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

I would be pissed if we drafted...

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by Pandarilla, Apr 25, 2016.

  1. Pandarilla

    Pandarilla Purist Emeritus

    14,282
    5,005
    113
    Sep 10, 2009
    Boone, NC
    Darron Lee.

    I've just read way too many negative comments to think he's worth it at 13.
     
    djphinfan likes this.
  2. Rock Sexton

    Rock Sexton Anti-Homer

    2,553
    1,793
    113
    Mar 14, 2015
    Clickbait!
     
  3. Dorfdad

    Dorfdad Well-Known Member

    4,052
    2,347
    113
    Dec 9, 2007
    ANYONES FAMILY!!!!

    I remember them trying to sell us on not only getting Ted Ginn but his whole family!!! LOL
     
    dolphin25, Pandarilla and MikeHoncho like this.
  4. tirty8

    tirty8 Well-Known Member

    1,325
    1,381
    113
    Jan 2, 2016
    Vernon Hargreaves III

    He is my litmus test to see if people on this message board know what they are talking about or not. If you want Hargreaves, you either A) just read other mocks and regurgitate B) have no ability to evaluate film
     
  5. Rex Deus

    Rex Deus Guest

    Is that because you don't rate him or you don't think he is a system fit for our scheme?
     
  6. Finster

    Finster Finsterious Finologist

    3,087
    2,038
    113
    Jul 27, 2013
    Yeah, the guy looks more like a SS to me.
     
    Pandarilla likes this.
  7. Mike8272

    Mike8272 Active Member

    155
    133
    43
    Sep 1, 2012
    The only player I would be annoyed with us for drafting in the first round is Paxton Lynch or another quarterback.

    I am not against drafting Darron Lee because of the risks attached to drafting him, but he's one of those players that if he overcomes those shortfalls in his game, then he could be a very useful linebacker. However, I hope we don't draft him.
     
    Pandarilla likes this.
  8. dolphin25

    dolphin25 Well-Known Member

    6,338
    2,400
    113
    Nov 22, 2014
    this is a good post, because I cannot think of a player that I really want at 13. I dislike Hargreaves and something about the Ohio State back doesn't feel right. Perhaps it is only that we should have signed Miller so we don't have yet another hole to fill.
     
    Pandarilla likes this.
  9. number21

    number21 Active Member

    540
    231
    43
    Sep 1, 2015
    North Miami
    Ezekiel Elliot.
     
  10. Claymore95

    Claymore95 Working on it... Club Member

    6,449
    11,202
    113
    Sep 8, 2012
    Peebles, Scotland
    Elliot after a trade up to #3....would be ok with drafting him at #13, but not giving up multiple picks to trade up and draft him. Hopefully, and likely, it's just media speculation.
     
  11. tirty8

    tirty8 Well-Known Member

    1,325
    1,381
    113
    Jan 2, 2016
    Both. He is an already undersized corner who would have to face Marshall, Watkins, Decker. When drafting, you have to consider your division. His tackling is pretty poor and he struggles to be aggressive at the line.

    Honestly, I would love for one Hargreave lover to show me footage of Hargreaves where he looks like he would be more successful on our team than William Jackson III.

    One of the biggest problems concerning this draft is that people think that ranking the players by position and effective way to evaluate talent. This draft is full of specialists. If you ask yourself, "What am I trying to accomplish by drafting player X?" For example, if you are looking to shore up your run game from the linebacker position, Reggie Ragland is really good at stopping the run, but if you think you are gonna vastly improve your pass coverage with Ragland, you will probably be disappointed. If it is pass coverage you are looking for, a guy like Myles Jack may be more of your taste.

    This same concept applies even more so for the corners. If receivers like DeSean Jackson, Brandon Cooks, and Tavon Austin were in our division, Hargreaves would make more sense. Don't be fooled by Mel Kiper. The player rankings ARE NOT LINEAR. Ask yourself what you are trying to accomplish at a given position and what players you face twice a week.
     
    Pandarilla likes this.
  12. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    You can't draft based on your division though because players and coaches change all the time. You have to draft based on getting the best players possible. I'm not saying this to defend one rookie over another, btw, I just disagree with your general drafting strategy.

    Also height is overrated in cbs.
     
    Clark Kent likes this.
  13. Rex Deus

    Rex Deus Guest

    I don't even read Kiper's stuff, and most fans realise there's no such thing as an absolute ranking system.

