Swiss Cheezhead Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 Menudo -- do you really think teh Steelers would target another smallish WR? You may have noticed in my mock, I have them taking Hagan. I guess my question is, if they (hypothetically) valued Moss and Hagan the same, who would they take? I have to believe that they'll need some size at WR at SOME point. Am I wrong? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 Menudo -- do you really think teh Steelers would target another smallish WR? You may have noticed in my mock, I have them taking Hagan. I guess my question is, if they (hypothetically) valued Moss and Hagan the same, who would they take? I have to believe that they'll need some size at WR at SOME point. Am I wrong? 1383874[/snapback] Or another soon to be ex-QB in rd 3? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blitztalk Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 To keep things moving along I'm going to PM my pick to Outshined since I have to go to work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hosler427 Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 Agree or we may never finish a draft. 1383873[/snapback] I agree...I think if we stop everytime something new comes up, we will never finish. I say lets get through 3 rounds and start a new up with the updated order and information. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatman Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 Shouldn't Tennesse have the third pick in the second round? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 Menudo -- do you really think teh Steelers would target another smallish WR? You may have noticed in my mock, I have them taking Hagan. I guess my question is, if they (hypothetically) valued Moss and Hagan the same, who would they take? I have to believe that they'll need some size at WR at SOME point. Am I wrong? 1383874[/snapback] Your point is well-taken. I was looking at the fact that Moss can fill two roles, as a returner & a wide receiver. I value Moss quite a bit more as a playmaker than Hagan, but, if the Steelers value them the same, then yes, you make a good point, and I think they would go with Hagan. The Steelers did like what they were getting from Quincy Morgan and like the prosepects of Nate Washington, who are two somewhat-taller receivers, but, I still think they should go WR with their 1st pick. For some reason though, I have a feeling they will go elsewhere, (Nick Magold) and snag a Randle-El-type replacement (Michael Robinson, Reggie McNeal) a bit later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 (edited) Or another soon to be ex-QB in rd 3? 1383886[/snapback] A definite possibility. Edited March 23, 2006 by Menudo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huddled Masses Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 (edited) Shouldn't Tennesse have the third pick in the second round? 1384477[/snapback] The order is based on what NFL Draft Countdown has but I don't know if this is correct. See link for all traded draft picks as of 3/13: Traded Draft Picks The only traded picks since then that I can recall is the Falcons getting Denver's 3rd round pick. Edited March 23, 2006 by Huddled Masses Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
budlitebrad Posted March 24, 2006 Share Posted March 24, 2006 :cough: pack should take carpenter :cough: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatman Posted March 24, 2006 Share Posted March 24, 2006 I'm pretty sure that the draft order is off with Tennesse not being third in the second round, but I'll move along anyways. Tough to see Mangold go right before this pick - the Packers O-line is aging rapidly and needs an infusion of young talent (and not the Scott Wells variety). Don't know yet if Flanagan will be back, but all indicaitons from Thompson show that he's not a priority. I'd rather see a guard rated this high, but a center would help, too. That being said, the Pack needs major help at LB. Barnett can be a starter (and a good one, although he needs to be more disiplined) but he needs help. Diggs never lived up to potential and the rest of the dudes we've had in are short-term solutions. Coming off of an injury, Carpenter has some question marks but gives us a speedy, sure tackler to pair with Barnett. Now, let's figure out the strong side... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swiss Cheezhead Posted March 24, 2006 Share Posted March 24, 2006 I'm pretty sure that the draft order is off with Tennesse not being third in the second round, but I'll move along anyways. Tough to see Mangold go right before this pick - the Packers O-line is aging rapidly and needs an infusion of young talent (and not the Scott Wells variety). Don't know yet if Flanagan will be back, but all indicaitons from Thompson show that he's not a priority. I'd rather see a guard rated this high, but a center would help, too. That being said, the Pack needs major help at LB. Barnett can be a starter (and a good one, although he needs to be more disiplined) but he needs help. Diggs never lived up to potential and the rest of the dudes we've had in are short-term solutions. Coming off of an injury, Carpenter has some question marks but gives us a speedy, sure tackler to pair with Barnett. Now, let's figure out the strong side... 1386118[/snapback] Strong side? If you want Carpenter, you just figured out the strong side. He's a perfect SLB, but would be totally out of place at WLB. And, just out of curiosity, why do you think the draft order is messed up? I mean, it could be, but I've seen it that way at multiple sources. The order is hardly ever the same in each round. It has to do with ties in overall records. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Todd1 Posted March 24, 2006 Share Posted March 24, 2006 As the Raiders GM, "D@mn you Fatman!!!" As also a Packers fan... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatman Posted March 24, 2006 Share Posted March 24, 2006 Strong side? If you want Carpenter, you just figured out the strong side. He's a perfect SLB, but would be totally out of place at WLB. And, just out of curiosity, why do you think the draft order is messed up? I mean, it could be, but I've seen it that way at multiple sources. The order is hardly ever the same in each round. It has to do with ties in overall records. 1386144[/snapback] Everything I've read about Carpenter sounds like a weaksider - rangy, sure tackler, good speed sideline to sideline, not great at the point of attack, doesn't shed blocks very well. What have you heard? We need both spots, so I guess the pick works either way... As for draft order, I've never heard of things switching from round to round with teams of similar record. Tennesse has the lowest strengther of schedule of all the 4-12 teams, but maybe I'm wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huddled Masses Posted March 24, 2006 Share Posted March 24, 2006 As for draft order, I've never heard of things switching from round to round with teams of similar record. Tennesse has the lowest strengther of schedule of all the 4-12 teams, but maybe I'm wrong. 1386289[/snapback] Both NFL Draft Countdown & NFL Draft Scout have this order so I have to assume that there were traded draft picks prior to this year that account for this order.(although I can't find this info to confirm) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swiss Cheezhead Posted March 24, 2006 Share Posted March 24, 2006 (edited) As for draft order, I've never heard of things switching from round to round with teams of similar record. 1386289[/snapback] Well, I guess you haven't been paying attention. 2005 draft 2004 draft 2003 draft Notice a trend? Edited March 24, 2006 by Swiss Cheezhead Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swiss Cheezhead Posted March 24, 2006 Share Posted March 24, 2006 Everything I've read about Carpenter sounds like a weaksider - rangy, sure tackler, good speed sideline to sideline, not great at the point of attack, doesn't shed blocks very well. What have you heard? We need both spots, so I guess the pick works either way... 1386289[/snapback] Well, he specializes in coverage (zone and man) and blitzing, two of the major elements of a SLB's game. Plus, he's got the size for it. There's no reason to put a 257-pound guy in a position where he never has to take on blocks. If he's not good at it, you just coach him up until he is. You won't find a WLB in the NFL over 255 lbs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatman Posted March 24, 2006 Share Posted March 24, 2006 Well, I guess you haven't been paying attention. 2005 draft 2004 draft 2003 draft Notice a trend? 1386369[/snapback] Well, he specializes in coverage (zone and man) and blitzing, two of the major elements of a SLB's game. Plus, he's got the size for it. There's no reason to put a 257-pound guy in a position where he never has to take on blocks. If he's not good at it, you just coach him up until he is. You won't find a WLB in the NFL over 255 lbs. 1386379[/snapback] Apparently I've just had some knowledge dropped on me! Thanks for the info, Swiss. Details, schmetails... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted March 24, 2006 Share Posted March 24, 2006 Well, he specializes in coverage (zone and man) and blitzing, two of the major elements of a SLB's game. Plus, he's got the size for it. There's no reason to put a 257-pound guy in a position where he never has to take on blocks. If he's not good at it, you just coach him up until he is. You won't find a WLB in the NFL over 255 lbs. 1386379[/snapback] I have heard that and that he may put on more pounds in th NFL. Sounds more like SLB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatman Posted March 24, 2006 Share Posted March 24, 2006 Well, he specializes in coverage (zone and man) and blitzing, two of the major elements of a SLB's game. Plus, he's got the size for it. There's no reason to put a 257-pound guy in a position where he never has to take on blocks. If he's not good at it, you just coach him up until he is. You won't find a WLB in the NFL over 255 lbs. 1386379[/snapback] I have heard that and that he may put on more pounds in th NFL. Sounds more like SLB. 1386417[/snapback] Alright, you two seem to know quite a bit about him...what do you think of him going to the Pack here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swiss Cheezhead Posted March 24, 2006 Share Posted March 24, 2006 Alright, you two seem to know quite a bit about him...what do you think of him going to the Pack here? 1386539[/snapback] I think he's a very good player, but I think Poppinga will do fine in that role next year. For that matter, I think Robert Thomas will be just fine at WLB, too. In Bates's scheme, the OLBs are very insignificant, from what I understand. The DEs line up really wide, the OLBs are behind them, and most plays get funneled to the middle. Obviously, I think Barnett is very solid at MLB, so I'm not too concerned about the other positions. So, I wouldn't use a high 2nd-rounder on an OLB. I think we could use another CB and there will be good CB value there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Outshined Posted March 24, 2006 Author Share Posted March 24, 2006 Niners and Oakland picks were Pm'd to me...Tennessee is on the clock. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted March 24, 2006 Share Posted March 24, 2006 (edited) Alright, you two seem to know quite a bit about him...what do you think of him going to the Pack here? 1386539[/snapback] I don't have an opinion at this point. I just heard he could put on some pounds and become a bigger player. Swiss is more knowledgable. Edited March 25, 2006 by Randall Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Outshined Posted March 25, 2006 Author Share Posted March 25, 2006 40. Detroit is on the clock Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huddled Masses Posted March 27, 2006 Share Posted March 27, 2006 Could we please make a pick for Arizona and move on or has this draft ended. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swiss Cheezhead Posted March 27, 2006 Share Posted March 27, 2006 Could we please make a pick for Arizona and move on or has this draft ended. 1389299[/snapback] Give 'em a free safety and stick a fork in Robert Griffith. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.