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

Goldfish's Too Early Draft Rankings 2017 (Browns at 1)
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL Draft
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
game3525


Joined: 03 Oct 2009
Posts: 10985
PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 11:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

MemphisEagles wrote:
I thought the two guard picks and Desmond King were great picks, so I think the Chargers did have a great draft.

But I would be iffy on Mike Williams in the teens. Top ten pick is a bad move imo. But then again, I'm looking at the draft and I can't tell you who they should have gotten instead. Maybe Marshon Lattimore? I would have picked Davis over Williams, but if their scouts like Williams better than that's what they think and they have more credentials than I do.

Actually I would have probably drafted McCaffery and used him as a slot WR, returner, and change of pace to Gordon. But I can see why some would go the more traditional route.


Lattimore is who I wanted them to take at 7. But I understand why they took Williams. Outside of Keenan, they don't have a receiver who can consistently move the chains (Gates isn't that guy anymore and Tyrell and Benjamin are big-play guys, not volume guys) and Keenan's injury history has made him someone you can't rely on.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Broncofan


Joined: 02 Dec 2013
Posts: 3525
PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 1:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

game3525 wrote:
MemphisEagles wrote:
I thought the two guard picks and Desmond King were great picks, so I think the Chargers did have a great draft.

But I would be iffy on Mike Williams in the teens. Top ten pick is a bad move imo. But then again, I'm looking at the draft and I can't tell you who they should have gotten instead. Maybe Marshon Lattimore? I would have picked Davis over Williams, but if their scouts like Williams better than that's what they think and they have more credentials than I do.

Actually I would have probably drafted McCaffery and used him as a slot WR, returner, and change of pace to Gordon. But I can see why some would go the more traditional route.


Lattimore is who I wanted them to take at 7. But I understand why they took Williams. Outside of Keenan, they don't have a receiver who can consistently move the chains (Gates isn't that guy anymore and Tyrell and Benjamin are big-play guys, not volume guys) and Keenan's injury history has made him someone you can't rely on.


Either Lattimore or Hooker would have made this the #2 draft or even #1.

One comment re: Tyrrell Williams I don't think anyone could say he wouldn't have been able to take a leap forward. It's hard to say that he is only a big play guy after 1 year of play (2015 being almost exclusively PS). Now there might not be enough targets to go around to see but I think his injuries and typical Year 1 (on the field) learning curve had more to do with the Chargers than him being limited to that role.
_________________
steelpanther wrote:
This is like playing checkers with a pigeon. No matter how well you play, sooner or later the pigeon is going to crap on the board, then puff his chest out and strut around like he won something.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JammerHammer21


Joined: 27 Dec 2009
Posts: 39477
Location: Anywhere
PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 1:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Broncofan wrote:
game3525 wrote:
MemphisEagles wrote:
I thought the two guard picks and Desmond King were great picks, so I think the Chargers did have a great draft.

But I would be iffy on Mike Williams in the teens. Top ten pick is a bad move imo. But then again, I'm looking at the draft and I can't tell you who they should have gotten instead. Maybe Marshon Lattimore? I would have picked Davis over Williams, but if their scouts like Williams better than that's what they think and they have more credentials than I do.

Actually I would have probably drafted McCaffery and used him as a slot WR, returner, and change of pace to Gordon. But I can see why some would go the more traditional route.


Lattimore is who I wanted them to take at 7. But I understand why they took Williams. Outside of Keenan, they don't have a receiver who can consistently move the chains (Gates isn't that guy anymore and Tyrell and Benjamin are big-play guys, not volume guys) and Keenan's injury history has made him someone you can't rely on.


Either Lattimore or Hooker would have made this the #2 draft or even #1.

One comment re: Tyrrell Williams I don't think anyone could say he wouldn't have been able to take a leap forward. It's hard to say that he is only a big play guy after 1 year of play (2015 being almost exclusively PS). Now there might not be enough targets to go around to see but I think his injuries and typical Year 1 (on the field) learning curve had more to do with the Chargers than him being limited to that role.


Williams was pretty inconsistent, and I think there were multiple balls that bounced off him into the hands of receivers for picks.
_________________

Bohlmann20 (On The 95 Cleveland Browns Staff) wrote:
Lombardi - Isn't that the guy the trophy is named after? If so, top 3 coach of all time.

#JDI
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
game3525


Joined: 03 Oct 2009
Posts: 10985
PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 1:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JammerHammer21 wrote:
Broncofan wrote:
game3525 wrote:
MemphisEagles wrote:
I thought the two guard picks and Desmond King were great picks, so I think the Chargers did have a great draft.

But I would be iffy on Mike Williams in the teens. Top ten pick is a bad move imo. But then again, I'm looking at the draft and I can't tell you who they should have gotten instead. Maybe Marshon Lattimore? I would have picked Davis over Williams, but if their scouts like Williams better than that's what they think and they have more credentials than I do.

Actually I would have probably drafted McCaffery and used him as a slot WR, returner, and change of pace to Gordon. But I can see why some would go the more traditional route.


Lattimore is who I wanted them to take at 7. But I understand why they took Williams. Outside of Keenan, they don't have a receiver who can consistently move the chains (Gates isn't that guy anymore and Tyrell and Benjamin are big-play guys, not volume guys) and Keenan's injury history has made him someone you can't rely on.


Either Lattimore or Hooker would have made this the #2 draft or even #1.

One comment re: Tyrrell Williams I don't think anyone could say he wouldn't have been able to take a leap forward. It's hard to say that he is only a big play guy after 1 year of play (2015 being almost exclusively PS). Now there might not be enough targets to go around to see but I think his injuries and typical Year 1 (on the field) learning curve had more to do with the Chargers than him being limited to that role.


Williams was pretty inconsistent, and I think there were multiple balls that bounced off him into the hands of receivers for picks.


Yup.

His route running should get better, but I don't think his hands will ever be consistent enough to occupy the role Keenan has on offense.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Broncofan


Joined: 02 Dec 2013
Posts: 3525
PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 1:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

game3525 wrote:
JammerHammer21 wrote:
Broncofan wrote:
game3525 wrote:
MemphisEagles wrote:
I thought the two guard picks and Desmond King were great picks, so I think the Chargers did have a great draft.

But I would be iffy on Mike Williams in the teens. Top ten pick is a bad move imo. But then again, I'm looking at the draft and I can't tell you who they should have gotten instead. Maybe Marshon Lattimore? I would have picked Davis over Williams, but if their scouts like Williams better than that's what they think and they have more credentials than I do.

Actually I would have probably drafted McCaffery and used him as a slot WR, returner, and change of pace to Gordon. But I can see why some would go the more traditional route.


Lattimore is who I wanted them to take at 7. But I understand why they took Williams. Outside of Keenan, they don't have a receiver who can consistently move the chains (Gates isn't that guy anymore and Tyrell and Benjamin are big-play guys, not volume guys) and Keenan's injury history has made him someone you can't rely on.


Either Lattimore or Hooker would have made this the #2 draft or even #1.

One comment re: Tyrrell Williams I don't think anyone could say he wouldn't have been able to take a leap forward. It's hard to say that he is only a big play guy after 1 year of play (2015 being almost exclusively PS). Now there might not be enough targets to go around to see but I think his injuries and typical Year 1 (on the field) learning curve had more to do with the Chargers than him being limited to that role.


Williams was pretty inconsistent, and I think there were multiple balls that bounced off him into the hands of receivers for picks.


Yup.

His route running should get better, but I don't think his hands will ever be consistent enough to occupy the role Keenan has on offense.


If his hands aren't better then absolutely fair comments & conclusion. One Q - were his hands issues in the 1H or 2H of the season? I only raise this because the balls I saw him drop/muff, he was playing hurt - not that it affects hands directly, but when he had a bad wheel, playing in pain, etc. - way more likely to have drop/muff issues. It doesn't mean it's not a problem, but there's far more chance it's something that gets better (not the right talent level comp, but it's like Amari Cooper's drop problem, which seems fixable, vs. Sammy Coates - likely unfixable).
_________________
steelpanther wrote:
This is like playing checkers with a pigeon. No matter how well you play, sooner or later the pigeon is going to crap on the board, then puff his chest out and strut around like he won something.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Crickett


Joined: 27 Nov 2004
Posts: 4801
PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 1:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Broncofan wrote:
game3525 wrote:
MemphisEagles wrote:
I thought the two guard picks and Desmond King were great picks, so I think the Chargers did have a great draft.

But I would be iffy on Mike Williams in the teens. Top ten pick is a bad move imo. But then again, I'm looking at the draft and I can't tell you who they should have gotten instead. Maybe Marshon Lattimore? I would have picked Davis over Williams, but if their scouts like Williams better than that's what they think and they have more credentials than I do.

Actually I would have probably drafted McCaffery and used him as a slot WR, returner, and change of pace to Gordon. But I can see why some would go the more traditional route.


Lattimore is who I wanted them to take at 7. But I understand why they took Williams. Outside of Keenan, they don't have a receiver who can consistently move the chains (Gates isn't that guy anymore and Tyrell and Benjamin are big-play guys, not volume guys) and Keenan's injury history has made him someone you can't rely on.


Either Lattimore or Hooker would have made this the #2 draft or even #1.

One comment re: Tyrrell Williams I don't think anyone could say he wouldn't have been able to take a leap forward. It's hard to say that he is only a big play guy after 1 year of play (2015 being almost exclusively PS). Now there might not be enough targets to go around to see but I think his injuries and typical Year 1 (on the field) learning curve had more to do with the Chargers than him being limited to that role.


Ehh, I dunno. I had Desmond King as a second rounder and getting him in round 5 is one of the reasons I rate the Chargers draft so high. If they take Hooker and don't take King (which I would assume possibly incorrectly they wouldn't) I don't know if I look at their draft in such high regard. Especially if not taking Williams necessitates drafting a WR in rounds 2 or 3.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Broncofan


Joined: 02 Dec 2013
Posts: 3525
PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 1:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Crickett wrote:
Broncofan wrote:
game3525 wrote:
MemphisEagles wrote:
I thought the two guard picks and Desmond King were great picks, so I think the Chargers did have a great draft.

But I would be iffy on Mike Williams in the teens. Top ten pick is a bad move imo. But then again, I'm looking at the draft and I can't tell you who they should have gotten instead. Maybe Marshon Lattimore? I would have picked Davis over Williams, but if their scouts like Williams better than that's what they think and they have more credentials than I do.

Actually I would have probably drafted McCaffery and used him as a slot WR, returner, and change of pace to Gordon. But I can see why some would go the more traditional route.


Lattimore is who I wanted them to take at 7. But I understand why they took Williams. Outside of Keenan, they don't have a receiver who can consistently move the chains (Gates isn't that guy anymore and Tyrell and Benjamin are big-play guys, not volume guys) and Keenan's injury history has made him someone you can't rely on.


Either Lattimore or Hooker would have made this the #2 draft or even #1.

One comment re: Tyrrell Williams I don't think anyone could say he wouldn't have been able to take a leap forward. It's hard to say that he is only a big play guy after 1 year of play (2015 being almost exclusively PS). Now there might not be enough targets to go around to see but I think his injuries and typical Year 1 (on the field) learning curve had more to do with the Chargers than him being limited to that role.


Ehh, I dunno. I had Desmond King as a second rounder and getting him in round 5 is one of the reasons I rate the Chargers draft so high. If they take Hooker and don't take King (which I would assume possibly incorrectly they wouldn't) I don't know if I look at their draft in such high regard. Especially if not taking Williams necessitates drafting a WR in rounds 2 or 3.


I'd take both Hooker & King - I think King can succeed as a SS. Neither Charger incumbent is worth passing over both IMO.
_________________
steelpanther wrote:
This is like playing checkers with a pigeon. No matter how well you play, sooner or later the pigeon is going to crap on the board, then puff his chest out and strut around like he won something.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JaguarCrazy2832


Joined: 28 Jun 2008
Posts: 90783
PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 1:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Crickett wrote:
TheVillain112 wrote:
Crickett wrote:
6. Ryan Glasgow - Ordinary I would praise this pick. It's a pretty good value at a need position. But here's the thing. This is the third year in a row the Bengals have made a "value" pick at defensive tackle in the fourth round. The last two have contributed nothing so far. Third time's the charm maybe?.


