My mock

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

My mock

Post by HalCHorn on Sun Apr 26, 2015 12:48 pm

Put it up for all to see, both sites:

I will project one trade, the Eagles taking Dion Jordan off our hands for the 156th pick, giving us yet another 5th rounder.

1st (14) Landon Collins, S, Alabama: I think the top 3 WR's will be gone, and probably Waynes too. Collins will be the best defensive player on the board.

2nd (47) A. J. Cann, OG, South Carolina: A safe pick at a big need; would start right away

4th (114) Steven Nelson, CB, Oregon St.: This position will have to be addressed. Another safe pick for the spot.

5th (149) David Cobb, RB, Minnesota: Another position that seems certain to be addressed. Skills would compliment Miller's.

5th (150) Titus Davis, WR, Central Michigan: Hope they address this position earlier, myself. Davis could push for time, though he isn't the go-to guy we really need.

5th (156) Ben Heeney, MLB, Kansas: He will slide due to questions about size and athleticism

6th (191) John Crockett, RB, North Dakota St. If WR Justin Hardy from East Carolina is still here, I'd love to see this flier go his way.

HalCHorn

Posts : 517
Join date : 2015-04-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: My mock

Post by Birdmond on Sun Apr 26, 2015 2:02 pm

I've heard arguments that Collins can play FS and I've heard some that say he can't. Just from what I've read I do not believe he's on Miami's radar. Love the Cobb pick.

Birdmond

Posts : 1001
Join date : 2015-04-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: My mock

Post by CarsonChris on Sun Apr 26, 2015 2:43 pm

I think Miami stays away from the line until the later rounds. Miami needs to put points on the field and we haven't addressed scoring in a long while. If we do go other than WR or RB, it will be for ILB in the first two rounds. Greg Jennings was the contingency plan to fill out the receiver corp if they can't draft a big bodied receiver in rounds 1-2.

CarsonChris

Posts : 630
Join date : 2015-04-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: My mock

Post by JMP on Mon Apr 27, 2015 9:46 am

Probably the most interesting mock I've seen so far.

I know people have seemingly soured on Collins recently, but I think he's a helluva player. I'm not too worried about free safety vs. strong safety in this defensive scheme, and I think Collins has the combination of skill, attitude and toughness this team needs.

I hate the idea of going OL in the first 3 rounds, but Cann is a good prospect and fits the bill for what we need.

I like Cobb a lot.

Heeney looks like a STs-only player to me, which is exactly what the Phins tend to draft year after year at LB. I'm hoping they address the position early this time, with a legit prospect.

You're obviously going with a lot of safe picks here. I think that is exactly how Hickey operates. But - despite what the team says publicly, I think Tannenbaum has the power here and will want to make a big splash ion round one. I'd look for a trade up, involving 2016 picks, targeting either Cooper or Gurley.

JMP
Admin

Posts : 3819
Join date : 2015-04-07
Age : 45

View user profile http://dolfancave.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: My mock

Post by HalCHorn on Tue Apr 28, 2015 11:11 pm

Yeah, this was my "what I think they'll do" mock, not what I would do.

I'd probably take one of the top two RB's at 14.

If we do trade down, Jaelen Strong would be fine with me too.

HalCHorn

Posts : 517
Join date : 2015-04-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: My mock

Post by white1 on Wed Apr 29, 2015 7:53 am

If I recall correctly, Hickey chose at least one really good linebacker in Tampa. I may have even heard it's one of his strengths, evaluating linebackers?

If so, he can really make some hay for us.

If McCain and Tripp develop, he could really solidify his credentials in this area.


white1

Posts : 1391
Join date : 2015-04-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: My mock

Post by JMP on Wed Apr 29, 2015 9:04 am

McCain doesn't resemble a 4-3 LB at all to me. I think he should either be a 3-4 OLB or a 4-3 DE. But, I guess we'll find out what he can do...so far, he's really shown nothing.

Tripp to me looks like a marginal STs player at best. I don't see him as a real LB at all...weak, can't fight through traffic, not a great tackler. The best thing I can say about him is he plays with a lot of energy. I think he's Austin Spitler 2.0...but not as good.

It would be great if players like this can develop, but honestly I don't see much reason for hope.

JMP
Admin

Posts : 3819
Join date : 2015-04-07
Age : 45

View user profile http://dolfancave.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: My mock

Post by mercury22nathan on Wed Apr 29, 2015 9:58 am

JMP wrote:McCain doesn't resemble a 4-3 LB at all to me.  I think he should either be a 3-4 OLB or a 4-3 DE.

you might be onto something there...

