I think a good part of it is mental, obviously. But how much of that is inexperience? I'm not sure. He was a TE convert. He had some injury issues derail him a little bit during his college career. He was a role player in 2007. This was his first real year starting and trying to be an every down guy. It could just take years of experience being out there before he is able to manage through the game and keep his intensity level up. Another part of it is just his body. This is a very abnormal combination of size and explosiveness, and for an abnormal body like his you can expect some other differences positive and negative. His muscles are probably dominated by quick twitch as opposed to endurance fibers (I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night) even more so than typical athletes at his position. He went through real problems with cramping before 2008. I think there's a certain amount of maturity and change that is still taking place in his body and he's still growing into it, learning how to manage it and keep it in good shape. The key is, is he willing to really go above and beyond to do that...like an Aaron Maybin. That's where you have to really take a look at the work ethic. Is he lazy? Is there always going to be a fight to keep him in shape? Is he considered a leader? How do his teammates view him? And with all that said...keep in mind we're talking about the #25 pick in the draft here. We are NOT talking about perfect prospects, not even in the slightest. Especially not in this draft. You view Michael Johnson a lot differently at #25 than you do at #7, for instance. You have to really take stock of who else is available at #25 and why you should take that player. In my draft, the way I have it set up...at #25 the best values left on the board are Knowshon Moreno, Jarron Gilbert, Michael Johnson, Sean Smith and Darius Butler.
To me, Johnson would be the kind of player that you really need to trust the FO on until they have a history of blowing it. They are the one conducting workouts and interviews and talking with the kid. Its easy for an armchair draftnik to look at a tape and say "Oh hes just lazy," without recognizing that there might be some physical issues at this point. For the 25 spot, he is one the best pure talents in the draft. Is he a "safe" pick, no. Hes also a guy who, imo, could be one of the best in this draft a few years from now. So far, the FO has made mostly good moves. If they pull the trigger on Johnson Im going to hope they did their homework, feel hes a kid who really does care and want to improve, and have a plan in place for him to succeeed. At the 25th pick, I would not be dissapointed if we took someone with his kind of raw talent at all.
I agree with everything you just said... and I still feel he has top 10 talent, so if I don't take him at #7, then I still don't take him at #25 either. I understand he has a huge upside, but when it comes to my 1st round pick, thing that I want to be most certain about are the things that I'm the least certain about with Johnson. My priority for a 1st rounder before I even look at his upside is knowing that he has heart and passion for the game, an intense desire to win, dedication, instincts, leadership, great game attitude, can be an every down starter, and consistently makes big plays at big times while not costing the team precious yards/penalties. Stupid mental penalties/late hits out of bounds/poor attitude/negative aggressiveness resulting in personal fouls/ facemasks etc are all red flags to me that say stay away. I want a guy who can be the emotional leader that everyone else looks up to for confidence... whos very presence makes everyone around him better. I have quesion marks surrounding all these with Johnson, and there are plenty of players in the draft who will possess these characterisitc at 25 that I'd rather have. But that's just me if it were my team. LOL.
I agree with that. If they take him b/c they've done their dudiligence and have no concerns about the issues I mentioned, then I'd be very happy. If they feel he is still a risk, but draft him purely on his upside.... not so happy. LOL.
Food for thought. Johnson has the talent to be the #1 overall pick to Detroit. If he makes it to us, then that means at least a dozen teams passed on him for some reason.... which would only reinforce the reason for us to pass on him as well.
That's really not very good logic. By that logic every player that we could take at #25 would be ruled out because two dozen teams already passed on him.
I think you should reread what I said, b/c what you just summed my words up as is nothing close to what I wrote. There's nothing wrong with my logic. If you're saying that what I said can't be true, then it can only mean that you feel everyone in the draft has the potential/talent to be the #1 pick to Detroit. So what you're actually saying is everyone available to us at 25 had the potential/talent to go in the top 5, but they just don't b/c of circumstance or that the talent pool is just that darn good?
Why would you say that? What.... is it only the top 20 guys who can have a majority of those traits? I guess we shouldn't draft anyone at all if you're saying that there will be no guys left at 25 who have heart, leadership, drive, good attitude, determination... etc. Coming from a "draft Guru" I thought you would have a better understanding of how the draft works and the players involved. I didn't say they also had to be a freak athlete or super talented. If I said that, then there might not be anyone to fit "my criteria". I only referred to the qualities that any football player can possess/obtain if they put there mind to it. This must be the weakest draft class ever if there are no quality team leaders scattered throughout it.
Lets make this easy CK..... Do you feel that Michael Johnson has the greatest upside in the draft at DE/HYBRID? Do you feel he has the talent of a #1 overall pick? You don't have to explain your answers, just a yes/no will do.
No, but everyone can SAY that about every prospect that could be available at #25 and it would be just as true about that player as it would about Michael Johnson. It's just meaningless words strung together into a completely unproveable statement that is supposed to somehow prove some other point. As I said, faulty logic.
I know how the draft works, thank you. I'm simply saying that the criteria as you described them, criteria that you are using to discredit Michael Johnson, could also be used to discredit pretty much every other player that we could take at #25. Glad I could clarify for you.
Did Tom Brady have the greatest potential in the 2000 NFL Draft among quarterbacks? Yet, he clearly did, because he achieved the greatest potential of any quarterback this decade aside from maybe Peyton Manning. Your assignment of the concepts of potential and upside are not as clear cut as you would like to think. You're prioritizing certain things above others. For instance, if Michael Johnson's intensity issues are physical in nature (ie. he's a quick twitch athlete that naturally has no stamina and never will), then what 'potential' exactly did he have? Even physically, he had only as much potential as some player who is not fast enough and couldn't make it as a pro, either. And what about mental potential? Some guys can juggle and some can't. Some receivers can think so quickly and so accurately that they've got their next two moves planned before they even catch the ball and yet they can concentrate on the ball while keeping that in mind (Welker). What was his potential? As I said, your statement about him having the potential to be the #1 pick and therefore the fact that teams passed on him to where he got to #25 more so than they passed on other players, is faulty logic.
you guys are completely twisting this into something it isn't. LOL. We're not talking about Marino, we're talking about Johnson. I had no idea that Marino had a lot of question marks regarding his love for the game etc when he came out of Pitt.
just because I prefer to not spend 1st round picks on boom/bust type players does not make my logic wrong, as long as I remain consistent with the same approach every year. If you feel it's logical to draft high-risk/ high-reward players (with questionable love for the game) who were passed over by many other teams for the same reason you feel they're a risk....then that's your prerogative as well. If you stay consistent in your approach, then I can't call you illogical. I can disagree with that style...but not call it illogical. If 10 teams pass on a guy for the same uncertainties that I have about him, then that's enough reinforcement to tell me to not draft him. I don't believe in having a God complex where you draft a player with the hopes of changing him. The 1st round means there's a ton of talent still left on the board to choose from without having to worry about them being a project.
I think you're missing the point. You're speaking of a preference, not a line of logic. Your line of logic was that because Michael Johnson has the physical potential to be a #1 overall, if he falls down to #25 that means he shouldn't be drafted because two dozen teams passed on him. I said that is faulty logic, because it can be applied to every single player that we could take in the first round. Every player we could end up taking there has enough physical ability to go #1 overall if he were a special enough player at a position that is considered valuable enough to go #1 overall (for instance, a safety, tight end, kicker, center, guard, kicker, punter, maybe corner...would not be considered for a #1 overall). So therefore, for every player you suggest to me that we could take at #25 overall, I could say to you that by your own logic, we should pass on that player because two dozen teams already did. That's faulty logic, because it can't be consistently applied. You just need to rephrase and re-craft your rationale on why Michael Johnson should not go at #25. It's no big deal. Nobody is saying it's wrong or right to pass on the guy.
Ok now we're getting somewhere I agree with most of what you're saying except when it gets to relating our 25th pick to the #1 pick. LOL Most of the guys we have to choose from at 25 aren't traditional boom/bust type players, so teams wouldn't be passing on guys like Sintim, Nicks, Butler at say 9 to GB because the Pack feels they are a risk, but rather because there are better players available. If this weren't the case there would be no such thing as a big board...or that there would be no difference between Orakpo and English....or that the 1st pick wouldn't get paid $40 million more than the 25th....or that Jake Long could have been reflexive with Gosder Cherilus last year. LOL. Gotchya... If you go up to my first post, I gave my reason why I'd prefer to not draft him based on what I saw. I understand my opinion means didley until he plays, but it's still how I feel.
Maybe we shouldn't even be using Michael Johnson for this whole analogy.... and instead agree on a ficticious player who is #1 caliber but slides to 25 due to multiple question marks. LOL Posted via Mobile Device
Good job CK. I'm not a big fan of the player but I like the side of the ball you have us picking. If you had us taking a receiver we'd be on round 7 of our war right now...LOL!
Hindsight doesn't count. LOL. But if you use Allen as your example, then that only backs my logic about passing on him considering what he's done for us.... or hasn't done for us. Since you're trying to be a bigger PITA then myself, how about this analogy: Let's pretend we want to make a Defensive Super Football Player where you get to mix and match aspects all the DEs/OLBs in the draft to make him.... like creating a Mr. Potato Head.... only for this head, the beginning potato to build on is the player with the greatest natural ability/physical talent/athleticism. In this regard, who's your potato? Who do you think the majority of the NFL would use? For me, my initial potato to build on is Michael Johnson. LOL.
They wouldn't if they investigated and found out that he doesn't have the stamina to play hard on every down, and never will. Still, your logic is actually docking players for having physical gifts, just because a team passed on them. Where does it stop? Connor Barwin. When should a team draft him? After all he's a very physically gifted athlete. Brian Cushing is very physically gifted. Evander Hood has extraordinary athleticism. So does Darius Butler. And Jeremy Maclin. You rely too much on rules in order to bolster your opinion of a guy. Rules, when it comes to drafting, are made only to be proven futile. Especially ones that are applied inconsistently like the one you're talking about. Just say, you think Michael Johnson is an underachiever, he doesn't have good intensity, and you don't like first rounders that don't have what you consider to be good intensity. Voila. End of story.
BTW, as I predicted in my mock, the Broncos are indeed trading Cutler. Now it's just a matter of time before he becomes a Jet and the #17 pick goes to the Broncos.
I dont know, I think there are other teams that have more ammunition to offer. Hopefully thats the case, or if he does go to the Jets he still collapses in big games and whines like the girl he is.
What I think you could see happen is the Jets offer a combination of a player and a pick, or offer the first rounder this year and a conditional that could be a first rounder next year. Kerry Rhodes has already spoken up saying that he hates Jay Cutler, doesn't like how he handles himself or something to that effect. McDaniel knows what it's like to game plan against Kerry Rhodes, I could see him being glad to accept him in a player/pick combo trade.
OK... I think Michael Johnson is an underachiever, he doesn't have good intensity, and I don't like first rounders that don't have what I consider to be good intensity.