Seems like a bad reason to dislike a pick...


Why? It's not like I hate the pick per say, but at some point there's the whole 'definition of insanity' thing to consider.


Does that really apply when you're talking about different players? They arent asking the same question over and over again that is player X any good they ask is X good? How about Y and Z?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Crickett


Joined: 27 Nov 2004
Posts: 4801
PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 2:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JaguarCrazy2832 wrote:
Crickett wrote:
TheVillain112 wrote:
Crickett wrote:
6. Ryan Glasgow - Ordinary I would praise this pick. It's a pretty good value at a need position. But here's the thing. This is the third year in a row the Bengals have made a "value" pick at defensive tackle in the fourth round. The last two have contributed nothing so far. Third time's the charm maybe?.


Seems like a bad reason to dislike a pick...


Why? It's not like I hate the pick per say, but at some point there's the whole 'definition of insanity' thing to consider.


Does that really apply when you're talking about different players? They arent asking the same question over and over again that is player X any good they ask is X good? How about Y and Z?


Why wouldn't it? If you're drafting the same position in the same round year after year and none of them are contributing, maybe you should stop doing that? It's Cincinnati though, I know they're not going to. Heck, if I write mock drafts next year, chances are I'm going to give them a cornerback in round 1 in 80% of them. Because Cincinnati and because even numbered year.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
candyman93


Joined: 02 Dec 2009
Posts: 58754
PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 2:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Last minute trick to get us #1 Razz

Quote:
PatMcManamon
@PatMcManamon
Story: Browns DL draftee Caleb Brantley will not face misdemeanor battery charges in Florida, case is closed -- https://t.co/6vCRNvAgnC

_________________

2016 Adopt a Brownie - Joe Schoebert & Christian Kirksey
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TheVillain112


Moderator
Joined: 19 Feb 2010
Posts: 21728
PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 3:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Crickett wrote:
TheVillain112 wrote:
Crickett wrote:
6. Ryan Glasgow - Ordinary I would praise this pick. It's a pretty good value at a need position. But here's the thing. This is the third year in a row the Bengals have made a "value" pick at defensive tackle in the fourth round. The last two have contributed nothing so far. Third time's the charm maybe?.


Seems like a bad reason to dislike a pick...


Why? It's not like I hate the pick per say, but at some point there's the whole 'definition of insanity' thing to consider.


So the last 3 guys that we've taken that fit your description are Andrew Billings, Marcus Hardison and Brandon Thompson.

Thompson has been a solid player for us when he's healthy. But has been nicked up a lot recently. Hardison isn't really the big run stuffer type, he's brought in to backup Geno. Billings is going to be our starting DT along side Geno this season (barring injury). I don't really see those picks as a "definition of insanity" to not take Glasgow.

I think the logic here is that if those guys (Thompson, Hardison and to an extent Billings) can't stay healthy we have a guy that can replace them. Also, with Peko no longer on the roster, it's probably a smart move to have another DT in case of an injury that can play that role...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
onejayhawk


Joined: 14 Apr 2006
Posts: 7503
Location: Waco, Tx
PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 3:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is an inconsistency:

2016: As for Tyreek Hill, Im just stunned hes on an NFL roster. Literally stunned.

2017: Best Pick: Joe Mixon

Consider the placement of the draft with the following--

Best Pick: Carl Lawson

Most questionable pick: Joe Mixon. Im just stunned hes on an NFL roster. Literally stunned.

The Bengals draft pivots on your opinion of Joe Mixon. GFW believes his past indiscretion is either one off or manufactured. Hence, Mixon is a 1st round talent at a mid-2nd round price. Others would go to the extreme shown in the example.

I'm in the middle. Calling Mixon the best pick dismisses the significant potential blowback. I would say it's a reasonable balance in the slot he was taken, but not a bargain. Now, with Lawson or Willis as your best pick, this draft is in the 8-12 range.

J
_________________


Last edited by onejayhawk on Thu May 18, 2017 9:09 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
onejayhawk


Joined: 14 Apr 2006
Posts: 7503
Location: Waco, Tx
PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 4:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

candyman93 wrote:
Love what the 49ers did so I can see them being #1. Bengals had an incredible draft.