Barry Jackson wrote:There's also Chris McCain, who said he split his practice snaps between defensive end and linebacker last season.

http://miamiherald.typepad.com/sports-buzz/2015/04/evaluators-analyze-um-draft-prospects-dolphins-draft-nuggets-whiteside-record-marlins.html

Barry Jackson wrote:So Terence Fede, who defensive coordinator Kevin Coyle loves, becomes Miami's No. 4 defensive end for now, behind Cameron Wake, Olivier Vernon and Derrick Shelby. The Dolphins will add more defensive end help during and/or after the draft. Chris McCain also can play defensive end.

http://miamiherald.typepad.com/sports-buzz/2015/04/what-should-dolphins-do-in-first-round-ten-analysts-weigh-in-dolphins-canes-marlins-chatter.html

mercury22nathan

Posts : 550
Join date : 2015-04-13

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: My mock

Post by white1 on Wed Apr 29, 2015 11:01 am

Is it me or does the D line start to look pretty well stocked if we consider McCain an end?

Don't we have all these on the roster right now?

Suh
Mitchell
AJ Francis
Anthony Johnson
Wake
Vernon
Shelby
Fede
(?)McCain?

Doesn't adding even one more player create a numbers game where we are either going to have to cut a rookie, or a promising 2 or 3 year player going into the season? Instead of wasting a draft pick, why not try and bring in a couple undrafted FAs and let them compete in camp?

white1

Posts : 1391
Join date : 2015-04-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: My mock

Post by JMP on Wed Apr 29, 2015 11:38 am

white1 wrote:Is it me or does the D line start to look pretty well stocked if we consider McCain an end?

Don't we have all these on the roster right now?

Suh
Mitchell
AJ Francis
Anthony Johnson
Wake
Vernon
Shelby
Fede
(?)McCain?

Doesn't adding even one more player create a numbers game where we are either going to have to cut a rookie, or a promising 2 or 3 year player going into the season? Instead of wasting a draft pick, why not try and bring in a couple undrafted FAs and let them compete in camp?

Well, we certainly have a lot of bodies on the DL, but how many are actually good? I don't know. The only proven players at DE are Wake and Vernon, and both could be gone in 2016. Shelby has been pretty good as a role player, but how would he play in a more expanded role..and I think he is a free agent in 2016 as well. Beyond that, Fede and McCain are raw and unproven.

At DT, Suh and Mitchell are experienced starters and we know what we're getting. But behind them, we have a bunch of question marks. Francis and Johnson are very raw and unproven.

I'd have absolutely no problem using draft picks at DE or DT, and I really don't care if it means we lose a guy like, say, Anthony Johnson. If we lose a young player, all it means is we've replaced him with someone better - that's a good thing.

Personally, I'm scared when I look at the DL depth, particularly DE. If everyone stays healthy we should be fine, but if any starters get hurt we could be in trouble. Then fast forward to next season, with three FA defensive ends and potentially cap issues, things could get ugly fast. Seems like we're putting an awful lot of faith in late round picks and undrafted FAs.

JMP
Admin

Posts : 3819
Join date : 2015-04-07
Age : 45

View user profile http://dolfancave.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: My mock

Post by white1 on Wed Apr 29, 2015 12:16 pm

I agree with your analysis, but I still put the defensive line down as a "WANT" vs a "NEED".

Why? Because it has to be relative to other position groups on the team.

Let's take the defensive backfield as one example. Two spots are locked in with proven, well playing veterans: Jones and Grimes. Are we really considering Delmas the other starter at Safety, coming off a major injury and an injury-riddled career? Who is starting opposite Grimes? Omar actually listed Taylor as a projected starter on the other side at CB and I called him on it, my response was "You listed Taylor as a starter with a straight face?"

We've also got Zach Bowman bouncing around, and prospects like Michael Thomas, so there is some depth but consider this. Here's a unit that will regularly need to field 5 guys to defend multiple receiver sets, and I'm struggling to list four proven starters. Let alone the depth we will need to survive in-season injuries, which is almost sure to happen when you start guys with histories like Delmas.

Defensive back is a unit that's paper thin, and has so few answers to basic looming questions it's clear to me this is a huge need. So when I look at the defensive line, with a good mix already of proven starters, blue chip players, and quality prospects for depth, I can't imagine actually making the defensive line a priority over other positions on the team.

