|
National Football League
Draft King Mailbag
April 1, 2006
Lou Pickney, DraftKing.com
Reader feedback is always welcomed here at DraftKing.com. Send your thoughts to me at LouPickney@gmail.com.
At long last, this morning I got my high speed internet set up here at my new apartment. You'd think that it wouldn't take 45 minutes on the phone with a tech in India to get a modem reconfigured from Verizon to BellSouth, but that's how it played out. I could only imagine a non-computer savvy person trying to get this set up. But it's up now, so let's dig into the mailbag, shall we?
From: James Holmes
To: LouPickney@gmail.com
Date: Mar 26, 2006 2:47 PM
Subject: Mock Draft
I am a huge Jets fan, and while I agree with most of your Mock, I doubt
the Jets take a DE @ 29. Even though the Jets may spend the #4 pick on
Da'Brick, they still don't have a center. If Mangold is still there @ 29 I
believe this is the way they go, or perhaps a RB. Their biggest problem is
the Offensive line and Mangold & the Brick would fix this overnight. If
they do mix it up and go defense @ 29, there biggest weakness there is CB.
Going to a 3-4 I doubt end is a need, maybe a NT though.
Just my opinion and thanks for the good work. I enjoy your site.
Lou: Your e-mail brings forth an important point: the Jets have tons of holes to fill. This past week in Nashville, my friend Dustin (who checks out this site somewhat regularly) and I had an in-depth discussion about Vince Young and where he'll go. He felt strongly that if Young was on the board at #4, the Jets would take him. I countered that, while the Jets would love to have Young, they have way too many other needs (not to mention the contractual complications that would result with the cap-strapped Jets, which is a topic that has been covered on here in the past.)
I would disagree with the Jets passing on a DE at #29 to take a center. At this point, there hasn't been any buzz about a first-round calibre center, and unless the Jets decided to make a stretch pick and select someone more likely to go in round two or three (i.e. Greg Eslinger from Minnesota, Nick Mangold from Ohio State -- who you mentioned, etc.) The only way you might see the Jets do that is if there's one center who they think would really fit their system well, and even then why not trade down into the top of the second round and get more picks if that's the plan?
Incidentally, I think the "Brick Wall" is more fitting than "The Brick" for D'Brickashaw Ferguson, but either way it works.
From: Omri Klugman
To: LouPickney@gmail.com
Date: Mar 26, 2006 8:27 PM
Subject: the Cardinals
Hey Lou, hate to pester you with this, but I can't help but feel that the odds of the cardinals taking a QB in the 1st round are slim to none. I'll explain.
the passing game was never the problem, and despite his age kurt just helped put both fitzgerald & boldin in the league's top 5 in stats, and was re-signed for a 3 year deal. I do agree with you that they need a backup QB, but I just don't see them paying a QB 1st round money to spend what looks like a 2 year minimum on the bench, especially if you take into consideration that the coach attributed their 32nd ranked rushing offense to the OL, and placed a great deal of money into eddgerin james. it seems an improvment there is the next logical step for them.
what do you think?
Lou: There's been a certain phenomenon in the past few years: it seems like the Cardinals might take a QB in the first round... but every time, they don't. Dennis Green is a sharp guy, and certainly he can hear the clock ticking in his head for the time that he has left to turn things around in Arizona. He saw how a guy like Daunte Culpepper, with just one year on the bench, was able to have immediate success in Minnesota. But does Green have until 2007 to start producing results? One would think that he'd lobby for a pick that would help him right away versus one that would take a few years to begin paying off.
Arizona might have suitors wanting to trade up, and it's very possible that the Cardinals would stand pat and take someone like TE Vernon Davis (who would help in the blocking for the running game.) But I still think that QB is a distinct possibility for the #10 spot. Warner's three year deal to me means he will be starting in 2006, and then potentially a 37-year-old backup in 2007 with a young QB working his way in as the starter. Look at how Oakland has struggled since Rich Gannon began breaking down physically, plugging in a veteran in Kerry Collins, and now trying another "retread" in Aaron Brooks. Do the Cardinals really want to follow that same path? We shall see...
From: Marion Reed, Jr.
To: LouPickney@gmail.com
Date: Mar 27, 2006 7:44 PM
Subject: (none)
I really enjoy your posts but I have one question to ask? Why do a lot of the mock drafts have us taking AJ Hawk? Hawk is not the kind of linebacker who brings smoke from the outside. In fact he’s probably a better inside backer in the 3-4 if that’s what the 49ers choose to run. Also if Mario Williams is available, which I don’t believe, do the 49ers switch to the 4-3. Elaborate please. Thanks again
Lou: I'll take it from the context of this e-mail that you mean the 49ers when you say "us" taking AJ Hawk.
I don't think the availability of one player would cause the 49ers to have a radical change of its defensive structure. Williams is a great player, but he's not so good as to cause that type of change. Williams could potentially be moved to OLB, I suppose, though why do that to a guy who projects so highly at DE? But I think it's immaterial at this point, since it seems very unlikely that he'd fall to #6.
The reason you see A.J. Hawk being linked with the 49ers is because there's a huge hole at OLB created by the free agency departures of Julian Peterson and Andre Carter. Keep in mind that Hawk runs a 4.59 40, and while blitzing isn't his specialty per se, he's right up there with the other top OLB prospects (if not slightly higher than many) in his 40 time. A 6'1" 250 pound OLB who has great field vision and instincts, who also runs a sub 4.6 40, is a real rarity. There's a reason I have him projected going before #6 at this point.
From: Jay Dennison
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 6:19 AM
To: LouPickney@hotmail.com
Subject: Bubba and the draft
I'm a subscriber to Sirius satellite radio as well as a die-hard Denver Bronco fan. I must say that even though I have heard Bubba the Love Sponge for a short time, I think that the show is great. I am a big fan of breaking social norms as well as nasty, entertaining, radio.
I wanted to say thanks for putting out your mock draft for this year. Since Denver hasn't been too active in free agency, I become more and more intrigued by what they are going to be doing in their draft.
I have been a fan for almost 30 years and they still seem to surprise me with who they draft every time. But it sure is fun to speculate. You are the first draft that I have seen that doesn't have them taking an offensive player in the first round. I tend to agree with you. I don't think that they will be trading up for a QB like some folks are speculating, and I have a hard time seeing them taking a RB in the first round. I think that they may go with WR in the first round, but chances are they will go one CB/S and one DE. I can't imagine them drafting LB or CB in the first.
Keep up the good work in both the radio and the draft site.
Lou: The Broncos are in position to catch one of the "Big Three" QBs (Matt Leinart, Vince Young and Jay Cutler) if one happens to fall to them at #15. It's not impossible to logic that they moved up thinking that they could get a great bargain if one of those guys falls to them, but if not then they can further upgrade their defense. At Pittsburgh showed in the AFC Championship Game, the defense is not without its exploitable points.
With two picks, the Broncos can move up, move down, and basically play it by ear in the draft. It's not outside the realm of possibility to think that if one of the Big Three isn't there at #15 (or when the final one goes off the draft board), Denver will try to trade down. Or... did Denver trade up with their sights set on a WR like Santonio Holmes? Therein rests the mystery of the draft... and the fun of trying to guess how it will play out.
From: Aubrey Green
To: LouPickney@gmail.com
Date: Mar 30, 2006 12:54 AM
Subject: Aaron Brooks signing doesnt change Raiders draft board...
I still believe that the Raiders will take Vince Young
with the 7th unless Mario Williams or AJ Hawk drops to
the 7th pick. Take notice that Aaron Brooks is 30
years old not exactly not old but not too young. And
take notice that they signed him for 2 years meaning
that they take Vince Young let him sit on the bench
for two years then bam 2008 is our starter.
Lou: The Raider Nation (or at least observers of the Raiders) seem really split about the possibility of Oakland going with Young at #7. To continue the point about the Young conversation made earlier, my friend Dustin (the Young proponent) pointed out that Oakland with Aaron Brooks isn't exactly a solid situation. Plus, Brooks only received a two-year deal. I've been back-and-forth on that pick, but I think (as of this writing) that Oakland will take Young if he's on the board. And, with that, I think it's high time to redo the mock draft...
NFL Draft Prospect Profiles
Draft King is owned and operated by Lou Pickney. © 2003-2024, all rights reserved.
Unless otherwise noted, the views expressed here are those of Lou Pickney alone and do not necessarily reflect those of any media company.
| 