http://www.draftcountdown.com/sub/Mock-Draft-A.php
Page 1 of 4
-
I just can't see Barkevious Mingo being Miami's pick. Not consistent enough.
-
I could see the logic in their draft for Miami. You take from the strength at pass rusher early and then come back in the second round and take advantage of the strength of WRs available there. Notice that neither Hopkins or Bailey was taken in the first.
Mexphin, Bpk and sports24/7 like this. -
Considering the needs this team has, and considering that Scott has Johnthan Banks going one pick after Miami's pick, Banks is who I would take. -
I agree with KB, Banks is who I would take if the draft unfolded this way. FA moves could change my opinion but we currently have no one on the payroll that can play #1 CB and a few below-average quality #2's. Quality WR's can be had in the 2nd round and I don't see starting passrushers as a gaping hole due to my faith in Vernon.
-
If the Dolphins did take a Barkevious Mingo it would be as a SLB replacement for Koa Misi, and that's way too big of a transition to happen in Year 1. Therefore, I consider the chances of Miami going after Barkevious Mingo at pick #12 to be minimal, at best. -
-
-
If the Dolphins are going to go the route of replacing Koa Misi, which after the year he had I seriously doubt, then Dion Jordan and Jarvis Jones are much more in play than Barkevious Mingo.
But overall I don't see any of the three happening. It's not in Jeff Ireland's history to A) Use a high pick to directly replace a productive player that is still under contract, or B) Use a high pick on a player that can expect to be no more than a role player right away.
If they retain Randy Starks then I don't think they use that pick on a defensive lineman period. If they don't, then IMO they're going to steer toward a bigger body to either replace Starks directly or replace Jared Odrick who will move inside. Either way that's not going to be a Barkevious Mingo, Jarvis Jones, Damontre Moore or Dion Jordan.
The most likely picks at that spot in the Draft remain to this day Dee Milliner, Johnthan Banks, Zeke Ansah (pending the Starks situation), Sheldon Richardson (pending the Starks situation), D.J. Fluker (pending the Long situation), Lane Johnson (pending the Long situation), Keenan Allen and Cordarrelle Patterson.Claymore95 likes this. -
-
-
I think player development was absolutely not a priority under Parcells and Sparano. Parcells has always favored vets to rooks. I would say it was glaring enough that player development was talked about throughout the coaching search as a goal. You wouldn't emphasize it so much if it wasn't a deviation from what you did in the past.
As for Mingo or any pass rusher, I think that they were disappointed in their pass rush this year. I I think it's pretty obvious that Misi is unlikely to ever be a great pass rusher. They could think that Vernon may develop into that, but I doubt they're thinking, "we're good enough" in terms of pass rushers. I think it's a priority for them. I see it as part of their stated emphasis on play maker on both offense and defense.MrClean likes this. -
A little off the draft topic but NFL radio had Cliff Avril on as a guest earlier this week. He will be an unrestricted free agent. He would command a sizable contract. When asked what situation he would like to go to, he mentioned being from Florida, that he prefers a 4-3 basic alignment and particularly that he prefers a grass field.
Depending on his cost, might it be a good idea to not re-sign Starks, using that money towards Avril. Then our front is Wake-Soliai-Odrick-Avril. How would this compare to our current front? What would Avril's price be?
Then BPA in the first round might be more do-able. Any thoughts? -
But I do agree with you that Parcells didn't give two ****s about developing players. Sparano may have cared just didn't know how. -
2. I doubt they're thinking "we're good enough" in pass rush either. But you're making an awfully big leap from that to "We need to use a #12 overall on situational pass rusher". That's like going from a guy complaining that "my back hurts" to predicting he goes in for elective surgery. When Joe Philbin commented on the pass rush the first thing he pointed out was not their shortcomings, but the fact that they were #7 in the league in sacks. That was the first thing he pointed out. After that, he gave the "however" bit about how there's more details you need to look at than that including situational stuff and they can definitely get better in those areas.
3. As for the stated priority of making plays on offense and defense, you're glossing over the language Joe Philbin used. He specifically pointed to TURNOVERS on defense. While this could of course be stretched to include more pass rush, I think it's pretty obvious that means more interceptions. -
gandalfin likes this.
-
Tampa however, is one of the teams with a lot of cap room, and the Jags are eternally searching for a pass rushing De. -
I see Mingo as being this year's Bruce Irvin. It's possible IMO that he could go 12th overall, even if he were not looked at initially as a base defense starter, but a big contributor in the nickel, playing opposite Wake at DE. Play about 500 snaps, get 10 or so sacks along with a bunch of other QB disruptions.
-
-
-
Is it based on anything? Anything whatsoever that you can point to? -
-
IMO, this is one of his flaws as a GM, he'd prefer "solid and dependable contributor" over "playmaking talent" -
It was obvious from the day Philbin was hired (and during the search) that developing players was something they wanted to new staff to do differently. I would say developing players and transparency were by far the two most frequently cited goals for the new regime. Whenever you have a change in regime you see what's going to be different stated over and over again. Those were two areas that were lacking under Parcells and two areas they hoped would be different under Philbin. I think you see the under-lying philosophy in their QB choices. Henne was one of Parcells' 4 year starters while RT was almost universally described as raw and needing time to develop. I don't think RT would have been selected under Parcells and obviously he was under Philbin. I think that's an example of a different philosophy being in place.
The Rev likes this. -
-
-
-
-
rafael likes this.
-
As an aside, we should really get off this idea that Miami needs a #1 wide receiver. I'm not even sure what #1 wide receiver means, other than someone that is a target hog that takes away from the other receivers on the team. You don't need a #1 wide receiver to win in the NFL. You do need a solid mix of talent at the position though.
Miami's biggest need is for speed and big play ability.mbsinmisc likes this. -
Odrick is a case in point, not really a playmaker but he contributes on all three downs and will have a high snap-count as a result. Could you replace him with a DE that gets to the quarterback more often, yes probably, but you might lose the ability to slip in as a DT when needed and to get pressure from there on 3rd down.
High snap-count players are just as necessary as playmakers.KB21 likes this. -
The Dolphins have a new commitment to player development with Joe Philbin as the coach, which makes them more likely to take a player that is considered a "project" and may need some time to develop properly and won't play as much right away.
And the evidence of this change in philosophy is the new Dolphins taking Ryan Tannehill in the Draft (whom they started immediately from Day 1), whereas the old Dolphins took Chad Henne in the Draft (whom they let sit on the bench for more than a year until their starter got hurt).
Am I getting that right?
That seem whacky to anyone else?Mile High Fin likes this. -
Just because things ended up the way they did does not prove intent. -
-
Again with the "play makers" quote on defense. Joe Philbin didn't say that in his off season Q&A. Here is what he said.
-
How the Tannehill situation is in any way whatsoever different is beyond me. There's some revisionist history going on. -
Page 1 of 4