Like every team, we have limited resources to bring in new players each offseason. We have to triage which spots get more priority and focus based on who we already have on the roster. You raised FA next year, yes we will have to make some moves which may include resigning some of our own Free Agents. But that is a next year problem. Right now we have "TODAY" problems that must be addressed before we add more resources to an already deep unit. Again I'm speaking relatively.

white1

Posts : 1391
Join date : 2015-04-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: My mock

Post by white1 on Wed Apr 29, 2015 12:23 pm

I will go further with my train of thought and list WR as a "WANT" for us and not a "NEED". I'm sure this will not be a popular opinion.

Day one, we can field a four WR set with Stills - Landry - Jennings - Matthews. Four very nice weapons, each of whom has proven they can perform at an NFL level, with differing skill sets that complement each other. We have a couple more prospects on the roster for additional depth and development. I am confident we can go into this season with zero changes and our WR corps would still be one of the stronger units on the team.

Now, I have said in the past and I will say again - I like it when teams follow the Best Player Available approach. If DeVante Parker falls to us at #14 would I be upset if we took him? Hell no, that's a clear value and a great weapon for Tannehill. But do we need to reach for a guy if there is a run on receivers, or trade up for Cooper while sacrificing one or more picks? No, and I think we would be left with a huge unmet need elsewhere on the roster if we put too much focus on desperately drafting a receiver, and we spend too many resources to do so.

white1

Posts : 1391
Join date : 2015-04-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: My mock

Post by JMP on Wed Apr 29, 2015 12:29 pm

Well, DL may not be a need in 2015, but in 2016 it very well could be. Same thing with RB, where Lamar Miller is a due to become a free agent. "Next year" has to be considered today, or you'll find yourself in a hole very quickly.

We've got to move away from the practice of drafting for immediate needs. That's how you build a mediocre team, because you are passing on great players at positions that could be needs down the road. It's lilke drafting Ginn over Willis because we didn't "need" a LB at the time (and for the record, that's the exact argument I used to justify Ginn over Willis - and I was dead wrong).

And yes, the defensive backfield is a mess right now. But that doesn't mean we should draft a CB if a better player at DT is available, as an example. Take the better player - every time. That's what I'd do.

The problem is, you can look at this entire roster and see holes everywhere, both starters and depth. That makes it difficult to prioritize any one position. And that's why ultimately I think the goal should be simple: just bring in good players, regardless of position. This team lacks top-end talent everywhere, and that should be the priority. But again - it can't be just about today - we need to look ahead and project at positions that may become thin due to free agency sooner rather than later. Prepare for the future while building for the present...not an easy thing to do, but the top teams know how to accomplish it.


JMP
Admin

Posts : 3819
Join date : 2015-04-07
Age : 45

View user profile http://dolfancave.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: My mock

Post by JMP on Wed Apr 29, 2015 12:34 pm

white1 wrote:I will go further with my train of thought and list WR as a "WANT" for us and not a "NEED".  I'm sure this will not be a popular opinion.

Day one, we can field a four WR set with Stills - Landry - Jennings - Matthews.  Four very nice weapons, each of whom has proven they can perform at an NFL level, with differing skill sets that complement each other.  We have a couple more prospects on the roster for additional depth and development.  I am confident we can go into this season with zero changes and our WR corps would still be one of the stronger units on the team.

Now, I have said in the past and I will say again - I like it when teams follow the Best Player Available approach.  If DeVante Parker falls to us at #14 would I be upset if we took him? Hell no, that's a clear value and a great weapon for Tannehill.  But do we need to reach for a guy if there is a run on receivers, or trade up for Cooper while sacrificing one or more picks? No, and I think we would be left with a huge unmet need elsewhere on the roster if we put too much focus on desperately drafting a receiver, and we spend too many resources to do so.

In a league where the passing game is king and big plays win games, I would classify WR as a huge need for the Phins. We have a small WR corps that features a bunch of possession receivers and just one player that has shown any real big-play ability (Stills). Jennings is on his last legs, Landry averaged under 10 yards a catch as a rookie, Stills is still developing and is now playing in a new offense with a lesser QB, and Matthews has shown very little. This is by far the worst WR corps in the division, and an influx of talent is desperately needed. If WR, as it stands now, is considered a strength of the team, we won't win 8 games IMO.

JMP
Admin

Posts : 3819
Join date : 2015-04-07
Age : 45

View user profile http://dolfancave.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: My mock

Post by white1 on Wed Apr 29, 2015 12:34 pm

True, and you probably wrote your post before I followed on with my "BPA" philosophy, which you just captured in this one.

So I will see, if the top 3 WRs are off the board, and so is Gurley, and we have Danny Shelton DT as our Best Player Available - then yes I agree we should take him.

