Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 34 of 74 FirstFirst ... 24323334353644 ... LastLast
Results 496 to 510 of 1106
  1. #496
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    12,910
    Quote Originally Posted by poppapuh86 View Post
    Has nothing to do with taking it personally but everything to do with your lack of understanding.

    If we started off at pick 12 and traded up to 6 then I would agree with it. But that's not what happened.

    If you can guarantee smith would be there at 12 then I would hate trading up to 6. But you can't. We have positioned ourselves to be right in the middle of the WR/Pitts run, if that happens. See how things shake out before you jump off a cliff.

    Please stop saying OBJ is elite. Another terrible take.

    Like I said, and you need to understand this, Miami will take the same player they could've take at 3 while picking up an extra 1st. It's that simple.
    Dude, I understand what youíre saying and just simply saying I donít agree. Iíve said consistently that while I love the top of this WR draft, if youíre going to take one in the top 10 you NEED him to be an elite talent. Now youíve added the extra pick and you simply must add an elite talent to validate the cost.

    They took a chance on the two elite talents being gone and settling for a very good prospect, in what is another incredibly deep WR class. I donít think the value of trading up is worth it if itís just to get you Smith or even Sewell.

    Of course this is just over reacting to the pro days, I joked about it earlier. But itís also a very real possibility that should be discussed. Do you really think Smith or Waddle are worth two first round picks?

    And really just think youíre overselling how much value we really got from the trade. We got a pick two years away that might be in the late twenties, and a conditional 3rd that might as well be a high 4th. We also dropped our 4th to a 5th. All to move down to 6 and possibly miss out on an elite prospect?

    Quote Originally Posted by TakeAnotherL View Post
    We very well may get the #1 player on our board at the 6th pick, while adding another 1st and somehow we did something wrong? lol
    If you get the guy you wanted at 3. Thereís simply no guarantee you get him at 6. You might not even get the 2nd best player on your board. You might have to settle when you actively spent extra ammo to move back up and get someone.

    Thatís literally all Iím saying. This could work out, and we get the top guy on their board. At that point obviously itís a great move. I believe that Grier made a very calculated move because itís very rare when he gets aggressive. I truly appreciate the move by him. They clearly value a few players very highly.

    But if they miscalculated and lets say they really only had Chase and Pitts as the blue chip players, which I doubt is the case, then it could be a big swing and a miss. Thatís literally all Iím trying to say. Personally, I donít have guys like Waddle and Smith rated high enough to justify trading up for, which would make drafting them at 6 a bad move in my eyes.

    Just some random dudes opinion. Iím allowed to not think every move they make is incredible.

  2. #497
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    12,910
    Quote Originally Posted by Dolphin North View Post
    I know you guys are aware of this, but my question on Sewell is, how important is it to snag the best LT on your board when your QB is a lefty? I understand it helps, but at contract extension time, you almost want to have (for example) the 5th or 10th best LT, so your biggest resources can be spent elsewhere, wouldn't you? Any thoughts on our unique lefty situation?
    Most respected Oline coaches will say it doesnít matter. Both tackles are incredibly valuable in the NFL with how easily pass rushers are able to move around now.

    Although Iíd argue that in this scheme the Oline isnít as important as some may think. They want to scheme up quick and easy passes, get the ball out of Tuaís hands, and use the threat of the run to keep defenses honest. The problem with that is it requires literally nothing wrong to happen or it puts you in an impossible spot, but hopefully they can start to open things up and be more vertical. But I donít think youíll ever really see Tua take deep 7 step drops to attack downfield all day.

    At that point having just big Olineman like we have comes in handy just because theyíre so difficult to get around.

  3. #498
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    770
    Quote Originally Posted by KodytheKing View Post
    Most respected Oline coaches will say it doesnít matter. Both tackles are incredibly valuable in the NFL with how easily pass rushers are able to move around now.

    Although Iíd argue that in this scheme the Oline isnít as important as some may think. They want to scheme up quick and easy passes, get the ball out of Tuaís hands, and use the threat of the run to keep defenses honest. The problem with that is it requires literally nothing wrong to happen or it puts you in an impossible spot, but hopefully they can start to open things up and be more vertical. But I donít think youíll ever really see Tua take deep 7 step drops to attack downfield all day.

