Please, show me where London has shown that in a game situation.

Cam is coming off a serious injury.

Many argue that Ginn is nothing special (nor will he ever be by some people's estimation).

Bess is nice, but most see that he wouldn't start on most teams (heck he doesn't on ours).

Don't get me wrong, I like our WRs as a whole, but like at almost every position, we could use an upgrade to talent and depth.

Not to mention we see what dominant WRs can do for other teams (B. Marshall, Plaxico, Fitz & Boldin, Andre Johnson etc.) and everyone wants that on their own team.

 

I'm sure many fans want Nicks bc he is an exciting player, but my reasoning might be a little different. IMO the upside to the 3 "starters" we have now is limited, and they do not fit into a "physical" style offense. They are all very good WRs for the role in which they should playing- which is at #3 WR.

A very physical, dependable WR like Nicks who can also block is a must if this offense wants to take it's game to the next level while having defenses truly respecting our wideout position.... which in turn allows us to improve our rushing attack. Miami needs a threat to keep the defense from crowding the box...and they need him to impact this year.

Nicks is the guy bc be is the most NFL ready receiver in this class and meets virtually all of our needs at wideout. There are plenty of quality corners in rounds 2-4 without much disparity between them, but there is only 1 Hakeem Nicks.

Therefore, a guy like Nicks brings more value to the outside position (offense or defense) than any CB in the draft. If it came down to Barwin and Nicks...that'd be a different story. LOL

 

London's a project. Like most UDFA projects, he has a high chance of washing out eventually. Might as well throw in someone with some good potential and 1st day talent to compete with him.

 

Wr in first round=Shiney!

:lol:

Because we haven't had a Wr who was consistently explosive since OJ McDuffie's toe went south on him, Chambers had that one season, but other then that, for a franchise used to having Warfield, Moore, Clayton and Duper, we haven't had a decent Wr in a decade or more.

 

Drafting by need is a poor draft strategy. If you bypass better players to fill a need you end up with a team full of lesser players.

CB
This is a poor CB draft. Why would anybody advocate reaching for a 2nd rd player in the first? The only CB who fits our needs in the first is Sean Smith but that's not a universal opinion. I see many mocks that have Smith going to us in the 2nd.

OLB
OLB is also a need but the draft is full of many similarly ranked players some of which will absolutely fall to our 2nd rd picks.

WR is also a need. We don't have a #1 WR. We just have a few guys we can place some hope in. Those that are saying WR at #25 are not saying that the WR need is greater than CB or OLB. They are just looking beyond team needs and also considering where the value in this draft lies.

 

CP is the short-term QB. Building a team requires thinking past just the short-term. Rumors are that Henne will be the guy no later than next season anyways.

Sean Smith, Sintim and/or Barwin are likely to be available in the 2nd round. I haven't seen any good arguments for drafting 2nd round talent in the 1st. (Butler is a bad fit for our defense and Matthews is a 1 year wonder, so neither is worth the premium over Smith, Sintim and Barrow).

 

We'll see Rafael, if we have another winning season and make the playoffs it would be beyond difficult to simply jettison Chad P for Chad Henne as the reality of Pennington being a winner will overcome Henne's potential.

In some ways, it would be better if we traded Pennington before this season begins and simply start Chad Henne from Day 1.

The best one I can come up with is a player whose skills are unique, but is probably not a #1 value, a guy like Ziggy Hood or maybe a shut down Cb.

 

I didn't know that was what you were looking for, it sure sounded to me from the OP that you wanted to know why so many people wanted us to go WR with the first pick. No one should be able to convince you that we'd be better off by the way, since there is no way to prove one player will be better than another at this point, it's all conjecture (especially since you seem to think no WR would be able to hep our offense since we run a short passing game apparently).

 

I 100% agree with your premise. Who they should take @ #25 though is not without perspective. I'd prefer the team take a WR or heck a QB if that player is the best rated prospect @ that position. If Kwonshon Moreno was there, I don't think it would be a bad idea to get him on the roster. The whole team could use better players @ every position and so long as that player is the best player available, I don't really care who they take.

 

I don't think whether CP is the QB for one, two or even three more seasons should have any affect on our draft decision. It's pretty obvious that they are trying to build a team for long-term success. IMO those that use the "CP only dinks and dunks argument" are inappropriately thinking in the short-term. I only brought up the Henne thing to point out that their argument may be moot in both the short and long term.

There's some sentiment in the league that shut-down corners don't exist with the current rule structure. Relevant to the discussion here is that both Sparano and Parcells have implied that.

