Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 46
  1. #16
    39thebeast's Avatar
    39thebeast is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    conecticut
    Posts
    2,740
    Rep Power
    38

    Re: Ouch....Pat Kirwan's 3.0 mock

    I like Jake Long/ Lawrence Jackson the most. Heres why: you are addressing your 2 biggest needs, keeping Carriker at his best position, getting your future LT, instantly improving the offense of an offensive team, and your getting a great run stopper and pass rusher to play opposite Little in Jackson


  2. #17
    Mooselini Guest

    Re: Ouch....Pat Kirwan's 3.0 mock

    Quote Originally Posted by 39thebeast View Post
    I like Jake Long/ Lawrence Jackson the most. Heres why: you are addressing your 2 biggest needs, keeping Carriker at his best position, getting your future LT, instantly improving the offense of an offensive team, and your getting a great run stopper and pass rusher to play opposite Little in Jackson
    Jake Long and Jacob Bell can move around on the line I'm sure. It'll be nice to have that on our squad.

  3. #18
    Goldenfleece's Avatar
    Goldenfleece is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Age
    33
    Posts
    3,586
    Rep Power
    60

    Re: Ouch....Pat Kirwan's 3.0 mock

    Well, Dorsey and Carriker would be a fierce combo in the middle, but would we go for a defensive end later in the draft? I can't think the front office is that high on James Hall considering they cut him and waited almost a month to bring him back. From a need perspective, this doesn't make much sense as a draft strategy. If we were to take Dorsey, I think it would indicate a commitment to the idea of taking simply the best player available and building for long-term rather than immediate success.

    What this reminds me of is when we first signed Carriker, and there was talk of playing more of a left tackle/right tackle combination rather than nose tackle/under tackle. With two talented pass-rushing tackles, we might switch up who is playing three technique throughout the game.

  4. #19
    harrydog's Avatar
    harrydog is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    429
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: Ouch....Pat Kirwan's 3.0 mock

    Quote Originally Posted by Rambos View Post
    What are we looking for? What do you think C. Long will get, if we got him? We have Little he was hurt last year and missed half the season.
    I don't know...I have this little voice in the back of my head telling me that C. Long might be better than Jackson. But Jackson certainly should be an upgrade to what we have now. How likely is it that he'll be there when we pick in the 2nd?

  5. #20
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    32
    Posts
    19,875
    Rep Power
    154

    Re: Ouch....Pat Kirwan's 3.0 mock

    Quote Originally Posted by harrydog View Post
    How likely is it that he'll be there when we pick in the 2nd?
    At this point, very. I'd be pretty surprised if he wasn't there, though he could go to Jacksonville late in the first I guess.

  6. #21
    Fortuninerhater's Avatar
    Fortuninerhater is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    L.A., Ca.
    Posts
    2,712
    Rep Power
    38

    Re: Ouch....Pat Kirwan's 3.0 mock

    Quote Originally Posted by HUbison View Post
    From his latest mock, Pat Kirwan has the following:

    1. C. Long
    2. Dorsey
    3. Ryan
    4. Gholston
    5. J. Long

    What caught my eye was this statement from Kirwan's scouting of Gholston & Chris Long.... I'm going to assume those 10 plays didn't show up on the "Godlike" video.

    See, this is the stuff that scares me about Gholston. Are we getting the one that looked great ('07 Michigan, '07 Wisconsin, '06 North Ill.) or the one that didn't show up ('06 MSU, '06 Michigan, '07 Wash., '07 PSU, '07 Purdue)?

    It's just concerning that there appears to be a difference between his play against winning teams (per game: 3.62 tackles, 1.23 tfl, 1.04 sacks) and against non-winning teams (per game: 3.00 tackles, 1.11 tfl, 0.69 sacks). Not a huge difference, but enough that the question must be (and has been) asked.

    As well, I'm still concerned that 26% of his career tackles-for-loss and 31% of his career sacks came in two games ('07 Wis., '07 UM)! Away from those two games, he played 24 games (just counting his two years as a starter) with 22.5 tfls and 15.5 sacks. Impressive, but not #2 kind of production.