    At that point having just big Olineman like we have comes in handy just because theyíre so difficult to get around.
    Thank you.

  4. #499
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    625
    Quote Originally Posted by KodytheKing View Post
    Dude, I understand what youíre saying and just simply saying I donít agree. Iíve said consistently that while I love the top of this WR draft, if youíre going to take one in the top 10 you NEED him to be an elite talent. Now youíve added the extra pick and you simply must add an elite talent to validate the cost.

    They took a chance on the two elite talents being gone and settling for a very good prospect, in what is another incredibly deep WR class. I donít think the value of trading up is worth it if itís just to get you Smith or even Sewell.

    Of course this is just over reacting to the pro days, I joked about it earlier. But itís also a very real possibility that should be discussed. Do you really think Smith or Waddle are worth two first round picks?

    And really just think youíre overselling how much value we really got from the trade. We got a pick two years away that might be in the late twenties, and a conditional 3rd that might as well be a high 4th. We also dropped our 4th to a 5th. All to move down to 6 and possibly miss out on an elite prospect?



    If you get the guy you wanted at 3. Thereís simply no guarantee you get him at 6. You might not even get the 2nd best player on your board. You might have to settle when you actively spent extra ammo to move back up and get someone.

    Thatís literally all Iím saying. This could work out, and we get the top guy on their board. At that point obviously itís a great move. I believe that Grier made a very calculated move because itís very rare when he gets aggressive. I truly appreciate the move by him. They clearly value a few players very highly.

    But if they miscalculated and lets say they really only had Chase and Pitts as the blue chip players, which I doubt is the case, then it could be a big swing and a miss. Thatís literally all Iím trying to say. Personally, I donít have guys like Waddle and Smith rated high enough to justify trading up for, which would make drafting them at 6 a bad move in my eyes.

    Just some random dudes opinion. Iím allowed to not think every move they make is incredible.
    So to summarize...

    You're upset we gave up a 1st in 2022 to move up from 12 to 6 to select Smith? The same player we could've taken at 3 but not pick up a 1st in 2023? Of course at 3 we'd have the pick of the litter. Yet you're completely fine with staying at 12 after the trade down and risk all 4 top WRs, Pitts and Sewell gone, while holding on to the picks we received from SF?

    Don't forget we could be in a prime spot to trade down again. a couple spots so we may recoup that 2022 1st. It's a possibility.

    I still think Smith/Waddle or both slide a bit if we don't select 1 of them at 6. Last year Lamb slid down and that was w/o QBs going 1-3. With talent of Parsons, Slater, Surtain II, and Horn I think they all get sprinkled in 9-18 range. This is w/o taking into consideration any trades.

  5. #500
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    12,910
    Quote Originally Posted by poppapuh86 View Post
    So to summarize...

    You're upset we gave up a 1st in 2022 to move up from 12 to 6 to select Smith? The same player we could've taken at 3 but not pick up a 1st in 2023? Of course at 3 we'd have the pick of the litter. Yet you're completely fine with staying at 12 after the trade down and risk all 4 top WRs, Pitts and Sewell gone, while holding on to the picks we received from SF?

    Don't forget we could be in a prime spot to trade down again. a couple spots so we may recoup that 2022 1st. It's a possibility.

    I still think Smith/Waddle or both slide a bit if we don't select 1 of them at 6. Last year Lamb slid down and that was w/o QBs going 1-3. With talent of Parsons, Slater, Surtain II, and Horn I think they all get sprinkled in 9-18 range. This is w/o taking into consideration any trades.
    Let me try this again.

    I personally have Sewell, Pitts, and Chase as blue chip players. Those would be the three names I would say are worth being picked at three, and Waddle would be just below them. I love Smith, but donít think heís an elite talent in the draft.

    So to me, and I cannot stress enough that itís just my own evaluation, thereís only three players I would consider in that group of ďthey probably get the same guy they would have picked at 3Ē. If they stayed at 3 and took Smith I would have been livid. WR in particular is incredibly deep and personally I think you should only take a WR in the top 10 if heís an absolute freak. When you add in the extra pick we spent to move back up, you REALLY need to be sure that the player you add has a realistic shot to be a top 5 player at his position in a few years.