 

Why?
Because the current roster barely has a WR worthy of being a #2, let alone a #1.
If the Phins stand pat at WR or draft dome scrub late in the draft, we will have nothing but #3 and #4 WR.
Not good enough.

 

That would be true if Pennington wasn't going into his contract year, we signed him with only the short term in mind as they apparently believe in Henne being a NFL Qb, I would have prefered a 4 year deal, but there has been -0- noise about giving him a longer term deal.

Penington's game is perfect for our offense, high efficiency low turnover Qb play is what the doctor ordered for a run first offense, dip dunk, ramen noodle, whatever, we went from 1-15 to 11-5 with CP as out starter, anyone who is willing to jettison that for a shiny rookie Qb is a fool.

The even more remarkable thing is he finished #2 in the MVP voting with two fringe Wr and a two Te's whose previous career highs were 35 catches and maybe 2 touchdowns in a season.

To me, Penny is our modern day Bob Griese and I love to watch him do his job.

And last year the #1 pick was going to be a "pillar of our defense for alot of years to come", they lie sometimes in their public statements to send out smokescreen Rafael.

As for the rule change, talent is talent.

 

Yeah, maybe, Wr is a glamour position, fans love numbers.

 

I love winning. And it's hard to win with no WR's.

 

Exactly, Raf..... and to add to it- how does "dink and dunk" keep the defense honest so we can be more effective running the ball. With "dink and dunk" the safeties can play up hinder our running game all day long. It'll will be a "Ravens" all over again. You don't have to throw the long ball with Penny to have defenses respect your pass more. Nicks is like Larry in the manner that all you need to do is throw the ball his way and let him do his thing. It doesn't have to be 40 yards downfield.

I know we both disagree on "shut down" corners to some extent... but I'm sure we can both agree that there is no one in this draft even close to DRC or Revis, who would be considered as close to potential shut down/impact corners as you can draft as of late. These are the type of guys you spend 1st round picks on IMO.

 

Not particularly, the Chargers won for a couple of years with just Antonio Gates, the Titans did not have real quality Wr either, and we won last season without top quality (numbers wise) Wide Receivers.

Numbers are not as important as key plays are, first downs and Td's are more important then just numbers.

 

I agree with you regarding this Padre... but it makes it very difficult to be a physical smash-mouth offense when your 3 starting WR's are 5'10, 190/ 5'11, 180/6'1, 190. Other teams win with less talentened WR's then the norm as you pointed out.... but I would venture that those WR's were not so diminutive in stature. LOL.

These 3 guys make it a little difficult to be the smash-mouth offense we're attempting to become. :wink2: We want tackling CBs.... well we also need quality blocking, physical, wide receivers.

 

Smaller Wr does not mean they cannot block though, look at the Redskins Wr when they had to Hogs, Gary Clark was not exactly TO sized...:lol:

Wr blocking is typically interference blocking and size is not as important, what is important is managing to present oneself for the Qb and to then make a play, if we look back at 08, our Wr were able to move the chains consistently.

 

Very good point.... although we moved the chains against half of the league who ranked in the bottom half of defense rankings. We played 5 of the top 10 worst teams....so our passing game was a little misleading. Against playoff caliber teams, we didn't fare as well. Hence the reason for a more phsyical playmaker at the WR position who is capable of "presenting oneself for the Qb and to then make a play" as you say. LOL.

 

The league back then also wasn't comprised of as many physical, defensive beasts that offenses face today.

 

There is no guarantee a rookie would fare any better though TP.

If we recall, it was Greg C splitting the ravens secondary in 07, the only thing that kept him from a 1,000 yd season was his knee injury, Ginn was the #2 for most of the year and he still was in eyesight of 1,000 yds and Bess had a ton of catches as a UDFA he also was within range of breaking Chrebet's rookie catches record.

To me, a Wr at #1 is a possibility, I'd prefer we work on our core game, running the ball with a Te like Pettigrew if he is there, he can have an impact as a blocker from Day 1 "if" he is as advertised.

 

At Cb? That doesn't make much difference though TP, Wr mostly get in the way of the Db, as long as a Wr is a willing blocker 90% that is enough.

 

Ravens 07 was not the Ravens of 08. LOL. It's not the yards I'm concerned with.... it's the presence of at least one intimidator, and we don't have one. I'm not saying that we take Nicks first... but if our other core targets are gone, then I'd prefer Nicks over any DB is all. I agree about working on our core game.

You have to admit that our guys are a little small when it comes to blocking downfield against some of the bigger DB's of today. LOL. I think they are a great core, but there is still plenty of room to upgrade. If Nicks isn't there, I don't want a WR at all till the 4th in Mike Wallace.

 

I don't want Nicks at all. I think Tate is just a physical, just as talented, has hands that are just as good, and is far faster. If we draft on potential alone, reach down into the third or fourth and draft Tate.

 

I prefer not to draft on talent alone. I like Nicks b/c he is an impact player who wills himself to make big plays when the team needs it. There's not a receiver over the past 2 years who is as clutch as Hakeem, and that's what makes him extra special.

 

excellent explanation!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:up:

 

Simply put: If Hakeem Nicks is on the board, unless another big time prospect slides, I think he'll have a great shot at being the best player on the board. That's what you do in the draft. You select the best player available. Drafting based on need gets you nowhere in this league.

 

It's true regardless. Whether CP is our QB or we switch to Henne, we should draft the BPA. In this draft that may be a #1 WR.

I love CP. I just hate the argument that we shouldn't draft a WR b/c of CP's limitations.

Parcells said this a couple of years ago. I think Sparano said it a while ago as well. There have been articles quoting other GMs over the last few years expressing the same sentiment. This isn't a draft smokescreen. It's just a recognition that the teams that have been winning SBs lately have been doing it without pro bowl talent at the CB position.

 

I think you can draft for need later in the draft, but in round 1 you have to draft BPA.

 

Rafael, Parcells had no history of drafting a OT in rd 1, in the modern draft there had been 3 OT taken with the #1, yet we still took Jake Long.

Public statements from these three mean -0-, nothing, they are barely worth quoting IMO.

 

Nicks is really the only WR I would advocate taking at #25. He's the only one I see with the combination of talent and production to be a true #1 worth that slot. Other WRs may breakout but they have more question marks and therefore are lesser prospects.

I think most of the NFL evaluators agree as well. The later mocks from the "connected" guys show downward trends or 2nd to 3rd round grades on most of these CBs that some here are pushing for at #25. In my experience those later mocks from the "connected" guys tend to reflect their conversation with the NFL talent evaluators.

And you're still young. I have faith that you'll eventually come around on the shut-down corner thing. :wink2:

 

These weren't draft comments. These were comments about the philosophy of team building. Parcells has talked candidly about that before, for example, his commandments for QBs and the skill-sets he prioritizes for CBs. Some of these things he said on his radio show when he wasn't even working for a team.

 

Nonsense. Nicks didn't even step up until he had to when Tate went down. Before Tate went down he was lighting the world up and there was serious discussion of him being the best receiver in the draft. The only reason Tate is considered a third or fourth round prospect is because of questions about how his knee is healing.

Tate represents more value at 89 or 108 than Nicks does at 25.

 

If I was able to put together a per pass attempt comparison list from Marino and Pennington and could show you unequivocally that Marino's yards per pass were not much more then Chad Pennington's would you then change your mind and not blame our passing game on Pennington. I am talking yards in the air and that the YAC achieved after the catch is what made Marino so much more successful; that Marino consistently had better receivers.

This core of guys is not doing Pennington any favors. I knew when I saw this thread it would come to this....blame our receivers inadequacies on Pennington :no: The guy had the 2nd best rating in the NFL Last year 97.4. Dan Marino only exceeded that number 1 time in his entire career. Don't get me wrong I am not saying or even suggesting Pennington is a Dan Marino, but last year was a awesome year and you want to replace him with a QB who played 1 game in his career........you may want to reconsider your position!!!!!!:tongue2:

 

okay fine

we take Hicks at 25 and Tate at 44....now were set at receiver!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

And yet Ty Law and Anthony Henry were #1 picks, beware the absolutist position when it comes to player personnel moves Rafael, they are willing to break the mold.

The thought that we viewed Chad Henne as our future Qb in the last draft, and passed on him in favor of Phillip Merling is astounding, and highlights how unpredictable they can be.

If they missed on Henne at #57, they just missed on the guy Tuna wanted at Qb, yet they did it anyway.

 

Nonsense is right.

Nicks blew Tate out of the water in 07, and in 08 he did the same since Tate couldn't even stay on the field.

Through 4 full games last year that both played in here is what they did:
Tate: 14 rec, 359 yards, 3TDs
Nicks: 23 rec, 357 yards, 3TDs

Sure looks like Tate is lighting the world up compared to his teammate. :rolleyes:

A better average, sure. But not so significantly better to suggest Nicks lack of stepping up until Tate went down.

 

Wait, are you serious? That's absolutely ridiculous and a complete waste of our draft picks. I can see Nicks/Tate at 89/108, but not that early. My ideal first four rounds run like this:

1) Darius Butler
2a) DJ Moore
2b) Tyrone McKenzie
3) Brandon Tate
4) Michael Hamlin