If the Cardinals go Lane Johnson

[MWOOD92]

Johnson was a second round prospect... now all of a sudden he's a top 10 pick? He's all hype because of the combine.

 

[Stout]

I will be pissed. You don't take the 3rd best OT and pass on the #1 OG. Especially when you need an OG more than an OT anyway.

Exactly.

I won't be pissed with any pick that addresses the offensive line.

That is like bitching all summer you can't find ice cream and then complaining when someone brings you mint chip instead of chocolate chip.

So you'll be cool if they draft a 3rd-round prospect at #7 because it addresses the offensive line?

Drafting the 3rd best LT prospect at #7 wouldn't be like not being able to find ice cream and then complaining when you get mint chip instead of chocolate chip; it would be accepting thawed and re-frozen ten-year old ice cream instead of going to the store and buying it fresh.

 

[kerouac9]

Johnson was a second round prospect... now all of a sudden he's a top 10 pick? He's all hype because of the combine.

Don't know about all that. Johnson has always been considered the 3rd best OT. Teams don't really set up their draft boards until late March.

http://www.arizonasportsfans.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2799372&postcount=16

That was written two months ago, and it didn't seem crazy that someone would be wanting Johnson at that time, even at 7 overall.

 

[Mulli]

I know I will be banned for this, but:

Mint Chip is gross.

 

[crisper57]

I'm all for it. If we get any of the 3 T's or the 1 G, I am happy. They will all start. They will all make an immediate impact, and Johnson looks to actually have the biggest upside of the 3 T's long-term.

Maybe I am in the minority, but I will be more upset if we go pass-rush in the first round if any of the elite OLs are still on the board. Everyone knows our OL sucks out loud, and has for years. If we don't address our biggest weakness in the first round, how are we supposed to expect a different result next season?

I know you don't reach for a need in the first round, but IMO, none of the top 4 OL in this draft is a reach at #7. We need to stop going for the sexy picks in the first round and realize that where the OL goes, so does the entire offense.

 

[MWOOD92]

Don't know about all that. Johnson has always been considered the 3rd best OT. Teams don't really set up their draft boards until late March.

http://www.arizonasportsfans.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2799372&postcount=16

That was written two months ago, and it didn't seem crazy that someone would be wanting Johnson at that time, even at 7 overall.

Seems pretty crazy to me

Johnson barely squeezed into the end of the first round during that time.

 

[Denny Green Fan]

How would you guys feel if we drafted Lane Johnson, and then started him at guard for a season or two, while we wean him into the game, get his fundamentals straight, and get Levi Brown off our books?

I would rather draft Warmack ( but I dont think we will) then get Levi

off our books

L eonard Davis

L j shelton

L evi Brown

L ane Johnson

See a pattern?

 

[Chris_Sanders]

Exactly.



So you'll be cool if they draft a 3rd-round prospect at #7 because it addresses the offensive line?

Drafting the 3rd best LT prospect at #7 wouldn't be like not being able to find ice cream and then complaining when you get mint chip instead of chocolate chip; it would be accepting thawed and re-frozen ten-year old ice cream instead of going to the store and buying it fresh.

Good god why does everyone take an inch and run a mile. Is the need to be right so important on the internet for some?

Here Stout, lets just take my inch and run a marathon to really make our straw man point.

Why not say "So you would be happy with a rated 7th round pick at #7" I mean if you are going to go for hyperbole, may as well go the whole way.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

For the Hyperbole's out there...here are your common first round offensive linemen and how Scout's Inc grades them:

Joeckel - 97
Fisher - 96
Warmack - 95
Johnson - 94
Cooper - 94
Fluker 91

So a whopping 6 point difference between the 6 guys rated in the first round.

90-100 Rare Prospect
Player demonstrates rare abilities and can create mismatches that have an obvious impact on the game. Is a premier college player that has all the skill to take over a game and play at a championship level. He rates in the top 5 players in the nation at his position and is considered a first round draft prospect.

Oh woes me, we might have to settle for one of the other Elite Prospects at #7 than my favorite Elite Prospect.

 

[Southpaw]

Johnson was a second round prospect... now all of a sudden he's a top 10 pick? He's all hype because of the combine.

This is not a consensus opinion.

 

[Stout]

Good god why does everyone take an inch and run a mile. Is the need to be right so important on the internet for some?

Here Stout, lets just take my inch and run a marathon to really make our straw man point.

Why not say "So you would be happy with a rated 7th round pick at #7" I mean if you are going to go for hyperbole, may as well go the whole way.

LOL It isn't a need to be right--it's a desire to not reach and take the 3rd-best prospect at a position at #7 overall. We've been burned with that in the past, and I can't think of a situation where doing something like that in the top 10 has worked out for teams. I just hate the idea. I remember taking the leavings (Levi Brown) instead of, like, the best player at his position in the draft (Adrian Peterson). I don't have a driving need to be right; I just think it's a really bad idea.

For the Hyperbole's out there...here are your common first round offensive linemen and how Scout's Inc grades them:

Joeckel - 97
Fisher - 96
Warmack - 95
Johnson - 94
Cooper - 94
Fluker 91

So a whopping 6 point difference between the 6 guys rated in the first round.

90-100 Rare Prospect
Player demonstrates rare abilities and can create mismatches that have an obvious impact on the game. Is a premier college player that has all the skill to take over a game and play at a championship level. He rates in the top 5 players in the nation at his position and is considered a first round draft prospect.

Oh woes me, we might have to settle for one of the other Elite Prospects at #7 than my favorite Elite Prospect.

Woe is me :BIM:

I don't have a favorite prospect in this draft, because I haven't had time to follow it this year. Rankings on a draft website are worth less than the space they take up on the internet--he's the flipping third best prospect at his position, and unless we have the next Boselli, Ogden, AND Brown in this draft, I don't think it's a good idea.

Why not take the monster guard considered the best at his position instead, seeing as though guard is a bigger need anyway?

Oh, and I'm cool with agreeing to disagree. I absolutely used wild hyperbole in my post, because you overreacted in the post I responded to. Also, I think downplaying the 3rd-best at his position issue while pointing to scout rankings is disingenuous.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

Well I do have a favorite guy and that is Warmack.

My guess is we draft a pass rusher though and then wonder why we can't run or pass block again...

 

[MWOOD92]

This is not a consensus opinion.

For people who started following the draft in March

 

[Stout]

Well I do have a favorite guy and that is Warmack.

My guess is we draft a pass rusher though and then wonder why we can't run or pass block again...

I wouldn't mind us picking Warmack.

 

[Crimson Warrior]

I don't think that Lane Johnson is Jonathan Ogden, but if you want to think about whether this is possible, Branden Albert played LG for two seasons in college at Virginia (Next to D'Brickashaw Ferguson and Eben Britton, IIRC--I'm not looking it up) before going to LT for the Chiefs, and former UGA (and K9 favorite) Cordy Glenn started as OG and RT for the Bulldogs before becoming a left tackle for the Bills.

I'm not willing to throw away half a season because I didn't really enjoy watching Kevin Kolb be a punching bag when D'Anthony Batiste was out there. It's not fun football to watch.

IMO, the technique that Johnson will be learning as an LG will get him 80% of where he'll need to be to be a LT in 2014 or 2015. The difference between that and 8 starts at LT in 2013 is maybe 10%.

If I'm squinting hard and have had a couple of drinks, I can talk myself into 10 wins on the schedule that DON'T include going 5-1 in the division. Unfortunately, a number of those games are in the early part of the schedule.

I actually think that Johnson's athleticism helps us more as a guard because we're going to do a lot of pulling and zone concepts than it will if he's a tackle and we kick Levi Brown into guard, because I don't think that Levi has good straight-line speed.

My intention is to have the 2015 offensive line be Johnson-Potter-???-???-Massie with Kelemete as being one of those question-mark fillers or a 3rd guard.

This team has won ten games exactly once in the last forty years. But you decide to pick 2013 to say year, " hey, if we catch a couple of breaks, we might get to double digits in the win column"?

Hmmmmm.

Here's what got us nine wins in 2008:

1. Our QB throwing the occasional perfect game.
2. Two HOF wide receivers on the roster, playing most of the year.
3. A respectable, capable offensive line.
4. Credible running back play.
5. Very good, perhaps even great, offensive play calling.
6. A slightly above average, opportunistic defense.
7. Playing in a down NFC West

I could be wrong, but we'll be lucky to cobble together three or four of the above elements for 2013

I get that you said ten wins with tongue in cheek, but at the same time, I would caution you (and everyone else) not to get your hopes up this year. Ten wins went out the window with that tough-ass schedule we drew.

We'll be more competitive than last year though. We'll at least be watchable (if that's any consolation).

 

[JeffGollin]

Getting hung up on one specific player probably isn't particularly good for your digestive system. It's time to put away our favorite son banners, set up and trust the Cardinal board and hopefully be happy with and support whatever Keim's decision turns out to be.

Otherwise this draft IMO will set most of us up for disappointment.

Those of us crossing our fingers that Fisher will fall to us are likely to hang our heads if he 's gone by #7. Same thing could very well happen with Warmack, Jordan or even Johnson.

I'll be happy if we draft any of the five offensive linemen or Jordan. All we need is for one of these 6 guys to fall to us to achieve this goal. (I know I'll be pulling for Milliner, Geno, Floyd &/or Lotuleilei to be picked before us). And if it doesn't happen, I could live with the 2 DT's or Milliner as my pick at #7.

 

[kerouac9]

I get that you said ten wins with tongue in cheek, but at the same time, I would caution you (and everyone else) not to get your hopes up this year. Ten wins went out the window with that tough-ass schedule we drew.

We'll be more competitive than last year though. We'll at least be watchable (if that's any consolation).

I'm just saying that we don't have to be doormats this year if we don't want to be. That speculation is based on two assumptions, one of which is realistic:

a) the offense improves to at least league-average, and
b) the defense declines to only above-average from dominant.

Here's the way you get to 10 wins:

- beat St. Louis, Detroit, Carolina, Indianapolis, and either San Francisco or Seattle at home (5 wins)
- beat St. Louis, Tampa Bay, Jacksonville, Tennessee, and either Philly or New Orleans on the road (5 wins).

Is it going to be a tough row to hoe? Heck, yes. But four of those 10 teams are drafting in the Top 10 along with us.

I was worried that Daryl Washington may have shot this team in the face by being dumb with his drug program, but then I thought about the game-changing plays that he made last year, and realized that they either happened in blowout wins (Philly) or blowout losses (everything else). I'm more worried about the salted earth that is our safety position right now than I am with missing Washington.

Now, do I believe that this team should win 10 games next year? Heck, no. I think we'll be fortunate to win 7. But I can IMAGINE this team winning 10 games the way that Indy did last year.

 

[desertdawg]

I'm just saying that we don't have to be doormats this year if we don't want to be. That speculation is based on two assumptions, one of which is realistic:

a) the offense improves to at least league-average, and
b) the defense declines to only above-average from dominant.

Here's the way you get to 10 wins:

- beat St. Louis, Detroit, Carolina, Indianapolis, and either San Francisco or Seattle at home (5 wins)
- beat St. Louis, Tampa Bay, Jacksonville, Tennessee, and either Philly or New Orleans on the road (5 wins).

Is it going to be a tough row to hoe? Heck, yes. But four of those 10 teams are drafting in the Top 10 along with us.

I was worried that Daryl Washington may have shot this team in the face by being dumb with his drug program, but then I thought about the game-changing plays that he made last year, and realized that they either happened in blowout wins (Philly) or blowout losses (everything else). I'm more worried about the salted earth that is our safety position right now than I am with missing Washington.

Now, do I believe that this team should win 10 games next year? Heck, no. I think we'll be fortunate to win 7. But I can IMAGINE this team winning 10 games the way that Indy did last year.

Who are you?? And what have you done with K9?? 10 wins is possible (unlikely) but damn bro, your glass is usually half realistic, not overflowing with the "Oh Yeeeaaah!!!!"

 

[Bodha]

Ill be nauseated if we take Lane Johnson.




He was a late 1st round talent, then he ran the 40 at the combine, and now hes a top 10 selection.

That makes me ill

 

[Azlen]

Ill be nauseated if we take Lane Johnson.

He was a late 1st round talent, then he ran the 40 at the combine, and now hes a top 10 selection.

That makes me ill

That isn't necessarily true. We have no idea where he was on the board of actual NFL teams. All we knew is where the Kipers and Mayocks had him. When you see a player rise like that, it's more likely that the speculators are hearing that he was higher on NFL boards than where the speculators had him. Movement on mock drafts is probably quite a bit different than it is on the draft board of your average NFL team.

 

[Jay Cardinal]

Was Lane Johnson even a top-5 tackle before Taylor Lewan and others withdrew from the draft? Now we are talking about him top 10? No thank you. Reminds me of Levi Brown all over again. Many had Levi rated close to Joe Thomas, many others could see the difference. Give me Fischer, Joeckel or I am taking Warmack or Jarvis Jones. Personally I would also choose DJ Fluker over Lane Johnson. I think Fluker's power outweighs Johnson's mobility.

 

[Stout]

That isn't necessarily true. We have no idea where he was on the board of actual NFL teams. All we knew is where the Kipers and Mayocks had him. When you see a player rise like that, it's more likely that the speculators are hearing that he was higher on NFL boards than where the speculators had him. Movement on mock drafts is probably quite a bit different than it is on the draft board of your average NFL team.

Or it means that a team bought into the great combine numbers a guy puts up. It happens, a lot, and I buy that phenomenon more than the one you describe, because your theory supposes that teams actually give out more accurate information the closer the draft gets. Quite the opposite is true.

 

[WildBB]

Also, I think downplaying the 3rd-best at his position issue while pointing to scout rankings is disingenuous.

Doesn't matter if your third best at your position if the top two might go 1 & 2.

3rd best is prob. better than a bunch of 1st bests in other positions. Has no bearing on this draft other than they def. need at least one OL.

 

[Azlen]

Or it means that a team bought into the great combine numbers a guy puts up. It happens, a lot, and I buy that phenomenon more than the one you describe, because your theory supposes that teams actually give out more accurate information the closer the draft gets. Quite the opposite is true.

It's not really my theory, it's what Bill Polian said what happens in an insider article on ESPN. Maybe he's not telling the truth, but I don't see why he would feel the need to lie in this article.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9177881/2013-nfl-draft-nfl-draft-room-looks-like-no-1-pick

 

[WildBB]

Was Lane Johnson even a top-5 tackle before Taylor Lewan and others withdrew from the draft? Now we are talking about him top 10? No thank you. Reminds me of Levi Brown all over again. Many had Levi rated close to Joe Thomas, many others could see the difference. Give me Fischer, Joeckel or I am taking Warmack or Jarvis Jones. Personally I would also choose DJ Fluker over Lane Johnson. I think Fluker's power outweighs Johnson's mobility.

Warmack, Jones and the real flavor of the hour Fluker all have their flaws as well. There is no sure thing. The staff will make their decision and live with it. They'll have to, their jobs depend on it. BA def. knows it.

If we're staying put, Johnson mtl has the biggest upside and plays a vital position on the team. RT's are just not as valuable in the NFL as LT's. That will always be so. Same with guards.

Jones has value and will be in the mix too. Nobody has him in the top 7 right now. Which means squat, because the same thing applies. Whoever they take that high, they better be sure pans out. That means evaluating the whole picture not just the one in the moment.