RudyZ's Power Rankings Power Ranking
2) y2's pie Power Rankings (3.1416 rules!)
3) N4L's Poster Power Rankings
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Cypher


Joined: 04 Mar 2008
Posts: 2851
PostPosted: Thu Apr 20, 2017 10:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

rudyZ wrote:
Cypher wrote:
rudyZ wrote:
Cypher wrote:
rudyZ wrote:
I don't like it for the niners. I mean, I get the need for the QB, but the value of Trubisky (as a top 2 overall pick) and the interest from the niners (I don't remember any special interest in him by either Shanahan or Lynch) don't match. I feel like we're infinitely more interested in Watson or Kizer in the second than in Trubisky at 2. I don't know how that would impact the rest of the dominos falling if you had to rework your mock. Nice try, but I feel like stumbling on the second pick of the draft kinda screws the entire mock.


I struggled with #2. It was down to Foster, Adams or Trubisky. I thought Trubisky was the "least offensive" selection. Who would you have preferred?



Personally, I don't like anyone at 2, really. I'd even take a below market return on a trade down, but I don't think that's the majority's opinion. If we're stuck at 2, I'd probably go with one of the DBs (we have the possibility to move Jimmie Ward to S or CB, depending on what we do in the draft), but there has been interest in Foster. Foster would probably the FO's #1 target in a trade down scenario, in my opinion. There's an outside chance that given we can't make a trade down, he'd be the pick at 2. But we're caught between a rock and a hard place at 2. What we truly need is a QB (no QB should go this high this year) and a dynamic pass rusher (who will most likely be gone first overall). Then, there are a few very good players who really don't match what we need. Allen/Thomas would be great, but then we'd have a logjam on the DL, and we still wouldn't have that dynamic pass rusher on the edge.We could take a safety, even though we have Ward, Reid and possibly Tartt already competing for starting jobs. We could take Lattimore and keep Ward at FS. But adding a DB is really more of a secondary need. We need a QB, edge rusher, #1 WR far more than we need a DB. But none of the talent truly lines up with #2 overall. So for me, it's a trade down scenario. We can get Foster (it would be nice to have LBs be a position of strength again, after losing Willis two years ago) or Barnett a little further down. Or maybe we manage to trade a guy like Arik Armstead, and then taking Solomon Thomas at 2 makes a ton of sense. But I don't know.. our situation is quite volatile. But for the purpose of this mock, where you try to input needs, value and team interest, I guess the closer you have to a match is Foster.


Honestly, I feel you. I'm in a somewhat similar boat with Carolina. I don't feel like any of the top-3 blue chip defenders make it to 8, and while i'd be thrilled to trade up for Thomas, I feel like if we trade up it's for Fournette, which would be a colossal mistake. Take him at 8, fine, but giving up that much capitol for a HB would be draft suicide.



I feel you could move up without mortgaging your draft. That's why many think the Panthers and Niners could be good trade partners. I personally don't expect a king's ransom (first and second this year plus future first) for #2. Maybe only sending us your second second rounder would be enough (although it wouldn't be exactly the most exciting trade from our perspective... if we end up selecting the same guy at 8 we would at 2, it would nonetheless be a good trade). You could then draft Thomas and still keep your high second rounder. Maybe add a future second as well. In the lines of #2 for #8 + #64 + 2018 second rounder. I think that's feasible, and well below market, so that's a big win for you guys, and possibly a small underwhelming win for us.


Seems like we're targeting Fournette and McCaffrey at this point. I would not be in favor of trading up for a back in this class under any circumstances, honestly. I might be okay with doing it for our late 2nd, but a dime more than that would be a massive overpay to me.

At this point, i'm more comfortable sitting at 8 and taking the BPA.
_________________

AkronsWitness wrote:
The Browns are a football team, run by baseball people, making smart basketball trades...#Analytics
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> 2017 NFL Mock Draft All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
Page 3 of 3

 
Jump to:  
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 vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group