    If the Jim Thomas report is to be accepted, my questions are irrelvant as we won't be drafting VG. However, if the report is smoke.............just a little concerned, that's all.

    I'm sure Vernon could explain everything in those 10 plays and the other points Mr. Kirwan tried to make if he felt he needed to. There....now you can put your concerns to rest.

    My question to you is, is there something wrong with a player preserving his energy as much as possible for plays he actually has a chance to affect? Not saying this is the case here, but it is certainly within the relm of possibility, wouldn't you say?

    If you've been in the huddle, surely you know what I'm talking about.

    So what Mr. Kirwan, he didn't pass anybody in pursuit, what I would be concerned about is if everybody passed him up.

    Besides that, how do we know Mr. Kirwan's opinion isn't biased? I say that because I didn't notice any quotes from Vernon's coach. Though I did notice a convenient one from Chris's.

    How do we know what 10 plays he looked at and if he had any ulterior motive when he looked at them? All this proves to me is that he looked at the wrong plays.

    If I had the time and interest, I could find 10 plays on every defensive player that's ever strapped it up, similar to this. So what does the fact that in these 10 plays he never saw Gholston pass any teammates say? Not a whole lot. Just depends on how you choose to see it.

    I see it as the norm, since I believe you could find 10 similar plays on everyone who's ever played defensive end.

    His production has been solid if not spectacular. That in itself is impressive for someone with limited experience playing football and doesn't have a Hall of Fame dad.

    I have stated that Chris is more well rounded at this point and that's attributed to having a Hall of Fame dad every day of his life.

    In two years (barring injury), I believe Howie's influence will be erased, and Vernons ability will surpass Chris's. No doubt, Chris will be an excellent player for a number of years, but IMO, he won't be no Gholston.

  7. #22
    ENN107 Guest

    Re: Ouch....Pat Kirwan's 3.0 mock

    Pat Kirwan is a misguided individual. Need proof? He is still rocking an 80's mustache

  8. #23
    Rambos's Avatar
    Rambos is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Cali
    Age
    50
    Posts
    9,574
    Rep Power
    75

    Re: Ouch....Pat Kirwan's 3.0 mock

    My question to you is, is there something wrong with a player preserving his energy as much as possible for plays he actually has a chance to affect?
    Yes! I was watching the NFLN and they had the Eagles top ten plays of the year. A WR ran down field and ended up recovering two fumbles for TD. That player was Curtis, never give up on a play.
    Last edited by Rambos; -04-10-2008 at 11:41 AM.

  9. #24
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    32
    Posts
    19,875
    Rep Power
    154

    Re: Ouch....Pat Kirwan's 3.0 mock

    Quote Originally Posted by ENN107 View Post
    Pat Kirwan is a misguided individual. Need proof? He is still rocking an 80's mustache
    You say that as if it's a bad thing.

  10. #25
    ram1906's Avatar
    ram1906 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    ca
    Posts
    134
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: Ouch....Pat Kirwan's 3.0 mock

    Outstanding points Nick!!.... I am truly on the VG bandwagon. His speed and strength pose a threat before he even steps on the field. We can give microanalysis to any collegiate coming out...." what are his strengths and weaknesses" But here are the facts...he is the strongest fastest player in the draft at the position we have the biggest need (see 2.5 sacks alll year!)...the choice seems clear

  11. #26
    harrydog's Avatar
    harrydog is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    429
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: Ouch....Pat Kirwan's 3.0 mock

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    At this point, very. I'd be pretty surprised if he wasn't there, though he could go to Jacksonville late in the first I guess.
    So Nick, at this point, which do you think would serve us best:
    1) Gholston and then WR/OT in the 2nd and 3rd rounds.
    2) J. Long and Jackson and then a WR in the 3rd

  12. #27
    Goldenfleece's Avatar
    Goldenfleece is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Age
    33
    Posts
    3,586
    Rep Power
    60

    Re: Ouch....Pat Kirwan's 3.0 mock

    Quote Originally Posted by Fortuninerhater View Post
    In two years (barring injury), I believe Howie's influence will be erased, and Vernons ability will surpass Chris's. No doubt, Chris will be an excellent player for a number of years, but IMO, he won't be no Gholston.
    I take it you don't attribute much of Long's success to his father then? I mean I'm sure Gholston's Ohio State coaches were teaching him a lot of the same things. Old habits die hard, and some players still rely too much on their physical gifts in the pros, too. I'd argue that you can't teach instincts, and while you can teach ways to improve awareness, it varies greatly from to player to player as to who picks things up. If a guy wasn't technically sound in college, I think it's too much to assume that with proper coaching, he will become technically sound as a pro. Yes, that's what you hope, but obviously it doesn't always work out. And how many NFL defensive ends do you see blocking kicks and regularly deflecting passes? I can't remember the last time I saw Leonard Little bat down a pass.

  13. #28
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    32
    Posts
    19,875
    Rep Power
    154

    Re: Ouch....Pat Kirwan's 3.0 mock

    Quote Originally Posted by harrydog View Post
    So Nick, at this point, which do you think would serve us best:
    1) Gholston and then WR/OT in the 2nd and 3rd rounds.
    2) J. Long and Jackson and then a WR in the 3rd
    Either I think would be pretty solid strategies, though I think Jake Long represents slightly better value at the top of the first round.

  14. #29
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,709
    Rep Power
    145

    Re: Ouch....Pat Kirwan's 3.0 mock

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick
    As for you, Monsieur Bison...
    Yes, Senor Nick; what can I do for you?
    1) What would you define as #2 kind of production?
    I define it as better than 0.94 tfl per game, 0.64 sacks per game, and 3.17 tackles from a one trick DE. But if Chris Long is gone (btw, I can't believe that C. Long vs. Gholston is even a viable debate), then take him. I even voted as such in the recent poll. Maybe he'll step it up on Sundays.
    2) Is Giants DE Osi Umenyiora any less of a pass rush threat or player because eight of his 13 sacks last year came in two games? Nine of Patrick Kerney's 14.5 sacks came in three games, and 12.5 of Jared Allen's 15.5 sacks came in six games. What about them?
    That's a little concerning as well in some cases. Take Umenyiora for example. Huge game against Philly, big sack in the SB, but just solid other than that. For me, I'd rather have the guy on the other end who has been much more consistent throughout his career. OU got shut out from the backfield in 9 games this year. So the question becomes, which is more indicative of the player: Osi's 2 big games or his 14 not-big games? Kerney's big 3 or his not-big 13? Allen's big 6 or his not-big 10? Little's big 5 or his not-big 11? Gholston's big 2 or his not-big 32?

    I guess we'll find out soon.
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick
    there's no denying he's more of a question mark
    And once again, that's all I'm saying.

    My issue is not with Gholston. My issue is with the idea that he WILL BE a stud. What would make someone say that? Becuase he is strong? Because he's fairly quick for a DE/OLB? Because he has a highlight reel calling him "Godlike"?

    There is this false notion floating through the minds of some that Gholston being the greater risk (than Long) means he is also the greater reward. That's just silly. Every bit as silly as the notion that Long has somehow peaked as a 22-year-old college senior. Long has outperformed Gholston on the field. Everything else is just educated guesses & more prevalent, uneducated guesses.

    Sometimes, the greater risk is just that.....the greater risk. But if Long is gone, take Gholston. There's no doubt in my mind he is the best choice at DE left on the board.
    "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
    harrydog's Avatar
    harrydog is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    429
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: Ouch....Pat Kirwan's 3.0 mock

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    Either I think would be pretty solid strategies, though I think Jake Long represents slightly better value at the top of the first round.
    As much as I want us to go defense in the 1st round, I'm beginning to come around to the idea of taking J. Long if C. Long is gone. I wouldn't be totally bummed out.
    I'd still love to see a trade with KC, even if it wasn't for equal value according to the chart (just an additional 2nd rounder), but the only problem is that there's a definite possibility that both Gholston and Dorsey would be gone by #5 and in that case I wouldn't want to do it.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 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
  •