1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Miami Dolphins Might Want To ‘Overpay’ For Ryan Tannehill

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by Onehondo, Apr 8, 2012.

  1. ToddsPhins

    ToddsPhins Banned

    29,125
    7,721
    0
    Mar 15, 2009
    .... the last I checked, the draft only deals in whole numbers, Aquafin. just sayin.

    And why would you trade up that high for a WR who might not become a top 10 NFL receiver?
     
  2. Phinatic19

    Phinatic19 New Member

    461
    202
    0
    Aug 30, 2010
    what the hell man?
     
  3. HardKoreXXX

    HardKoreXXX Insensitive to the Touch

    20,459
    14,210
    113
    Apr 2, 2008
    Coral Springs, FL
    The Dolphins get Andrew Luck's upper half and Robert Griffin's lower-half. It's like a Griffin-Luck-taur, or Gricktaur. Not to be confused with a Luck-Gryphon-Taur, or Lyphontaur, which is similar, but much cooler because it's the best Lion with Eagle Wings prospect to come out since Peyton Manning.
     
    Jcouch1021 and ToddsPhins like this.
  4. fin13

    fin13 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    1,695
    1,237
    113
    May 29, 2009
    Waterloo
    we all know the risks involved in drafting the wrong guy, but you have to take a chance if Tanny is your guy you go get him.
    The cost of having this guy sit for a year is not the same as it use to be, Jake long cost 10 million from day one, I know things could go wrong but if you are right 2013 could be the start of something for this team.
     
  5. aleeeeex

    aleeeeex New Member

    14
    13
    0
    Mar 14, 2012
    If we draft Tannehill number 8 then I think we should trade back into the first round and draft Alshon Jeffery to fill the WR spot. I don't think we should use a 1st round pick on someone who may or quite as easily may not be our next franchise QB, I would personally much rather see Michael Floyd taken in the first and Weedon in the second. Just a thought.
     
    Jcouch1021 likes this.
  6. Jcouch1021

    Jcouch1021 New Member

    926
    127
    0
    Jan 21, 2011
    New Jersey
    So would he half black half white? Or Asian?
     
  7. ckparrothead

    ckparrothead Draft Forum Moderator Luxury Box

    79,599
    159,162
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    Apropos of this subject, whether to "overpay" for Ryan Tannehill or not...

    One big reason NOT to get caught up in the idea of overpaying for Ryan Tannehill, is this guy:

    [video]http://www.youtube.com/6jFGjqRawAs[/video]

    Bottom line is, he's a damn good quarterback, and he's definitely going to be available to you because of some strange circumstances (age), and when there are two guys I'm not sure it makes sense for the price difference on the two to be really wide...especially if the cheaper of the two is actually the better player, which is the case here, IMO.

    To me, the "overpay" for Ryan Tannehill is trading up. Trade up to where? The theory is that you need to trade up to #3 to be assured of getting him. That would cost 800 "points" in the old value chart. If you're lucky, you get away with just giving away your 2nd and 3rd round picks this year (710 points). You probably have to give up the #105 pick in the 4th round on top of that.

    On the other hand, you don't need to take Weeden at #8 overall. Let's say you get to trade down with the Titans at #20 and you're still pretty assured of getting Weeden. To trade down that far, you'd be asking the Titans for their 2nd at #52 and their 3rd at #84.

    So the price difference between the two could very well be #42, #52, #72, #84 and #105 overall picks.

    Imagine that for a moment. If you go for Ryan Tannehill you just get Ryan Tannehill and then someone at #73 overall, let's say Cam Johnson of Virginia. If you go for Brandon Weeden, you pick up Dwayne Allen at #42 overall, Bobby Massie at #52 overall, Brandon Brooks at #72 overall, Cam Johnson at #73 overall, Ryan Broyles at #84 overall and Devon Wylie at #105 overall.