    Yes, you run the risk of not getting any of them at 12. Itís why even though I donít like the value, Iíve said over and over again that I appreciate Grier getting aggressive and swinging for a playmaker. You make this move because you think the player youíre getting will not only develop well, but also help you immediately. Someone that pushes you closer to the elite teams in the NFL.

    So with all of that in mind, the two guys I value that highly are Pitts and Chase. Two guys I think who can be elite playmakers and help us compete with Buffalo. Sewell is great, but it really seems like the NFL doesnít value him as highly and thereís only so much of an impact a tackle can give. So in the scenario that both are gone, and weíre looking at a board of Smith, Sewell, and Waddle, I think the trade would be terrible value. Yes you lose the risk of missing on all of them at 12, but I also donít think all three are that big of game changers that you canít possibly live without them. And you would have kept an extra first for next year that could have been used to fill another hole or get aggressive in other ways.

    TLDR I think Pitts and Chase are really good and think the value of trading up and not getting either would suck a lot.

  6. #501
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    625
    Quote Originally Posted by KodytheKing View Post
    Let me try this again.

    I personally have Sewell, Pitts, and Chase as blue chip players. Those would be the three names I would say are worth being picked at three, and Waddle would be just below them. I love Smith, but donít think heís an elite talent in the draft.

    So to me, and I cannot stress enough that itís just my own evaluation, thereís only three players I would consider in that group of ďthey probably get the same guy they would have picked at 3Ē. If they stayed at 3 and took Smith I would have been livid. WR in particular is incredibly deep and personally I think you should only take a WR in the top 10 if heís an absolute freak. When you add in the extra pick we spent to move back up, you REALLY need to be sure that the player you add has a realistic shot to be a top 5 player at his position in a few years.

    Yes, you run the risk of not getting any of them at 12. Itís why even though I donít like the value, Iíve said over and over again that I appreciate Grier getting aggressive and swinging for a playmaker. You make this move because you think the player youíre getting will not only develop well, but also help you immediately. Someone that pushes you closer to the elite teams in the NFL.

    So with all of that in mind, the two guys I value that highly are Pitts and Chase. Two guys I think who can be elite playmakers and help us compete with Buffalo. Sewell is great, but it really seems like the NFL doesnít value him as highly and thereís only so much of an impact a tackle can give. So in the scenario that both are gone, and weíre looking at a board of Smith, Sewell, and Waddle, I think the trade would be terrible value. Yes you lose the risk of missing on all of them at 12, but I also donít think all three are that big of game changers that you canít possibly live without them. And you would have kept an extra first for next year that could have been used to fill another hole or get aggressive in other ways.

    TLDR I think Pitts and Chase are really good and think the value of trading up and not getting either would suck a lot.
    I completely agree with this paragraph.

    My thinking is different than your son the o-line. My take is there is no point in taking play makers at WR or TE when you don't have a goo o-line to pass protect for the play makers to get open or run block for the rb to bruise his way through holes and pound the rock. We had like a bottom 5 o-line last year which was to be expected with basically 3 rookies starting. Obviously we all hope they improve in year 2 and a Jackson/Sewell, Kindley/Flowers, Skura/Rookie, Hunt, Jackson/Sewell o line would really tickle my fancy.

    I do agree if we take Smith at 6 I will be sadden but I will live. If Mac Jones goes 3 and some team trades up to 4 or the Falcons take a QB then we're sitting perfect with 1 "top" qb and 2 of Chase/Pitts/Sewell available at 6.

    Pro Days today to keep in eye on - Sewell and Vera-Tucker

    Do we have interest in Vera-Tucker at 18 to slide in beside Jackson if we go WR/Pitts earlier? Pair Jackson and Vera-Tucker back together gives some continuity on the left side of the line. For what it is worth I doubt this happens.

  7. #502
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    12,910
    Saw this on Twitter and thought it was super interesting. From Paul Hembekides

    ďFun research project with @VinMasi - hit rate for 1st-round draft picks by position:

    C (100%)
    OT (60%)
    LB (55%)
    G (46%)
    EDGE (45%)
    QB (42%)
    RB (40%)
    S (39%)
    TE (39%)
    CB (35%)
    DT (35%)
    WR (27%)

    Determined by whether or not that player signed a 2nd contract with his draft teamĒ

    I think Center is a little skewed because you rarely see one drafted early, but is a good reminder that teams wonít take one unless heís a stud.

    WR is becoming one of the more devalued positions in the draft. Thereís just so many good players year over year, offenses are getting more and more creative, and different body types are getting on the field and finding success.

  8. #503
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    12,910
    Quote Originally Posted by poppapuh86 View Post
    I completely agree with this paragraph.

    My thinking is different than your son the o-line. My take is there is no point in taking play makers at WR or TE when you don't have a goo o-line to pass protect for the play makers to get open or run block for the rb to bruise his way through holes and pound the rock. We had like a bottom 5 o-line last year which was to be expected with basically 3 rookies starting. Obviously we all hope they improve in year 2 and a Jackson/Sewell, Kindley/Flowers, Skura/Rookie, Hunt, Jackson/Sewell o line would really tickle my fancy.

    I do agree if we take Smith at 6 I will be sadden but I will live. If Mac Jones goes 3 and some team trades up to 4 or the Falcons take a QB then we're sitting perfect with 1 "top" qb and 2 of Chase/Pitts/Sewell available at 6.

    Pro Days today to keep in eye on - Sewell and Vera-Tucker

    Do we have interest in Vera-Tucker at 18 to slide in beside Jackson if we go WR/Pitts earlier? Pair Jackson and Vera-Tucker back together gives some continuity on the left side of the line. For what it is worth I doubt this happens.
    And thatís perfectly fine that you disagree. Personally I think offenses are good enough now to overcome some slight Oline issues. My main issue with Sewell is purely that I donít feel like we need an OT. Iím ok with Jackson and Hunt for another year. But obviously pushing Hunt inside and Sewell will make a great Oline.

    But Iím much more confident that I can find a good OT or OG on day 2. Thereís only one Pitts and one Chase. Thatís really all Iíve been trying to saying.

    And again, Smith is awesome. But itís crazy to think that Grier gave up an extra first for one of the biggest outliers in draft history.

    I love AVT, and Iím sure Miami will love his versatility. I personally think heís the 3rd best Olineman in the draft, so I donít see him falling. But outside of OT and Najee I really have no idea what to do at 18.

    Btw Sewell is currently doing his pro day. His numbers are obviously nuts, but his arms came back a little short. 34 is kind of the standard for OT and he came back with 33 1/4. But the dude showed so much promise that I canít imagine passing just because his arms were a little short.

    Flo is also at the Oregon pro day. Oregon has some good defenders to look at.

  9. #504
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    610
    Quote Originally Posted by KodytheKing View Post

    But Iím much more confident that I can find a good OT or OG on day 2. Thereís only one Pitts and one Chase. Thatís really all Iíve been trying to saying.
    I agree with the idea that there is only one Pitt and one Chase. I look at it like this: Would you rather have Drafted Julio, Kelce, or Tyrone Smith. A great online is really important but it has been so long since Miami has had a Jersey worthy skills player

  10. #505
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    10,125
    I remember when we took Jake Long instead of Matt Ryan. Jake Long was one of the best tackles in football, but you need some playmakers on your team. At this point I would rather draft Pitts or Chase than Sewell. I am not high on taking Sewell at 5 and my gut tells me the Dolphins are not seriously considering Sewell at 5.

  11. #506
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Rincon, Georgia
    Posts
    128
    Quote Originally Posted by Plague View Post
    I remember when we took Jake Long instead of Matt Ryan. Jake Long was one of the best tackles in football, but you need some playmakers on your team. At this point I would rather draft Pitts or Chase than Sewell. I am not high on taking Sewell at 5 and my gut tells me the Dolphins are not seriously considering Sewell at 5.
    I agree completely. Pitts or Chase at 6 or trade back to gain more picks. With the potential of 4 to 5 QB's being drafted in the top 5 or 6 spots, one or both will be there at 6. We did a great job of putting us in this position to not only grab an extra 1st and 3rd in the next couple years, but to give us the chance of getting Chase or Pitts. If something happens and both are gone at 6, then there will be QB's still on the board that other teams would covet which will make a trade back scenario very lucrative for us. If we were to trade back and Sewell was still on the board then maybe take him at that point. Though I would rather add an Edge or Center first then RB.

  12. #507
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    12,910
    Iím glad I was finally able to get my point across and you guys kinda see what I was talking about. Obviously an elite OT can push a good Oline to great. Look at Wirfs and Wills last year. But the Bucs didnít win just because of the Oline, but because they had the best supporting cast in the playoffs. Just like an elite QB can make players better, having that elite threat in the passing game can open up so much.

    Obviously itís still super early, and Iíll have plenty of time to overreact to a bunch of other things, but hereís what Iíve seen on the situation.

    PFN is reporting that the Bengals loved Sewell yesterday and around the league they felt like he would be the Bengals pick. Theyíre also reporting that it would be a surprise if we took Sewell, but if we did the idea would be to push Jackson to RT and Hunt to RG. Again, PFN is super up and down on the Dolphins because they jus throw out SO much. Tony Pauline also says that the vibe is that ATL is likely taking a QB or Pitts.

    Armando is reporting that the big 3 we have right now is Chase, Pitts, and Smith, with Smith being the 3rd choice of the three.

    I really donít think a trade down happens.

  13. #508
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    12,910
    Iím thinking CIN goes Chase, so what the Falcons do is the really kicker to me. That pick will completely dictate how stressed I am on draft night lol

  14. #509
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    10,125
    Quote Originally Posted by KodytheKing View Post
    Iím glad I was finally able to get my point across and you guys kinda see what I was talking about. Obviously an elite OT can push a good Oline to great. Look at Wirfs and Wills last year. But the Bucs didnít win just because of the Oline, but because they had the best supporting cast in the playoffs. Just like an elite QB can make players better, having that elite threat in the passing game can open up so much.

    Obviously itís still super early, and Iíll have plenty of time to overreact to a bunch of other things, but hereís what Iíve seen on the situation.

    PFN is reporting that the Bengals loved Sewell yesterday and around the league they felt like he would be the Bengals pick. Theyíre also reporting that it would be a surprise if we took Sewell, but if we did the idea would be to push Jackson to RT and Hunt to RG. Again, PFN is super up and down on the Dolphins because they jus throw out SO much. Tony Pauline also says that the vibe is that ATL is likely taking a QB or Pitts.

    Armando is reporting that the big 3 we have right now is Chase, Pitts, and Smith, with Smith being the 3rd choice of the three.

    I really donít think a trade down happens.
    I have never been on the pick Sewell at 3 group. I am not in the pick Sewell at 6 groups either. I feel if we pick Sewell at 6 we failed.

    Apparently Joe Burrows is pushing for Chase. The key will be what happens at the falcons pick. Will the Falcons pick Pitts or trade to someone who will pick Pitts.

    If Chase and Pitts go 4 and 5 I would prefer we trade down. If we somehow trade down to 10 plus and Sewell is there then I would be good with taking Sewell. Similar to what happen with Tunsil. I just don't believe in taking a Tackle when a obvious franchise playmaker is available.

  15. #510
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    12,910
    Quote Originally Posted by Plague View Post
    I have never been on the pick Sewell at 3 group. I am not in the pick Sewell at 6 groups either. I feel if we pick Sewell at 6 we failed.

    Apparently Joe Burrows is pushing for Chase. The key will be what happens at the falcons pick. Will the Falcons pick Pitts or trade to someone who will pick Pitts.

    If Chase and Pitts go 4 and 5 I would prefer we trade down. If we somehow trade down to 10 plus and Sewell is there then I would be good with taking Sewell. Similar to what happen with Tunsil. I just don't believe in taking a Tackle when a obvious franchise playmaker is available.
    The fact that Burrow might be fighting for Chase makes me think the vibe in the building is Sewell.

    I just donít see a trade happening. Itís very unlikely that youíll get more than what you traded up for. Thatís why I think Grier has 3 guys at the least that he wants.

Page 34 of 74 FirstFirst ... 24323334353644 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •