Draft strategy depends on what kind of team we want to be.

If we take a guy like Cooks (for example), we could easily have certain packages that showcase him. Again, I don't know how the draft is going to play out 1-18, so maybe the BPA will be a lineman, I dunno. I'm just guessing that quality of lineman available at 50 won't be all that below what was available at 19. If we were in one of the top 10 slots, I'd feel differently, but when guys like JuWaun James, Billy Turner, joe bitonio, etc. are being mentioned in the 2nd or 3rd, then i like my chances if a solid skill guy is available at 19. the other thing is, I'm not sold Zach Martin can move to RT, and I just don't think a RG is worth the 19 pick. Now, a Moses or Lewan might also be a different story......depending on who else is available.

Like I said, I'm just taking this approach because this draft is chock full of good lineman. Personally, I think the top 15-20 oline rookies are better than what we had last year, plus I have complete faith in John Benton and the improvements we've already made.

Imagine if the line improves AND we have a guy with YAC potential......

 

So we spend our 1st round pick on a guy to upgrade our 4th RB/return man? I would be royally pissed.

 

I agree, that is not worth it. And not what I said.

 

All good points and I'll admit I haven't really studied the draft prospects much this year. My POV stems from having a solid group of four WRs that any rookie would be added to.

Cooks for instance, who's spot is he taking in 2014? Gibson was a big part of the offense last year. Are we spending a 1st round pick to replace him? Ditto for Wallace and Hartline. In two years I've seen this staff bury most rookies, no matter how talented, so there's a good chance Cooks ends up stuck behind Matthews as the 5th guy until he earns the coaches' trust.

That being the case why not wait till the 2nd or 3rd round to take a WR and allow him to develop for a year of two while taking the best OT available since that's the guy who's probably gonna have to be ready for the Pats in week 1?

 

My bad, didn't mean to do that.

 

Watkins is the only legit bad *** I see. The rest are maybe maybe not guys. And given what we have at WR and our staffs general attitude towards rookies I'd say the non Watkins guys are closer to maybe not than maybe.

 

Then in two years we could have a really good game changing wide receiver instead of a right tackle that is O.K. at his job and people debate on if he should be replaced.

 

If the OL isn't fixed this season Philbin won't be around to use the new WR in two years. Hickey too. Tannehill as well. So what do you think their priority is?

 

I think we can stop worrying who replaces who at this point and think of a guy like Cooks as more of a player that would have packages built for him. I like our receivers but we need a YAC guy. Plus I only brought up Cooks as an example, because he was the first guy that popped into my head.

The problem with waiting, is that the talent drop off is more severe for WRs in those rounds then it is for olinemen, in this specific draft. Seriously this draft is rotten with quality lineman.

 

That's fine, lot flying around. I do like Cooks though and think he can be a playmaker. Wallace stretching deep, Cooks underneath or running screens causing problems. And if he can improve on Thiggy then there is 600k of his salary right there. Having said that, 19 is probably too high for Cooks.

 

Back in 1995, did you agree with Shula taking Billy Milner with Derrick Brooks still on the board? We did not really NEED a OLB, but there is and was no doubt back them who was the best player available.
The draft should be for adding the most talented players possible to your roster. Free agency is to plug holes. JMO.

 

I don't think he will be the BPA or even close, at 19.

 

The BPA vs need debate? I might lean BPA in theory but IMO there is no right answer one way or the other. It all comes down to the specific team and its situation. Jordan vs Johnson last year, for example. DJ was the more talented guy, Johnson was the guy who could come in and help us win games and make the playoffs. In hindsight it's easy to see who Philbin preferred, and now he's the guy calling the shots.

No need to go all the way back to 95. Last year I wanted an OL at 12, if the tackles were gone gimme Franklin or Warmack and then trade back into the first to get one of the 2nd tier OTs. Of course nobody agreed, everybody wanted a flashy WR or TE. Then the season started and those same people were screaming for Ireland's head b/c he didn't fix the OL. "Worst OL in franchise history" is the new catch phrase.

And now, a year later it's the same thing. We still have OL problems, and people still want a flashy WR or TE in the first round. If last season, missing the playoffs b/c we couldn't block anybody, didn't bring the point home then I dunno what will.

 

Can he block Muhammad Wilkerson, Mario Williams, Clay Matthews, Justin Houston, Rob Ninkovich, etc, yes? Do we enjoy seeing our QB get ear holed, no? Then he's the BPA at 19.

 

I can't stress enough, this draft is different than last year's. There will be amazing oline talent available at 50, there will not be amazing skill position talent available at 50.

 

The decision is who to put on Mario Williams? A rookie like martin, Kuandjio, Moses, Turner or a guy like Fox? That's where we lost a lot of battles last year.

Another point of concern for me is that our Dline got rolled a lot in run game. That should be fixed.

 

we do? Can someone kindly please send them a PM letting them know?

oh, you mean like Cooks or Beckham, for specifically when the ball is in their hands, which should specifically happen more than the specific instances you're referring to, more specifically.

 

Gone are the boring days of Sherman's bland horizontal stretch offense that didn't know what to do with Wallace beyond playing him exclusively on the right side and for clearing out for the short stuff underneath, besides the occasional screen to pacify everyone. Lazor will be stretching vertically and horizontally, and I'm guessing he won't want to be doing it with just Wallace or from just one side of the field only. Lazor needs a FULL TIME receiver capable of complimenting Wallace and who can make plays on his own, which means capitalizing on the opportunities Lazor provides him as he gets him the ball in space. Hartline doesn't cut it, nor does anyone else in more than a half-assed capacity sans Wallace and Clay. Therfore, adding skill players who allow Lazor to run his offense on all cylinders and with the full array of playbook he desires is of highest priority. Doing anything but this would be like the Harlem Globetrotters deciding to ignore ball handlers when they're currently lacking.

Tannehill struggled beyond 12 yards last year, and I'm guessing that wasn't all on Tannehill himself, that some of the blame fell on both the personnel and play design. Thus the personnel needs to be addressed two fold- one for Tannehill specifically, and one to fit the new play design. We can find players who fit both these needs, and two of their names are Beckham & Cooks.... or Cody Latimer in the second if he's there. Hickey looked at Moncrief who ostensibly also fits that role, although I'm not as sold on his hands as others forgivingly seem to be. He also brought in Robert Herron who meets these needs as well if we miss out on targets in the first and second round. The way Hickey has it tiered, it seems like WR may just so happen to be his top priority, starting with the first round guys of Beckham, Cooks, and Lee.... and if they're not they're he has his 2nd round options of Moncrief & Bryant, and then 3rd round options like Herron as potentially the fall back.

 

Although it has been reported that Hickey has said he likes BPA over drafting for positional need, I can't help but think their draft strategy will very much revolve around both lines (offensive and defensive). With the obvious priority being on offensive. That said, I can't help but think if someone they perceive to be a top ten or fifteen guy falls, Ebron, Evans, or whoever, I don't think they'll hesitate to grab him. JMHO.

 

I'm not sure he can block all those guys effectively, Would you have taken Billy Milner over Derrick Brooks in 1995 too?

 

Funny part about this is the fact that Hartline had a better YAC with 4.1, than Wallace at 3.9.

Charles Clay is the only Dolphin receiver with decent YAC at 5.5.

Which is why a receiver with decent YAC is a bigger need than a lot of people think.

 

Soo Allen Robinson in the 1st, and Troy Niklas in the 2nd. Would that change your former opinion above? I love that approach. Add in a seastrunk and I'm digging.

 

I'm not knocking any of those players talent wise. I'm saying they were not going to help us win games the way two quality starters on the OL would have. By my count we lost 4 games b/c we couldn't block people or run the ball and we only lost one game b/c our receivers weren't good enough, the last one, after Binns/Keller/Gibson/Hartline had all torn their knees up. And had we taken those OL last year, not only do we probably make the playoffs last year, we may not have had to give Albert that huge contract and we'd be in a position to do exactly what you want this year, take a flashy skill guy.

