Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 38 of 38
Like Tree8Likes

Thread: HUb's mini-mock 1.0

  1. #31
    Fortuninerhater's Avatar
    Fortuninerhater is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    L.A., Ca.
    Posts
    2,605
    Rep Power
    37

    Re: HUb's mini-mock 1.0

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    We don't seem to have any trouble answering these questions for Robinson/Matthews/Lewan or Watkins/Evans, though.
    So because we don't know on March 17th, which defender should come off the field on third and long, we should draft an OT or WR because he's likely to be on the field every down?

    In the infamous words of Ochocinco................Child please!!


  2. #32
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,373
    Rep Power
    153

    Re: HUb's mini-mock 1.0

    Quote Originally Posted by Fortuninerhater View Post
    So because we don't know on March 17th, which defender should come off the field on third and long, we should draft an OT or WR because he's likely to be on the field every down?
    You're putting words in my mouth, as you've cut off the first part of that paragraph which gives the statement context.

    I outwardly wondered if maybe the questions were too hard for fans to answer, but then followed up with the realization that we've been able to answer them about other positions.

    Point being, it shouldn't take an NFL coach or GM to answer them about these players, either.

  3. #33
    Fortuninerhater's Avatar
    Fortuninerhater is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    L.A., Ca.
    Posts
    2,605
    Rep Power
    37

    Re: HUb's mini-mock 1.0

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    You're putting words in my mouth, as you've cut off the first part of that paragraph which gives the statement context.

    I outwardly wondered if maybe the questions were too hard for fans to answer, but then followed up with the realization that we've been able to answer them about other positions.

    Point being, it shouldn't take an NFL coach or GM to answer them about these players, either.
    There is one simple question that any of us can answer concerning messers Mack and Donald, that you're not asking though.

    And that is, do they instantly make us a far superior defense than the current one? If the answer is yes, then who comes off the field on third down carries the weight of a feather, when it comes to considering them in the draft.

  4. #34
    FestusRam's Avatar
    FestusRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Festus, Missouri
    Posts
    1,181
    Rep Power
    20

    Re: HUb's mini-mock 1.0

    Hub, you seem to be an intelligent, reasonable person. Because of this, I rarely disagree with your posts. With that said, it's nice that I can finally do so. It's pretty bland around here in between FA and the draft, so i'll start throwing some jabs. Just kidding, but seriously, i'll stop blabbering and get down to it....

    What I don't like about this particular draft is the first round.

    As much as I like Mack, I don't think his talent outweighs the talent of other players we could get at #2 who also happen to be at positions of need(Matthews, Robinson). If Ogletree wasn't a Ram, it would be a different story. Couple that with Dunbar's resigning, and I'd stay away from the LB position early. As I stated earlier, I'd rather grab a prospect at a position of need who I believe has just as much talent as Mack. However, I will agree the idea of Mack, Williams, and our current D is pretty tempting.

    I never boarded the Aaron Donald hype-train. To be fair, he is a very intriguing prospect, but I personally don't see him having the impact at the NFL level that others do. His size is the obvious issue. Sure, he's fast in college, but I think he'll have a tough time with NFL centers and guards. If he's double-teamed it's game over, and I doubt he holds up against the run. He is an intriguing athlete who could potentially become a great inside pass-rusher, but I wouldn't touch him until round 2.
    HUbison likes this.

  5. #35
    tomahawk247's Avatar
    tomahawk247 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Essex, England
    Age
    27
    Posts
    4,667
    Rep Power
    57

    Re: HUb's mini-mock 1.0

    I like most of the first few picks but I'm not on the Mack train personally. Not saying I don't like him as a player, and that Rams D would be scary good with him on there, I just think we would be better suited going in another direction. It's a pick similar to Clowney in my eyes. Great player, but we are pretty good at the position already

  6. #36
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,567
    Rep Power
    145

    Re: HUb's mini-mock 1.0

    Quote Originally Posted by FestusRam View Post
    Hub, you seem to be an intelligent, reasonable person. Because of this, I rarely disagree with your posts.
    Festus, we're all intelligent reasonable people. Except for those who disagree with me, of course.

    Ok, seriously, I hear what you're saying, and honestly you're NOT disagreeing with me. When I do a mock, it's not (like some) a personal wish list, but rather a guess at what may happen if certain things happen early on. Kind of a butterfly effect. That's what intrigues me about the draft.

    And really what prompted me to do this was all the Mack-Rams talk I'd been hearing. It made me curious as to what the draft might look like if the Rams did take Mack. Not necessarily my personal preferences, hopes, wishes, or desires.

    This draft would make me very nervous. I have to admit I would be exicted to see our front 7, but there's 15 other positions that need to be effective as well. And while I like the idea of Billy Turner, not sure he can come in immediately to fill either OT spot, if called upon. As well, this draft doesn't advance the WR cause. For all the excitement this would create on the defensive front, it leaves a lot of holes up.
    FestusRam and turbofargo like this.
    "Before the gates of excellence the high gods have placed sweat; long is the road thereto and rough and steep at first; but when the heights are reached, then there is ease, though grievously hard in the winning." --- Hesiod

  7. #37
    FestusRam's Avatar
    FestusRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Festus, Missouri
    Posts
    1,181
    Rep Power
    20

    Re: HUb's mini-mock 1.0

    Quote Originally Posted by HUbison View Post
    Festus, we're all intelligent reasonable people. Except for those who disagree with me, of course.

    Ok, seriously, I hear what you're saying, and honestly you're NOT disagreeing with me. When I do a mock, it's not (like some) a personal wish list, but rather a guess at what may happen if certain things happen early on. Kind of a butterfly effect. That's what intrigues me about the draft.

    And really what prompted me to do this was all the Mack-Rams talk I'd been hearing. It made me curious as to what the draft might look like if the Rams did take Mack. Not necessarily my personal preferences, hopes, wishes, or desires.

    This draft would make me very nervous. I have to admit I would be exicted to see our front 7, but there's 15 other positions that need to be effective as well. And while I like the idea of Billy Turner, not sure he can come in immediately to fill either OT spot, if called upon. As well, this draft doesn't advance the WR cause. For all the excitement this would create on the defensive front, it leaves a lot of holes up.
    Yeah, I'm more worried about solidifying the OL and Secondary. I believe the talent will be there to do so, so we won't be reaching just to fill a need. WR is not as important to me, but I like the idea of Sammy Watkins. How contradictory was that last sentence? haha

  8. #38
    RebelYell's Avatar
    RebelYell is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    St. Louis ,Missouri
    Posts
    2,342
    Rep Power
    44

    Re: HUb's mini-mock 1.0

    Quote Originally Posted by HUbison View Post
    2. Atlanta - Jadeveon Clowney, DE - That's right. I "mocked" a trade. Sue me (lol).
    Please private message me an address to mail the small claims paperwork.
    Thanks.

    Mack I could see.
    Donald - no. Pass rushing DTs are exceptionally difficult to project.
    Sua'-Filo seems very similar to Saffold.
    Last edited by RebelYell; -03-18-2014 at 03:20 PM.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Similar Threads

  1. HUb's 1st & Ram's 1st four. v3.1
    By HUbison in forum DRAFT & FA
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: -04-16-2008, 01:10 PM
  2. HUb's 1st & Ram's 1st four. v2.0
    By HUbison in forum DRAFT & FA
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: -03-21-2008, 09:30 AM
  3. Replies: 23
    Last Post: -10-24-2007, 04:06 PM
  4. HUb's top 13 picks, and 7 rds of Rams
    By HUbison in forum DRAFT & FA
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: -04-17-2007, 08:02 AM
  5. HUb's mock draft...first edition
    By HUbison in forum DRAFT & FA
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: -03-06-2006, 01:13 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •