Draft Scenario: What would you do?

[kerouac9]

I take Cam Newton in this scenario.

No matter what, when the labor stuff is done there will be slotted salaries. No more will you have to risk crippling a franchise financially to take a QB. This makes QBs more valuable early since you won't be paying them obscene money.

Can you come up with ONE example where a busted top 5 pick at any position "crippled a franchise financially"? Because it doesn't happen. I can't think of a single example. I think you're combining two critiques of taking a QB high:

1) The money paid to a top 5 pick is ridiculous for a player who's never appeared in an NFL game. I care very little about this critique, because that's just the way football works.

2) Drafting a Top 5 QB requires the franchise to make a commitment to the growing pains of that quarterback. It's not even necessarily because of the financial investment a team makes; it's more because the people in charge really think that that player is going to be good, and is going to give that player every chance to succeed.

The Cards drafted #7 10th overall and paid him a lot of money, but that never prevented them from doing anything in free agency, including re-signing Kurt Warner to a big two-year contract extension.

 

[juza76]

at silb position we should takea look at:
Mario Harvey really turned some heads at his Pro Day. Despite bulking up to 257 (from his 250-pound listed weight), Harvey ran a 4.43 on Thursday. He also recorded 27 reps of 225. Harvey ran like a receiver by some accounts.

6'00'' 257 lb and run 4.43 tackle machine so fast

 

[Chopper0080]

Can you come up with ONE example where a busted top 5 pick at any position "crippled a franchise financially"? Because it doesn't happen. I can't think of a single example. I think you're combining two critiques of taking a QB high:

1) The money paid to a top 5 pick is ridiculous for a player who's never appeared in an NFL game. I care very little about this critique, because that's just the way football works.

2) Drafting a Top 5 QB requires the franchise to make a commitment to the growing pains of that quarterback. It's not even necessarily because of the financial investment a team makes; it's more because the people in charge really think that that player is going to be good, and is going to give that player every chance to succeed.

The Cards drafted #7 10th overall and paid him a lot of money, but that never prevented them from doing anything in free agency, including re-signing Kurt Warner to a big two-year contract extension.

The biggest problem for a top QB failing is that it cripples your team's continuity. You draft a QB high in the draft, he fails, your coach gets fired, staff changes, scheme are then changed, other players are devalued because they don't fit new schemes, and then QB is cut because new coach doesn't think he fits.

 

[Cardiac]

The biggest problem for a top QB failing is that it cripples your team's continuity. You draft a QB high in the draft, he fails, your coach gets fired, staff changes, scheme are then changed, other players are devalued because they don't fit new schemes, and then QB is cut because new coach doesn't think he fits.

This.

It doesn't help the bank account but the above is why whiffing on a QB is worse then any other whiff at any other position.

 

[kerouac9]

The biggest problem for a top QB failing is that it cripples your team's continuity. You draft a QB high in the draft, he fails, your coach gets fired, staff changes, scheme are then changed, other players are devalued because they don't fit new schemes, and then QB is cut because new coach doesn't think he fits.

Yup. That's kind of what I was saying with #2. JaMarcus Russell murdered the careers of 3 Raiders HCs if you count Tom Cable. Alex Smith iced Nolan and Singletary. Kyle Boller put the knife in the back of a HC who won a Super Bowl for the Ravens.

It's much better to draft a QB in Year 1 of a new HC's regime than it is in Year 4 unless the HC has an extension in place. That happens with other players (Glenn Dorsey getting caught in a philosophy transition comes immediately to mind), but the cost when it's your QB is tough. Any incoming HC is going to tell their interviewer (GM/Owner) that they can work with the young guy. I can count on one hand the number of times that's worked out, though.

 

[football karma]

Per the Natl Football Post: Peterson, Miller, and Dareus have established themselves as the "cleanest" top 5 prospects as it relates to level of effort, maturity and off the field issues.

The Cardinals worst scenario would be for all three of those to be off the board when they pick.

It does mean one of Newton or Gabbert is there, but listening to everyone close to the Cardinals ( Wolfley, et al ) one sure gets the impression they aren't taking one at #5. As an example-- this week Calvisi said "I think in a few years, we wil be talking about Gabbert and Newton as guys who should have gone in the second round" I don't think he came up with that himself.

 

[ARodg]

K9 why do you have Cannon as a Tackle? and as going 38?

 

[kerouac9]

K9 why do you have Cannon as a Tackle? and as going 38?

I like Cannon more than a guy who has never played tackle and has been injured through the whole draft process. I think Cannon can lose weight with Lott and play LG or LT. He's Levi Brown with some heart. It's a little bit of a reach, but I think he'll be good in the NFL.

 

[ARodg]

I like Cannon more than a guy who has never played tackle and has been injured through the whole draft process. I think Cannon can lose weight with Lott and play LG or LT. He's Levi Brown with some heart. It's a little bit of a reach, but I think he'll be good in the NFL.

Everything I'm reading about him says that he doesn't have the feet to play Tackle. He's not an elite Guard either

 

[kerouac9]

Everything I'm reading about him says that he doesn't have the feet to play Tackle. He's not an elite Guard either

I disagree. Think you take 25 lbs off him and he's a monster G. Take 40 off him and he's an elite LT if he wants to be.

 

[JeffGollin]

I actually like Locker a lot. I would love for him to last to the second or to trade up to the mid twenties to get him. Honestly my guess is he goes to Seattle.

Therein lies the reason why mocks are so uncertain and all over the place.

I don't like Locker at lot. In fact, I don't like him at all. I don't like his inconsistency or his lack of accuracy. That's my opinion. Chris_Sanders has a 180 degree different one - an opinion that's equally as valid as mine.

I'm reasonably sure you'll find the same sort of opinion-differences among the 32 NFL clubs - trying to scope out (a) what their boards look like or (b) what they're likely to do is well nigh impossible.

Which doesn't make mocks any the less fun/just difficult if not impossible.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

I take Newton like the majority.

I like Locker in the bottom 3rd of R1 or our pick of R2.

 

[juza76]

i read a rumor said a x team is willing to offer their 1st round for kolb..i can see his scenario so..i am pretty sure is not arizona..i think cincinnati will trade palmer to seattle..minnesota will trade for young..kolb to cincinnati and like always arizona is out of the market