I agree, though we seem to view value in a different way. We're talking about a low value position in WR to begin with. QB, OT, DE/OLB, CB, are all more important IMO. WR ranks down there with LB, OG, RB and S in terms of how much they contribute towards winning games.

We're also talking about a position where we've already invested heavily in the last year. I'm looking at our current WR unit and thinking any rookie outside of Watkins (Benjamin maybe) is going to have a hard time seeing the field this season. Not for talent reasons per se, because this staff seems loathe to play rookies period. Matthews, Gilly, Miller, Thomas, Sims, Egnew, all of them basically red shirted. On defense the same thing happened to Jordan, Vernon, Jenkins, Taylor and Davis. When Wheeler/Ellerbe/Misi couldn't go due to injury they put Trusnik or Spitler in the game ahead of the #3 overall pick. It's a pattern of behavior which I doubt changes this season.

Meanwhile I'm counting 4 losses in 2013 that were due primarily to our inability to block people or run the ball. Buffalo twice, NE, Carolina, 5 if you count Tampa.

Give me a stud OT and all of a sudden I can control the edge on the outside zone that Miller has the potential to be devastating on. I can stop leaving backs in on every pass play (their weakness) and use them as check down targets (their strength) instead, plus I can give RT more time and more chances to execute throws down the field. That's how we go from 8-8 to 10-6 or 11-5, and that trumps any "talent or BPA" based assessments IMO. It's all about winning games and fixing the OL will win more games than adding a flashy new WR.

Fin D makes a good point about grabbing a stud OT later in the draft but after last season I have no stomach for even taking the risk TBH. Get the OL fixed in the best way possible, worry about the other stuff later.

 

Bigger need than getting Tannehill some decent pass pro?

 

I think we can get a better quality WR in round 1 than tackle in round 1.

Also, Miami beats Carolina if they stop a 4th and 10 or any other play on that long drive.

EDIT: I am also of the opinion that Miami's line will improve a lot now that they have a NFL caliber offensive line coach that knows how to get them prepared.

 

How does getting a good WR help us win games vs getting a good OT? That's the question I haven't heard addressed. If the WR is stuck on the bench behind four other guys for most of his rookie season then how does that make him a better player?

 

I totally disagree. We need to get dynamic players on the field that make plays. The line will be ok with middle round picks building on what we already have. Wasting early picks on O-line all of these years has gotten us absolutely nowhere. Always a step behind most of the league. Extremely boring offense to watch for years. What is the definition of insanity again?

Here is a good read...
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...l-draft-why-offensive-linemen-are-valued-high

 

I outlined the value of the OT earlier, improving the running game, improving the pass pro, allowing for more versatility in the pass game, giving an explosive back like Miller actual holes to explode into.

At the root of it, the draft is about improving the team and winning games, no?

 

I do not like drafting for immediate needs. IMO that leads to overdrafting and reaching. If Lewan falls to 19, of course take him. However I rather have a first round talent WR on the team, than a 2nd round talent Tackle in the first round. Having a rookie tackle struggle isn't going to help Miami win games.

 

question is can Hickey find an offensive lineman in the 2nd or later worth a damn? our last GM couldn't, and it costs us.

 

Last GM pretty much failed in the 2nd round period.

 

Great read, thanks for sharing.

How is taking an OT being a step behind the league when 3 of the top 4 picks were OTs last year?

 

thing is if we go another route with our first pick we'd almost HAVE to take an OL in the 2nd, regardless of who's still on the board....we coudn't afford to go BPA in the 2nd, it would have to be BOLA really....if not, you really want to bank on finding a starting RT in the 3rd round or later? extremely risky.

 

Sign Bryant McKinnie. Have him fight injured McGee.

The best place to find talent is the draft. I don't want to get a less talented player to fill a whole.

I don't want to bank on finding a starter in the draft.

 

To clarify, which WRs are you talking about in the first round?