If the draft truly fell like that, id love Miami to trade down to 23/25, let's the vikings take Patterson. Do not want another LT or lineman in round 1.

 

I like that pick, and it would make the most sense.

 

Not with the FA market as it is. WR/DE/CB more sense as we drafted a LT last year.

 

We drafted a tackle who is not as athletic as Johnson is. Thinking because you spent x last year means you can't reinvest in x again this year is a fallacy. A serious one.

Those assets are already accounted for, trying to make future decisions based off of that is not the correct thing to do.

Reaching for a WR, DE or CB considering we're playing more zone, and that the DE's early don't really fir what we want to do (see Cincy defense and how many times they asked their DE to play in a two point stance and stunt etc.) or a WR since we look to be filling that via free agency and what we did last year - Rishard Matthews is no the best thing to do.

Johnson is the better pick, unless you go Tavon Austin and then grab the OT can't remember his name from the small school, who coincidentally we've been all over. Otherwise, seriously consider this.

My conviction is based on my gut.

 

It's questionable whether or not Martin can play LT in the long term. And either way, we still have a hole at the tackle position if Long does not come back.

 

Like many have said its doubtful he or any of the top 3 tackles make it to 12. But if one of them did, Johnson would be my choice. He has flat out rocked in all these pre draft showcases

 

If you're drafting Tavon Austin at #12, with no other F/A acquisitions made, and passing on Lane Johnson + Xavier Rhodes, I really have to wonder what the **** we are doing.

Building up this super talented/fast WR Corps while ignoring quality players in the 1st round.

 

I'd love Lane Johnson, but I don't think there's much chance he gets to 12. And I'd say there's almost zero chance Sharrif Floyd does.

 

Teron Armstead of Arkansas Pines-Bluff?

 

I can never remember this kid's name.

 

Are either Johnson or Rhodes the only players at their position? Are we finished with FA?

If not then I have no idea what you're talking about.

 

What do you think of him Richard? I've never seen him in anything other than the Combine. I did see a mock draft that had Miami taking him with their 2a pick the other day.

 

Honestly, he's an interesting prospect. He is athletic as hell. He can/will mirror pretty much anyone and he has the feet to stay with you. He isn't very strong, but that's to be expected given where he went to school. Don't get me wrong, he isn't a pushover but he will be more of a positional blocker than he will ever drive someone off the line of scrimmage.

The best way I can say it is to think of Mike Pouncey at tackle without the sheer aggression. He will need a year or two to get his base strength up to snuff, as I expect he will end up on his behind a bit, but then again he has good flexibility and he does not stop his feet. He will be able to adjust to a redirect better than Jake ever was and that's the truth.

Maybe the best comparison is Duane Brown albeit a bit undersized in terms of girth. Very agile player, but he needs to become stronger.

I'll try and get a video together of him over the weekend.

 

Duane Brown checked in undersized at the combine too (6'5 300)

 

Indeed, the chain of mistakes would continue unbroken.

PLAYMAKERS

Not blue collar types at what point does this become apparent to Davie?

 

6'5'' isn't exactly undersized. I mean what maybe 1 inch away from being ideal if at all? Its not like the guy measured in at 6' or something. 6'5'' with 34'' arms is pretty damn good to be honest.

Armstead is 6'5'' and 306. Jake Long was 6'7'' and 307 lbs IIRC. 2 inches and 1 lb. Jake is tall for a tackle.

 

I am not for drafting a LP in the first round BUT are you saying Austin is not a quality player?

 

sorry. just meant that he was still growing into his football body at the time and needed to get a little bigger & stronger.

 

I would say Lande is on crack... but the Jags are just bad enough to make this big a mistake.

 

Love this. First official sighting of a Top Ten Tank Carradine mock pick. And you know what? If Tank's knee is healthy, he is worth the pick.

Best DE in the draft, imo.

 

No way ALL the DTs stay untouched til 13th pick. No way. Too talented a bunch.

 

Dang, Cyprien in the 1st? And Lemonier? Word is getting out on the 'value' picks. Oh well. I see Eifert sank.

 

CK has liked Xavier Nixon, but he's not from a small school. Is it someone else?

 

Your first question - Are Rhodes and Johnson the only players at their position?

Now, it's pretty obvious here I said quality players in the 1st round. Not ignoring the positions as a whole. Not "not drafting anyone to play those positions" but quality. I mean quality top tier 1st round prospects. So the answer to your question is no, they are not, and your off base even pretending that's what I was saying.

Your second question - "Are we finished with F/A?"

In this hypothetical I think it's pretty damn clear that yes, in the context of my statement, we are done with F/A.

Now you have an idea of what I'm talking about. I hope this was helpful.

Edit: You can make amends for being snarky for no reason by telling me about this f/a acquisition you were alluding to with regards to a RFA, in non riddle form plz ;-).

 

I owe you nothing as far as ammends as you wanted to make a grand statement of overdramatization that was itself snarky as if you know better than the FO, which hasn't even finished the process of FA. But you won't even give them the time to finish before condemning them as being somehow of lesser intelligence. If you don't want people to point out the errors in your argument, construct it better. You typed the sentence, you owe yourself an apology.

If its not what you mean, so be it, but you chose the words you used.

So by you highlighted "ignoring quality players in the 1st round'' you're saying they are the only 2 that are quality? Thats what the statement infers, those are not my words, they are yours and I'm sorry but I'm not going to infer other elements of argumentation into other than what was said. That's called putting words in your mouth.

How can you make a statement about the end of FA when there is over a month left, or are you saying there is no way anything will change between now and then? Apparently we're still waiting of Jake Long, so if we do sign him back wouldn't that change the damn clear message of hypotheticial and then render it rather useless? Hard to have a statement when there is a high possibility of it not being true.

That would be a guess.

What you wrote wasn't a hypothetical. It was a blanket statement as if the events had already happened. Putting an 'if' doesn't make it a hypotheitcal you do realize that right.

Don't get me wrong here, I'm not trying to be an *******, but if the statement you wrote is basically off then accepting it isn't the right thing to do either.

 

I can be very critical of Ireland but think he has found quality guys in the first rd, we've yet to have a real bust of a 1st rd pick, they all have played well, save for Odie when he broke his leg and that is just stuff happens

Where he has not done as well is rds 2-4, it's a bit of a desert of mediocrity or they were waived or have left as fA w/o really having much of an impact while they were here.

 

We NEED to hit on the 2-4's this year.

 

First - Every single person who questions a move by the front office, including many of the respected draftniks on this site, even one as slight as "I really don't understand how they are approaching this situation, etc etc", would fall under your logic of "oh so you're doubting the front office? You're smarter than them?!"... so if that counts as "acting as if you know better than the FO" I suppose I'm guilty. This is all opinion. Everyone does it. That's literally the entire purpose of a discussion board.

Second - The "hypothetical". Like I said, it was a hypothetical situation. Maybe everything I've known to be true is wrong, but I'm rather certain that a hypothetical situation is one where you take a set of variables and make an conclusive assumption of them, and then take those conclusions towards a final outcome. It was blatantly clear that is my opinion. Hypotheticals, their creation and logic at least, are pretty much my entire well-being, so I like to think I have a slight idea of what I'm talking about with that regard.

You're throwing in way too much absolute in my post. I suppose we have a strong disagreement about throwing an "if" in a statement making it a hypothetical, because that's exactly what it is. I'd love to see a rationale of how it is not. IF dictates that this is a non certain conclusion. Your first part of your post falls apart at the hand of the second. It's contradictory. I really don't know how to respond to someone who sits there with a straight face saying "Well they are APPARENTLY waiting on Jake Long. If they sign him, won't that destroy your hypothetical?!"

Well, yes, it will, because it is a different conclusion for a variable that I made an opposite assumption. That's pretty much exactly what a hypothetical is.

Third, I've been a pretty big backer of Jeff Ireland, and I was merely saying that taking a guy like Austin, while ignoring other positions that need to be addressed with starter quality players (In My Opinion, which means it's my belief, a non-fact) is a foolish move. I feel the best quality starter possibilities are guys that would be there @ #12, and not there when we pick again. That's it.

However, I'll agree with you I was somewhat unclear with my position on the 1st round quality player thing, that's fair. But the free agency thing, yeah I just stand by that. No big deal. Your reaction is pretty confusing, but I suppose that's to be expected with so many posts and opinions.

EDIT: The "make amends" thing was said tongue in cheek. Text on forum doesn't translate well for me, but I promise you I'm not one to get all huffy about anything as unimportant as Dolphins football :) No hard feelings.

 

Take this for instance:

If I pull the trigger on a gun it fires.

Is that hypothetical? Seems like there's nothing hypothetical about it.

I'm not throwing anything into your post. That would be putting words in your mouth, what I did do was take what you said as it was written. The use of 'if' does not automatically denote a hypothetical, it also denotes certainty many times.

"When a tree falls in a forest with no around to hear it does it still make a noise?"

Thats also a hypothetical not created by 'if'. And believe it or not there are others that understand hypotheticals are. There are some that realize when one makes a statement as if fact, when truly they just chose the wrong way to say what they actually meant.

I have no doubt that 'you' knew what you were saying, the point I'm making is the way in which you said it to everyone else did not denote a hypothetical. It denoted a basic belief that if they did x and not either y or z then it was a failure you could not comprehend. It it was truly a hypothetical why whittle down the variables. That tends to be what one does they are trying to provide something as more of a fact or foregone conclusion. Otherwise they would not typically whittle down the variables, as all would still be viable, especially in a hypothetical. Which as you say is:

No where in there did you mention or infer that you would whittle down the variables. So your own sentence does not meat what you state as your understanding of a hypothetical and how to use it. End results are typically whittled down, or a better word would be a conclusion or deduction, though yours wouldn't truly fit into a deduction to be fair. But honestly limiting the variables, when as you note you take the set of variables is not truly creating a hypothetical.

Bu in honesty, do what you want, next time I'll just leave it alone as it just isn't worth it.

 

We could take any of them, this is why I banged the table for Keller to be signed.

Season started tomorrow, with no draft class, objectively our only real holes would be Cb, even if Martin stayed at LT.

Tannehill has his weapons, or enough of them, to develop and make the offensive more prolific.

I'm curious if they have an eye on Richardson/Floyd/Star

 

Armstead, Ark-Pine Bluff.

 

Ha, now I can totally tell you're an attorney (by the way you constructed your post)! :lol: :p

Anyone gets a traffic ticket please send it to Crazy685. He does pro bono for all ThePhins members. :shifty:

 

Milliner was.