DCK Mock Draft
#76
Posted 18 January 2013 - 02:17 PM
#77
Posted 18 January 2013 - 02:59 PM
what dont you guys like about a guy who has produced with inconsistent QB play for 3 years in a row?on top of being the only true threat at WR so teams rolled coverages and game planned around stopping him.
I don't think he's fast enough. I'd take Patterson before him if I was taking a WR.
#78
Posted 18 January 2013 - 03:10 PM
im a fan of CP as well, but speed is not everything when determing how good a WR is.bet he still runs a 4.4 at the combine.I don't think he's fast enough. I'd take Patterson before him if I was taking a WR.
#79
Posted 18 January 2013 - 03:10 PM
because you dont want a WR in the 1st.Not a fan of this draft.
#80
Posted 19 January 2013 - 10:20 AM
I don't think he's fast enough. I'd take Patterson before him if I was taking a WR.
There's a lot of great "not fast" wrs in this league. No GM other than Al Davis base everything on speed.
I'm having a hard time thinking Patterson will be drafted ahead of Keenan. Keenan is the better overall WR at the moment.
#81
Posted 19 January 2013 - 10:21 AM
Not a fan of this draft.
Ill cut my throat the day Lafell become a no.1 WR in this league, for any 32 teams.
#82
Posted 19 January 2013 - 03:25 PM
There's a lot of great "not fast" wrs in this league. No GM other than Al Davis base everything on speed.
I'm having a hard time thinking Patterson will be drafted ahead of Keenan. Keenan is the better overall WR at the moment.
I don't care if he's better at this time. Why wouldn't you want the guy who is going to be better in the long run? I realize there are good WR's that don't have top end speed, I just wouldn't want to take one of those guys in the first round.
#83
Posted 20 January 2013 - 10:58 AM
I don't care if he's better at this time. Why wouldn't you want the guy who is going to be better in the long run? I realize there are good WR's that don't have top end speed, I just wouldn't want to take one of those guys in the first round.
How do you know he'll be the better receiver in the long run?
The most solid and sure receiver at this point is Keenan. He's already polished, but the ceiling is low on him. Patterson ceiling is above sky but at the same time he's also the closest thing that could bust in the next level. It's a 50:50 with Patterson. Either he'll boom or bust.
#84
Posted 21 January 2013 - 01:01 AM
How do you know he'll be the better receiver in the long run?
The most solid and sure receiver at this point is Keenan. He's already polished, but the ceiling is low on him. Patterson ceiling is above sky but at the same time he's also the closest thing that could bust in the next level. It's a 50:50 with Patterson. Either he'll boom or bust.
Are you not concerned with his injury history?
#85
Posted 21 January 2013 - 10:17 AM
Are you not concerned with his injury history?
If I'm correct, this is his first injury/surgery. He's not an injury proned guy.
#86
Posted 21 January 2013 - 10:20 AM
If I'm correct, this is his first injury/surgery. He's not an injury proned guy.
That's what they said about Hogan.
How's he doing btw?
#87
Posted 21 January 2013 - 10:32 AM
If I'm correct, this is his first injury/surgery. He's not an injury proned guy.
1 to many. were in no position to waste picks
#88
Posted 21 January 2013 - 10:34 AM
2 different people and and 2 different injuries. cannot compare an acl tear to a pcl strain.That's what they said about Hogan.
How's he doing btw?
#89
Posted 21 January 2013 - 10:36 AM
i think it was more so Tedford was doing what was best for Keenan future.it was a pcl injury that did not require surgery, so he didnt play the last 3 weeks.not wasting a pick.1 to many. were in no position to waste picks
#90
Posted 21 January 2013 - 04:22 PM
1 to many. were in no position to waste picks
You're telling me taking Keenan is a wasted pick? Lmfao
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users





