The Implication of Taking Doucet

[MadCardDisease]

If you guys don't believe me, would you believe Charlie Casserly? He just highlighted this as a high-value--and "good fit"--draft pick.

you beat me to it.

I can't wait to see Boldin, Fitz and Doucet on the field together!

 

[Dr. Jones]

Who gonna be our slot guy? Early or Q? I have wondered about this all day.

My issue is that Whis has said all weekend that we pick the BPA that will give us the most immediate improvement on the field. This pick kind of goes against that theory.

BPA, yes. BPA that makes us merkedly better on Sunday? No.

 

[Doc Cardinal]

Ok Charlie that's fine....but you're the guy who passed on Reggie Bush....and I watched you for 5 minutes today and you talked about that Meechegan WR that you called Mario Manningway....plus you have bad teeth and bad hair.

 

[Pariah]

Ok Charlie that's fine....but you're the guy who passed on Reggie Bush....

...for the guy tied for the NFL lead in sacks last year.

By all accounts, that seems to have been the correct call at this point.

 

[vinnymac]

Terrible pick. We needed a speed #3 WR that could stretch the field, and instead got a slow, physical, possession WR. Balls to the idea we're trading Boldin; would have happened by now if it was going to. This smells of BPA, which I usually like, but I don't think he WAS BPA. Ugh.

I will go by what kiper & chris carter said. He is just as good as Dwayne Bowe when he came out of college. Kiper expected him to go a lot sooner than what he did. The Cardinals have plenty of needs. I feel they had a solid draft. Nothing exciting.

 

[Doc Cardinal]

...for the guy tied for the NFL lead in sacks last year.

By all accounts, that seems to have been the correct call at this point.

....but he's still ugly.

 

[Duckjake]

After "The Juggler" Urban and "Skillet Hands" Johnson it will be cool to have a #3 WR who can actually catch the ball.

 

[Totally_Red]

After "The Juggler" Urban and "Skillet Hands" Johnson it will be cool to have a #3 WR who can actually catch the ball.

 

[cardsfanmd]

Uh huh. That's why I heard soooooo many people on this board coveting Doucet before the draft. No, wait a second...that was Avril. And people slobbering on this board at the thought that Avril would be available in the 3rd. Of course, that was before, and so nobody is willing to admit it.

That is because nobody on this board thought there was a snowballs chance in hell that a guy like Doucet would still be available in the third.

I doubt many people had us taking Branch in the second last year either, so I guess we should have been pissed with that pick.

I know a bunch of us had the team getting Buster Davis in the third and were ecstatic over the selection.

 

[Capital Card]

Sorry, it's late and I won't have time to read everyones comments in this thread until tomorrow - so if this has already been mentioned, well, great minds....

I think Doucet was drafted, a) because he was best player on our board, and b) to be Boldin's back-up and a #4 WR, much like an ex-Card Ricky Proell was for the Rams. Not as a #3.

Look for Breaston to get a shot to replace BJ, and Doucet to take the field only in a 4WR set, or if Q is out for injury.

He is a hands guy who has shown toughness in the slot. He is a guy I trust getting the ball on 3rd or 4th down, much more than any other WR or TE on our roster other than Larry Fitz or Q.

Just my opinion, I look forward to reading everyone elses comments tomorrow.

Go Cards!!!

 

[Pariah]

That is because nobody on this board thought there was a snowballs chance in hell that a guy like Doucet would still be available in the third.

That's exactly my point.

 

[Stout]

Including stout apparently!

 

[Stout]

Guys, I'll relent on the pick. As I said before (it got lost amongst my frustration with the pick), I like Doucet as a player and am glad we have him. I would have preferred we go in another direction. We didn't, so I'll live with the pick and be glad we got good value out of it.

 

[Stout]

you beat me to it.

I can't wait to see Boldin, Fitz and Doucet on the field together!

Well, which one of them stretches the field then? I'm sorry, MadCardDisease, but we still have not addressed that issue. Doucet, while a good lesser version of Q, is not that guy.

 

[Stout]

Who gonna be our slot guy? Early or Q? I have wondered about this all day.

My issue is that Whis has said all weekend that we pick the BPA that will give us the most immediate improvement on the field. This pick kind of goes against that theory.

BPA, yes. BPA that makes us merkedly better on Sunday? No.

Thank you. Very well said.

 

[Dr. Jones]

Of course Anquan isn't known as a 16 game a year guy...... His style almost ASKS for injuries.

