One of my last mocks (4.18.06 |1 Trade| Comments please)

I am going to make only 3 more after this. I have fun making them but will hold off on them.

First of all to set it up the first 10 picks look something like this:

1 HOU Reggie Bush RB USC
2 NO D'Brickashaw Ferguson OT Virginia
3 TEN Matt Leinart QB USC
4 NYJ Vince Young QB Texas
5 GB Mario Williams DE NC State
6 SF AJ Hawk LB Ohio State
7 OAK Brodrick Bunkley DT Florida State
8 BUF Winston Justice OT USC
9 DET Vernon Davis TE Maryland
10 ARZ Michael Huff DB Texas

Leaving us with the possibility of grabbing Cutler or trading down to someone.

And lets get it started.

NFL Commish announces : "The Rams have traded the 11th Overall pick of the 2006 NFL Draft to the Minnesota Vikings for the 17th Overall Pick and 83rd Overall pick of the NFL Draft."

NFL Commish announces : "With the 11th Overall Pick in the 2006 NFL Draft the Minnesota Vikings select Jay Cutler QB of Vanderbilt."

Vikings get there way and we get Vikes first and 3rd Round picks.

Now the Rams Draft.

Round 1: Chad Greenway LB, Iowa
http://media.scout.com/Media/Image/25/259513.jpg

Round 2: Marcedes Lewis TE, UCLA
http://www.draftdaddy.com/images/pla...cedesLewis.jpg

Round 3: Brian Calhoun RB, Wisconsin
http://media.scout.com/Media/Image/28/282944.jpg

Round 3: Babatunde Oshinowo DT, Stanford
http://graphics.fansonly.com/photos/..._springfbA.jpg

Round 4: Will Allen OG, Texas
http://www.mackbrown-texasfootball.c...en_will_01.jpg

Round 5: Drew Olson QB, UCLA
http://media.theinsiders.com/Media/C...olsonfront.JPG

Round 6: Nate Salley S, Ohio State
http://media.theinsiders.com/Media/C...runsinTDAP.JPG

Round 7: Donovan Raiola C, Wisconsin
http://www.noramsports.com/news/BigT...o/DRaiola1.jpg

Round 7: Moe Thompson DE, Grambling State
http://moethompson.com/11162003/foto01.jpg

Round 7: Danny Baugher P, Arizona
http://graphics.fansonly.com/photos/...-baugher04.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RamsFan16

First of all to set it up the first 10 picks look something like this:

1 HOU Reggie Bush RB USC
2 NO D'Brickashaw Ferguson OT Virginia
3 TEN Matt Leinart QB USC
4 NYJ Mario Williams DE North Carolina State
5 GB A.J. Hawk OLB Ohio State
6 SF Vernon Davis TE Maryland
7 OAK Brodrick Bunkley DT Florida State
8 BUF Winston Justice OT USC
9 DET Halotia Ngata DT Oregon
10 ARZ Vince Young QB Texas

Leaving us with the possibility of grabbing Cutler or trading down to someone.

---

Um, why wouldn't we just stay put and draft Michael Huff?

As for the mock, it looks fairly good. I don't think we need to spend two of our first six picks on RB and QB though. Would like to see a DB in there somewhere before the sixth.

yeah why wouldn't you take huff

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nick

Um, why wouldn't we just stay put and draft Michael Huff?

As for the mock, it looks fairly good. I don't think we need to spend two of our first six picks on RB and QB though. Would like to see a DB in there somewhere before the sixth.

---

I forgot to edit it last night my bad. I just did. Thats the way the original mock draft was supposed to go.

Question for all the mock drafts that have been posted by everyone:

Is it kind of like having 15 fantasy teams? So you can say, "Hey my mock draft had him going to the Browns in the 6th round?"

I've only done two, but my main reason for doing them is to generate discussion. It's just a way of envisioning scenarios that could arise and finding out others' opinions on specific players or team needs. You can ask yourself, "okay if we traded up for Hawk, how well could we fill our other needs?" or "well, what if we traded down instead?" and then test it out in a hypothetical situation. I also notice little details about the draft while putting it together, like there are a bunch of DTs graded third round and hardly any first day MLBs. It kind of gives you a sense of what the team could feasibly accomplish on draft day. Plus, the process of making it helps me learn a little bit about the new class of rookies.

I understand that but geez....even Foxsports.com has something like 15 mock drafts. To me, that's just overkill.

Well, as they say, that's the reason why there is a mechanism like a remote control. If you don't want to watch or read something, change the channel or the go to another web site.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by txramsfan

Question for all the mock drafts that have been posted by everyone:

Is it kind of like having 15 fantasy teams? So you can say, "Hey my mock draft had him going to the Browns in the 6th round?"

---

No. It's simply to examine different situations that could present themselves on draft day, and the reason more than one is made is because player stock rises and falls in the months prior to the draft, not to mention how free agency shakes up team needs.

this will go down as the year of the mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock Draft.......................................................

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RamDez

this will go down as the year of the mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock mock Draft.......................................................

---

Damn, there goes another monitor.

LOL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nick

No. It's simply to examine different situations that could present themselves on draft day, and the reason more than one is made is because player stock rises and falls in the months prior to the draft, not to mention how free agency shakes up team needs.

---

And Nick, that's what I don't get. How can someone's stock rise and fall 2 months after the combine and 3 months after the season? You can take your stopwatches, and your bench measurements, and all that stuff and throw it out the window. Close the blinds, break out the film, and watch how he plays. That's where a player should rise and fall, not because he ran a 4.3 40 when someone else ran a 4.4.

Beware of being too scientific. You could end up with a draft full of Mandarich's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RamsFan16

I am going to make only 3 more after this.

---

ONLY 3 more? :tongue:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by txramsfan

Close the blinds, break out the film, and watch how he plays.

---

Of course, that's not exactly full proof either. There are tons of guys who were great college players that didn't amount to much in the pros.

After the college season finishes, there are tons of reasons why a player's stock can rise and fall. You've got the East/West Shrine Game, the Senior Bowl which includes a week of practice leading up to it for select coaches to get a feel of how well a guy can be taught, then you have the Scouting Combine, and then you have each school's pro day and individual pre-draft visits with teams. Keep in mind for some players who didn't get the chance to completely show off their skills in college football (best examples being Cromartie and Allen because of injuries), they need these workouts to improve their stock and show they're top players who have recovered from injury.

I dunno, man. Do you honestly believe that each organization would spend thousands of dollars administering tests to these players if they could find out all they needed to know based on game film alone? I agree that what a player did on the field in college is one of the biggest factors that should be used when evaluating, but I think it would be a huge mistake to just ignore measurables and how those measurables effect the pro potential of a guy.

I'm really just playing devils advocate here. I'm sure a hybrid of game film and combine results are in order to pick a player. However, what would you weigh more? The way a player plays in a game or his scientific numbers?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by txramsfan

I'm really just playing devils advocate here. I'm sure a hybrid of game film and combine results are in order to pick a player. However, what would you weigh more? The way a player plays in a game or his scientific numbers?

---

Definitely what he does on the field. But I'm sure after watching game tape, coaches have questions about aspects of a guy's game, and that's where some of the measurables come in.

Let's say I see a guy like Michael Huff primarily playing safety in college, but I think he might be able to play cornerback at the next level. He runs a 3.96 short shuttle and a 6.68 three cone drill at his pro day, and those are cornerback-like numbers that show good change of direction ability and support the idea of Huff being able to transition to cornerback.