Two Mock Drafts

[defiantgiant]

So I've taken enough potshots at other people's mocks (all constructive criticism, I promise) - I figured it was time to let you guys tee off on two of mine. As a caveat, I used Draft Tek's big board as a reference. Their mocks are suspect sometimes, but their big board is usually pretty good. Each one of my choices is a guy who Draft Tek has projected to be available somewhere around that pick.

 

The first scenario I've got has Chicago standing pat with all their current picks:

 

1.18) Hakeem Nicks, WR, UNC

2.49) Phil Loadholt, OT, Oklahoma

3.84) Paul Kruger, DE, Utah

3.99) Jason Williams, OLB, Western Illinois

4.119) Nate Davis, QB, Ball State

5.154) Emanuel Cook, SS, South Carolina

6.190) Chris Clemons, FS, Clemson

7.246) Bernard Scott, RB, Abilene Christian

7.251) Roger Allen III, OG, Missouri Western

UDFA) Frank Summers, FB, UNLV

UDFA) Brennan Marion, WR, Tulsa

 

Kruger in the mid-third is slightly wishful thinking, but I think he could fall there, depending on what happens with Ayers, Gilbert, et al. Here's the other scenario, which involves the Bears trading with the Giants:

 

1.29) Eben Britton, OT, Arizona

2.49) Brian Robiskie, WR, Ohio State

2.60) Jairus Byrd, CB/FS, Oregon

3.91) Tyrone McKenzie, OLB, South Florida

3.99) Stephen McGee, QB, Texas A&M

4.119) Cedric Peerman, RB, Virginia

5.154) Mike Wallace, WR, Mississippi

6.190) Sammie Lee Hill, DT, Stillman

7.246) Will Davis, DE, Illinois

7.251) Marcus Mailei, FB, Weber State

UDFA) Ian Hoskins, DE, Marshall

UDFA) Al Afalava, SS, Oregon State

 

I've got the Bears sending their first, third, and a sixth in 2010 for the Giants' first, second, and third this year. Effectively, the Giants move up in round 1 and round 3, the Bears move down in rounds 1 and 3 but pick up an extra 2nd. The draft pick value chart says #18 and #84 are worth 1070 points combined, whereas #29, #60, and #91 are worth 1076. The six-point difference is worth a 7th-rounder this year, but the Bears' 7ths are both compensatory and can't be traded, hence the 6th-rounder in 2010.

 

Let me know what you guys think...

[dawhizz]

I'm not quite sure I understand your general approach to the draft, looking at both. Why, for instance, do you see an OLB as a top-4 need in both? Why are you drafting a SS in the first draft when two SS spots are essentially locked up? Do you see DE as a need (3rd round in the first draft) or not a need (7th round in the second)? Is it just BPA?

 

As far as your general approach, for me, OLB would not be a consideration until late, RB would bearly be a consideration at all, despite the Bears' apparent interest in James Davis (we have 4). I would go for an OG somewhere in the first 5 rounds or so. As far as the drafts themselves:

 

First draft: Love Nicks, but I'm very nervous about Loadholt. I would go FS much earlier and OLB much later (someone like Darcel McBath or Sherrod Martin instead of Williams). I'm kind of torn on whether or not to go QB in the middle rounds, but I like Davis (and McGee, actually). I'd also like to another receiver earlier than UDFA.

 

Second draft: My favorite of the two. First three picks are fine by me. I would switch out an OL for the OLB (maybe someone like Kraig Urbik or Troy Kropog) in the third and probably go DE instead of RB in the fourth, but other than that I have few complaints about it.

[defiantgiant]

I'm not quite sure I understand your general approach to the draft, looking at both. Why, for instance, do you see an OLB as a top-4 need in both? Why are you drafting a SS in the first draft when two SS spots are essentially locked up? Do you see DE as a need (3rd round in the first draft) or not a need (7th round in the second)? Is it just BPA?

 

As far as your general approach, for me, OLB would not be a consideration until late, RB would bearly be a consideration at all, despite the Bears' apparent interest in James Davis (we have 4). I would go for an OG somewhere in the first 5 rounds or so. As far as the drafts themselves:

 

First draft: Love Nicks, but I'm very nervous about Loadholt. I would go FS much earlier and OLB much later (someone like Darcel McBath or Sherrod Martin instead of Williams). I'm kind of torn on whether or not to go QB in the middle rounds, but I like Davis (and McGee, actually). I'd also like to another receiver earlier than UDFA.