And IIRC, when Q went down, our offense became VERY one-dimensional. Early could be a big help in keeping us balanced while he or Fitz recovers from anything that may come.

 

[Mulli]

....but he's still ugly.

with a bad toupee.

 

[Russ Smith]

...for the guy tied for the NFL lead in sacks last year.

By all accounts, that seems to have been the correct call at this point.

Absolutely, Bush has been a letdown and Mario Williams had a great year last year.

But he does have bad hair.

 

[cardpa]

I think they got him so when they really need a touchdown they take Fitz out because they believe Doucet won't run out of bounds when there is nothing but green grass in front of him.

 

[cardsfanmd]

Well, which one of them stretches the field then? I'm sorry, MadCardDisease, but we still have not addressed that issue. Doucet, while a good lesser version of Q, is not that guy.

How big was the issue??? Somehow we managed to score 400+ points last year without this "burner" everyone says we need.

Picks like Doucet in the 3rd are what keeps teams from being forced into drafting for need ion the future.

 

[Stout]

How big was the issue??? Somehow we managed to score 400+ points last year without this "burner" everyone says we need.

Picks like Doucet in the 3rd are what keeps teams from being forced into drafting for need ion the future.

Not sure how many times I have to explain it, but it's really an elementary discussion. We scored so much because Warner HAD to gunsling. Basically, we had to try and outscore our opponents. We went 8-8 and lost some very winable games, so we can see it didn't work out all that well; it rarely does. If we're playing the same way this season, we'll fail to make the playoffs. If we settle back in to the offense Whis is looking for this season, with more of an emphasis on the run, those points won't be coming so easily. We certainly need a burner, but hopefully can squeak by without one.

 

[cardsfanmd]

Not sure how many times I have to explain it, but it's really an elementary discussion. We scored so much because Warner HAD to gunsling. Basically, we had to try and outscore our opponents. We went 8-8 and lost some very winable games, so we can see it didn't work out all that well; it rarely does. If we're playing the same way this season, we'll fail to make the playoffs. If we settle back in to the offense Whis is looking for this season, with more of an emphasis on the run, those points won't be coming so easily. We certainly need a burner, but hopefully can squeak by without one.

First, all teams try to outscore their oppenents, as it is the point of the game.

I hate to break this to you, but do not expect to see us run much more this year 'cause it ain gonna happen. Whiz had a run first mentality coming here because it is easier to be a good running team than a good passing one. When you have two Pro Bowl WRs and a hell of a QB things change my man.

Regardless, our lack of a "speed burner" did not keep us out of the playoffs last year, it was our lack of defense, depth and fg kick/punting that killed us. If there was some players that we "needed" they were not WRs, they were a CB and defensive depth. We did that. I was hoping for a new P or K, but that has yet to happen. I am assuming that Seattle will cut either Jeff Wilkins or Brandon Coutu and we could bring in the odd man out to compete with (embarrass) Rackers.

 

[Ed Burmila]

This is being over-analyzed. Our WR corps was Boldin, Larry, and a bunch of stiffs. Just because he lacks ideal speed, the basic fact remains that we only had two good wideouts. Name a team that succeeds without 3 good ones.

None of them are the burner you all apparently wanted, but the more important thing is that they are all GOOD. Adding another guy who can actually play is a sign that the front office have working brains, not that someone is about to be traded.

 

[Totally_Red]

This is being over-analyzed. Our WR corps was Boldin, Larry, and a bunch of stiffs. Just because he lacks ideal speed, the basic fact remains that we only had two good wideouts. Name a team that succeeds without 3 good ones.

None of them are the burner you all apparently wanted, but the more important thing is that they are all GOOD. Adding another guy who can actually play is a sign that the front office have working brains, not that someone is about to be traded.[/quote]

Good point! Carolina has a pro-bowl receiver in Steve Smith with outstanding speed. But good defenses can scheme him out of existence (He didn't make the pro-bowl last year, and only partially because Delhomme went on I.R.).

I'd rather have a solid #3 receiver that can run AFTER THE CATCH than a speed-burner who drops a lot of passes. Preferably you get both speed and good hands, but not necessarily in the third round.

 

[Phlegyas]

I know it's great to have a guy who can get behind the defense and score 50-yard TD's. But I've seen Boldin do that, and he ran a 4.7 40 at the combine. And really, for the offense to progress, you need only 10 yards. You don't need a 4.3 40 to run 10 yards. And you can get down the field and score pretty quickly in about 3 or 4 plays, and you don't need burners for any of that, when you're throwing 20 to 30 yard passes down the sidelines and middle of the field.