I think this is one of the better mocks I've seen, honestly. I could see the draft playing out like that.
Or you'd just consider them a 1 contract player and let them move onwards afterwards at 32-33 yrs old.
It’s my honest answer. You’re asking me if I’d rather re-sign a 33 year old Watkins (he’ll be 31 in this scenario BTW) or a 27 year old Pouncey. My answer is I’d rather get the five years of superior play out of Watkins and then get his replacement.
If the head coach and GM still have their jobs with the franchise.. 5 yrs in coaching time is also an eternity which is sort of the trick to the draft, you need longevity, you need fast production, hard to find those guys.
What, you don't think a new coach and/or GM would re-sign Long just because they didn't draft him? Or Kendall Langford if you don't want to use a d'uh player.
Nope, not what my point is at all, Long has instant productivity and probably longevity. My point is this is a right now league and if the 27 yr old can come in and start from day 1 but won't have a ten yr career is compared to a 23 yr old who may or not contribute quickly, if a Franchise consistently goes with the 23 yr old hoping for the extra 5 yrs at the end of their careers that front office will not be long for the team. A great example would be Whisenhunt going with Kurt Warner over Top 15 pick Matt Leinart.
There's zero chance anyone could have possibly taken what you just wrote in this quote as the intended meaning/point for your previous reply.
Good stuff. DraftTek just put Locker to the Skins as well. Of course, I disagree about Ingram, but if the Bills go Miller over Gabbert, I could definitely see things playing out that way up to 15, though I'm still not sure I see the Locker pick. I just don't know if I'm buying the "he's their type of player" arguments. Mallett just seems much more superior of a quarterback. And, if I'm Atlanta, I am ecstatic with Aldon Smith.
Right, 31, sorry. I don't see why you are making this so difficult though. You choose to re-sign either a 31 year old or a 27 year old; which would it be? You said age is irrelevant so you're saying you would rather have the 31 year old, right?
That'd also be assuming the 31 yr old has continually played better than the 27 year old even though growth in talent isn't the same for each prospect/player, and that's assuming Watkins isn't near/at his peak already.
You realize I’m approaching this from the point of view that Pouncey will not be the player most draftniks believe he will, right? So if I don’t believe he’s going to be a player worthy of the #15 pick, why would I a. assume that he’ll be performing at a high level at age 27, and b. why would I have drafted him in the first place if I didn’t believe he was worth the pick? I guess I’m not making myself clear? I don’t want Mike Pouncey because I don’t believe he’s going to be the type of great player you want in the first round. I think if Maurkice Pouncey hadn’t played well, we’d be talking about Mike Pouncey as a late 2nd player with a consensus ranking behind Ben Ijalana. I question if he has a position on this team (maybe pulling LG?) and I’m not sure he’s the best option we have to fill whatever position he might play. So when you guys ask me if I’d like to re-sign him in Hypothetical Situation A, or Set of Circumstances B, it’s like asking me if I want a tooth pulled now or later. You’re missing the point. I don’t want him in aqua and orange.
You are seriously killing me with posts like these and your avatar. I can just hear Halpert saying that exact thing to Michael.
I said age is irrelevant to me when deciding which of the two to draft, because both will be of NFL playable age during the span of their rookie contracts, a presumably 5 year term. When those rookie contracts expire, they become free agents. At that point, I would make a decision in free agency not to pursue Watkins, and I would have already made preparation to replace him. Their age would become a question in free agency, 5 years after the draft. From the perspective of the draft—2011, not 2016—give me Watkins over Pouncey and the OL will be better for it. The 5 years of better play I’d get out of Watkins and his rookie contract is, to me, better than the 10 years of play I’d get out of Pouncey’s rookie contract and free agency re-signing. This is why I’m a little baffled why you’re bringing up re-signing in the context of drafting these guys, because what happens in 2016’s free agency is irrelevant to what happens in 2011’s draft.