Don't sell the Browns short. They have one for the draft of the decade arguments. The 49ers are merely very, very good, even including the way they fleeced the Bears.

J
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
game3525


Joined: 03 Oct 2009
Posts: 10985
PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 4:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Broncofan wrote:
game3525 wrote:
JammerHammer21 wrote:
Broncofan wrote:
game3525 wrote:
MemphisEagles wrote:
I thought the two guard picks and Desmond King were great picks, so I think the Chargers did have a great draft.

But I would be iffy on Mike Williams in the teens. Top ten pick is a bad move imo. But then again, I'm looking at the draft and I can't tell you who they should have gotten instead. Maybe Marshon Lattimore? I would have picked Davis over Williams, but if their scouts like Williams better than that's what they think and they have more credentials than I do.

Actually I would have probably drafted McCaffery and used him as a slot WR, returner, and change of pace to Gordon. But I can see why some would go the more traditional route.


Lattimore is who I wanted them to take at 7. But I understand why they took Williams. Outside of Keenan, they don't have a receiver who can consistently move the chains (Gates isn't that guy anymore and Tyrell and Benjamin are big-play guys, not volume guys) and Keenan's injury history has made him someone you can't rely on.


Either Lattimore or Hooker would have made this the #2 draft or even #1.

One comment re: Tyrrell Williams I don't think anyone could say he wouldn't have been able to take a leap forward. It's hard to say that he is only a big play guy after 1 year of play (2015 being almost exclusively PS). Now there might not be enough targets to go around to see but I think his injuries and typical Year 1 (on the field) learning curve had more to do with the Chargers than him being limited to that role.


Williams was pretty inconsistent, and I think there were multiple balls that bounced off him into the hands of receivers for picks.


Yup.

His route running should get better, but I don't think his hands will ever be consistent enough to occupy the role Keenan has on offense.


If his hands aren't better then absolutely fair comments & conclusion. One Q - were his hands issues in the 1H or 2H of the season? I only raise this because the balls I saw him drop/muff, he was playing hurt - not that it affects hands directly, but when he had a bad wheel, playing in pain, etc. - way more likely to have drop/muff issues. It doesn't mean it's not a problem, but there's far more chance it's something that gets better (not the right talent level comp, but it's like Amari Cooper's drop problem, which seems fixable, vs. Sammy Coates - likely unfixable).


It was an issue all year long, granted the shoulder injury made it worst.

Now, don't get me wrong, Tyrell is only going to get better. He did put up 1000 yards and was among the league leaders in big plays, but I just don't think he will ever be the reception monster Keenan is, who if healthy is a 100 catch threat.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ragnarok


Joined: 17 Oct 2016
Posts: 850
Location: Washington, DC
PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 5:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JaguarCrazy2832 wrote:
Crickett wrote:
TheVillain112 wrote:
Crickett wrote:
6. Ryan Glasgow - Ordinary I would praise this pick. It's a pretty good value at a need position. But here's the thing. This is the third year in a row the Bengals have made a "value" pick at defensive tackle in the fourth round. The last two have contributed nothing so far. Third time's the charm maybe?.


Seems like a bad reason to dislike a pick...


Why? It's not like I hate the pick per say, but at some point there's the whole 'definition of insanity' thing to consider.


Does that really apply when you're talking about different players? They arent asking the same question over and over again that is player X any good they ask is X good? How about Y and Z?


I get where he is coming from. TT tends to draft a certain type of DL and doesn't have the best track record doing so. Justin Harrell, Mike Neal, Jerel Worthy, Josh Boyd, Khyri Thornton, Christian Ringo, Mike Daniels, and Kenny Clark fit a type. Usually around 6'3" and 300 pounds.

Raji was an obvious change from this type and Clark is a different type of player in some ways plus we don't know how good he will be yet. But so far, Daniels is the only non-NT type of DT TT has drafted that has been a hit. And Daniels is the biggest outlier size-wise of the non-NTs.

At some point, you get skeptical.
_________________
Come join BDL!

Seriously, we're awesome. We all may or may not have mild-at-best psychological issues, but we are damn fun.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL Draft All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29  Next
Page 25 of 29

 
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