Re-tuned Mock

[JCBills]

Trade:

Donte Whitner for a 4th (KC - #99)- Someone in need of safety help would pay an early 4th for Whitner to take a need off of their draft list. Wilson has outplayed him every time he hits the field.

Kyle Williams for a 3rd (CH - #75) - Underrated by fans, Williams finally gets a little recognition this season with a Pro Bowl alternate spot. I love him to death, but I don't think he fits the 3-4 very well. Short arms, 6'1''.....I could be wrong, he could be a monster next season, I just can't think of a position he fits in the new base.

#9 Pick for Cincinnati's #21 + #54 (2nd) + 2011 6th

Draft:

1. (#21) Jerry Hughes - DE/OLB - TCU - 6'1¾" 251 Lbs

The honest truth is we don't have any good LBs outside of Poz, I think Maybin will be able to make the adjustment (playing ROLB), and I honestly see Schobel retiring. Hughes is a possible NFL 3-4 LOLB, TCU uses a 4-2-5, with Hughes basically acting as the strong side LB with his hand in the dirt. They would check to a 3-3-5 or 3-4 at times as well, so he has a good amount of experience standing up. Deep bag of pass rush moves. I honestly think if we don't take him, one of the other AFC East teams will, and he'll end up a nightmare for us. Not a finished product, but worth it.

2. (#41) Brandon Spikes - ILB - Florida - 6'3'' 252 Lbs

A first rounder a year ago, Spikes had his stock slide with somewhat of a down year compared to his previous play, and the eye gouge doesn’t help, but he’s one hell of a football player. He probably won’t time well at the upcoming combine, but he makes up for lack of elite speed with instincts and good pursuit angles. He’s got the size I’d hope we are looking for in a Mike backer, and gives us a young, talented ILB pair. They need to extend Poz ASAP though, we’d have a solid duo for years.

2. (#54) Dan LeFevour - QB - Central Michigan - 6'3'' 229 Lbs

Four year starter with a lot of W's under his belt. All-around threat, can make defenders miss in space, and shows good but not great throwing mechanics. I also think Brohm has the potential to make a run at the starting position, but we'll still probably draft a QB relatively early.

3. (#73) Taylor Price - WR - Ohio - 6'0⅜" 198 Lbs

Burner that fits well in the slot. Good hands, runs pretty good routes, gets open a lot and gives 110% effort in blocking. Suffered from poor QB play throughout his college career. I think Steve Johnson takes a step forward and ends up the #2, but Price could play a significant Welker-like role for us, adding a big piece we've been missing.

3. (#75) Torrell Troup - NT - UCF - 6'2½" 310 Lbs

I think Troup showed he can anchor against good competition in the Shrine Game if there were an doubters that missed him during the season. Two-gap DT that ate blocks for the nation's #4 run defense. Strong lower body and good use of hands, can ride and split double teams. He's been weighed in at 310 and 314 recently, having played as high as 340 in previous years, and could add 5-10 lbs but isn't really needed.

4. (#99) Rodger Saffold - OT - Indiana - 6'4½" 312 Lbs

Saffold had a phenomenal Shrine Game, he was clearly the best offensive lineman in the game, erasing his opponents nearly every play. I still think Jamon Meredith has a very good chance at panning out as a solid NFL LT, but we'll still draft at the position early. Signing IU's OL coach increases the chances of this pick.

4. (#105) C.J. Wilson - DE - ECU - 6'3'' 284 Lbs

Wilson showed up at the Senior Bowl weighing 284 lbs and moved well. I talked to Matt McGuire from WalterFootball.com about him, and he said he did well in 1 on 1s during practice. 3-4 RE prospect, he can hold up against the run as well as bring some pressure. Had a very good career at ECU, somewhat of a down year as a senior, but Wilson has 4 years of production under his belt, and has played well against ranked teams. He had a down year, but posted 45.5 TFL and 27 Sacks in his career.

5. (#137) Brandon Deaderick - DE - Alabama - 6'4'' 295 Lbs

Experienced 3-4 DE, good prospect for the LE spot. Played 5 days after being shot, that says something haha.

6. (#169) Will update after Combine. (OT/3-4 OLB)

7. (#194) Will update after Combine. (NT)

7. (#201) Will update after Combine. (ILB)


Something like this would touch on the main needs on offense, as well as start giving us players that fit the 3-4, which we're seriously lacking right now. I expect OBD to be either moving picks or players come draft day. Instead of picking twice in the 1st like we seem to like doing recently (Evans-Losman, Whitner-McCargo, Maybin-Wood - Wood and Evans have [obviously] been the best picks, too soon to tell for Maybin) I'm looking for them to stack early-mid round picks. This is year one of rebuilding, again. Focus (in the draft) on the side of the ball that's getting the bigger overhaul, in this case obviously D.