 

Second draft: My favorite of the two. First three picks are fine by me. I would switch out an OL for the OLB (maybe someone like Kraig Urbik or Troy Kropog) in the third and probably go DE instead of RB in the fourth, but other than that I have few complaints about it.

 

I was heavily prioritizing four needs in rounds 1-3: WR, RT, FS, and DE. Starting with our compensatory 3rd, I went to a mix of need and BPA. By the time I got to pick 84 in the first mock, Malcolm Jenkins, Sean Smith, Byrd, Louis Delmas, Rashad Johnson, McBath and William Moore were all off the board. I'm not really sold on David Bruton or Sherrod Martin. Bruton reminds me too much of Danieal Manning - great athlete, doesn't have the instincts or awareness to play FS. Martin, I think, is a corner playing safety. He's fast, but he takes bad angles and is a poor tackler, from what I've seen. His frame worries me, too. Basically, once I'd missed on the few top-tier safeties, I didn't see a significant dropoff between the remaining guys and prospects like Clemons or Cook.

 

I have SS in both mocks because I'd like to see a draft pick at each safety spot, and then open competition for both starting safety jobs. Kevin Payne has serious problems in coverage and slides off tackles; Steltz could be good, but he hasn't shown enough to be handed a starting job. Also, Cook reminds me of Bob Sanders. He was a guy like Kruger, where I just couldn't pass on him.

 

The OLBs were kind of a new idea. Neither Roach nor Hillenmeyer are studs at strongside LB, and I was thinking Chicago could spend a high second-day pick there, get an immediate boost to the defense, and also get a guy who could eventually slide to the middle and replace Urlacher. I think both Williams and McKenzie project pretty well to 4-3 Mike backer, especially if they started off with a couple of years at Sam to get up to speed.

 

Anyway, that was my rationale.

[Stinger226]

So I've taken enough potshots at other people's mocks (all constructive criticism, I promise) - I figured it was time to let you guys tee off on two of mine. As a caveat, I used Draft Tek's big board as a reference. Their mocks are suspect sometimes, but their big board is usually pretty good. Each one of my choices is a guy who Draft Tek has projected to be available somewhere around that pick.

 

The first scenario I've got has Chicago standing pat with all their current picks:

 

1.18) Hakeem Nicks, WR, UNC

2.49) Phil Loadholt, OT, Oklahoma

3.84) Paul Kruger, DE, Utah

3.99) Jason Williams, OLB, Western Illinois

4.119) Nate Davis, QB, Ball State

5.154) Emanuel Cook, SS, South Carolina

6.190) Chris Clemons, FS, Clemson

7.246) Bernard Scott, RB, Abilene Christian

7.251) Roger Allen III, OG, Missouri Western

UDFA) Frank Summers, FB, UNLV

UDFA) Brennan Marion, WR, Tulsa

 

Kruger in the mid-third is slightly wishful thinking, but I think he could fall there, depending on what happens with Ayers, Gilbert, et al. Here's the other scenario, which involves the Bears trading with the Giants:

 

1.29) Eben Britton, OT, Arizona

2.49) Brian Robiskie, WR, Ohio State

2.60) Jairus Byrd, CB/FS, Oregon

3.91) Tyrone McKenzie, OLB, South Florida

3.99) Stephen McGee, QB, Texas A&M

4.119) Cedric Peerman, RB, Virginia

5.154) Mike Wallace, WR, Mississippi

6.190) Sammie Lee Hill, DT, Stillman

7.246) Will Davis, DE, Illinois

7.251) Marcus Mailei, FB, Weber State

UDFA) Ian Hoskins, DE, Marshall

UDFA) Al Afalava, SS, Oregon State

 

I've got the Bears sending their first, third, and a sixth in 2010 for the Giants' first, second, and third this year. Effectively, the Giants move up in round 1 and round 3, the Bears move down in rounds 1 and 3 but pick up an extra 2nd. The draft pick value chart says #18 and #84 are worth 1070 points combined, whereas #29, #60, and #91 are worth 1076. The six-point difference is worth a 7th-rounder this year, but the Bears' 7ths are both compensatory and can't be traded, hence the 6th-rounder in 2010.

 

Let me know what you guys think...

I like the second draft better, but why would the Giants move up? I think the only ones moving up would be for a QB, or RB, maybe Macklin if he falls, otherwise I dont see the Giants having the need to move up . I also dont see us talking a RB before 5, with the resigning of Jones and Wolfe expected to get more carries.

[balta1701-A]

I like the second draft better, but why would the Giants move up? I think the only ones moving up would be for a QB, or RB, maybe Macklin if he falls, otherwise I dont see the Giants having the need to move up . I also dont see us talking a RB before 5, with the resigning of Jones and Wolfe expected to get more carries.

The Giants might have a need of a WR. The 2nd round class is solid so I doubt they would, but they could really like one of the top guys.

[lemonej]

The second mock is a lot better looking IMO but Brian Robiskie as JA's second rounder would be shocking since he tends to take a reach at pick number 2 all the time.Brian Robiskie in the 2nd makes sense.

[defiantgiant]

I like the second draft better, but why would the Giants move up? I think the only ones moving up would be for a QB, or RB, maybe Macklin if he falls, otherwise I dont see the Giants having the need to move up . I also dont see us talking a RB before 5, with the resigning of Jones and Wolfe expected to get more carries.

 

As weird as it sounds, the Giants might move up to have fewer picks. They've got a huge number of veterans returning, and they have very little room on the roster: they're returning everyone but Toomer and Ward, they added Chris Canty, and they have exactly one restricted FA. Of the guys who are returning, there's really nobody who ought to lose his job.

 

New York could make better use of a single high pick (probably a WR to step in for Plaxico if they don't think Manningham can do it) than several lower picks, not all of whom would make it onto the roster. Right now, they've got a first, two seconds, two thirds, a fourth, two fifths, a sixth, and a seventh. They don't have room to add 5 contributors and five guys for depth, so it makes sense to trade, either up in round 1 or for picks next year.

 

As for picking a running back, I'm not sold on either Wolfe or Jones, since neither of them produced at all last season. I know that in the real world, they'll be handed another opportunity to contribute, but in my mocks I've got them competing for their spots with a draft pick, either Scott or Peerman. If the incumbents win, great. If not, either of those two should be able to contribute in a committee. I think a solid change of pace back is a more pressing need than people realize: we can't risk putting the entire offense on Forte's shoulders for two seasons in a row. He's too good a back for Lovie and Turner to run him into the ground in his first two seasons. Jones and Wolfe both have potential, but you can't say that either of them did anything last year that makes them a sure thing to step up and spell Forte.

[Stinger226]

As weird as it sounds, the Giants might move up to have fewer picks. They've got a huge number of veterans returning, and they have very little room on the roster: they're returning everyone but Toomer and Ward, they added Chris Canty, and they have exactly one restricted FA. Of the guys who are returning, there's really nobody who ought to lose his job.

 

New York could make better use of a single high pick (probably a WR to step in for Plaxico if they don't think Manningham can do it) than several lower picks, not all of whom would make it onto the roster. Right now, they've got a first, two seconds, two thirds, a fourth, two fifths, a sixth, and a seventh. They don't have room to add 5 contributors and five guys for depth, so it makes sense to trade, either up in round 1 or for picks next year.

 

As for picking a running back, I'm not sold on either Wolfe or Jones, since neither of them produced at all last season. I know that in the real world, they'll be handed another opportunity to contribute, but in my mocks I've got them competing for their spots with a draft pick, either Scott or Peerman. If the incumbents win, great. If not, either of those two should be able to contribute in a committee. I think a solid change of pace back is a more pressing need than people realize: we can't risk putting the entire offense on Forte's shoulders for two seasons in a row. He's too good a back for Lovie and Turner to run him into the ground in his first two seasons. Jones and Wolfe both have potential, but you can't say that either of them did anything last year that makes them a sure thing to step up and spell Forte.

I am trying to figure out what JA might be thinking, not necessarily what I would do. I personally would like to draft a big guy we could slam in at the goal line, like Jenning/Liberty. 235lbs. The only way the Giants are moving up is if a WR drops to us that they dont think will be there with there pick.