However, going in I think the position is a "want" and not a "need", and if it's Gurley or Parker vs Shelton and they are all ranked equally on our board we go with Gurley or Parker.

white1

Posts : 1391
Join date : 2015-04-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: My mock

Post by white1 on Wed Apr 29, 2015 12:37 pm

For the record, I do not want to see us "REACH" for Trae Waynes. From what I've read, he lacks breaking speed on the ball, will be an average starter (at best).

white1

Posts : 1391
Join date : 2015-04-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: My mock

Post by JMP on Wed Apr 29, 2015 1:55 pm

white1 wrote:So I will see, if the top 3 WRs are off the board, and so is Gurley, and we have Danny Shelton DT as our Best Player Available - then yes I agree we should take him.

Which brings up an interesting point...what the hell do the Phins do if all those guys (including Shelton) are gone at 14 - which could very well happen. Waynes could be gone too. That's when BPA gets tricky, because all the top guys are gone. Birdmond suggested Melvin Gordon in that sitaution, and I'd be fine with that. Eric Kendricks is also a possibility too. But, I just think that this is a very top-heavy draft, and things start to get ugly after the first 12 or so players. I don't even know how much weight you can put on "best" player available at that point, because the pickings are sort of slim.

white1 wrote:
However, going in I think the position is a "want" and not a "need", and if it's Gurley or Parker vs Shelton and they are all ranked equally on our board we go with Gurley or Parker.

Agreed. Although I'd have Gurley ranked WAY above Parker.

JMP
Admin

Posts : 3819
Join date : 2015-04-07
Age : 45

View user profile http://dolfancave.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: My mock

Post by rightchea on Wed Apr 29, 2015 3:09 pm

I think that I would switch up the 4th and one of the 5th round picks. There will be some skilled contributors at WR in the 4th round. Getting a WR at 5th might be a bigger risk that Philbin is not ready for.

rightchea

Posts : 1307
Join date : 2015-04-28
Age : 32

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: My mock

Post by Birdmond on Wed Apr 29, 2015 4:05 pm

I've been really wanting that 3rd round pick back today for some reason. I think I'm officially on the trade down band wagon. Trading down and getting Gordon is now my dream scenario.

Birdmond

Posts : 1001
Join date : 2015-04-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: My mock

Post by DolFan 316 on Wed Apr 29, 2015 7:43 pm

You guys are all forgetting one thing: at this moment in our time, Dallas Thomas is currently listed as a starting guard.

Roll that one around in your heads for a minute or three.

NO supposed need on this team should trump THAT one.

DolFan 316

Posts : 2438
Join date : 2015-04-07
Age : 44

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: My mock

Post by Umix10 on Wed Apr 29, 2015 10:40 pm

316 are you forgetting that we have a need for a non queasy coach?

Umix10

Posts : 264
Join date : 2015-04-08
Location : Waianae, Hawaii

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: My mock

Post by Birdmond on Thu Apr 30, 2015 6:49 am

Well , cough, cough, Dallas Thomas was really only atrocious at tackle. He was only really bad at guard. Fair is fair.

Birdmond

Posts : 1001
Join date : 2015-04-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: My mock

Post by DolFan 316 on Thu Apr 30, 2015 7:47 am

Umix10 wrote:316 are you forgetting that we have a need for a non queasy coach?

Well, if you want to get all technical about it we really need a new owner, scouting department, medical staff... Laughing

DolFan 316

Posts : 2438
Join date : 2015-04-07
Age : 44

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: My mock

Post by JMP on Thu Apr 30, 2015 9:25 am

Birdmond wrote:Well , cough, cough, Dallas Thomas was really only atrocious at tackle.  He was only really bad at guard.  Fair is fair.  

Fair enough! LOL

But regardless of how we view Dallas Thomas, it seems like the coaches are in love with the guy and I think he'll get every chance to earn a starting job. Sadly, even if he sucks the coaches may start him because he apparently can do no wrong in their eyes. Evil or Very Mad Given the scrubs we added in free agency, and the coaches' love of Thomas, we may not draft OL at all...sounds crazy, but it wouldn't surprise me.

JMP
Admin

Posts : 3819
Join date : 2015-04-07
Age : 45

View user profile http://dolfancave.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: My mock

Post by DolFan 316 on Thu Apr 30, 2015 9:30 am

Well, La'el Collins is no longer a possibility. Or shouldn't be, anyway. So who else is left that won't suck at least as much as Thomas? I haven't heard anything about non-first round O-linemen and this team hasn't proved it can draft any worth a damn anyway.

DolFan 316

Posts : 2438
Join date : 2015-04-07
Age : 44

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: My mock

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum