Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 32

Thread: My Mock

  1. #16
    harrydog's Avatar
    harrydog is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    429
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: My Mock

    I agree that either of the Longs are probably "safer" picks than VG but like I've said in the past, I think VG has more upside potential to go along with the risk.
    Any of those three would be OK with me though, and if not one of them, I think we have to trade down.


  2. #17
    todd1 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    nebraska
    Age
    36
    Posts
    36
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: My Mock

    I understand the trepidation on drafting VG at #2 instead of C. Long. But I would do it, without any hesitation. I see C.Long as a Grant Wistrom type. Nothing at all wrong with that as we know, but not a true difference maker that opposing offenses will have to gameplan around. I think VG could be a stud pass rusher like Freeney or Leonard Little (minus the bar-hopping). Although that may be what is termed a "one-trick pony", that one trick is the key to having a great defense in the NFL (see Giants, NY).

    One last thing, on the topic of being a "clean" prospect: How clean was Antonio Cromartie? Going back 2 years, Tye Hill would have been far more "clean" going into that draft, right? How many of us, if those two players were available to us right now, would take Hill over Cromartie? I realize they both still have long careers ahead, my point is simply that sometimes you have to take a risk to be successful. Take a chance on the rare athletic abilities that can't be taught. VG has to be the pick.

  3. #18
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,642
    Rep Power
    145

    Re: My Mock

    How clean was Antonio Cromartie?
    About as clean as Ryan Leaf, Charles Rogers, and Mike Williams. All with rare athletic ability.
    "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

  4. #19
    todd1 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    nebraska
    Age
    36
    Posts
    36
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: My Mock

    Oh, you mean clean like Robert Gallery, Mike Williams (the OT from Texas), and Andre Carter. All with high character and clean backgrounds, all top 7 picks.

    There are examples on both sides. I would prefer to err on the side of athletic ability.

  5. #20
    Fortuninerhater's Avatar
    Fortuninerhater is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    L.A., Ca.
    Posts
    2,670
    Rep Power
    37

    Re: My Mock

    Quote Originally Posted by todd1 View Post
    I understand the trepidation on drafting VG at #2 instead of C. Long. But I would do it, without any hesitation. I see C.Long as a Grant Wistrom type. Nothing at all wrong with that as we know, but not a true difference maker that opposing offenses will have to gameplan around. I think VG could be a stud pass rusher like Freeney or Leonard Little (minus the bar-hopping). Although that may be what is termed a "one-trick pony", that one trick is the key to having a great defense in the NFL (see Giants, NY).

    One last thing, on the topic of being a "clean" prospect: How clean was Antonio Cromartie? Going back 2 years, Tye Hill would have been far more "clean" going into that draft, right? How many of us, if those two players were available to us right now, would take Hill over Cromartie? I realize they both still have long careers ahead, my point is simply that sometimes you have to take a risk to be successful. Take a chance on the rare athletic abilities that can't be taught. VG has to be the pick.

    I was on the phone with my 49er loving cousin as the Rams made the mistake of drafting Hill over Cromartie. Even as I screamed to no avail, at the TV "You Idiots", why would you take a 5'9 corner over a 6'1 corner with no noticeable difference in their skillset? Still haunts me, because even a 49er fan realized we had just made the wrong choice and he reminds me everytime he gets a chance.

  6. #21
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,642
    Rep Power
    145

    Re: My Mock

    Quote Originally Posted by todd1 View Post
    Oh, you mean clean like Robert Gallery, Mike Williams (the OT from Texas), and Andre Carter. All with high character and clean backgrounds, all top 7 picks.

    There are examples on both sides. I would prefer to err on the side of athletic ability.
    Todd, go re-read the definition from earlier in this thread. We're not talking about character and background. To say Gholston isn't as "clean" as either Long has absolutely nothing to do with character.

    And while I'm here, I'm curious about this comparison as well....
    Quote Originally Posted by Todd
    I see C.Long as a Grant Wistrom type.
    Other than both being Caucasio-Americans, where is the similarity between Long and Wistrom?
    "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. #22
    todd1 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    nebraska
    Age
    36
    Posts
    36
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: My Mock

    I understand what you mean by "clean"...most NFL ready from a skills and mental standpoint, right? Less bust potential. That's why I noted the players I did when stating that the so called clean players of past drafts also fail. Gallery is the poster-child for the "clean" outright bust.

    As for the Long - Wistrom comparison: Now that you mention it, they ARE both white. I hadn't noticed. But from a football standpoint, they're very comparable in that they are not explosive edge rushers. They are effort guys that get to the QB with motor. In my opinion, that makes them complimentary players. Todd McShay also feels that is the hole in Long's game (consistent edge rushing), and getting to the QB is our #1 defensive need. Wistrom was the beneficiary of having other teams gameplan for Little. I think Long is in for a similar type career, which means we're still searching for the heir to Little. Again, not saying that a Wistrom-type player is all bad, I just think we can do better with the #2 overall pick (in the person of VG).
    Last edited by todd1; -03-20-2008 at 07:13 PM.

  8. #23
    TekeRam's Avatar
    TekeRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Lexington, Kentucky, United States
    Age
    30
    Posts
    3,879
    Rep Power
    71

    Re: My Mock

    Long just had a pro day where he showed the whole league that he can play OLB in a 3-4. Considering that he would be in coverage as well as rushing around the edge as an OLB, I have to imagine that he has a bit more speed than everyone give him credit for. I know that's his rap, and I agree, he's not quite as fast as Gholston. But let's look at that, ok?

    First, a QB's not forty yards away, and he IS behind a wall of blockers. As I haven't seen Long's lifting numbers yet(I don't think he's lifted for scouts yet, actually) we can't "compare" strength, but the reports say Long is stronger. We'll give it a push as Gholston tied for best at the combine.

    For agility, point goes to Long, as his three cone was 7.02 vs Gholston's 7.12.

    For short acceleration, we turn to the 20 yard shuttle. Chris Long LED all defensive linemen with a 4.21, while Gholston came in with a 4.40. Point goes to Long.

    The one thing that Gholston wins is the forty yard dash. So, when he has to go all the way across the field, Gholston will win ever so slightly. As in one tenth of a second. Let's see how much that is. 40 yards is 120 feet which is 1440 inches. 1440 inches/4.67 = 308.35 inches/second for Gholston. Long did it in 4.75, so he travels an average of 303.15 inches/second. 5 INCHES per second faster. At the point Gholston hits 40 yards, Long will have travelled 1415.75 inches, which equates to 118 feet. So if for some reason, they need to cross the field, Long will be a whole two feet behind Gholston.

    So how much better is Gholston? Physically, they're about the same. Chris Long is already a master of his game and never quits. Like Peyton Manning, he endlessly watches film to try to get better(I was so excited to hear an expert use that reference after I had for a while!). He plays to not disappoint himself and his family. He fears failure above all else. You could confuse him with Ray Lewis in a huddle. I'm sure Gholston is a great leader too, but he was also shut out by a lot of sub par teams, and I haven't heard an explanation for that yet.

  9. #24
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,642
    Rep Power
    145

    Re: My Mock

    Quote Originally Posted by todd1 View Post
    As for the Long - Wistrom comparison: Now that you mention it, they ARE both white. I hadn't noticed. But from a football standpoint, they're very comparable in that they are not explosive edge rushers. They are effort guys that get to the QB with motor. In my opinion, that makes them complimentary players. Todd McShay also feels that is the hole in Long's game (consistent edge rushing), and getting to the QB is our #1 defensive need. Wistrom was the beneficiary of having other teams gameplan for Little. I think Long is in for a similar type career, which means we're still searching for the heir to Little. Again, not saying that a Wistrom-type player is all bad, I just think we can do better with the #2 overall pick (in the person of VG).
    I could not disagree more, todd. Long has shown a versatility that Wistrom has never shown. Wistrom was great, I'm a big fan. But he was purely a 4-3 End, much more like a Justin Smith than a Chris Long. Wistrom never had the mobility to play off the line; which Long has done.

    And hats off to Teke for displaying the very little difference between Gholston and Long physically.
    "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

  10. #25
    todd1 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    nebraska
    Age
    36
    Posts
    36
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: My Mock

    Teke,

    Great analysis. But did you happen to see Mayock break down film on Gholston? His first step is outstanding. Long may have had the better 20 yard split, but I know what I've seen on the film that they show of each player. No Way does Long get off the snap as quickly as Gholston. Again, if we go C. Long, I still think we're looking for an impact pass rusher in next year's draft.

    Bison,

    I guess we agree to disagree. I would not jump off a cliff if we draft Long, but I just think Gholston will be the better pro. Everyone likes to point to Gholston's lack of production in games other than Michigan & Wisconsin, but do you know how many sacks Long had prior to his senior year? A whopping 7 in 30 games played. Why does nobody ever mention his lack of production his first 3 years of college play? In comparison, Gholston had more sacks (22.5 in 28 collegiate games) in less time (Long career - 21 sacks in 43 games). A run-stuffing DE is not worth the #2 pick, IMO. And I don't think Long projects all that well to an OLB in a 3-4, either. Not as well as Gholston. I think Long will be a solid player, good competitor, great locker room guy. Gholston will be an IMPACT player and pass rusher that a defense can be built around.
    Last edited by todd1; -03-21-2008 at 01:52 PM.

  11. #26
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,642
    Rep Power
    145

    Re: My Mock

    Quote Originally Posted by todd
    Why does nobody ever mention his lack of production his first 3 years of college play?
    The exact same reason nobody mentions All-Pro Richard Seymour's lack of production........he was a 3-4 DE. It wasn't until Long's senior year that he saw time as a 4-3 DE.
    "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

  12. #27
    rams_fan81's Avatar
    rams_fan81 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    ohio
    Age
    22
    Posts
    520
    Rep Power
    9

    Re: My Mock

    Teke I don't think that there is anyway that Chris Long is stronger than Vernon Gholston and Long probably knows it which is why he hasn't lifted.

  13. #28
    Fortuninerhater's Avatar
    Fortuninerhater is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    L.A., Ca.
    Posts
    2,670
    Rep Power
    37

    Re: My Mock

    To me the bottom line difference between Long and Gholston is Chris is viewed as more solid and Vernon more dynamic. So basically it's whatever your preference is. For me, I like dynamic more than solid.

  14. #29
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,642
    Rep Power
    145

    Re: My Mock

    Quote Originally Posted by Fortuninerhater View Post
    To me the bottom line difference between Long and Gholston is Chris is viewed as more solid and Vernon more dynamic. So basically it's whatever your preference is. For me, I like dynamic more than solid.
    Now THAT is an interesting viewpoint; and a common one I would guess. I agree with the general perspective that solid describes Long where dynamic describes Gholston. But are those qualititative assignments indicative of performance or not? That's the true question. Oddly enough, their sack numbers are identical.

    So which one leads to a better professional......solid or dynamic?
    "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

  15. #30
    mde8352gorams's Avatar
    mde8352gorams is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Age
    62
    Posts
    1,755
    Rep Power
    22

    Re: My Mock

    Quote Originally Posted by todd1 View Post
    1. Vernon Gholston (DE - Ohio St.) - can not pass on this ridiculous athlete. I've seen him compared to Merriman and Adalius Thomas. I'll take it. Also fills HUGE need.
    2. Reggie Smith (SS/CB - Oklahoma) - excellent versatility. Can help out at CB if Fakhir decides to burn a few. Also can eventually replace Chavous at SS.
    3. Will Franklin (WR - Mizzou) - speed merchant on the outside can fill the need for a deep threat. Admittedly a bit of a homer pick on my part, but he will go in this range.
    4. Jeremy Zuttah (OL - Rutgers) - again, Versatility! Can play all the OL spots. I've heard he may be an excellent Center prospect as well.
    5. Kevin O'Connell (QB San Diego St.) - intriguing developmental QB prospect. We've had some luck sith SDSU products, too.
    6. Gary Guyton (OLB - Georgia Tech) - LB depth with solid measurables.
    7. Tommy Blake (DE - TCU) - Excellent talent with serious off-field issues. But at round 7, why not?

    I realize my draft takes a huge leap of faith with our o-line - hoping Pace can stay healthy, Barron finally gets it, etc. But we have so many holes, there is no way we can address them all in one draft.

    Alternatives -

    I was torn on Smith and James Hardy (WR - Indiana) at the top of the second round. I really like Hardy, he ran excellent times at the Combine at 6'6" and seems to fit Linehan's mold of receivers. I see him as a Plax Burress type. Not sure if Saunders would like the big WR, though.

    If we were to go with Hardy in Round 2, it would alter the following picks. Maybe take Carl Nicks (OT - Neb) at the top of round 3 and hope Zbikowski (S- ND) falls to top of round 4.

    Thoughts??
    I like your picks of Gholston and especially William Franklin at WR. Franklin has caught my attention because I see him as a round 3-4 type pick where I feel we'll be able to address the WR position. He is also one of the few excellent route runners in this draft. One web site was downgrading all the WR hype in this draft cause the guys are not as polished as they should be at the position. A lot of them are not good route runners or they won't go over the middle. I have also been reading that James Hardy has some off-field issues that may make him less desireable, although he's an incredible talent.

    We may need to address the OL line sooner than round 4 and I don't think Nicks will last past round 2.

    Gholston is starting to get the #1 DE rating above Chris Long, so this talk about "too high to pick at #2" is baloney!

    Go Rams!:r

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. 3 Round Fantasy Mock Draft [NFL.com]
    By evil disco man in forum FANTASY
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: -11-27-2007, 10:18 PM
  2. Return of the MOCK GAMBLING Competition for 07/08
    By JackieSlater in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: -09-09-2007, 12:13 PM
  3. Week 10 Mock Gambling - Richbert88 takes the lead!
    By JackieSlater in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: -11-12-2006, 02:07 PM
  4. Week 9 Mock Gambling - lead changes again!
    By JackieSlater in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: -11-05-2006, 02:07 PM
  5. Week 8 Mock Gambling- Major changes
    By JackieSlater in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: -10-29-2006, 02:09 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
  •