[PECKERWOOD]

Re: Re-tuned Mock

Maybe a bit unrealistic but I'll play along, I kept the picks that I like:

1 - Charles Brown, LT, USC (One of the more athletic tackles in the draft, perfect for the ZBs scheme)
2 - Terrence Cody, NT, Alabama (In the mold of Shaun Rodgers, may slide due to his weight)
2 - Brandon Spikes, ILB, Florida (Thumper in the middle next to Poz)
3 - Dan LeFevour, QB, Central Michigan (We both like this guy, cool, we agree here.)
3 - Ciron Black, RT, LSU (A leader amongst linemen, good football player, one of my favorite RTs in the draft)
4 - Eric Decker, WR, Minnesota (Good receiver, cerebral player, ex QB)
4 - Jermaine Cunningham, OLB, Florida (I like him, good player, I'm sure everybody here has seen him play at one time or another)
5 - Kade Weston, DL, Georgia (Underrated prospect, I had the chance to watch him play a couple times last year)
6 - Matt Kopa, OT, Stanford (I know everybody here is sick of all the ivy leaguers but this one is actually worth the weight)
7 - DeMarcus Granger, DL, Oklahoma (Talented player, character issues & injury issues)
7 - Juice Williams, QB, Illinois (Talented player but may not be a QB at the next level, but still a specimen and I like that so I'm taking him here)

[YardRat]

Re: Re-tuned Mock

I really don't want a 'maybe' or 'tweener' in the first round. Like the third and fourth rounders.

[Bravo82]

Re: Re-tuned Mock

nobody cares.

[JCBills]

Re: Re-tuned Mock

I really don't want a 'maybe' or 'tweener' in the first round. Like the third and fourth rounders.

Don't want to fill a major need in the 1st?

[Night Train]

Re: Re-tuned Mock

A major need in the first two rounds is the lines. Winning organizations build from the lines out.

LT, NT..that's our major needs in the first 2 rounds. Then LB.

[Bravo82]

Re: Re-tuned Mock

and I might add, this mock is usless without Timothy Tebow.

[SquishDaFish]

Re: Re-tuned Mock

Great job with the work. But all those trades wont happen

[dannyek71]

Re: Re-tuned Mock

I love how every year people have this trade and that trade.....This isn't madden on your Super Nintendo people.

We will trade up into the 1st for a guy who was a reach in the 4th. That is my prediction.

[Mahdi]

Re: Re-tuned Mock

Maybe a bit unrealistic but I'll play along, I kept the picks that I like:

1 - Charles Brown, LT, USC (One of the more athletic tackles in the draft, perfect for the ZBs scheme)
2 - Terrence Cody, NT, Alabama (In the mold of Shaun Rodgers, may slide due to his weight)
2 - Brandon Spikes, ILB, Florida (Thumper in the middle next to Poz)
3 - Dan LeFevour, QB, Central Michigan (We both like this guy, cool, we agree here.)
3 - Ciron Black, RT, LSU (A leader amongst linemen, good football player, one of my favorite RTs in the draft)
4 - Eric Decker, WR, Minnesota (Good receiver, cerebral player, ex QB)
4 - Jermaine Cunningham, OLB, Florida (I like him, good player, I'm sure everybody here has seen him play at one time or another)
5 - Kade Weston, DL, Georgia (Underrated prospect, I had the chance to watch him play a couple times last year)
6 - Matt Kopa, OT, Stanford (I know everybody here is sick of all the ivy leaguers but this one is actually worth the weight)
7 - DeMarcus Granger, DL, Oklahoma (Talented player, character issues & injury issues)
7 - Juice Williams, QB, Illinois (Talented player but may not be a QB at the next level, but still a specimen and I like that so I'm taking him here)

Nix likes big OLmen. Charles Brown is a very slim OT. Barely 300 pounds. I don't like his value in the first round.

[JCBills]

Re: Re-tuned Mock

Great job with the work. But all those trades wont happen

Including them actually makes it more realistic than a non-trade involved mock.

[DraftBoy]

Re: Re-tuned Mock

Including them actually makes it more realistic than a non-trade involved mock.

No it makes it far less realistic. Let me show you why;

9th (1350 Points)

for

21st (800 Points), 54 (360 Points), and 2011 6th (20 points)

So in that trade alone we lost 170 points or the equivalent of a mid to late 3rd Round pick.

KC 4th for Whitner...not a bad trade but KC has Mike Brown at SS who was a good player for them last year 103 tackles, 2 sacks, and 3 INTs. They need a FS not a SS. That trade doesn't make sense for KC.

Chicago 3rd for Kyle Williams....Williams doesn't fit our 3-4 system you're right but why would the Bears want him? Tommie Harris, Jarron Gilbert, Anthony Adams, Marcus Harrison, and Israel Idonjie are already their 5 deep rotation. They have no need for another DT at this point. Especially since they play to develop Gilbert.

[JCBills]

Re: Re-tuned Mock

No it makes it far less realistic. Let me show you why;

9th (1350 Points)

for

21st (800 Points), 54 (360 Points), and 2011 6th (20 points)

So in that trade alone we lost 170 points or the equivalent of a mid to late 3rd Round pick.

KC 4th for Whitner...not a bad trade but KC has Mike Brown at SS who was a good player for them last year 103 tackles, 2 sacks, and 3 INTs. They need a FS not a SS. That trade doesn't make sense for KC.

Chicago 3rd for Kyle Williams....Williams doesn't fit our 3-4 system you're right but why would the Bears want him? Tommie Harris, Jarron Gilbert, Anthony Adams, Marcus Harrison, and Israel Idonjie are already their 5 deep rotation. They have no need for another DT at this point. Especially since they play to develop Gilbert.

It was in reference to including trades in general considering how many moves are made come draft day.

Whitner was playing pretty well at FS this past season before going down, basically it's dealing him to a team in need of secondary help rather than a specific one, but I did it anyways because I'm just such a rebel. (lol) Even then Mike Brown is 32.

Let's have a look at KC's safety play.

Mike Brown -

Thrown at: 27 times
Opposing QB rating when thrown at: 68.2
Snaps: 1,106
Run D Value: -4.0
Pass D Value: -5.6
Missed Tackles: 10
Stops/Stuffs: 33

Jon McGraw -

Thrown at: 18 times
Opposing QB rating when thrown at: 119.0
Snaps: 610
Run D Value: -3.9
Pass D Value: -6.4
Missed Tackles: 6
Stops/Stuffs: 14

The backups had weak metrics as well.

Vs. Donte playing FS, SS, and Nickel

Thrown at: 29 times
Opposing QB rating when thrown at: 58.1
Snaps: 608
Run D Value: -4.1
Pass D Value: 1.8
Missed Tackles: 3
Stops/Stuffs: 15

Instant upgrade at either spot for them, not saying this trade will happen, but KC is a fit, that isn't the point though, I just think Whitner is decent trade bait.

Because Chicago has 5 DTs they won't make a move? They wouldn't look to upgrade over Anthony Adams? Looking to develop Gilbert doesn't mean they won't take an instant upgrade over their current situation?

You have to realize you can't go by the value charts exactly, it almost never works out that way. I could have made the 6th a 5th sure, or made it a 2010 pick, but no need to nitpick.
I know it didn't value out perfectly.

[DraftBoy]

Re: Re-tuned Mock

It was in reference to including trades in general considering how many moves are made come draft day.

Whitner was playing pretty well at FS this past season before going down, basically it's dealing him to a team in need of secondary help rather than a specific one, but I did it anyways because I'm just such a rebel. (lol) Even then Mike Brown is 32.

Let's have a look at KC's safety play.

Mike Brown -

Thrown at: 27 times
Opposing QB rating when thrown at: 68.2
Snaps: 1,106
Run D Value: -4.0
Pass D Value: -5.6
Missed Tackles: 10
Stops/Stuffs: 33

Jon McGraw -

Thrown at: 18 times
Opposing QB rating when thrown at: 119.0
Snaps: 610
Run D Value: -3.9
Pass D Value: -6.4
Missed Tackles: 6
Stops/Stuffs: 14

The backups had weak metrics as well.

Vs. Donte playing FS, SS, and Nickel

Thrown at: 29 times
Opposing QB rating when thrown at: 58.1
Snaps: 608
Run D Value: -4.1
Pass D Value: 1.8
Missed Tackles: 3
Stops/Stuffs: 15

Instant upgrade at either spot for them, not saying this trade will happen, but KC is a fit, that isn't the point though, I just think Whitner is decent trade bait.

Because Chicago has 5 DTs they won't make a move? They wouldn't look to upgrade over Anthony Adams? Looking to develop Gilbert doesn't mean they won't take an instant upgrade over their current situation?

You have to realize you can't go by the value charts exactly, it almost never works out that way. I could have made the 6th a 5th sure, or made it a 2010 pick, but no need to nitpick.
I know it didn't value out perfectly.

Your premise is right and wrong, yes many moves are made during the draft, but many of those moves cannot possibly be perdicted so trying to do so are just as futile (one could even argue more so) than not perdicting them. Thus making it even less realistic, really its a semantics argument, and I break it down like this. I refuse to mock trades so if one happens it doesnt screw up my mock all up, if I mocked one though and it doesnt happen it throws everything else off.

Whitner is an improvement over McGraw but is it worth a 4th Round pick, you only reinforce my previous notion with your metrics argument. Basically the only thing Whitner add is a positive Pass D number but is worse in the run game. Besides that Metrics isn't even a completely fair measure given contract status, bonus money, scheme type, injury history and many other factors that metrics doesn't apply in. Its simply a more complicated way of looking at statistics, its far more interesting yes but trying to base some sort of logical conclusion specifically involving a players trade value based solely on that is a reach that I wouldn't take.

What does adding a 6th DT get Chicago? Teams don't just make moves to make them, they have to have a logical reason to make them, you know that. Improving on their 5th DT isn't going to be worth a 3rd Round pick to somebody. The Bears have two young DT's they are trying to develop in Gilbert and Harrison, and adding a 6th DT and taking more snaps away from them is not going to help that. It would essentially be flushing draft picks away. Find a 4-3 team in need of a DT and yea maybe they give Williams a shot, but not somebody who already has a solid rotation.

Im aware that it doesnt work out exactly but how often do you think a team underpays by over 100 points to move up 12 spots in the 1st round? If anything they have to overpay. Hence the use of the values, if the Bills made the move that you suggested they should and would get slaughtered for it. You don't move down out of the top 20 from the top 10 and not get at least close to exact value for it, if anything you ask for over value. 12 spots is a huge drop for us to make, with big time risk involved. And please save the penis measuring. I dont know why you would of taken my comments to be condenscending, that's not how they were meant, now we can either discuss this and continue what was developing into a good discussion or we can end it here.

[JCBills]

Re: Re-tuned Mock

Your premise is right and wrong, yes many moves are made during the draft, but many of those moves cannot possibly be perdicted so trying to do so are just as futile (one could even argue more so) than not perdicting them. Thus making it even less realistic, really its a semantics argument, and I break it down like this. I refuse to mock trades so if one happens it doesnt screw up my mock all up, if I mocked one though and it doesnt happen it throws everything else off.

Whitner is an improvement over McGraw but is it worth a 4th Round pick, you only reinforce my previous notion with your metrics argument. Basically the only thing Whitner add is a positive Pass D number but is worse in the run game. Besides that Metrics isn't even a completely fair measure given contract status, bonus money, scheme type, injury history and many other factors that metrics doesn't apply in. Its simply a more complicated way of looking at statistics, its far more interesting yes but trying to base some sort of logical conclusion specifically involving a players trade value based solely on that is a reach that I wouldn't take.

What does adding a 6th DT get Chicago? Teams don't just make moves to make them, they have to have a logical reason to make them, you know that. Improving on their 5th DT isn't going to be worth a 3rd Round pick to somebody. The Bears have two young DT's they are trying to develop in Gilbert and Harrison, and adding a 6th DT and taking more snaps away from them is not going to help that. It would essentially be flushing draft picks away. Find a 4-3 team in need of a DT and yea maybe they give Williams a shot, but not somebody who already has a solid rotation.

Im aware that it doesnt work out exactly but how often do you think a team underpays by over 100 points to move up 12 spots in the 1st round? If anything they have to overpay. Hence the use of the values, if the Bills made the move that you suggested they should and would get slaughtered for it. You don't move down out of the top 20 from the top 10 and not get at least close to exact value for it, if anything you ask for over value. 12 spots is a huge drop for us to make, with big time risk involved. And please save the penis measuring. I dont know why you would of taken my comments to be condenscending, that's not how they were meant, now we can either discuss this and continue what was developing into a good discussion or we can end it here.

Heh you're looking into what I said too much, I'm not talking about the specific trades adding realism, but something to the tune of them, trying to nail that on the head would be even more of a waste of time than mocks are in the first place.

The whole idea of mocks is absurd and unrealistic. Trying to predict anything outside of a few picks that are somewhat obvious is ridiculous, we both know that. A mock with trades is more realistic than a mock without, not saying the specific trades are likely, but moves in general. That's all. Penis measuring? Come on dude, really? I don't get into the whole e-peen internet deal, did I whip it out when I asked to be talked to like an intelligent human being? How would I swing that on here? You've been here longer and me doing that would be pointless. Not sure where in what I said that could be taken from, but I'm over it let's move along. It was in reference to the "let me explain to you why" as if I were oblivious, but no point in continuing there, could have just been miscommunication, which I would have preferred to be brought up instead of "penis measuring".

I know it didn't value out perfectly, if I did it with that I'd probably have a handful of people trying to call me out for that.