    For what it's worth, I am not a huge fan of Hargreaves either. Undersized and not a great tackler. I'd much rather take WJIII - although none of us really know what Defensive system we'll be using this year.
     
  14. dolphin25

    dolphin25 Well-Known Member

    6,338
    2,400
    113
    Nov 22, 2014
    odds are strong it will resemble the Bengals since we got a guy from there to run it. which I like cause they have done well with the backfield
     
  15. tirty8

    tirty8 Well-Known Member

    1,325
    1,381
    113
    Jan 2, 2016
    Seriously???? I feel like you are the engineer of the crazy train. I don't know why you wouldn't draft based on your division. Think about a guy like Myles Jack who could be the coverage answer to players like Gronk and Clay who play in our division. Why on Earth would we not try and address these concerns in the draft? Pretending that they will not be there next year is simply ridiculous. We could hope that our opponents receivers suddenly get smaller, but what would possibly lead us to believe that would happen. We know the Bills gave up a ton to get Watkins, and he isn't going anywhere, and both of the Jets receivers are bigger receivers. Why wouldn't you focus on winning those division games? You know you will play those teams every year. If we went 4-2 within the division, we only need to win 5 or 6 more games throughout the year to make the playoffs. Conversely, if we went 2-4 within the division, we would have to win 7 or 8 more games out of the remaining 10 games to make the playoffs.

    The point is, winning your division games should be a priority.
     
    Puka-head, dolphin25 and Pandarilla like this.
  16. Rex Deus

    Rex Deus Guest

    Yep, but it's bound to have some wrinkles and differences.
     
  17. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    I didn't deserve your attitude.

    Again, think it through, Gronk could be traded next year for example. Then what? That's point you're not getting, you have to build the team you want regardless of your division because the players and coaches in your division change all the damn time.

    And none of that counters the fact that winning in your division is priority.
     
    Clark Kent and Puka-head like this.
  18. Rocky Raccoon

    Rocky Raccoon Greasepaint Ghost Staff Member

    30,224
    36,965
    113
    Dec 2, 2007
    Jersey
    lol

    And what about all the people who get paid to watch film and evaluate talent that love Hargreaves? Do they just not know what they're talking about just because you don't like him?
     
  19. Finster

    Finster Finsterious Finologist

    3,087
    2,038
    113
    Jul 27, 2013
    Imo, and nearly every expert/scout you can find, Hargreaves is just flat out better than Jackson, better in run support, better in coverage and better diagnosing plays, better body control, better technique and better composure.

    There are plenty of 5'10"-5'11" CBs in the league, not a thing to worry about when they have talent to stick with the WR.
     
  20. Pandarilla

    Pandarilla Purist Emeritus

    14,282
    5,005
    113
    Sep 10, 2009
    Boone, NC
    I disagree, our finesse offensive line is a prime example of why you should consider who you're playing against. Our division is loaded with monsters on the dline and we paid dearly for not having behemoth olinemen.

    The trend of taller cb's is league wide after the deluge of tall receivers. That's not just going to go away.

    I think you're both right to an extent, but clearly divisional opponents take precedence...
     
    texanphinatic likes this.
  21. bakedmatt

    bakedmatt Well-Known Member

    2,129
    909
    113
    Mar 29, 2008
    Orlando, FL
    A'shawn Robinson
     
  22. Unlucky 13

    Unlucky 13 Team Raheem Club Member

    51,932
    63,010
    113
    Apr 24, 2012
    Troy, Virginia
    Because you're obviously 100% correct and anyone who feels otherwise is flat out wrong? That's an offensive position to have on any sports issue, man. You're free to like who you do and disagree with others, but to say that someone doesn't know what they're talking about because they think more highly of a player than you do is BS. Especially a player who NFL front office people rate as a top 20, maybe top 10 talent.
     
  23. dolphin25

    dolphin25 Well-Known Member

    6,338
    2,400
    113
    Nov 22, 2014
    you have a good point, cause those experts have never been wrong before. like jamar fletcher,,,,,
     
  24. dolphin25

    dolphin25 Well-Known Member

    6,338
    2,400
    113
    Nov 22, 2014
    all that being said I don't like Hargreaves either :)
     
  25. Finster

    Finster Finsterious Finologist

    3,087
    2,038
    113
    Jul 27, 2013
    That's fine, you know I've taken positions on players that buck the consensus, I have no problem with that, but his stance that you are either a follower or an idiot is ridiculous.
     
    dolphin25, Unlucky 13 and Pandarilla like this.
  26. Rocky Raccoon

    Rocky Raccoon Greasepaint Ghost Staff Member

    30,224
    36,965
    113
    Dec 2, 2007
    Jersey
    Oh, so you're saying no one is perfect? Thanks for the clarification.

    I never said that experts were batting 1.000.
     
  27. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    We don't have a finesse oline. We have a **** depth that destroys the overall quality of the oline when one or more of the 3 starters are out. If we had average guards and average backups our style of oline play wouldn't hurt us in our division.

    Again, I need you guys to quit ignoring the simple FACT that players and coaches change all the time.
     
  28. Pandarilla

    Pandarilla Purist Emeritus

    14,282
    5,005
    113
    Sep 10, 2009
    Boone, NC
    Hey, it's part of why the draft is so intriguing.

    One guy who I believe is way overhyped is Emmanuel Ogbah. Louis Tee on youtube is a guy I trust to give me a detailed feel for prospects and he laid into Ogbah as basically having no moves in the pass rush. His stats are completely misleading when it comes to sacks. He collected a ton of coverage and flush sacks that inflated his total and makes him appear to be a superior pass rush specialist.

    Yet, he is regularly listed high on mock drafts. Teams will know, but even an ardent fan might not have a clue due to his youtube highlights.

    In fact, I also tend to round out my opinions of players just by reading comments in articles. A lot of times, long time fans who actually watch the games as they happen have a much better feel about how good a prospect is. They make comments that shed new light on how you view a player.This year Ohio St. Fans have schooled me on Darron Lee and Eli Apple. A lot of them are surprised to see them mocked in the first round. They also chime in on off the field stuff, like how Ezekiel Elliott is a huge party guy. How Joey Bosa roomed with Elliott and eventually had to move out due to not being able to focus in such an atmosphere.

    I remember one fan from Tampa being pissed his Buccaneers were mocked to get Hargreaves. He mentioned how VHIII got roasted by Kelvin Benjamin. Not only does Benjamin play in that division but the division is loaded with tall receivers.

    Furthermore, just relying on game tape can also be misleading. A lot of context gets lost in translation when say studying a Leonard Floyd. He gets roasted and diminished when being graded as a mlb. When in reality it is not his natural position and he was actually being unselfish by playing that position as his draft status would be affected.

    My point is a lot of people's opinions are based on scant information on any forum. However, the criticism (even if it is justified) simply needs to be more constructive.

    That said, I bet half these posters don't even know the horrors of being married and how that could affect one's demeanor online, lol...
     
    Finster likes this.
  29. Pandarilla

    Pandarilla Purist Emeritus

    14,282
    5,005
    113
    Sep 10, 2009
    Boone, NC
    They do, but you're being equally obstinate about teams not trying to draft favorable matchups within their division.
     
  30. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Wait, I never said teams don't do that. I said I think its a bad strategy based on common sense. Common sense, btw, that you or the other person have yet to actually address.
     
  31. Pandarilla

    Pandarilla Purist Emeritus

    14,282
    5,005
    113
    Sep 10, 2009
    Boone, NC
    I think saying, "You have to draft based on getting the best players possible" is undoubtedlty the best strategy. It's a "no $hit Sherlock" strategy, though. I would contend that sizing up mismatches within your own division is possibly the biggest factor involved in determining who said best player is.

    Big wide receivers are the latest trend now and they're likely not going anywhere. They have become the norm, not the exception.

    So in the case we are discussing. I believe it's commonsense that a taller, bigger cornerback should be deemed a better player than a Hargreaves based on his issues with tall receivers.
     
  32. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    And still, we ignore the fact that these players, schemes and coaches could all be gone next season from your division.......
     
  33. texanphinatic

    texanphinatic Senior Member

    11,881
    4,834
    113
    Nov 26, 2007
    Detroit Metro Area MI
    Could doesn't mean they will though. Should you severely overdraft just because of a matchup? Absolutely not. But if you are deciding between a few closely ranked players or positions, yes you absolutely take a guy that can help you within the division - doubly so when there is a trend (big targets) to counter. Hargreaves struggled against big WRs in college. We play a number of teams with the type of WRs that he struggled with. It would be foolish to ignore that because oh well it may not be that way five years down the line.

    Personally, I am not a Hargreaves fan at all. Bad choice. I would be disappointing in any CB really. Hargreaves underwhelms me and any other CB is a huuuuuuuuge reach at 13 right now.
     
    dolphin25 likes this.
  34. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Right, but the position put forward is Player X, while good, is too short for players in this division. To me, that is nonsense, because those receivers could be out of the division before the season even starts for all we know.
     
  35. Pandarilla

    Pandarilla Purist Emeritus

    14,282
    5,005
    113
    Sep 10, 2009
    Boone, NC
    Nah, we still take that into account. But, watch Devante Parker feast on the small cb's this year and you will see some changes guaranteed.

    For me, personally, I think height is overrated until you hit about the 6'4-6'5" range. Then I think you kind of need someone similar in stature to cover. I'm not against getting a VHIII, I just think that when we play the Jets, we should definitely match him up with Lippett. I think we could use an extra 5'10-5'11" cb against all the New England smurf receivers.

    We've got two tall CB's in Maxwell and Lippett, already. I'd rather have a VHIII/Alexander type in the draft. Its the cult of the #1 position-wise in the NFL that's behind all this Eli Apple BS, imo. This draft logic train we've been riding in the media promotes this thought that whoever we take is gonna start. Then they say, well Maxwell is a good #2 corner. They induce that since Miami desperately needs a cb, and whoever they take is gonna start and they already have a #2, that the pick should be taller due to all this. The best tall cb prospect being Apple and wala, a good second round prospect gets mocked to us at 13.

    fuggit...take Conky or Shaq at 13 unless you can trade up for Jack.
     
  36. Silverphin

    Silverphin Well-Known Member

    11,035
    4,419
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    Regarding the division thing...

    I think you have to consider what your division rivals have, but not on what they don't have.

    I remember a while back people acted I was crazy when I said it's stupid to not to draft a left tackle because our division rivals' pass rushers weren't all that. That was the year before Brandon Albert was drafted. Take a guess how that year went.
     
    dolphin25 likes this.
  37. Pandarilla

    Pandarilla Purist Emeritus

    14,282
    5,005
    113
    Sep 10, 2009
    Boone, NC
    Nah, if you're drafting to stop one tall receiver, it's a good bet that the guy is good and is likely to be around for awhile. If he does get traded and you're stuck with him, then trade him to the division rival of where said tall receiver landed. Rosters are fluid as you say.

    I understand what you mean and think it's certainly a legitimate concern.

    [​IMG]
     
  38. Finster

    Finster Finsterious Finologist

    3,087
    2,038
    113
    Jul 27, 2013
    When it comes to the division thing, if you want to consistently make the playoffs, and win the division, you have to beat the teams in your division, so when drafting you do have to take that into consideration, but scheme also plays a roll in that.

    As far as CBs, imo skills count more than size, Revis, Chris harris, Darby, just off the top of my head are all under 6', skill is really important at that particular position, but Oline/Dline is a little bit different, if you are in a division with big strong lineman, you aught to be focusing on the same.
     
    Pandarilla likes this.
  39. Puka-head

    Puka-head My2nd Fav team:___vs Jets Club Member

    8,605
    6,743
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    Slightly left of center
    Ahhh! A Jamar Fletcher flashback. Thanks brah. Thanks a lot.
     
    dolphin25 likes this.
  40. Clark Kent

    Clark Kent Fighter of the Nightman

    8,560
    4,133
    113
    May 9, 2008
    This. The division is important, but the league is fluid. Players are constantly moving around, getting hurt, coaches get hired and fired on whim theses days, schemes change, etc... Build the team you want and draft players who fit your vision of a superbowl caliber team. When you look at the best teams in the league, Denver, NE, Seattle, GB, etc... they're not chasing players to win the division, they're just building great teams that can compete every Sunday. We all understand the importance of winning in your division, but competing in your division isn't the same as competing for a championship.

    Denver is a good example here. John Elway didn't change organizational philosophy because he feared his division, he did it to compete with the Seattle's, NE's, Arizona's, and GB's of the NFL. He saw the value of having a defensive oriented team that could attack and create turnovers and made the necessary adjustments to retool the franchise.

    I want Miami to consistently marry value and need as best as possible (with value weighted highest). IDGAF about NE, Buffalo, or NYJ. If we can acquire talented players who fit the philosophy of TPTB, we'll be OK one of these days.
     
    Unlucky 13 and Fin D like this.

Share This Page