    So essentially you've either got the 2011 Miami Dolphins offense minus Brandon Marshall, Vernon Carey and Marc Colombo, but with Ryan Tannehill, Artis Hicks and Lydon Murtha added into the mix, or you've got the 2011 Miami Dolphins minus Brandon Marshall, Vernon Carey and Marc Colombo, but plus Brandon Weeden, Brandon Brooks/Artis Hicks, Bobby Massie/Lydon Murtha, Ryan Broyles, Dwayne Allen and Devon Wylie.

    Which one has the better chance at success?
     
  8. ToddsPhins

    ToddsPhins Banned

    29,125
    7,721
    0
    Mar 15, 2009
    would that make it difficult for him to drive the ball downfield? :shifty:
     
  9. MrClean

    MrClean Inglourious Basterd Club Member

    Great info CK, but your link didn't work for me.
     
  10. Den54

    Den54 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    19,678
    31,347
    113
    Nov 23, 2007
    AMERICA!


    The Hurricane's mascot?
     
  11. UCF FINatic

    UCF FINatic The Miami Dolphins select

    5,783
    1,931
    113
    Apr 17, 2008
    You wonder if we are planning to trade back some with the way we keep working out these late 1st round, early 2nd round prospects. Ireland has traded back before and I could see him doing it again here.
     
  12. MikeHoncho

    MikeHoncho -=| Censored |=-

    52,652
    25,565
    113
    Nov 13, 2009
    Short quick passes... eventually...
     
  13. jw3102

    jw3102 season ticket holder

    7,760
    3,486
    113
    Sep 4, 2010
    Maui, Hawaii
    I just don't get the Aaron Rodgers comparison. Rogers was an outstanding QB in college, while Tannehill was merely mediocre. While I think Rogers should certainly have been taken higher in his draft class, it is my opinion that Tannehill will never be anything but a mediocre QB in the NFL and is really no better than a late second or third round talent. In fact I think comparing Tannehill to Chad Henne makes far more sense than comparing him to Rogers.
     
  14. Dol-Fan Dupree

    Dol-Fan Dupree Tank? Who is Tank? I am Guy Incognito.

    40,533
    33,035
    113
    Dec 11, 2007
    I think Rogers would go about the same in this draft class. He didn't put up huge stats in college and there was still the problem with the Tedford quarterbacks.
     
  15. rafael

    rafael Well-Known Member

    27,364
    31,261
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    Rodgers

    Year Cmp Att Pct Yds Y/A TD Int Rate
    Career 424 665 63.8 5469 8.2 43 13 150.3

    Tannehill

    Year Cmp Att Pct Yds Y/A TD Int Rate

    Career 484 774 62.5 5450 7.0 42 21 134.2

    I actually find a stat analysis to be meaningless on it's own. It's basically lazy evaluation, but I did think it was interesting how similar Rodgers' and Tannehill's production was. Basically, Tannehill threw a few more picks than Rodgers and we know he had a ton more drops than the average QB.
     
  16. I would be really happy if we got tannehill and WR Stephen hill without moving in the draft.
     
  17. fin13

    fin13 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    1,695
    1,237
    113
    May 29, 2009
    Waterloo
    I like CK's point, that's alot of picks by moving down.
     
  18. UCF FINatic

    UCF FINatic The Miami Dolphins select

    5,783
    1,931
    113
    Apr 17, 2008
    Yea, I agree with you that it is quite meaningless. The big things that jump out from me there are Rodgers completion percentage. I remember watching him in college and thought he was incredibly accurate. I cannot believe his completion percentage was that low. I wonder if he had a bad Junior season and then had a great Senior season... If I remember correctly he did only play two years at Cal after transferring there from a smaller school...

    Another thing is the Y/A for Tannehill compared to Rodgers, a 1.2 yard difference on Y/A is a huge difference. I don't know if you could attribute that to a more downfield attacking offense or better WRs, probably a little bit of both.

    The biggest thing that gets me excited is the fact that if Philban could turn Rodgers into what he is at Green Bay, I can't wait to see how a Tannehill would do under him. The closer we get to the draft the more I want Tannehill. I am just trying not to get my hopes up only to be crushed lol.
     
  19. Roman529

    Roman529 Senior Member

    2,643
    909
    0
    Dec 16, 2007
    Colorado Springs, CO
    If he is there at #8 we draft him....if someone moves up to get him, I think we should try to trade down.....if we can't trade down, I think we go with Ingram or Floyd. Even Ireland can't mess this up...right???
     
    Fin-Omenal likes this.
  20. Roman529

    Roman529 Senior Member

    2,643
    909
    0
    Dec 16, 2007
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Bleacher Report actually did a good article on why Miami won't trade up for Ryan Tannehill....they basically said there is about a 2% chance Cleveland takes Tannehill....
    http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...trading-up-for-ryan-tannehill-will-not-happen
     
  21. UCF FINatic

    UCF FINatic The Miami Dolphins select

    5,783
    1,931
    113
    Apr 17, 2008
    If he is not there at 8 I see us trading down. Don't think we would take Floyd. Floyd doesn't strike me as a great WC wide receiver (he doesn't run great routes and he isn't that great at getting YAC) and Ingram in my opinion is a poor value there. I have a feeling that one of the teams that really wants DL help will be willing to trade up and leap frog the Panthers in order to get their choice of Cox, Poe, or any one of the DEs.
     
  22. ckparrothead

    ckparrothead Draft Forum Moderator Luxury Box

    79,599
    159,162
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    The Club Level mock draft brought up an interesting question.

    When I laid out my scenario before, we had two assumptions:

    1. Ryan Tannehill will be taken by Cleveland at #4 if available
    2. Tennessee is willing to trade up with us from #20 to #8

    What if these assumptions are just not the case? What if these assumptions are replaced:

    1. Ryan Tannehill will be available at #8 overall
    2. No team is offering us a trade for the #8 pick

    That changes things considerably. Before, we were assuming the Fins to take Cam Johnson at #73 to help out in the pass rush effort, and talking about QB Ryan Tannehill (#3) by himself versus a package of QB Brandon Weeden (#25), TE Dwayne Allen (#42), RT Bobby Massie (#52), OG Brandon Brooks (#72), WR Ryan Broyles (#84) and WR Devon Wylie (#105).

    That's a significant difference. But if the assumptions change so do the packages. Now you're looking at taking Ryan Tannehill at #8 overall, versus taking someone else (Quinton Coples being most popular choice), and then trying to flip off the #72 or #73 pick in order to move UP from #42 overall to #25 or #26 overall, in order to secure Brandon Weeden.

    So now you're looking at, for example, QB Ryan Tannehill (#8), TE Dwayne Allen (#42), OG Brandon Brooks (#72), DE Cam Johnson (#73) and WR Devon Wylie (#105), versus DE Quinton Coples (#8), QB Brandon Weeden (#25), OG Brandon Brooks (#73) and WR Devon Wylie (#105).

    Essentially, to take Weeden instead of Tannehill means you're actually giving up one player in the packaging (in this example, Dwayne Allen), but also getting a better defensive end in Quinton Coples as compared with Cam Johnson. Or replace Cam Johnson with Malik Jackson, whichever you prefer, doesn't matter.

    That makes it a tougher question, more interesting. I think I'd still prefer the Weeden route. However, is it realistic? If we pass on Ryan Tannehill at #8 overall, where is he destined to fall before getting taken? Would he fall to #22? That would be a question of critical importance because the Browns are a threat to take Weeden at #22 and our #72 overall pick won't get us from #42 overall to #21 overall. Also, if the Browns catch wind that we're trying to trade up to #21 overall to snatch Weeden from them, you'd have to think they'll offer something so that the Bengals don't have to move down a great distance. Or hopefully division rivalries being what they are, and with our front office having a rapport with the Bengals due to the Carson Palmer talks, maybe they wouldn't give the Browns that heads up.
     
  23. jw3102

    jw3102 season ticket holder

    7,760
    3,486
    113
    Sep 4, 2010
    Maui, Hawaii
    I see Tannehill as a mediocre talent at the QB position. He hasn't shown the ability in college to read through his progressions and find the open receiver. He tends to lock onto one receiver and will try to force the pass into this receiver whether he is open or not. He is not a very effective passer on deep throws and he didn't show in college that he plays well against good defenses. If he was as good a QB as you and others think he is, he wouldn't have spent more time playing WR at Texas A&M than he spend playing the QB position.

    I see Tannehill as the next Chad Henne because just as Henne was a mediocre QB in college who was thought to be a starting caliber QB in the NFL because of his strong arm, Tannehill was also a very mediocre QB at Texas A&M. In fact if Matt Barkley and Landry Jones had not decided to remain in college next season, I doubt if Tannehill would have even been drafted before the third round of the 2012 draft. He only moved up because these two college QB's stayed in school.

    I watched Tannehill play three full games this past season and I never felt he was a future star in the NFL. In fact I saw him as a future backup in the NFL, just as I feel Henne should be. I don't see him as a future upgrade over Matt Moore and I don't think Matt Moore is anything but a very good backup QB in the NFL.

    If you want the Dolphins to draft another backup QB with their first round selection, so be it. I would rather the Dolphins go with Moore and Garrard this coming season and do everything they can to move up in the 2013 draft and pick Matt Barkley.
     
  24. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    I just think when it comes to getting a guy you think is a franchise QB, take him first chance you get and be happy. None of the scenarios you posted are locks. The draft is enough of a gamble, I'll never understand adding more uncontrollable variables into the equation when dealing with the most important position.
     
  25. UCF FINatic

    UCF FINatic The Miami Dolphins select

    5,783
    1,931
    113
    Apr 17, 2008
    J

    Just curious but why did you project the Titans to trade up to our position? Who do they have their eye on? Just curious...
     
  26. UCF FINatic

    UCF FINatic The Miami Dolphins select

    5,783
    1,931
    113
    Apr 17, 2008
    I'm surprised they would be willing to trade up considering at least one of those top DEs will be there when they are on the clock. Guess we have to hope they fall in love with a certain DE that might not be there when they pick.
     
  27. MrClean

    MrClean Inglourious Basterd Club Member

    Crack cocaine...it's a helluva drug.
     
  28. ckparrothead

    ckparrothead Draft Forum Moderator Luxury Box

    79,599
    159,162
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    That's fair.
     
    Fin D likes this.
  29. ckparrothead

    ckparrothead Draft Forum Moderator Luxury Box

    79,599
    159,162
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    I've heard some persistent rumors they're looking to trade up for some DL help, particularly DE. I've been speculating Melvin Ingram but perhaps Quinton Coples is their flavor.
     
    UCF FINatic likes this.
  30. ToddsPhins

    ToddsPhins Banned

    29,125
    7,721
    0
    Mar 15, 2009
    How about if the Browns pull a surprise and take Coples. He represents one of the missing pieces to that team IMO, and he turns their starting front 4 into a very strong unit that'd be extremely difficult to run on. Plus they have a nickel pass rusher in Marcus Benard to sub in for Rubin, allowing Coples to move inside next to Taylor.

    Currently, their two most talented DEs are better suited for the weak side IMO, making Coples a perfect fit on the strong. (Sheard and Benard are both 6'2 255)


    The Browns obviously prioritize building their Dline, evident by using their 1st 2 picks last year on DT & DE (Phil Taylor & Sheard), so it wouldn't surprise me to see them jump on the opportunity to finish it off and make the unit a strength. He seems to fit the mold of the physical type of player they look for on defense (Haden, Ward, Taylor, Sheard)

    Originally I was thinking Claiborne would be the best pick for helping create a dominant D and pairing with Haden, but now I'm a little up in the air over the 2. Personally, if I had the choice between a great running back in a mediocre offense or a great DE in a promising defense who will see more snaps, I'd go with the defensive end. Plus, there's something to be said about the swagger & confidence instilled in a player when he knows he's a part of something special & imposing, which Cleveland's Dline would be with Coples-Taylor-Rubin-Sheard. A Dline like that could leave themselves feeling like their front 4 is a team within the team (just as the Dline in NY does), and there's some special value to that IMO. It's an 11 man defense but the Dline is its own 4 man team in a sense. Drafting Claiborne could create a similar feeling for their secondary, but not to the extent of a Dline since the front 4 represents the first line of defense.
     
  31. UCF FINatic

    UCF FINatic The Miami Dolphins select

    5,783
    1,931
    113
    Apr 17, 2008
     
  32. ToddsPhins

    ToddsPhins Banned

    29,125
    7,721
    0
    Mar 15, 2009
    Deal. I still call first dibs on pink though. :tongue2:
     
    UCF FINatic likes this.
  33. rafael

    rafael Well-Known Member

    27,364
    31,261
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    That's where I am. We all want to get the franchise QB. Obviously, it would be better to get the franchise QB and another top player. But if the cost of trying to get that combo involves the risk that you don't get the franchise QB, that would be a risk that I'm not willing to take.
     
    Steve-Mo, Stringer Bell and Fin D like this.
  34. ToddsPhins

    ToddsPhins Banned

    29,125
    7,721
    0
    Mar 15, 2009
    There's gotta be some movement in the top 10, right, so it'll be interesting to see where it occurs.

    What if Buffalo wants to leap up for Claiborne to put a finishing touch on their defense? Hairston played promisingly at LT so it's possible they'll roll the dice with him.
     
  35. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Its just time.

    I have this fear with any FO, that they look at the draft as all BPA always. I feel like that's why we ended up with Ronnie Brown instead of Aaron Rodgers. Brown had a grade that said he had 85% (made up number, just a hypo) chance of being elite, while Rodgers maybe had a 80% grade of being elite. So take Brown, maybe Rodgers drops...oh well he didn't drop far enough. Now I understand why that was needed before, when the draft was soooooooo costly, but now its not and I hope people have changed their philosophy with it.
     
    Steve-Mo and rafael like this.
  36. rafael

    rafael Well-Known Member

    27,364
    31,261
    113
    Apr 6, 2008




    I find that the "he locks on to WRs" claim that fans often make about QBs (I'm talking about QBs in general here, not any QB specifically), is one of the most commonly misdiagnosed evaluations made by fans. Just about every offense today has so many quick throws in it that the QB is supposed to only look at one WR. The link you provided does a good job of showing how it is an inaccurate criticism as it's applied to Tannehill. Obviously, a reasonable person would admit that they got that wrong, but what are the odds of that happening? :lol:
     
    Steve-Mo and Aqua4Ever04 like this.
  37. ToddsPhins

    ToddsPhins Banned

    29,125
    7,721
    0
    Mar 15, 2009
    With all the pressure they should be capable of creating, imagine the opportunities a guy like Claiborne would get. :no: .... and then with Claiborne on the field, imagine the opportunities Byrd would get. :no: Then they still have a developing Aaron Williams to worry about and McKelvin & Rogers available for nickel. Searcy looks promising at SS. As much as I'd hate to see Floyd added to their offense, I think I'd look less forward to Claiborne added to their D..... and roughly 18.0M wouldn't be a huge ding to their pocket for a potential shut down corner. I'll be watching their draft with my hand partially covering my eyes, peaking through my fingers.
     
  38. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    Problem is a lot of those guys won't be there very long. I believe Byrd is a FA after this year. They won't be able to afford a lot of those guys after signing Williams to that contract.
     
  39. UCF FINatic

    UCF FINatic The Miami Dolphins select

    5,783
    1,931
    113
    Apr 17, 2008
    You got it, I just want mine in bold ;)
     
  40. ToddsPhins

    ToddsPhins Banned

    29,125
    7,721
    0
    Mar 15, 2009
    Then that might be all the more reason to go after Claiborne (to counter a potential loss of Byrd). However, they have 2 high priced corners falling off the books (or can be cuttable) to help resign Byrd. They won't need the expensive Dwan Edwards or Chris Kelsay..... and they can replace the more expensive George Wilson with Searcy.
     

Share This Page