Cordarrelle Patterson, WR - Tenn.

I get that but it's also possibly that they already screwed up and you can't worry about past screwups else you're set to make more screwups in the future.

Very recently I'm putting together a mock draft and trying to figure out what Kansas City is going to do. Everyone's plugging in Luke Joeckel or Geno Smith for them. I don't buy Geno Smith for a second so I'm thinking Joeckel. Then I'm thinking about it and I'd take Lane Johnson over Luke Joeckel. I would. I start writing up a surprise #1 overall, Lane Johnson. I then think better of it just because John Dorsey's record suggests that in the high areas of the Draft in Green Bay they generally went with the more experienced, technique-savvy guy as opposed to the all star potential guys. So I gave them Joeckel after all.

But if Lane Johnson is a guy that's a hair away from being plugged in at #1 overall and he makes it to #12 overall, am I going to split hairs on past mistakes in order to justify passing on him? No way.

 

lol this is probably the same logic our front office used (not saying it's flawed, but it damn sure was in 08) when they figured they'd rather have Long and Henne over Matt Ryan and a lesser OT prospect.

I understand this is a nice and deep draft for WRs, but are ALL these 2nd-4th round guys gonna be good players? it seems everyone on here would be fine with a Wheaton or Hopkins or Bailey or Woods or Terrance Williams or Patton with our 2nd/3rd/4th picks and I'm like well **** if every highly rated WR is gonna be good then this will go down as the best WR draft in history. And do you even trust Ireland to hit in the middle rounds on a WR?

In my opinion we will rue the day that we pass on Patterson, I mean honestly I wouldn't be shocked if he didn't make it out of the top 10, someone might trade up in front of us to steal him away, that's how coveted he could become.

 

*wrong thread*

 

The answer to that question is no, which I've pointed out myself quite a few times. You have to pick your spots and prospects extremely well and even then you live with the fact that it's a numbers game.

And I wouldn't be shocked if Patterson went top 10 either.

This isn't 2008, though. You're never going to run into a situation where you draft a successful left tackle and you rue the day you took him because you could have had a wide receiver that is just as successful. This is not the quarterback position. With a quarterback you might rue the day you took a Jake Long over a Matt Ryan, but when it comes to the other positions for example the Texans don't rue the day they took Duane Brown because they could've had Jordy Nelson.

 

Also, with regards to Patterson - I make no qualms, I love him as a prospect. I really do. Everything I want in a player at that position, especially with his higher floor due to his multiple threats.

But I see several guys that are simply unique to this draft. I was enamored with Josh Gordon last year, and in that same vein, I'm enamored with Stedman Bailey and Marquees Wilson. I think both of those guys are going to make impacts that make people say "Wow talk about steals" at their relative positions in the draft.

I'm saying this expecting Bailey in the 4th and Wilson in the 6th/7th

 

THIS. I swear that might be the most annoying statement I hear approaching the draft. Lol like these fans swear Miami is the only team interested in a certain player in the draft and that he's guaranteed to fall to us or that we're guaranteed to take him when we're on the clock. you have 31 other teams picking players!!! Nothing is guaranteed.

 

I don't see how any of this is relevant to what I said about drafting Lane Johnson and Markus Wheaton instead of Cordarrelle Patterson and Menelik Watson.

 

So does that mean you're waving your hand and saying, "yeah but we can just draft __Stedman Bailey__ in the __4th round__"?

 

I think to a certain extent you've got to note the relative lack of "big money" guys that you could put up with Dwayne Bowe, Greg Jennings, and Mike Wallace, but I think in general people overrate the effectiveness of free agency wildly.

 

LOL! It's actually not, nor was it directed at you whatsoever. I had multiple windows open and was commenting in your free agency thread. Calm down Chris, we're not all attackin ya! :P

Not at all, and your logic here is pretty flawed, if we're going to walk down this road. To explain why, answer me this. What would that be in reply to, using your argument? There's no "but" here, in the same vain we are discussing people who simply hand wave.

Honestly it seems like you're grasping just to try to show me up because you felt like I was disagreeing with you for whatever reason.

 

How am I "grasping"?

You have two posts here. In one post you talk about how tired you are of people dismissively saying that we can just draft X player in the 2nd round. In the next post you essentially say that we can win the draft by grabbing Stedman Bailey in the 4th round.

You don't see the obvious contradiction there? I do. It's not an attempt to show anyone up. It's pointing out that I don't think you're affording people the respect that you hope to be afforded. What you just said about getting Stedman Bailey in the 4th could easily be interpreted the same way you interpret suggestions that Miami draft a wide receiver in the 2nd round.

 

That's an ignorant statement WADR. Just b/c the logic may not have worked out the way you hoped in the past, it doesn't mean the logic is flawed or will fail if repeated. Each situation is unique in and of itself.

you realize the Packers offense is full of guys like the ones we're speaking of in the 2nd/3rd round this year. It's quite a talented group of guys, and there's not a big drop off in talent between your typical first rounder and many of these guys.

 

I don't necessarily agree with this, Barry. Let's pretend for a moment we didn't draft Long in 2008 and we're currently sitting here with a potential huge hole at tackle and a player of Johnson or Fisher's caliber is sitting on the board; do you consider the stud tackle or not?

 

Again CK, I'm pretty sure this is a short sighted argument that's being based on a simple misunderstanding. But, if you really want to continue this derail, I'll gladly oblige and explain myself here, with the hope that with clarity will end this strange de-rail and allow WR discussion to continue-

You're ignoring context with regards to the 2 statements. I'll explain the two.

My first statement - "I'm tired of people saying oh we can just draft X in the 2nd round"
Now, what did I mean when I said that? What would their statement, "let's just draft X in the 2nd round" be in response to? Letting a player walk in free agency. As I stated previously, and I'll state again, that was meant for the Free Agency Thread. That was my fault. But you brought it up again, so here we are.

To elaborate, I suppose this hypothetical comment would go something like this -

Guy 1: "Man, I don't really think Smith is the greatest CB but 6.5 million a year to lock up a guy like that doesn't seem out of the ordinary, plus we have so little CB depth"
Guy 2: "Man screw Sean Smith, let him walk! We can just draft a cornerback in the 2nd"

Hopefully that's clearer.

Now, with regards to the 2nd comment, I'm saying I would gladly take guys like Stedman Bailey in the 4th, or Marquees Wilson in the 7th, because I view them as much better prospects than it seems everyone else does, and they are giving me the feeling of "People will look back at those two and wonder how they slipped through the cracks" With regards to value of a WR.

It has nothing to do with me handwaving anything nor does it have to do with excusing one performance I feel should be (or should not be, depending how the discussion is going) done with an alternative course of action. Not at all. There's absolutely zero connection between those two statements except that they are both about the NFL Draft coming up in April 2013.

To be fair to you, as I always am, perhaps you weren't grasping. Perhaps you simply misunderstood the context of the hypothetical of the "1st comment". Regardless, no, that is not a direct contradiction, nor is it even anything you could call "conflicting"!

Again, apologies for my placing my post in the wrong forum, I'm catching up with different threads I had bookmarked and I made a mistake there, as I stated. I feel like you skimmed over my response and only read "you're grasping here", because you didn't address either points of 1) It being a mistake or 2) The explanation of "Answer me this question first, maybe that will explain my point better"

 

Contradict yourself much?

 

I'm assuming you posted that before reading the above response (or any of the responses, really). I should really take that out, seeing as it was meant for the Free Agency thread.

As stated.

Three Times now.

I think we can move on from this perceived slight against CK.

 

a) I think you'd be foolish to pass over talented 2nd & 3rd round receivers just b/c you think it's a lock to get Bailiey in the 4th & Wilson in the 7th. How did the rest of the league feel when you sent them a memo stating you called first dibs on these guys in those specific rounds?

b) How do you know what everyone else truly feels about these prospects? People say stuff like this every year only to end up being wrong.

c) if you like those guys that much and you're a GM, you'd be silly to hold out so long to take them just b/c you think you're the only one who has the rated properly.

 

There's a lot of conjecture on your part here, but we all do it so that's to be expected.

A) I never said I'd be passing on 2nd & 3rd round receivers based on my feelings for Bailey and/or Wilson. Obviously if I have someone ranked highly and they are at my draft position, especially a position of need, I'm obviously drafting them. I'm a large proponent of "Best Player Available". I suppose my line of thinking is best suited for someone saying "Miami didn't even draft a WR until the 3rd round*! What the hell are they doing?! OLineman in the 1st*!? This team is so stupid!"

*3rd round receiver is Bailey, 1st round lineman is Johnson.

B) I'll give you this one, although I sincerely feel you're being nitpicky just to build up multiple "errors" on my part. I should have been more clear. Everyone being "draft boards and positional rankings on the popular draft websites". I quickly generalized a statement in my head without explaining clearly who I was referring to.

C) As stated above, nowhere did I say I'd hold out on them. If I have them rated as a 4th round guy on my board and they are available in the 4th round, I'm taking them.

 

My response to you had nothing to do with CK; it was about noticing you heavily contradicted yourself, which I thought was interesting after you had just mentioned how annoyed you get when posters do the exact same thing you, yourself, are guilty of. It doesn't matter what thread it was intended for as the meaning remains the same.

 

If you can say this after reading my long reply regarding context, let's just agree to disagree, because we clearly have a fundamental disagreement on the definition of the word "contradiction". Or possibly "context". Either way, I think it's safe to say we should move on.

 

That makes things a little clearer. As you say, wrong post in the wrong thread makes it very difficult to discern that you're talking about free agency.

But, I still think you're running a danger of being overly dismissive of people who could turn around and be dismissive of you. Maybe a person has in mind who he would like to have in the 2nd round over Sean Smith, and he has as much reason to believe that 2nd round player is going to cause people to ask "How in the world did he slip through the cracks" as you do with Stedman Bailey. I mean if you're drafting Stedman Bailey and Marquess Wilson and you have high hopes for them it means you have to give them a path to make good on your expectations. You're not necessarily going to draft them for example if you re-sign Brian Hartline while simultaneously signing Mike Wallace and Johnny Knox, keeping Davone Bess. With all those veterans you're not leaving young players a clear path to make good on your expectations. So you don't necessary overload on veterans, you don't necessarily make it so that Stedman Bailey and Marquess Wilson as rookies (not to mention Rishard Matthews) can be no better than #5 to #6 on the roster. And then you do have a situation where someone could come at you saying you're doing the same thing that you're criticizing.

I just think you have to be careful when you're dismissing peoples' opinions that way, that's all...especially when you turn around and you say something that at least on the surface seems like exactly what you're dismissing.

 

To be fair to myself, in the context of the Free Agency thread I was discussing people "in real life" who simply say "Draft *A* tackle!" and not "Draft *Player X from Tackle U!"
Two entirely different thought processes, but as we've agreed, it's rather impossible to distinguish without the surrounding context that I failed to include (partly from being in the wrong thread, partly because I was not as clarifying as I typically am!)

However, those are fair points, even taken generally with regards to posting style and discussion boards. That being said, I'm hardly dismissive of anyone in the draft threads, simply because I know there are people here who dedicate themselves to these things at a much higher level than I can, whether it be due to desire or simply time constraints.

It would be my luck that a stupid error like posting in the wrong Firefox window would happen in a thread that closely mirrors the topic of discussion and spawns a page long debate. D'oh.

 

I know you think this is about a perceived slight on my part. It's really not. It's about what I perceive as an overly casual slight on a whole swath of people.

 

I only said that in reference to phinsational, but point taken. Also, I should further clarify (although, again, it should probably go in the free agency thread, so I'm guilty of a derail right now) - the "swarth of people" are those who simply say "just draft a tackle in round 2!" without actually offering up an actual player or strategy. Hence my Madden comment. I'd hardly accuse people who frequent this specific forum of having a "Madden" mentality.

To atone for the de-rail: allow me to ask, as it was brought up and I'm now wondering if this is a legitimate possibility - As it stands, pre-combine, what times would be candidates for a "trade up above Miami and steal Patterson from them" ?

 

If you think I'm offering an opinion based on incomplete information, it's because you're providing incomplete information and not making much sense at the moment, WADR, or perhaps my brain isn't functioning so well today, which is possible.

that's how you made it seem by stating you'd gladly take Bailey in 4th & Wilson in the 7th. If those are your main target guys, then you'd obviously be skipping guys in the 2nd round for the hope of getting 2 players later on who have no guarantee of being available when we pick.

It's not nitpicky. It's pointing out an error in your line of thinking. It's being naive b/c you have no idea what the NFL decision makers are thinking, but you instead seem to rely too much on media & public perception. How many people last year thought they could use their 1st pick on whomever and nab their coveted guy, Bruce Irvin, in the 2nd round b/c he wasn't getting much media/analyst attention? Then Seattle took him at 15, and if they hadn't, the Bears would've swooped him up a few picks later. I remember when people were saying Greg Little might not even get drafted so he could be a mid round bargain; then he goes in the 2nd round. I wonder how many teams last year were looking forward to drafting AJ Jenkins in the late 2nd or 3rd round, except the Niners took him in the 1st.

that's understandable, but that's not how you made it seem. Not to mention, does that mean you're rating Bailey & Wilson as 4th & 7th round prospects? Now, I CAN understand believing a player will give you better value than where he's drafted (as I do with Corey Fuller), but I'm not gonna flat out peg him as a 6th round pick and expect no one else to be greatly intrigued by him just b/c NFLdraftscout or whatever has him projected as a late round guy. More often than not I find that, if there's a player I really like who isn't getting much media attention, chances are there's at least 1 in 32 GMs somewhere who likes him, too; so in that regard, IMO, you gotta be prepared to take your guy when you have a chance, provided you're not foolishly over-drafting him of course.

 

CK you know Fin-O loves ya no matter wich site.....but Knox and Wallace compliment eachother as well as water and water.

 

Hah, I was just picking names to demonstrate a point.

 

that would be tough for me, but If Eifert runs a 4.6 I would take his overall impact over Patterson..for me the combine might sway it either way.

 

I'll take your first two all day.

 

I'm curious what you are seeing on film that makes you think so highly of Eifert.

I've been watching his film, and to be quite honest with you, if Travis Kelce played for Notre Dame instead of Cincinnati, I think we would be talking about him more than we are talking about Eifert. I think they are almost identical players. Kelce is better as a blocker, and Eifert has better body control. Neither player have a lot of suddeness to their pass routes or their ability to separate though.

The guy I haven't found any film on that I want to see is Gavin Escobar from San Diego State. From what I've read about him, he seems to be the type of tight end that Joe Philbin would prefer.

I also don't believe that Joe Philbin has shoveled the dirt on Michael Egnew yet. Most probably don't realize, but Jermichael Finley had similar struggles as a rookie in Philbin's system. To me, Finley and Egnew are very similar to one another. Overall, Finley had 88 total snaps during his rookie year to Egnew's 25 snaps, and I think he only caught 6 passes or around there. He made a remarkable jump in his second year, and then blossomed into a potential all pro in his third season. It remains to be seen if Egnew can do this.

 

the logic is definitely not flawed, the logic could of got us Luke Kuechly and Russell Wilson..

 

I used to watch a lot of Escobar back in the day evaluating Ryan Lindley. He stood out even back then. He was their best receiving target once Sampson and Brown left.

 

a complete athlete, complete player, movement skills are top notch, essentially a 6'5 250 athlete who moves like a wide receiver, someone who can adjust his body athletically to any kind of throw, even the most difficult, 180 back shoulder on a high pass with the toe tap he can do like it's nothin , he can really high point the ball and get vertical with that great control as you mentioned, box out player around the goal line, uses Some basketball metaphors as he plays and controls his position...plus, his body is perfect for the job, easy 10 lbs of muscle potential, frame and genetics are excellent.

Maybe I'm a bit bitter about not drafting Gronkowski and Allen and he's my rebound ***, but I don't care, if this dude runs a 4.6, I'm really confident in his movement skills and hands, and excited about matching up that ability and size.I think he's a solid first round pick in this draft, solid for the scheme, solid for our QB, solid work ethic, and to me, very low risk...My theories on drafting are aimed to accumulate first round picks, if I have to play it safe a bit, I'm prepared to do it, cause I feel like picture I'll win out.

There are defenders on the board that I would take over him, but if it comes down to offensive payers, I don't necessariliy believe a Patterson or Bailey or Woods/etc is gonna have a better career than Eifert..

 

I don't think you need to draft Eifert at 12 to address the position. There's only one Gronkowski out there and there's only one Gonzalez. Even Graham isn't playing at Gronkowski level. The rest of the guys are not at such a level that you cannot find them if you pick them smartly.

 

That Gavin Escobar guy is actually pretty intriguing.

 

Yessir. As is Travis Kelce.

 

Ireland says the Most important traits in a receiver for him is the ability to catch the football..and the ability to catch the ball in traffic..

I would say that Keenan Allen and Eifert are the best at their positions in those regards..

 

I've said it for a while, but Escobar has skills. He can block although he's inconsistent, especially on the move. But he can hit the seam ith speed and he's very athletic going and getting the ball and he's athletic with the ball in his hands.

 

"The one kid I'm really interested in seeing run (at the Combine) is the Patterson kid from Tennessee," said Mayock. "You heard me say earlier I haven't seen any really explosive difference makers (in this draft); This kid's only played one year of Division-I football. And I put the tape on, my jaw dropped. And he's big. ... He's 6-foot-3, 200-plus pounds, and he flies. And he makes people miss all over the field. All I know is his ceiling could be really exciting because he's so darn raw. And I can't wait to see him run

http://www.rotoworld.com/player/cfb/131085/cordarrelle-patterson


Interesting quote from Mayock. I've been wanting Patterson at 12 for awhile now and it looks like he may be going above that. Starting to get a lot more attention and I think he garners more attention after he works out at the combine and his pro days.