Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Michael Lombardi's mock draft


Highlandfire

Recommended Posts

I hope not. Happy feet, dances and will not step up in the pocket. Seems to me that he got a lot of three-man rushes (in the Illinois game) and the ends were attacking from the outside. Three linemen blocked the nose. He didn't step up most of the time, and started running from the DEs. He is a lower first round talent, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I'm confused. I've been told that the smokescreen was that the Panthers leaked that Cam Newton was perfect in his private interview, but Rivera had already said good things about him in public anyway, so what was the point, and how are you going to fool teams that have already interviewed him anyway and knew exactly how he did?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I'm confused. I've been told that the smokescreen was that the Panthers leaked that Cam Newton was perfect in his private interview, but Rivera had already said good things about him in public anyway, so what was the point, and how are you going to fool teams that have already interviewed him anyway and knew exactly how he did?

Addressing in a separate thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ugh, PASS. I hate that nowadays it's dumb to take anything BUT a quarterback even if the quarterback class is as weak as this one. next year the best quarterback prospect in this draft would probably be the 5th+ QB taken.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ugh, PASS. I hate that nowadays it's dumb to take anything BUT a quarterback even if the quarterback class is as weak as this one. next year the best quarterback prospect in this draft would probably be the 5th+ QB taken.

And that's another thing. I've been told over and over that there is no clear cut #1 pick, yet I'm supposed to believe that we're engineering this brilliant smokescreen in order to get somebody to give us some of their draft picks for one of these players? I just don't buy it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Even limited as he was I still don't think they have replaced his production, and not just the sack stats. The games Clowney missed it was very obvious what his value still was. Risky move but whatever. They only had 32 sacks last year and if that drops then it's going to get ugly. I see the improvement in run stopping but not in pass protect in any way.  
    • I have zero issues with this.  
    • Sorta related.  I just looked up a stat:  Success rates for NFL draft's second rounders.  I was surprised that it is 49%.  The success rate for first rounders is 58%.   Here success does not mean those that did not bust, it means that roughly half of the players selected in the second round become full-time starters at some point in their careers.  Busts do that too.  However, considering the fact that a first round talent is worth up to 1800 points (first overall pick) more than the first pick of the second round and as low as 350 points (last pick in first round) higher than the last pick in round 2, it seems there could be cases in which it would be to your advantage to trade out of round 1 and draft two or three second rounders for the value.  Of course, the elite players are likely to be gone, and some positions overwhelmingly suck after round 1 (traditionally, like QB or LT, for example), but if you need to find starters at positions like DT, G, LB, S, C, TE, RB, etc, there could be a time when you trade back for more starters.  I was surprised that the margin between rounds 1 and 2 was only 9%.    While I realize that some of you sofa scholars are thinking, "Well duh?  Trading back gives you more players." as you wipe the Cheetos off your shirt.  Not the point.  The point is you have to consider the draft,the needs (and the number of them), and you need to scout the second and third rounds like you do the first, the cap, and the long-term impact.  If you can find 2 players with a 49% chance of becoming a starter, are you better off than drafting one player who has a 58% chance in the long term? So if I traded away my first rounder for two second rounders (a trade most teams would make) regularly, when I got 10 second rounders (by trading 5 first rounders), 5 would be starters.  If I did not trade and kept my 5 first rounders, 3 would be starters.  Furthermore, their rookie contracts would be much cheaper than the 5 first rounders. 
×
×
  • Create New...