My initial mock 1.0

Love the first three picks!

Nice mock. :up:

"Aqua4Ever04 wrote:

Nice job, man. I wouldn't call Sintim a reach, he's a great pick at that spot. Larry English is way too low, but you already expressed that you think he could fall so no need to hash out that argument.

I'm not sure how well Ziggy translates to a 34, he'd definitely need to add some weight to his frame.

I do agree that pick 56 is the most intriguing one. The cupboard will be FULL of talent at picks 25 and 44 but I think things start to get a little bare by 56. Should be interesting.

Hood is 300 pds and fast, to me he is a DE on our line, not a NT.

We lack pass rushing De's..badly, not situational guys like Roth, but guys who go in on first and 10 and can pass rush on a "running" down.

The problem with #56 is, we don't know what the front office is thinking as "need" positions.

I just don't expect us to ignore CB in the first three picks. I don't agree with only one CB overall and then the one you have there, Johnson, is probably going to go lower. IMO we need to look to draft a CB who is likely to step in as a starter as a rookie and Johnson is too raw to expect that from him, though he would be a nice choice as the 2nd CB we draft to develop.

IF we sign Bodden, then this draft would make more sense. Also I don't expect English to last until our 2b pick, unless he is arrested for something before the draft. Not sure how well Hood would do as a 3-4 DE, other than adding energy to the pass rush. Not that we don't need that. He would add speed to our DL, his long arms can make up for his less than ideal height and he is plenty strong. I guess I do like that pick. Since I don't expect English to be around for #56, just insert another CB there, one more likely to start as a rookie. Byrd or Francies maybe.

"MrClean wrote:

I just don't expect us to ignore CB in the first three picks. I don't agree with only one CB overall and then the one you have there, Johnson, is probably going to go lower. IMO we need to look to draft a CB who is likely to step in as a starter as a rookie and Johnson is too raw to expect that from him, though he would be a nice choice as the 2nd CB we draft to develop.

IF we sign Bodden, then this draft would make more sense. Also I don't expect English to last until our 2b pick, unless he is arrested for something before the draft. Not sure how well Hood would do as a 3-4 DE, other than adding energy to the pass rush. Not that we don't need that. He would add speed to our DL, his long arms can make up for his less than ideal height and he is plenty strong. I guess I do like that pick. Since I don't expect English to be around for #56, just insert another CB there, one more likely to start as a rookie. Byrd or Francies maybe.

It's tough in a way, Ireland and Tuna rarely spend high picks on defensive backs, but we need some defensive backs, so with them placing a low value on Db's in favor of the front 7 a balance must be struck.

"padre31 wrote:

It's tough in a way, Ireland and Tuna rarely spend high picks on defensive backs, but we need some defensive backs, so with them placing a low value on Db's in favor of the front 7 a balance must be struck.

Ireland does not have enough of a track record to get a pattern of what he will do. Bill, if one looks back at his time with the Giants, Pats, Jets, and Boys, does indeed draft early and play rookie DBs, when and if necessary. I listed them all in another post in another thread earlier today. The teams he's been involved with also show a tendency to double up on need positions, often early, which is definitely what we have at CB as things stand today.

"MrClean wrote:

Ireland does not have enough of a track record to get a pattern of what he will do. Bill, if one looks back at his time with the Giants, Pats, Jets, and Boys, does indeed draft early and play rookie DBs, when and if necessary. I listed them all in another post in another thread earlier today. The teams he's been involved with also show a tendency to double up on need positions, often early, which is definitely what we have at CB as things stand today.

Look at the timing of when he drafted Cb's early, with the Gmen he already had his core of LT, Marshal and Carson then he added Haynes, and a couple of years later Collins.

They tend to put together the front 5 and front 7 then go after Cb's early, and even then, it is not multiple picks, maybe one, then a later round player.

In 1990, they rode old Everson Walls to the Super Bowl.

"padre31 wrote:

Look at the timing of when he drafted Cb's early, with the Gmen he already had his core of LT, Marshal and Carson then he added Haynes, and a couple of years later Collins.

They tend to put together the front 5 and front 7 then go after Cb's early, and even then, it is not multiple picks, maybe one, then a later round player.

In 1990, they rode old Everson Walls to the Super Bowl.

Haynes drafting was before Parcells was the head coach. The timing wasn't because of any grand plan. It just worked out that way. Haynes was drafted before LT, Burt, Banks, Marshall, or Reasons arrived on the scene, because he was a great value and they needed a corner. The only core defensive player from the Parcells years who preceded Haynes was Carson.
Haynes was traded away before they won any Super Bowls though, but not before they turned the franchise into a winning one that made the playoffs.
When Parcells took over as the head coach for the Giants, what position did his initial 1st round pick play? Safety. Terry Kinard.
In the following round he added Marshall. Then in later drafts added guys like Reasons, Banks, Dorsey, etc. They drafted Collins when they shipped Haynes off to Denver, because they needed a corner again.

I dont think we need another DE at this point though with Starks, Merling, Langford and Wright already there. At least not in the first few rounds.
Would love to grab English at 2b, but I dont see him falling that low. Johnson Beckum and Joseph would be nice pickups in those rounds :)

"texanphinatic wrote:

I dont think we need another DE at this point though with Starks, Merling, Langford and Wright already there. At least not in the first few rounds.
Would love to grab English at 2b, but I dont see him falling that low. Johnson Beckum and Joseph would be nice pickups in those rounds :)

IMO, when we kept Dotson and Wright all last season, with them only activated 2 and 1 times respectively, it was partially in anticipation of one of them replacing Holliday in the rotation eventually. So you are probably right.

That's absolutely right. Also Wright, Starks, and Merling all have solid pass rush potential. That may become our third down lineup with Starks at the NT position. Unless some kind of earth shattering DE was available there's no point to drafting another one. I'm talking Shaun Ellis type pass rushing from the 3-4 DE spot, Seymour in his prime.

By the way I might change my view on Clay Matthews III very soon. His ability to shed-and-tackle, his near perfect package to play ILB is very enticing. He could also play SOLB and with his athletic ability he also could even play ROLB. I know he's a self-made man and he could be another Bobby Carpenter but the fact of the matter is that even Bobby Carpenter is a mystery. I think he's almost a case of a guy who didn't really have any major downside and for some reason just didn't click. I don't know what to think.

All I know is that if Matthews works out I may have myself a player at ILB or at SOLB (sure he needs some pounds but still). I love the fact that he's also played DE at times and is stout against much heavier players.

I like the first three positions selected. Many fans would go ape over not taking a CB or a WR but I like both English and Sintim a great deal. They will both be solid players, imo and I think they would add a great deal of toughness to our D.

I like the NT selection - but I think I'd just as soon have a player later on.

I'm not big on an early CB selection b/c of the lack of speed at that position.

Overall, I like this mock better than any I've seen so far. Great stuff.

"texanphinatic wrote:

I dont think we need another DE at this point though with Starks, Merling, Langford and Wright already there. At least not in the first few rounds.
Would love to grab English at 2b, but I dont see him falling that low. Johnson Beckum and Joseph would be nice pickups in those rounds :)

We need a De who can pass rush as well as play the run, with all the teams switching to the 3-4 they will be hard to find so if one is available early IMO we snatch them up.

We need a Leonard Marshal type of DE, at least one of them.

"Da 'Fins wrote:

I like the first three positions selected. Many fans would go ape over not taking a CB or a WR but I like both English and Sintim a great deal. They will both be solid players, imo and I think they would add a great deal of toughness to our D.

I like the NT selection - but I think I'd just as soon have a player later on.

I'm not big on an early CB selection b/c of the lack of speed at that position.

Overall, I like this mock better than any I've seen so far. Great stuff.

You are ok with drafting just one CB, and that one being a somewhat raw small school product who is not likely ready to start as a rookie?

change hood for a CB and the draft would be superb

Two OLBs on the first day is way too much. A three man rotation is common, a four-man isn't unheard of, but I don't know how they're going to work 5 players in there. You're essentially relegating Matt Roth and Cameron Wake down to nothing.

Pretty unlikely they take another DE high, too. Holliday was released in part to give the young 3 players they have more time, adding another 4th in there doesn't make any sense.

"Disgustipate wrote:

Two OLBs on the first day is way too much. A three man rotation is common, a four-man isn't unheard of, but I don't know how they're going to work 5 players in there. You're essentially relegating Matt Roth and Cameron Wake down to nothing.

That is a part of the reason it is 1.0, and I expect Sintim can play ILB at need as well.

Pretty unlikely they take another DE high, too. Holliday was released in part to give the young 3 players they have more time, adding another 4th in there doesn't make any sense.

Here I genuinely defend my position, our DE's simply cannot generate any pressure..at all..to me that is more of a priority then even OLB or Cb.

"padre31 wrote:

That is a part of the reason it is 1.0, and I expect Sintim can play ILB at need as well.

I'm skeptical they are going to spend that kind of resource to convert a DE for ILB, especially in a draft that is pretty good for reasonably sized ILB prospects.

"padre31 wrote:

Here I genuinely defend my position, our DE's simply cannot generate any pressure..at all..to me that is more of a priority then even OLB or Cb.

The amount of pressure is adequate for 3 first year DEs. The current coaching staff didn't try to suddenly replace Chris Canty or Marcus Spears after their rookie years, did they?

"padre31 wrote:

That is a part of the reason it is 1.0, and I expect Sintim can play ILB at need as well.

Here I genuinely defend my position, our DE's simply cannot generate any pressure..at all..to me that is more of a priority then even OLB or Cb.

we had 2 rookies learning a new position, 1 playing against top competition after playing against much smaller competition his whole college career....

we are fine at DE, im confident Langford and Merling will create more pressure next season.

"Disgustipate wrote:

I'm skeptical they are going to spend that kind of resource to convert a DE for ILB, especially in a draft that is pretty good for reasonably sized ILB prospects.

None are as fast as Sintim at his size, and I'm putting forward that if they choose to try him at ILB IMO he can play there not that he is a ILB to begin with, he appears to be very versatile.

The amount of pressure is adequate for 3 first year DEs. The current coaching staff didn't try to suddenly replace Chris Canty or Marcus Spears after their rookie years, did they?

Not replace, they did also add D Ware in that draft so that helped the pass rushing numbers appear better, and neither Canty nor Spears were pressure players in Dallas.

That is a part of the reason for all the OLB/DE types, if you keep acquiring 6'2 or taller players who run sub 5'0 40's and weigh in at 270 someone will develop.

"padre31 wrote:

and neither Canty nor Spears were pressure players in Dallas.

and neither will our DEs for the most part. thats part of a parcells 3-4, your pressure comes from else where

"padre31 wrote:

Here I genuinely defend my position, our DE's simply cannot generate any pressure

They aren't supposed to. There's some variants of the 3-4 that place a little more emphasis on the DEs rushing the passer - ours is not one of them. This is a run-stuffing position within our scheme and on passing downs, they are supposed to occupy the blockers, not rush the passer themselves.

"MrClean wrote:

You are ok with drafting just one CB, and that one being a somewhat raw small school product who is not likely ready to start as a rookie?

Not necessarily that CB - and perhaps another CB in round 7; but I'm okay with looking at Def. front 7 in the first two rounds and then going for outside positions in the latter rounds as a broad based philosophy. At least, where we are right now as a defense.

"Vendigo wrote:

They aren't supposed to. There's some variants of the 3-4 that place a little more emphasis on the DEs rushing the passer - ours is not one of them. This is a run-stuffing position within our scheme and on passing downs, they are supposed to occupy the blockers, not rush the passer themselves.

Leaving...who...to rush the passer on a pass on 1st and 10?

That is why the line of thought that De's in the 3-4 are just sort of stumps who are not expected to pass rush a bit absurd, even when the Giants were winning SB's under Tuna, Marshal would end up with 10 sacks or so.

"padre31 wrote:

Leaving...who...to rush the passer on a pass on 1st and 10?

linebackers? this is the reason there are 4 of them(multiple positions to rush from confusing the offense) and should be good at rushing the passer.