That's understandable, but that has very little relevance to the argument that Pouncey is only viewed as a 1st rounder because of his brother, or as justification for why everyone else is dumb if they have Pouncey higher than Watkins. Not everyone grades OL the same.
How is it physically possible to re-sign a player who you didn’t sign (read: draft) in the first place? If I don’t want him the first time, why would I want him the second time? Granted, we’re speaking in hypotheticals here, but that’s the best I can answer your question. Mind pointing out where I’ve thrown out the “dumb” accusation? If anything, people are throwing it at me in this thread for engaging in precisely the action outlined in your last sentence.
You've gotta think in advance. You talked about after the five years, you'd replace him. Why not just re-sign him? Makes no sense to me.
I highly doubt there’s a single team in the NFL that looks five years ahead of a draft. That said, I agree with you in principle, it would be nice if teams used the draft to fill future needs a year or two in advance, rather than attempt to fill immediate needs. I brought up the length of their rookie contracts and said that I think Watkins will be better over those next 5 years than Pouncey.
Dumb = silly to me. If it's silly that Pouncey is considered a higher prospect than Watkins, to me that's the same as saying that person obviously has some mental deficiency if they think Pouncey is rated higher. Like if they can't think for themselves and evaluate a player for what he is and only put Pouncey high because he's riding his brother's coattails. Plenty of times I'll say "you're crazy to think player x is the best at his position." I don't actually think they are crazy, I just think they have a mental deficiency regarding the subject matter.
No, not five years in advance but you gotta think in advance. If so and so lives up to expectations and you plan him for the future, do you want to face the thought of him being five years older than the other guy despite them both possibly playing at a high level? As I said, everything is taken into account in the draft process. You can't just say he's more talented, like you said on page one or two in this thread.
I’ve never associated dumb with silly. Dumb = stupid, uninformed. Silly = ridiculous, amusingly comical, ill-considered. If I wanted someone to know that I thought they were saying something dumb, I would say precisely that. If I say something is silly, then it means I think their underlying reasoning has at least a little bit of absurdity to it. Absurd != unintelligent. Having to apparently adhere my use of the English language to your mental filter is silly. In a vacuum, I can absolutely say Watkins is more talented than Pouncey, and I can absolutely say that I would prefer Watkins on the Dolphins instead of Pouncey, because it’s my opinion. When I’m paid seven figures a year, then I’ll worry about the roster composition in 2016 and beyond. And frankly, I don’t think Ireland is worrying too much about 2016 right at this moment. Sparano sure isn’t.
The things that jumped out to me first were Aldon Smith fallilng as far as he did, Jimmy Smith falling as far as he did, and Mallett at 12. I just think Aldon Smith's upside is too good for him to fall that far. I'd be very surprised to see him fall out of the top 15. Jimmy Smith at one time would have been thought to be lucky to go that high, but I honestly believe he will go much higher now. I think he could go as high as 13. With Mallett I just think there's too much smoke about the concerns with him for him to go that high. With all these television personalities with strong ties to scouts and GMs repeatedly talking about him going later, I just think there's something to it. Casserly the other day said every GM he talked to said they think he's a 1st round QB, but they wouldn't take him there. Maybe that's just smoke screen stuff, but there's just too much noise IMO. I also just don't see the Cardinals taking Gabbert. I know a lot of people think they would draft him there, but I think Fitgerald wants them to get a vet and I think their management agrees. They still have Skelton who has upside and a veteran could take them to the playoffs next year making Fitz happy in a contract year while Skelton develops. I think unless someone moves up for him (ideally Miami), Gabbert goes 7 to the 9ers. In regards to Pouncey at 15, I know him and Ingram are the two en vogue picks but I just can't see them taking either of those guys at 15. If they stay at 15 I think it's for a QB like Mallett or a surprise BPA guy like Aldon Smith or Amukamara (or someone along those lines). If not I think they try their best to move down or even move up if Gabbert falls a bit.
Yea, we're taking Ayers. Ayers = Team Captain. Or Kerrigan, he too is a team captain. And from the Big Ten. :-/
