Saturday, 13 March 2010

Weekend links

Mike Mayock discusses the risk of taking a quarterback in round one and debates Jimmy Clausen's (QB, Notre Dame) pro prospects.

Rob Rang updates his mock draft and like my own mock draft updated earlier this week, he sends Clausen to the Seahawks. Derrick Morgan (DE, Georgia Tech) is the other pick at #14.

Matt McGuire discusses Gerald McCoy's (DT, Oklahoma) draft range. He suggests they might pass on McCoy to take Eric Berry if afforded the opportunity. I doubt that.

Michael Lombardi offers a top ten mock draft with the Seahawks taking Russell Okung (OT Oklahoma State).

Mel Kiper and Todd McShay discuss Bradford and Clausen:

18 comments:

c-hawker said...

McShay underestimate's Clausen and overestimate's Okung. I think there will be some NFL team's that do the same. We'll see if they are in the top #5 or #6 come draft time. It will change the value at #6 if either is selected ahead of Seattle.
McShay does have Clausen going to Buffalo at #9...

Austin said...

Why is everone so high on Okung if his game tape is underwhelming? Is this a case of someone saying something and everyone else jumping on board? I don't get it. Walterfootballs breakdown of Clausen's stats is pretty impressive. I wasn't a Clausen guy but I really don't see how they pass on him at 6. I've also read reports that on tape Best is more explosive than Spiller. Rob can you comment on this? Any chance Seattle takes Best at 14 or 40?

Mr. Chriss said...

With Best's injury history, taking him at 14 is a pretty big risk.

Kip Earlywine said...

For one thing, opinions on players often times are based on the games that people use to scout with. So that creates some discrepancy.

The other thing is that this entire tackle class is below average, but its not quality that drives the market- its need. And it seems like more teams than ever need a left tackle this year. So pretty much every tackle prospect in this draft is going to get bumped up about 10-15 spots higher than they probably should go because of this year's intense demand.

Vince Mulcahy said...

Kip - I think you pretty much explained the biggest discrepancy between reports on Okung: which game. Okung does flash the skill set that deserves a top 5 pick, for instance in the Mizzu game. But other times he shows next level talent just not dominance, in the Texas game. He is definitely a player that you need to watch a couple of extra games on to look for inconsistencies in his game.

No way Best is selected in the top 20 because of injury concerns. Concussions are getting much more negative press than ever before (and should) and will turn teams off.

Patrick said...

I am a huge Best fan, and I would LOVE to grab him at 40. Really, my ideal draft would be 6. McCoy or Berry, 14. Davis and 40. Best. However, I'n not sure if I could see Carroll and Co. going after Best, after all isn't he a very similar version to Justin Forsett? If I thought he'd still be available, I'd be very happy with Hardesty in the 4th.

Rob Staton said...

Austin - I think that has played a large part in it.

micah said...

It's funny how heated McShay and Kiper almost got. They have such different opinions. I think even if they watched the same exact game film, people would still have different opinions on what skill sets equate to a good player and what skill sets are the most important to be successful in the NFL. Also, McShay said he had Clausen ranked 26th on his big board, but that he thought the Bills would be "forced" to select him at 9 if he was still there. His face was definitely clenching when he said that. and he kept referring back to how wrong Kiper was about Brady Quinn.

Austin said...

Unless I'm mistaken Forsett and Best are very different in how they get things done on the football field. Best has elite level speed and a 2nd gear that Forsett just doesn't have. Forsett is shifty and makes people miss but Best has the ability to out run people. I think Best would be a perfect compliment to Forsett and I'm not convinced we need a bigger back to compliment him. It will be interesting to see which running back they get. Also if they don't sign Marshall don't they have to go wr within the first 3 picks? Any chance they target Tate at 40 or is that being unrealistic?

Rob Staton said...

I think wide out is a huge need and they'll have to consider it if they don't get Marshall. Tate would make sense if they draft Clausen because the two are familiar, but I'm not a big Tate fan. He's also a smaller, slot type guy and not the bigger - #1 target Seattle lacks. I think Brandon LaFell, Demaryius Thomas, Damian Williams and Arrelious Benn are more likely options.

DUWORKSON said...

Rob, can you explain the signing of Baker? What does this do for our offense?

Rob Staton said...

DUWORKSON - the Seahawks will use a lot of two-tight end sets next year. It means they'll use less full back and either put the extra TE or receiver out there. Baker will be more of a blocker but he's no slouch in the passing game, he'll get some targets. Carlson will still get most of the red zone work I think.

Austin said...

Rob- I agree with your assesment of the wr's but Steve Smith comes to mind as a guy who is similar to Tate and actually smaller but is an elite #1. I realize is a rare talent but is Tate's game similar to Smiths? Also out of the guys you mentioned as possibilities can any of them produce right away? Thanks in advance!

Jon said...

re: Tight Ends, this is a good group. Baker in 2 TE sets should do some things for Carlson and help flesh the offense out a bit. It also gives Cameron Morrah some time to develop.

I'm not a huge fan of McShay or his apparent sunburn in that clip but I'm with him on Clausen. Thing is, Kiper is right in that when you're talking about Shanahan it makes sense. A cocky pro style QB going to Shanahan in a new team is just as likely as Bruce Campbell or JPP going to the Raiders.

Doesn't mean they would be great choices but they're very likely.

Rob Staton said...

There are some similarities. Both very competitive, fast, aggressive. Tate is raw though - blocking poor, not a great route runner, not great hands. Smith is a rare breed. I expect Tate to maybe do a bit of wildcat and play slot, get the ball in his hands and let him run with it. Not sure he'll be that effective early on though.

Of the names listed, I think Damian Williams is the most pro-ready - but he body catches too much. LaFell has the ability to have a Dwayne Bowe type rookie season but everything he's done since 2008 has disappointed. Arrelious Benn is very big and talented, but suffered through drops/bad QB play in 2009. Demaryius Thomas is intriguing as a bigger target and fits the bill for what the Seahawks probably want at a wide out.

ChavaC said...

Yah not the greatest draft for WR's. The only guys I like are Thomas, Briscoe, Alexander and Barnes. Unfortunately none of them would really be able to contribute much in their first year. Tate looks OK, but it seems like a pretty big gamble to bank a 2nd rounder on him becoming the next Steve Smith. They are physically similar and both high point the ball very well, but plenty of small fast receivers fizzle out in the NFL. And lets not forget that butler runs a 4.3 .

Tim Malone said...

Is Tate as fast as Smith? He ran a fast 40 but I never thought he looked terribly fast in the open field. He's tough and will go up and get the ball and reminds me more of Anquan Boldin and Hines Ward. I dont know that he'll be as good as either and I don't think he's what the Hawks really need, but I think he'd be a solid pick in the 2nd round.

With Clausen you have to take into account two things with his stats.

1. Tate and Floyd constantly went up and grabbed jump balls, that won't happen as often in the NFL.

2. Weis's red zone play calling was abysmal. Too often he took the ball out of Clausens hands and he loved going wildcat in the RZ. I think Clausen left at least 5 TD passes on the field. One could say that Weis didn't have the trust in Clausen in the RZ, but I just think Weis didn't know what the hell he was doing.

Rob Staton said...

Tim - it's a great point regarding the red zone. Notre Dame were rotten in that area last year so thanks for giving us a bit more detail as to why that was.

Very legitimate point also regarding Tate and Floyd and how that helped Clausen. Tate doesn't look as fast as he ran in Indy on tape - which is why it was a surprise he managed a 4.3