3 Years Later: Grade Our 2010 Draft

I think it's overly simplistic and in that way I agree with you.

But I also think it needs to be taken into consideration.

The flip side of that overly simplistic argument is how people toss around the word "starter" as if it's an accolade when that starter plays for a bad team and is probably more a problem than a solution.

 

Ted Ginn was a starter here. all 3 years he started more than half our games.



I give the draft a C as well. Gave us warm bodies and one very good starter.

I wouldn't have done any better. I wanted Jerry Hughes.

 

C.
No one that special, no one that couldn't be found any draft.

 

Thats hard to answer D. It would depend on how big a single SStar is. It would also depend on the % of draftees that make an impact.

So this year for example, I believe we have 9, I'm thinking we need at least 2 to be huge NFL difference makers. Of course the others would bring down the grade because in comparison they would not be. Again its difficult.

BTW, after the 2010 draft I graded the class as a C+ if memory serves me.

 

I would give them a C+. I believe Ireland was using Parcell's Blueprint and that was a handicap, not trying to make excuses for Ireland. Its easy to look in hind site and say we should have taken this player over that player but you never really know beforehand. I remember the year Ginn was drafted there was just as many people wanting Ginn to be drafted in the 1st round as there were against it. Of course when we did draft Ginn we also got his whole family too. That year quite a few wanted Brady Quinn in the 1st round but we could have had Patrick Willis.

 

I wanted Brandon Graham (on the verge of fulfilling his awesome potential, he has workout issues) but when we traded out to the latter part of the round it was all about one guy for me..Gronk....denied.

I'll give them a c+ grade for Odrick..Misi..Jones..Spitler..Carroll..

 

C to C+. It's Jones and then "a bunch of guys". We also passed up on talent on need positions for "a bunch of guys". Earl Thomas was my favorite, but there were good passrushers we could have taken in Graham or JPP as well. Gronk, Hernandez and Graham all could have vastly upgraded a very average Fasano. Sure that happens every year, but I remember 2010 being more acute and accurate than most - this isn't all people after the fact saying "of course!" Many people were pumping these players prior to the draft and they all would have filled big needs at the time. Very Parcellian draft in passing up the athletes for guys like Odrick and Misi. Passing blue chip prospects to trade down and recoup that second round pick.

 

Yeah I was in love with Graham. He and Dez Bryant were my guys at the pick but with the trade for Marshall that made Dez kind of moot. Simon was nutso for Earl Thomas I remember that.

I'd take any of the three though over what we ended up with.

 

D.

I hated the draft on draft day, still hate it now. Should have never traded down all the way from 12 when there was elite talent still on the board. Odrick was not a good first round pick at all. Misi was a reach in the 2nd, which is fine if he was an impact player but he isn't. Jerry in the 3rd was a terrible selection, especially when TE was a much bigger need at the time than OG and you had a stud sitting there in Jimmy Graham. Edds, McCoy, Spitler gave us nothing. Jones was really the only good pick. Carroll wasn't a bad pick but I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't even make the team this year.

 

wait, Dolphins fans actually wanted to draft Ginn? Are you sure about that?

 

No pro bowls, a 20-28 record, and what maybe..9 interceptions in 3 yrs or so?

Mediocre, won't put a grade on it, just blaah, aside from Jones unless Odrick finds another level it looks to remain that way as well.

 

I give it a C+/B-. I like Carrol more than others and Reshad Jones is a very good starter. Odrick and Misi are good players but I could see them off the team soon.

 

This is a C+ to a B- draft. You have several guys who may or may not have reached their full potential (Odrick, Misi, Carroll). You have another who could do great things but can't do something as simple as keep his weight down (Jerry). And you have another who appears to be a blue chipper (Jones).

You really can't go by who was missed as each team has misses and besides, every team missed Jones. As well, like Odrick and Misi, the jury is still out on the likes of Graham, JPP and Bryant. Many in Cowboyland are lamenting his propensity for being in the wrong position and making the wrong reads which are leading to turnovers.

As for this past draft, I'm quite glad Ireland didn't follow the suggestion of many on here who were clamouring for Brandon Weeden. Imagine where we'd be if he followed that suggestion.

 

If Ireland drafted Thomas he def wouldn't have traded up to grab jones and even if he made it to us in 6th round he wouldn't have taken him.

 

You don't really know that. They play different positions.

 

Yes but safety wasn't a priority for Ireland in that draft. We still had Bell and and I forgot who was our other safety at the time and jones was drafted to be groomed. I doubt Ireland would have drafted 2 safeties in one draft.

 

FS was a huge need, the gibril wilson experiment failed miserably, the only free safeties we had on the roster at the time were a couple of 6th rounders (Clemons and Culver) who had a combined 4 starts in 5 total seasons between them. there's a reason everyone wanted Earl Thomas, or if by some miracle he fell to us, Eric Berry.

 

Certainly a fair point. But if my argument is too simplistic because I say being a starter on a bad team means you are bad, why is it OK to say that just being a starter means you are good and therefor we had a good draft?

Jones is an impact player. Marshal, who we rented for two years at the cost of essentially a 2nd+ round pick and a large contract, was an impact player. Dansby was a solid starter. The rest of the guys who have stuck have only displayed enough talent so far to be low end starters on a fairly bad football team. Clearly the offseason in question was not good enough to turn the team around because several years later we are still in the turn lane.

I'm the first guy to gush after each draft that we have hit the jackpot but at some point we have to look back at reality and say things haven't worked out.

 

I never said it was OK to say just by being a starter means they are good.

Myself I would never give a draft that had an impact player a D. Finding an impact, especially one that a team desires to keep long term should automatically give a lowest grade of a C-.

I also believe if Miami had some drafts in 2008 and 2009 with 5 players who are good enough to contribute, they would be a much better team.

I believe it is rare for a offseason to turn a team around, and certainly wouldn't give an offseason that turned a team from mediocre to good, a C.

I think you are giving the grade, "C", too high a station.

 

All in all I think people get out of hand with these draft grades. I think the easiest way to grade a draft is with money...in the sense of does a team in the NFL think a player is worthy of a lucrative second contract?

If you look at the 08 draft, Long, Langford, Thomas and Henne have all received lucrative second contracts (or in Thomas' case 4th). As for the 09 draft, Smith and Hartline have already cashed in and Irsay has said Davis isn't too far behind. If Clemons gets that lucrative I guess third contract, that would make four lucrative second contracts coming out of that draft.

Still too early to tell for 10 and beyond.

 

We haven't ascended from mediocre. We are a perennial also ran. This draft, so far, has done nothing to change that which is why I believe it is a "C-". It is certainly possible that the grade could change if Misi and Odrick improve but as of now they are not impact starters.

EDIT: I never stated that you were the one one who said just being a starter meant they were good.